Monday, September 19, 2005
Piling On
You know, with principled support like that, we would still be British subjects.
Kristof prides himself on being the voice for the unfollowed, unreported injustices...Darfur and Aids in Africa, for instance. Not a single President, no world leader, has done so much to tackle these issues as President George Bush. Even Bono, a real honest to God rock star, has the decency to recognize and laud Bush for his willingness to do more for Africa than anybody else on this planet, ever. And the small minded, waffling, wishy washy, unprincipled partisan Nicholas Kristof cannot allow himself to do this?
Pathetic, weak-kneed spineless drivel. Read the New York Sun or New York Post. Even the Washington Post. But abandon the New York Times. Punch Sulzberger...in the nose...
4 Comments:
By 
TigerHawk, at
Mon Sep 19, 02:15:00 PM:
By Gordon Smith, at
Mon Sep 19, 02:22:00 PM:
It's funny that none of us bloggers care for the NYT anymore (outside, of course, for my Krugman fix). Since J.Miller threw in her lot with Ahmed Chalabi and the Go Get'em Gang at the Pentagon, the NYT has been just another propaganda arm for another set of editorial board members' personal fantasies.
It's hard enough to find accurate news without the Old Gray Lady becoming a sycophantic whore.
Yuck. Where do you go for your news, CP?
By Cardinalpark, at
Tue Sep 20, 09:07:00 AM:
Cassandra:
It is worse than that with Kristof. He wants the girl to be saved, but he hasn't the balls to do the saving, or suppoort the brutality required to do the saving. He wants the freedom to whine and complain and speak his mind (which I support by the way) but is unwilling to fight for it. I am reminded of the great moment in an otherwise mediocre movie when Jack Nicholson, playing Marine Colonel Jessup, reminds Tom Cruise that "you want me on the wall, you need me on that wall," speaking of the Marine position at Gitmo.
This is the problem of the intellectual NKristof or TFriedman - you cannot count on them on the wall, at the trench, when the moment is dire and difficult. The price of freedom is high. He wants us to save to Somalian girl, but can't stand the requirement to accomplish it. How many Afghan girls and Iraqi girls have been spared thanks to our brave people. He is soft, a weak pen...and so is Dbrooks by the way. So in no way am I being partisan about it. Killing the enemy is dirty business, and you need to call him by his name.
SH - boy, finding the news in a form that's fit to read these days is tough. On this we can agree. From an Op ed perspective, I tend to trust the WSJ, perhaps the FT. While they can be quite conservative, they aren't rank partisans and arent afraid to criticize a republican or laud a democrat. Then there are specific columnists who I enjoy reading because, regardless of whether I agree with them, they are eloquent - I put Steyn and Hitchens in that role. I liked Safire. David Broder can be good. Claudia Rosett is one of the very few writers who has covered the greatest financial fraud in world history (Oil for Food). One of the reasons I really enjoy Glenn Reynolds and PowerLine is because they point you to so many intelligently written sources. John F. Burns at the NYT can be excellent sometimes, and he does have some balls. Still, I think his book about the war reporting is in many instances more insightful than his actual reporting. I like Charlie Rose. He has some excellent people on. Michael Yon is doing an incredible job reporting from Iraq. Austin Bay. Fouad Ajami. Ralph Peters. Amir Taheri. Dick Morris. Michael Barone. Tigerhawk.
By Gordon Smith, at
Tue Sep 20, 10:57:00 AM:
WSJ and FT are certainly readable... I won't comment on your entire list...
I think "the greatest financial fraud in world history" may be the current Iraq boondoggle, what with $10 billion dollars and counting just missing...missing U.S. taxpayer moneys in the hands of every Iraqi/Saudi/Egyptian/Syrian redneck with two hands and a connection.
Anyhoo - back to the news - I'll let you know if I find any good nonpartisan sources. This is our first civil conversation. Nice, eh?
