The New York Times columnist Paul Krugman is facing criticism for an op-ed piece in which he called the 9/11 anniversary “an occasion for shame.”
In a brief column that appeared in the newspaper on Sunday, Krugman said conservatives have latched onto the attack to do “shameful” things:
What happened after 9/11 — and I think even people on the right know this, whether they admit it or not — was deeply shameful. The atrocity should have been a unifying event, but instead it became a wedge issue. Fake heroes like Bernie Kerik, Rudy Giuliani, and, yes, George W. Bush raced to cash in on the horror. And then the attack was used to justify an unrelated war the neocons wanted to fight, for all the wrong reasons...
The memory of 9/11 has been irrevocably poisoned; it has become an occasion for shame. And in its heart, the nation knows it.
Popular VideoThis young teenage singer was shocked when Keith Urban invited her on stage at his concert. A few moments later, he made her wildest dreams come true.
Former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld tweeted that he canceled his subscription to The Times because of the "repugnant piece."
The Blaze reports that conservative commentator Michelle Malkin wrote:
Koward Krugman’s problem is that he’s a lazy intellectual slob who hurriedly hits the “publish” button before the sand in his little kitchen egg timer empties. He hurls Molotov cocktails at his political enemies, while hiding behind his hallowed desk at the Fishwrap of Record.
And Glenn Reynolds of InstaPundit.com:
Popular VideoThis young teenage singer was shocked when Keith Urban invited her on stage at his concert. A few moments later, he made her wildest dreams come true:
Understand it for what it is, an admission of impotence from a sad and irrelevant little man. Things haven’t gone the way he wanted lately, his messiah has feet of clay — hell, forget the “feet” part, the clay goes at least waist-high — and it seems likely he’ll have even less reason to like the coming decade than the last, and he’ll certainly have even less influence than he’s had.
But Krugman has his supporters. Nicole Belle of Crooks and Liars wrote:
But is Krugman wrong? Yes, almost 300 people died that day, needlessly, horribly. But that day was the impetus for us to attack and invade Iraq, a country that had nothing to do with the attacks and posed no threat to us. To date, we’ve lost 4,752 allied service members in Iraq and over 100,000 Iraqi civilians. How is this not a black mark of shame on the legacy of 9/11?
Krugman ended his piece by writing:
I’m not going to allow comments on this post, for obvious reasons.
To which Malkin wrote:
…it is worth calling out the smug coward who flung his op-ed crap against the wall and then deliberately turned off his comments section to avoid any heat in the Times’ kitchen...
Shame on him. Shame on The New York Times.