A long-time confidante of the crack young staff—who considers himself a man of the Left—once referred to New York Times columnist Nicholas D. Kristof as a moron whose heart was in the right place. Mr. Kristof’s July 4 column in the Paper of Record does nothing to gainsay the moron characterization, but it does cast doubt on the location of his ventricles.

In this installment of the Gray Lady, Mr. Kristof takes time off from his busy schedule of writing columns dedicated to showing off his good deeds. Giving money to Thai prostitutes to change their lives; rescuing young girls from Third-World hell holes—what good are these things unless you advertise them? As far as Mr. Kristof is concerned, it seems, none at all.

Naturally, if Mr. Kristof takes a break from self-publicizing his own virtue, the matter heÂ’s discussing is a big one. And, in this particular column, it is rather weighty: ItÂ’s another pathetic attempt to exonerate the Times for publicizing the SWIFT story.

Now, to be fair, Mr. Kristof’s piece contains this bit of semi-reason: “The more recent disclosure about bank transfers seems to me a harder call. The program seems both legal and sensible, and it would be a setback in the unlikely event that bankers backed off in the glare of publicity.” But this, alas, is as far as Mr. Kristof gets with rationality at his side.

In fact, in the very next bit, Mr. Kristof informs us:

So, I might have made that decision [i.e., about publicizing the SWIFT program] differently. But so far there is no evidence that the banking story harmed national securityÂ….

Huh? There’s “no evidence”? And what kind of evidence does Nicholas D. Kristof expect there to be in two weeks time? This isn’t like rescuing a Third-World sex slave, for crying out loud.

As if this weren’t bad enough, Mr. Kristof then goes off to Tangentland, the official locale of pathetic Gray Lady apologists. He offers a tired retread of the usual “Oh yeah, well other people did it” argument.

Dear reader, please note that when you tout the “Oh yeah, well other people did it” rationale, you have lost the fight. It should be obvious that a thief who excuses his actions by noting the existence of other burglars has not presented strong exculpatory evidence.

Yet this does not stop Mr. Kristof from raging at Senator Pat Roberts, whom Kristof claims has also damaged national security. To which we, the crack young staff of “The Hatemonger’s Quarterly,” respond: That’s irrelevant, you dolt.

Overall, Times staffers have engaged in umpteen pseudo-apologias for the SWIFT disclosure. And all of them have been laughable. IsnÂ’t it time to stop?

Posted by: Chip at 12:01 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 454 words, total size 3 kb.