Friday, February 13, 2009
PC Police String Up Kling on Bogus Charge
Lately Arnold Kling has been fending off accusations of being a racist, because he (foolishly) had a blog post saying the stimulus bill was really about "reparations" and then at a Heritage Foundation/Club for Growth event, he called the Obama crew a bunch of thugs. Here is how Vanity Fair blogger James Wolcott described it:
But if you watch the first 70 seconds of the clip below, you almost feel embarrassed for Wolcott. Oops. I'm sure the apology will come out after the long weekend.
BTW, Kling mentions here that Krugman repeated the quote. Incidentally, I personally have no problem with the Times not "fact checking" an op ed columnist's quotes. But if Krugman doesn't post a clarification--not necessarily an apology--on his blog, well, I don't know what. I'm already not his best friend.
A few days ago notice was taken...of economist Arnold Kling's contention that the Obama stimulus plan was actually "reparations" in disguise. Given the complexion of our new president, this was interpreted as injecting a needless bit of race-baiting into the economic debate...
And there the matter might have rested had not Kling surrendered to heat of candor today at a Heritage Foundation/Club for Growth confab and decried, "Barack Obama is destroying my daughter's future. It is like sitting there watching my house ransacked by a gang of thugs."
Now if Kling can't comprehend the implication of racial menace encoded in daughter-gang-thugs/home invasion, he's either fatuously clueless--too innocent for this wicked world--or weaselly disingenuous, and a drama queen either way. Did he feel the sanctity of his home was being violated when the costs of the Iraq war shot into outer space? Did he picture marauders smashing cherished mementoes when Hank Paulson introduced TARP? Anytime Obama's name and "thug" are thrown in close proximity, it's a pretty sure bet that the speaker or author intends to fan the anxiety and animosity of those who think Obama's presidency represents black grievance gloved with the iron fist of the state--and out to punish whitey.
But if you watch the first 70 seconds of the clip below, you almost feel embarrassed for Wolcott. Oops. I'm sure the apology will come out after the long weekend.
BTW, Kling mentions here that Krugman repeated the quote. Incidentally, I personally have no problem with the Times not "fact checking" an op ed columnist's quotes. But if Krugman doesn't post a clarification--not necessarily an apology--on his blog, well, I don't know what. I'm already not his best friend.
Comments:
I'd consider it a badge of honor to be attacked by these PC nitwits. Wanting to grab Hank Paulson out of the TV is racist? The reference to reparations refers to the treaty of Versailles. Mr. Kling's comments are now news. Is there a better way than this to draw out these knuckle-headed leftists who have NOTHING whatsoever to offer but howls of "racist racist racist"?
# posted by 
: February 13, 2009 at 10:02 PM
: February 13, 2009 at 10:02 PM
Right, but like I said in the post, I think Kling was asking for it by putting "reparations" in the title of a post about Obama's stimulus plan.
But the "thug" comment was clearly innocent, and didn't even have the possibility of being wink-wink since he was talking about Paulson at first.
One last clarification: I think the original (mis)quote came from someone liveblogging the event, who might even have been connected with Heritage itself (I'm not sure about that). So that's why I'm not mad about Krugman "quoting" Kling, since Krugman would not have had reason to doubt the quote until the video surfaced.
But Wolcott still should have difficulty talking and walking, what with his foot being in his mouth and all. I.e. Wolcott confidently "bet" that Kling was using racist codewords, and Wolcott was oh so sure that Kling never used such language in reference to Paulson. Like I said, I actually cringed with embarrassment, Wolcott stepped in it so badly here.
But the "thug" comment was clearly innocent, and didn't even have the possibility of being wink-wink since he was talking about Paulson at first.
One last clarification: I think the original (mis)quote came from someone liveblogging the event, who might even have been connected with Heritage itself (I'm not sure about that). So that's why I'm not mad about Krugman "quoting" Kling, since Krugman would not have had reason to doubt the quote until the video surfaced.
But Wolcott still should have difficulty talking and walking, what with his foot being in his mouth and all. I.e. Wolcott confidently "bet" that Kling was using racist codewords, and Wolcott was oh so sure that Kling never used such language in reference to Paulson. Like I said, I actually cringed with embarrassment, Wolcott stepped in it so badly here.
I think Kling was asking for it by putting "reparations" in the title of a post about Obama's stimulus plan
Maybe, but if people read the short article rather than simply jump on King's back on readng the headline then its quite clear what he was referring to and it wasn't slavery reparations.
The disingenuity of the left can be really insufferable at times ...
Maybe, but if people read the short article rather than simply jump on King's back on readng the headline then its quite clear what he was referring to and it wasn't slavery reparations.
The disingenuity of the left can be really insufferable at times ...
the "thug" comment was entirely harmless, unless of course, you don't like being called a "thug." Obviously, wolcott doesn't know jack about libertarianism, or he'd understand that the T-word gets thrown around an awful lot. There is no subtext to it.
Post a Comment
# posted by : February 14, 2009 at 10:15 AM
: February 14, 2009 at 10:15 AM Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]