Will somebody please explain what’s wrong with Nicholas Kristof? The same guy who writes
unequaled columns about the horrors of Darfur can come up with this weirdness about the
Ignoramus in Chief:
[M]ost liberals have not revised their view that Mr. Bush is a nitwit. In fact,
I’m convinced that Mr. Bush is not only smarter, but also a better man than his critics believe.
Most important, he’s not a panderer.
And that’s not all. “While Mr. Kerry zigs and zags on trade and Middle East policy,” Kristof
writes, “Mr. Bush has a core of values and provides genuine leadership” — [but, get this]
— “typically, I believe, in the wrong direction …”
Then he cites the Ignoramus’s “grim willingness to raise gas prices during his re-election
campaign” — which, Kristof allows, is “foolish economically” and “crazy politically” — as a sign of
“a solidity of character and convictions.”
Some might call Kristof’s remarks nuanced or even-handed. I call it nuts. It staggers belief. It
also makes you wonder what medication Kristof is on. By his fuzzy logic Osama bin Laden
doesn’t zig and zag either. He’s got a core of values, too. And the way he’s been motivating his
troops, he sure as hell is providing genuine leadership, albeit in the wrong direction.
There’s a long list of non-zig-zaggers you could name who fit Kristof’s peculiar thinking.
Hitler, Stalin, Mao for starters. They showed the world a core of values and demonstrated
genuine leadership in the wrong direction. The Ignoramus nowhere near deserves to be elevated
into those ranks, thank gawd. But that’s poor consolation.
Postscript just in from Freilich
Central:
KRISTOF CLEAR
The man of conviction’s to be admired;
