Where firefighters come to talk training

Paul Krugman: Biggest Loser is a Nobel Winner?

I have always believed that I was not capable of hating my fellow Man.

That’s not to say that, for my personal reasons, I have people that I hold no fondness towards; not many, but some.

But, I hate Paul Krugman.

Oh, don’t worry; I said that I didn’t have the capacity to hate my fellow MAN.

Paul Krugman is a repulsive, repugnant, reprehensible, reptilian reprobate!

In addition, a man has scruples, morals, ethics and yes; a conscience. Krugman doesn’t.

He is p****** away his “gift” in an arena where his political opinions are far removed from his noted area of expertise, which is economics.

You see, we cannot dismiss ANYTHING Krugman says, because he has his bully pulpit aka The New York Times. Once a very prominent and relevant source for current events, consumer confidence in the paper has eroded amid accusations of plagiarism, poor vetting of “sources” and for stories that are the product of the imagination of its writer.

And then, there’s Krugman.

Since when has wild assertions with no linkage to even a scintilla of logic qualify as “opinion”?

Krugman’s blog post, “The Years of Shame” wasn’t an “op-ed” article. It was a hate piece, pure and simple.

To claim that 9/11 was an excuse to invade Iraq is narrow-minded; nay, small-minded.

You use an excuse when you are late for work.

You use an excuse when you forget to take the trash out.

You DON’T use an excuse to send 100,000 U.S. troops into a foreign country and into Harm’s way.

THAT is to trivialize the value of human life.

Krugman is clearly confusing humanitarianism with imperialism.

For some, there is no justification for military action. Krugman must be in this camp. Also, he no doubt believes that Israel is always the aggressor when they retaliate for the bombings perpetrated by those who want Israel wiped from this Earth.

Oh; there are some who have profited in the days since 9/11, but Krugman failed to accurately identify them.

There are a few; albeit very few, who agree with Krugman’s wacky assertions.

He applies the broad brush to many Americans who couldn’t disagree more with his statement, “…and in its heart, the nation knows it”. Even though he would not allow comments on his blog and took the extra step to disable his email, Krugman is finding out that sometimes, it is not a good idea to think out loud and put it to paper.

As long as The New York Times continues to showcase his absurdities, they will continue to put a drain on our ecology and assault our common sense and our common decency.

Yeah; maybe “hate” is a little too strong.

Upon reflection, I don’t hate Paul Krugman.

I despise him for his ginsu approach to writing.

I pity him for his cowardice.

I find it ironic that he believes his credibility as a writer comes from his Nobel Prize; a single event that leaves me to wonder about the nomination and selection process of such a “prestigious” award.

Doesn’t that award come with some money?

Hmmm.

TCSS.

The opinions and views expressed are those of the article’s author, Art Goodrich, who also writes as ChiefReason. They do not reflect the opinions and views of fireengineering.com, Fire Engineering Magazine, PennWell Corporation or his dog, Chopper. This article is protected by federal copyright laws and cannot be re-produced in any form.

Comment

You need to be a member of Fire Engineering Training Community to add comments!

Join Fire Engineering Training Community

Comment by Art "Chief Reason" Goodrich on September 28, 2011 at 4:50pm: So, Krugman, though he has no proof, calls Guiliani, Bush and others "profiteers" of 9/11. But that's OK.

I was being kind when I called him what I did and I have proof that he is. Just read his stuff. This isn't the first time Krugman has closed his eyes and swung wildly.

And besides; "name-calling" has become "labeling". If a person writes something that is contrary to the party in power, you are called the opposite. If you have a fundamental believe in God, you are labeled a fundamental Christian. Heck; you don't even have to call anyone anything to get the other side angered. Just misrepresent their views and it's game on.

People are WAY too sensitive about their politics, but still many are in a state of denial.

Wally; John's cool. He was Starsky to my Hutch.

Comment by John Mitchell on September 28, 2011 at 10:47am: Thank you Allen.

I respect your opinion and would fight to the death for you to be able to express it. You may find it interesting that I vehemently disagree with much of what Paul Krugman says on a regular basis.

The question was asked not because of who Art is, but because of what he wrote.

To call Paul Krugman "a repulsive, repugnant, reprehensible, reptilian reprobate" stoops to the childish level of name calling so many have found as the best way these days to respond to a view different from theirs.

These great United States are now lousy with so many out there unable to separate the person from the opinion which I believe continues to contribute to the de-maturation, indeed the de-volvement, of what was once a much better and respected time in our history.

Oh, and I do know Art- I’ve spent countless hours on the phone with Art, collaborated on projects with Art, broke bread with Art, I’ve even hugged the MAN..

You see, Allen, that’s EXACTLY the reason I asked him to clarify.

Because I do know him and don’t think he is a “Mr. Poopy-Pants.”

Comment by Allen Wahlstrom on September 27, 2011 at 8:10pm: Krugman uses the NYT as a bully pulpit for his radical nut job point of view.

I took a couple weeks away from that article to make a comment, as my relationship with several 9/11 related health and wellness programs are populated by many members of FDNY who lost brothers and family on 9/11.

What Krugman said was reprehensible and hurtful to many.

His use of that day to post that spiteful piece was just wrong.

John, If you knew Art you would not even ask that question.

Comment by John Mitchell on September 27, 2011 at 3:55pm: Just to be clear, do you hate (or not hate- I'm not sure on that either) EVERYONE that shares the opinion that the attacks on 9/11 were not used as an excuse to hurry into war? It's just Krugman, right?

RSS

Welcome to
Fire Engineering Training Community

Sign Up
or Sign In

Or sign in with:

Policy Page

PLEASE NOTE

The login above DOES NOT provide access to Fire Engineering magazine archives. Please go here for our archives.

CONTRIBUTORS NOTE

Our contributors' posts are not vetted by the Fire Engineering technical board, and reflect the views and opinions of the individual authors. Anyone is welcome to participate.

For vetted content, please go to www.fireengineering.com/issues.

We are excited to have you participate in our discussions and interactive forums. Before you begin posting, please take a moment to read our community policy page.

Be Alert for Spam
We actively monitor the community for spam, however some does slip through. Please use common sense and caution when clicking links. If you suspect you've been hit by spam, e-mail peter.prochilo@clarionevents.com.