Spoons of the Apocalypse
While “hate†is a strong word, it’s a reasonable description of my feelings for Charles Krauthammer. But some of my fellow Krauthammer-haters spent yesterday lamely defending the indefensible, and it does none of us any credit. Joe Klein’s musings on Krauthammer’s disability were shallow and prejudiced and there’s no way to convincingly spin them otherwise. Klein would be best off apologizing; the rest of us would be best off helping him see the need.
I would never try to convince you that Krauthammer’s ideological confreres – those scourges of “political correctness†(and opponents, largely, of the Americans with Disabilities Act) – have any standing themselves to express outrage. Nor am I saying that Klein is some kind of Ableist Hitler. (That’s right, Hitler!) But Klein’s argument is absurd in the way only bigotry can be absurd. (Do all quadriplegics support American hegemony? Have neocons who can take transatlantic flights moderated their bellicosity? No? Then Krauthammer’s disability is a red herring.)
Team sports are fun, but we have to recognize when our own side fouls someone. We all have our prejudices, and when we slap ourselves in our own faces with them, we should seize the chance to become just a little better than we were.
Comment by kid bitzer —
May 21, 2009 @ 8:45 am
“Team sports are fun, but we have to recognize when our own side fouls someone.”
dammit, jim. the worst kind of spoil-sport is the person who leaves you feeling bad even when you ignore them.
Comment by SomeCallMeTim —
May 21, 2009 @ 9:02 am
I want a T-shirt that says, “I Was Rooting For The Pool.” Is that wrong?
Comment by dhex —
May 21, 2009 @ 10:22 am
i had no idea cabbagesmasher was in a wheelchair. huh.
it’s not like someone couldn’t load up some blowed the fuck up iraq shots on an iphone and hand it to the guy.
“The greatest President of the past 150 140 years–(Thanks, commenter flownover!)– sat in a wheelchair.”
that’s a clear slur against william henry harrison. double apology is due, stat!
Comment by Mediocre Lawyer —
May 21, 2009 @ 10:55 am
I’m outraged that you would invoke the doctrine of “standing” when speaking about Mr. Krauthammer!
Comment by Jon H —
May 21, 2009 @ 10:56 am
You have to admit, though, that Krauthammer crossed the line when he created the Daleks.
Comment by ajay —
May 21, 2009 @ 11:26 am
Going to have to disagree: I think it’s entirely OK to point out that Kraut is one of a long line of right-wingers who is very authoritative about places he’s never visited (cf. Michael Ledeen), even if it’s not through choice. Do you think it’s ludicrous to suggest that visiting Iraq might cause someone to realise that things are more complex and nuanced than he thought?
Comment by kid bitzer —
May 21, 2009 @ 12:41 pm
ajay, that would have been a fair criticism for klein to make of ck.
but the smart way to make it would not involve mentioning ck’s tragic accident and subsequent paralysis. which is what klein did.
klein should have just said: yeah, i think ck should have traveled more to the places he writes about.
since klein introduced it as “ck had an accident, now he’s paralyzed, geez, he’d be a better pundit if he traveled more,” i think he deserves some of the flak he’s getting.
some. i think it was a stupid thing to say, not the worst thing evah.
but then, it is predictable that right-wingers will play the victim card whenever they get the chance.
Comment by strasmangelo jones —
May 21, 2009 @ 1:23 pm
Do you think it’s ludicrous to suggest that visiting Iraq might cause someone to realise that things are more complex and nuanced than he thought?
Plenty of right-wingers have visited Iraq specifically to use those visits as confirmations of their previous beliefs. See for instance George Bush, John McCain, Barack Obama…
Comment by Jim Henley —
May 21, 2009 @ 1:29 pm
Two words: Mark Steyn.
Comment by dhex —
May 21, 2009 @ 1:50 pm
road to damascus moments don’t necessarily happen even if you fly all the way over to damascus.
Comment by Seward —
May 21, 2009 @ 1:56 pm
ajay,
First off it would depend on the manner in which one visited Iraq. Second of all it would depend on how prone the individual in question is to things like confirmation bias.
Comment by Seward —
May 21, 2009 @ 2:08 pm
I do think that this whole dust-up illustrates why one should resist taking blogging too seriously. Not that I am pure as snow on that account.
Comment by Joe Strummer —
May 21, 2009 @ 2:25 pm
I did think a worse insult was the one given by E.J. Dionne that said Krauthammer was reasonable because, hey, he is more restrained than Ann Coulter and Glenn Beck. I’d be more pissed at Dionne than Klein, who I think was just kind of being, as you say, shallow and not really trying to damn with faint praise.
Comment by Flippanter —
May 21, 2009 @ 3:39 pm
Wouldn’t flying to Damascus preclude a road to Damascus experience, even if one brought Dorothy Lamour along?
Comment by Ginger Yellow —
May 21, 2009 @ 3:42 pm
“Team sports are fun, but we have to recognize when our own side fouls someone. ”
Wait, Joe Klein is on our side now? I should probably stop fouling him, then.
Comment by doubled —
May 21, 2009 @ 3:58 pm
“Do you think it’s ludicrous to suggest that visiting Iraq might cause someone to realise that things are more complex and nuanced than he thought?”
Does this thought really only apply to one side of the aisle?
Related to Klein , when and/or where will we be able to find and appreciate journalists who aren’t all about promoting the ‘correct team’ and demonizing the ‘wrong team’? Short supply for sure.
Comment by Mona —
May 21, 2009 @ 4:58 pm
Jim is right. Klein should not have “gone there.” Period.
Comment by Jim Henley —
May 21, 2009 @ 5:13 pm
This is me agreeing with doubled. Let’s imagine a quadriplegic antiwar columnist known for his rueful pessimism about the ethical and practical prospects for American hegemony. Could I imagine a hawkish critic lamenting that “If only the gimp could see in the field the great work Our Boys are doing for people in conflict zones, he might be less critical of the military?” Of course I could.
It’s a bullshit argument either way.
Comment by Jim Henley —
May 21, 2009 @ 5:14 pm
e.g. give Andrew Bacevich catastrophic spinal trauma in his past, as a thought experiment.
Comment by The Sanity Inspector —
May 21, 2009 @ 5:53 pm
Classy post; wish I could say the same for all the comments.
Comment by Seward —
May 21, 2009 @ 6:48 pm
Does this thought really only apply to one side of the aisle?
I would assume that there are actual examples of such.
Comment by mds —
May 22, 2009 @ 11:04 am
I was cleaning out my attic, and found this only slightly dusty ARPANET. dhex can have it.
Nah, the closest would be mocking a Parkinson’s sufferer on one’s radio program. Which was also reprehensible, and deserved an apology, just as in this case.
Also, I’m with Ginger Yellow. Who’s this “our side” of whom you speak?
Comment by mds —
May 22, 2009 @ 11:13 am
Yes, yes, mds should read through all the front-page posts first. Bad mds.
Comment by Rhodo Zeb —
May 22, 2009 @ 1:11 pm
I accept that there are ’sides’, i.e. honest people who put forth true information and fair suggestions, and those who twist and selectively mis-inform for their own ends.
Hence, Joe Klein, famous of course for lying about whether he published his little political book, is not on my team. Meet my team .
Comment by Gary Farber —
May 22, 2009 @ 6:55 pm
“Going to have to disagree: I think it’s entirely OK to point out that Kraut is one of a long line of right-wingers who is very authoritative about places he’s never visited (cf. Michael Ledeen), even if it’s not through choice. Do you think it’s ludicrous to suggest that visiting Iraq might cause someone to realise that things are more complex and nuanced than he thought? ”
I’m curious: does this mean you’ve been to Iraq, or does it mean that things there are more complex and nuanced than you thought?
Comment by mathew h —
May 24, 2009 @ 6:00 am
“Krauthammer-haters spent yesterday lamely defending . . . ”
Lamely.
Good one.