In which my favorite leftist does her tired softshoe routine about the distinction between the tiny nutroots minority of Bush-hating terror denialists whom no one listens to — Krugman, Herbert, Rich, Dowd, pretty much the entire op-ed page except for David Brooks and whoever’s filling the Hamas slot that day — and the supposed silent majority of Democrats who hope against hope for victory notwithstanding those yummy Senate seats they stand to gain from defeat and the Teachable Moment about American hubris that a little genocide will provide. Which group does Times management belong to? Surely the latter, says KP, not explaining why then their withdrawal plan is more precipitous than even Harry Reid is comfortable with or why, in another terror vein, they went and outed the SWIFT program to embarrass Bush even though it was legal and effective and, by their own public editor’s admission, the wrong thing to do.
Needless to say, MM politely takes issue. As will the left, ironically, citing KP’s criticism of Krugman once again as proof that she’s not a “real” Democrat. Leave it to a Fox News liberal not to see the cutting brilliance of “War on Terror” followed by a trademark symbol. She probably believes there’s been some kind of turnaround in Anbar province, too. That’s what she gets for not reading Glenn Greenwald daily.
Believe it or not, the Times discussion is the second segment here. I can’t bring myself to say what the lead was.