In his column on yesterday's New York Times op-ed page, Paul Krugman refers to "a broader effort by conservatives to sling Enron muck toward their left, hoping that some of it would stick." Mr. Krugman writes, "One doubts that the people putting out this stuff really expect to convince anyone. But they do hope to muddy the waters. If they can get a little bit of Enron dirt on everyone -- the Clinton administration, environmentalists, liberal columnists -- the stain on people and ideas they support will be less noticeable."
Well, here is Mr. Krugman's fellow New York Times op-ed page columnist -- and a former New York Times managing editor -- Bill Keller, writing on today's Times op-ed page: "If you're asking whether the Bush administration do favors for Enron, sure it did -- and so, by the way, did the Clinton administration, and both parties in Congress."
It's rather impolite of Mr. Krugman to accuse his fellow columnist, Mr. Keller, of not expecting to convince anyone, and of hoping to muddy the waters, and of slinging muck. And it's unseemly for the Times to have its columnist Mr. Krugman so openly denigrating the work of its columnist Mr. Keller.
Guerillas and Terrorists: An article in today's New York Times about Al Qaeda cells in Singapore runs with Times references to "a terror inquiry" and "terror's outposts." Yet an article about a suicide bombing at a Tel Aviv pedestrian mall never mentions the word terrorism or terror, only Palestinian "militants." Another article refers to Hezbollah as "a guerilla group that is fighting a low-level war with Israel from Lebanon" without mentioning that Hezbollah is on the U.S. State Department lists of terrorist organizations, in part because of its role in attacks on American government personnel and targets. Maybe you're only a terrorist if you attack civilians in New York City?
Not in the New York Times: New Yorkers looking to find out that 50,000 tons of mangled metal from the twin towers have already been sold off and shipped to Communist China as scrap had to read about it in today's Los Angeles Times. No mention in today's New York Times that Shanghai Baosteel is denying Chinese press reports that it plans to manufacture souvenirs out of the material.