"In January we'll have a new president. We hope it will be Barack Obama. And he should immediately undo all the hypocritical and anti-women policies that he can do with a stroke of his pen. And just as the Bush administration started out on a wrong foot, Obama can start out on a right one. Then he and Michelle can go out dancing and celebrate for all the women of the world."
 |
| Keeping the Natives Plump |
The above comment was written in October, 2008, in response to this article by Shifty Nick entitled: "Can This Be Pro Life?", in which our fuzzy do-gooder friend at the New York Times laments the way Western aid is distributed in Africa. Specifically, Kristof finds abhorrent the terrible paradox that arises from the insanity of promoting population growth in Africa with tanker loads of free food (the ones that don't get rerouted by Somalians), while at the same time restricting the supply of birth control to the noble savages of the Dark Continent.
It's funny the way that Kristof in his diseased wishful thinking uber-liberal mind wants it both ways, thereby perfectly representing the hypocrisy of the proclaimed utopianism of his employer. The halo over Kristof's head grows brighter when he proclaims that Western aid to Africa is good; it positively radiates when he attacks the Bush administration for restricting birth control to that cutest of continents; and it becomes blindingly bright when Brave Nick doth dare to suggest that African women should abide by the same moral guidelines as those that work so well in the hated West. Poor Nick is either too blinded by his wishful thinking, or too dishonest to simply admit that not all people the world over are exactly the same, and that women in Africa are the victims not of evil Western interventionism, but of the customs and abilities of their ancestors, and that no amount of outside help can change the intrinsic nature of certain groups.
Nicholas Kristof: a poster child for all that is wrong with New York Times-style global liberalism.
It's funny the way that Kristof in his diseased wishful thinking uber-liberal mind wants it both ways, thereby perfectly representing the hypocrisy of the proclaimed utopianism of his employer. The halo over Kristof's head grows brighter when he proclaims that Western aid to Africa is good; it positively radiates when he attacks the Bush administration for restricting birth control to that cutest of continents; and it becomes blindingly bright when Brave Nick doth dare to suggest that African women should abide by the same moral guidelines as those that work so well in the hated West. Poor Nick is either too blinded by his wishful thinking, or too dishonest to simply admit that not all people the world over are exactly the same, and that women in Africa are the victims not of evil Western interventionism, but of the customs and abilities of their ancestors, and that no amount of outside help can change the intrinsic nature of certain groups.
Nicholas Kristof: a poster child for all that is wrong with New York Times-style global liberalism.
Kristof is truly amusing in a slightly goofy, english lit professor sort of way. I could see him getting raped in prison and then writing an eloquent essay about the underprivileged upbringing of his attacker. Krugman is the other one who blathers and blathers and never gets one thing right. The fact they both write so much and are always wrong about everything is just funny to me.
ReplyDelete