Playing politics II

Adam J. and Scott and I have been corresponding offline on this item, and Adam forwarded on some further info from This Modern World on the NY Times article (and it’s Mysterious Changes):

A Lexis search on the Times story headlined “Goal Is to Lay Cornerstone at Ground Zero During G.O.P. Convention” brings up not only the article — with the headline intact — but the following correction, appended at the end:
CORRECTION: An article yesterday about rebuilding at the World Trade Center site misstated the goal of development officials in setting an aggressive environmental review schedule. It is to start construction next summer, not to lay a cornerstone for the first tower during the Republican National Convention. (State officials had considered that at one point, but they recently decided not to do so, a spokeswoman for Gov. George E. Pataki said yesterday.)
Hmm. So this horrifyingly shameless exploitation of 9/11 actuallly was “considered” at some point, albeit by unnamed “state officials,” which conveniently gives the White House deniability.

That latter is a marvelous paragraph, managing to accuse the White House (or by their not being accused.

I’d also be a bit more sensitive about using the word “horrifying” in the context of 9/11. “Shameless” such at thing would be. But the true horror of 9/11 cannot actually be diminished by political shenanigans.

As to it being considered — sure, I can imagine it. How seriously it was considered, and whether it got past the icy glare stage, is impossible to say. But I’d be surprised if someone somewhere didn’t suggest it.

That said, relevant “state officials” for setting the WTC rebuilding timetable should logically include the Lower Manhattan Development Association, whose team lineup includes Bush cronies like Republican Leadership Council founder and Bush fundraiser Lewis Eisenberg, Reagan cabinet member John Whitehead, and Yale classmate, Bush donor, and former Texas Rangers co-owner Roland Betts, who can be seen leading Bush around his Jackson Hole retreat on the White House website.

Hmmm. A major political plum committee/association, whose members by statute are named by the governor (Republican) and mayor (Republican). How shocking that they have ties to the GOP. That, of course, makes them “cronies.”

Again, the idea that the LMDA directors are all political hacks who seriously proposed such a silly-ass idea, debated it, and only reluctantly dropped it when a firestorm of protest erupted among right-thinking Americans is not stated in the above paragraph, but it’s certainly implied.

Now, I don’t have the slightest idea who first floated the idea for using the WTC disaster as an enormous GOP prop. And I don’t have the slightest idea who told the Times about it, who at the Times then made the decision to delete the GOP-embarrassing headline, or if any pressure was applied. Not claiming to know.

Not know, just suggest.

But isn’t it the job of the Times to answer questions like that, not create them?

Well, I’d certainly be interested in hearing more about which “state officials” made the suggestion, and how seriously it was discussed — and, if it was seriously discussed, who actually put the kibosh on it. Perhaps the Times is working on that story even now. Perhaps they have, and it was some minor functionary who’s been sent off to count manhole covers in the Bronx. Or maybe it’s a major scandal which has been suppressed by covert White House Elite Press-Bashing Special Forces. I’m not sure that we haven’t heard the story behind it yet means that there is a major story, though — or that we won’t hear it in the future. Indeed, I have little doubt that the Times would love to run with a story like that …

Maybe the correction was put forward as it, simply to note that the original item was, actually, in error.