So I was recently linked to Paul Krugman’s opinion piece from the NYTimes entitled Prostates and Prejudices and I just can’t ignore it… I mean, you guys actually pay this man to put out hypocritical crap like this? Wow… I need to go to work for the NYTimes.
The third paragraph is where we really start to hit Rudy Giuliani hard:
Let’s start with the facts: Mr. Giuliani’s claim is wrong on multiple levels - bogus numbers wrapped in an invalid comparison embedded in a smear.
So a politician didn’t get his facts right or took something out of context to further his own point? Well, that’s not exactly news, but alright, let’s hear what you’ve got to say…
Mr. Giuliani got his numbers from a recent article in City Journal, a publication of the conservative Manhattan Institute. The author gave no source for his numbers on five-year survival rates - the probability that someone diagnosed with prostate cancer would still be alive five years after the diagnosis. And they’re just wrong.
Wrong you say? Ok, I can believe that. I mean, who’s ever heard of this City Journal and why would we believe a conservative Manhattan Institute anyway? Carry on…
You see, the actual survival rate in Britain is 74.4 percent. That still looks a bit lower than the U.S. rate, but the difference turns out to be mainly a statistical illusion. The details are technical, but the bottom line is that a man’s chance of dying from prostate cancer is about the same in Britain as it is in America.
Wa… Wait a minute. So you’re saying the survival rate in England is actually 74.4% but that it’s actually the same as the claimed 82% survival rate in the United States? I’m not sure my high school Algebra teacher would agree with you on that one, Mr. Krugman.
Oh, by the way, where did you get your claim of 74.4%? Forget to cite a source, did we? And how exactly does 74.4% end up equaling 82%? Oh, right, just take your word for it…
So that’s bogus numbers1? Check. Invalid comparison2? Check. Smear campaign against Giuliani3? Check.
Hey, I hate the man just as much as the 9/11 next 9/11 guy4, but come on. If you’re going to call the pot black, at least make sure you’re not the kettle first.