There is something about reflexive anti-Trumpism that keeps allegedly intelligent people from conducting even the most basic research before spouting off about whatever it is that grieves them so.
This is a real problem.
The New York Times’ Paul Krugman, for example, aired a historically illiterate grievance this week after Trump honored Tiger Woods with the Presidential Medal of Freedom.
“I’m old enough to remember when Presidential Medals of Freedom were given for showing courage and making sacrifices on behalf of the nation and the world,” Krugman lamented Monday evening. “Tiger Woods … hits golf balls for money.”
As reality would have it, Woods is the fourth professional golfer to win the Presidential Medal of Freedom, which is the highest honor available to American citizens. Former President Barack Obama gave the same award to professional golfer Charles Sifford in 2014. Former President George W. Bush did the same for Jack Nicklaus in 2005 and Arnold Palmer in 2004.
Woods may be a trailblazer in a lot of areas, but winning the Presidential Medal of Freedom is not one of them. This is basic stuff, knowledge that is readily available online or in, you know, books.
Does Krugman not know that a professional golfer won this award just five years ago? Or does the Times columnist know and just not care?
For that matter, is he even thinking of the correct award? Krugman’s bit about “courage and making sacrifices on behalf of the nation and the world” suggests he may be thinking about the Medal of Honor, which is the highest award available for military courage. The Medal of Honor is indeed a somber affair. It is given only to those who commit uncommon acts of heroism in battle.
The Presidential Medal of Freedom, which Krugman suggests has been greatly devalued by Trump awarding it to Woods, has gone to such noble and self-sacrificing heroes as sketch comedy producer Lorne Michaels, baby boomer spokesman Bruce Springsteen, Dairy Queen enthusiast Warren Buffet, actual war criminal Henry Kissinger, and professional teleprompter reader Tom Brokaw.
The Presidential Medal of Freedom is a broadly defined award. It is awarded broadly. Treating it with all the gravity and severity of the Medal of Honor suggests either that Krugman does not know the difference between the two accolades or that he knows the difference but does not realize that the latter is more cheerful than the former.
Lastly, what is this nonsense about devaluing Woods as merely a guy who hits golf balls for money? You can say a lot about Woods, but he certainly meets the award’s criteria that the recipient makes an “especially meritorious contribution” to “cultural or other significant public or private endeavors.”
Woods is not only one of the greatest golfers of all time, but he is also the first black man to come this far in this sport. Not to say they performed under the exact same circumstances, but to say Woods is just a guy who “hits golf balls for money” is a bit like saying Muhammad Ali, who was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 2005, was just a guy who “punches people for money.”
Just because you do not like Trump does not mean that everything he does is bad or deserving of condemnation. Sometimes, he does a good thing, like awarding an actual and currently active sports pioneer the Presidential Medal of Freedom.
[Also read: Trump’s business dealings with Tiger Woods overshadow Medal of Freedom]
