Paul Krugman Is An Asshole

[georgecolombo]

For years, I've considered myself a Krugman fan. I read his columns and bought his books. I overlooked that fact that all during the primary, he shilled shamelessly for Hillary. After all, he's entitled to have his candidate, just as we all were.

Today's column, however, is just too much. It is not the specifics of the column itself that rankles. Rather, it is the opening paragraph. In a column that's ostensibly about Medicare, Krugman begins:

It was the worst of days, it was the best of days. On Wednesday, Senate Democrats capitulated to the Bush administration on wiretapping — with Barack Obama joining the coalition of the craven.

This was a completely gratuitous swipe at Obama. If Krugman wanted to write about FISA, that's fine, but this column wasn't about FISA. He just couldn't resist bashing Obama even though he was writing a column on a completely unrelated matter.

Krugman's constant drumbeat of anti-Obama jabs has crossed the line for me. In the context of the campaign that is in front of us, he is not helpful. He's become a caricature of the embittered Hillary supporter. Krugman these days is not much different than Harriet Christian, just less honest and straightforward.

[MannyGoldstein]

1. Krugman's A Pretty Black-or-White Guy

Very smart, but there's never any gray.

[sshan2525]

2. I don't disagree with Krugman....

The people that voted for FISA were, in fact, craven. That doesn't mean I agree with everything Krugman says and it doesn't change my intent to vote for Obama. Obama is the best of the two choices and will probably make a good president but it doesn't mean he walks on water.

[georgecolombo]

3. I Agree, BUT...

As I mentioned in my post, if Krugman wanted to write a column about FISA and criticize Obama in that context, it would have been fine with me. (And, for the record, I disagree with Obama's position on FISA.)

My problem with Krugman is that he seems to be intent on inserting as many gratuitous criticisms of Obama as he possibly can. The Obama reference in this particular column contributed nothing to the column's central thesis. It was just a petty, unnecessary swipe that served no real purpose other than to undermine Obama. When it comes to Obama, Krugman has become like a child who needs to show us that he's stomping his feet because he didn't get what he wanted.

[indepat]

4. And he cravenly and royally fucked up on this one big-time

:D

[Benhurst]

5. link?

[georgecolombo]

6. Sorry

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/11/opinion/11krugman.html?hp

[Benhurst]

9. Thanks.

:hi:

[The Backlash Cometh]

7. A true progressive would have understood what that vote was about.

It was about taking away a citizen's right to learn about the wire-tapping details through civil procedure. Now, we'll have to accept another government self-investigation, and another government report which will be as manipulated as the Warren Commission, 9-11 Commission, you name it.

I don't agree with Krugman's vocal support of Hillary, but this criticism about the vote and about Obama is precisely how a progressive should feel because actions speak louder than words. Restoring civil rights transcends the candidate. And this is a progressive newsgroup.

[leveymg]

8. He's still got a lot of reserve good-will built up. Let him vent.

We all need to.

[Benhurst]

10. Especially when the Constitution is being trampled underfoot.

[leveymg]

11. Especially.

Gawd, I hate electoral politics, sometimes. Do anything to get elected, and hope you can sort it out afterwards - usually, you can't. This is one of them, I'm afraid.

[Jim Sagle]

12. Krug's right, you're wrong, and that's the end of it.

[georgecolombo]

13. Quite Impressive Logic

A very impressive display of reasoning and intellectual rigor.

[Jim Sagle]

18. No 'reasoning and intellectual rigor' is needed when replying to such an empty blast at such an

honorable and progressive public figure.

[GOPBasher]

14. I agree that that comment was unnecessary, but Krugman is supporting Obama.

I don't think we should totally despise Krugman now.

[georgecolombo]

15. With A Supporter Like That...

I really want to like Krugman again and have always had enormous respect for his analysis and judgment. (In fact, I got out of the market late last year based on a couple of his columns and continue to be grateful.) But this column was one little snide remark too many. Of course, he's not really an asshole but I wish he'd stop the incessant, gratuitous digs -- at least until after the election.

[Voltaire99]

16. Krugman's right.

Shill all you will for Obama, the fact remains he's abetting Bush fascism.

Expect more of this from the center-right Obama, who has much of Bush in him:

http://www.counterpunch.org/whitney07112008.html

[lolly]

17. Quite a propos

One of the elements that made it the "worst of days" was the craven about-face by Obama, who is supposed to be the standard bearer for Democrats now. Obama sold out progressives, sold out the Constitution. And frankly, I don't think it garnered him a single vote. Nobody who was on the fence before, or who was pro-McCain, is going to jump up and decide to vote for Obama because he went along with gutting the Constitution to protect Bush.

[FredfromSpace]

19. Krugman is great

and I have no disagreement with this:

"It was the worst of days, it was the best of days. On Wednesday, Senate Democrats capitulated to the Bush administration on wiretapping — with Barack Obama joining the coalition of the craven."

Except, maybe, that craven might be too generous a word.

I would say something like "cravenly complicit in this criminal assault on our national principles."

Sorry that is just how I happen to see it.