Is it just me, or have you also noticed that ever since Paul Krugman began appearing on cable news shows his Princetonian tolerance for conventional bullshit has undergone a pronounced decline? Yesterday, for instance, I caught just a minute of Krugman on Fareed Zakaria's "GPS," in which he was hilariously dismissive of the Beltway's prevailing wisdom. I paraphrase: Everyone keeps saying President Obama should focus on the economy, to which Krugman added, What's Obama supposed to do? Wander around the White House muttering "I'm focused on the economy?" even though there's not a chance in hell of the GOP House following up? On anything productive?
And in today's column, there's this:
O.K., at this point the conventions of punditry call for saying something to demonstrate my evenhandedness, something along the lines of "Democrats do it too." But while Democrats, being human, often read [empirical] evidence selectively and choose to believe things that make them comfortable, there really isn’t anything equivalent to Republicans’ active hostility to collecting evidence in the first place....
[F]or all the talk of reforming and reinventing the G.O.P., the ignorance caucus retains a firm grip on the party’s heart and mind.
No, it's not an untethered rant or anything close to blogospheric rage, but it seems to reflect an increasing, almost unTimes-like impatience with, and what's more a growing disgust of, his commenting colleagues' willful ignorance.
Perhaps he has suffered long enough the George Wills on panels and David Brookses in print. Or maybe I'm just projecting.
More importantly, when will the POTUS reach his end?
Posted by: dr.e | February 11, 2013 at 12:13 PM
I have been struck by how many people, including the center and right, have been willing to point out over the past year that most of the radicalization of politics is due to the GOP.
I am dumbfounded by the fact that I have not heard anyone deny it.
Posted by: Robert Lipscomb | February 11, 2013 at 03:17 PM
Where have you been since 2000? Krugman has been visibly disdainful of beltway thinking at least since he got his NY Times column during the 2000 race.
In some ways, Krugman has become more measured and precise in his sarcasm. I think at one time he thought he could win over the beltway by trying to have a reasonable discussion with them. He's long since passed that point (and he openly mocks those who seem to be trying to do the same).
Posted by: Chris Andersen | February 11, 2013 at 05:00 PM
I'm actually seeing more of this "un Times-like impatience" in the Times recently, it's not just Krugman. I've been enjoying reading the Times more lately. Maybe they finally got the message.
Posted by: priscianus jr | February 12, 2013 at 04:41 AM