Replacing Paul Krugman
This is a few days old already, but it sums up exactly how I feel about Paul Krugman myself.
I've made no secret of the fact that I'm not over-fond of Paul Krugman's New York Times column. I don't hate it on ideological grounds; I hate it for reasons of economic efficiency. Surely we have better uses for our nation's tiny stock of really smart economists, than using one to write 1400 words a week proving that the Bush administration is at the root of every single bad thing that ever happens in the world?I don't blame Mr Krugman entirely. For one thing, it is Mr Bush's fault for getting elected; if you read through Mr Krugman's 2000 columns, it is clear that this event unhinged him. The slow decline starts in the summer of 2000, and by Jan 1, Mr Krugman has been transformed from Dr Jekyll, the economist who wrote so elegantly and eloquently on issues like trade and productivity, into Mr Hyde, the economist who thinks that his PhD somehow elevates his poorly researched forays into politics and international affairs into something worth reading, and who hates the Bush administration so much that no crime is too ludicrous to accuse them of--including forcing the outgoing president of Indonesia into making anti-semitic remarks.
For another, the medium is a poor one for anything weightier than Maureen Dowd's fluff. (I don't particularly enjoy said fluff, myself, but it is sufficiently vacuous that the time and space constraints do it no damage.) Writing twice a week is too heavy a burden for a columnist, particularly one with a day job. 700 words is far too short to say anything interesting or meaningful about economics. And Mr Krugman has had his column for going on six years, which is too long. One gets the sense that he keeps repeating "I hate George Bush" because he has long ago exhausted his supply of insight.
Comments
Damn! And to think I missed all those good Krugman columns of trade & productivity, pre-2000.
All I've ever read from him has been some variation of "Bush is the devil."
SOmehow I'm afraid Paul Krugman might do even more harm as an economist, rather than as one of a legion of Bush-hating NY Times columnists.
Posted by: JMK | February 22, 2006 05:03 PM
Either you with the president or you with the terrorists. I guess Krugman must be with the terrorists.
Does that mean they can tap his phone without a warrant?
:P
Posted by: Bob | February 22, 2006 08:02 PM
I think poor Krugman is just "with the doofuses," at this point, Bob.
My understanding has always been that communications FROM suspect foreign portals to Paul Krugman, Mohammad Aknad, even myself &/or yourself, have always been able to be monitored without a warrant, as that falls under the purview of "gathering foreign intelligence."
That is how Operation Eschelon, conducted under the Clinton administration, caught American traitor Aldrich Ames via both warrantless intercepts of "international communications" originating from suspect foreign portals and at least one warrantless search of Mr. Ames property in Virginia.
The current controversy involves the expanding of that policy (post-9/11) to include communications originating in the U.S. made TO suspect foreign portals.
A sound strategy, in my view, given that no less than four federal courts AND the FISA court have all upheld those warrantless intercepts of those "international communications" originating FROM suspect foreign portals. It would seem the flip side of that should also be allowed under the purview of "gathering foreign intelligence."
If this eventually goes to the Supreme Court, the Roberts and more vitally, the Alito appointments may loom very large in any decision that body makes. I'd figure at least five votes in favor of the warrantless "gathering of foreign intelligence" - Roberts, Alito, Thomas, Scalia and Kennedy...and only ONE certainly against (Ginsburg).
Given Breyer's, Souter's and Steven's votes in favor of governmental intrusion in the recent Kelo Decision, I couldn't count any of them as being "sure votes" against. I mean, it would appear hypocritical to support such a radical and sweeping expansion of governmental powers via the expanded Eminent Domain that was Kelo and oppose the flip side of an already acknowledged and approved governmental tool.
Posted by: JMK | February 22, 2006 08:29 PM
spider solitaire Probaly you should read this. spider solitaire Hope this helps. See you next life. Buy spider solitaire now
Posted by: spider solitaire | March 27, 2006 10:19 PM
spider solitaire Probaly you should read this. spider solitaire Hope this helps. See you next life. Buy spider solitaire now
Posted by: spider solitaire | March 27, 2006 10:19 PM