Saturday, June 20, 2009

Krugman on Froomkin

The Froomkin firing - Paul Krugman Blog - NYTimes.com
Thus we still live in an era in which you have to have been wrong to be respectable. You’re not considered serious about national security unless you were for invading Iraq; you’re not considered a serious political analyst unless you spent the last 3 years of the Bush administration predicting a Republican comeback; you’re not considered a serious economic analyst unless you dismissed the idea that the Bush Boom, such as it was, rested on a housing bubble.

That’s why the firing of Dan Froomkin now makes a perverse sort of sense. As long as the right was in power, he was in effect the Post’s designated moonbat, someone who attracted readers but didn’t threaten the self-esteem of the self-perceived serious people at the paper. But now he looks like someone who was right when the serious people were wrong — and that means he has to go.

This is why I don't write for a living. Paul Krugman said in two paragraphs what I have been trying to get straight in my mind for 2 days now.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Not moderated but I do delete spam and I would rather that people not act like assholes.