Paul Krugman and Nixonland
Paul Krugman must have banged his head before penning this mornings column (Hate Springs Eternal). He begins by deriding the vitriol of the current democratic campaign, using an upcoming book–Nixonland–as a comparative statement on negative politics. After notching strong points on the sleaze of smear and innuendo politics he bathes in those same waters himself, comparing Barack Obama to perhaps the most reviled Democratic foes of all time, Richard Nixon and George Bush.
The Obama campaign seems dangerously close to becoming a cult of personality. We’ve already had that from the Bush administration — remember Operation Flight Suit? Â
What exactly is Krugman’s beef with Obama anyway? Is he so hung up on health care mandates that he’s willing to be Hillary’s bitch? Yes she is sober, she is ready (snore), and she is serious–all the things that put her on which side of the Iraqi argument? And I thought Krugman was an Edwards man. Hidden not so subtly in the piece’s subtext is the notion that Obama’s supporters–so drunk on Kool-Aid–are immature and even deluded. Now here he might have something. Not that one is delusional because they can be inspired, but there is this air among some Obama’s supporters - a we know better attitude that you found among Deaniacs in ‘04 - that is a bit grating and has polarized some HRC supporters. They are note sole heir to the internet/web2.0/meme/bloggosphere/anything hip generation. How come nobody ever claimed Bill Clinton was inspirational? And how come Krugman didn’t note the delicious irony that Hillary was a Nixon supporter? Actually if we want irony how about when this whole thing winds up in front of the Supreme Court, because now it’s the Democrats who have disenfranchised voters. The pledged delegates go for Obama, but the unelected Super Delegates throw the nomination to Hillary.
How are they going to juggle that one?
