Bird, that was fore-ordained. just prior to the financial meltdown, when the Obama candidacy was starting to lose steam, iirc more than one NY Times Op/Ed columnist declared that if [the least qualified candidate in the history of the country, pace, Nancy Ferraro] lost the election, it could only be because of racism.

btw, i’m not Dorothy Parker — i’m Eleanor Roosevelt.

I dislike the “cap and tax” formulation. It obfuscates the the real issue – follow the money. Cap is a loser for everybody but particularly the coal industry. Trade is where the money is. Goldman Sachs anybody? The robber barons are oh so much more clever now.

Regards,
Roy

FWIW, Krugman doesn’t seem to me to tout “racial fear” as much as “ignoramuses who don’t know what the bleep they’re talking about” as the cause of anti-Obamacare protests. His explicit example is of protesters who, asked if they are against all forms of gov’t healthcare, say “Yes,” then when asked if they’re on Medicare, also say “Yes.” As usual, the problem is the question: Asked to give a yes/no answer to either question, the answerers can’t engage in any of the nuance the Left claims to be so good at – for example, saying, “I support a health care safety net for those with no other options, much like Medicare today, but recognize that expanding Medicare to include EVERYbody is a recipe for (a) immediate disaster and (b) eventual health care rationing that may indeed result in de-facto euthanization of the vulnerable.”

Krugman is a tool. Has been forever. What I loved, in addition to his characterization of angry protesters as “crass” (thank goodness none spit in his pinot, or he might’ve upgraded them to “cretinous barbarians”), was the little line at the bottom: “David Brooks is off today.” I do hope Mr. Brooks is on the correct (that is, the right) side of this debate, considering his own genteel Obamania…

It’s that he’s Red.