Krugman Effigy Update

Last week, you'll recall, New York Times columnist Paul Krugman began his column by saying: "A message to progressives: By all means, hang Senator Joe Lieberman in effigy," which was in seeming contradiction to his alarmed observation four months prior that "congressmen hanged in effigy" by Tea Partiers represented "something new and ugly" in American politics. Well, yesterday, the Krugger issued one of the better non-apology apologies you'll read this week:

(Management wants me to make it clear that in my last column I wasn't endorsing inappropriate threats against Mr. Lieberman.)

I for one am convinced that management would indeed like Krugman to make that clear. (Link via Wonkette.)

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • ||

    It must be nice to be able to be internally inconsistent and not care. Very freeing, I would imagine, much like watching TV with no pants on while eating Doritos.

  • John Tagliaferro||

    I need to close my blinds more.

  • ed||

    Nobel laureates and Pulitzer Prize-winners can do and say as they please, forever and ever, can't they? Those honors, bestowed by fellow travelers with a stake in the game, are get-out-of-jail-free cards that never expire.

  • hmm||

    I'm not that familiar with print, but doesn't an editor constitute management and don't they approve articles?

  • NAL||

    Again, I would like to conjecture in all seriousness that Krugman is psychologically impaired. My money is on schizophrenia, but Alzheimer's disease, mad cow disease, or a brain tumor are also possible.

  • ||

    I think he suffers from a condition known as terminal jackassery.

  • The Art-P.O.G.||

    I find your hypothesis oddly compelling, NAL.

  • Scagsdale||

    LOL. He probably just needs an enema.

  • ||

    /Korsakoff's Syndrome fit pretty well.

    There are six major symptoms of Korsakoff's syndrome:

    1. anterograde amnesia and
    2. retrograde amnesia, severe memory loss
    3. confabulation, that is, invented memories which are then taken as true due to gaps in memory sometimes associated with blackouts
    4. meager content in conversation
    5. lack of insight
    6. apathy - the patients lose interest in things quickly and generally appear indifferent to change.
  • Ska||

    Confabulation? Confabulous!

  • ||

    I think that from now on, I'll refer to this disorder as "Krugman's disease".

    -jcr

  • ||

    Agreed. I will definitely include Korsakoff's Syndrome in my next post regarding non-sequiturian Krugman spewings.

  • ||

    I read somewhere that sometimes entire populations go mad. The two examples given were revolutionary France and Nazi Germany. The U.S. hasn't gone mad on that scale yet. But, it is pretty obvious that liberals have completely lost their minds. And I point to the esteem that Krugman is held in liberal circles as exhibit number one.

  • Mike M.||

    The fact that his comment even managed to make it by his editors in the first place is more evidence of this.

    And it wasn't one of his blog posts, it was a featured column that made it into the print edition! I don't think even the typical liberal editor ever would have allowed that to go in just ten or fifteen years ago.

  • Citizen Nothing||

    Columnists, everywhere and always, are given surprising latitude.

  • George||

    whereas "conservatives" went mad enmass from about 2002 or 3 and haven't fully recovered as yet.

  • ||

    Yes all threads must be highjacked to discuss either Iraq or Sarah Palin.

  • George||

    Yes, all threads must be hijacked to make partisan swipes at liberals.

  • ||

    Entire populations don't go mad. Places like revolutionary France and Nazi Germany get taken over by a few mad people, the usual minority chunk of the population that has harbored similar crazy beliefs support them, and to survive everyone else plays along with it.

  • ||

    I'm currently reading Shirer's "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich", and he makes it clear that not everyone, or even most people, believed the crap the Nazis foisted on them.

  • highnumber||

    I thought this was a good book about living in Nazi Germany:

    http://www.amazon.com/Defying-.....0312421133

  • Johnny Longtorso||

    Who gets to decide what threat is "appropriate"?

  • ||

    Salient point!

    Inappropriate threats - "Nonononooooo...". Appropriate threats, however? "Wellll...OK, yeah!"

    There must be a guidebook somewhere.

  • ¢||

    I'm not that familiar with print, but doesn't an editor constitute management and don't they approve articles?

    Not in the sense you mean. "_____ Editor" at a place as prestigious as the Times is a no-work mission-statement job (except "Copy Editor," and they get fired if they fix things). Editors "brand," not read.

  • ||

    Krugman argued like an asshole even back in 1999, according to his ardent defender Brad DeLong. Even if Bush drove him crazier, he still hasn't gotten better.

  • ||

    I read that column.

    By the time I had finished, I wanted to go to Krugman's house, hide in the bushes, and throw a big bag of flaming dog shit at him.

  • John Tagliaferro||

    An example of an appropriate threat.

  • Joe Lieberman||

    Paul Krugman can suck my entire ass.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    The New York Times? Is that thing still around?

  • Citizen Nothing||

    We could probably assume the NYT's debt and take it over. Anyone want to jump into the newspaper biz with me?

  • Citizen Nothing||

    Hell, I once ran a newspaper with a 1,000 circulation into the ground. I'm sure I could do the same with the Times.

  • The Art-P.O.G.||

    Bwah ha ha ha

  • ||

    What better than the current management?

  • ||

    Columnists, everywhere and always, are given surprising latitude.

    That's because the editors are always in the speakeasy across the street, drunk and wreathed in cigar smoke, cracking wise, while dandling babes upon their knees.

  • Ska||

    Dandling? Who's editing over there, Roman Polanski?

  • Citizen Nothing||

    My editors for the past 20 years have all been women. They may be drunk, wreathed in cigar smoke and cracking wise, but I've never seen one knee-dandling babes.

  • BakedPenguin||

    Yeah? Start writing for the Village Voice.

  • ||

    Wow, are you serious? This is like totally cool.

    RT
    www.online-invisibility.net.tc

  • Dave Anthony||

    Jesus Christ.

    "It’s a seriously flawed bill, we’ll spend years if not decades fixing it, but it’s nonetheless a huge step forward."

    That sentence alone makes me want to bludgeon Mr. Krugman on the head with a shovel.

    "Health care sucks, and we're going to pass this bill that also sucks, but gives us lots of power, and then we'll spend decades mucking around with it trying to fix that disaster." He's the definition of a technocratic ass hole.

  • ||

    It used to be that entertainment and politics were the two main ways to obtain prestige without merit. I think we'll have to add academia, and economics in particular to that list.

    -jcr

  • ||

    What makes you think he hasn't already been hit on the head with a shovel? Aren't his columns enough evidence?

  • ||

    It is preposterous that Joe Lieberman would refuse to help the Democrats.

    Sincerely,
    That Guy The Democrats Put Up Against Lieberman And Lost

  • MNG||

    Dudes
    I'm pretty sure what Krugman said was, you know, a JOKE. It strikes me that it was made totally with his earlier comments in mind. If your outrage at Krugman would lighten up its strangle hold on your sense of humor I think you'd see that rather plainly...

  • ap||

    dude, stfu. that was asinine.

    you see, when a liberal makes a ridiculous comment its a joke and a veiled jab/joke at the lunatic right. when a conservative makes a ridiculous comments its evidence of inferior intellect and rabidness.

  • MNG||

    Sorry, it just makes total sense. The "by all means..." lets you know it refers to the craziness of the right burning officials in effigy. Think about how anomalous it sounds if it were not said with that background.

    But I realize the right has some trouble with subtle humor when the epitome of their funny-men, Rush Limbaugh, finds the height of satire to be playing older black officials giving impassionate speeches while he makes faces (I'm referring to his short lived TV show which I watched quite a bit). Har-de-har-har!

  • ||

    A message to H&R commenters: By all means feel free to stuff sausages down MNG's throat and starving dogs up his ass.

  • Slut Bunwalla||

    Jesus christ, man.

  • MNG||

    And oh, ap, see those keys on your keyboard, one on the left hand side, one on the right, that say "shift?" If you press that while typing the first letter of every sentence it will capitalize it for you.

  • Marc||

    L'esprit de l'escalier, c'est toi.

  • ap||

    by all means, jump off a bridge

  • ap||

    PS - you should use correct grammar when you are calling someone else out. but by all means, be a useless prick.

  • ||

    I'm pretty sure what Krugman said was, you know, a JOKE.

    Of course it's a joke. That doesn't mean that Krugman intended to make a joke, though.

    -jcr

  • MNG||

    And before the "you ove Krugman" starts let me say that 1. I don't read the Times I read the WaPo 2. I've read very little Krugman at all and what I have read bored me to tears or did not seem very insightful

    I just think it's plain the comment was a joke not hypocrisy...What Krugman should get called on is defending a pretty awful reform bill.

  • ||

    (Management wants me to make it clear that in my last column I wasn't endorsing inappropriate threats against Mr. Lieberman.)

    But apparently management thinks its just fine to make appropriate threats.

  • ||

    Paulie takes a page from the porn-is-rape playbook:

    Yes, there were filibusters in the past — most notably by segregationists trying to block civil rights legislation.

    Take something you don't like, and equate it with something that everyone hates- it's fun and easy! I'll start: "Crowds at the mall are annoying. Most notably: HITLER."

  • ||

    Smoky factories annoy me. You know who ordered a lot of factories built? Stalin.

  • jk||

    As I have said before and will continue to say, Paul Krugman is a moron. Has anyone checked Keynes' grave lately - I think his head is shoved up Krugman's ass.

  • ||

    Sorry, it just makes total sense.

    It makes sense to you. And there's never been any conflict in the past between what makes sense to you, and the truth.

  • Dave||

    I think you are giving Krugman too much credit by thinking he writes his own columns. He probably just skims Daily Kos diaries and changes some pronouns. Voila!

  • Jeffersonian||

    I tried to hang Krugman in effigy, but it's just too cold out. So instead I just tossed a "Wizard of Oz" DVD into the fireplace.

  • mybrainison||

    and yours is not. What a pitiful waste of oxygen you guys are. Crybabies: you and other yahoos like you can say and do anything, when one gets not your horrible actions but just your horrible words back at you, you can't take it for an instant.

  • mbt||

    hi,
    everybody, take your time and a little bit.hdghfsgh

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Video Game Nation: How gaming is making America freer – and more fun.
  • Matt Welch: How the left turned against free speech.
  • Nothing Left to Cut? Congress can’t live within their means.
  • And much more.

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement