Lying in Ponds does a remarkable job of highlighting which columnists are, as they say, "fair and balanced" and which fall woefully short of this mark.
Paul Krugman belongs in the latter camp. Indeed; he may well be the head of the class when it comes to partisanship.
Ponds presents an article today about Krugman's history at the New York Times regarding partisanship.
Paul Krugman reached a milestone a couple of weeks ago -- he's now written over 400 columns for The New York Times, yet not a single one of them has been a "crossover column", consisting primarily of substantive praise of Republicans or criticism of Democrats. The award-winning economist and leading columnist has never written an entire column praising the Republican Party or any individual Republicans on any issue. He's never written an entire column criticizing the Democratic Party or any individual Democrats on any issue.
Mr. Krugman has never mentioned in one of his columns the universally-condemned 2001 pardon of Marc Rich by President Clinton. Despite living in New Jersey, he has never mentioned former Senator Robert Torricelli, who withdrew late in his 2002 reelection campaign because of a fundraising scandal. He has never mentioned former Democratic kingmaker and still-active presidential candidate Al Sharpton.
I would feel shame for such a record.
My guess is that Krugman feels pride in exposing the evil of the Right.
Krugman really is a piece of work, isn't he?
Posted by: Dean Esmay | Sunday, March 28, 2004 at 05:17 AM