Or is it just that everything Jon Klein says is vaguely ominous? ... P.S.: Larry King is only 73? ... 12:36 P.M.
Semi-Reality Journal: From Brad DeLong's blog:
A correspondent writes, asking where is my quarterly post reminding the internet that Donald Luskin--National Review's contribution to the grand coordinated right-wing Paul Krugman-trashing enterprise ably reported by Nicholas Confessore--more often than not simply doesn't know what he is talking about.
Now it is true that the right-wing campaign has collapsed--even its two original leaders, Mickey Kaus and Andrew Sullivan, now admit that Paul Krugman's batting average since he started at the New York Times has been above 90%.
Here are three problems with the three assertions that relate to me in this passage:
1) Was I part of a "grand coordinated" campaign? Not that I know of. Who coordinated me? Whom did I coordinate with? And here I thought I was just bitterly lashing out because Krugman called me a Rhinoceros!
2) The "ably reported" Confessore piece cited by DeLong says I'm "non-right wing." That became "right-wing" in DeLong's summary. I'm with Confessore.
3) Do I now admit that Krugman's "batting average since he started at the New York Times has been above 90%"? I don't think so. (I'd have to concede that Enron was more important than 9/11!) Because I don't think it, I doubt I've ever said it--and I doubt DeLong can cite somewhere where I've said it.
That seems an oddly high hysterical b.s./word ratio for a tenured Berkeley professor. What are DeLong's economics like? ... 1:36 A.M.
Wednesday, Ap ril 4, 2007
Cranky! What's eating at JPod? 4:54 P.M.
Tuesday, Ap ril 3, 2007
Southern California and this newspaper's role in its development made the Chandlers rich beyond any normal human being's wildest dreams. All the heavy lifting, of course, was done by their rapacious forbearers and, later, by Otis Chandler, who broke with the rest of his venal clan to make The Times a great newspaper. ... [snip]
The truth of the matter is, however, that — except for Otis — the Chandlers never have conceived of this newspaper as anything much more than agent or — in recent years — adjunct of their own financial interests. [E.A.]