So when the Washington Post defends the honor of their editorial board and slams Krugman for his dramatic change of heart on the Social Security issue by quoting competing columns from a decade apart, I had fun. I can only assume that Krugman will argue that the last decade has witnessed a dramatic improvement in the Social Security system!
Ultimately, Krugman suffers from arguing with an idiot ten years his junior. Or ten years his senior.
And then the Weekly Standard hits Tom Friedman, the most overrated so-called deep thinker there is today:
What his columns invariably lack in insight and sophistication about the world beyond our borders, they more than make up for in signaling (albeit belatedly) the direction of fashionable opinion in Washington and New York.
It was weird to watch Friedman go from war supporter to war opponent as the fight got difficult. Actually, I got the impression that what got difficult for him was enduring New York cocktail parties where all his wife's friends loathed Bush and "his" war. Now Friedman is starting to flip back, confident it is safe to say we might win the war.
My personal standard for judging the war lies not with Friedman but with the bulk of the non-Left war opposition. When they stop calling it "Bush's war" we'll know we've won.
As I've said before, I'm not saying you can't drown in a pool of Friedman's wisdom, but you'd have to be drunk and face down to do so.
Good times. Good times. It really is a time for giving thanks.
