Greenwald: Paul Krugman Unironically Anoints Himself Arbiter of “Seriousness”

[99th_Monkey]

Paul Krugman Unironically Anoints Himself Arbiter of “Seriousness”: Only Clinton Supporters Eligible
by Glenn Greenwald * Jan. 28 2016 * The Intercept

For years, New York Times columnist Paul Krugman has repeatedly complained about the D.C. orthodoxy-enforcing tactic of labeling only those who subscribe to Washington pieties as “Very Serious People,” or “VSPs.” It’s a term Krugman borrowed (with credit) from the liberal blogger Atrios, who first coined it to illustrate how Iraq War opponents were instantly marginalized in establishment discourse and only war advocates were deemed to be Serious. Krugman mockingly uses it so often that the New York Times created a special tag for the term. The primary purpose of the “VSP” tactic is to malign anyone who dissents from D.C. establishment pieties as non-Serious or un-Serious, thus demeaning the person as someone who can (and should) be ignored as residing on the fringe, unworthy of engagement or a real platform regardless of the merits of their position.

Yesterday, one of the purest and most noxious examples of this tactic was invoked — by Paul Krugman. The longtime Clinton defender announced that all Serious policy experts “lean Hillary”; he even used the term “serious” unironically to advance his claim:

Meanwhile, the Sanders skepticism of the wonks continues: Paul Starr lays out the case. As far as I can tell, every serious progressive policy expert on either health care or financial reform who has weighed in on the primary seems to lean Hillary.

Let’s repeat that: “Every serious progressive policy expert on either health care or financial reform who has weighed in on the primary seems to lean Hillary.”

The economist Dean Baker — previously cited as a financial reform and economic policy expert by Krugman, but who now most assuredly does not “lean Hillary” — quickly reacted to his formal exclusion by Krugman from the Club of Seriousness:

Paul Krugman Revokes Credentials of Those Who Don’t Support Clinton. …

Oh well, so much for those of us backing or leaning towards Sanders. I guess we just have to turn to that old Washington saying, “better right than expert.” In other words, it’s better to rely on people who have a track record of being right than the people who have the best credentials.

MORE: https://theintercept.com/2016/01/28/paul-krugman-unironically-anoints-himself-arbiter-of-seriousness-only-clinton-supporters-eligible/

[99th_Monkey]

1. TruthDig: "Krugman Deems 170 Economists Who Support Sanders’ Wall Street Reforms ‘Un-Serious'

Paul Krugman Deems 170 Policy Experts Who Support Sanders’ Wall Street Reforms ‘Un-Serious’
by Alexander Reed Kelly. * Jan 28, 2016 * TruthDig
http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/paul_krugman_says_the_170_policy_experts_who_support_sanders_wall_street_re

[PotatoChip]

18. That was a very good read too. Thanks!

[99th_Monkey]

20. You're most welcome PotatoChip. n/t

[Broward]

2. What's gotten into Krugman?

He actually wrote the other day that basically Sanders and Clinton share the same goals but differ on strategy. To me, this is way off the mark. I don't see how anyone can actually believe this.

[99th_Monkey]

3. I think Krugman smells a cabinet position in his future, if Hillary gets in the WH n/t

[Spitfire of ATJ]

5. Treasury Secretary?

[99th_Monkey]

7. That would be my guess, or Commerce? n/t

[Enthusiast]

22. That would be my guess.

[mythology]

16. In the Senate they voted the same 93% of the time

That would seem seem to indicate a certain similarity in goals.

[retrowire]

4. lol

and just the other day 2 hillary supporters dog piled on me for not devoutly respecting Krugman.

[navarth]

6. I assume supporters of Sec. Clinton will scream Greenwald

and move on. Since, you know, Greenwald is bad and stuff.

[whatchamacallit]

8. They hate Greenwald for the same reason they love Hillary

An aversion to truth.

[ErisDiscordia]

10. !

You have a definite point there. It's not a truth unless the Hillary Group signs off on it. Until they get different orders and change their so-called minds, of course.

[Z_California]

9. Krugman actually used the term "Berniebros" in a tweet

So it's not like he's biased or anything.

[pnwmom]

11. Greenwald, the Libertarian, is hardly an unbiased reporter on progressive issues. n/t

[Armstead]

12. Nor is Krugman

[pnwmom]

14. Krugman is a strong progressive, not a Libertarian. n/t

[Armstead]

17. Krugman has had his moments, but he's gone back to his persona of the Clinton years

During the Clinto years, he used to be considered a fairly conservative supporter of free trade and other such non-progressive snake oil, as he would be the first to admit.

Then in the Bush years, he found a niche for a new identity as a voice for progressives. Now, in his rabid support for a return of Clintonism he has come full circle as an attack dog against the ideas and goals of "the left."

[99th_Monkey]

13. At least Greenwald isn't transparently angling for a cabinet position with Hillary's WH n/t

[ejbr]

15. Is he serious?!

[99th_Monkey]

19. LOL - good one. nt

[uhnope]

21. as if Greenwald's entire "career" isn't one self-anointing fest using lots of KY Jelly

[wilt the stilt]

23. Why does anyone take Greenwald seriously

e wasn't even political until recently. i also don't take anyone who is a libertarian seriously.

[DesMoinesDem]

24. Kicked for pissing off the anti-Greenwald troll.