Krugman's Weird Jihad

Krugman's pile of capital is almost infinite in my mind, so his bizarre sallies against Barack Obama--in language formerly reserved for the likes of Rove and Rummy--won't do much to make me stop reading or appreciating his column. But, smart as he is, I wouldn't want him operating on my spleen. Campaign analysis is obviously beyond his ken, too:

The bitterness of the fight for the Democratic nomination is, on the face of it, bizarre. Both candidates still standing are smart and appealing. Both have progressive agendas (although I believe that Hillary Clinton is more serious about achieving universal health care, and that Barack Obama has staked out positions that will undermine his own efforts). Both have broad support among the party’s grass roots and are favorably viewed by Democratic voters.

Supporters of each candidate should have no trouble rallying behind the other if he or she gets the nod.

Why, then, is there so much venom out there?

I won’t try for fake evenhandedness here: most of the venom I see is coming from supporters of Mr. Obama, who want their hero or nobody.

That's from the delicately-titled "Hate Springs Eternal."

1) There is no venom between the candidates. Given that this is the most closely-fought campaign in my life, it's especially strange that it's been so genteel. Krugman, unfamiliar with campaign history, apparently doesn't realize this.

2) This is, by my count, the third assault on Barack Obama Krugman has leveled, not to mention other snide asides and numerous anti-Obama blog posts. Given that he has a very large megaphone, it wouldn't surprise me that he's hearing from some of the millions of readers out there. Sorry, Paul, but the heat in the kitchen comes from your souffle. You attacked first; buck up.