Paul Krugman in an interview:
Again, I think it comes back to press coverage. Just this weekend, I was looking at something: There’s an enormous scandal right now involving Boeing and a federal contract, which appears to have been overpaid by $4 billion. The Pentagon official who was responsible for the contract has now left and has become a top executive at Boeing. And it’s been barely covered in the press –- a couple of stories on inside pages.
You compare that with the White House travel office in 1993. There were accusations, later found to be false, that the Clintons had intervened improperly to dismiss a couple of employees in the White House travel office. That was the subject, in the course of one month, of three front-page stories in the Washington Post. So if people don’t understand how badly things are being managed now, and have an unduly negative sense of how things were managed in the Clinton years, well, there in a nutshell is your explanation.
I can understand the blind rage Paul Krugman’s name arouses in the far-right, nearly equal to the rage against Clinton himself. Good. Link via Atrios.
Recent Quackings