Rolling my eyes (part two)

Listen, the last time I called Paul Krugman a hack I had some fellow Democrats calling me and emailing me, all the while encouraging me to reconsider. Well, after this pathetic attempt at journalistic commentary, I stand by my original assertion.

I mean, Good Lord, isn't it appropriate to admit when you're getting paid by a particular campaign? I've never seen anything like the apparent divorce from reality Krugman's done in order to embrace the Clintons. Despite rising to prominence due to his opposition to the war, he's hitched his wagon to the candidate which endorsed the war and refuses to acknowledge its failed prosecution.

And, in unnecessarily attacking Obama supporters, Krugman had to force himself to ignore the Clinton supporters who have unleashed their own 'venom.' Not a word over Bill Clinton's weirdly personal attacks - attacks so patently false and over the line that several Democratic leaders called the campaign to urge him to tone down the rhetoric - but column after column berating Obama and his supporters?

I just find it hard to consider someone relevant when that person is so brazeningly ignorant of the actual situation.

UPDATE: Jason Linkins at Huffington Post has a nice response.