I too really enjoyed the line you quoted Andrew
I like Krugman. He's extremely smart and writes well, but when reading this column I was thinking: "When thinkers become pundints."
I accept that whatever republicans do is bad, that's a given, but it's not like everything the democrats do is that good. I think Krugman, like many when they get to the main stage, feel they have a political responsibility and for this responsibility he is willing not to make difficult subtle arguments, and rather paint things more as black and white and easy to understand.
An important example was given by Penelope in her mandatory-reading
post about the sexes, or should I say by Margaret Mead, how instead of having a complicated bi-directional urge it is simpler to separate it into two opposing urges. Or, what TV does, that instead of having an intelligent debate they prefer to bring a person to represent the right, a person to represent the left, and each shouting their own side's opinions. This is not a way to educate your public, and it's not a way to think, but it is comfortable and easy. Even many artists prefer to have two opposing characters to represent different sides of the personality rather than having a complicated character.
But, when you feel the responsibility of your position, it is not an easy call to make. Anything not pro-democrat he'll say will be repeated and used for goals he very much objects to by the Republicans (or
Tea party). So I don't blame him.
I would ask, if we know people are
no longer grown ups, should we still try to behave as if they are? Should we treat them as grown ups and speak in subtleties, or do we each choose our side and try to convince as much as we can for what we believe in, even if that means not to be totally precise and correct?
As for the specifics, I really don't know enough in economics to say either way, but it is a subtle case. I will say that I think it is
very smart to sue them. Nothing bad can come out of suing them for Obama, whatever the results will be. It will show people how these companies act and it will help him advance the law for financial regulatory reform.
From my very narrow viewpoint, and as I said it is very narrow as I don't understand nor read enough about this, there is a reasonable chance that what they did was actually illegal, and it was clearly unethical which even they were aware of, so they deserve to be sued. I'm sure there are enough people that actually think that what they did was illegal to warrant a trial.
If this succeeds, there will be more suits as it is known that many operated in this shady way.
