Is Paul Krugman Watching A Different Election?

In Paul Krugman's latest column in the New York Times "Hate Springs Eternal," the journalist seems to be fretting about the "bitterness of the fight for the Democratic nomination" and wonders why "is there so much venom out there?"

Now, I've been watching a lot of the politics that have been going on this last year, more than I ever have in the past. And I've been keeping a closer eye on the Democratic side, and I have no idea where Krugman gets his feeling from. How many times does he have to hear the candidates say they like each other, they were friends before this campaign started and they'll be friends after?

Sure, he goes on to mention David Shuster and MSNBC, as if that's the first time that the network has said something negative against the Clinton camp, but he accuses not the media, but specifically Barack Obama of using "Clinton rules"... well not so much Obama but Obama supporters. Maybe he's been reading too many comments on the internet.

But the problem is that Krugman is using guilt by association and indirectly accusing Obama. I had to reread sections of the article for it to become clear to me that he was actually accusing supporters and not Obama, likening them to a cult.

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. I’m not the first to point out that the Obama campaign seems dangerously close to becoming a cult of personality.

Unfortunately, Clinton fans will read this and assume it's Obama using harsh words and not the more than occasional rant in the comment sections of liberal blogs. And it's not like Clinton supporters haven't been just as vitiolic at those same sites.

What does Mr. Krugman have to say about Bill Clinton's "fairy tale" comment, or Mark Penn bringing up Obama's drug use when he was a teenager, which was already part of the public record? The Clinton's have not been playing with kid gloves through any of this campaign, they are in it to win, as well they should be; and if the public in general has a feeling or suspicion of the Clintons, it's only due to the fact that the media itself have been playing by Clinton rules for the last 15 years. Paul Krugman's own colleagues have been the ones aiming for the Clintons.

The funny thing is that I'm a Krugman fan, but he wears his heart of his sleeve with this opinion in defense of the Clintons.

Stop reading the blogs, Mr. Krugman. The comments you read are not what the mainstream voter feels. Instead, why not try watching and listening to the actual candidates and reading their words instead of biased opinions and acerbic critiques of anonymous commenters in a blog.