So this 2005 Powerline quote on Krugman is making the rounds:

It must be depressing to be Paul Krugman. No matter how well the economy performs, Krugman’s bitter vendetta against the Bush administration requires him to hunt for the black lining in a sky full of silvery clouds. With the economy now booming, what can Krugman possibly have to complain about? In today’s column, titled That Hissing Sound, Krugman says there is a housing bubble, and it’s about to burst. . .

I use John Cole's cite because he has the decency to add "[c]onsidering my recent past (at least up until mid 2005), I am not really in a position to get all high and mighty . . ." Indeed. Now, I guess it is bad form to talk about Andrew Sullivan's joining up with Donald Luskin in their anti-Krugman crusade for so many years. It seems to me Andrew would be well served to acknowledge his errors and disavow Luskin, once and for all. He could cite this rant from Luskin on Krugman's Nobel prize:

I scanned Andrew Sullivan's blog to see if he had mentioned Paul Krugman winning the Nobel Prize for Economics. He hasn't. But, after championing Donald Luskin and being, in Luskin's words, a "Krugman Truth Squad senior member," Andrew Sullivan would like you to forget he wrote outrageously stupid things about Paul Krugman (and about everything else.) Now of course, Sully hates Bush, hates Republicans, hates the Right, hates the Clintons (oh wait, he always did that) - so he is now a "Charter Member of the Left blogosphere." I personally won't forget what he wrote about Krugman and other things, even though clearly others are willing to forget (and forgive?)

More . . .

They predicted snow for Denver today but it's a gorgeous fall day so I'm going to take advantage of it.

For those of you online, here's an open thread.

Via Todd Beeton, I take my opportunity to associate myself with the remarks of a Nobel Prize winner:

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Both candidates ended up running some version of a turn out the base election. It just so happens that this year the Democratic base is much bigger than the Republican base.

. . . PAUL KRUGMAN: I was critical of Obama early on for this notion that we were going to be bi-partisan, it wasn't going to happen...

STEPHANOPOULOS: You wanted a base election...

KRUGMAN: ...and here it is.

Indeed, here it is. Events have provided Barack Obama with the opportunity for a progressive mandate. Let's hope he takes that opportunity.

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only

With 3 weeks to go, the polls have all switched to a LV (likely voter) model. It is important to understand the each organization has its own likely voter model. Gallup invented its famous one (the 5 questions) and, as far as I know, has not varied it much. As a result, Gallup LV polling has been subject to wild fluctuations. By contrast, Rasmussen (and others, R2000 for one, I think) on the other hand, has switched to a party ID likely voter model and is more stable. And of course each polling outfit has its own general house biases and flaws. (One misconception to be addressed here is about the Bradley Effect. That turns up, for the most degree and if at all, in exit polls, not in pre-election polling.) Later I will round up some old posts from 2004 on the LV model controversies. But for now, let's look at the polling 3 weeks out.

DKos/R2000 has Obama up 12, 52-40. WaPo/ABC has Obama up 10, 53-43. Gallup's new LV polling has Obama up 6, 51-45 (or 4, 50-46, using their 2004 model.) Hotline has Obama up 8, 49-41. Battleground has Obama up 8, 51-43. Ras has Obama up 5, 50-45.

More . . .

NYTimes:

The American economist Paul R. Krugman won the Nobel economics prize on Monday for his analysis of trade patterns and location of economic activity. Mr. Krugman, 55, a professor at Princeton University in New Jersey and a columnist for The New York Times, formulated a new theory to answer questions about free trade, the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences said.

“What are the effects of free trade and globalization? What are the driving forces behind worldwide urbanization? Paul Krugman has formulated a new theory to answer these questions,” the academy said in its citation.

In his spare time, Krugman has become the most important progressive opinion writer in the country. Congratulations to Professor Krugman.

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only

Here's William Kristol's prescription for the McCain campaign:

What McCain needs to do is junk the whole thing and start over.

Right. Because junking the campaign and starting over three weeks before the election is a perfect way for McCain to counter the charge that he's erratic.

Kristol also wants McCain to run "as a cheerful, open and accessible candidate." Because that cheery smile (a/k/a forced grimace) is what will win the election for McCain.

John McCain has a plan.

In his visit with volunteers on Sunday, Mr. McCain acknowledged that “the economy has hurt us a little bit in the last week or two” and that he was “a couple points down” in national polls. But he said he would rebound because voters “want knowledge and they want vision.”

Win with vision. An intriguing plan, coming this late. And what is John McCain's vision for "the economy [that] hurt [him] a little bit in the last week or two?"

[more ...]

If you've had your fill of politics this weekend, here's something heartwarming and completely different to read.

In the beginning, there was a boy, a girl and an apple. He was a teenager in a concentration camp in Nazi-controlled Germany. She was a bit younger, living free in the village, her family posing as Christians. Their eyes met through a barbed-wire fence and she wondered what she could do for this handsome young man.

She was carrying apples, and decided to throw one over the fence. He caught it and ran away toward the barracks. And so it began.

Herman and Roma Rosenblat celebrated their 50th wedding anniversary this summer.

This is an open thread, all topics welcome.

Welcome news today in the Washington Post: The U.S. Sentencing Commission is considering alternatives to prison for non-violent, low level drug offenders as well as for some supervised release (parole) violators.

The commission's consideration of alternatives to incarceration reflects its determination to persuade Congress to ease federal mandatory minimum sentencing laws that contributed to explosive growth in the prison population. The laws were enacted in the mid-1980s, principally to address a crime epidemic related to crack cocaine. But in recent years, federal judges, public defenders and probation officials have argued that mandatory sentences imprison first-time offenders unnecessarily and disproportionately affect minorities.

Drug courts and adult developmental programs for parolees have worked in the state system. They are far more cost effective than prison: [More...]

Is all the right wing angst over some Acorn workers who apparently registered nonexistent people (who are, by definition, incapable of voting) a distraction not only from John McCain's intellectually bankrupt campaign but also from the real election fraud that we've come to expect from Republicans?

Now, New York University professor Mark Crispin Miller is warning that elements within the Republican Party may attempt to steal the 2008 presidential election from Barack Obama.

[UPDATE: As with every post I write, I speak for myself only. BTD wishes to be specifically disassociated from this post.]

[more ...]

A Dallas Morning News investigation has produced a series of articles that every judge, lawyer, and citizen who might ever sit on a jury should read. The paper examined 19 wrongful convictions in Dallas County.

In every instance but one, a Dallas Morning News investigation found, police and prosecutors built their case on eyewitness accounts, even though they knew such testimony can be fatally flawed.

Eyewitness identification procedures often cause victims to believe with certainty that their mistaken identifications are correct.

In such cases, witnesses can give false testimony with complete confidence. And nothing convicts like a confident eyewitness.

Part I explains why the common practice of showing an array of suspect photographs to crime victims so often leads to misidentifications and wrongful convictions. [more ...]