The Great Unraveling

Powerline has some interesting bits on the Okrent/Krugman break-up. Worth noting as Krugman is such a lefty fav-

>>
We commented here on the end of Daniel Okrent's tenure as Public Editor of the New York Times, and the parting shots he took at Paul Krugman, Maureen Dowd and William Safire. Krugman is not one to take criticism lying down (or any other way), so he replied to Okrent, which triggered a dialogue that you can read here.
Krugman's efforts to defend himself against the charge of slicing and dicing, and flat-out misrepresenting, economic data in order to support his far-left political positions are, I think, lame, but what really jumps out at me is the intensity of Okrent's apparent loathing for Krugman. Consider the following paragraphs:

This was the first he heard from me on these specific issues partly because I learned early on in this job that Prof. Krugman would likely be more willing to contribute to the Frist for President campaign than to acknowledge the possibility of error. When he says he agreed “reluctantly” to one correction, he gives new meaning to the word “reluctantly”; I can’t come up with an adverb sufficient to encompass his general attitude toward substantive criticism. But I laid off for so long because I also believe that columnists are entitled by their mandate to engage in the unfair use of statistics, the misleading representation of opposing positions, and the conscious withholding of contrary data. But because they’re entitled doesn’t mean I or you have to like it, or think it’s good for the newspaper. Believe me -- I could go on, as could a number of readers more sophisticated about economic matters than I am. (Among these are several who, like me, generally align themselves politically with Prof. Krugman, but feel he does himself and his cause no good when he heeds the roaring approval of his acolytes and dismisses his critics as ideologically motivated.) But I don’t want to engage in an extended debate any more than Prof. Krugman says he does. If he replies to this statement, as I imagine he will, I’ll let him have what he always insists on keeping for himself: the last word.
I hate to do this to a decent man like my successor, Barney Calame, but I’m hereby turning the Krugman beat over to him.

Ouch. Paul Krugman is a perfect emblem of the sickness at the heart of the New York Times. Notwithstanding his protestations of affection for that once-great institution, it is hard to miss Okrent's relief at putting down his "Public Editor" shovel.