probabilityfields

In this NY Times opinion piece, Krugman sets out to debunk the claim that America will be transformed by Barack Obama, arguing that America has already been transformed, and Obama’s nomination is the evidence for this. As the NYT resident liberal, Krugman supported Hillary Clinton, and now it’s good to know he’s being an adult about her loss by trying to take the wind out of Obama’s sails.

Krugman’s beef with Obama is that he’s too quick to forget the Boomers who fought and protested for the racial equality that made his nomination possible. Without citing any examples, he also points out that we have yet to make comparable moves toward gender equality, but we know what he really means. While none of these points are outright false, it all comes across as sour grapes.

There were only two Boomer presidents and both of them were sleaze bags. Still, the 60s generation has warranted more PBS specials, coffee table books, and four-disc retrospectives than anyone could have imagined. Do Paul and the Clintons really need Obama to bow down and ask permission for the torch to be passed?

Krugman reminds us again that Obama’s victory is no certainty, that Rev. Wright will be back, and “[m]oreover, despite Hillary Clinton’s gracious, eloquent concession speech, some of her supporters may yet refuse to support the Democratic nominee.”

Come on, Paul, it’s time for you to graciously and eloquently step aside for the new kids, and let’s see if we can’t continue where the Boomers left off. Sorry, Paul, but your generation’s time has passed.