Mr. Krugman,

I am a huge fan of your writing and appreciate the keen insight on the economic and political issues of our day. But I must admit that in recent days your bitterness for all things neo-conservative appears to be driving you towards unhealthy negativity.

Do you really think the answer to our country's problem is to drive a deeper wedge down the middle? Do you really believe hyper-partisanship is correct response to hyper-partisanship?

I understand you believe that hyper-partisanship is not itself the problem, but the damage done by its careful wielding by a few evil men (and women). But do you really believe the way to reverse that damage, and move the country forward, is to wield the same blunt axe with the other hand?

No, I think that you're smarter than that. You must know that the only way to make big changes is bring along a larger mandate.

I'm of the opinion that lasting change happens when people can largely agree with the changes, not when they're rammed down your throat.

dsinha writes:

"But do you[Krugman] really believe the way to reverse that damage, and move the country forward, is to wield the same blunt axe with the other hand?"

I guess the "blunt axe" you're so worried about is informed democracy. It's not bitterness to forthrightly reject Bush Republican tactics (ie. Let's negotiate--what's mine is mine forever, what's yours is very negotiable).

"Quisling," sans WWII connections, is a nice word to use in describing so-called centrist Democrats. These Dems are placing themselves right where the Mitch McConnels (R) and Evan Bayhs (D) want them to be, in the center of the road. Only John Edwards is willing to get into the ditches along that road where the citizens without K-street lobbyists working for them struggle to live.

And please, don't give me that Edwards and the 527 supporting him crap in reply. Krugman has thoroughly answered that one. Get a little perspective in your analyses, Big Pharma/Oil/Insurance money and influence vs. the people who clean their fancy executive suites!

Breaking through the infotainment fog of the corporate media to provide a list of particulars on how the Republicans have been screwing the middle class only seems like "hyper-partisanship."

The list is that long and that egregious.

I agree, the next president needs to be charismatic enough to reduce support for the radical right down to the point where Fox News and their like a no longer so profitable. Progressives need to fight the special interests who will oppose our agenda, but progressives also have to pull away the support special interests get from those not very involved in political discussions. Bush still has support from 28%, much of that is from people who can be influenced by a strong leader. Obama is such a leader. Hilary, and this is not entirely her fault, is strongly disliked by too many. Obama's talking to the right wing folks does not mean that he will be weak in fighting the 10-20% hard core movement conservatives who will be left when his leadership has finished pealing away another half of their supporters.