I’m inundated by Paul Krugman dogma (socialistic, probably totalitarian) everyday through alerts from Google about various economic topics. Krugman, whose diatribe appears in the New York Times, is pro-union, pro-taxation, pro-big government, pro-nationalization–everything that doesn’t work, but he’s pretty much gotten a free ride since free-marketers have been, along with Rush Limbaugh, assigned to the category of far-right hallucinators (ever see a newspaper use the term "far left"?–it’s not part of the liberal media’s lexicon) by Obama and his media kiss-asses.

Along comes someone describing himself as a liberal who takes on Krugman and his ersatz "Nostalgianomics," and he does so wthout a conservative’s litany of free-market benefits. Brink Lindsey of the Cato Institute rebuts Krugmania by focusing on what really happened from the Great Depression until now–showing that the liberals are as much or more to blame than conservatives for creating what Krugman derides as income inequality but is really just economic and political freedom.

This is must reading: "Nostalgianomics, liberal economists pine for days no liberal should want to revisit."