Krugman takes note of his paper's reporting that Ted Cruz has joined Rand Paul in the insane, politically motivated push to "audit" the Fed, thus ending its century of political independence. Krugman asks: "How does one report on politics when a significant wing of the political spectrum is, not to put too fine a point on it, stark raving mad?"
It should be noted that some Democrats, too — most notably, Bernie Sanders — have called for auditing the Fed. It's the populist thing to do. The difference? Were the Fed to "fully open its books," as Cruz has now demanded it do, most Democrats in pursuit of Fed "transparency" would concede the exposed facts and monetary policies contained therein. In brief, their populist agitation would blow over.
Not so with the Cruzes and Pauls and their "significant wing of the political spectrum" — known as stark raving madness. No facts, no evidence, no proof contrary to populist agitation is ever good enough for this crowd. How, then, as Krugman asks, does one report on their politics? With true grit, my friend. With true grit. Well, with that and the historical assurance that ultrapopulist nimrods have been assaulting America for two centuries — we've suffered the sectional firebreathers and Ben Tillmans and Huey Longs and Joe McCarthys — and we're still standing.