I should be used to this by now, but why is that every time Paul Krugman writes a column people misrepresent his point and then proceed to criticize him based on that? Even TAPPED gets into the act.
Look - Krugman isn't attacking Republican nepotism because it is *necessarily* any worse than Democratic nepotism, he's attacking it because it's rather, um, "ironic", that the party of the meritocracy seems so interested in pursuing policies and appointments that amount to affirmative action for their families.
