Austin asks a good question in his last post. I’ve certainly been animated by my own experiences to become more involved in politics and policy. I’ve tried to do so in a civil and honest way that reflects the skills of our profession. I’ve found this gratifying. It’s brought terrific opportunities. It’s brought some personal and professional sacrifices, too.
My TIE postings are generally pretty restrained. This is not the proper forum for higher-temperature things. The web offers plenty of outlets for partisan zeal. We offer something different here. We hope that we add value for readers who embrace a number of partisan and ideological perspectives.
Readers who want to see some of my more politically-engaged pieces look here (in 2008, about why Obama and Clinton people needed to look past their intra-party fight) here (criticizing Rick Santorum on politicizing disability issues), here (on bringing a disabled loved one home), here (on Medicaid and block grants) and here (what it was like to participate in the health reform fight), here (on death panels), here (defending Medicaid and rebutting attacks on presumed welfare dependence of Medicaid recipients), here (on the likely consequences of a Romney victory), here (on Chicago’s tough times), and here (ripping into a shock jock who said mean things about kids with autism).
I think we should emulate Krugman’s analytic rigor, his often-beautiful writing, and his concern for people in America who desperately need help. Of course few of us have Krugman’s platform, polemical skills, professional stature, or his zeal for the fight. I think my own best journalism and blogging combine my substantive knowledge with my personal passion about specific issues. Sometimes it works, sometimes not.
I tend to shout a bit less than Krugman does. That’s generally not my thing. I do share his anger, though. People need to follow their own path, stay within their own game. That’s mine.
(HAP)
