We support our Publishers and Content Creators. You can view this story on their website by CLICKING HERE.

Paul Krugman is retiring as a New York Times columnist. His final column is here, but I haven’t found a way to get past the Times paywall. That’s OK: Krugman’s content is certainly not worth paying for. This is how much I can extract from the Times:

What strikes me, looking back, is how optimistic many people, both here and in much of the Western world, were back then [when Krugman started writing for the Times] and the extent to which that optimism has been replaced by anger and resentment. And I’m not just talking about members of the working class who feel betrayed by elites; some of the angriest, most resentful people in America right now — people who seem very likely to have a lot of influence with the incoming Trump administration — are billionaires who don’t feel sufficiently admired.

Are there any billionaires other than Elon Musk who will have a role in the Trump administration? I can’t think of one, and Elon is anything but “angry” or “resentful.” Most billionaires who are active in politics are on the Left. And those who “don’t feel sufficiently admired” no doubt include New York Times columnists like Krugman, whose political preferences have been resoundingly rejected by the voters.

It’s hard to convey just how good most Americans were feeling in 1999 and early 2000. Polls showed a level of satisfaction with the direction of the country that looks surreal by today’s standards. My sense of what happened in the 2000 election was that many Americans took peace and prosperity for granted, so they voted for the guy who seemed as if he’d be more fun to hang out with.

So that’s where it all went wrong! Never mind that polls show a deep dissatisfaction with where the country was headed under Barack Obama, and even more under Joe Biden.

I actually have little interest in Krugman’s far-left views, which have been refuted by experience over several centuries. I am more interested in Krugman the man. The liar. Years ago, there was a Krugman Truth Squad that critiqued Krugman’s columns, which were generally filled with misinformation. I myself caught Krugman lying many times, which is why he hates me. Years ago, he attacked me repeatedly, but since then, as the Times editorial page has faded into irrelevance, we have gone our separate ways.

Still, for old times’ sake, I want to resurrect a portion of my catalogue of Krugman lies–not all the lies he told, but just some, not all, of the ones I happened to catch him in. This is how it happened: Krugman didn’t like a particular Power Line post of mine, and when he was angry at me he would do a post on his official New York Times site that linked to and criticized that post. His behavior was predictable, so my wife brilliantly suggested that I amend that Power Line post to begin with an explanation of why Krugman hated me–that is, the many times I had caught him lying, with links.

In honor of Krugman’s retirement, here it is (Some links are now probably broken):

In Krugman Goes Around the Bend, I pointed out the absurdity of Krugman’s equating a group of country music fans destroying their own copies of Dixie Chicks CDs to Kristallnacht.

In The Paul Krugman Truth Squad, Paul linked to a post by Donald Luskin that showed that Krugman had dishonestly attacked the Bush tax cuts by comparing a single year’s salary in a newly-created job against the ten-year cost of the tax cuts that created that job.

In Krugman the Barbarian, I critiqued Krugman’s attack on Arnold Schwarzenegger, in which Krugman asserted that California’s taxes are “now probably below average.” Probably? He evidently was too lazy to look up the data–laziness is a frequent issue with Krugman–which showed that Californians then had the 8th-highest tax burden of the 50 states.

In Poor Paul Krugman, I noted that, contrary to Krugman’s characterization of Wesley Clark’s views–Clark was Krugman’s candidate of the moment–Clark had testified under oath that Saddam Hussein “has chemical and biological weapons.”

In Krugman On Civility, I ridiculed Krugman’s claim that the invasion of Iraq in March 2003 caused Osama bin Laden’s escape at Tora Bora in December 2001.

In Krugman Descends Further, I noted that, while Krugman had repeatedly criticized Republicans for being “uncivil,” the U.K. cover of his book The Great Unraveling depicted President Bush as Frankenstein’s monster, and Dick Cheney as Hitler. (Some things never change, do they?)

In Paul Krugman’s Credibility Recession, I showed that Krugman’s claims about current unemployment data were false. This was another case of Krugman making blithe (but fictitious) assertions about the unemployment numbers, assuming that no one would take the trouble to look them up.

In That Was Then, This Is Now, I pointed out that Krugman had written disapprovingly about Enron without disclosing that he was a paid Enron adviser who, when he was cashing Enron’s checks, did nothing about the supposed abuses that were the subject of his column.

In Ducks In A Barrel, we linked to a Donald Luskin column that showed how Krugman had misrepresented economic data to mislead his readers with respect to the Reagan administration’s record on taxes and the economy.

In Paul Krugman, Around the Bend, I called Krugman on his false statements about Florida’s Governor Jeb Bush.

In Krugmania, I pointed out that Krugman’s hysterical claim that President Bush stole the 2004 election in Ohio was based on false statements of fact that were easily demolished–if, that is, one actually does research instead of parroting goofy left-wing blogs, as Krugman so often does.

In Krugmania, Continued, I demonstrated that Krugman lied–once again, uncritically repeating a baseless claim on a left-wing blog–with respect to the Navy’s performance in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.

In Deja Vu, I exposed another example of Krugman’s misleading characterization of economic data to draw a conclusion that was the opposite of the truth.

In Krugman Flails Wildly, Misses, I cataloged falsehoods in a Krugman column about Social Security.

In Krugman vs. Krugman, I pointed out that Krugman denounced, in his column, the idea that extending unemployment benefits can prolong unemployment as a “bizarre point of view,” while in fact his own textbook, Macroeconomics, makes precisely that point.

In Krugman Embarrasses Himself, Again, I criticized Krugman for fabricating a quote that he attributed to Newt Gingrich, which led to a red-faced correction in the Times.

In Sun Rises in East; Krugman Makes Fool of Himself, I ridiculed Krugman’s criticism of Republicans for using “eliminationist rhetoric,” i.e.–I’m not kidding!–“Fire Nancy Pelosi,” when Krugman himself wrote, to take just one of many examples: “A message to progressives: By all means, hang Senator Joe Lieberman in effigy.”

In Paul Krugman, Buffoon, I criticized Krugman for blaming Michele Bachmann for Jared Loughner’s murders, based on a false account of what Michele said in an interview with me.

In Paul Krugman, Punch Line, we posted a video of a room full of people bursting out in laughter when they learn that Krugman is the source for a liberal’s crackpot claim.

In Iowahawk vs. Krugman, we linked to Iowahawk’s dissection of yet another attempt by Krugman to lie with statistics, this time on education.

In Liberals: Wrong Again, Do They Care? I ripped Krugman’s baseless claim, which turned out to be entirely false, that Koch Industries stood to benefit from the sale of a handful of small, antiquated power plants in Wisconsin. This was one of countless examples of where Krugman repeated outlandish claims made on far-left web sites as though they were Gospel, without doing any investigation to determine whether they had merit, or, as in this case, were obvious fantasies.

In his farewell column, Krugman says that he is leaving the Times, but will “still be expressing my views in other places.” That is too bad. For more than two decades, Paul Krugman’s dishonesty has contributed to the decline in the quality of public discourse in America. It would be better if he would simply go away.