Krugman's nose unexpectedly visits Los Angelos

I presume that's what happens when you live in New York, and you say a lie so gigantic that your nose grows across the Continental Divide?
From his column (my emphasis added)

The stimulus was too small; policy toward the banks wasn’t tough enough; and Mr. Obama didn’t do what Ronald Reagan, who also faced a poor economy early in his administration, did — namely, shelter himself from criticism with a narrative that placed the blame on previous administrations.

I read it over and over, thinking that I had misread it. Or that maybe Krugman was being sly and ironic. But he wasn't . He actually believes it.
He didn't even stop there.
Not content with arguing that Obama should have placed some of the blame on the Bush administration for his failures....

Mr. Obama could have done the same — with, I’d argue, considerably more justice. He could have pointed out, repeatedly, that the continuing troubles of America’s economy are the result of a financial crisis that developed under the Bush administration, and was at least in part the result of the Bush administration’s refusal to regulate the banks.

But he didn’t. Maybe he still dreams of bridging the partisan divide; maybe he fears the ire of pundits who consider blaming your predecessor for current problems uncouth — if you’re a Democrat. (It’s O.K. if you’re a Republican.) Whatever the reason, Mr. Obama has allowed the public to forget, with remarkable speed, that the economy’s troubles didn’t start on his watch.

Wow.
Any cursory look into any of Obama's speeches, and you find that he does actually place blame on the previous administration.

Here's from the first page of a Google search:

From February 22nd, 2009, Politico:

Obama blames financial woes on Bush

From March 14th, Washington Post:

Obama's New Tack: Blaming Bush
President Points to 'Inherited' Economy

Apparently, The Washington Post thought it was a new strategy then.
From July, 29th, 2009, AP:

Obama blames Bush, Wall Street
Says economic woes caused by bad decisions

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama yesterday blamed "irresponsible decisions" by the Bush administration and Wall Street for the country's economic woes as government officials said the budget deficit would soar to record heights next year.

Hmmm. Sounds like he's blaming Bush to me?
Let's keep going.


Maybe Krugman meant that he hadn't heard anything recently from Obama blaming Bush?
From AP, January 9th, 2010:

He says "the buck stops with me," but nearly a year into office, President Barack Obama is still blaming a lot of the nation's troubles — the economy, terrorism, health care — on George W. Bush.

The list goes on. You can do your own search. But you get the idea. To say that Obama hasn't blamed Bush for the economy is a complete fallacy. Its a fantasy. A denial of reality.
There are many things that Krugman has said that has led me to believe that he is not dealing with reality. That his sole job on earth is to protect democrats from criticism.

But this tops them all.