At last, someone has seen the Emperor's New Clothes and called them what they are. Paul Krugman tears down the myth of the 'angry populist movement' and gives a peek into who they really are.

Yet if you want to find real political rage — the kind of rage that makes people compare President Obama to Hitler, or accuse him of treason — you won’t find it among these suffering Americans. You’ll find it instead among the very privileged, people who don’t have to worry about losing their jobs, their homes, or their health insurance, but who are outraged, outraged, at the thought of paying modestly higher taxes.

The rage of the rich has been building ever since Mr. Obama took office.

[...]

For one thing, craziness has gone mainstream. It’s one thing when a billionaire rants at a dinner event. It’s another when Forbes magazine runs a cover story alleging that the president of the United States is deliberately trying to bring America down as part of his Kenyan, “anticolonialist” agenda, that “the U.S. is being ruled according to the dreams of a Luo tribesman of the 1950s.” When it comes to defending the interests of the rich, it seems, the normal rules of civilized (and rational) discourse no longer apply.

At the same time, self-pity among the privileged has become acceptable, even fashionable.

Oh, those poor, poor babies, having to pay higher taxes after enjoying some of the lowest historical tax rates ever. And the little darlings seem to have short memories, too, because they can't seem to process facts very well. Especially facts that show empirically and beyond all doubt that higher tax rates actually make them richer, not poorer.

And when the tax fight is over, one way or another, you can be sure that the people currently defending the incomes of the elite will go back to demanding cuts in Social Security and aid to the unemployed. America must make hard choices, they’ll say; we all have to be willing to make sacrifices.

But when they say “we,” they mean “you.” Sacrifice is for the little people.

Oh yeah. I forgot. :)

Forbes is a magazine so bad, I once canceled a free subscription. So I guess I shouldn't be surprised that they've published articles attacking what they call "ObamaCare."

I especially like this one, "ObamaCare Can Punish You for Being Healthy." Now, you would think of the audience that reads Forbes, they would agree - but the comments are overwhelmingly critical of the author's outright hackery. (Which makes me wonder: if readers of a magazine like Forbes are so critical of the health care system, where are the calls opposing reform coming from? Hmm.)

Anyway, here's a sample:

This has got to be one of the worst articles I have seen on Forbes. I am a registered Republican and no left winger but what a crock. The assumption is that the HMO system motivates people to live a more healthy life. God has anybody looked at Americans in the last 40 years! We have a country full of Obese, Unhealthy, entitlement mentality citizens. On the other hand looking at countries like Japan which have partially subsidized health care similar (but not the same) to what the Obama administration is offering has allowed Japan to become one of the healthies countries in the world. They live longer than anywhere else. It is because you can get regular check ups that Doctors are able to influence people with bad habits more regularly to adjust or face the consequences. I know this problem and the laws are MUCH MORE complex than just this, but the logic behind parts of this article are pretty sad.

Or this one:

Will you stop publishing biased articles? First, a piece about the 10 best blue collar jobs -- but you fail to mention that these jobs are all held by men. Then, this slick article about how the healthy will be punished by the prospect of decent health insurance coverage for all. I'll have you know that I have had allergies to dust and mites all of my life. That is considered a "pre-existing" condition. Yep -- something minor treated with allegra is in the same category as a serious condition such as diabetes, heart disease or cancer. My untreated assault as LAUSD while substitute-teaching a PE class with 53 students is also considered a pre-existing condition. But the District's insurance has been stalling treatment for more than a year and when they finally approved it, they approved it for one day two weeks ago. That is absolutely ridiculous. You should be ashamed for misleading the public and writing complete falsehoods.

Or this:

I have no idea where you can get health insurance that tailors your premium to your fitness. My employer (300,000 employees) certainly doesn't offer it and I doubt if most other employers do either. Since I'm tied to my employers' offered plans, it doesn't matter if "someone" out there offers it, I have limited choices. If I could get it, it would probably be like my life insurance- my doctor says I'm extremely healthy but because I have a condition that "can" be a problem, I pay outrageous rates for life insurance. I don't need that for health insurance, too.

Get the picture? Even relatively well-off Americans are unhappy with their very expensive, unreliable health care coverage and see it as inherently unfair - because it is.