What's happened with Krugman?

He's been cheering on the health care as it currently is: here, here, and here. It's rather a huge shock and letdown.

He's considers only one issue to be important; it's a nice symbolic victory for US progressives. It's the symbolism, stupid!

There are a great many symbols in this world, Professor Krugman: the Trojan Horse, as an example.

It's filled with rotted and weakened intentions. It will itself become one more burden for USians as they will be forced to buy insurance which has no price caps and no basic standard controls for a basic contract.

Professor Krugman, your most glaring error is in ignoring the single greatest sin in this bill. It rips apart woman's choice, and sets womans' rights back by decades. The Stupak Ammendment alone is reason enough for any decent self-respecting progressive to vote no on this bill, but you've entirely chosen to ignore it.

What's happened with the Krugman from what now seems like ages ago, who gained even a link from Glenn Greenwald, whose pen can rip apart any argument reducing it not to garbage but to folded origami, with which progressives might present to conservatives to show the value of simple honesty?

What's happened with you, Professor Krugman? Were you offered some Kool-Aid, and thought it'd be a waste not to drink it? Were you asked by your old pal from Harvard to talk nice about the bill?

You are telling US progressives to support this bill, and to wait for a time to fight for something better. However, the Senate Bill is the Health Insurance Industry's gift the US people, and it's being done in the name of US progressives. How's that for symbolism? Would you like to sign your name to it?