Steve Benen plucks out another Angle clanger amongst a NYT interview:

Q. Did Keynesian economics, the stimulus spending, work in the Depression of the ‘30s?

A. No. And I think history has really proven that to be true. Most economists agree that the thing that really worked, which is a sad commentary, is the war.

Benen notes the foolishness of this, but dances by the real point (as I see it, anyway). Where was this series of follow-up questions:

Q. So, then, if we accept that WWII was solely responsible for the nation’s economic recovery, what exactly was it about the war that spurred the recovery?

Q. I see. So, where did that money come from. By which I mean: who was buying all the arms and so forth?

Q. So what you’re saying is that massive government stimulus, in this case, a government stimulus that happened to be directed at the construction and production of war materiel is what stimulated the economy and resulted in essentially full employment and a large scale recovery?

Q. Well then, I guess you can explain how this is in any way different from what you decry as Keynesian intervention, but simply on a more massive scale? And how you square that with your previous statements re: the New Deal did nothing?

But we don’t get this. Ever. Instead, the next question is this probing and incisive fastball:

Q. In Washington, you hear various Republican committees talk about trying to remake you or change you. How do you react to that?

I’d rate that right up there with

Q. Mr. Burns, your campaign seems to have the momentum of a runaway freight train. Why are you so popular?

Reporters are never prepared, or, alternatively, are prepared but too beholden to power and access to ever ask the appropriate follow-up. Even when getting an answer would mean making real news out of an otherwise milquetoast interview that maybe twelve people will look at. And it’s killing the country. Day by day, week by week, we’re tapping away on the flag way up in the rigging while the ship sinks below us.