If we need another reminder as to why that epithet sticks, check out the Kaus Files (at the Daily Caller):
Paul Krugman now says that some kinds of Keynesian stimulus spending just aren’t as effective as other kinds. Specifically, he suggests, aid to state and local governments (to enable them to keep government workers in their jobs) is a sort of second-class stimulus:What. A. Great. Economist.
So what happened to the stimulus? Much of it consisted of tax cuts, not spending. Most of the rest consisted either of aid to distressed families or aid to hard-pressed state and local governments. This aid may have mitigated the slump, but it wasn’t the kind of job-creation program we could and should have had. [E.A.]
Hmm. That’s not what I remember him saying back in 2009. In 2009, if I remember right, job-preserving aid to state and local governments was almost the most important thing in the world.
Be sure to follow the link and read Kaus' post in its entirety, as it provides the evidence in support of the finding that Krugman reversed himself.
Hat tip to Hot Air.