Compare and contrast. Here is Joe Scarborough during his debate with Paul Krugman on Monday:
Q: Would you support an extra $200 billion a year in spending on infrastructure and education right now?
A: Oh yeah. I talk about it all the time. I go around and I talk to Republicans all the time.
And here is Scarborough writing with Jeffrey Sachs in the Washington Post today:
Both of us opposed the  stimulus package, the increased spending in Afghanistan and Washington’s fixation on short-term thinking. We said that the only result of this short-termism would be exploding deficits. And well before Obama himself acknowledged the point, we said that there was no such thing as “shovel-ready” projects worthy of public investment in the 21st century.
I'm confused. During the worst of the financial crash, with GDP plummeting like a rock, Scarborough opposed stimulus spending and believed that there were no infrastructure investments worth pursuing. But today, with the economy fragile but recovering, he thinks it would be great to spend $200 billion more on infrastructure and education.
Something ain't right here. And I have to say, for a guy who talks about this extra spending "all the time," he sure missed a chance to do it again in today's op-ed. I wonder what Joe really thinks?