I'll have a look at that. The funny thing is, Art, I wrote a little textbook in the 1990s, basically with the IS-LM model. I got criticized by one or two colleagues for doing that, they said macroeconomics had moved on. And indeed it had, here is what Krugman wrote in 1997
But the IS-LM model, while it continues to be the workhorse of practical policy analysis in macroeconomics, has increasingly been treated by the profession as a sort of embarrassing relative, not fit to be seen in polite intellectual company.
I used to dare these critics (apart from pointing out that my textbook was introductory) to point out what all the fancy mathematics of these DSGE models added in terms of better explanation of real-world economic phenomena (even if they do have better microfoundations), and I never really got anywhere near a convincing reply..
But so great is the pear pressure to use these latest bells and whistles that even Krugman in 1997 (who wasn't the controversial NYT columnist back then, but a very respected macro economist) had to restate the liquidity trap (than already running rampant in Japan as it has now spread allover the Western world apart from places like Australia) in DSGE model terms. And these DSGE models tend to have their own problems..
So I feel a little vindicated myself, ISLM isn't so bad after all.. 