Krugman is Still Shrill

Props for the underpants gnome reference.

I find it disturbing that I am having a mind-meld the past few months with Krugman.






39 replies
  1. 1
    Zifnab says:

    When are you going to get on winning that Nobel?

    Alternately

    When can we expect to see Krugman start Cat-blogging?

  2. 2
    J. says:

    @John Cole: I find it more disturbing that a Nobel Prize-winning economist is making South Park references.

  3. 3
    Wag says:

    I find it uplifting to have an ongoing mind meld with the smartest guy around. Makes me feel superior to the thugs that surround us.

  4. 4
    Wag says:

    …and by superior, I mean smarter than you average GOP shill.

  5. 5
    edmund dantes says:

    I don’t get it. I still can’t figure out why Obama is giving the signal he did. It doesn’t matter what dimension of chess he was playing with his statements about the Senate should wait for Brown.

    Even if he believes that the House should pass the already voted on Senate bill, why would he put out a soundbite that can be used in attack ads if Dems work up the courage to just pass the Senate bill before Brown is seated. He’s undermining anything they might do. If he thought they should pass the Senate version, he should have been out there putting out how strongly he believes in the work that has already done, and how the American people can’t afford to keep waiting. Instead he gives out this vague statement that can easily be used to attack the Dems for ignoring the will of the people in MA. A stupid fucking play no matter what dimension of chess you play.

  6. 6
    Wag says:

    Oh what the hell, I mean smarter than ANY GOP shill!

  7. 7
    Guster says:

    This should break the spell, John: http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.c.....iting-for/

    “I have to say, I’m pretty close to giving up on Mr. Obama, who seems determined to confirm every doubt I and others ever had about whether he was ready to fight for what his supporters believed in.”

  8. 8
    Stroszek says:

    Over the last few months, Krugman has really distinguished himself from the reflexive wrist-slitters. He’s tough but realistic about what can be done and I can’t really argue that he’s been terribly wrong about anything.

  9. 9

    Really trying to tune out this week. But thanks John for being the voice of reason during all of this. You’ve had some good insights.

  10. 10
    Kryptik says:

    I’d say the Underpants Gnomes businessplan would’ve fit Republicans more, but they actually had a second step and have been more successful then they ever should’ve been:

    1. Obstruct everything Dems ask for.
    2. Rely on Incompetent Democratic Bipartisanship to piss away their advantage.
    3. 41-seat Majority!!

    But….yeah. I agree with Krugman here. The bill is a shit sandwich. But you eat what you can get, if you know you won’t eat for another 10-20 years if you don’t eat the shit sandwich first.

  11. 11
    Rock says:

    NPR is telling me that the White House is considering proposing a more modest bill, and I’ve had John McCain tell me twice in the hour that now the Dems must reach out and work with Republicans and start over from scratch. Also, some poli-sci guy says Obama’s whole agenda is effectively dead.

    My questions are:

    1) Did anyone say Bush’s agenda was dead when he didn’t have 60 senate votes?

    2) If so, did NPR report that?

    3) Why is McCain on my radio? Repeatedly?

    4) Will no one besides Pelosi have the sense to say that one election in Mass. does not change the agenda?

    I still think Obama is generally competent and much better than the Republican alternative, but he needs to show some leadership here. They may be cats, but he has to herd them. There’s no other choice.

  12. 12
    General Winfield Stuck says:

    I find it disturbing that I am having a mind-meld the past few months with Krugman.

    Well, yea, with more hits than misses maybe. But you never know if he has his sober minded realistic hat on, or the tin foil one. But he has been some more consistent lately, with fewer dogma brain farts.

    the previous article “not the one we was looking for” was a brain fart.

  13. 13
    Jim says:

    @Rock: I heard that too, and in between, there was a clip of him telling us that our national security has been severely compromised because a sexually frustrated kid with a bomb in his boxers wasn’t tortured.

    From the 41 seat majority to President McCain, the sheer absurdity of our politics has me ready to go from figurative to literal in banging my head against the wall.

  14. 14

    This survey:

    http://act.boldprogressives.or.....llresults/

    suggests what will happen if the House passes the current Senate bill.

    Everyone I know wants a public mandate and doesn’t want to be forced to buy an overpriced private insurance policy, or be taxed on their insurance policy, or have to pay a two percent tax for not buying a policy. Put in a public mandate and most of the opposition goes away.

    So what happens if Congress bangs through the Senate’s anti-abortion, pro insurance company bill? Lots of Democrats will stay home or vote a protest. Anyone here want Tom Campbell as your next U.S. Senator from California?

    Maybe a little less mind-melding and a little more finger in the wind.

  15. 15
    Kryptik says:

    @Rock:

    Don’t you just love the insistence from the likes of McCain and McConnell about how Obama must now reach across the aisle and be ‘bipartisan’? Like he never did that before and they never flung feces in his face for his trouble?

    Oh, and as far as question 4 goes? No, no one else with actual power will, because they’ve all bought into the self-fulfilling prophecy that Brown’s election changes EVERYTHING, therefore they must ACT like it changes everything. Because it did. Because…ghhggghghgh….

  16. 16
    Cat Lady says:

    Maybe Krugman is having a mind-meld with you? BJ’s got some high quality lurkers.

  17. 17
    Joe Beese says:

    “I have to say, I’m pretty close to giving up on Mr. Obama, who seems determined to confirm every doubt I and others ever had about whether he was ready to fight for what his supporters believed in.”

    I take it that Mr. Krugman is also upset about not getting his unicorn?

  18. 18
    Woodbuster says:

    Only if your mind-meld is as a Hillary fanbot. If he has ever really supported Obama, it has only been the most lukewarm “support” imaginable. He was always Hillary’s guy, and his politics haven’t changed just because Obama is in office. If anything, he has only supported Obama whenever Obama has done something that Krugman thought of first.

    Don’t get me wrong. I enjoy his take on economics, and don’t dispute his opinions there (if only because I am an economic idiot), but he is no big fan of this administration and never will be. Today’s column only confirms that.

  19. 19
    Stroszek says:

    @Bob In Pacifica: Thinking the Senate bill doesn’t goes far enough and supporting the public option does not equate to being a bill-killer. Regardless, if the Dems fail to pass a bill that comes with a built-in four year window for fixes and tweaks, the bill-killers will stay home anyway and the bill-savers will do the same. It’ll do double the damage… at least. The only way to satisfy both sides is to pass the Senate bill and tweak it via reconciliation.

  20. 20
    Napoleon says:

    @Bob In Pacifica:

    Bob, the choice is between the Senate bill or something 10 -20 years down the line. If you don’t realize that you are seriously disconnected from reality. The ninnies in the Dem caucus who are running around like a bunch of 4 year olds that just had someone say boo to them are not going to come within a zillion miles of health care reform any time in the rest of there careers if it fails this time.

    That is just reality.

  21. 21
    D.N. Nation says:

    Paul Krugman flushed his credibility with me down the toilet when he sheepishly defended HRC’s idiotic gas tax holiday. Unless he’s found a way to fish it out again, that’s where he stands.

    Same goes for Glennzilla and his shilling for Jake “Dat Ass” Tapper.

    IIRC, the Buffalo Beast once said that Peggy Noonan was just writing speeches in defense of her vanity these days. Same applies to Krugman and Greenwald. Sorry, fellas.

  22. 22
    Napoleon says:

    @Joe Beese:

    I agree with Krugman. Obama is one of the most pathetic “leaders” I have seen in my entire life. He couldn’t lead his way out of a paper bag. This whole incident is going to show if I am right or wrong. A leader is going to do everything he can, win or lose, to get the bill through in its current form. A feckless coward will try to go back to the Republicans for a deal even though a corpse could see that the Republicans will not cut a deal in a million years.

    My money is on the latter.

  23. 23
    General Winfield Stuck says:

    @Stroszek: Obama is maintaining a solid 50 to 53 percent poll approval average. Or about the percent that voted for him. He is doing just fine at this stage of his term. In fact, even better than some first term, first year presidents. The sound and fury on the blog tubes don’t add up to that much, other than the decibel level.

  24. 24

    Kryptik, if it’s a shit sandwich, and you know it’s a shit sandwich, and the voters know it’s a shit sandwich, then the voters know you are selling them a shit sandwich. If you lie and say it’s a ham sandwich the voters know you are lying to them. Every paycheck they are reminded that the Democrats are making them pay for that shit sandwich. You don’t get customers at the CongressCafe if you’re serving shit sandwiches.

    With sixty votes the Democrats have managed to defeat themselves with the Republicans doing nothing. At 59 votes the Dems should put up every single reform, separately, and let the Republicans filibuster. At least then, when Mitch McConnell lets his fingers wander across a phonebook for hours on end the public will know who is keeping healthcare reform from them.

    Really, folks. I remember real filibusters. They’re fun. If the Dems can’t pass decent healthcare reform, at least let the Republicans do their asshat show 24/7. That would be the best publicity for the Democrats in the fall.

  25. 25
    Guster says:

    @Joe Beese: Ha-ha! A unicorn! Because those are mythological! That Krugman, with his head in the clouds. He is very silly.

  26. 26
    Woodbuster says:

    @Bob In Pacifica:

    “If the Dems can’t pass decent healthcare reform, at least let the Republicans do their asshat show 24/7. That would be the best publicity for the Democrats in the fall.”

    How about reading up on the filibuster rules before you state something like this. It doesn’t work the way your “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington” fantasy has apparently convinced you.

  27. 27
    Stroszek says:

    @Bob In Pacifica: While I generally oppose the excise tax as a backwards-thinking idea, the reality is that most people aren’t going to be affected by it. Those who will be affected aren’t going to see it on their paycheck since the tax is levied on the insurer’s end.

    Moreover, the millions of poor and minority voters who make up an enormous portion of the Democratic base sure as hell aren’t going to see a Medicaid expansion and subsidies as a shit sandwich. Most of the people who view the public option as a deal-breaker already have insurance through their employer and don’t reflect opinion outside their gentrified neighborhoods.

    Also, as someone pointed out yesterday, the way the filibuster now works, you can’t actually make the GOP oppose the bill 24/7. They can quietly shut the thing down to their heart’s content.

    All in all, I can see where you’re coming from generally, but your response is just a truckload of erroneous zombie memes.

  28. 28
    Mary says:

    Oh joy. Progressives are fixing to primary Blanche Lincoln to make sure we lose that seat too.

    http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.....hp?ref=fpb

  29. 29
    General Winfield Stuck says:

    @Stroszek: This is the way to deal with these zombie memes that are going to be a staple here at Bj for some time to come. I am taking notes on how you civil folks do it, to moderate my impulse to go wolly on them. Nicely done!

  30. 30
    Bill H says:

    @Stroszek:

    …aren’t going to see it on their paycheck since the tax is levied on the insurer’s end.

    A lot of them will see it in higher employee payment share, or they will see it as as a loss of benefit when employers switch to smaller plans which don’t have the excise tax.

    …aren’t going to see a Medicaid expansion and subsidies as a shit sandwich.

    Yes they are, when their states go bankrupt and cannot any longer provide the other state-funded assistance that they have been accustomed to receiving. Nebraska is, of course, the exception.

  31. 31
    Kirk Spencer says:

    @Bill H:

    Yes they are, when their states go bankrupt and cannot any longer provide the state-funded assistance that they have been accustomed to receiving. Nebraska is, of course, the exception.

    No, they’re not. Oh, yes, those who look BEHIND the numbers might, but not most of them. This is especially true as the bankruptcies will not (at least for the most part) be immediate.

    It’ll be more like the effects of the increases to minimum wage. Lots of doom forecast, some of which is true but at a much less significant level and which happens a year or more down the road. As a result, the only people who get direct and noticeable impact are, well, the ones who benefit and the people who have to see the bottom line.

  32. 32
    Jim says:

    and Mary Landrieu has joined the “Back to the Drawing Board Caucus” that Anthony Wiener wants to work with.

    “I would strongly advise about completely going back to the drawing board,” Landrieu said.
    There’s always tomorrow and next year and several years. We can continue to improve it. This is a massive undertaking. We’ve been debating it for 47 years.

  33. 33
    Toast says:

    I find it disturbing that I am having a mind-meld the past few months with Krugman.

    Why? If Krugman had a slogan on his blog, it might very well be “Consistently right since 1999.”

  34. 34
    Rick Taylor says:

    I’ve had a mind meld with Krugman for years, and never quite understood why you were so upset with him. His sins seem to have amounted to criticizing Obama for proposing a stimulus package that was positive, but too small that would be difficult to fix later (which has turned to have been very positive, but insufficient, but we are informed it is impossible to pass another), and criticizing Obama for attacking the idea of mandates, when he or whoever tried to pass health care would need to use mandates in a comprehensive solution. Since then, Obama has endorsed mandates; Kruman’s error here was anticipating the attacks on mandates would come from the right rather than the left.

  35. 35
    Rick Taylor says:

    Although I admit I find his entry immediately preceding the one you quoted to be over the top.

  36. 36
    Chris Andersen says:

    @D.N. Nation:

    Paul Krugman flushed his credibility with me down the toilet when he sheepishly defended HRC’s idiotic gas tax holiday. Unless he’s found a way to fish it out again, that’s where he stands.

    This is not specifically a comment on this comment, but it did give me a bit of a lightbulb moment. I’ve never really understood the animus that Krugman generates in some circles. There was this idea during the campaign that he hated Obama and was doing everything he could to undermine his candidacy. What I saw was that Krugman simply disagreed with Obama on a couple of points (specifically the need for a mandate in HCR) and expressed those disagreements in a cogent fashion. Yet some people read this as some kind of signal that Krugman was a sock puppet for Hillary.

    Your comment about Krugman flushing his credibility because of one post made me realize something: I’m a lot more forgiving of people making the occasionally stupid comment. I know of no public figure who hasn’t had at least one serious WTF moment. But I don’t hold that against them because I’ve had more than my fair share of those moments as well.

    What matters to me is the aggregate of their actions and thoughts over the course of time. And Krugman has more than demonstrated that he has a first class mind that offers valuable insight and that he is someone who it would be stupid to ignore simply because you disagree with him on one point.

  37. 37
    Tsulagi says:

    @Guster: I liked the title of that Krugman piece: He Wasn’t The One We’ve Been Waiting For. Pretty much says it all.

    Also props for the duality. Depending on his reader, he could be alerting them Obama isn’t the messiah, or some might read that as Black Neo.

  38. 38
    Cat says:

    I find it disturbing that I am having a mind-meld the past few months with Krugman.

    Odd given a post by him yesterday basicly saying he’s one step away from giving up on Obama.

    You give the impression of being several miles away from that destination.

  39. 39

    When can we expect to see Krugman start Cat-blogging?

    More importantly, when will he Rickroll Ross Douthat?

Comments are closed.