Skip to comments.PAUL KRUGMAN: The Years of Shame
Posted on 09/11/2011 8:30:49 AM PDT by SomeCallMeTim
September 11, 2011, 8:41 am The Years of Shame ... The memory of 9/11 has been irrevocably poisoned; it has become an occasion for shame. And in its heart, the nation knows it. Im not going to allow comments on this post, for obvious reasons.
(Excerpt) Read more at krugman.blogs.nytimes.com ...
Shame yes... on him.
Sorry.... trying to play “beat the posters” after just getting home from church..
Should say, “Can’t he spare ONE day to be an American, and NOT just a liberal.
Krugman is a shameful piece of garbage deserving of the worst in life.
I hear the growls of Satan
in the pen of Paul Krugman
My heart informs me that our leaders are now little more than decrepit marmosets. Our institutions now lack that pine scent that gave them purity and purpose, and our politics has devolved into a quandary of endless mismatched, hateful metaphors blah blah blah....
Nor does he have courage enough to accept comments. Typical cowardly DemonRat puke.
You couldn't have waited five more minutes to show solidarity with the evil-doers?
He’s not wearing his panties, either.
Krugman, Obama, Obama, Krugman, what’s the difference??? Both avid and dumb America haters!!! Americans, wake-up and flush these morons down the toilet into the forever cesspool they both belong!!!!
No worries, Paul. We'll comment on your post right here on FR, you gutless coward.
Either that or he ate too much cabbage for lunch.
As stupid as he is despicable. Living proof that you don’t have to be a genius to win a Nobel (of course, Obama and Gore also provide this living proof).
and yet, he is constantly rewarded, like
william ayers, the clintons, rahm emmanuel,
george soros, etc.
I give NO credence or validity to anything this Keynesian Nobel-Idiot has to say, whether in print or via television. =.=
hw ouldn’t allow comments for “obvious reasons”. This guy is one big dirt bag!
Paul Krugman is working hard to become one of the most despicable people in the Mainstream Media — and he is succeeding. He’s right up there with Olbermann, Schultz, and Matthews. I shan’t use the words worthy of describing this pitiful piece of protoplasm.
In a 2003 article, The Economist noted that Krugman’s critics argue that “his relentless partisanship is getting in the way of his argument”. The Economist also wrote that the vast majority of Krugman’s columns feature attacks on Republicans and almost none criticize Democrats, making him “a sort of ivory-tower folk-hero of the American lefta thinking person’s Michael Moore” On Krugman’s “prophecy of doom” following the 2010 election, Will Wilkinson, in The Economist’s “Democracy in America” blog, called it a “baseless partisan freakout”.
Libertarian conservative and federal appeals court judge Richard Posner called Krugman “an unabashed Democratic partisan who often goes overboard in his hatred of the Republians [sic].” He also notes that Lyinginponds.com, which tracks partisanship among public intellectuals, has in most years from 20022008, ranked Krugman number 1 or number 2 among Democratic columnists for partisanship.
Liberal journalist and author Michael Tomasky in The New York Review of Books stated “Many liberals would name Paul Krugman of The New York Times as perhaps the most consistent and courageousand unapologeticliberal partisan in American journalism.” New York Magazine called Krugman “the leading exponent of a kind of liberal purism”, while liberal historian Michael Kazin has opined that Krugmans account of the right succumbed to the Marxist flaw of false consciousness.
Krugman won`t allow comments? Well, he doesn`t get a vote on FR. My comment is this:
Paul Krugman, you`re truly unable to put your vitriol aside for even this day? To call you an “American” degrades the title.
Didn’t Jimmy Carter and Yasser Arafat get Nobels also?
The bad thing about living in a free society is that you have to periodically tolerate statements from some elitist whose ideological blinders and arrogance drives them to say the most obviously false and destructive things in order to prosletize and avoid questioning their Socialist world view.
Don't forget Jimma Carter.
I like to believe that what goes around eventually comes around.
Paul Krugman: Mountains of B******t
Sometimes an asshh*le, is just an assh*le, and no further explanation is needed.
Krugman is a jerk. His policy recommendations have been a disaster.
Does there not reach a point when a commentator is so consistently wrong about so many things so many times that you stop reading him? I guess not in the case of a liberal.
Self-righteous moonbat is more like it.
Those reasons being that he is a cowardly POS, an America-hating Communist and is intolerant of opposing viewpoints (like all Leftists).
Paul Komodo Dragon Krugman.
His insides must be just as toxic.....
Wish I was good as posting photos - he almost looks like one of these Komodos.
Iowahawk just tweeted, "Paul Krugman commemorates 9/11 by detonating a 200 word mental suicide bomb"
That's pretty much all the comment required.
This blog post is as vacuous as the conscience of a liberal.
Typical lib - free speech for me but not thee. I’m sure it grinds on them that the internet exists at all and they have to tolerate the “dingy masses” being able to respond to their brilliant analysis of the news. The fact that he even admits that he is not allowing comments “for obvious reasons” tells you that even he knows this is nothing more than an immature childish rant and he doesn’t want to be called on it.
He is like a cartoon, irrelevant.
On 9-11-01, I told many of my conservative friends that there are many lefties who are silently, very happy that the Pentagon was attacked along with Twin Towers.
To us Americans, 9-11 was a national tragedy but to the left it was a ‘day of triumph’ for those who loathe/oppose Western Civilization.
Krugman? (spit, spit)
This piece is so despicable - so Ward Churchill - Krugman should take a good beating for this.
what goes around eventually comes around
My friend, you can take this statement to the bank. I have witnessed the truth to this many times in my life.
This reprehensible and vile fop could not contain his hateful opinion for even a few hours on a day of national mourning? Krugman will ride the S.S. NY Times straight to the bottom, flipping all of us the finger and pissing on Old Glory as he drowns. You’re a bum Krugman!
The atrocity should have been a unifying event, but instead it became a wedge issue.
Krugman missed a true shameless exploitation of 9/11 that occurred almost ten years later when Obama shamelessly tried to claim far too much credit for the killing of OBL. And there are legitimate questions whether he deserves any credit at all.
You’re correct. He really couldn’t be more disgusting.
Krugman is a pile of crud masquerading as a human.
It’s actually good that he has exposed his pathetic case against conservatives, because it will be disassembled, defeated and jammed right back up his anal orifice.
Libs usually jump from argument to argument to avoid defeat on any one point.
It's you, Paul. You live in a delusion of your own making. This country was united after 9/11...so united the left was FORCED to agree to war in Iraq and Afghanistan, and you voted for it because the people demanded it, but you never believed. You never acted as Americans on 9/11... you shamefully posed as Americans and bided your time until you could start chipping away at the patriotism that made your skin crawl. You aren't Americans, you hate America, and everyone can see it.
I'm so angry that I'm having trouble finishing this post.
Paul Krugman Gives UpThis is an excerpt. More at the link.
By Fred Douglass
A marvelous thing happened over on Paul Krugman's blog at the New York Times last week. Krugman effectively conceded defeat on a range of economic debates. Who defeated him? People who posted comments on his New York Times blog. Mere commenters.
For those who do not know, Paul Krugman is one of the few who still claim that Keynesian progressivism is the answer to America's (and Europe's) problems, not their cause. He repeats that claim many times each month. Amid these repeated expressions of his "progressive" faith, he now also repeatedly expresses grim despair because his progressive policy prescriptions are being accepted less and less in the public square, even by the Obama administration.
Krugman is an academic. He has never run a company. He has never created a job. The closest contact he evidently ever had to "business" was as an adviser to Enron, where (in his own words) he was paid $50,000 to help build Enron's "image."
This, perhaps, explains the dozen or so points that Krugman makes over and over. Here are a few: Obama's stimulus was too small. Debt is good. Austerity is bad. Deflation is coming. Ken Rogoff, Greg Mankiw, Alberto Alesina (all at Harvard), and other serious economic scientists do not understand economics as well as he does. Those who do not agree with him are "mass delusional." And perhaps Krugman's favorite line: "I was right, of course."
Befitting his ideology, Krugman has only one policy to propose, regardless of topic: Transfer more resources from the discipline and dynamism of markets to the inefficiency and cronyism of government.
Government-run health care. Government-controlled banks. Government bailouts. High taxes. High spending. Krugman wants it all, just like in Europe (which, in 2008, he called "the comeback continent"). And Krugman has no problems denying economic science and current events to advocate it.
With the meltdown in Europe so obviously the consequence of too much Krugmanism and U.S. unemployment near 10% after a trillion dollars in stimulus, Krugman has attracted some criticism.
For example, Robert Barro, the distinguished Harvard economist, noted that Krugman "just says whatever is convenient for his political argument. He doesn't behave like an economist." The New York Times ombudsman Daniel Okrent observed that Paul Krugman has "the disturbing habit of shaping, slicing and selectively citing numbers in a fashion that pleases his acolytes but leaves him open to substantive assaults." James Taranto at the Wall Street Journal, after listing the falsities in Krugman's latest piece on climate last week, hazarded that perhaps "Krugman makes himself ridiculous merely to make our job easy."
But no matter how low Krugman's fallacious fruit hangs, Krugman has long been comfortable among the acolytes who frequently post on his blog. A representative post is: "Paul, you are a God-send for those of us who appreciate a superior intellect with common sense! Thanks for applying your brilliance." Or this: "Paul, dig deep dude. You are brilliant." It was hardly surprising that last January, Krugman declared, "I love my commenters."
For just as Krugman was declaring his love for his blog commenters last January, people started posting serious rebuttals of Krugman's standard claims about economics. These commenters were not obviously Republican stooges. They were not obviously members of "the political class." They were not obvious ideologues.
Rather, the posters simply knew some economic science and how jobs are created and economies grow, perhaps because they were members of "the productive class." And they came prepared to support their rebuttals of Krugman's ideology and his singular policy prescription by facts and peer-reviewed economic science.
For six months, they made Krugman's blog one of the more informative and interesting places to hear economics debated. In part, this was because they gave Krugman a serious run. Their posts were long, near the 5,000-character limit set by the New York Times. They were reasoned. They were knowledgeable. They carried citations to economic science literature that one might expect in a Ph.D. dissertation.
And so their rebuttals were often decisive.
pk is really ticking off people today. Almost 100 comments on this thread. Linking for others to read more comments.