Posted on 08/20/2012 9:29:39 AM PDT by Kaslin
NewsBusters reported Sunday that Newsweek is out with a truly shocking edition featuring a cover story entitled "Hit the Road, Barack: Why We Need a New President."
New York Times columnist Paul Krugman took to his blog Sunday excoriating the article in a piece he called "Unethical Commentary, Newsweek Edition":
There are multiple errors and misrepresentations in Niall Ferguson’s cover story in Newsweek — I guess they don’t do fact-checking — but this is the one that jumped out at me. Ferguson says:
The president pledged that health-care reform would not add a cent to the deficit. But the CBO and the Joint Committee on Taxation now estimate that the insurance-coverage provisions of the ACA will have a net cost of close to $1.2 trillion over the 2012–22 period.
Readers are no doubt meant to interpret this as saying that CBO found that the Act will increase the deficit. But anyone who actually read, or even skimmed, the CBO report (pdf) knows that it found that the ACA would reduce, not increase, the deficit — because the insurance subsidies were fully paid for.
Please notice that the CBO report Krugman linked to is from March 30, 2011.
What he failed to inform his readers is the CBO revised these numbers in a March 13, 2012, report finding "the insurance coverage provisions of the ACA will have a net cost of just under $1.1 trillion over the 2012–2021 period."
Yet the Time columnist had the nerve to attack Ferguson:
Now, people on the right like to argue that the CBO was wrong. But that’s not the argument Ferguson is making — he is deliberately misleading readers, conveying the impression that the CBO had actually rejected Obama’s claim that health reform is deficit-neutral, when in fact the opposite is true.
Really, Paul? Who's "deliberately misleading readers?"
What discipline was that?
Isn't that what you call a circular firing squad?
No, it is probably a catfight when two pussies like those two get their claws out.
I call it: “Awesome”
Trade.
The Rodent that held Palin accountable for the Tucson massacre.
Alex: What is a “Krugman?”
According to the interview Greta had with the author, this is a legitimate hit piece as far hit-piece-legitimacy goes.
I believe the author hails from the UK, and supported McCain in 2008. Not sure about his post in the inimical weekly rag.
That magazine needs to change its name to “Newspeak”.
I suggest a read of the comments following Krugmans blog. It is truly frightening that there are so many true believers in the USA.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.