?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Paul Krugman makes me angry lately.

« previous entry | next entry »
Aug. 1st, 2011 | 07:38 am

The President Surrenders, says Krugman

It seems as if he wants Obama to be a one term president. He was one of the major players banging the drum of complaint last fall that led to the Teabagger Congress we now have. This is more of the same. He should be lambasting the Republican House for holding the country hostage. They were willing to bring down the government, the economy, and the country if they didn't get their way. What should Obama do? Declare martial law and have a purge? I don't buy Krugman's suggestion. First of all, he doesn't define his "legal end run", but the implication is the 14th amendment which was talked about a lot. That would have led to immediate impeachment hearings in the House, which would have completely paralyzed the government for the rest of Obama's term. I think he took the only way out possible. Social Security and Medicare are not touched, and the debate continues with the hostage rescued.

Link | Leave a comment |

Comments {12}

Matt

(no subject)

from: ed_dirt
date: Aug. 1st, 2011 03:57 pm (UTC)
Link

HEAR HEAR!

Reply | Thread

Michael

the debate continues with the hostage rescued.

from: nebris
date: Aug. 1st, 2011 06:44 pm (UTC)
Link

He negotiated with terrorists and conceded in part to their demands, which is to lose by default. Social Security and Medicare were not touched..this time. But they will be...

And all this was 'political theater'. The Corporate State is triumphant and the final decline of The Republic is painfully clear.

~M~

Reply | Thread

Michael

Ransom Paid

from: nebris
date: Aug. 1st, 2011 09:05 pm (UTC)
Link

http://robertreich.org/post/8331408301

Monday, August 1, 2011

Anyone who characterizes the deal between the President, Democratic, and Republican leaders as a victory for the American people over partisanship understands neither economics nor politics.

The deal does not raise taxes on America’s wealthy and most fortunate — who are now taking home a larger share of total income and wealth, and whose tax rates are already lower than they have been, in eighty years. Yet it puts the nation’s most important safety nets and public investments on the chopping block.

It also hobbles the capacity of the government to respond to the jobs and growth crisis. Added to the cuts already underway by state and local governments, the deal’s spending cuts increase the odds of a double-dip recession. And the deal strengthens the political hand of the radical right.

Yes, the deal is preferable to the unfolding economic catastrophe of a default on the debt of the U.S. government. The outrage and the shame is it has come to this choice.

More than a year ago, the President could have conditioned his agreement to extend the Bush tax cuts beyond 2010 on Republicans’ agreement not to link a vote on the debt ceiling to the budget deficit. But he did not.

Many months ago, when Republicans first demanded spending cuts and no tax increases as a condition for raising the debt ceiling, the President could have blown their cover. He could have shown the American people why this demand had nothing to do with deficit reduction but everything to do with the GOP’s ideological fixation on shrinking the size of the government — thereby imperiling Medicare, Social Security, education, infrastructure, and everything else Americans depend on. But he did not.

And through it all the President could have explained to Americans that the biggest economic challenge we face is restoring jobs and wages and economic growth, that spending cuts in the next few years will slow the economy even further, and therefore that the Republicans’ demands threaten us all. Again, he did not.

The radical right has now won a huge tactical and strategic victory. Democrats and the White House have proven they have little by way of tactics or strategy.

By putting Medicare and Social Security on the block, they have made it more difficult for Democrats in the upcoming 2012 election cycle to blame Republicans for doing so.

By embracing deficit reduction as their apparent goal – claiming only that they’d seek to do it differently than the GOP – Democrats and the White House now seemingly agree with the GOP that the budget deficit is the biggest obstacle to the nation’s future prosperity.

The budget deficit is not the biggest obstacle to our prosperity. Lack of jobs and growth is. And the largest threat to our democracy is the emergence of a radical right capable of getting most of the ransom it demands.

Reply | Thread

i

Re: Ransom Paid

from: i
date: Aug. 1st, 2011 10:52 pm (UTC)
Link

i don't know anyone who is "characteriz[ing] the deal between the President, Democratic, and Republican leaders as a victory for the American people over partisanship". i certainly am not. i stand by what i said. feel free to go vote for someone who will never ever be elected president in this universe. as soon as you come up with someone who can beat obama in a primary, beat the Republican in November, and convince a Teabagger Congress to enact a progressive agenda, I'll be right there with you. Until then, i want no part of your fantasy.

Reply | Parent | Thread

Michael

Re: Ransom Paid

from: nebris
date: Aug. 1st, 2011 11:45 pm (UTC)
Link

*laughs* Oh, dude,you've totally forgotten who I am, haven't you? That is sooooo not my fantasy. Mass Democracy has failed and other paths must now be followed. Basically I was saying being pissed off at Krugman is like being pissed off at a canary choking in a mineshaft.

~M~

Reply | Parent | Thread

i

Re: Ransom Paid

from: i
date: Aug. 1st, 2011 11:53 pm (UTC)
Link

you're the one posting reich to defend krugman.

Reply | Parent | Thread

Michael

(no subject)

from: nebris
date: Aug. 2nd, 2011 12:09 am (UTC)
Link

Yeah, you forgot. No worries though. You were never part of my target demo anyway. Have a nice day. =)

~M~

Reply | Parent | Thread

serendipity

(no subject)

from: serendipity
date: Aug. 1st, 2011 10:46 pm (UTC)
Link

hi!

Reply | Thread

i

(no subject)

from: i
date: Aug. 1st, 2011 10:48 pm (UTC)
Link

hi! how are ya?

Reply | Parent | Thread

serendipity

(no subject)

from: serendipity
date: Aug. 1st, 2011 10:57 pm (UTC)
Link

Doing well, thanks... Still wondering when the real relaxation of retirement might kick in, but definitely not missing the 40-hour-workweek grind. How are you?

Reply | Parent | Thread

i

(no subject)

from: i
date: Aug. 1st, 2011 11:14 pm (UTC)
Link

incredibly busy with the new gallery and trying to work on the side to make ends meet, but managing to travel a lot and enjoy marriage and grandkids. no relaxation or retirement in my future!

Reply | Parent | Thread

serendipity

(no subject)

from: serendipity
date: Aug. 2nd, 2011 02:25 am (UTC)
Link

Artists don't get to retire. :P

Reply | Parent | Thread