19 thoughts on “Paul Krugman, Rube”

  1. Barack Obama lacks credibility as a leader on spending cuts.

    He’ll vote present. More tee time that way.

  2. Leadership Style: Wait for the last block of the parade, tackle the Drum Majorette, wave the baton, claim credit for the good parts and ignorance of the bad parts (“Hey, I was golfing then.”), then go golfing.

    He’s making Dilbert’s boss look Presidential. What? You say Trump’s running?!?

  3. From Comrade Krugman,

    I realize that with hostile Republicans controlling the House, there’s not much Mr. Obama can get done in the way of concrete policy.

    I’ve heard this at least a dozen times since last Friday. And my reaction hasn’t changed.

    BULL $H1T!!

    How is it that the Demoncrats had both houses of Congress tied up, with Obama rubber stamping anything HE, Ms Pelosi, or Mr Ried thought the country couldn’t live without, until the November elections, yet it’s the REPUBLICANS fault that “X”, Y”, or Z hasn’t or “can’t” be done…this week or LAST WEEK?

    How is it that they shoved Obamcare and the Porkulus bills through in spite of public opinion, constant polling, town hall meetings and all those horrible terrorist acts committed by the Tea Party, but Krugman can’t find the Obama he voted for?

    Which Obama is the good Comrade looking for?

    The one who was going to close Gitmo?

    The one who was going to bring the troops home?

    The one who created 2 million jobs?

    The one who ‘thought’ there were shovel ready jobs?

    Or, is he just NOW seeing the, silly, pathetic excuse for a, man behind the curtain? The silly, pathetic excuse for a man wearing, and being, the stuffed shirt?

    The last time I saw someone in that far over his head, I was a Life Guard at the Annual Lead Skivvies Swim Meet, at the Marianna Trench!

    In deep over his head. Deep, DEEEEEEP in over his pointed ,little, half-African-American, H.E.A.D.

  6. If Lott made a purely logical argument, then if true it would be true even if made by a liar.

    But that isn’t what Lott writes. He starts with a series of assertions of fact. Since Lott has a history of making false assertions, that history is relevant to the credibility of assertions he makes.

    If Bill Clinton said ” Aristotle is a man. All men are mortal. Therefore, Aristotle is mortal.” then disputing the argument because Bill Clinton made it would be ad hominem.

    On the other hand, if Bill Clinton said: “Aristotle isn’t mortal. I saw him yesterday. He was fine. Trust me. ” that’s an assertion of fact. You then need to look at the credibility of the witness.

  11. How is it that they shoved Obamcare and the Porkulus bills through in spite of public opinion, constant polling, town hall meetings and all those horrible terrorist acts committed by the Tea Party, but Krugman can’t find the Obama he voted for?

    Which Obama is the good Comrade looking for?

    The one they were certain could prove once and for all that Keynesian economics does work. To Krugman, Obama apparently isn’t the one, anymore. But the idea that Keynesian economics does work is still not identified as a flawed premise, just the implementation.

  14. “OMG Aristotle is dead?!?! Why didn’t anyone tell me!”

    Where have you been? The tweets have been flying all day!

  17. Andrea…..I know this is going to be a shock to you….I hope you are sitting down…….Aristotle is tragically dead…..[Rev Lovejoy]There There Andrea….There There……….[/RevLovejoy]

Comments are closed.