HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Video & Multimedia (Forum) » Paul Krugman and Joe Scar...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Tue Mar 5, 2013, 12:09 PM

Paul Krugman and Joe Scarborough on Charlie Rose, March 4, 2013

http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/12802

51:54

6 replies, 1112 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 6 replies Author Time Post
Reply Paul Krugman and Joe Scarborough on Charlie Rose, March 4, 2013 (Original post)
horseshoecrab Mar 2013 OP
TheMastersNemesis Mar 2013 #1
CTyankee Mar 2013 #2
horseshoecrab Mar 2013 #3
CTyankee Mar 2013 #4
horseshoecrab Mar 2013 #5
CTyankee Mar 2013 #6

Response to horseshoecrab (Original post)

Tue Mar 5, 2013, 12:23 PM

1. Charlie Rose RW POS

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to horseshoecrab (Original post)

Tue Mar 5, 2013, 08:27 PM

2. OK, I looked at this. Krugman made substantive statements throughout and Scar simply

rebutted (most of the time) with assertions of Krugman's statements in the 1990s. He went back again and again and again to them instead of debating the SUBSTANCE of the argument.

This showed me that Scar knew he couldn't possibly debate Krugman on the substance so he had to find another "window" to attack. Krugman objected several times against this tactic. He pointedout that it was ad hominem, not substantive, but Scar refused to listen. Finally, Krugman just got disgruntled and let that be known. No big deal, really.

Scar has no victory at all in this. If he claims one, he is wrong. Krugman is right and has always been right and Scar is a demogogue.

I suggest that Scar put a sock in it...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CTyankee (Reply #2)

Thu Mar 7, 2013, 12:10 PM

3. Scar is a complete and utter blowhard

I thought that Krugman did very well considering the fact that he could barely finish a sentence.

Scar's position seems to be something along the lines of, "why argue substance when I can make stuff up?" The insistence on marrying Krugman to his writings in the 90's (totally out of context with today's 2013 reality) really does personify rethug tactics. It was similar in a way to the rethug convention's "You didn't build that" taking things out of context theme.


All in all, yes, Krugman had the substance and Scarborough had absolutely nothing. But he's awfully persistent with that nothing. I understand why Krugman gave himself a bad review, although I think he did well.

I'm listening yet again and came across this gem from Scar: "Anyone that knows me knows that I don't engage in ad hominem attacks"




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to horseshoecrab (Reply #3)

Thu Mar 7, 2013, 02:05 PM

4. The only thing that will help this situation is for responsible people to make a fuss and either

refuse to go on MJ until Scar cleans up his act, or the public "gets it" and starts to watch something else in that time slot. I am comforted by that old saying "The bigger they come, the harder they fall." We may be hearing a loud thud sooner than we think.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CTyankee (Reply #4)

Fri Mar 8, 2013, 07:04 PM

5. Scarborough and Democrats


Well ... I suppose that when liberal guests start to feel insulted enough by Scarborough they'll stop accepting his invitations to participate in his (and Mika's) little shindig.

One can hope.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to horseshoecrab (Reply #5)

Sun Mar 10, 2013, 01:36 PM

6. too many of them "fall into line." I suspect they like the money...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread