Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
6. I get the sense
Sun Jan 6, 2013, 07:21 PM
Jan 2013

"Krugman will remain banished from the White House until he embraces triangulation, which he will not barring a brain trauma of some sort."

...that the most important thing in the world to you is to prove Obama is a sellout who should be despised.

Krugman is a practical person who rarily subccumbs to knee-jerk.

Battles of the Budget

By PAUL KRUGMAN

The centrist fantasy of a Grand Bargain on the budget never had a chance. Even if some kind of bargain had supposedly been reached, key players would soon have reneged on the deal — probably the next time a Republican occupied the White House.

For the reality is that our two major political parties are engaged in a fierce struggle over the future shape of American society. Democrats want to preserve the legacy of the New Deal and the Great Society — Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid — and add to them what every other advanced country has: a more or less universal guarantee of essential health care. Republicans want to roll all of that back, making room for drastically lower taxes on the wealthy. Yes, it’s essentially a class war.

The fight over the fiscal cliff was just one battle in that war. It ended, arguably, in a tactical victory for Democrats. The question is whether it was a Pyrrhic victory that set the stage for a larger defeat.

Why do I say that it was a tactical victory? Mainly because of what didn’t happen: There were no benefit cuts.

<...>

There were also some actual positives from a progressive point of view. Expanded unemployment benefits were given another year to run, a huge benefit to many families and a significant boost to our economic prospects (because this is money that will be spent, and hence help preserve jobs). Other benefits to lower-income families were given another five years — although, unfortunately, the payroll tax break was allowed to expire, which will hurt both working families and job creation.

- more -

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/04/opinion/kurgman-battles-of-the-budget.html


I could go for that. Of course, I admit a tiny crush on Paul Krugman. TwilightGardener Jan 2013 #1
Me too...I think Stiglitz is cute also. Sekhmets Daughter Jan 2013 #3
be still my heart handmade34 Jan 2013 #13
I saw him first! PasadenaTrudy Jan 2013 #40
Nice... Sekhmets Daughter Jan 2013 #2
Kim never said that Obama was the world's worst poker player. MannyGoldstein Jan 2013 #4
I get the sense ProSense Jan 2013 #6
No need to prove it PBO is doing it all on his own stultusporcos Jan 2013 #7
Yup, that ProSense Jan 2013 #10
yes your post was at least you knew it stultusporcos Jan 2013 #11
Hmmm, familiar? ProSense Jan 2013 #12
KnR ananda Jan 2013 #5
His books are really interesting... YvonneCa Jan 2013 #8
ProSense... are you feeling more liberal these days? fascisthunter Jan 2013 #9
He would be a good pick. LWolf Jan 2013 #14
Robert Reich would be a "good pick" too & has experience from the Clinton administration. xtraxritical Jan 2013 #25
there are reasons to want an economist in the job cthulu2016 Jan 2013 #31
Reich is a PhD in Economics, teaches at UC Berkeley. xtraxritical Jan 2013 #35
Why not start a petition on the white house website? riverbendviewgal Jan 2013 #15
I think Krugman would feel too constrained in the job RomneyLies Jan 2013 #16
Sorry. This is a non-starter. radiclib Jan 2013 #17
Obama would be so smart to appoint Krugman. JDPriestly Jan 2013 #18
You do know that Bernanke.... ReRe Jan 2013 #23
That might be a good beginning. JDPriestly Jan 2013 #29
Correctamundo... ReRe Jan 2013 #32
Wouldn't Goldman Sachs have to give permission for this to happen? rurallib Jan 2013 #19
Surely there are better candidates UnrepentantLiberal Jan 2013 #20
Apparently Obama wants Larry Summers, another Clinton administration retread. Cleita Jan 2013 #21
Larry Summers would be a terrible choice. JDPriestly Jan 2013 #30
Oh, I agree and I would love Paul Krugman but it ain't gonna happen. n/t Cleita Jan 2013 #33
I have heard nothing on Summers. I have heard tons about Jack Lew. Jennicut Jan 2013 #38
You could be right. I heard Summers mentioned by a pundit Cleita Jan 2013 #46
Krugman said that he does not want the job. Jennicut Jan 2013 #47
Maybe you should direct this post to the OP as it was ProSense who Cleita Jan 2013 #48
I'm with you, ProSense garthranzz Jan 2013 #22
Yeah, PO should go ahead and stick a fork... ReRe Jan 2013 #24
ProSense, did you notice this part of the story? Hagel is being trashed here on DU: freshwest Jan 2013 #26
I haven't really noted Hagel being "trashed" Fumesucker Jan 2013 #37
Aint no way in HELL the money boys gonna let Obama do that RedstDem Jan 2013 #27
Should have been his VP Peregrine Jan 2013 #28
I wish. But doesnt Pres Obama only appoint republicans? nm rhett o rick Jan 2013 #34
Sign the petition eridani Jan 2013 #36
No way in hell Obama does this, but... dreamnightwind Jan 2013 #39
For me it comes down to the fact that Krugman is a Kensian. He understands how we got out of jwirr Jan 2013 #41
I'm guessing that ProSense would rather have Krugman inside the tent pissing out Fumesucker Jan 2013 #42
I guessing you have ProSense Jan 2013 #43
I'm sitting on this bar stool talking like a damn fool Fumesucker Jan 2013 #44
I can support this. Xyzse Jan 2013 #45
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Why Paul Krugman should b...»Reply #6