Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Krugman: Getting to Crazy

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-15-11 08:50 AM
Original message
Krugman: Getting to Crazy
Krugman: Getting to Crazy

The last paragraphs of this piece really lay out the problem.

<...>

Recently, however, all restraint has vanished indeed, it has been driven out of the party. Last year Mitch McConnell, the Senate minority leader, asserted that the Bush tax cuts actually increased revenue a claim completely at odds with the evidence and also declared that this was the view of virtually every Republican on that subject. And its true: even Mr. Romney, widely regarded as the most sensible of the contenders for the 2012 presidential nomination, has endorsed the view that tax cuts can actually reduce the deficit.

<...>

Heres the point: those within the G.O.P. who had misgivings about the embrace of tax-cut fanaticism might have made a stronger stand if there had been any indication that such fanaticism came with a price, if outsiders had been willing to condemn those who took irresponsible positions.

But there has been no such price. Mr. Bush squandered the surplus of the late Clinton years, yet prominent pundits pretend that the two parties share equal blame for our debt problems. Paul Ryan, the chairman of the House Budget Committee, proposed a supposed deficit-reduction plan that included huge tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy, then received an award for fiscal responsibility.

So there has been no pressure on the G.O.P. to show any kind of responsibility, or even rationality and sure enough, it has gone off the deep end. If youre surprised, that means that you were part of the problem.


Think about where this country is. There were always more progressives in the House Democratic caucus, and that number has grown. In fact, the Progressive Caucus outnumbered the blue dogs during the last Congress. There are more Democrats, even among Senators, who support marriage equality. That is in stark contrast to 1990. There are more pro labor Senators. President Obama has been able to reverse or is making progress toward reversing/improving many of the damaging policies of the last 40 years, and he's doing it with little to no Repubican support.

It doesn't matter how much the country tries to move left, Republicans continue to test the electorate with every right wing policy they can advance. They go unchallenged, and as Krugman stated, they even get rewarded. Keep electing them and Democrats have to deal with them. House Democrats can't pass a bill on their own. The good thing is that it appears Boehner doesn't have control over his caucus.

Still, there would not be a debate about the debt ceiling with Nancy Pelosi as Speaker.

When the GOP gained control of the House, it was just another opportunity for them to move further toward crazy.

Imagine if they had gained control of the Senate.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
mdmc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-15-11 08:58 AM
Response to Original message
1. the GOP bends over backwards to benefit corporations
the dems just look at them and ask, "hey corporations, can we bend over too to please you?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
woo me with science Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-15-11 09:07 AM
Response to Original message
2. ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
enough Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-15-11 09:14 AM
Response to Original message
3. Good point about the complicity of the media/punditocracy. (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
woo me with science Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-15-11 09:17 AM
Response to Original message
4. Krugman: "Obama, Moderate Republican"
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/07/14/obama-moder... /

"What Obama has offered and Republicans have refused to accept is a deal in which less than 20 percent of the deficit reduction comes from new revenues. This puts him slightly to the right of the average Republican voter.

So we learn two things. First, Obama is extraordinarily eager to make concessions. Second, Republicans are incredibly unwilling to take yes for an answer something for which progressives should be grateful."


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-15-11 09:34 AM
Response to Reply #4
6. Krugman: OK, not exactly.
Wonder how many of these Republicans (chart from your link):



...fell into this category: "Oh, and for all those older Americans who voted GOP last year because those nasty Democrats were going to cut Medicare, I have just one word: suckers!" (Krugman, April)

In fact, I remember a lot of ignorant people who were not right wingers also screaming that Democrats had cut Medicare.

If Americans didn't want the President negotiating with assholes, they shouldn't have turned control of Congress over to Boehner and Cantor.

Pelosi on the President's handling of the current negotiations.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
woo me with science Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-15-11 09:40 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. You attempt to paint him as struggling to fight back against the extremists,
Edited on Fri Jul-15-11 09:54 AM by woo me with science
What a pantload.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...


He has found them extremely useful. They have allowed him to go further right than he could have dreamed without their help.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-15-11 09:53 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. Hmmmm?
"You attempt to paint him as struggling to fight back against the extremists,"

Speaking of "pantload," facts always trump bullshit opinions.

<...>

On June 24, Judge Tanya Pratt of the Federal District Court in Indianapolis issued a preliminary injunction blocking enforcement of a new Indiana law banning the use of Medicaid funds at Planned Parenthood clinics, which provide essential health services to low-income women. The mean-spirited law is part of a Republican-led national campaign to end public financing for Planned Parenthood. The Obama administration promptly told Indiana, and other states weighing similar legislation, that the measure violated federal law by imposing impermissible restrictions on the freedom of Medicaid beneficiaries to choose health care providers. Judge Pratt agreed with that assessment in her decision.

link
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
woo me with science Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-15-11 09:57 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. Don't want to talk about the deals, huh.
Edited on Fri Jul-15-11 10:21 AM by woo me with science
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-15-11 10:51 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. Um
"Don't want to talk about the deals, huh."

What deals? Speculation and opinions aren't deals.

Want to talk about actual facts?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ladjf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-15-11 09:20 AM
Response to Original message
5. Krugman accurately describes the problem.
We've seen enough analysis of how we have gotten to where we are. We need more work in the area of real solutions. (Easier said than done.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Dec 28th 2014, 08:51 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC