If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The New York Times)   Paul Krugman Godwins Cory Booker   (krugman.blogs.nytimes.com) divider line 79
    More: Sad, Paul Krugman  
•       •       •

3856 clicks; posted to Politics » on 22 May 2012 at 8:28 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



79 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-05-22 12:23:11 AM
"And my guess is that the Cory Booker thing is ultimately related; I didn't know this, but apparently Booker is so close to his Wall Street donors that it never occurred to him that echoing their over-the-top reactions to Obama's very mild populism would destroy his own political future (which I believe it has)."

Whoa. That seems a little premature. Although his Twitter feed did come off as a little desperate today.
 
2012-05-22 06:02:10 AM
There are many liberals I respect even if I disdagree with them. I even enjoy Bill Maher although he is a bit over the top at times, but hey, he is a comedian after all. Krugman however, is a different story. Basically, his economic arguments are as follows:

1. John Maynard Keynes was infallible and was never wrong
2. Always refer to rule #1.

In essence, he is nothing more than a left wing Limbaugh, whose views are as follows:

1. Conservatives are infallible and never wrong
2. Always refer to rule #1.
 
2012-05-22 08:35:23 AM
FTA: "I think there's a process going on here, in which wealth and power creates a bubble in which people are so eager to please the paymasters that they lose any sense of what it sounds like to those not already answering to the same paymasters."

Really, Krug... ya think so? Now that you've come to this mind-shattering revelation, read over the last 10 years of your column.
 
2012-05-22 08:38:04 AM
Is this the thread where Fark IndependentsTM pretend to be smarter than a nobel laureate who has a record of being the most correct columnist in the country?

I like these
 
2012-05-22 08:38:26 AM
the Cory Booker thing

Gotta love articles that write about something and don't even give the most basic explanation or even a single, simple quote.

My guess is he started writing that one about 20 minutes before his deadline.
 
2012-05-22 08:38:33 AM

mikemoto: In essence, he is nothing more than a left wing Limbaugh


Yawn. Wake me up when he's a pill-popper and spends a whole week calling a woman a slut.
 
2012-05-22 08:41:05 AM

mikemoto: There are many liberals I respect even if I disdagree with them. I even enjoy Bill Maher although he is a bit over the top at times, but hey, he is a comedian after all. Krugman however, is a different story. Basically, his economic arguments are as follows:

1. John Maynard Keynes was infallible and was never wrong
2. Always refer to rule #1.

In essence, he is nothing more than a left wing Limbaugh, whose views are as follows:

1. Conservatives are infallible and never wrong
2. Always refer to rule #1.


What if someone wrote a physics column, and had views that said:

1. Isaac Newton was infallible and was never wrong
2. Always refer to rule #1.

The hypothetical blogger would be wrong at atomic scales or at speeds approaching c, and there might be some weird stuff in the column about alchemy, but he/she would still have some useful analysis to offer in a lot of situations. I think that's the role that Krugman plays, whereas I fail to see what value Rushbo offers to society.
 
2012-05-22 08:41:33 AM
And no, the same thing doesn't happen on the left...

BLASPHEMY!! BOTH SIDES ARE THE SAME!!!! EVERY CONSERVATIVE CAUGHT BREAKING RULES HAS INSISTED SO!!! BURN HIM!!
 
2012-05-22 08:41:43 AM
I have no idea what that article is about. Seriously.

And who writes a newspaper article that starts with the word "so"? That seems unprofessional to me.
 
2012-05-22 08:43:01 AM

PanicMan: I have no idea what that article is about. Seriously.

And who writes a newspaper article that starts with the word "so"? That seems unprofessional to me.


Its not a newspaper article its his blog that NY Times hosts
 
2012-05-22 08:43:53 AM

PanicMan: I have no idea what that article is about. Seriously.

And who writes a newspaper article that starts with the word "so"? That seems unprofessional to me.


That isn't so damning when coming from someone who tries to pass off one word with a period as a sentence. Really.
 
2012-05-22 08:44:05 AM

quatchi: My guess is he started writing that one about 20 minutes before his deadline.


His column comes out Monday and Friday. This is his blog which he posts in whenever he feels like. You see stuff in there about what music he's listening to and one-sentence notes about his travel schedule.
 
2012-05-22 08:44:25 AM

quatchi: the Cory Booker thing

Gotta love articles that write about something and don't even give the most basic explanation or even a single, simple quote.

My guess is he started writing that one about 20 minutes before his deadline.


PanicMan: I have no idea what that article is about. Seriously.

And who writes a newspaper article that starts with the word "so"? That seems unprofessional to me.


It's his blog, not his column.
 
2012-05-22 08:45:07 AM

mikemoto: There are many liberals I respect even if I disdagree with them. I even enjoy Bill Maher although he is a bit over the top at times, but hey, he is a comedian after all. Krugman however, is a different story. Basically, his economic arguments are as follows:

1. John Maynard Keynes was infallible and was never wrong
2. Always refer to rule #1.

In essence, he is nothing more than a left wing Limbaugh, whose views are as follows:

1. Conservatives are infallible and never wrong
2. Always refer to rule #1.


Really? I don't think Krugman calls Sarah Palin a whore because she uses birth control (which, in this case, doesn't actually make sense). He may call her a political whore, which is true. But no, your false equivalency argument finds no perch. Krugman does not apply jingoistic labels to conservative politicians like Boehner the Magic Cracker (much the same way Limbaugh called Obama the Magic Negro).

Congrats, another conservative who still holds on to the false equivalency hope that his politically-similar colleagues haven't gone off the deep end (guess what, they have).
 
2012-05-22 08:45:28 AM

mikemoto: There are many liberals I respect even if I disdagree with them. I even enjoy Bill Maher although he is a bit over the top at times, but hey, he is a comedian after all. Krugman however, is a different story. Basically, his economic arguments are as follows:

1. John Maynard Keynes was infallible and was never wrong
2. Always refer to rule #1.


I got the same thing from TFA. Krugman goes on to rail against the 0.1% that funds the right, neglecting to remember that the Democrats have their own 0.1% that helps them out.

/so vote Republican
 
2012-05-22 08:46:08 AM

CPennypacker: PanicMan: I have no idea what that article is about. Seriously.

And who writes a newspaper article that starts with the word "so"? That seems unprofessional to me.

Its not a newspaper article its his blog that NY Times hosts


Well that's goddamn retarded.
 
2012-05-22 08:47:25 AM

xanadian: mikemoto: There are many liberals I respect even if I disdagree with them. I even enjoy Bill Maher although he is a bit over the top at times, but hey, he is a comedian after all. Krugman however, is a different story. Basically, his economic arguments are as follows:

1. John Maynard Keynes was infallible and was never wrong
2. Always refer to rule #1.

I got the same thing from TFA. Krugman goes on to rail against the 0.1% that funds the right, neglecting to remember that the Democrats have their own 0.1% that helps them out.

/so vote Republican


SOOOOOROOOOOOOOOOOS!
CLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONEEEEEEEEEEY!

Their 0.1% is a lot bigger than our 0.1%. (Don't believe it? Look at the donor comparison in Obama vs. Romney's campaigns, but please, keep farking that false equivalency chicken, it's soooooo cute!)
 
2012-05-22 08:48:08 AM
I can't wait for the b-b-b-but Bush vs. b-b-b-but Booker threads.
 
2012-05-22 08:48:58 AM

PanicMan: CPennypacker: PanicMan: I have no idea what that article is about. Seriously.

And who writes a newspaper article that starts with the word "so"? That seems unprofessional to me.

Its not a newspaper article its his blog that NY Times hosts

Well that's goddamn retarded.


Why?
 
2012-05-22 08:52:18 AM

quatchi: the Cory Booker thing

Gotta love articles that write about something and don't even give the most basic explanation or even a single, simple quote.

My guess is he started writing that one about 20 minutes before his deadline.


It's his blog, not a column. He doesn't post on a schedule. He often cross references his own posts or other news stories. like, you know, most blogs.

That said, he's usually good about linking stuff, but didn't here and I have no clue who or what he's talking about.
 
2012-05-22 08:52:37 AM
Booker did himself real damage. Romney is the one running on his business record, to wit Obama can and should draw contrast. To compare that to the Rev. Wright attacks by the right is nonsense.
 
2012-05-22 08:53:31 AM

DarnoKonrad: Booker did himself real damage. Romney is the one running on his business record, to wit Obama can and should draw contrast. To compare that to the Rev. Wright attacks by the right is nonsense.


He's been spending too much time on Morning Joe.
 
2012-05-22 08:54:43 AM

CPennypacker: PanicMan: CPennypacker: PanicMan: I have no idea what that article is about. Seriously.

And who writes a newspaper article that starts with the word "so"? That seems unprofessional to me.

Its not a newspaper article its his blog that NY Times hosts

Well that's goddamn retarded.

Why?


Because I'm in a bad mood. I'll stop posting now until coffee kicks in and I can compose an intelligent thought.
 
2012-05-22 08:55:15 AM

CPennypacker: most correct columnist in the country?


How does one become that? Is there a trophy?
 
2012-05-22 08:55:51 AM

JusticeandIndependence: CPennypacker: most correct columnist in the country?

How does one become that? Is there a trophy?


Be right a lot?
 
2012-05-22 08:55:54 AM

mikemoto: In essence, he is nothing more than a left wing Limbaugh, whose views are as follows:


A left-wing Limbaugh who won the Nobel Prize in Economics. Is Krugman always right? No, but he has a hell of a lot more credibility than most of the derpers on the right. He was, afterall, right in saying that the stimulus wasn't enough.

As for the Booker thing, this is what he was referring to.
 
2012-05-22 08:57:29 AM

xanadian: neglecting to remember that the Democrats have their own 0.1% that helps them out.


Yeah, he totally forgot that Wall Street helps Democrats, too. Completely slipped his mind. That's why he didn't bring up Cory Booker and his ties to Wall Street in this column and he never mentions the Obama administration's close ties to Wall Street in his other columns. Oh, wait...
 
2012-05-22 09:01:46 AM
Booker's political career isn't over. The entire reason he made his comments is because he wants to run for Senator in 2014. Wall Street remembers who their friends are.
 
2012-05-22 09:03:39 AM

FACT: Newark Mayor Cory Booker received over $565K from Bain + the financial industry for 2002 campaign thkpr.gs/K5wPmq

- ThinkProgress (@thinkprogress) May 21, 2012
 
2012-05-22 09:05:31 AM

JusticeandIndependence: CPennypacker: most correct columnist in the country?

How does one become that? Is there a trophy?


Yes. It's called the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences (informally the Nobel Prize in Economics).

Has anyone pointed that that was Krugman's blog and not his column yet? Or that comparing a Noble prize winner to a drug addled radio entertainer is idiotic?
 
2012-05-22 09:05:33 AM

Mentat: Booker's political career isn't over. The entire reason he made his comments is because he wants to run for Senator in 2014. Wall Street remembers who their friends are.


Yes, because all the contributions coming out of Wall Street these days are going straight to Farttaxtimemachinebongo.
 
2012-05-22 09:06:36 AM

Mentat: Booker's political career isn't over. The entire reason he made his comments is because he wants to run for Senator in 2014. Wall Street remembers who their friends are.


I agree with that. Krugman greatly overestimates how damaging those remarks are and underestimates how loved Cory Booker is. In fact, I think they help his chances even before you factor in Wall Street money. Regardless of his Wall Street comments, NJ Dems will vote for him any chance they get. Those comments only strengthen his standing with NJ Reps.

It's something Obama would do. He knows his base is locked up, so he can reach out to independents and even conservatives without much risk.
 
2012-05-22 09:09:44 AM

mikemoto: nothing more than a left wing Limbaugh


i1122.photobucket.com
 
2012-05-22 09:14:48 AM

JusticeandIndependence: CPennypacker: most correct columnist in the country?

How does one become that? Is there a trophy?


A liberal arts professor and a bunch if his students sat around and judged predictions in a sliding scale, judging which predictions were right, mostly right etc. They averaged scores and picked who was most accurate. Liberals took this to be hard science, completely ignoring the judicial bias in a sliding scale and ran with it. They repeat the claim a lot, those who actually read the paper see the obvious bias in the judgement scale and toss the rating as flawed and subjective. But it makes krugman disciples warm and fuzzy so we generally just let them post it and laugh at them quietly.
 
2012-05-22 09:15:29 AM

thurstonxhowell: Mentat: Booker's political career isn't over. The entire reason he made his comments is because he wants to run for Senator in 2014. Wall Street remembers who their friends are.

I agree with that. Krugman greatly overestimates how damaging those remarks are and underestimates how loved Cory Booker is. In fact, I think they help his chances even before you factor in Wall Street money. Regardless of his Wall Street comments, NJ Dems will vote for him any chance they get. Those comments only strengthen his standing with NJ Reps.

It's something Obama would do. He knows his base is locked up, so he can reach out to independents and even conservatives without much risk.


Maybe in New Jersey, but if Mr Booker has national aspirations as a Democrat it doesn't help the fact he's now starring in a Romney campaign ad.
 
2012-05-22 09:16:28 AM

thurstonxhowell: Mentat: Booker's political career isn't over. The entire reason he made his comments is because he wants to run for Senator in 2014. Wall Street remembers who their friends are.

I agree with that. Krugman greatly overestimates how damaging those remarks are and underestimates how loved Cory Booker is. In fact, I think they help his chances even before you factor in Wall Street money. Regardless of his Wall Street comments, NJ Dems will vote for him any chance they get. Those comments only strengthen his standing with NJ Reps.

It's something Obama would do. He knows his base is locked up, so he can reach out to independents and even conservatives without much risk.


Oh yeah obamas got that base locked up just like in 2010. Brilliant.
 
2012-05-22 09:18:20 AM
Another day, another Krugman op-ed that I pass by..........

Is he still beating that one trick pony to death?
 
2012-05-22 09:20:43 AM

Bob16: Oh yeah obamas got that base locked up just like in 2010. Brilliant.


I didn't realize Obama was elected president in 2010 again. Now, you do realize that the Republicans who were elected in 2010 will have to defend their record. Good thing they have a record of passing a lot of helpful new laws and bringing a lot of jobs to America rather than one of shiatting the bed by holding the national economy hostage for the sake of political gamesmanship and having a national credit downgrading accredited to them.
 
2012-05-22 09:20:56 AM

DarnoKonrad: Booker did himself real damage. Romney is the one running on his business record, to wit Obama can and should draw contrast. To compare that to the Rev. Wright attacks by the right is nonsense.


This, sadly. Letting the GOP draw that false equivalence and then point to Booker to support their point is damaging and distracting.

/BSAB, so vote Kodos
 
2012-05-22 09:24:46 AM

DarnoKonrad: Maybe in New Jersey, but if Mr Booker has national aspirations as a Democrat it doesn't help the fact he's now starring in a Romney campaign ad.


This is true only because Cory Booker's extraordinary career isn't as well known outside the state.

Bob16: Oh yeah obamas got that base locked up just like in 2010. Brilliant.


Obama didn't run in 2010. The Republicans weren't running the worst liar in the country in 2010.
 
2012-05-22 09:27:33 AM

thurstonxhowell: This is true only because Cory Booker's extraordinary career isn't as well known outside the state.


While we're on the subject, please watch this. It's on Netflix.



/hope he still runs for Governor
 
2012-05-22 09:30:28 AM

CPennypacker: has a record of being the most correct columnist in the country?

I like these


citation?
 
2012-05-22 09:32:46 AM
i49.tinypic.com

Just as rational a billboard.

/Over 9000 hrs in paint
 
2012-05-22 09:34:56 AM

EyeballKid: Bob16: Oh yeah obamas got that base locked up just like in 2010. Brilliant.

I didn't realize Obama was elected president in 2010 again.

No, that is not true. There was a midterm election in which the dems were shellacked at a historic level.

Now, you do realize that the Republicans who were elected in 2010 will have to defend their record. Good thing they have a record of passing a lot of helpful new laws and bringing a lot of jobs to America

employment has improved since Jan 2011. Also passing the 0bama tax cuts (including for the wealthy) has worked out well too. They will have plenty good to say.

 
2012-05-22 09:39:31 AM

blackminded: thurstonxhowell: This is true only because Cory Booker's extraordinary career isn't as well known outside the state.

While we're on the subject, please watch this. It's on Netflix.



/hope he still runs for Governor


I'm going to assume you dropped an image depicting Brick City. If I'm right, I've been meaning to.

Thanks for the heads up on it being on Netflix. I guess I know what I'm doing tonight.
 
2012-05-22 09:42:00 AM
You know why conservatives hate Krugman? Because he's smart, he's usually right, and in doing so disagrees with them. Burns them like liquid fire.
 
2012-05-22 09:50:07 AM

CPennypacker: You know why conservatives hate Krugman? Because he's smart, he's usually right, and in doing so disagrees with them. Burns them like liquid fire.


He's also extraordinarily civil. He never devolves to name calling and generally tries to use reason and evidence to prove his point. Conservatives find that maddening which is why they compare him to people like Limbaugh when the two are about as different as public figures can get. It's their typical (and quite effective) play of ascribing to one of their opponents the almost exactly opposite characteristics of the ones they actually have (e.g. the Obama/Teleprompter talking point).
 
2012-05-22 09:57:09 AM

CPennypacker: You know why conservatives hate Krugman? Because he's smart, he's usually right, and in doing so disagrees with them. Burns them like liquid fire.


Still waiting for your citation of: "has a record of being the most correct columnist in the country"

Conservatives don't hate him. Just because we often disagree with him and we laugh at him doesn't mean we hate him.
 
2012-05-22 10:00:27 AM

tenpoundsofcheese: CPennypacker: You know why conservatives hate Krugman? Because he's smart, he's usually right, and in doing so disagrees with them. Burns them like liquid fire.

Still waiting for your citation of: "has a record of being the most correct columnist in the country"

Conservatives don't hate him. Just because we often disagree with him and we laugh at him doesn't mean we hate him.


http://www.hamilton.edu/news/polls/pundit

And generally, smart people aren't too offended when idiots laugh at them
 
2012-05-22 10:00:51 AM

eiger: He never devolves to name calling


are you serious or being sarcastic?
 
Displayed 50 of 79 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report