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)   "Calls for centrism and bipartisanship aren't actual demands for specific policies - they're an act, a posture these people take to make themselves seem noble and superior"   (krugman.blogs.nytimes.com) divider line 114
    More: Obvious, moderates  
•       •       •

982 clicks; posted to Politics » on 11 Apr 2013 at 9:22 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-04-11 08:25:14 AM
Lets be bipartisan and do what I want.
 
2013-04-11 08:51:26 AM
Krugman is finally wrong about something.  At least he is human.
 
2013-04-11 09:00:42 AM
the truth is that the "centrists" aren't sincere. Calls for centrism and bipartisanship aren't actual demands for specific policies - they're an act, a posture these people take to make themselves seem noble and superior. And that posture requires blaming both parties equally, no matter what they do or propose.

Spot on. Its "Both sides are bad" while Obama negotiates with himself moving further and further towards the right, who then just move the goal posts further.

Most of us don't want Social Security changed, and the program isn't bankrupt now nor in the near future. But here goes Obama in appeasement mode, trying to negotiate peacefully with the political equivalent to a bunch of Hitlers.
 
2013-04-11 09:05:48 AM

Generation_D: the truth is that the "centrists" aren't sincere. Calls for centrism and bipartisanship aren't actual demands for specific policies - they're an act, a posture these people take to make themselves seem noble and superior. And that posture requires blaming both parties equally, no matter what they do or propose.

Spot on. Its "Both sides are bad" while Obama negotiates with himself moving further and further towards the right, who then just move the goal posts further.

Most of us don't want Social Security changed, and the program isn't bankrupt now nor in the near future. But here goes Obama in appeasement mode, trying to negotiate peacefully with the political equivalent to a bunch of Hitlers.


Hitlers? Lol
 
2013-04-11 09:06:16 AM

Generation_D: the truth is that the "centrists" aren't sincere. Calls for centrism and bipartisanship aren't actual demands for specific policies - they're an act, a posture these people take to make themselves seem noble and superior. And that posture requires blaming both parties equally, no matter what they do or propose.

Spot on. Its "Both sides are bad" while Obama negotiates with himself moving further and further towards the right, who then just move the goal posts further.

Most of us don't want Social Security changed, and the program isn't bankrupt now nor in the near future. But here goes Obama in appeasement mode, trying to negotiate peacefully with the political equivalent to a bunch of Hitlers.


I bet if you were president you would get everything you wanted and would give those GOP swine nothing.
 
2013-04-11 09:10:20 AM

Altair: Generation_D: the truth is that the "centrists" aren't sincere. Calls for centrism and bipartisanship aren't actual demands for specific policies - they're an act, a posture these people take to make themselves seem noble and superior. And that posture requires blaming both parties equally, no matter what they do or propose.

Spot on. Its "Both sides are bad" while Obama negotiates with himself moving further and further towards the right, who then just move the goal posts further.

Most of us don't want Social Security changed, and the program isn't bankrupt now nor in the near future. But here goes Obama in appeasement mode, trying to negotiate peacefully with the political equivalent to a bunch of Hitlers.

I bet if you were president you would get everything you wanted and would give those GOP swine nothing.


Make political dissent illegal. That will show those Hitlers.
 
2013-04-11 09:26:28 AM
God. Krugman greenlit on FARK? Who's next: Friedman?
 
2013-04-11 09:31:09 AM
After all, if whoever it is that Obama is trying to appeal to here - I guess it's the Washington Post editorial page and various other self-proclaimed "centrist" pundits - were willing to admit the fundamental asymmetry in our political debate, willing to admit that if DC is broken, it's because of GOP radicalism, they would have done it long ago. It's not as if this reality was hard to see.

What Krugman apparently fails to understand here is that it's not the "pundits" that Obama's trying to appeal to here, but rather, the voters - a good chunk of whom are (at best) mildly retarded and do in fact need these basic things spelled out in an exaggeratedly obvious fashion.
 
2013-04-11 09:31:38 AM

heinrich66: God. Krugman greenlit on FARK? Who's next: Friedman?


Lulzier.
 
2013-04-11 09:38:20 AM
Remember folks, Krugman is only a booster for the Administration and would never criticize them.
 
2013-04-11 09:43:19 AM

Biological Ali: After all, if whoever it is that Obama is trying to appeal to here - I guess it's the Washington Post editorial page and various other self-proclaimed "centrist" pundits - were willing to admit the fundamental asymmetry in our political debate, willing to admit that if DC is broken, it's because of GOP radicalism, they would have done it long ago. It's not as if this reality was hard to see.

What Krugman apparently fails to understand here is that it's not the "pundits" that Obama's trying to appeal to here, but rather, the voters - a good chunk of whom are (at best) mildly retarded and do in fact need these basic things spelled out in an exaggeratedly obvious fashion.


In other words, voters who don't realize that "centrist" pundits are cynical, lying sacks of shiat.
 
2013-04-11 09:48:33 AM
OK, let's look to an example of compromise on a specific policy issue:  health insurance reform.  Oh, the GOP is doing nothing but obstructionism, fear-mongering, and over thirty attempts to repeal?  Mr. Krugman, I'd like some of what you're smoking.  Oh, it's Republican pole?  Nevermind then.
 
2013-04-11 09:48:48 AM

Fart_Machine: Remember folks, Krugman is only a booster for the Administration and would never criticize them.


He's criticized them quite often on the stimulus spending. For not going far enough.
 
2013-04-11 09:53:02 AM

Biological Ali: After all, if whoever it is that Obama is trying to appeal to here - I guess it's the Washington Post editorial page and various other self-proclaimed "centrist" pundits - were willing to admit the fundamental asymmetry in our political debate, willing to admit that if DC is broken, it's because of GOP radicalism, they would have done it long ago. It's not as if this reality was hard to see.

What Krugman apparently fails to understand here is that it's not the "pundits" that Obama's trying to appeal to here, but rather, the voters - a good chunk of whom are (at best) mildly retarded and do in fact need these basic things spelled out in an exaggeratedly obvious fashion.


Right. Obama is proposing cuts to Social Security to appeal to the voters... who overwhelmingly oppose cuts to Social Security.
 
2013-04-11 09:55:38 AM
chained cpi =! cutting SS

Stop repeating talking points.
 
2013-04-11 09:58:55 AM

Wendy's Chili: Right. Obama is proposing cuts to Social Security to appeal to the voters... who overwhelmingly oppose cuts to Social Security.


Reading TFA might help you understand what's actually being talked about here.
 
2013-04-11 09:58:57 AM

Altair: chained cpi =! cutting SS

Stop repeating talking points.


Giving people less than they paid for is, in fact, a cut.
 
2013-04-11 09:59:00 AM
This doesn't make any sense. Last time I checked, passing a bill in "a bipartisan manner" just meant caving to ridiculous GOP shenanigans.
 
2013-04-11 10:01:58 AM

Altair: chained cpi =! cutting SS

Stop repeating talking points.


Chained CPI means reduced benefits for seniors. When something is reduced, that is commonly referred to as a cut.

So which centrist dickbag outfit are you getting paid to shill for?
 
2013-04-11 10:02:37 AM
How can anybody believe any of this kayfabe? A shiatton of indoctrination?

I turned on the boob tube last night, watched the Nightly News for the first time in a year. Nothing but a bunch of used-car salesmen running around, with fancy hair and toothy grins. The anchors, the politicians, all of em. Just making it up as they go along; who needs right and logic when you got misdirection?

"AND THEY ALL. SPEAK. REALLY. SLOWLY. LIKE THIS. BECAUSE THEY THINK. WE'RE FARKING. MORONS."
 
2013-04-11 10:07:16 AM
This is why I'm a Libertarian.  I don't fall for the DEMOCANS or the REPUBLICRATS!  I'm a free thinker.  I've got my own mind.  I'm a loner, a rebel.
 
2013-04-11 10:09:12 AM

Biological Ali: Wendy's Chili: Right. Obama is proposing cuts to Social Security to appeal to the voters... who overwhelmingly oppose cuts to Social Security.

Reading TFA might help you understand what's actually being talked about here.



And pulling your head out of your ass might help you understand what I'm talking about.

Joe Sixpack isn't going to hear about Obama's proposed SS cuts and think, "Wow! Those Republican bastards are ruining our country! Bring back Pelosi!" He's going to think, "Wow! That damn Obama wants to take my Social Security! F*ck the Democrats!"
 
2013-04-11 10:09:50 AM

Generation_D: Fart_Machine: Remember folks, Krugman is only a booster for the Administration and would never criticize them.

He's criticized them quite often on the stimulus spending. For not going far enough.


I know.  That's the joke.
 
2013-04-11 10:13:33 AM

Wendy's Chili: Chained CPI means reduced benefits for seniors


And a tax increase that's regressive!

www.washingtonpost.com

Link
 
2013-04-11 10:13:54 AM

Wendy's Chili: Biological Ali: Wendy's Chili: Right. Obama is proposing cuts to Social Security to appeal to the voters... who overwhelmingly oppose cuts to Social Security.

Reading TFA might help you understand what's actually being talked about here.


And pulling your head out of your ass might help you understand what I'm talking about.

Joe Sixpack isn't going to hear about Obama's proposed SS cuts and think, "Wow! Those Republican bastards are ruining our country! Bring back Pelosi!" He's going to think, "Wow! That damn Obama wants to take my Social Security! F*ck the Democrats!"


Oh the poor blighted fool! How dare he blame Obama for trying to feed granny catfood when Obama says he wants to feed granny catfood?

Can't he grasp nuance!
 
2013-04-11 10:16:42 AM

Altair: chained cpi =! cutting SS

Stop repeating talking points.


Just stop. Your profile says "poli-sci major." You're terrible at it. Find a new major.
 
2013-04-11 10:16:55 AM

Wendy's Chili: Biological Ali: Wendy's Chili: Right. Obama is proposing cuts to Social Security to appeal to the voters... who overwhelmingly oppose cuts to Social Security.

Reading TFA might help you understand what's actually being talked about here.


And pulling your head out of your ass might help you understand what I'm talking about.

Joe Sixpack isn't going to hear about Obama's proposed SS cuts and think, "Wow! Those Republican bastards are ruining our country! Bring back Pelosi!" He's going to think, "Wow! That damn Obama wants to take my Social Security! F*ck the Democrats!"


The only thing I was doing was highlighting Krugman's bizarre assumption about the target audience re: Obama's message concerning Republican intransigence and insincerity. I'm not particularly interested in going off on a tangent about how successful that message is likely to be, though I'm sure you can find plenty of other people in this thread to have this discussion with if that's what you want to talk about.
 
2013-04-11 10:19:09 AM
Every time you hear Obama drone on about "putting politics aside and coming together", just replace it with "I've decided this isn't important enough to actually fight for it".
 
2013-04-11 10:19:32 AM

Rapmaster2000: This is why I'm a Libertarian.  I don't fall for the DEMOCANS or the REPUBLICRATS!  I'm a free thinker.  I've got my own mind.  I'm a loner, a rebel.


Whatever happened to Dottie?
 
2013-04-11 10:20:01 AM

Rapmaster2000: This is why I'm a Libertarian.  I don't fall for the DEMOCANS or the REPUBLICRATS!  I'm a free thinker.  I've got my own mind.  I'm a loner, a rebel.


I hear you man. I'm the same way. It ain't easy being such a rugged individual, though - us loners gotta stick together.
 
2013-04-11 10:20:03 AM
Centrism is the bastion of the uninformed and indecisive.
 
2013-04-11 10:22:29 AM

Zeno-25: Centrism is the bastion of the uninformed and indecisive.


And compromise is a tactic not a principal.
 
2013-04-11 10:23:14 AM
Compromise is for cowards that don't have the guts to destroy their enemy.
 
2013-04-11 10:33:11 AM

Ned Stark: Zeno-25: Centrism is the bastion of the uninformed and indecisive.

And compromise is a tactic not a principal.


Compromising with people who have been wrong about every major issue for the last 30few years is a terrible tactic.
 
2013-04-11 10:33:15 AM

Biological Ali: Wendy's Chili: Biological Ali: Wendy's Chili: Right. Obama is proposing cuts to Social Security to appeal to the voters... who overwhelmingly oppose cuts to Social Security.

Reading TFA might help you understand what's actually being talked about here.


And pulling your head out of your ass might help you understand what I'm talking about.

Joe Sixpack isn't going to hear about Obama's proposed SS cuts and think, "Wow! Those Republican bastards are ruining our country! Bring back Pelosi!" He's going to think, "Wow! That damn Obama wants to take my Social Security! F*ck the Democrats!"

The only thing I was doing was highlighting Krugman's bizarre assumption about the target audience re: Obama's message concerning Republican intransigence and insincerity. I'm not particularly interested in going off on a tangent about how successful that message is likely to be, though I'm sure you can find plenty of other people in this thread to have this discussion with if that's what you want to talk about.



Well aren't you so awesome and above-it-all.

Krugman is right. Obama is trying to get some good press from the WaPos, the Scarboroughs, the Politicos, the Pete Petersons, the Fix-the-Debt-ers, etc. Which is dumb. They may come out and commend him intially, but as soon as the Republicans fold their arms and say "uh-uh" to any sort of compromise, they will go back to bemoaning the lack of leadership and complaining about how Washington is broken because both sides are bad.

Any voters who pay close enough attention to know that Obama doesn't really want SS cuts and is only proposing them to bring obstinate Republicans to the table already know that nothing will bring obstinate Republicans to the table.
 
2013-04-11 10:34:05 AM
Outrageous Muff: Compromise is for cowards that who don't have the guts to destroy their enemy. country.
 
2013-04-11 10:34:58 AM

verbaltoxin: Altair: chained cpi =! cutting SS

Stop repeating talking points.

Just stop. Your profile says "poli-sci major." You're terrible at it. Find a new major.


I suggest you go back to Daily Kos comments section where you belong.  You're in over your head.
 
2013-04-11 10:37:18 AM
centrism would require both parties to move to the left.
 
2013-04-11 10:38:24 AM

verbaltoxin: Altair: chained cpi =! cutting SS

Stop repeating talking points.

Just stop. Your profile says "poli-sci major." You're terrible at it. Find a new major.


Poli-sci is where you end up when you can't get into another major.
 
2013-04-11 10:39:03 AM

Outrageous Muff: Compromise is for cowards that don't have the guts to destroy their enemy.


I agree if compromise is an end goal - which it is for a lot of these losers. But compromise as a means is not inherently bad - the question is, what in the compromise?

Compromise to Republicans:
Dem offer: We want a 5% tax raise because we're broke
Repub offer: No raise, we want lower taxes
Compromise: Lower taxes

Compromise to sane people:
Dem offer: We want a 5% tax raise because we're broke
Sane person offer: We dispute the effectiveness of raising taxes to combat the deficit, and would rather no tax increases, but will compromise at a 2-3% tax raise and then adjust based on the studied results.
Compromise: 2-3% tax raise
 
2013-04-11 10:39:50 AM

Rapmaster2000: This is why I'm a Libertarian.  I don't fall for the DEMOCANS or the REPUBLICRATS!  I'm a free thinker.  I've got my own mind.  I'm a loner, a rebel.


Born in Chicago. Raised in the city streets. Your momma gave you the basic facts of life.
 
2013-04-11 10:40:57 AM

Dubya's_Coke_Dealer: verbaltoxin: Altair: chained cpi =! cutting SS

Stop repeating talking points.

Just stop. Your profile says "poli-sci major." You're terrible at it. Find a new major.

Poli-sci is where you end up when you can't get into another major.


I dual major in Economics, what say you now?
 
2013-04-11 10:43:40 AM
Compromise and working together is the single most important thing one can do.

Compromise in politics allows a country/society to define what's important by aligning priorities.  Compromise means being able to accept a scenario where everyone either gains a little or loses a little.  It's very easy to tear apart the idea of compromise because it's very susceptible to rhetoric.

When everyone loses a little it's extremely easy for people to passionately and logically make cases for their loss and in the noise we lose sense of the fact that had we not compromised in that way one side would have suffered greater than we all currently are.

When everyone gains a little it's also easy to downplay or up sell ones gains or ones opponents' gains.

Rhetoric misaligns priorities and compromise brings them together.
 
2013-04-11 10:48:05 AM

Dubya's_Coke_Dealer: verbaltoxin: Altair: chained cpi =! cutting SS

Stop repeating talking points.

Just stop. Your profile says "poli-sci major." You're terrible at it. Find a new major.

Poli-sci is where you end up when you can't get into another major.


That would be communications, actually. A good indicator is how popular your major is among student athletes.
 
2013-04-11 10:48:52 AM

Altair: Dubya's_Coke_Dealer: verbaltoxin: Altair: chained cpi =! cutting SS

Stop repeating talking points.

Just stop. Your profile says "poli-sci major." You're terrible at it. Find a new major.

Poli-sci is where you end up when you can't get into another major.

I dual major in Economics, what say you now?


Credentials don't mean shiat when you deny that which is patently obvious.
 
2013-04-11 10:49:48 AM

Zeno-25: Ned Stark: Zeno-25: Centrism is the bastion of the uninformed and indecisive.

And compromise is a tactic not a principal.

Compromising with people who have been wrong about every major issue for the last 30few years is a terrible tactic.


Yes.
 
2013-04-11 10:50:21 AM

Wendy's Chili: Altair: Dubya's_Coke_Dealer: verbaltoxin: Altair: chained cpi =! cutting SS

Stop repeating talking points.

Just stop. Your profile says "poli-sci major." You're terrible at it. Find a new major.

Poli-sci is where you end up when you can't get into another major.

I dual major in Economics, what say you now?

Credentials don't mean shiat when you deny that which is patently obvious.


I'm not the one that brought up my "credentials".  I just like to think for myself and not call the chained-cpi a flat-out SS cut just because all the liberal pundits in my inbox are calling it that.
 
2013-04-11 10:51:24 AM

Zeno-25: Compromising with people who have been wrong about every major issue for the last 30few years is a terrible tactic.


*facepalm*  I weep for this country.
 
2013-04-11 10:54:39 AM
maybe it's because I don't really have any overtly conservative friends on Facebook, but I think the one outlook that always really annoyed me, especially during last year's election, was one's friend's wishy-washy "Both sides are bad" posts. It's not BSABSVR -he's actually pretty liberal- but "both sides are bad, so pat me on the back for pointing this out, pls. I am omniscient."

I finally lost it when he equated homosexuals who wanted to get married "just because" as being on par with those who would deny them those rights.
 
2013-04-11 10:54:58 AM

Altair: Wendy's Chili: Altair: Dubya's_Coke_Dealer: verbaltoxin: Altair: chained cpi =! cutting SS

Stop repeating talking points.

Just stop. Your profile says "poli-sci major." You're terrible at it. Find a new major.

Poli-sci is where you end up when you can't get into another major.

I dual major in Economics, what say you now?

Credentials don't mean shiat when you deny that which is patently obvious.

I'm not the one that brought up my "credentials".  I just like to think for myself and not call the chained-cpi a flat-out SS cut just because all the liberal pundits in my inbox are calling it that.


images.bwbx.io
 
Displayed 50 of 114 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report