Reading Paul Krugman so that you don’t have to. * Moe Lane:
“I was there for 2008: the race only started looking close when Sarah Palin came along. It took the American economy melting down – and John McCain’s in-retrospect stupid response to it – to put it away for President Obama, sure… but Sarah Palin was the only thing that gave that campaign any internal energy at all. This should have been well known, even to those associated with the New York Times: I can only conclude that Krugman has somewhat, ah, peculiar requirements for maintaining a particular narrative.”
"There really is no difference at this point between Markos Moulitsas, Keith Olbermann, and Paul Krugman. Actually, there is a difference. Moulitsas spreads disinformation knowing it is a lie, Olbermann doesn't care, and Krugman is too sanctimonious and self-righteous to recognize it."
Liberals Seek Ban on Metaphors In Wake of Arizona Shooting * Ann Coulter at Human Events:
"The winner of the most cretinous statement of 2011... is MSNBC's Chris Matthews, who on Monday night recalled Palin's statement, 'We're not retreating, we're reloading,' and said, I quote, 'THAT'S not a metaphor.' Really, Chris? If that's not a metaphor, who did she shoot? By blaming a mass killing on figures of speech, liberals sound as crazy as Loughner with his complaints about people's grammar. Maybe in lieu of dropping all metaphors, liberals should demand we ban metonyms so that tragedies like this will never happen again... Every friend of Loughner who has characterized his politics has described him as liberal. Not one called him a conservative... If any public figure influenced this guy, my money's on Bill Maher."
* Lefty economist Paul Krugman would never overtly admit that Sarah palin has been right all along about Death Panels, but his Freudian slip on network television Sunday was tantamount to such an admission. NewsBuster Noel Sheppard reports:
Although he was likely taking a swipe at former governor Sarah Palin with the reference, Paul Krugman on Sunday recommended "death panels" as a means of helping to balance the federal budget.
In a Roundtable discussion on ABC's "This Week," the New York Times columnist said of what recently came out of the President's deficit commission, "Some years down the pike, we're going to get the real solution, which is going to be a combination of death panels and sales taxes"
KRUGMAN: No. Some years down the pike, we're going to get the real solution, which is going to be a combination of death panels and sales taxes. It's going to be that we're actually going to take Medicare under control, and we're going to have to get some additional revenue, probably from a VAT. But it's not going to happen now.
After he realized what he had said, Krugman later tried to clarify his remarks:
By trying to clarify, Krugman seems to be digging himself deeper into a hole, for "how much we’re willing to spend for extreme care" was part of Sarah Palin's point when she first wrote about this at Facebook in August 2009.
[...]
In the end, Krugman's attempt at being "deliberately provocative" was really him saying in front of the cameras what Palin and others warned was the danger of allowing further government intrusion into healthcare.
If only such dangers were better explained to the public before Congress voted on this bill in March.
Reuters economic policy columnist James Pethokoukis:
In a recent Facebook posting, Palin expressed deep concern over the dollar’s “continued viability as an international reserve currency” in light of huge U.S. budget deficits.
She might be onto something here, politically and economically. A recent Rasmussen poll, for instance, found that 88 percent of Americans say the dollar should remain the dominant global currency. Now, the average voter may not fully understand the subtleties of international finance nor appreciate exactly how a dominant dollar has benefited the U.S. economy. But they sure think a weaker dollar is a sign of a weaker America.
And that’s the political problem for the Obama administration. Its benign neglect of the dollar is another example of an economic policy — along with TARP and the $787 billion stimulus — that the White House thinks is helping the economy, but many Americans find wrongheaded.
