Krugman: We Can't Keep Hope Alive, It's Freeze-Dried!

Fortunately, I'm usually too busy to look in on what Krazy Krugman is up to these days. But this is priceless. Poor Barry, the halo has been replaced by a kick me sign in Paul Krugmans' eyes! Hope has gone from being kept alive, to being freeze dried. 

So I guess we are, in fact, seeing what Mr. Obama is made of.

Whatever is going on inside the White House, from the outside it looks like moral collapse — a complete failure of purpose and loss of direction.

At that meeting, Mr. Obama, who has faced two years of complete scorched-earth opposition, declared that he had failed to reach out sufficiently to his implacable enemies. He did not, as far as anyone knows, wear a sign on his back saying “Kick me,” although he might as well have.

It would be much easier, of course, for Democrats to draw a line if Mr. Obama would do his part. But all indications are that the party will have to look elsewhere for the leadership it needs.

Oh, and check out this idiot blogger playing the race card. It seems mostly everyone in the Netroots is telling Obama to get to the back of the bus. God bless their crazy little race-obsessed hearts!

Barack Obama seems bound and determined to spend four years (because it's impossible to believe that having completely alienated his base AND independence, he'll get eight) trying to prove to an intransigent Republican Party that would hang him by a rope from a tree if it thought it could get away with it that he's not one of those THREATENING, MEAN black men.

Comments

[A Stephens]

"scorched earth"? Have to give credit to these fools for at least reading, then parroting, the talking points everyday.

Same with the "middle class tax cuts", and the Start Treaty, and the Michellobomb school lunch program, being "held hostage" by the Republicans. In a 48 hour period one can hear the attack phraseology of the day making it's way from the lips of the Democrat officeholders, to the supposed unbiased media, to the lefty blogs, and into the comment threads everywhere else. Would that they would be as efficient in doing their constitutional duties as they are at releasing their attack hound packs.

[salvage]

Neat isn't it? Krugman supports Obama but notices when he isn't doing well. Wingnuts never notice when politicians they like are screwing up and if they do they either never say anything or just deny it to the point of absurdity.

Iraq is a good example of this.

[A Stephens]

Iraq is a good example of taking down a murderous dictator who engaged in genocide of a portion of his own population, and having in place of said dictator a fledgling democracy in a region of the world declared by the "progressive" camp as unable or unwilling to have such. Add that, every attempt has been made by Democrats here for the most part to marginalize and undermine that effort and it's a testament to the good people who fought that fight, and ultimately to the Iraqui's themselves that they are succeeding.

But this thread wasn't about Iraq. Or by inference, Bush. Nice try though. And typical, can't argue the merits, change the narrative.

[Marica]

"because it's impossible to believe that having completely alienated his base AND independence... "

I'm not sure about this, because I'm not supposed to know how to read, but shouldn't it be "independents"? On the other hand, Independence *is* probably feeling pretty alienated these days.

[Fred Beloit]

Oh, savage, you are a trip: "Krugman supports Obama but notices when he isn't doing well." So Memeorandum's favorite expert-on-everything, Krugman, "notices" when he is hit between the eyes by a ballpeen hammer called variously, U.S. becomes 100% borrower state, Repubs retake House, Repubs unman Semate Dems, does he? Well, I swone.

[daveinboca]

Krugman made his name originally by predicting a recession every year that GWB was POTUS, and just like Arafat, Baradei, Gore, Obama got a now-worthless Nobel for nothing-at-all for being WRONG ALL THE TIME. This whining specimen of Demonrat boy-bitch pollutes the Op-Ed of the soon-to-be-defunct NYT and is quoted by squat-for-brains airheads, ditzes and morons on the Left nodding in agreement at his absurdities.

Let's see. Today unemployment is right around 10% & REAL unemployment is almost 20% and the cure for this is: RAISE TAXES on the wealthy, the old Marxist recipe that destroyed economies around the world, and right now the EU is trying to force Ireland to raise its corporate tax rate to the exorbitant levels of cretin-lands like Germany and France.

Kill the goose that lays those golden eggs, and get Nancy Pelosi a few more drams of botox---those wrinkles and other sagging body-parts are revealing her Dorian Gray moral leprosy.

[salvage]

So much stupid so little time.

>Iraq is a good example of taking down a murderous dictator who engaged in genocide of a portion of his own population,

And now all minorities are safe in Iraq! Except Christians, Jews, certain Muslims, women, children, the unborn, government officials,civil servants, police, army anyone who walks, drivers, crawls, breaths air, carbon based etc.

>a fledgling democracy in a region of the world declared by the "progressive" camp as unable or unwilling to have such.

Ya, very democratic as long as you live long enough to get to the ballot box and since their civil war isn't over (I know, it's not on Fox so you don't see it) fledgling is far too generous a term for it. Stillborn is a bit more accurate.

Oh and when smart people said "Invading Iraq is a mistake" they didn't mean that they can't be democratic or free. I know you need to simplify everything but the real world is a tad more complex than that.

>But this thread wasn't about Iraq.

Quite right, I brought up Iraq as an example of how wingnuts refuse to note the failure of their Dear Leaders and that's why you can't understand when people who like Obama criticize his specific actions. You provided a wonderful example of the Borderline Personality Disorder of your average wingnut, thank you.

[Who R U]

Sniff sniff raised chin rhetoric from the party of those who were okay with Iraq violating the cease fire 17 times, gave OBL a pass when his head was offered up on a plate, and campaigned against the surge in Iraq! Crickets chirping now from all those political military geniuses who moaned daily about soldiers dying in Iraq , it’s not like more US soldiers have died in the past two years in Afghanistan than in the entire 7 years prior. I like this quote because it puts things into prospective:"I voted for Obama because he is going to bring ALL Iraq troops home immediately and beat the Taliban in the righteous war in Afghanistan!"

[barfo]

"Poor Barry, the halo has been replaced by a kick me sign "

I'm confused.

Is the far right against Obama freezing the wages of federal workers?

[salvage]

>were okay with Iraq violating the cease fire 17 times,

Yes, that was worth the hundreds of thousands of dead people, billions spent and war without end. I remember Bush and his wingnut hordes screaming about those violations and as worthy reason for war. Oh no, wait, it was WMD, going to war over SAM sites painting F16s (with no hope of hitting) would be an INSANE reason to go to war. Of course the WMD were complete lies so that is just as crazy.

>"I voted for Obama because he is going to bring ALL Iraq troops home immediately and beat the Taliban in the righteous war in Afghanistan!"

You do know that when you say a quote you should attribute it to whoever said it? Unless of course it's something you completely made up in a pathetic strawman attempt which is the case here.

Fact is Obama should have immediately ended the pointless occupation of Iraq moved those troops into Afghanistan to begin a ruthless campaign against the Taliban but instead he continued Bush retarded policies with pretty much the same result; two losing wars. Soon he will own both conflicts and while they're not his fault they are most certainly his responsibility.

A distinction lost on wingnuts.

But what's funny (not ha-ha) and what proves my initial point about wingnuts refusing to notice when their Dear Leaders fail is that both Bush and Cheney are on the record claiming that the Taliban were beaten. You'd think you want to take them for task for such lies but since you don't think well here we are.

[firefirefire]

Ya think Barry is regreting that "I Won" crack about now?
Nah,,me either.

[mark l.]

obama better get his ass back over 50% approval...

"But all indications are that the party will have to look elsewhere for the leadership it needs."

sounds like somebody is pining for a primary challenger.
***********************************************************

if the dems think they have found a popular position to form battlelines around, one can only ask why they didn't move to this redoubt, BEFORE the midterms. Ditto on the dream act and the dadt repeal.

the liberals still don't understand how much they have lost.
at present they have 58 senators, the presidency, and 257 house seats.

how bad is it?
they are pursuuing policies that they can't even get olympia snowe or susan collins to back, OR, even if they could get both MODERATE members of the gop to support their schemes, they lose members from their own party.

the snafu of this point is that the dems have conservatives in their midst, who don't support them or their ideas.

the problem for dems is that they are controlled by a 'rump party' of liberals, with no attempts at moderation.

[barfo]

"obama better get his ass back over 50% approval..."

Why?

Palin and the cranky old man only got 45% of the vote...and that's probably the high water mark for Republican presidential candidates.

[mark l.]

"Soon he will own both conflicts and while they're not his fault they are most certainly his responsibility."
********************************

joe biden on iraq:
"I am very optimistic about -- about Iraq. I mean, this could be one of the great achievements of this administration. You're going to see 90,000 American troops come marching home by the end of the summer. You're going to see a stable government in Iraq that is actually moving toward a representative government.

I spent -- I've been there 17 times now. I go about every two months -- three months. I know every one of the major players in all the segments of that society. It's impressed me. I've been impressed how they have been deciding to use the political process rather than guns to settle their differences."
*****************************

"...moved those troops into Afghanistan to begin a ruthless campaign against the Taliban..." until June 2011.

he moved 65k troops into afghnaistan, before even reducing the presense in iraq.

casualties by president in afghanistan:
bush, 630 casualties/8 years.
obama, 784 casualties/2 years.

salavage is worried about ownership of wars?

"but instead he continued Bush retarded policies"
talk about revisionist history...

might come as a shock to you salavage, but obama TRIPLED our forces in Afghanistan and tried to emulate the 'surge strategy' of bush. One would think that if bush believed a surge in forces would have increased our chances, he would have done so.

funny, this time the "ha-ha" kind, is that you are pessimistic about Iraq, but you think that obama could win in Afghanistan with more troops. Can I go out on a limb and call you a "chicken hawk"?

[mark l.]

"obama better get his ass back over 50% approval..."

Why?
*********************************

this isn't a matter of shutting up the gop. it is exclusively a matter of getting the potential primary challengers to stay in the back of the bus.

the difference between a 50% and a 40% is not linear. the closer he gets to 40% the greater the exponential increase in the chances of him facing a primary challenger.

While I joke about obama being the second term of carter, I'm beginning to see shades of Bush 41. 41 had a world wide recession to deal with, less than 2 years after the most spectacular military victory in US history, and was deemed to have betrayed his base.

if the libs fielded a challenger(fiengold), their guy gets less than perot's 19%. If the other clinton dems challenge him from the right with bayh, obama would be left with a tad more than perot, but hardly a majority of his own party.

when you fall below 50%, it can definitely be stated that one is NOT a popular president.

[barfo]

A primary challenge for Obama is a bigger wingnut fantasy than a Palin presidency.

[salvage]

>joe biden on iraq:

Has got what to do with the price of tea in my pants?

I know wingnuts are used to America being run by the VP but that era is over, when it's President Biden then maybe I'll care what he has to say about anything.

>he moved 65k troops into afghnaistan, before even reducing the presense in iraq.

You are not good at reading are you? What I wanted him to do was a complete removal of all US military assets from Iraq to Afghanistan, that means every boot and every gun and every humvee, everything.

>casualties by president in afghanistan:
>bush, 630 casualties/8 years.
>obama, 784 casualties/2 years.

Yes, that's because Bush let the Taliban escape, regroup, rearm and get better at IEDs and the other tricks of the insurgent trade while he was playing his fool games in Iraq. The war there has heated up, oh I know, it's not on Fox so it's not real but really? It is.

>salavage is worried about ownership of wars?

I'm not,it's not my problem, doesn't affect me in the slightest but Obama should be. Bush is too stupid to worry about anything.

>"but instead he continued Bush retarded policies"
>talk about revisionist history...

What history am I revising here? This is the sort of question I ask knowing I won't get an answer, wingnuts like to say this sort of thing without thinking, pretty much how they do everything.

>might come as a shock to you salavage, but obama TRIPLED our forces in Afghanistan and tried to emulate the 'surge strategy' of bush.

Yeah, hence my point that Obama is doing the same stupid things that Bush did that didn't work. The US "surged" in Vietnam, the Soviets "surged" in Afghanistan, Israel "surged" several times in Lebanon, they all worked out the same way.

Hint, when you have generals talking about a strategy on CNN odds are it's more a publicity thing than an actual tactic.

When you are dealing with an insurgency you have two choices you either kill every single on of them, you destroy anything that provides them with support, you eliminate whatever political wing they have, you basically make it fatal for them to exist. If you are not able or are not prepared for such a thing (it's hard for a democracy to go psycho like that) then you have to sit down and negotiate a withdrawal otherwise you're just going to lose very slowly but you will lose.

Guess what America is doing right now?

>One would think that if bush believed a surge in forces would have increased our chances, he would have done so.

One would think that if Bush had a clue he never would have invaded Iraq in the first place so his opinion on anything other than brush clearing has as much value as Binden's.

>is that you are pessimistic about Iraq,

As anyone with a brain would be and they would be right.

>but you think that obama could win in Afghanistan with more troops.

I always forget that when dealing with a wingnut one must be careful not to assume. Obama (or anyone) could "win" if he took on the proper insurgency smashing strategy. It's more than just more soldiers, war is a tad more complex than numbers.

>Can I go out on a limb and call you a "chicken hawk"?

You could if you had any idea of what the term meant but that doesn't stop you for talking about other stuff you're clueless about so go crazy.

[alanstorm]

"Whatever is going on inside the White House, from the outside it looks like moral collapse — a complete failure of purpose and loss of direction.'

Not possible - no evidence of morals, purpose or direction was ever in evidence at the Obama White House.

[Fred Beloit]

Savage say: "And now all minorities are safe in Iraq! Except Christians, Jews, certain Muslims, women, children, the unborn, government officials,civil servants, police, army anyone who walks, drivers, crawls, breaths air, carbon based etc."

Don't forget to add Detroit, Chicago, and St Louis, all Dem-run, anti-self defense cities, there, Savage. Let's not leave out the murderous messes closer to home now, there's a good little mutt.

[Who R U]

"I voted for Obama because he is going to bring ALL Iraq troops home immediately and beat the Taliban in the righteous war in Afghanistan!"

I prefer not to source a quotes made by person with special needs, they suffer enough humiliation:

"President Obama Jokes About Being a Bad Bowler: 'It's Like the Special Olympics"
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/03/president-ob-15.html

[salvage]

>Don't forget to add Detroit, Chicago, and St Louis, all Dem-run, anti-self defense cities, there, Savage. Let's not leave out the murderous messes closer to home now, there's a good little mutt.

Ah yes, the buh-buh- X is worse than Iraq therefor the invasion of Iraq was correct and the whole WMD lies don't matter! argument. It's been awhile since a wingnut has dragged that whorish old chestnut out of their butts.

Right. How many citizen / police / government officials of Detroit, Chicago, and St Louis have been blown up by a suicide bomber in say the last oh I don't know 100 years? How many liquor stores have been burnt to the ground by al Qeada Taliban types? Do those cities have slabs of blast walls on every road? To compare Iraq to anywhere short of Somalia or any other war zones is a laughable farce.

Have you actually bothered to compare the per capita crime stats of those place to support your retarded argument? Have you bothered to give it any thought at all?

No, you're a wingnut, waaaaay above your paygrade all you can do is blither whatever Fox / Beck / Limbaugh and the rest of your brain trust tell you to think, facts and logic of course are unwelcome.

Next why don't you pull out that map that shows only a small portion of Iraq is violent, that the majority is peaceful and then I can point out that it certainly is peaceful in the dessert, it's the bits where there are people that's the problem? That's what wingnuts usually come up with next in this kabuki.

>I prefer not to source a quotes made by person with special needs, they suffer enough humiliation:

Ah do what you mean is that you are in fact a liar, that's okay, I guessed that.

[mark l.]

salvage, the latest liberal neocon.

good luck, general.

[richard mcenroe]

">were okay with Iraq violating the cease fire 17 times, etc."

So if UN resolutions aren't worth enforcing, what's the purpose of the UN? If the Congressional call to depose Saddam under Clinton wasn't worth acting on, what's the worth of Congress or a Democratic President?

[salvage]

>So if UN resolutions aren't worth enforcing, what's the purpose of the UN? I

I love how wingnuts suddenly find UN resolutions somehow binding. Shall we apply that to all the UN resolutions? Like the ones against Israel as well as the US?

Oh and the UN didn't want America to invade so not really sure what your point here is.

>If the Congressional call to depose Saddam under Clinton wasn't worth acting on, what's the worth of Congress or a Democratic President?

It wasn't "worth" acting on because that's a war crime. See you can't actually invade a country for the express purpose of regime change. That's a crime under both American and international law.

Also there are dictators as bad as and worse than Saddam ever was but gosh, America isn't invading them, huh, I wonder why?

[mw]

I have just one question regarding Mr. Krugman...

http://westanddivided.blogspot.com/2010/12/since-weve-done-nothing-he-recommended.html