Sunday, April 3, 2011
Obama Kool-Aid, Paul Krugman, Because I Say So
Like a corrupt kingdom or religion, the New York Times has its own psycho-disciples, who spread the creed not just presenting what they say is fit for our consumption, but who is right and who is wrong and exactly how the huddled masses are supposed to feel about their edicts. It takes little time before their most mighty mouthpieces and arbitrators of all that's fit, Maurine Dodd the erudite naysayer and ultra bitch of Paul Krugman, the fellow who's so big a mere chip on his shoulder isn't good enough, he requires a fine California sequoia for that purpose.
We, of course, are just a bunch of average Joe's, like the fictional Los Angeles detective, Joe Friday from Dragnet, his credo was, "The fact's, ma'am, just the facts." Is that too much to ask.
What American couldn't be outraged, angry, and scared by the horrible massacre where innocent citizens gathered and were murdered, congresswoman, Gabrielle Giffords was shot, outside a Safeway in Tucson, Arizona?
The story was just beginning to unfold through out the news media, but within minutes of the report, there was Paul Krugman, the ominsicient seer, "it is because I say so," no time to gather facts, blaming the incident on rightwingers inflammatory speech being the cause suggesting that some whacked out, right wing extremist pulled the trigger. The edict hath been declared from high atop the great Ivory Tower of Wisdom, well maybe the gaudy bankrupt New York Times headquarters. okay truth be told, some grumpy old dork sitting at a computer keyboard. Quickly, the lower barkers started to yip from MSNBC to NPR. Quickly the facts piled up and their template simply didn't fit, but did they correct their error, hardly, they just barked louder and louder.
Meanwhile, their compatriots accused the other side of being Nazis, baby killers, racists, and just about any other label they could dream up. When it comes to inflammatory rhetoric and hate speech, what would they have to say about the union thugs and the spineless Wisconsin Democrats who fled the state, abandoning their jobs and resposibilities, screaming in heated hostile rants full of personal attacks and threats? If hate speech and inflammatory rhetoric is so awful doesn't the Wisconsin situation count? Nope, it doesn't fit, but if the Republicans tasked with trying to save the state from financial offered the slightest criticism of their adversaries -- look out!!
The bubbling hot domestic issue right now is economy. Would not one want to know how an Ivy League educated professor at the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs at Princeton University hired to write substantial, highly informed column for the New York Times assesses such economic matters as the Federal Government's massive debt, should not us lowly subjects hang on his ever word?
He thinks so.
Normal folks and some lesser economists see higher gas prices, a huge debt with a government unwilling to reel it in, uncertainty on how the Arab world's chaos could affect fuel costs, how might the Japanese mess destabilize the world's markets, what will the impact of "Obama-care" and escalating health costs do, and how much more regulation and government restrictions further choke financial growth. This issues seem real and very threating. Some are very quantifiable. The world's economic state of 2011 does not provide a good climate for investment, hiring, and expansion.
Paul Krugman doesn't think so.
Things aren't bad. It's those horrible people who want to blame everything on Obama. Based on earlier columns he's written along with the wicked witch or is it blabbering bitch of the Ivort Tower, Maurine Dowd, they know what those people are all about -- THEY'RE HATERS, THEY'RE BIGOTS. They're trying to scare everybody and have tried to make that noble and nice Barack Obama the scapegoat. His opinion is Obama skeptics are flawed human beings whose judgment is so clouded with prejudice, one need not even be able to repeat what their point was, Krugman can simply dismiss it as out of hand. They're not Nobel Prize winners. they're just low life yokels they don't even have the stature to respond, because in the Land of the Ivory Tower, they'd have their tongues cut our to spare the impressionable masses the temptation of exploring notions that counter their edicts. The Empiror Obama is just and wise. The Empiror would never mislead the public and the Empiror would never bee seen in public without his luxurious clothes on. The public cannot believe what their lying eyes tell them. The Empiror is a man of exceptional style in splendorous fine adorments from head-to-toe. Yes, as messenger for the thrown, we should all heed,
"All This Stuff About Uncertainty is a Myth Made Up to Blame Unemployment on Obama."
Well there you have it. Somehow the little girl who shouted out the Empiror Obama isn't even wearing gym shorts and a Harvard tea shirt is making a lot more sense than Rube Krugman. If a tree falls in a forest and no one hears it fall, does it make a sound? If the New York Times publishes a Paul Krugman column and no one heeds his tale, is it still real news?
While the empiror can't find his tea shirt for his grad school alma matter, maybe Mr. Krugman can at least lend him a Princeton tea shirt. If Ivy League tea shirts are like the prevailing ideologies articulated by their elites, one size fits all.
Reference article: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2011/04/03/krugman-all-stuff-about-uncertainty-myth-made-blame-unemployment-obam#ixzz1IVabuVXe