Krugman Attacks Obama's Reagan Comments

NY Times:

Historical narratives matter. That's why conservatives are still writing books denouncing F.D.R. and the New Deal; they understand that the way Americans perceive bygone eras, even eras from the seemingly distant past, affects politics today.

And it's also why the furor over Barack Obama's praise for Ronald Reagan is not, as some think, overblown. The fact is that how we talk about the Reagan era still matters immensely for American politics.

Read the whole story: NY Times

Comments

[LittleBrother]

If Krugman's criticisms of Obama are indeed motivated by Krugman's support of Senator Clinton, that's unfortunate. But he's right about Obama.

When I came across Obama's recent Epistle to the Reaganites, I had this thought:

If Jesus Christ were running for King of the Jews as an Obama-style messianic meta-politician, the Gospels would be full of statements like, "I think that ordinary Jews responded to something about the Pharisees' commitment to the whitest sepulchres possible that gave them desperately-sought hope and confidence, and that we need to reach out and connect with the Pharisees instead of employing the broken plow of Negative and Adversarial Politics as Usual.

"It's time to get past the divisive politics cemented in place after the Slaughter of the Innocents- I don't share or endorse certain specific solutions employed by Herod, but it's still possible to learn and be inspired by the courage and determination he showed in difficult times. Herod had it, and Jewish citizens recognized this.

And while I don't necessarily endorse the execution of John the Baptizer, it's worth noting that a national leader must maintain the broadest possible appeal, and not allow Himself to be drawn into controversies generated by the extremist, uncompromising politics of fringe groups.

I submit that, in the trying and difficult turmoil of this crossroads in History, that the path to salvation will not be blazed by another hand-washing Pontius Pilate.

For these reasons, I believe that I am uniquely qualified to be your Messiah."

[myname]

Krugman has lost his class as an intellectual as he is obsessed in attacking Obama and carrying water for Clinon. He has no credibility left.

[snruB]

Krugman sucks

[shangti]

God, that is all Obamaniacs can think about "it is either with us or against us." That sounds like someone most democrats hates, doesn't it?

[fourex]

Not in Arizona.

[mkjohn1]

Krugman so clearly cow-tows to anything Clinton that he points don't carry nearly as much weight when he's discussing anything political. Far far too biased.

[StephenDedalus82]

Obama's Reagan comment was a mistake because it indicated that Obama doesn't care so much about the nitty-gritty of change, about responding to actual facts and working specifically to confront problems, but that he wants to be some messianic uniting figurehead. He'd rather be like Reagan than Clinton because Reagan is worshipped by a lot of people while Clinton is merely respected. This is scary to me and, I suspect, a lot of true Democrats. I get that he wants change perhaps of the scale Reagan supposedly delivered, but I would argue that Clinton delivered more necessary and beneficial change, and that Obama doesn't understand the difference betrays a quite frightening attitude of his that he'd rather be a symbol than a leader.

[m4rk0]

So when is Krugman going to start writing articles about Obama being Muslim and not pledging to the flag?