Paul Krugman Slams...Hillary

Anything to criticize Hillary, shotgunjohnny. Krugman has real contempt for Greenspan. But Hillary is just trying to get as many minds...??...as possible to solve our nation's economic problems. And normally you would not hear any criticism from Krugman about Hillary.

this is a slam? Did they actually read the thing before the wrote the headline?

Krugman slamming Hillary only makes me more likely to vote for her.

This is kind of big. Krugman has been a staunch HRC supporter. For him to go after her is a media setback for her campaign. Every single op-ed writer has slammed her for one thing or another in the last week.
Wake up Clinton, save your career as a democrat by bowing out. Do it in a way that reunites the party. You'll do more good as a leader in the senate.

Wow....what a slam.....NOT.

It's apparent there are no boundaries when it has been decided to bash Sen. Clinton.

Robert Rubin is no innocent bystander either. In an interview on NPR, Robert Rubin was asked by Michelle Norris about the mortgage mess "
Michelle Norris: "I ask the question not necessarily because your hands were on the levers, but you're seen as one of the wisest of the wise men on Wall Street. And I wonder if you ever wish that you had perhaps spoken up or raised this issue?"
Robert Rubin: "I actually did raise them for years in my speeches. If you go back over the speeches I gave for the three or four years before this occurred, you'll see a lot of reference to the underweighting of risk and the developing of excesses. But if you're running trading rooms, you've got to run them every day and you've got to be in the business every day. And the kinds of views that others have around you of that kind may factor into what you're doing. But fundamentally, you can't go out of business. You can't stop doing business. And that's how the system just continues to move along that way...................but if you're actually running businesses, which I did at one time [20 or more years ago], you can listen to all that but fundamentally you've got to be in there every day, engaging in what's going on. Otherwise, you're not in the business."
In other words, Robert Rubin was just going along with the system with business as usual, while collecting big bonuses!

Yeah, a roundtable with A.G., Hillary et al, to include Carville and Chelsea. He's the rock (of St. Peter) upon which the Clinton campaign machinates ("a seasonal metaphor"). She's a Wall Street wizard these days and skilled at non-answering a legitimate question from an acknowledged Clinton supporter.

Now that would be an interesting den of vipers.

Hillary will stop at nothing to win even if it means wrecking the Party. In effect she says it and so does her principal surrogate, Bill. Fight back. Write the superdelegates in your state. Power to the people!

Will Rachel Sklar be next? Nah, she's a bit too thick.

You break it you buy it Paul.

It will be enjoyable to hear what the Hildbeast Camp calls Paul now. Hey Carville, what are you going to brand Paul?

I am so sick of this show. Its disturbing and disgusting and hurtful.

In a season of hope, this.

Enough is enough, time to say no to all of this.

Obama 2008

I am pleased to see Krugman slam Clinton for her statement she would appoint Greenspan to the stated position. Greenspan bears some responsibility for lack of oversight over the complex debt instruments and securities that got us in the mortgage mess we're in. The fact she would suggest his appointment shows she is more interested in creating the impression she is accomplishing something than really being interested in getting the right results. Her support for freezing interest rates temporarily also falls in this category. There are other forms of relief like a stay of all foreclosures for subpar mortgages that makes sense. Both she and Obama support this.

My problem with Krugman has been two-fold: (1) his overemphasis on the differences in their health care plans - few campaign plans make it through the Congress as originally proposed. While he may be right about the need for a mandate, he repeatedly battered Obama about it and refused to acknowledge that overall Obama is more progressive. He was pathological in the repetition of his criticism. (2) His assault on Obama supporters was unfair as there are many Clintonistas (I used to support Bill) who are no less passionate. The fact is for many of us Obama gives us hope because his popularity is so great he could produce a large mandate for the Dem party that no candidate in my time (I first voted in '84) has been likely to produce. His failure to recognize Obama's potential transformative power seemed misguided.

this guy has drunk too many manhattans on the job--its telling!!

I think Krugman is smart. I am an Obama supporter- he was not my first choice but once I got to know him I really grew to like him. Hillary was never a contender for me- too Republican.

But about the health care plans. It is too soon to talk about them other than very general terms. You better believe that the HMOs will fight tooth and nail to keep their gravy train. Clinton has already said she couldn't do it her first term. Anyone that has taken so much money from this industry cannot be objective.

So I'm with Obama and hoping for the best. At least he is objective.

Remember when the uprroar when Greenspan said that Iraq war was all about oil? Then he backed right off it. (What are you crazy- don't just tell the truth to the American People)

I never had much respect for him. He created this big mess. So what- put him on a commission to cover his tracks? Hillary -your allegiance to the Bush administration is showing!

I for one, am gratified to see Krugman exhibit a more balanced approach. I used to enjoy
his editorials, before they became rants for Hillary

Paul Krugman is a sexist! How could you implay that about Hillary! Are you trying to say that women are not good with money!

About time the exposure of Greenspan began. If ever there was a more overrated financial pundit please let us know. The book "Greenspans Bubbles" by Fleckstein and Sheehan details that this guy has been consistently wrong for decades. Its not just the current mortgage fiasco. Its S&L, Long Term Management, tech boom, Y2k etc.

For Rove/Clinton to suggest putting him on panel to solve this mess shows how out of touch she really is. The motto of her campaign really is "Back to the Future" or maybe "a bridge to the 20th century".