The president that Tim Geithner works for is making policy, and he didn't ask Paul Krugman or Rush Limbaugh for their permission! So Krugman and Limbaugh are building personal Obama-Will-Fail, media-based ego empires to hedge their anti-Obama bet.
Yes, I know that open discussion, a "loyal opposition" and all that play a part, and that the strength of the Democratic Party is the free exchange of ideas, as opposed to the top down ideological "purity" of the folks in the Republican Party. However the Obama critics to the left criticize some members of his team for being beholden to the "Wall Street mentality." Well, what about the ethos they are beholden to? These commentators live in a media news cycle bubble, wherein after only 8 weeks they already expect miracles, or they are academics who live in the academy bubble where it's all hot air all the time with no personal buck-stops-here accountability.
Enough is enough! Some of us -- including this life-long Republican and now independent voter -- voted for Obama, and, guess what?: we will back him! We trust Obama more than we trust his detractors. We actually believe in him and are ready to think in years not sound bites.
The Krugman/Limbaugh legacy now depends on Obama (and America) failing in order to vindicate these (and many other) naysayers. Luckily for Krugman/Limbaugh, their "predictions" get a big hearing so they can help guarantee the outcome of their Obama Is Wrong prophecies; sort of like God. Maybe not even "sort of," because together Krugman/Limbaugh make the perfect team: the smart white lefty and the stupid white righty together at last!
The Nobel committee said; ""Krugman has deepened our understanding of the determinants of trade and the location of economic activity." And Limbaugh has 20 million listeners! Nevertheless, Obama thinks he can lead America without Krugman/Limbaugh. See, Krugman/Limbaugh backed Hillary and sniped at Obama through the primary. But the American people wouldn't do what Krugman/Limbaugh told them to do and didn't back their candidate, irrespective of the fact Krugman/Limbaugh said only Hillary could win and govern.
If Obama succeeds will Krugman's Nobel Prize become an SNL-style joke, something like Arafat's Nobel? Will Krugman/Limbaugh get made fun of by Jon Stewart? What will Krugman/Limbaugh do if by the end of next year an economic turnaround is in full swing? (Note to Krugman/Limbaugh: buy stock - in anything but newspapers -- just in case.)
Krugman worked his whole life for a Nobel Prize, the way some actors strive for an Oscar. Some folks need more affirmation than others. It's tough to prove that a life spent in the softest of soft "sciences" in academia matters as much as being Bono or the President or something sexy like that! So Krugman got his prize and now he's on the cover of Newsweek too and all over the Sunday news shows!
Suck on that all you jocks who made fun of Krugman at high school in Bellmore! Suck on that Clinton administration Undersecretary of Commerce Jeffrey Garten, who said of Krugman that; "He behaves like someone with a massive chip on his shoulder." Suck on that all you who questioned Krugman's judgment, just because he worked for Ronald Reagan and was a consultant for Enron! How could anyone question Krugman's liberal credentials or political savvy just because he's a progressive ripping into our progressive first black president? Didn't Krugman write a book called The Conscience of a Liberal? See? He is the conscience of liberalism!
As for Limbaugh, how could he be wrong? A $400 million radio deal proves he must know something we ordinary voters don't about the American way.
Thanks to Obama, Krugman/Limbaugh are more famous -- and therefore richer (and more relevant, perhaps even sexier -- if you're into old white men!) -- than ever, all because Krugman is a Democrat smearing (and sneering at) the new Democratic president's economic team and policies, and all because Limbaugh had the guts to say what every flag-waving, Jesus-loving Republican really hopes: better America fails than Republicans are proved wrong!
Talk about no honeymoon! Krugman/Limbaugh are mugging Obama at the altar! And things are looking up for the muggers: Obama is distracted by trying to fight the two wars he inherited, turn around the economy he inherited, revamp education, change our energy policy, stop global warming, prevent nuclear war... all that actual responsibility stuff Krugman/Limbaugh don't "do." So all Krugman/Limbaugh need to do to guarantee they are proved right -- is to keep chipping away at Obama's economic plans and credibility night and day until the rest of us (right and left) lose confidence in Obama. Unlike the President, Krugman/Limbaugh only have one task: go negative 24/7. Plus, unlike Obama, Krugman/Limbaugh take no actual risks. Crazy racists don't usually shoot white academics and/or white entertainers. And when tenured professors fail (and/or zillionaire entertainers), who cares? They've got theirs.
Still, Krugman/Limbaugh's reputation may not be completely secure, even with the help of the we-never-met-a-doom-story-we-didn't like media. What if the nightmare scenario occurs? What if a few years from now Krugman/Limbaugh are just obscure footnotes to history, some sort of bitter joke? Maybe they'll wind up the way radio personality and pontificator Reverend Coughlin did after Roosevelt succeeded and all Coughlin's shrill predictions of ruin (made in the 1930s) came to nothing.
Sure Coughlin was of the far, far nutty right and Krugman is of far, far nutty left, but those Far-Everything-Ideologue-Guys have to stick together against what they regard as the cowardly center, inhabited those who are about responsibility and real time choices and necessary compromise.
From the Krugman/Limbaugh nightmare point of view America is scarily strong, rich, resilient, generous and creative. In comparison to the rest of the world our problems are flea bites. What is so scary for Krugman/Limbaugh and the rest of the Obama-Must-Fail-Prophets-For-Profit-and-Glory, is that every challenge confronting us has a ready solution. Worse yet -- from the Krugman/Limbaugh point of view -- we're about to shift to a vast trillion dollar entrepreneurial green economy. We're about to rebuild our infrastructure. We are about to launch a massive environmental clean up. We have a much loved and fearless levelheaded president and, for the first time in decades, the world loves our president.
What scares Krugman/Limbaugh silly is that by the end of next year we may see the beginnings of a massive economic turnaround. But there is hope for the Krugman/Limbaugh mugging duo yet: Obama has the toughest start of any American president with the exception of Lincoln, so he should be easy to take down. And we mere voters who back our president notwithstanding, Krugman/Limbaugh can count on the sound bite 24-hour news cycle carnivore press to amplify their voices because doom passes for entertainment these days.
So Krugman/Limbaugh are probably good to go for another round of self-fulfilling prophecy spouting, even if -- worst case -- the President succeeds. For Krugman/Limbaugh it's you lose we win. Even if they are proved wrong they'll get away with it, because the media will never give a black man the credit for saving our country, just like they didn't give him a honeymoon.
Frank Schaeffer is the author of Crazy For God: How I Grew Up As One Of The Elect, Helped Found The Religious Right, And Lived To Take All (Or Almost All) Of It Back. Now in paperback.
This attack on Krugman - who has a long and distinguished history as a public figure with something useful to say - is no different.
That doesn't make Krugman's views right. But it does make them worthy of respect.
There's a world of difference between his constructive, content laden critique, and the kind of shitslinging Limbaugh makes his millions over. It's hard to believe this isn't obvious to everyone here - starting with Frank Schaeffer.
I feel Krugman does provide balance and does give credit where credit is due. I'm sure he has his bais' and maybe he wanted Geithner's job which causes him to be overly critical of the approaches TG and the admin are taking. But I think he also makes it clear that the admin's choices are not end of the world (see Rush and many of the other nut jobs who need advertisers), that they could work, but are maybe not what he would have done.
Krugman's is not 'disagreable' disagreement like the likes of Rush. Frank we need voices like Krugman's to be heard as they are constrcutive IMHO. But keep it up Frank you do speak for me in many ways.
Krugman assumes the role of advisor. I have not heard one word from Krugman that Obama will fail. He suggests there may be alternatives to what Obama proposes. His is a constructive voice.
Limbaugh is a spoiler. He wishes for nothing more than the failure of Obama's policies. His suggestions are the tried and false policy bungles that have crippled this nation. If Obama's policies fail, Limbaugh will retreat to the same of bromides that the Republicans have suggested for the last thirty years.
The two voices diametrically opposed. Leave it at that.
When Rush is talking about wanting Obama to fail he is talking about his policies. Frankly I and many others already know his policies WILL fail. History tells us that big government and higher taxes with rampant spending is a perfect storm. The mantra I hear all the time about "the failed policies of the last 8 years" is just smoke screen. The economy has only really started falling apart in the last 8 months. Bush poured a few cups of gas on it with his late term "stimulus" packages. Obama is pulling out the 5 gallon cans. When you stoke the fires of hatred towards the rich the masses are all too willing to raise the pitchforks and chant along. But the masses forget that the rich are just regular people who worked hard to get where they are and raising their taxes only makes them tighten the belt elsewhere, mainly in the workforce. The unemployed (and I'm a recent addition) tighten their belts too, mainly at the checkout line. That leads to more businesses going broke which leads to more unemployment and the snowball is just starting down the hill.
on the contrary i have never read anything by krugman, who has worried about all these things, in which he expressed the hope that obama's policies would fail. i have read a lot by him saying that he fears they will fail, because obama and his people are doing the wrong thing, and that what they are doing is too little and too late. but hoping obama fails? not krugman.
on the contrary, on march 29 column, he praises obama's program compared with that of other countries, writing: "I don’t believe that even America’s economic efforts are adequate, but they’re far more than most other wealthy countries have been willing to undertake." a week earlier he wrote: "All is not lost: the public wants Mr. Obama to succeed, which means that he can still rescue his bank rescue plan. But time is running out." hardly the words of someone who hopes, as limbaugh fervently does, that obama and our economy will fail. clearly krugman, unlike limbaugh, is rooting for obama to succeed.
I wonder how politically expedient failure will be.
Judge a person's position by its substance. Limbaugh has no substance. Krugman does. Limbaugh has explicitly stated he wants Obama to fail, so Shaeffer is on solid ground there. Krugman hopes Obama will succeed, but has doubts about the viability of Geithner's plan. Schaeffer's accusations of Krugman having greedy, egocentric, and possibly racist motives for offering his criticism are specious and irresponsible.
There is nothing wrong with Paul Krugman having a opposing opinion of Obama/Geithner's plan. However, I think it's very crappy for him to get on a national magazine or on TV and belittle Geithner's plan and then start promoting his idea for Nationalzation. Nationalization is a good idea and it worked for Sweden but this is not Sweden. Nationalization might work but i don't believe for one second that it is THE only option that will save the U. S. economy.
If Krugman is wrong and Geithner's plan works, he is going to have more than just egg on his face.
As for Limbaugh....
What's the crappy part, that he has an alternative course of action or that he dared to publicly express it.
Funny, I thought freedom of speech and political expression was part of America.
What the sycophants really object to is that someone publicly states their honest opinion, and it isn't the blind loyalty and trust that they believe their political hero is entitled to.
Oh, and we are already nationalizing small banks. So nationalization is as American as apple pie.
First of all, I said Krugman has a right to oppose Geithner's plan.
Second, I didn't say that it is crappy to provide an alternative plan. What was crappy is Krugman going before the national public and say that Geithner's plan will not work before it can even get off the ground and then say that HIS IDEA is the ONLY option that will work.
At least, Tim Geithner has some experience in managing financial crisis in other countries, Paul Krugman of course, doesn't.
Yes the SMALL banks. I'm talking about the BIG banks.
You folks are no different from Obama supporters who get upset every time they think that someone is saying that their guy might be wrong.
The "I told you so twins".
+ That's why he is on these show...
The real question is "how" to jump start the system! You have to start someplace and do something, make that first step; until then all the doom and gloom talk just delays that first step and makes things worse... Obama's team has started taking steps and of course all of them will not be perfect but I predict most will propel our recovery forward; a useful analogy would be to imagine crossing a stream walking on slippery rocks, sure you will surely slip and slide a bit but you will cross the stream!
You said it best.
Here: "he's a progressive ripping into our progressive first black president" and,
Here: "the media will never give a black man the credit for saving our country".
But, frankly (no pun intended), I think that's simply the worst kind of baiting. The private/public investment plan isn't being criticized because Obama's "black", for the love of Pete, but because it's the same plan no one liked when Hank Paulson was promoting it at the behest of a "white" president!