Wednesday, September 2, 2015

Krugman says only Republicans indulge in personality cults

You'd have to read Paul Krugman to know anything else he said but John Sexton at Breitbart has an issue, a few issues actually, with Krugman's assessment. Krugman realizes his own silliness in delivering it and provides himself wiggle room with a word, "deserving."
“I know, now I’m supposed to be evenhanded, and point out equivalent figures on the Democratic side. But there really aren’t any; in modern America, cults of personality built around undeserving politicians seem to be a Republican thing,” 
The quote ends in a comma so the sentence is not finished. The link takes you to NYT to see for yourself.

John Sexton writes an able takedown at Breitbart, you'll enjoy it. Like I say, it is based on a single sentence portion but it's still very good. It's one of those things where you're reading along and cannot believe for ten good reasons and see your objections arrayed against the remark surrounding it so clearly you could spit it all out at once, and do. With time, then, to dig up the right pictures and everything.

Realizing his statement is flawed due to the obvious personality cult that formed around Obama that Krugman is part, he justifies that one cult being okay because of the great things it produced, ignoring his example is flawed that the jury is still out and the worst of it yet to come. The bit of time-sophistry doesn't work because all that comes well after the personality cult was on full display.

Such a fierce little liar, Krugman is. What a force of nature. I wonder why Sexton was reading Krugman in the first place. Looking for material, I guess. My doctor referenced Krugman once for authority on economic opinion and that quip alone is reason enough to drop him as doctor. I was nonplussed, shaking my head "no" I sputtered, "Even Keynes didn't believe in Keynesian economics" to his back as he left the room but knowing he respects Krugman made me doubt he knows how that remark even related to Krugman. That is, I doubt he knows much anything useful about political science or about economics. How can you respect that when it comes with strong opinion and comes from a professional? That you rely on.

I could make a mint producing Paul Krugman garden gnomes. He'd be petting his cat.

To live within the Obama cult of personality and then project that mental state outward onto the everlasting scourge of your existence where it doesn't fit, and write about it, is observable psychosis in action.

9 comments:

edutcher said...

Sure.

Jack Kennedy, Franklin Roosevelt ring any bells?

Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves said...

Paul Krugman is a fraud. He's an economic moron and he should be laughed off the stage.

Amartel said...

I saw this and could not stop laughing.
It went on for a while.
The Elite.
Are demented.
The only thing they're good at is fooling themselves and the LIVs. But I repeat myself.

ndspinelli said...

Krugman was a darling when Obama got elected. You saw that weasel[he actually looks like a weasel] on TV everywhere. He's now trying to get attention.

vza said...

Krugman is a smug douche bag. This excerpt from a New Yorker article is vomit inducing:

“I was nervous until they finally called it on Election Night,” Krugman says. “We had an Election Night party at our house, thirty or forty people.”

“The econ department, the finance department, the Woodrow Wilson school,” Wells says. “They were all very nervous, so they were grateful we were having the party, because they didn’t want to be alone. We had two or three TVs set up and we had a little portable outside fire pit and we let people throw in an effigy or whatever they wanted to get rid of for the past eight years.”

“One of our Italian colleagues threw in an effigy of Berlusconi.”

“I put out some coloring paper and markers so that people could write stuff on it and throw it into the fire. People really felt like there was stuff they wanted to shed! I had little hats and party whistles.”

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2010/03/01/the-deflationist#ixzz0jIOwU5UJ

Jim in St Louis said...

You guys are awfully harsh on the ole Enron economist.
He is just doing what he always does.

I think his premise is wrong, Dems always worship their rulers- You still will hear Roosevelt cited in discussions about what a good progressive looks like. And Kennedy can still make them swoon. Johnson and Carter not so much- I wonder why? they were both loyal progressives and did everything they could to advance the leftist cause- why do thy not get any love?

ricpic said...

Krugman says the way out of our current economic mess is MORE debt. Seriously. Mishuggah.

Amartel said...

Lefties yearn for someone to lead them. A daddy or boyfriend Prezzie to loooooove and who will love them back. Or at least pretend to love them, make them look good in public, justify all that emotional investment. Soooorrry, but it's true.

Johnson was a default (first to bring southerners in to vote for Kennedy and then due to Kennedy's assassination) and Carter looked good on paper. Smart, military background, southern governor, farmer. They tried to love him but were unable to do so. Truman was another default. Dead boyfriend is so romantic as any Twilight fan will tell you. All you remember are the good times and opponents hesitate to mention all the mistakes and abuse since that would be speaking ill of the dead.

virgil xenophon said...

With his pithy little comment, ELB wins the thread!