In today's New York Times, Paul Krugman's commentary, "Conservatives Are Such Jokers," begins:
In 1960, John F. Kennedy, who had been shocked by the hunger he saw in West Virginia, made the fight against hunger a theme of his presidential campaign. After his election he created the modern food stamp program, which today helps millions of Americans get enough to eat.But Ronald Reagan thought the issue of hunger in the world’s richest nation was nothing but a big joke. Here’s what Reagan said in his famous 1964 speech “A Time for Choosing,” which made him a national political figure: “We were told four years ago that 17 million people went to bed hungry each night. Well, that was probably true. They were all on a diet.”
Today’s leading conservatives are Reagan’s heirs.
Krugman could have noted that candidate Kennedy himself backed off from that estimate. In a September 28th speech during the 1960 presidential campaign, Kennedy responded to criticisms of his use of that number:
"They may not go to bed hungry every night, (emphasis added) but they don't go to bed very well fed and here is my source." He then cited a Republican senator and President Eisenhower's agriculture secretary. Interestingly, the secretary's statement was made in arguing against a food stamp program.
Days later at their second debate, Republican candidate Vice President Richard Nixon made a point of Kennedy's backtracking:
"I don't think it was helpful when he suggested - and I'm glad he's corrected this to an extent - that 17 million people go to bed hungry every night in the United States." For his part, Kennedy didn't dispute he had corrected his previous charge, going on to repeat the sources he'd used earlier.
Victor Lasky, in the heavily documented 1963 book "JFK: The Man & The Myth," dealt with the controversy:
But Kennedy's most dramatic claim - one he had to drop - was this: "The facts are that 17 million Americans go to bed hungry every night." And, naturally, it was all the Republicans' fault. "We'll admit the young Senator's figures are startling - but where did he get them?" the irreverent New York Daily News asked. "Did that amazing total include citizens on diets or ginmill patrons who plain forgot to order a sandwich?" Apparently Kennedy - or one of his ghost writers - seemed to have misunderstood a 1955 Agriculture Department study of the nation's eating habits. It found that many American families do indeed suffer from nutritional deficiencies. But again, while such deficiencies are most common in low-income groups, it was also found that between 13 and 17 percent of households with incomes of $10,000 and over suffer from various nutritional shortages.
The mainstream media just can't stop knocking conservatives in general and Ronald Reagan in particular. Whether their knocks have any merit or not is inconsequential. The important thing is to maintain their story line that conservatives are heartless because, unlike liberals, they don't believe in demonstrating their compassion with someone else's money.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Liberals have been using the same tactics for years
October 5, 2007 - 12:40 ET by c5thenOverstating statistics or plain outright making them up, and then vilifying anyone who derides their false statistics as heartless.
The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic. Let's get it back! Fred08.com
Liars and figures
October 5, 2007 - 12:56 ET by Michael M. BatesFor years the MSM would eat up any wild estimates of the homeless from advocate Mitch Snyder. One evening on Nightline, Mitch admitted that his numbers "have no meaning, no value." Except the MSM would routinely dish them out as irrefutable evidence that Fedgov wasn't spending enough on "the problem."
Yeah, he said 45 homeless
October 5, 2007 - 15:42 ET by pbanks7Yeah, he said 45 homeless people die every second, and the media repeated it quite a bit. Then somebody actually did the math - 1.4 billion (with a b!) every year. Yup! They're all dead.
The poor guy was really messed up - committed suicide.
Ignorance is bliss. It's easier to repeat a mindless slogan than to do some actual research.
Mitch Ryder, Mitch Snyder
October 5, 2007 - 15:47 ET by Michael M. BatesSnyder was an unfortunate fellow. I used to think he should have formed his own rock group to compete with Mitch Ryder and the Detroit Wheels. He could have called it Mitch Snyder and the Card Carriers.
Good Golly, Miss Molly!
October 5, 2007 - 16:57 ET by Del DolemonteI saw Mr. Ryder in concert a couple of months ago and he's doing great. His screams can still wake the dead.
Devil with a blue dress
October 5, 2007 - 17:18 ET by Michael M. BatesI saw Mr. Ryder in concert a couple of months ago and he's doing great. His screams can still wake the dead.
That guy's even older than I. They have to, if you'll pardon the expression, "wheel" him out?
Here's a typical liberal
October 5, 2007 - 13:14 ET by ConservativeRexHere's a typical liberal survey on hunger. This is not made up, this is how they come to their numbers. They go to an elementary school, preferably in a poor or rural area. While in this school, they ask students at about 10AM if they are hungry. Now what child at 10 AM is not hungry?
And there you have a liberal honest survey <sarcasm on>.
Surveys, ConservativeRex
October 5, 2007 - 13:36 ET by Michael M. BatesOne of my favorite liberal ploys is when they run a survey asking people if we need tougher gun laws. The question presumes the respondent already knows what laws are on the books and never is phrased something like, "There are already thousands of gun laws in effect. Do you think one more will do the trick?"
Beat on Reagan Again
October 5, 2007 - 13:35 ET by Lame CherryKrugman should have included that Ronald Reagan unlike him knew poverty, because Reagan grew up in poverty.
Reagan was the guy who had to work in a kitchen in college just so he could go to college and eat. Reagan understood hunger, want, poverty, need and wanting things so much you hurt inside.
Krugman has to learn there is a difference between bold ass lies liberals always tell and the reality of life.
I will be willing to bet besides Dan Rather trying to claim poverty in using an outhouse when all that is what was in America at the time........none of these liberals ever in their life had to make a chicken stretch for a family of 5 for a week..........believe me the chickens my grandmother had made use of even the squawk as you got loads of noodles and more noodles, but that chicken stretched farther than a bungie cord.
In that here am I product like Ronald Reagan, a Conservative. I never meandered in FDR nor falling for Carter's lines. I detested at my core liberals of all sorts from childhood as I instinctively knew they were weak, had no hope and all they did was whine.
In my world, you didn't got to a doctor........you either got a lysol soak for a nail stuck in your foot or the old man pulled your tooth out with a pliers.
I have been laughed at for clothes, have been stuck wearing not hand me downs, but wearing dead man's clothes..........I have been sneered at by wealthy people for looking poor and yup 30 years ago I was eating the bread and stuff that markets tossed out into the garbage........and I never once in my life have taken one fricking nickel from the American tax payer.
Life is a bitch most times and a cruel mistress who lures you in to trust and then tries to kill you. It gauls me to this day the humility I had to suffer to get through to this point in life in trusting in God's grace. It made me a better soul thank God.
In that though stated, I loathe with contempt these Krugman types making 6 figure salaries bitching about Reagan who knew what I know intimately...........and know Krugman's hardest times in life are deciding how to spend money.
Reagan knew like all Conservatives know that you get off your ass and try instead of sitting on your Oprah and crying about the wah wah wah of life. Reagan knew it was no joke to be poor and hungry, but he knew the joke of Kennedy and liberals using poor people as whores to get sympathy votes from doltish Americans feeling guilty because they had nice homes they worked for.
Enough of that.
*HIC IACET ARTORIVS REX QVONDAM REXQVE FVTVRVS
Poverty, Lame Cherry
October 5, 2007 - 13:40 ET by Michael M. BatesI don't know about Krugman's financial status. It's possible he may even be driving last year's model. And to limousine liberals, that could be poverty.
Krugs
October 5, 2007 - 17:01 ET by Del DolemonteKrugs grew up on Long Island, and went to Yale and MIT. Hardly cheap schools.
President Ronald Reagan
October 5, 2007 - 14:31 ET by Ten7sPresident Ronald Reagan (then Governor of California) quipped in the '60s that the Boomer, Counter-Culturists (and I paraphrase) 'dress like Tarzan, wear their hair like Jane, and smell like Cheetah'. Now that is FUNNY! You've just got to love that guy.
Lookin' for a new Reagan, Ten7s
October 5, 2007 - 14:51 ET by Michael M. BatesYou've just got to love that guy.
It's little wonder that Republicans keep hoping for a "new Reagan." I don't see one on the horizon.
Krugman Worked in Reagan's White House
October 5, 2007 - 17:03 ET by Del DolemonteKrugs worked for a year in the Reagan White House during Ron's first term.
Del... Wow! What the
October 5, 2007 - 17:10 ET by bigtimerDel...
Wow!
What the heck happened?
Who got the brains or lost them in this case?
Joke?
October 5, 2007 - 14:37 ET by mattmSince the New Raw Deal and the Great Socialist Society, the U.S. taxpayer has had over $3,000,000,000,000.00 taken from them and given to the "hungry" yet they continue to say millions of Americans (the most overweight people on earth) are going to bed hungry every night.
Obviously their socialism has failed.
Krugman is a joke.
Feeding the poor
October 5, 2007 - 14:54 ET by Michael M. Bates. . . the U.S. taxpayer has had over $3,000,000,000,000.00 taken from them and given to the "hungry". . .
It's like the late Sen. Dirksen reportedly said, "A billion here, a billion there, pretty soon you're talking real money."
Paul Krugman is an ignorant
October 5, 2007 - 14:55 ET by fitzfongPaul Krugman is an ignorant and arrogant lying slimeball. A really nasty piece of work. The suggestion that Republicans care less about the less fortunate than do Democrats is a fraud. Liberals create the myth that they care more for the less fortunate just because they say they do...and they're lying when they say it. In effect, liberals like Krugman are power hungry socialists who mask their desire by falsely claiming that they care about others. Conservatives believe in the power of the individual to use the unfettered market to best answer the needs of all. Then the decency of individuals takes over to answer those needs that haven't been met by the market. The difference between the liberal approach and the conservative approach: the conservative approach actually works.
Krugman is what, fitzfong?
October 5, 2007 - 15:00 ET by Michael M. BatesPaul Krugman is an ignorant and arrogant lying slimeball.
C'mon, now. Don't hold back. :)
That was holding back. ;-)
October 5, 2007 - 15:18 ET by fitzfongThat was holding back. ;-)
Admirable restraint
October 5, 2007 - 15:20 ET by Michael M. BatesI think. But only if absolutely necessary.
Oh that Krugman....getting
October 5, 2007 - 15:30 ET by bigtimerOh that Krugman....getting to be a regular little comedian with his BS tripe.
These mentally deficient critters will never stop.
We are just gonna' have to walk all over them in '08.
Thompson/Hunter '08
Just for grins
October 5, 2007 - 15:33 ET by Michael M. BatesOh that Krugman....getting to be a regular little comedian with his BS tripe.
The problem is so many people take him and his ilk seriously.
Oh I know Michael B. I
October 5, 2007 - 15:40 ET by bigtimerOh I know Michael B.
I just am sick of writing what I really feel about the nit-wit leftist scumball.
One thing I have been glad not to see...when he would come on Imus....he was a regular of his.
I always turned it before a minute was up.
Imus, bigtimer
October 5, 2007 - 15:44 ET by Michael M. BatesI've seen stories the I-man will be back soon. Maybe he'll have the Krug-man as a regular. He can call him the b-word and the h-word and the. . . .
Michael B... You got that
October 5, 2007 - 15:57 ET by bigtimerMichael B...
You got that right...and a few other words too.
ROFL....
Btw...Is Imus going to be on television again...do you know?
Imus in the morning
October 5, 2007 - 16:49 ET by Michael M. BatesBtw...Is Imus going to be on television again...do you know?
"A TV simulcast also is possible; Imus used to be seen on MSNBC."
FWIW.
Hey Krugman...
October 6, 2007 - 12:36 ET by aka Hondoyou are such a fool. Yes, there may be some people who may go to bed hungry once or twice a week/month. However, no one and I mean NO ONE is starving to death in this country. Just look at some of the (so called) impovershed people in the poor parishes after Katrina. Ever notice how obese some of those people are? They are getting food from somewhere and plenty of it by the looks of them. If you want to see real hunger and poverty, go to Africa. In the meantime, grow a brain.