If you’re confused about what to get Paul Krugman for Valentine’s Day, it’s not like he hasn’t dropped enough hints. He likes spending. Gobs of it. In fact, he thinks President Barack Obama is far too miserly with the public dime. Since Obama was elected in 2008, Krugman, a Nobel Prize-winning economist, has called for an increase in U.S. government spending 133 times in his New York Times column.
Liberal columnist Paul Krugman ludicrously blamed the press for "malpractice" in reporting that ObamaCare would cut two million full-time jobs. Krugman made his remarks on Thursday night's Colbert Report.
"I see a lot of media malpractice, because a lot of the news orgs got it wrong. The CBO did not say that," Krugman responded to host Stephen Colbert's claim that "2.5 million people fewer will have jobs by 2021." [MP3 audio available here; video below the jump]
In a December 27 blog post, New York Times columnist and incurable Keynesian economist Paul Krugman capitalized on the problems United Parcel Service and to a lesser extent Fedex had in delivering Christmas packages on time: "Can’t the private sector do anything right?"
While I recognize that there's sarcasm in his question, Krugman then went on to try to make HealthCare.gov's problems appear analogous: "[M]any pundits were quick to declare healthcare.gov’s problems evidence of the fundamental, irretrievable incompetence of government, and as an omen of Obamacare’s inevitable collapse. ... (But) none of these people are making similar claims about UPS or Amazon." Since the Nobel Economics laureate appears to be too dense to understand the differences between the two situations, Robert P. Murphy, "the author of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Capitalism," explained many of them in a Sunday post at the Ludwig von Mises Institute of Canada's web site (bolds are mine throughout this post):
Today’s installment of the Media Research Center’s “Best Notable Quotables of 2013,” as selected by our 42 expert judges: “The Tea Party Terrorists Award.” The establishment media have been hostile to the Tea Party from the moment it appeared on the scene in 2009, impugning participants as racists, “tea baggers” and terrorists ready to blow up the political system.
“Winning” this category in 2011, New York Times columnist Paul Krugman falsely suggested Tea Party complicity in the grievous wounding of Democratic congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, announcing in a blog post written just two hours after news broke of her shooting: “We don’t have proof yet that this was political, but the odds are that it was....It’s long past time for the GOP’s leaders to take a stand against the hate-mongers.” (This year’s winners and videos below the jump.)
At long last. After weeks of unrelenting bad news, Obamacare supporters in the mainstream media believe the cavalry has come to the rescue in the form of increased advertising buys by insurance companies. Huh? How does increased ad buys translate into Obamacare success? Well, the talking point now being recited is that the promised increase in advertising by the insurance companies translates into their confidence in Obamacare which somehow means it's going to work.
Paul Krugman, who a couple of months ago was celebrating the "success" of Obamacare based on discovering one person in New Jersey who signed up, is now in a similar state of bliss because "The Big Money Bets on Obamacare":
When The Washington Post headlines a story “A half-century of deep, hopeless intellectualism,” there’s a puff piece underneath. It’s not about Obama’s globe-trotting genius since the age of two. It’s a rave for The New York Review of Books, a leftist literary rag. (It's not The New York Times Book Review. This comes out about 20 times a year.)
Post writer Neely Tucker oozed all over “legendary editor Robert Silvers” and how “circulation is at an all-time high of 150,000.” Then came the "oh, so hopelessly smart" waterfall of gush:
It's time for an "ObamaCare Success" victory parade!
And what was this "ObamaCare Success?" Why, it was Paul Krugman conveniently discovering ONE unnamed person who claims to have "signed up" for ObamaCare. Here is Krugman breathlessly describing this astounding "ObamaCare Success":
Despite all the trouble ObamaCare has been having since health insurance exchanges opened about two weeks ago, New York Times columnist Paul Krugman on ABC’s This Week Sunday predictably had nothing but praise for the law.
Fortunately the Wall Street Journal’s Peggy Noonan and former Mitt Romney advisor Dan Senor were present to set the record straight (video follows with transcript and commentary):
NewsBusters readers are well-aware that one of our problems with New York Times columnist Paul Krugman - besides his perilously liberal bias, of course! - is how he plays fast and loose with facts to support his agenda.
On MSNBC's Morning Joe Thursday, co-host Joe Scarborough said, "One of the public editors of the New York Times told me off the record after my debate that their biggest nightmare was his column every week" (video follows with transcript and commentary):
One thing which is arguably worse for one's health than Obamacare is the act of reading a Paul Krugman column at the New York Times.
In his latest equivalent of a DNC press release on Thursday published in Friday's print edition, Krugman lambasted GOP Senator Rand Paul and House Majority Leader Eric Cantor as "politicians who gleefully add to the misinformation" the general public allegedly has about "the deficit" (more on that shortly). But "somehow," he a delusional statement made by Democratic U.S. Senator Mary Landrieu to a veteran earlier this month, as recounted by Army Lieutenant Colonel Andre Dean Benton (bolds are mine; note the weak headline more than likely chosen by the paper and not Benton):
Since last week’s revelations concerning the National Security Agency looking at American phone records, it’s been fascinating to watch Obama-loving media members take issue with what the White House is doing.
Include New York Times columnist Paul Krugman who on ABC’s This Week Sunday said that America is now “kind of” an “authoritarian surveillance state” (video follows with transcript and commentary):
Martin Bashir on Tuesday said New York Times columnist Paul Krugman "deserves the Nobel Peace Prize."
Yes, the MSNBC host said Peace Prize - not one for economics - all because the perilously liberal economist has advocated more deficit spending and even more federal debt to stimulate the economy (video follows with partial transcript and commentary):
Generally speaking, we try to avoid mentioning shrill leftist New York Times columnist Paul Krugman, not because he makes no absurd statements but because he makes so many of them. An exception to this rule must be made, however, thanks to an excellent piece by economist Robert P. Murphy in the American Conservative headlined “Heads Krugman Wins, Tails ‘Austerity’ Loses.”
In the past several years, during and following the recent “sequester” debate the leftist economist predicted utter disaster if it went through. According to Krugman, America was almost guaranteed to enter another recession on account of the supposed fact that miniscule cuts in the rate of the federal budget’s growth would have an anti-stimulative effect on the economy. A funny thing happened on the way to Armegeddon though: the U.S. economy actually seems to be doing better since the sequester went into effect.
Tavis Smiley invited ultra-liberal Princeton economist and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman on his show Monday night for a friendly chat about the American economy. Predictably, Krugman used the appearance as an opportunity to bash Republicans, and on a taxpayer-subsidized television program no less.
Krugman and Smiley both complained that the American people have not yet become “sufficiently outraged” over the budget cuts brought by sequestration. Smiley demanded to know why the outrage has not appeared and when it will come. Don’t worry, Krugman reassured him, pain from the sequester will take time to kick in. The outrage will come once people start losing essential government services. [Video below. MP3 audio here.]
While you were watching Rand Paul's historic filibuster and the debate surrounding budget sequestration, an economic theory battle was waging between two of the nation's foremost liberal economists Paul Krugman and Jeffrey Sachs.
In his most recent salvo published at the Huffington Post Saturday, Sachs spoke heresy to Obama-lovers across the fruited plain including Krugman claiming that following the 2008 financial crisis, "It was the Fed, not the fiscal stimulus, which prevented a fall into depression."
As NewsBusters reported earlier, New York Times columnist Paul Krugman and MSNBC's Joe Scarborough had quite a heated discussion about the budget, debt, and the economy on PBS's Charlie Rose Monday evening.
Near its conclusion, Scarborough actually scolded Krugman for pompously behaving like a sighing Al Gore (video follows with transcript and commentary):
New York Times columnist Paul Krugman and MSNBC's Joe Scarborough had an at times heated discussion about budget deficits, debt, and the economy on PBS's Charlie Rose Monday evening.
At one point Krugman got so rattled by the facts that he actually said Scarborough quoting what he had said in the past was making an ad hominem attack against him (video follows with transcript and commentary):
With the sequester looming, the impending budget cuts have got the left screaming the end of the world is just around the corner. In a blog published on Feb. 27, co-founder, CEO, and Editor-in-Chief Henry Blodget predicted that our economy was “crappy” because of cutting back government spending. He also posed that this was the problem with European countries like Greece and England.
The problem, according to Blodget is that “we reduce economic growth” which then will “put more people out of work” when there are government spending cuts. Oddly absent from this article was any mention of how increased taxes affect businesses and consumer spending.
Courtesy of James Taranto of the Wall Street Journal's "Opinion Journal" page Friday: Under the subheadline "Great Moments in Socialized Medicine," Taranto pointed to an abject failure of Britain's National Health Service in a Times account of "shockingly bad care" at a British hospital:
"Shockingly bad care and inhumane treatment at a hospital in the Midlands led to hundreds of unnecessary deaths and stripped countless patients of their dignity and self-respect, according to a scathing report published on Wednesday," reports the New York Times's Sarah Lyall from London:
A day after the New York Times ignored the connection between Floyd Corkins, who attempted a mass murder at a conservative think tank, and the left-wing "hate group" monitor Southern Poverty Law Center, which had labeled FRC "anti-gay," there broke another case of bias by omission regarding news that might embarrass prominent liberals. Chris Dorner, an ex-cop on a vengeful rampage against police officers in Los Angeles, praised liberal media personalities in his oddly chatty "manifesto" posted on Facebook. Those details were absent from Friday's account by Adam Nagourney and Ian Lovett, "Manhunt On for Ex-Officer Accused of Police Vendetta."
Yet the Times has previously made up entirely fantastical accusations about conservatives like Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, and Bill O'Reilly, accusing them with no links or evidence whatsoever of fanning flames of hatred that incited murder.
Last week New York Times economics columnist and liberal hero Paul Krugman actually said "death panels," the critique of Obama-care popularized by Sarah Palin and universally mocked by liberals, while discussing the necessity of cutting health care costs.
On January 30, Krugman spoke at the Sixth & I Historic Synagogue in D.C. (Krugman is out hawking the paperback edition of "End This Depression Now!," his paean to more government spending on infrastructure and other forms of stimulus.) During the Q&A, Breitbart's Joel Griffith noted, Krugman was asked about the rising national debt. A truncated version of his remarks follows:
Isn't it fascinating how in this supposedly "post-racial society," media members feel comfortable bashing white people at the drop of a hat?
Take New York Times columnist Paul Krugman who on ABC's This Week Sunday, in the middle of a discussion about immigration, felt it was necessary to talk about how Republicans are "doomed if they are only the party of old white people" (video follows with transcript and commentary):
Over the past few years, Paul Krugman has become known as one of the most rabid leftists prominent in the national political scene. He is, as George Will once described him, famous for believing that anyone who disagrees with him is “a knave or corrupt or a corrupt knave.”
What you may not know, however, is that that the very angry leftist New York Times columnist has actually diverged quite a bit from his former life. That past is what earned him his Nobel Prize in economics and also...a spot on Ronald Reagan’s Council of Economic Advisers. And while one wishes that he had worked there cleaning the commodes, the truth is that Krugman was actually there as an economist who believed (mostly) in the free market.
Paul Krugman vs. Jon Stewart. The New York Times columnist and economist put his utter lack of humor on display in a Saturday afternoon blog post in which he attacked as lazy and unprofessional the host of the Daily Show. Stewart's sin? Daring to mock the trillion-dollar platinum coin as a solution to the debt ceiling crisis. Here's Krugman on "Lazy Jon Stewart":
Oh, dear. Jon Stewart took on the platinum coin, and made a hash of it -- he faceplanted, as Ryan Cooper says. What went wrong? Jon Chait says that he flunked econ, but that’s just part of it. He also flunked law, politics, and just plain professional....Above all, however, what went wrong here is a lack of professionalism on the part of Stewart and his staff....In this case, however, it’s obvious that nobody at TDS spent even a few minutes researching the topic. It was just yuk-yuk-yuk they’re talking about a trillion-dollar con hahaha. Hey, if we want this kind of intellectual laziness, we can just tune in to Fox."
Paul Krugman's Friday column for the New York Times, "Coins Against Crazies," announced his support of a bizarre-sounding budget solution taken up mostly on the left: A trillion-dollar platinum coin that would supposedly avoid the looming problem of the debt ceiling. But more offensive than Krugman's nodding along with this unlikely idea is his referring to Republicans as terrorists.
PIMCO chief executive Mohamed El-Erian explained the platinum coin idea: "Under legal authority it already has (which is meant for decorative coins), the U.S. Treasury would issue to itself a very large platinum coin -- say a single, trillion dollar denomination. The coin would be deposited in the Treasury's account at the Federal Reserve. Against this 'credit,' the Treasury would withdraw from the central bank more conventional forms of money and use them to meet payments obligations that have already been approved by law....The key here is that the Treasury would raise money without borrowing. Thus, the increasingly binding debt limit would not apply...."