Abstract: As the dog returns to its vomit, we can depend on the far left to demonize their opponents with first sarcasm, then ridicule and when the hope of beating them in some contest flees away they play the Nazi Card—their best weapon and last straw. At this article, Paul Krugman, associated with economics in some arcane way, has gone to the mat fumbling and frustrated and played his last card. His arguments are incoherent, based on half truths, omitting critical data on jobs and taxes and reads like a conversation between two drunks fighting over a bottle of Tokay in some alley in
How to best read my blogs:
[I offer extensive quotes in this blog so that the reader can view the exact language and can be confident that nothing was taken out of context or that nobody was misquoted. The easiest way to take in the salient points is to read the emphatic points in the quotes and then peruse my comments. Comments on my comments are always welcome: ryckki@gmail.com.]
He foams this:
““The rage of the rich has been building ever since Mr. Obama took office. At first, however, it was largely confined to Wall Street. Thus when
”[1]-- The Angry Rich By Paul Krugman Op-Ed Columnist Published:
His rant begins with some isolated case where a few ‘rich’ have dim views of how Obama and his destruction of the economy of the
From the recent past, He bangs his head to hear it rattle:
“Austerity is self-defeating: when everyone tries to pay down debt at the same time, the result is depression and deflation, and debt problems grow even worse. And conversely, it is possible — indeed, necessary — for the nation as a whole to spend its way out of debt: a temporary surge of deficit spending, on a sufficient scale, can cure problems brought on by past excesses.”[2]-- 1938 in 2010 By Paul Krugman
This is the Eternal Source of money to fund the left—spend, spend, and spend.
A peek at leftist propaganda history:
Krugman Hitlerizes his political enemies, but hypocritically condemns others for that exact usage:
“…that if you do, in fact, start making Nazi comparisons, you’ve lost the argument and can no longer be taken seriously. I’m all for that.”[3] Here, Krugman mangles Godwin’s Law a sacred precept in liberal journalism or so we are told in November 2009.
And more:
John Leo has documented a host of cases where the far left have cloaked their Republican opponents, even President Bush, in Nazi regalia and more.
Comments like “Tom Ridge was the new Himmler, “… compared Rove to Josef Mengele ,” “…Rumsfeld was the real Hitler , “George Soros said Bush reminded them of Herman Goering.,” … Al Gore used the term "brownshirts" (Nazi street thugs),” … to Bush that it is "best viewed as a fitting memorial to Leni Riefenstahl,"… depicted Bush as a Hitler figure, “…Bush's rise to power was reminiscent of the rise of Hitler and Mussolini,” and this list goes on and on. [See footnote below for exact quotes.][4]
There is no question about the left’s Demonization and Nazification of any major political player on the right and even some in the near middle when they sink to desperation and despair.
Krugman sacks his own argument using Krugman’s own specious Nazi Comparison Rule.
In this article, Krugman focuses in on the rich with slurs:
The ‘rich,’ never clearly defined by the left and also the elastic upper income limits of the poverty level, are attacked from all directions in a political frenzy as this gives them more freedom to criticize their enemies and allows them to deceitfully zero in upon key targets as this word ‘rich’ portends them as an even more hated substitute for conservative Republicans—the arch enemies of the rabid left.
Krugman attempts to truncate and box in the ‘rich’ with his rare use of numbers. He faithfully passes over the obvious when he fails to mention that many of these $400,000 plus people have businesses and their corporate status throws the tax burden upon them at their current individual tax rate and omits any need for investment or other expenses like employees.
Well, they don’t make as much as the government of
“These days, however, tax-cutters are hardly even trying to make the trickle-down case. Yes, Republicans are pushing the line that raising taxes at the top would hurt small businesses, but their hearts don’t really seem in it. Instead, it has become common to hear vehement denials that people making $400,000 or $500,000 a year are rich. I mean, look at the expenses of people in that income class — the property taxes they have to pay on their expensive houses, the cost of sending their kids to elite private schools, and so on. Why, they can barely make ends meet.”-- The Angry Rich By Paul Krugman Op-Ed Columnist Published:
Krugman whines about the poor.
“And when the tax fight is over, one way or another, you can be sure that the people currently defending the incomes of the elite will go back to demanding cuts in Social Security and aid to the unemployed. America must make hard choices, they’ll say; we all have to be willing to make sacrifices.
But when they say “we,” they mean “you.” Sacrifice is for the little people”-- The Angry Rich By Paul Krugman Op-Ed Columnist Published:
Hypocrisy surges forth here as it is Obama and the Democrats who want to cut Medicare to ‘pay for’ their socialized medicine follies. Social Security is a disaster now that will consume our entire budget if let to metastasize. Where is the charge that the old folk will have to eat dog food?
A simple scan of this article shows that it is absent of any meaningful economic numbers or estimates, a key feature of the
We expect the liberals to explode with any threats or chum they can chuck as their chosen one descends in the polls down to about 41% and is sinking. Obama has made a mess of every single program he has endorsed and now is dragging his own party into the latrines. For this, we must blame the opposition and convince the voters that more spending and more welfare and more taxes and higher debt will benefit us in the long run. He employs chum-chuckers like Krugman to do his broadcasting and spins.
rycK
Comments:
[1] The Angry Rich By Paul Krugman Op-Ed Columnist Published:
[2] 1938 in 2010 By Paul Krugman [Emphasis is mine in all quotes.] Published:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/06/opinion/06krugman.html?src=me&ref=general
Krugman Offers Us Canned Circular Revisionism: We Can Repeat the War Time Successes of FDR.
http://ryckki.blogspot.com/2010/09/krugman-offers-us-canned-circular.html
[3] “Godwin’s Law — which says that in any sufficiently long online discussion, someone will compare his opponent to Hitler — is often interpreted to mean that if you do, in fact, start making Nazi comparisons, you’ve lost the argument and can no longer be taken seriously. I’m all for that. (Does this mean that we should no longer take any significant figure in the Republican Party seriously? Yes, it does.)”
[4]
Nancy Pelosi is shocked by the presence of some swastikas at protests against Obamacare. Who ever heard of such a thing? Well, any mildly alert American old enough to remember the anti-war protests of 2003-2007. Images of George Bush with a Hitler mustache and a Nazi uniform was everywhere at swastika-choked marches and rallies. "Stop the Fourth Reich-Visualize Nuremburg," said one sign at a
On far-left Internet sites, where basic Bush-Is-Hitler commentary became too familiar to attract attention, Bush aides were quickly assigned Nazi roles; Tom Ridge was the new Himmler and Colin Powell became Nazi Foreign Minister Joachim von Ribbentrop; Ari Fleisher, Karen Hughes and Karl Rove were all Josef Goebbels figures. Some thought Vice President Cheney was the most important Hitler figure - he commands "storm-trooper legions," said famous crackpot Lyndon LaRouche.
One fevered lefty connected Bush to Nero as well as Hitler, saying "Nero burned
An even more inventive commenter managed to link Rove to Josef Mengele, the depraved Nazi doctor nicknamed the Angel of Death: "Bush made up stories about John McCain, just as Josef Mengele conducted medical experiments on children in
Donald Rumsfeld was the new Rommel. The Action Coalition of Taos, New Mexico, however, thought Rumsfeld was the real Hitler, since, like Adolf, he had a mountain retreat. In an op-ed published in
Mainstream commentary featured Nazi references too. Both Senator Robert Byrd and billionaire Democrat George Soros said Bush reminded them of Herman Goering.
During the 2004 presidential campaign, Al Gore used the term "brownshirts" (
Vanity Fair magazine nominated Richard Perle for the Goebbels role, running photos of both men under the headline "Separated at Birth?"
New York Times columnist Frank Rich managed to work in a reference to a famous Nazi filmmaker. He said a Showtime program on 9/11 was so favorable to Bush that it is "best viewed as a fitting memorial to Leni Riefenstahl."
The Rev. Andrew Greeley, sociologist and novelist, depicted Bush as a Hitler figure who carried American over to "the dark side."
Federal appeals judge Guido Calabresi offered a comparatively mild Nazi reference, saying the Bush's rise to power was reminiscent of the rise of Hitler and Mussolini, with the Supreme Court pushing him into the presidency with the Bush v. Gore decision.
Bush reminded the left of non-Nazi villains as well. He was depicted as Attila the Hun, serial killer Ted Bundy, Mussolini, Ahab, Hannibal Lecter, the Anti-Christ and Frankenstein's monster (on the cover of the British edition of book by New York Times columnist Paul Krugman).
As far as we know, Nancy Pelosi never complained about any of this. Maybe she didn't notice. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/08/08/nancys_nazi_shock_did_she_forget_the_bush_years_97812.html
[5] Cryptomisoxeny is a mental condition in which a person is compelled to enlist in a valiant crusade to ferret out and squash such human notions such as bigotry, racism and hypocritism. The person with this disease is completely unaware of its presence and control of his actions and is deluded with the false or reverse notion that his or her conduct is actually the exact opposite from the unacceptable targeted conduct in others. Hence, those who rail and rant and search for bigots frequently use overt bigotry in their sanctimonious quest for the offenders and employ bigotry in its strictest definition to condemn other persons or groups. All this proceeds unconsciously as the bigots, in this case, believes that they are far above such a social defect and are some form of cleansing device for our society. Sanctamonicity is the ultimate internal psychosomatic reward as it draws rave reviews and wild applause from peers and others also burdened with this affliction and offers comfort and camaraderie. The same argument holds for those who chase and attempt to correct racists using overt racism and, of course, this is hypocrisy, but a form hypocrisy that is buried deeply in the id. Cryptomisoxeny Explained by Theory and Examples II Posted by rycK on
[6] The Babbling Brooks of the
[7] In honor of that celebrated Communist stooge and liar and winner of the Pulitzer Prize for the
“He said that these people had to be "liquidated or melted in the hot fire of exile and labor into the proletarian mass". Duranty claimed that the Siberian labor camps were a means of giving individuals a chance to rejoin Soviet society but also said that for those who could not accept the system, "the final fate of such enemies is death." Duranty, though describing the system as cruel, says he has "no brief for or against it, nor any purpose save to try to tell the truth". He ends the article with the claim that the brutal collectivization campaign which led to the famine was motivated by the "hope or promise of a subsequent raising up" of Asian-minded masses in the
No comments:
Post a Comment