Skip to comments.Paul Krugman Calls Newsweek's 'Hit the Road, Barack' Cover Story 'Unethical'
Posted on 08/20/2012 9:29:39 AM PDT by Kaslin
NewsBusters reported Sunday that Newsweek is out with a truly shocking edition featuring a cover story entitled "Hit the Road, Barack: Why We Need a New President."
New York Times columnist Paul Krugman took to his blog Sunday excoriating the article in a piece he called "Unethical Commentary, Newsweek Edition":
There are multiple errors and misrepresentations in Niall Fergusons cover story in Newsweek I guess they dont do fact-checking but this is the one that jumped out at me. Ferguson says:
The president pledged that health-care reform would not add a cent to the deficit. But the CBO and the Joint Committee on Taxation now estimate that the insurance-coverage provisions of the ACA will have a net cost of close to $1.2 trillion over the 201222 period.
Readers are no doubt meant to interpret this as saying that CBO found that the Act will increase the deficit. But anyone who actually read, or even skimmed, the CBO report (pdf) knows that it found that the ACA would reduce, not increase, the deficit — because the insurance subsidies were fully paid for.
Please notice that the CBO report Krugman linked to is from March 30, 2011.
What he failed to inform his readers is the CBO revised these numbers in a March 13, 2012, report finding "the insurance coverage provisions of the ACA will have a net cost of just under $1.1 trillion over the 2012–2021 period."
Yet the Time columnist had the nerve to attack Ferguson:
Now, people on the right like to argue that the CBO was wrong. But thats not the argument Ferguson is making he is deliberately misleading readers, conveying the impression that the CBO had actually rejected Obamas claim that health reform is deficit-neutral, when in fact the opposite is true.
Really, Paul? Who's "deliberately misleading readers?"
What’s a “Krugman?”
A Krugman is similar to a Klugman which is also an Oscar both of which are very sloppy.
But the anti Newt Gingrich and Pat Buchanan covers were of course, ethical.
I happened to catch Glen Beck this morning talking about this article. He seems to think it’s NewsWeak’s attempt to star relevant. They’ve been fawning over Baraq like love sick school girls for 4 years, all the while they’ve been circling the drain. Now they do an anti-0bama piece just to give the appearance of objectivity. I’m with Beck, I don’t buy it.
I took one just this morning -- and then I flushed it.
It’s a form of venereal disease.
And, what does a Krugman know about ethics?
Yet Krygman would have nothing to say when Bush and than Palin were treated to the most scurrilous and in many cases unethicial attacks by the left and his ilk......
Paul Krugman is a pompous gasbag but he must keep the red meat coming for his moon bat readers at the NYT’s to keep him employed...
He and Yassar Arafat have two things in common, both won Nobel prizes and both take it up the arse...at least that’s what I heard from Harry Reid...
If there's anyone out there who really believes this, give me a call...I have a bridge for sale.
Yep, this is their innoculation for the next weeks’ issues lauding 0bama all the way up to the election.
C'mon,pal...you've gotta keep up with current events.There was a "Krugman" who was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize a few years ago.
Something that will make your azaleas bloom.
Stepping up to the mic: Rev. Al and the Reverend (ahh) Jackssunnnnd in 5...4...3...2...
Didn’t we learn a couple of years ago that Newsweak puts different cover photos on for different world locations?
Weren’t they the ones who had an American flag in the trash can EXCEPT for US publication?
Why, YES, they did.
Who gets to see THIS cover with Hussien leaving?
me thinks that once Hillary decided not to be on the ticket, signals were sent to take down Barry from the Clintonistas.
Newsweek and Politico
Unethical would be the person who allows themselves to be referred to as a Nobel Prize winning economist without mentioning that the NP was in another discipline...
I think the Great Clintons get extra political media points for “living” down the street from Readers’ Digest in Chappaqua.
Derivative of a “Clymer” I think.
This coming from the clown who called for a fake space alien invasion as a way to fix the economy.
His Nobel Prize is as worthwhile as Gaybama’s.
Better put some ice on it, Krugman.
“The media simply does not want to admit Obama looks like a loser, one who deserves to lose as badly as Carter did, because his policies have been disastrous, and his executive skills reflect his complete lack of experience running anything bigger than his mouth before entering the Oval Office as president.”
“And, what does a Krugman know about ethics?”
I am still trying to figure out what a Krugman knows about economics.
All of a sudden he has developed an interest in facts?
Pretty late in life for such a major flip-flop.
this would never happen without the support of Weymouth and Graham...no way.
it really is The Economy Stupid
even over the St Albans progressive laundry list of social engineering must dos
amazing that there are elitist lefties out here that fear where Che Obama is headed economically
bet some of the staff there and WashPo and Politico are livid
i mean just roiling
The male version of Helen Thomas.
Isn’t Krugman that early-onset dementia liberal who used to write (or still does??) for the NY Times?
Yikes.. To publish this bitter old fellow’s diatribes is downright cruel at this point. I don’t know if Krugman has any friends or family who respect him, but they should take his blog away if they do. Same with Helen Thomas. People can become an embarrassment and make fools of themselves at a certain point.
A Krugman is a Clymer. Big time.
I took one just this morning
You will be needing some of this:
Somewhere, there’s a freight car just waiting for Krugman to come and spray paint his wisdom on it.
Krugman is from the same school of economics as Nancy "Every $1.00 spent on food stamps returns $1.79 to the economy" Pelosi. I think it was called "Keynesian" economics and it was thoroughly discredited by serious economists long ago. But the model promotes big government socialism, and therefore many communist Democrats still use it to play "make believe". (shrug) With the stupid Democrats it's brain damage and with the clever ones it's just brazen lying. As far as Krugman goes, take your pick, but I would lean toward mostly brain damage tempered with lies (such as citing an out-of-date CBO report).
Not me, not in the least.
The way the game is played is like this: the liberal newsrooms will publish covers like this Newsweak one, and write columns that take Ubama to the woodshed. Nearly all of them will do this. That way, when crunch time comes and the ignorant chattering class begins to pay some attention to the upcoming election (say, the final three weeks), the Democrat newsrooms can go full tilt for their p.o.s. Ubama and point to these months-old examples of how they have been "equally critical" and "fair to both candidates".
It's just the publishing version of the ACLU going to court on behalf of Illinois Nazis every few years.
"No agenda here.. We're balanced, see?"
What discipline was that?
Isn't that what you call a circular firing squad?
No, it is probably a catfight when two pussies like those two get their claws out.
I call it: “Awesome”
The Rodent that held Palin accountable for the Tucson massacre.
Alex: What is a Krugman?
According to the interview Greta had with the author, this is a legitimate hit piece as far hit-piece-legitimacy goes.
I believe the author hails from the UK, and supported McCain in 2008. Not sure about his post in the inimical weekly rag.
That magazine needs to change its name to “Newspeak”.
I suggest a read of the comments following Krugmans blog. It is truly frightening that there are so many true believers in the USA.