Don't put off 'till tomorrow
what you should do today!!
Help "Clean Up" the FReepathon
with a Donation to FR !!
Just Click Here!!
Posted on 04/09/2011 5:38:39 PM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
The $38.5 billion deal brokered between Republicans and President Barack Obama on Friday night may have resolved the immediate threat of a government shutdown. But it didn’t take long for many liberal Democrats to begin to realize that there might be not much cause for celebration.
Princeton University professor Paul Krugman noted that by agreeing to this level of budget cuts, Obama had accepted the premise that the economy has recovered enough to withstand the withdrawal of federal spending. Despite the fragile economic recovery, the economy is still not strong enough, Krugman argued.
“It’s worth noting that this follows just a few months after another big concession, in which he gave in to Republican demands for tax cuts,” Krugman said in his New York Times column on Saturday. “The net effect of these two sets of concessions is, of course, a substantial increase in the deficit.”
But it seemed that the Obama administration had long ago abandoned that line of argument.
Washington Post pundit Ezra Klein ripped Obama and Reid’s celebratory statements following a deal that he said was anything but what a Democratic president should embrace.
“If you were just tuning in, you might’ve thought Boehner had been arguing for moderation, while both Obama and Reid sought to cut deeper,” Klein wrote. “You would never have known that Democrats had spent months resisting these “historic” cuts, warning that they’d cost jobs and slow the recovery.”
House Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), the founding chairman of that Caucus was not talking. Her office released a statement saying that she “looks forward” to reviewing the deal when she returns from Boston.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
Princeton University professor Paul Krugman noted that by agreeing to this level of budget cuts, Obama had accepted the premise that the economy has recovered enough to withstand... "It's worth noting that this follows just a few months after another big concession, in which he gave in to Republican demands for tax cuts... The net effect of these two sets of concessions is, of course, a substantial increase in the deficit."A substantial increase in the deficit will be, according to Paul Krugman, partly the result of CUTTING SPENDING. What a stupid partisan jackoff!
Love it!
It does make sense, in an upside-down, backwards sort of way.
IIRC someone on FR posted a while back the suggestion that Krugman had gone literally insane, with his unhinged rants against Republicans and President Bush.
Based on this evidence, case closed.
Excellent!
70 years of big growth of government, communizing of America, getting each generation dumbed down to accept communism, owning all the educational and media establishments, getting government to support 50 million abortions, running the annual deficit up by $1 TRILLION per year in Ocrapper’s first year in office.
We just shaved off 4 days of 2011 borrowing at current deficit rates.
They have succeeded in totally destroying America and what it stood for. What in the world do they have to be disheartened about? Do they want to totally destroy the U.S. and hand it over to our enemies all in one year?
Krugman is overrated. He cries more than Boehner.
Cutting 38 billion dollars from the federal budget is about as significant as getting a haircut to lose weight.
EXACTLY!
Meanwhile ...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2702262/posts
George Soros Says The US Should Take On More Debt And Not Be Obsessed With Budget Cuts
This is such a bamboozle. Are we serious? Boohooner Got NOTHING!!!!! We burn 30 billion in the deficit in 3 damned days!! What planet are freepers living on? Wake the heck up!!!
That's big because both the Senate and WH are in Dem hands.
It's a sign that things are changing. You wanted the major cuts this year. Impossible.
This is a small step which leading to a much larger step and bill...the trillions of cuts in the Ryan bill.
This budget battle over spending for the balance of the fiscal year was small potatoes compared to what is to come. Whether he got 30 billion or 60 billion does not mean much relative to the entire 1.6 trillion deficit.The last thing one wants is to use all your ammunition by shutting down the government in the small battle leading up to the big one. What the Republicans wanted was momentum coming into the big fight coming up for trillions in cuts for the next 10 years.I think they achieved that objective, have not expended all their ammunition and a government shutdown will be much more warranted in the big fight where everything will be at stake than this little skirmish.
Typical liberal brain dead response. Government spending is what caused the frickin' depression. The less we do of it, the quicker the economy will recover.
Maybe someone can ping all the naysayers...
“he gave in to Republican demands for tax cuts,” Krugman said
BS, Paul. The Dems had 60% majorities in both houses and the President signed it into law. Those weren’t GOP cuts. They were Democrat cuts.
If Krugman says it’s bad, that means it’s good!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.