Channels of Influence (Krugman: Being Anti-Dixie Chicks Makes You Part of American Kristallnacht!)

The New York Times ^ | March 25, 2003 | Paul Krugman

[Timesink]

And now, proof positive that Paul Krguman is a lying sack of SHIT. (Yes, I'm using profanity. He has stepped way, way, WAY over the line here, and he needs the Mega-Freeping OF ALL TIME.)

From: "WTCR FM 103.3" <***@wtcr.com>
Date: Fri Mar 14, 2003 5:21:42 PM America/New_York
To: ***
Subject: RE: Removing Dixie Chicks from 'TCR Playlists

Hi *:

Thank you very much for taking the time to write to WTCR - we appreciate your input and thank you very much for your continued listenership.

Regarding the Dixie Chicks and their recent comments about President Bush and their perception of world opinion of the U.S.; WTCR's parent company, Clear Channel Communications, has advised us to remain patriotic not political. One of America's freedoms is the right of its citizens to give his or her opinion without fear of reprisal - in this case the removal of an artist's music from the airwaves.

The Dixie Chicks statements are, admittedly, an emotional and potentially divisive issue, but it is not the policy of WTCR (through Clear Channel) to respond regardless of our personal opinions.

Again, thank you for expressing your opinion; WTCR values your input.

[Name Expunged]
WTCR

EXPLAIN THE DICHOTOMY, MR. KRUGMAN!

EXPLAIN THE DICHOTOMY, MR. KRUGMAN!

EXPLAIN THE DICHOTOMY, MR. KRUGMAN!

[Timesink]

Spread this far and wide. Krugman has finally gone too far in his lies and grotesque hatreds.

[BossLady]

So it looks like he is saying that Clear Channel is behind the Rally for America events....huh???!!!

This needs a Tin Foil Hat Alert...hehehe...

[Timesink]

for consideration for your ping list

[frosty snowman]

Naturally, Krugman thinks its okay for communist organizations to sponsor ANSWER, and go unquestioned. But God forbid that a private company sponsors an event! The whole phony connection between the Dixie Chicks and the rallies is a figment of Krugman's imagination. Not to mention he is lying like a persian rug as you pointed out!

[Gunder]

"To those familiar with 20th-century European history it seemed eerily reminiscent of. . . . But as Sinclair Lewis said, it can't happen here."

Will someone please explain to Mr. Krugman that a group of 33,000 Americans deciding to get together to destroy some Dixie Chix CDs is not the same as a nation's leader )i.e., Hitler) ordering his troops to burn books. Idiot.

[photogirl]

BUMP READ LATER

[NYCVirago]

This doesn't even make sense. All Clear Channel has in common with Cumulus Media (the ones who banned the Dixie Chicks) is that they both own radio stations.

Besides, Bill and Hillary get eight-figure advances on books that have yet to be published, and Krugman doesn't bat an eye. But let a radio station or two publicize a pro-America rally, and he gets his panties in a knot.

[Free ThinkerNY]

The New York Times: All the Liberal Propaganda That's Unfit to Print

[atomic conspiracy]

This is an especially egregious example of "Amendment X", the mythical Constitutional provision that grants the left immunity to all disagreement, protest, or criticism. This doctrine also grants them the right to an audience and the right to be taken seriously. It equates such criticism to an abridgement of their rights, a criminal offense. It is almost the first thing out of every lefty's mouth when anyone disagrees with them. Think about that: according to Krugman, criticizing lefties is essentially a criminal offense. It has been pounded into the heads of two generations of American schoolchildren, with the results we see today. These people are authoritarian power-seekers, pure and simple.

[EternalVigilance]

When the pig squeals, you know you stuck him.

[jmaroneps37]

Just another leftist skunk who doesn't get it.

[jagrmeister]

The solution is to discredit Krugman. I would advise that we incessantly refer to Krugman's shilling for Enron in return for $50,000. Use that scandal to tar the man perpetually. Paul "Enron Shill" Krugman has this to say... Every radio station that refers to him should preface their remarks by saying "By the way, Krugman is the discredited journalist who took $50,000 from Enron to write a puff piece about them in Fortune while millions of investors and employees were being bilked." Destroy his credibility. Don't just call him a leftist. But attack his ability to be taken seriously as a journalist.

[jagrmeister]

Well said. I see Amendment X applied all the time. Their right to an uncritical audience must not be infringed.

[alwaysconservative]

I like your idea! I would further recommend the following lead-ins for constant use on some of the rest of the gang that would reveal them for who they are:

Irrelevant Clinton, disbarred Clinton, or disgraced Clinton
Judgment-debtor Sharpton, race-baiter Sharpton
Ineffective Daschle, out-of-touch Daschle, paranoid Daschle
Shakedown Jackson
"Life is a lottery" Gebhardt
Liebermann, changing beliefs and positions with the polls

[OpusatFR]

Heck no. It just makes Krugman a brown shirted facist.

I suppose he would like everyone who criticizes him Silenced.

We can criticize in this country and use our bucks to make our wishes known.

[an amused spectator]

Experienced Bushologists let out a collective "Aha!" when Clear Channel was revealed to be behind the pro-war rallies

This from a guy who took payola from Enron.

You get dizzy reading the list of "connections" that Krugman develops, if you try to remember at the same time the connections of Krugman and his crowd of lying Leftist thugs.

[careyb]

Why would a media company insert itself into politics this way?

You mean a media company like The New York Times?

[Timesink]

afternoon bump - i can't believe FR isn't infuriated by this

[atomic conspiracy]

Several people have now told me that Krugman actually used the word "Kristalnacht" in the original version (online last night) but it was edited out some time after midnight (EST). Can anyone here confirm that, ideally with a screen capture?