no, he's just a liberal scumbag...
Posted on 09/12/2011 5:43:29 AM PDT by Kaslin
We always knew that Krugman couldn’t add or subtract. As an economist, the guy is a terrific writer. And fantasy is his genre.
But the fact that he thinks that we’ve all been secretly ashamed of our reactions to 9/11 for the last ten years should be enough to place him in observation for indulging in too much fantasy.
“What happened after 9/11 — and I think even people on the right know this, whether they admit it or not,” writes Krugman as his sick 9/11 tribute, “was deeply shameful. The atrocity should have been a unifying event, but instead it became a wedge issue.”
Way to unify us Paul.
“Fake heroes like Bernie Kerik, Rudy Giuliani, and, yes, George W. Bush,” says Krugman “raced to cash in on the horror. And then the attack was used to justify an unrelated war the neocons wanted to fight, for all the wrong reasons.”
This is not a country that has a great fear of expressing itself. We have way too much self-love for that. If we were secretly ashamed, we’d go on Oprah and proclaim our secret shame to the world, as many liberals like Krugman have done. Or we'd write a book about it.
There were no fake heroes, as Krugman has called Rudy Guiliani and George W. Bush, after 9/11. No one was anxious to cash in on the war that was declared by Osama bin Laden in 1996 against the U.S.
Mistakes? Yes. There were many.
As Winston Churchill observed, wars are made of up surprises and disappointments. But that doesn’t mean they aren’t worth waging.
Contrast Bush’s reactions at 9/11 to the “Osama bin Laden is still dead” World Tour that Obama engaged in after he watched Seal Team Six dispatch bin Laden on his TV set.
All that was missing in front of Obama was popcorn and a Snuggie. No fake hero there.
Just a faux one.
The outpouring after the cowardly attack on the Twin Towers and the Pentagon was universal. So was the coalition that went into Afghanistan to kick out Al Qaeda and the Taliban sheltering them.
You had all the elements that liberals love including UN authorization, abuse of women, oppression, blight, gobs of government grant money and Congressional approval to wage war in Afghanistan.
Oh. That’s right. Scratch that last one. Liberals don’t care about Congressional authorization as long as Obama’s doing something to hurt Israel and support jihadists in North Africa.
Certainly the war that we have waged against radical Islam since 9/11, including the war that has still produced the Arab world’s only true democracy in Iraq, has cost America something.
But there has been no democracy in Egypt or Syria or Libya or any of the clients of the so-called Arab Spring. There are exactly two democracies in the Middle East: Israel and Iraq. If thriving democracies aren’t in the best interest of the United States in the Middle East, I don’t know what the hell is. We fought for them in Europe. Why should we do less for the Middle East and Central Asia when it improves our own security?
I will admit that the global war on terror- including the one in Iraq- is responsible for the much of the uncertainty and fear in the financial markets over the last ten years. We lost the peace dividend we gained after winning the Cold War.
And I don’t think we’ll get back to robust financial markets until we’ve gone a much longer way towards crushing Islamists out of existence including stabilizing Iraq.
But to pretend that everything would have been great had we not invaded Afghanistan or Iraq gets you about as far as pretending Al Qaeda didn’t attack the United States.
It’s like pretending the world would have been a much better place if we hadn’t stood up against Stalin and waged the Cold War, which is exactly what some liberals would have had us do.
And to pretend that somehow lobbing cruise missiles at Moammar Gadhafi in Tripoli is morally superior to ground operations in Iraq or Afghanistan is a logically flawed proposition.
Say what you will, but both liberals and conservatives- with the Ron Paul exception- have waged war in their own way for their own reasons.
Mr. Krugman would do well to respect those reasons.
We have not created the conditions of subjection and oppression in the Arab world that more than anything else is responsible for the attacks of 9/11, the war in Iraq, the uprisings in the Islamic world. But he is right that we do control our actions and must be responsible for them.
But ashamed of them?
Only one American should be ashamed by his reaction to 9/11. But the insane often feel no shame.
Krugman is depressed that he has been proven wrong about everything and that the left is losing power and influence.
His blog is plagiarized from any left wing forum post: Dai
ly, Kos, Huff Po, etc. And he gets paid. tsk tsk.
““The atrocity should have been a unifying event....”
For awhile it was, against a common enemy, Islamic extremism.”
It was unifying, then the liberals remembered that they could play politics to get an upper hand and the whole liberal political correctness and propaganda machine went into action. Better the country suffer than have republicans in power. Liberals are evil and insane.
Correction: an insane inflamed rectal cavity with hemorrhoids!
You expect the New York Slimes to have any sense of decency?
Shave his head, and he looks like Lenin. Marxists of a feather.
The only thing fake here is Krugman’s Nobel Prize, which is about as legitimate as Obama’s. But, that’s how liberals take charge: they give each other awards and pat each other on the back, then they say, “Look, he’s got a Nobel Prize or an Oscar.”Exactly right. That is one of their basic MO's.
....Krugman:
...your presence is denied....
Which head are you talking about? The one attached to his neck or the one attached to his dick?
What is insane is anyone takes this politically bigoted loser seriously as an Economist
The 1st Amendment does not guarantee every fringe quack a forum to publish their extremist, ignorant ideological doctrines.
The Slimes should say "You know what Paul, your right to say something does NOT mean we have to publish your hyper bigoted, ignorant nonsense. Start you own paper if you want to publish such rubbish"
I looked up his web biography...it seems he bases his economics on science fiction
read:
According to Krugman, his interest in economics began with Isaac Asimov’s Foundation novels, in which the social scientists of the future use “psychohistory” to attempt to save civilization. Since “psychohistory” in Asimov’s sense of the word does not exist, Krugman turned to economics, which he considered the next best thing.
True to form, Paul Krugman is still the same piece of sh*t he has always been.
You can always count on the NYT and it’s loathesome socialist editorial cadre to sink to the lowest form and try to stick it to the only place on Earth that would tolerate them.
Worthless trash.
Like most of us, I lead a quiet life and never expected to be exposed to the ridicule that conservatives face.
I have a question to all of us: What will it take for us (or at least me) retired gimpers to start rioting in the streets to take back our country?
I don’t know ... the building site is sacred ground. Thousands died there and I feel its like building in a grave.
In MHO, it should be made into a memorial park to the
memory of the fallen.
LLS
I don't know much about Bernie Kerik, but I am quite sure the other two would be pretty quick to disabuse anybody of the notion they were any sort of heroes. They've attended far too many funerals of real heroes.
no, he's just a liberal scumbag...
I wonder what Krugman wrote about the Wellstone memorial?
I wish, but no dice. He's not insane.
He's evil.
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.