Everyone is Outraged - Krugman

New York Times Op Ed ^ | 7/2/02 | Paul Krugman

[Dog Gone]

It was the SEC under Clinton who cleared him. Don't let facts get in the way of your opinion, though.

[Wait4Truth]

Glad you posted that tidbit about the CLINTON SEC closing the investigation. I was just about to. If Clinton had found anything to go after GW about, they certainly would have done it. The media and the RATS KNOW this is bogus but that won't stop them. And it won't stop the DU infiltrators on FR, either. The word "disgusting" does not begin to describe my feelings on this issue. And the media plans to run bigtime with this story - the facts will not get in their way. It's a Republican President and that's all that matters to them.

[Dog Gone]

The media and the RATS KNOW this is bogus but that won't stop them.

This is going to fade away because there is no substance to it. It's a smear, but it's not true. Bush-haters like Pitchfork don't care about the facts, but in the end, the truth matters and will win out.

In the meantime, these folks are proving themselves to be liars and idiots.

[RWG]

Sounds like Krugman has an agenda against the present prez and not the prior prez...it's all one club as is becoming more and more evident everyday.

[csmusaret]

G W Bush did file the appropriate form with the SEC prior to selling his stock. What did not get filed was a second form that is to be submited after the sale. There is debate about who was responsible for this ommission; Bush or the corporate attorneys.

[Wait4Truth]

The sad part about this is that plenty of people will believe it because they don't bother to get the truth. The media and the RATS (same difference!) figure they can take the President's popularity down a few points at a time. The RATS, unlike the Republicans, are very, very patient. It's too bad the most Rightist of us don't realize the consequences of NOT voting for all the Republicans they can. They whine about liberal justices but will not help GW get a Republican Senate. Such hypocrisy turns my stomach.

[rdavis84]

"Paul Krugman was a good economist, now he's a crappy leftist shill."

Yeah, there's a lot of that happening. Any idea Why?

[rdavis84]

"Glad you posted that tidbit about the CLINTON SEC closing the investigation. I was just about to."

Isn't it the same folks who gave Hillary a Free Pass on her Cattle Futures that had folks on here all bothered?

[rdavis84]

"the most Rightist of us don't realize the consequences of NOT voting for all the Republicans they can."

You mean the ones who didn't vote for Dole?

[Dog Gone]

I don't recall the Clinton SEC investigating the cattle futures, and I'm not sure why they would have. The transaction itself was not suspect.

Maybe you can fill us in on the details of that investigation.

[esopman]

"...go to extrodinary [sic] lengths to avoid having to re-assess their beliefs."

Yes, people do develop emotional linkages which preclude the light of fact, reason, reality chasing away the cockroaches of wrong beliefs. Islamicists, Nazis, Trotzkyites, Maoists...history is replete with examples. Twas ever thus.

Like many Freepers, after much education and many years of observation, I KNOW that the Clintons are scum. This is as sure as gravity and predicated on exhaustively researched FACTS. Since that pattern of fact is real and inalterable, the remaining liberal defenders of the Clintons fall in two groups: The deceived and the deliberate deceivers. Krugman is still portraying them positively. He is therefore suspect. His NYT piece is compromised by the usual leftist selective reporting.

Is the response of a writer to the Clintons then a litmus test? You bet.

Is your implication that Bush is no better than his predecessor? This is demonstrably false. While many of us would prefer a rigorous Constitutionalist President, the hand we have been dealt is politically in a different galaxy from Clinton/Gore. The latter would have fit in nicely at the Leningrad State University of the 1970's when I was there. What would Gore have done with Kyoto, the ICC, the Taliban, and most critically...court appointments?

Yes, I am dismayed by the Trent Lottism of the Pubbies in the District of Corruption, but I am still grateful for Bush. We serve ourselves poorly not to focus on the opposition: Liberals of every stripe. Keep attacking Bush and get Bubbette Rex.

Krugman is not just a 'squishy liberal.' He is a liar and an enemy of freedom. Both deceived and a deceiver.

Blessings on Freepers Everywhere.

[rdavis84]

"The transaction itself was not suspect."

We're not on the Clinton Criminality on this one, so I'd say you can refresh your own memory on the matter. Try some searches using "Red Bone" in the string of terms, but then I believe you knew that.

Since Bush is Clean on the Harken Deal, right?, then Clinton(s)is clean on the Whitewater Deal, right? (no charges filed in either against them) Then why did Ken Starr drag that up? Or are massive amounts of evidence of wrongdoing only to be applied against "the other party"?

[Wait4Truth]

I mean the ones that will not vote for President Bush or Republicans that they don't consider "conservative" enough - but they have no problem with helping to elect RATS that will produce all the things they claim to fear most.

[rdavis84]

"but they have no problem with helping to elect RATS that will produce all the things they claim to fear most."

There's a wide majority that want our southern border secured and immigration controlled. But there is no acknowledgement by this administration of that.

Conservatives wanted Fiscal Restrain and Reductions in government largesse, this Administration ignored that.

Seems like Democrat policies to many of us.

[gridlock]

is the miss a liberal?

I just tell her that I am right enough for both of us. Then I duck!