File Under: Barack Hussein Obama Finding answers, one file at a time…

The Politics of Bite… Next up, Krugman…

Ahh yes, Paul Krugman and The NYT, where would we be without you? Below is my response to his opinion piece entitled The Politics of Spite

By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: October 4, 2009

"There was what President Obama likes to call a teachable moment last week, when the International Olympic Committee rejected Chicago’s bid to be host of the 2016 Summer Games."

Uh-huh, another "teachable moment" like the one where he taught us about racism when he reacted to the news Henry Louis Gates was arrested? No thank you.

“Cheers erupted” at the headquarters of the conservative Weekly Standard, according to a blog post by a member of the magazine’s staff, with the headline “Obama loses! Obama loses!” Rush Limbaugh declared himself “gleeful.” “World Rejects Obama,” gloated the Drudge Report. And so on."

Obama's policies as well as his behavior has rubbed middle America the wrong way... $14k nights on the town, secret fly overs of Air Force One over New York, a failing economy despite scamulus, the trip to Copenhagen with Afghanistan hanging in the balance... Given our current economy and the reported debt incurred by hosting The Olympics, it's no wonder people cheered.

"So what did we learn from this moment? For one thing, we learned that the modern conservative movement, which dominates the modern Republican Party, has the emotional maturity of a bratty 13-year-old."

LOL WOW, if that isn't the pot calling the kettle black. Since you don't care for those on the right expressing themselves by cheering, one can only assume you prefer the method of expression exercised by your fellow liberals at The G20... Call me crazy, but polite cheers seems to be a more mature approach to a given situation than say, doing over 50k in damages to private property... Guess I'm just funny that way.

"But more important, the episode illustrated an essential truth about the state of American politics: at this point, the guiding principle of one of our nation’s two great political parties is spite pure and simple. If Republicans think something might be good for the president, they’re against it — whether or not it’s good for America."

While it's entirely possible there are those who do in fact feel that way, Krugman is yet another example of a good liberal stereotyping an entire group based on the actions of a few. None of you seem to recognize this behavior as wrong, perhaps because every one of you I've met is guilty of it... It's also true, I'm sure, that there are those out there who simply don't like Obama the man and want to see him fail. I would be one of those people, but what people like you cannot accept is that I've arrived at this station based on the content of the man's character, which is sadly lacking.

"To be sure, while celebrating America’s rebuff by the Olympic Committee was puerile, it didn’t do any real harm. But the same principle of spite has determined Republican positions on more serious matters, with potentially serious consequences — in particular, in the debate over health care reform."

LOL, health care... WOW, didn't see that coming

"Now, it’s understandable that many Republicans oppose Democratic plans to extend insurance coverage — just as most Democrats opposed President Bush’s attempt to convert Social Security into a sort of giant 401(k). The two parties do, after all, have different philosophies about the appropriate role of government."

To say that Obamacare will "extend coverage" is inaccurate at best... If this program, which NOBODY really understands through and through was perceived as something of value, there would be no argument here... However, at this point THE PEOPLE are rejecting Obamacare, so it really matters little what EITHER parties "philosophy" is on the matter.

"But the tactics of the two parties have been different. In 2005, when Democrats campaigned against Social Security privatization, their arguments were consistent with their underlying ideology: they argued that replacing guaranteed benefits with private accounts would expose retirees to too much risk.

The Republican campaign against health care reform, by contrast, has shown no such consistency. For the main G.O.P. line of attack is the claim — based mainly on lies about death panels and so on — that reform will undermine Medicare. And this line of attack is utterly at odds both with the party’s traditions and with what conservatives claim to believe."

Outcry regarding those "lies" about death panels forced a change in the verbiage from the original bill because of the possibility of it being "misused" or "misinterpreted"... Death panel or not, if the discussion changed the verbiage for the better, what's the problem?

"Think about just how bizarre it is for Republicans to position themselves as the defenders of unrestricted Medicare spending. First of all, the modern G.O.P. considers itself the party of Ronald Reagan — and Reagan was a fierce opponent of Medicare’s creation, warning that it would destroy American freedom. (Honest.) In the 1990s, Newt Gingrich tried to force drastic cuts in Medicare financing. And in recent years, Republicans have repeatedly decried the growth in entitlement spending — growth that is largely driven by rising health care costs.

But the Obama administration’s plan to expand coverage relies in part on savings from Medicare. And since the G.O.P. opposes anything that might be good for Mr. Obama, it has become the passionate defender of ineffective medical procedures and overpayments to insurance companies."

I'm constantly fascinated by the fact a party who is currently in full control still feels the need to play the victim and belittle an anemic adversary... Talk about a bratty 13-year old... To say The GOP is the "defender of unrestricted Medicare spending" is an embellishment, if not outright biased interpretation of the situation. Resistance to Obamacare can not be labeled by default to be the product of support for unlimited Medicare spending, and to say so is foolish. ALL of these entitlement programs need to be gradually rolled back because WE CAN'T AFFORD THEM. That DOESN'T mean hanging out to dry those who have already paid in, but making provision to ween future generations off of such programs. As for the GOP opposing anything that might be good for Obama, I would simply say that Mr. Obama needs to put forth something that could be deemed "good" by the majority of Americans before such a judgement can be made. Thus far, there has been nothing of perceived value being produced by this administration, this is why that even with a super-majority, nothing is getting accomplished.

"How did one of our great political parties become so ruthless, so willing to embrace scorched-earth tactics even if so doing undermines the ability of any future administration to govern?"

"Scorched earth tactics" creates a great visual, but it seems a bit over the top coming from a party who attacks US citizens like Joe The Plumber. I've yet to see The GOP act with a ruthlessness even close to that exhibited by SNL and Letterman when it comes to going after Sarah Palin or her children... Why the double standard, Mr. Krugman?

"The key point is that ever since the Reagan years, the Republican Party has been dominated by radicals — ideologues and/or apparatchiks who, at a fundamental level, do not accept anyone else’s right to govern."

The Republican Party has strayed from Conservatism and this is why they've been rendered inconsequential at this time... They've rightfully lost support for forgetting what it was they were supposed to be representing, but to say they're "dominated by radicals" is preposterous coming from the party who gave us Barack Obama. As one who resides in the "Liberal New York Bubble", you need to grasp the fact the majority of this country considers themselves "center-right", putting YOU and your ilk firmly into the camp of the radicals. One would think an educated man such as yourself would understand this but, then again, I suspect you do and are merely pulling the tried and true "accuse the adversary of that which you yourself are guilty of" in an attempt to create cover for your actions.

"Anyone surprised by the venomous, over-the-top opposition to Mr. Obama must have forgotten the Clinton years. Remember when Rush Limbaugh suggested that Hillary Clinton was a party to murder? When Newt Gingrich shut down the federal government in an attempt to bully Bill Clinton into accepting those Medicare cuts? And let’s not even talk about the impeachment saga."

Sooo, let me get this right... There was no "venomous, over the top opposition" to Bush and Cheney??? Really??? Mr. Krugman, what's good for the goose is good for the gander... There will always be opposition in varying degrees on both sides. However TRADITIONALLY, it is the left that will stoop to the extreme to make a point.

"The only difference now is that the G.O.P. is in a weaker position, having lost control not just of Congress but, to a large extent, of the terms of debate. The public no longer buys conservative ideology the way it used to; the old attacks on Big Government and paeans to the magic of the marketplace have lost their resonance. Yet conservatives retain their belief that they, and only they, should govern."

You are DEAD WRONG. The public no longer buys into The GOP because they've turned their backs on Conservative ideology and have in essence joined the ranks of big government, which the vast majority of people still roundly reject.  You use the terms "GOP" and "Conservative" as if they're interchangeable, they are not. True, there was a time when it was so, but no longer. Real Conservatism is alive and well Mr. Krugman, the currently sad state of The GOP is your evidence.

"The result has been a cynical, ends-justify-the-means approach. Hastening the day when the rightful governing party returns to power is all that matters, so the G.O.P. will seize any club at hand with which to beat the current administration."

Mr. Krugman, how does it feel to know you are no different than the average liberal ideologue who opines on Craigslist's Community Political Forum? Like the rest of your Hive, you default to the victim mentality, even when faced with an adversary as pathetic as the current GOP. They are OUT, you are IN and STILL COMPLAINING. Nut up and bring something constructive to the dialogue instead of whining like a"bratty 13-year old".

"It’s an ugly picture. But it’s the truth. And it’s a truth anyone trying to find solutions to America’s real problems has to understand."

I have serious doubts in your ability to asses "America's real problems" when many would argue you and your organization is one of them.

Related Posts

• November 23, 2009 -- Despite overwhelming public opposition, Obamacare marches on….
• November 1, 2009 -- Palestinians accuse U.S. of killing peace prospects – Hilary’s Hijab on the hotseat
• October 30, 2009 -- DEATH SURVIVES – So-Called ‘Death Panel’ Measure Survives in House Health Bill