Reply to Paul Krugman-Limiting the Damage
What is it about me writing replies to Liberals in the press. I know they won’t read them, they are immune to logic, humor or facts. Don Quixote Syndrome I guess, I just can’t resist the windmills.
(Lets see if I can get this link to work, the Times normally doesn't like links, unlike Timeswatch )
http://select.nytimes.com/2006/11/06/opinion/06krugman.html?em&ex=1163048400&en=bb587f3c190e00b3&ei=5087%0A
Normally I do not read your column, because of your predictability, except on rare occasions where I use it to manage my retirement portfolio. When you say the economy is on the rise, I sell, and when you say the economy is tanking, I buy. So far you have been an exceedingly accurate counter-indicator, and my retirement is secure.
When you refer to our President as an insecure bully, I just shrug it off as projection of your own bias. When you wax poetic about the government’s reluctance to pay to resettle poor people into an area below sea level in a hurricane zone, I think it is just a harmless delusion. When you complain about political cronyism in jobs where this President has been appointing supporters the same way Presidents have been doing for over 200 years, I just sigh. And the comments about the vicious campaign are normal in this season where the Dems have spent half their time throwing slime and the other half complaining about it.
But suddenly there is a hiccup in the normal Democratic talking points. “it’s still possible that the Republicans will hold on to both houses of Congress" And talk about vote suppression and electoral fraud. Could it be that Paul has seen the light? Could my one source of constantly wrong information have actually gotten something right?
No, the rest of the article slumps back into the dust of negativism and a fantasy world where Bush controls the entire government. *whew*
Keep it up Paul. My retirement savings depend on your predictions. And when the Republicans get Private Retirement Accounts enacted, I will need your advice even more so I can retire in comfort.
(Lets see if I can get this link to work, the Times normally doesn't like links, unlike Timeswatch )
http://select.nytimes.com/2006/11/06/opinion/06krugman.html?em&ex=1163048400&en=bb587f3c190e00b3&ei=5087%0A
Normally I do not read your column, because of your predictability, except on rare occasions where I use it to manage my retirement portfolio. When you say the economy is on the rise, I sell, and when you say the economy is tanking, I buy. So far you have been an exceedingly accurate counter-indicator, and my retirement is secure.
When you refer to our President as an insecure bully, I just shrug it off as projection of your own bias. When you wax poetic about the government’s reluctance to pay to resettle poor people into an area below sea level in a hurricane zone, I think it is just a harmless delusion. When you complain about political cronyism in jobs where this President has been appointing supporters the same way Presidents have been doing for over 200 years, I just sigh. And the comments about the vicious campaign are normal in this season where the Dems have spent half their time throwing slime and the other half complaining about it.
But suddenly there is a hiccup in the normal Democratic talking points. “it’s still possible that the Republicans will hold on to both houses of Congress" And talk about vote suppression and electoral fraud. Could it be that Paul has seen the light? Could my one source of constantly wrong information have actually gotten something right?
No, the rest of the article slumps back into the dust of negativism and a fantasy world where Bush controls the entire government. *whew*
Keep it up Paul. My retirement savings depend on your predictions. And when the Republicans get Private Retirement Accounts enacted, I will need your advice even more so I can retire in comfort.
posted by Georg Felis at 7:57 AM
2 Comments:
Wow, what an expensive lesson the Republicans are getting. Too bad the citizens will be the ones paying the tab.
I do hope it will be obvious to the RNC etc...that we don't win elections by pointing out that the other guys are worse!
There's always 2008. Hopefully the remaining Republicans will take the obstructionist lesson given by the dems to heart and hold the line on defense, judges and taxes.
Nice post. I share your sentiments on Krugman. What are the odds we'll have the choice (dems are pro-choice, right?) of privatized SS accounts?
The sad part is Paul Krugman was right, and the Republicans lost both houses. Even as I type, hordes of Republican lawyers are descending on vote counting places, demanding every vote be counted and filing a myriad of lawsuits… wait a minute. You mean the Republicans are actually conceding when they lose the elections? When the graveyards of St. Louis disgorge thousands of votes that go 85%+ to the Democrat, and we remain silent? Even in the Webb race, the Press is singing the siren song of the Democratic Jedi Mind Trick. “Pay no attention to the absentee votes in those envelopes. You lost by a staggering .45 percent of the vote, concede so you can try again in six years after your opponent has gotten settled in his office with his Senatorial perks.”
It is time for Bush to take a page from Reagan, get out his veto pen, and start talking directly to the American people.
Post a Comment
<< Home