Grammatical errors in this aside …

I have seen Krugman speak on several occasions, and at no time did he (or his language) answer to the adjective “hysterical.” That is a description that must originate more in the mind and eye of what I can only guess must be a fevered beholder. I have rarely heard anyone who is more even-tempered and reasonable than Mr. Krugman.

All one has to do is view his “encounter” with Bill O’Reilly to know which side is more prone to “hysterical” language.

As far as rhetoric – what do you mean by this? Who does not employ “rhetoric” in order to make a point?

New Rule:
“In America, it’s not the haves and have-nots.
It’s the haves and the been-hads.”

Thanks also to all well-informed TP readers who have refuted the immature smears against Krugman on this link. Thanks.

… If U Choose 2 Accept…

Your American Citizen, Duty 2 the Next Generations…

2 Return, America 2 – WE the PEOPLE – Americans All !

ADD Your Photo and/or SIGN ON to OUR ( DECLARATION of INDEPENDENCE ) image…

YUP… Just like OUR Founding Fathers Did !

( With your FULL understanding of what WE did 2 OUR Brothers and Sisters / the Indigenous Peoples of OUR land )

Here is how… U JUST DO IT !

Print Out – FREE – Impeach Image… here

http://www.RogerART.com

( top of page ) and then…

1. Glue IMPEACH IMAGE on LARGE poster board, paper, bed sheet, whatever…
2. Take it 2 Your ( THANKS-GIVING ) Get Together…
3. Take Family ( members or not ) Photos and GLUE em ON poster…
4. or… simply, SIGN YOUR NAME 2 it, ( Just like they did on the ORIGANAL – DECLARATION of INDEPENDENCE
5. Digitally Photo your WORK ( “ADD-U-POSTER” ) Make Copies 4 All… Every-One…
6. Take Image Back to where U Live… and… ADD, Neighbors, Friends (Photos & Signatures)

… And Then… Pass em Around / On

Hang your Works…

Make copies and send 2… Nancy P.

1. ( ALL ) your congress member…

2. the ( WHITE (millionaires) HOUSE )

3. Others… U know… Like, at your work and/or play…

PS… Also have ( HAPPY IMPEACHMENT on OUR tables TURKEY – POST CARDS )

The ( TURKEY bush, cheney, neo cons DAY ) GIVING-THANKS – 4 OUR CONSTATUTION ) etc. On hand, 2 pass out and around…

( Get em here… )

http://www.AfterDowningStreet.org

Send em OUT and/or Post all over OUR web…

Add Your Ideas,

Re-Write this as U C Fit…

and then

( Pass It On )
.
Peace, Love & Later, Roger@RogerART.com & http://www.EarthBall.org
.

JT, is a great example of today’s fact-challenged, Bush-worshipping right-wing troll. He begins with a self-satisfying mock polemic in which he asks Mr. Krugman (which he spells “Klugman”) to explain his roll as “chief economic adviser” to Enron. Of course, Professor Krugman never held such a post or anything even remotely resembling such a post. The professor served for less than a year on an advisory panel and resigned immediately upon beginning his columnist role at the NYT.

Pathetically, “JT” even includes the fact that Krugman is listed in Bernard Goldberg’s ridiculous “100 people” screed in which he finds one, count em’ one conservative out of his list of 100 people screwing up America. The absurdity of Goldberg’s nonsense seems to be lost on JT, but he’s absolutely sure he’s made a fine argument.

So, he begins with a lie and goes on to cite an absurd joke as an argument — and he’s full of himself. But apparently, not so full of himself that he can stay around and take the heat for his absurd argument.

A few years ago, when the Fed Chairman helpfully suggested to Americans that adjustable rate mortgages were a great idea, Krugman wrote that he didn’t even understand what the chairman was talking about and suggested to everyone who owned a home that they get a fixed rate loan for protection against a coming mortgage crisis. So, if the average person listened to Krugman instead of Bush and his friends, he wouldn’t be getting screwed today. Years ago, Krugman suggested that Bush’s monetary policies would lead to a collapse of the dollar’s value – JT’s favorite people screamed that Krugman was a “shrill alarmist.” Again, Krugman was absolutely correct and JT’s cult leaders were lying in our faces. Years ago, Krugman said the real cost of the Iraq war was going to be “far greater than the Bush administration is suggests.” JT’s people called him a “traitor and an alarmist.”

Krugman has consistently told the truth to the American people. That’s why Bush apologists must reflexively rush to slime him whenever they hear his name like slathering Pablov’s dogs.

Comment by JT — November 16, 2007 @ 5:57 pm

Same person who previously wrote: Concise and objective responses that refrain from vitriolic or ad hominen attacks are greatly appreciated. All those who resort to childish playground taunts, stay away.

’nuff said.

You are an @ss and a weak bully who titters away at the keyboard hoping Mummy won’t catch you being a meanie. You make me laugh as I shake my head in wonderment at you.

Connecticut Man1 – Sorry to hear about your plight. I suspect that ability you apparently have to look on the bright side will serve you well. Good luck to you and yours.

I am not really worried about ourselves. Many of the people that will lose their homes will be in seriously dire straits. Considering we will still have income, my wife has a pretty well paying job, we will still be able to afford starting over. We have been preparing for the inevitable for a while and trying to get politicians to do something fast. Something more legitimate than bailing out the companies like Countrywide (our mortgage company) while ignoring the homeowners completely. There was no trickle down from that corporate welfare for homeowners.

It is a problem for all Americans, and for all Americans to solve.

“Or, how about general criticisms that he employ hysterical and rhetorical language in a fashion that belies your presentation of otherwise objective data.”

Ironic considering the only thing you have left is “Some people think he twists the facts”, when that’s pretty much what you have done on this thread.

Comment by JT — November 16, 2007 @ 4:42 pm

The editorial board at the Economist isn’t any more authoritative than the editorial board at the WSJ. They are capitalist ideologues and propagandists. And give us just one example of “hysterical language” from Krugman’s writings. Or shut up.

A November 13, 2003 article in The Economist which states:

That would be the November 13 article that says:

What is beyond dispute is that Mr Krugman is the finest economist to become a media superstar—at least since Milton Friedman or, earlier, John Maynard Keynes turned to journalism. Mr Krugman’s work on currency crises and international trade is widely admired by other economists. He holds the John Bates Clark medal in economics, which is slightly harder to get than a Nobel prize.

Next?

Please address these criticisms from very authoritative sources:

A November 13, 2003 article in The Economist which states: “A glance through his past columns reveals a growing tendency to attribute all the world’s ills to George Bush…Even his economics is sometimes stretched…Overall, the effect is to give lay readers the illusion that Mr Krugman’s perfectly respectable personal political beliefs can somehow be derived empirically from economic theory.”

Or, how about general criticisms that he employ hysterical and rhetorical language in a fashion that belies your presentation of otherwise objective data.

Concise and objective responses that refrain from vitriolic or ad hominen attacks are greatly appreciated. All those who resort to childish playground taunts, stay away.