Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Krugman: That 90s Show
That 90s Show
I picked a good week to be away — and I am still away, mostly, although playing a bit of hooky on the notebook right now. For it has been the week of OBAMA SCANDALS, nonstop.
Except it seems that there weren’t actually any scandals, just the usual confusion and low-level mistakes that happen all the time, in any administration.
Does the evaporation of the scandals matter? I don’t know. Unfortunately, I remember the early Clinton years, when ridiculous stuff — restructuring at the White House travel office, for God’s sake, and a money-losing land deal — led to years of front-page headlines, endless investigations,and nothing at all in the form of proven Clinton wrongdoing. If the press decide that scandals are going to be the topic, the absence of actual scandals may not matter.
Oh, and the ongoing disaster of economic policy? Boooring.
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/05/17/that-90s-show/
I picked a good week to be away — and I am still away, mostly, although playing a bit of hooky on the notebook right now. For it has been the week of OBAMA SCANDALS, nonstop.
Except it seems that there weren’t actually any scandals, just the usual confusion and low-level mistakes that happen all the time, in any administration.
Does the evaporation of the scandals matter? I don’t know. Unfortunately, I remember the early Clinton years, when ridiculous stuff — restructuring at the White House travel office, for God’s sake, and a money-losing land deal — led to years of front-page headlines, endless investigations,and nothing at all in the form of proven Clinton wrongdoing. If the press decide that scandals are going to be the topic, the absence of actual scandals may not matter.
Oh, and the ongoing disaster of economic policy? Boooring.
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/05/17/that-90s-show/
Remember when everyone was talking about the next hostage, the debt ceiling? Krugman was right: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022215606. Reposting:
Not With A Bang But With A Whimper
When you’re wrong, you’re wrong. I thought that by ruling out any way to bypass the debt limit, the White House was setting itself up, at least potentially, for an ignominious cave-in. But it appears that the strategy has worked, and it’s the Republicans giving up. I’m happy to concede that the president and team called this one right.
And it’s a big deal. Yes, the GOP could come back on the debt ceiling, but that seems unlikely. It could try to make a big deal of the sequester, but that’s a lot more like the fiscal cliff than it is like the debt ceiling: not good, but not potentially catastrophic, and therefore poor terrain for the “we’re crazier than you are” strategy. And while Republicans could shut down the government, my guess is that Democrats would actually be gleeful at that prospect: the PR would be overwhelmingly favorable for Obama, and again, not much risk of blowing up the world.
<...>
A good day for sanity, all around.
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/01/18/not-with-a-bang-but-with-a-whimper/
When you’re wrong, you’re wrong. I thought that by ruling out any way to bypass the debt limit, the White House was setting itself up, at least potentially, for an ignominious cave-in. But it appears that the strategy has worked, and it’s the Republicans giving up. I’m happy to concede that the president and team called this one right.
And it’s a big deal. Yes, the GOP could come back on the debt ceiling, but that seems unlikely. It could try to make a big deal of the sequester, but that’s a lot more like the fiscal cliff than it is like the debt ceiling: not good, but not potentially catastrophic, and therefore poor terrain for the “we’re crazier than you are” strategy. And while Republicans could shut down the government, my guess is that Democrats would actually be gleeful at that prospect: the PR would be overwhelmingly favorable for Obama, and again, not much risk of blowing up the world.
<...>
A good day for sanity, all around.
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/01/18/not-with-a-bang-but-with-a-whimper/
Sequestration reclaims the national spotlight
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022771317
Why Republicans Suddenly Became Afraid Of Their Own Budget Shadow
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022690945
'The Excel Error Heard Round the World'
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022686815
Senate Republicans Block Progress On Budget
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/senate-republicans-block-progress-on-budget
McConnell Objects To Initiating Budget Conference Negotiations
http://sync.democraticunderground.com/10022810127
Krugman: Harpooning Ben Bernanke
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022833501
The sequestration issue didn't work out the way Republicans planned (Americans blame them and they're whining about specific cuts), they can't hold the debt ceiling hostage and their economic argument for austerity has been completely destroyed. It appears all that Republicans have left are bullshit accusations, Benghazirama and attempts to fan the flames of impeachment.
They have, for the time, successfully shifted focus from the damaging effects of the sequestration and passing a budget.
