Skip to content

NYT’s Paul Krugman: Obama’s Problem Is He Doesn’t Blame Bush Enough

January 18, 2010

One of the NYT’s dreaded Four Donkeys of the Apocalypse is weighing in on the obvious failure of the president’s first year with an answer that would be shocking, were it not for the fact that it’s the same answer that’s been front and center on the Times op-ed page for the past year: Obama doesn’t blame Bush enough:

The Obama administration’s troubles are the result not of excessive ambition, but of policy and political misjudgments. The stimulus was too small; policy toward the banks wasn’t tough enough; and Mr. Obama didn’t do what Ronald Reagan, who also faced a poor economy early in his administration, did — namely, shelter himself from criticism with a narrative that placed the blame on previous administrations.

That’s a winning strategy: blame Bush even more than you already do!  Perhaps a thousand references to “the previous administration” a day isn’t enough; maybe a thousand and one will finally convince the American public that hope and change don’t suck!

First off, Reagan laid blame for the 1981 recession at the feet of the Carter administration because that’s where it belonged; second, Reagan didn’t prattle on and on about it in every speech and press conference, in person, through aides, and through media surrogates for a full year after taking office with the shamelessness that has characterized the past year. 

In fact, so pervasive is the constant blame Bush meme that astute bloggers keep having to post, again and again, to try to inform people of the truth of the matter–that poor Democratic policies are the root cause of the financial crisis.  The “deregulation, tax-cuts-for-the-rich, and Wall Street greed” shtick is wearing really thin these days.

Krugman claims that the stimulus “surely worked” but was “too small” to affect any job growth.  Never does Krugman–or any other Keynes worshipping liberal for that matter–bother attempting to  justify the laughably absurd and demonstrably false idea that somehow the government can address deficits with more spending, or spur long-term job growth with fiscal profligacy.  It’s outrageous that liberals continue to claim that the failed Keynesian economic theories of the past century are anything but abject disasters, made even more outrageous by the fact that they counter 100 years worth of empirical evidence of failure with their audacious “failed policies of bla bla bla” argument. 

So I suppose that it’s time once again for this–you guessed it!–this graphic:

It’s more than just a touch ridiculous that this twerp continues to put his fingers in his ears and babble “Bush sucks, Obama’s great”.  Worse still is that he commits it to print.  Reagan had far more class than this current bunch could ever dream of.  Yes, Reagan did remind the country every great now again that he inherited a mess; that mess was, in fact, worse than what President Obama got handed.  Krugman is a tool, an apparatchik, and probably the world’s only Harvard-educated “economist” who doesn’t understand or believe in the power of the free market.  Hey, someone should give him a Nobel Prize!

No comments yet

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: