Paul Krugman points out Rand Paul's stupidity, once again

[n2doc]

By Paul Krugman

Don’t Know Much About History, Rand Paul Edition


I can easily understand it when people don’t know the facts about economic statistics; you need a fair bit of background knowledge even to know how to look these things up. It’s more surprising when people don’t know what they don’t know — when they make confident assertions that can be proved false in a few seconds by anyone who does know these things.

I had a one-on-one encounter with Rand Paul over such a case; there our heads were, talking on TV, and he insisted that government employment had risen under Obama. (It has actually plunged.) At the very least, you’d think he would have learned a lesson from the experience.

But no. There he goes, saying

When is the last time in our country we created millions of jobs? It was under Ronald Reagan …

Hmmm:



It’s not just that more jobs were created under Clinton, who raised taxes on the rich, than under Reagan; I wonder how many people know that more jobs were created under Jimmy Carter than under either Bush?

But I guess I really do understand it: according to right-wing theology, The Blessed Reagan’s tax cuts must have created far more jobs than the policies of evil redistributors. And so that’s what must have happened. Hey, Clinton was probably cooking the books.

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/04/18/dont-know-much-about-history-rand-paul-edition/?_php=true&_type=blogs&smid=re-share&_r=0

[Wounded Bear]

1. Paul should know better than to argue with someone who knows facts...

But, then, I guess that's part of his 'charm.'

[DirkGently]

2. Facts & reality have been relegated to the realm of "belief."

The American conservative movement blithely dismisses science, education, and journalism as all products of a "biased" world that unfairly refuses to recognize what they would prefer to be true as the actual truth.

[Blue Owl]

3. Krugman vs. Rugman

Advantage: Krugman

[Dragonfli]

4. "Rugman" LOL, I like that and will borrow it for future use /nt

[cspanlovr]

5. Is that really a piece on his head?

No one would wear a hairpiece that awful, would they?

[trusty elf]

6. ...........

[IMG][/IMG]

[The Wizard]

8. He should have removed the eyes before putting it on his head. (NT)

[Voice for Peace]

9. Actually he's got a nice head of hair.. this is unfruitful ridicule.

If it looks funny it's because he cuts it himself, but it's real
hair. http://www.businessinsider.com/rand-paul-hair-2013-2

Trump, on the other hand.. or somebody who is actually
wearing a ridiculous hairpiece. (This has nothing to do
with RP's politics.)

?w=381&h=283

[Enthusiast]

10. I agree. I think Trump's is an elaborate comb over.

Otherwise why would someone wear such an awful hairpiece?

[GeorgeGist]

7. Rand Paul probably sat in the back of the class ...

reading Sports Illustrated when he took Econ 101. Like DI Joe.