Professor Paul Krugman gives the President an A-; says he's the most consequential since...

[Hekate]

...Reagan, "not that I liked what Reagan did, but he was consequential."

About 45 minutes ago, in an interview with Fareed Zakaria, CNN. Zakaria asked Krugman to grade Obama, and Krugman said that in "grading the difficulty of the test" (specifically the behavior of Obama's opponents) he would give him an A-.

Fascinating, given some of the assessments here.

I expect this OP to either sink like a stone, or become a flamefest, but I just wanted to share.

Cheers.

[Control-Z]

1. No flames from me.

Thanks for posting, Hekate!

[Hekate]

3. You are most welcome.

[MADem]

176. Nor me--I agree w/him. nt

[Stuart G]

2. Krugman is correct. Millions of lives will be positively affected..by ACA

Regan was negative, Obama is positive.

[DallasNE]

22. Great Simple Assessment

And let's not forget that Reagan's policies toward Central America are what set in motion what we are seeing today so, yes, Reagan was consequential but so much of it was indeed negative. Same with the economy too where he set in motion the policies that have so decimated the middle-class to the point where Obama is attempting to rebuild from the middle-class out but Boehner an Ryan keep standing in the way.

[yeoman6987]

30. In 100 years, Reagan and Obama will be remembered for sure

Clinton maybe. Nixon probably because of the resignation. The rest I doubt it.

[Doctor_J]

103. Obama has indeed carried on the Reagan agenda

I am sure that makes him, the BOG, and the 1% ecstatic.

[NealK]

110. He sure is a big Reagan fan.

January 2008:

"I think Ronald Reagan changed the trajectory of America in a way that, you know, Richard Nixon did not and in a way that Bill Clinton did not."

He put us on a fundamentally different path because the country was ready for it. I think they felt like, you know, with all the excesses of the 60s and the 70s, and government had grown and grown, but there wasn't much sense of accountability in terms of how it was operating. I think people just tapped into -- he tapped into what people were already feeling, which was, we want clarity, we want optimism, we want a return to that sense of dynamism and entrepreneurship that had been missing."

"I think it’s fair to say that the Republicans were the party of ideas for a pretty long chunk of time there over the last 10, 15 years, in the sense that they were challenging conventional wisdom."

http://www.nytimes.com/ref/us/politics/21seelye-text.html

I don't see a lot of accountability in terms of how the Government is now operating. Ex. The NSA.

[DallasNE]

116. Reconcile This: "the Republican approach I think has played itself out"

That speech in 2008 seems to be echoing Krugman in saying Reagan was a consequential President. That doesn't make him a big Reagan fan as I'm sure he would turn around and say that a consequence of those policies was to diminish the middle-class and that is why he wants to re-establish the middle-class. At least, that is my reading of things.

[catbyte]

173. That's correct. Obama NEVER said that he agreed with Reagan. BO bashers here twist

Obama's words almost as egregiously as any bagger at posting on Freeperville. It's sad. And disappointing.

[marias23]

162. Reagan and Bush's and the U.S.'s downward spiral

Reagan started the US on its downward spiral and Bush continued it.

[Doctor_J]

96. millions? there aren't THAT many insurance executives

That is the group who will be most positively effected

[mcar]

4. An excellent post

I stand with Professor Krugman.

[CurtEastPoint]

5. Thanks, I needed to see this after reading this dreck:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2698685/This-weak-timid-President-talks-big-does-A-devastating-attack-Obama-Washington-insider.html

[Hekate]

6. Lotta dreck out there this morning. Like "spineless", with 61 enthusiastic Recs

Last edited Sun Jul 20, 2014, 03:33 PM - Edit history (2)

edited to add dreck link; re-edited to remove link because we wouldn't want a "call-out" would we? "Spineless" will get you there.

[Amonester]

101. Yeah, from that insipid gossip right-wing rag

What a bunch of cowards.

[greatauntoftriplets]

7. Thanks for posting this, Hekate!

[deafskeptic]

8. He's a waaay better president than Bush!

It was a surprise to me that many consider him the worst president in the last 50 year. It shouldn't have come as a surprise considering how Congress and Senate behaved towards him.

I agree ACA will affect a great many Americans in a positive way.

[Hekate]

9. Incidentally, Krugman's "grade" included Obama's environmental actions.

Just sayin' it was a pleasant interview to watch.

[NYC_SKP]

69. Obama gets an A from me on the envioronment; I understand energy science and challenges.

His detractors only see things from a binary POV: Unless he (fill in blank), he's a sellout, or a corporate stooge.

Unfortunately, these people have never held office and have no idea how government works.

These people, in reality, want Obama to dictate.

Sometimes a leader has to behave like a Trimtab [sic].



K/R

[Doctor_J]

104. .

[NYC_SKP]

109. I gather, then, that you're a Hillary Clinton supporter.

[CTyankee]

87. And, he and his wife enjoy vacations where they bike in France's countryside...

another reason to love this guy...

[PatrickforO]

130. Give me a break. OK. If he can't have any vacations, then neither can you.

And don't you dare have the temerity to tell me you haven't taken any vacations in the last few years. That's like me telling my grandkids I had to walk through thigh deep snow ten miles a day after doing all my chores just to get to my one room schoolhouse.

I think you've been having too much Limbaugh, and everyone knows how smelly THAT is!

[babylonsister]

10. Thanks for sharing; nice to hear that

from someone (two=you!) I respect!

[Hekate]

11. Ha!

[heaven05]

12. thanks

for the post. He's been up against a huge amount of ignorance and stupidity. So yeah, he has done some rather remarkable things for the american people.

[JDPriestly]

13. I agree. Unfortunately (and Obama would probably agree with me on this)

that is not saying much. Obama made the mistake of taking the Clintons' advice in hiring some of this aides (remember Rahm Emmanuel -- Horrors! Offended Obama's base repeatedly) and then ran into the hopeless disarray and negativity of the Republican Party which is still in the throes of disintegration. But Obama's foreign policy will win him praise in the history books. His choice of John Kerry for Secretary of State (which I opposed because I thought we needed Kerry in the Senate. Boy was I wrong) is brilliant. They make a wise, compassionate team.

Obama's foreign policy makes me feel pretty safe. He should cut back on the NSA's surveillance though. It is doing more harm than good.

[Larkspur]

15. Agree with you about Rahm Emmanuel

His bullying behavior and his pro-corporate positions helped depress the Dem base from turning out in 2010 and setting up a major roadblock in Obama's Prez legacy.

I pray that Rahm goes down in flames in his re-election bid.

[Cali_Democrat]

14. K&R

[CTyankee]

16. Here is the segment...

http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/

Is it just me or is Krugman thinner? His face and neck look leaner than I've seen him in the past...

[lovemydog]

24. thank you for the link

[CTyankee]

29. you are welcome...it's a good day when I can see my hero, Paul, on TV...

[lovemydog]

56. Same here. And yes, he looks thinner.

[CTyankee]

99. I wonder if his doc said "lose some weight..."

my husband just got the word...and he's complying...of course, when I say it, it's no dice, but when his doc says it...well...different story.

[cantbeserious]

17. My Grade For O Is C- At Best - By Comparison - Bush Rates A F-

Both men serve the same masters - Oligarchs, Corporations and Banks.

Would be interesting to know how they grade the presidents.

Maybe Krugman is the spokesperson for the 1% and now we know the opinion of the Oligarchs, Corporations and Banks.

[Hekate]

23. You're very wrong about Krugman, cantbeserious. He is a Liberal all the way

You should catch up on his columns going back well into the Bush2 presidency -- amazing stuff for an economist.

[cantbeserious]

25. Economists By Profession - Are Lackeys For The 1% - Even Krugman Was Surprised By Piketty

eom

[CTyankee]

31. Krugman is very progressive, a thorough Keynesian, and thought we should have universal

health care, but at least the public option. He's the best kind of economist, along with Joseph Stiglitz, fighting the reactionaries. He's incisive but witty and really kindhearted...just not to RWingers...I consider him a flaming liberal!

[cantbeserious]

34. Then Why Was He Surprised By Piketty - Krugman Is For Sharing Table Scraps Of The 1%

He has yet to reach the conceptual space of wealth redistribution from the 1% to the 99%.

[CTyankee]

41. It has been a little bit since I read his long piece reviewing Piketty and given my aging

brain, I can't recall some of his issues with Piketty...but itis my sense that he didn't disagree with Piketty on the way your frame the issue. However, duty commands that I stand by my argument, so back I will go to the google and I will post as a refresher to my comments here...

I'm editing here because I just gave a quick read of Krugman's review:

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2014/may/08/thomas-piketty-new-gilded-age/

No way does he say Piketty is wrong on income redistribution. I don't know where you got that from

[cantbeserious]

43. In An Interview With Bill Moyers - If Memory Serves - He Admitted That He Was Surprised

eom

[CTyankee]

47. "surprised" without more could be misleading, don't you think. Surprised by what, exactly?

[cantbeserious]

50. He Admitted Surprise About The Corrosive And Negative Impact Of Generational Wealth

eom

[1StrongBlackMan]

85. I think you are mis-framing this ...

was he "Surprised About The Corrosive And Negative Impact Of Generational Wealth" (Which would seem to not jibe with the weight of his writings)? Or, surprise About The Corrosive And Negative Impact Of Generational Wealth by the magnitude? ... Or, surprised that anyone would have to announce it?

[cantbeserious]

89. In His Moyers Interview - One Has The Sense - That He Completely Underestimated

The ability of Generational Capital (wealth) to maintain and grow over time - in spite of reforms.

In other words, small reforms like minimum wage, income taxes and even estate taxes are not enough to counter the impact that Generational Wealth has on economics.

Stronger measures, much stronger measures, are required to eliminate the generational wealth which will begin to reduce the corrosive wealth effect as Piketty's research shows.

[DanTex]

45. Not sure what you mean by "surprised". PK's review of Piketty is very positive.

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2014/may/08/thomas-piketty-new-gilded-age/

[cantbeserious]

48. Yes - But He Was Surprised By The Influence And Corrosive Impact Of Generational Wealth

He is complimentary of Piketty, because he does not have to champion the argument and can safely remain behind the ivory towers of Princeton University.

If he is so complimentary, where were his tirades against the corrosive influence of generational wealth?

Maybe those tirades were muted because the ivy league patrons of Princeton and similar institutions would be displeased.

"Polite Society" will only stomach so much Tongue Lashing.

Even Krugman has to tow the line of respectability in service of the Oligarchs, Corporations and Banks.

[DanTex]

53. Oh I see. Well, he was "surprised" because Piketty presented novel material.

Piketty's dataset was something new that nobody had seen before, and brought to light the true extent of the concentration of wealth, as well as a better picture of the historical trends. And Krugman recognized it for the original research contribution that it was. I don't think "surprise" is the correct term here.

And it's not true at all that Krugman has been muted in his criticism of inequality, nor is it true that he only started talking about it after Piketty. Here's an article from him back in 2002 talking about the New Gilded Age, which makes it pretty clear where he stood on these issues 12 years ago.
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/20/magazine/for-richer.html

[cantbeserious]

54. Yes - However, He Has Not Advocated For Wealth Redistribution - Only Reform - That Is Table Scraps

Piketty shows that unless one breaks apart generational wealth, nothing much will change.

Generational wealth is the 800 lb gorilla in the economists dark closet.

Until generational wealth is eliminated, all talk of reform is just hot air.

[DanTex]

58. I'm not sure what you mean.

Krugman is in favor of progressive taxation, he is in favor of the estate tax, he is in favor of expanding the safety net, etc. I don't know what policies you would like to see him advocate for that he isn't, but from what I can tell, Krugman is solidly in the progressive corner.

[cantbeserious]

61. On An Arbitrary Scale He Is Progressive - However, He Is Hardly A Champion Of The Kind Of Change

Suggested by Piketty's research.

Hence his surprise.

He now has to rethink his positions.

[CTyankee]

65. Paul has moved on from Princeton, exactly for the reasons you have missed here...

he wanted to teach at a public university and New York offered that to him. Very few ambitious professors would leave an enviable perch at an Ivy League university for a public university such as CUNY. Krugman did because of his egalitarian beliefs. You should applaud him.

[cantbeserious]

67. WikiPedia Says Otherwise - See Link Below

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Krugman

"Paul Robin Krugman (born February 28, 1953) is an American economist, Professor of Economics and International Affairs at the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs at Princeton University, Centenary Professor at the London School of Economics, and an op-ed columnist for The New York Times.[2][3] In 2008, Krugman won the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences for his contributions to New Trade Theory and New Economic Geography. According to the prize Committee, the prize was given for Krugman's work explaining the patterns of international trade and the geographic concentration of wealth, by examining the effects of economies of scale and of consumer preferences for diverse goods and services.[4]"

[CTyankee]

68. hmm, lemme see, wikipedia vs. nobel prize winning economist????

Gee, that's hard...

[cantbeserious]

70. Ah Yes - A Logical Fallacy - Ridicule The Information Without Refutation

Link From Princeton - Seems He Still A Professor.

http://wws.princeton.edu/faculty-research/faculty/pkrugman

[Orangepeel]

79. Krugman to leave Princeton for CUNY

http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2014/02/krugman-to-leave-princeton-for-cuny-184201.html


Also:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/25/opinion/krugman-the-piketty-panic.html?_r=0

Mr. Piketty is hardly the first economist to point out that we are experiencing a sharp rise in inequality, or even to emphasize the contrast between slow income growth for most of the population and soaring incomes at the top. It’s true that Mr. Piketty and his colleagues have added a great deal of historical depth to our knowledge, demonstrating that we really are living in a new Gilded Age. But we’ve known that for a while.

No, what’s really new about “Capital” is the way it demolishes that most cherished of conservative myths, the insistence that we’re living in a meritocracy in which great wealth is earned and deserved.

For the past couple of decades, the conservative response to attempts to make soaring incomes at the top into a political issue has involved two lines of defense: first, denial that the rich are actually doing as well and the rest as badly as they are, but when denial fails, claims that those soaring incomes at the top are a justified reward for services rendered. Don’t call them the 1 percent, or the wealthy; call them “job creators.

snip

I’ve been involved in debates over inequality for more than two decades, and have yet to see conservative “experts” manage to dispute the numbers without tripping over their own intellectual shoelaces.

and

http://prospect.org/article/rich-right-and-facts-deconstructing-inequality-debate
The Rich, the Right, and the Facts: Deconstructing the Income Distribution Debate

In 1992, economist Paul Krugman, now a New York Times columnist, published this article in the Fall issue of The American Prospect. Today, his assertions hold up, especially in answer to the conservative critics of Thomas Piketty's Capital in the Twenty-First Century.

[cantbeserious]

82. Seems He Is Still Listed As A Princeton Professor

eom

[erronis]

165. You really aren't serious

Most of your replies come from a robotic response. Government/contractor salary, perhaps?

Just to help you "people" understand how to appear "human":

Make some typeing misteaks.

Say something stoopid and then partially retract it.

Don't parody a single POV - maybe mix it up a bit with a cute cultural tidbit.

Oh, and get a life.

[cantbeserious]

169. Thank You For The Denigrating Remarks - Now We Know You Are Not Serious

BTW - DU has a Spell Checker Capability - You Might Consider Giving It A Try.

[CTyankee]

175. He is for now...he doesn't start at CUNY until either later this year or 2015...

[steve2470]

73. his biography at NY Times says something different

http://www.nytimes.com/ref/opinion/KRUGMAN-BIO.html?_r=0

Paul Krugman joined The New York Times in 1999 as a columnist on the Op-Ed Page and continues as professor of Economics and International Affairs at Princeton University.

Maybe it has not been updated ?

[CTyankee]

75. he hasn't left yet...he assumes his post later, I forget when, but later in the year or maybe early

2015. He announced his departure in his NYT blog after it was confirmed. Yes, he is at Princeton til later...but he accepted CUNY's offer...

[steve2470]

77. Noted Economist Paul Krugman to Join Graduate Center Faculty in 2015

http://www.gc.cuny.edu/News/GC-News/Detail?id=23418

Yep you were correct.

[CTyankee]

78. He said it was what he wanted to do...to teach non-affluent city kids...

now does everyone see why I love this guy so much?

[steve2470]

80. he's been attacked for his $250K salary but I think that's fair...

for a man of his stature. He is a great guy and a great economist.

[CTyankee]

81. He is on the forefront of income equality and is living it professionally...

I have the deepest respect for this good man...

[imthevicar]

148. BINGO!

And A ZING!

[Voice for Peace]

39. you can't be serious.

[cantbeserious]

40. Satire Is Lost On You?

eom

[Voice for Peace]

42. aha, now I KNOW you can't be serious.

[cantbeserious]

44. Aha - Now We Know - That You Are Incapable Of Comprehending Satire

eom

[Voice for Peace]

46. you keep referring to satire but have provided none, so your posts aren't making sense (to me.)

Maybe you could explicitly quote here verbatim the
satire I have somehow overlooked? This is a sincere request.

[cantbeserious]

66. My User Name - Which Was Denigrated

eom

[Voice for Peace]

71. was denigrated how, exactly?

[cantbeserious]

72. Your Post # 39

eom

[Voice for Peace]

74. gosh

really?

There was absolutely nothing intentionally denigratory or
otherwise disrespectful toward you or your post. I'm
sorry for the misunderstanding, and not sure why you
interpreted it as you did.

[cantbeserious]

84. Just Pointing Out - That's All

eom

[1StrongBlackMan]

156. Argues for 2+ hours ...

Before his post being "satire"????

[Voice for Peace]

160. I still don't know where the satire is.

There was misunderstanding, naturally. That's always
the problem.

[Iliyah]

18. K & R

Total constant negativity from corporate media fueled by a few here at the DU. I'm happy to at least see some positive feedback. Thank you!

[calimary]

19. No flames for you!

I'd agree, particularly considering the huge hurdles the bad guys keep trying to shove in front of him, the blockages and utter constipation of our government's smooth workings just for spite, from the TRUE "Sore Loserman" crowd. We need some political Ex-lax!

[steve2470]

20. I agree

If he had a more cooperative Congress and a more actively-liberal public, he'd be closer to A+. Historians will record the insanely negative opposition from the Republicans and note the nefarious influence of the far-right influences of the Tea Party segment of the Republicans.

[Cooperstown]

21. Obama has done everything in his power to make the economy revive

Of course, for 3.5 years, he has been blocked from doing all he wanted to do by Republicans in the House.

If Republicans were not controlled by their corporate campaign big donors, banks, insurance companies, investment houses, fossil fuel lobbyists, etc., we would have a very healthy economy in most states, and unemployment under 5%, the best that could have happened after the disastrous years and two wars of Bush.

I still imagine how the world and the nation would have looked if Al Gore had actually been granted his earned presidency from those 5 on the Supreme Court. We would all be doing very well by now.

[Rex]

26. A- sounds about right.

Best POTUS of my lifetime.

[wryter2000]

27. Thanks for posting

I'm so heartily sick of all the trashing of Obama here.

[GusBob]

28. the reality based thinking people should like BO

Very few and far between in a US tho

[BumRushDaShow]

32. K&R

And I definitely do not agree with everything Krugman has said and that goes for Zakaria who can be an ass and appeared to want to be one here, but sometimes folks have to get up off the crap and give the President his due.

Basically what he was saying was that Obama has so far become a "transformational President". When you look across the spectrum of subjects, save for education, immigration, gun control, and what was dumped on him from the Patriot Act spy machine, the President has started the course to reverse what was done under Raygun, Poppy, & Shrub, where he -

started winding down the wars and trying to tamp down the discord sowed around the world by the U.S.

started adding regulation BACK into the financial systems and shoving the tax structure back towards benefiting the people

started bringing healthcare to millions who were previously left out

started pushing for and enacting more environmental controls

started bringing some MAJOR social changes to the fore in terms of gender, gender-identity, and gender/gender-identity equality.

All in the face 24/7, wall-to-wall obstruction with the enabling of that obstruction by RW corporate media.

[Voice for Peace]

35. yes, many good points.

I remember well when he was first elected, thinking he now
had a task akin to turning the Titanic in order to miss the
iceberg and certain disaster (thanks, w.).

And I remember thinking that the task of turning, even the
success of it, was going to be nearly imperceptible to most
people:

Because it was such a huge heavy ship, and a huge looming
disaster; but those few degrees set the country on a new
course, just in the nick of time. Barely.

[freshwest]

52. Thanks. I remember when Obama made an analogy to the USA as a huge ship that needed careful steering

and believe he's done that.

[Voice for Peace]

60. aha. we had a mind meld. I KNEW it!!

[Iliyah]

38. Ditto

[Voice for Peace]

33. thanks Professor. Thanks Hekate.

I am in complete agreement, given the odds of his success,
the obstacles thrown constantly in his way, the many disasters
that have not been of his making, and on and on.

[BumRushDaShow]

59. "the many disasters"

like -

BP oil gush disaster and 7.0 earthquake disaster in Haiti (2010)

5.8 earthquake in Eric Cantor's district (obviously a sign ) and Hurricane Irene's massive flooding (2011)

Hurricane Sandy disaster (2012)

F5 tornado in OK (2013)

Worst winter on record (or 2nd worst) across the country (2014)

not to mention dozens of mass shootings (including of Gabby Giffords and 26 children and teachers). And then there were the "Arab Spring" uprisings that continue to this day.

All of these things required a Presidential response and Presidential engagement.

Yet because there is so much news or infotainment poured out at once (often selectively), many of these things have been forgotten by the general populace.

[Voice for Peace]

62. thanks for that list.

He must feel like he has been turned inside out, upside down,
had his heart and courage and conscience tested from every
side. And no breaks. And he keeps smiling, and he keeps on
going.

I'd say I've got his back but can't begin to keep up with him.

[BumRushDaShow]

63. I don't know where he gets the energy. nt

Last edited Sun Jul 20, 2014, 08:27 PM - Edit history (1)

[DFW]

137. Reminds me of a remark by Howard Dean in 2009 after the inauguration

Howard was asked by someone if he thought he might run again in 2016, and he said no way, because he thought that younger blood needed to be running for the job of President. He said that Obama at just under 50 (at the time) was just about the right age. He still feels that way, even though at 66 (this November) Howard's energy doesn't seem to have diminished any.

[Duval]

36. No flamefest here!

Thank you, Hekate, for your post.

[harun]

37. Krugman qualified it correctly...

It's not a grade based on Progressive objectives met, it's a grade based on a completely corrupted Congress awash with Corpo dollars.

[wyldwolf]

49. Everyone knows Krugman is a DLC/corporatist/Fascist Capitalist lackey

[liam_laddie]

83. Missing sarcasm tag? n/t

[wyldwolf]

94. intentionally left off... like The Onion. :)

[Hekate]

106. Some in this thread are totally in agreement, even if you are in jest

Including one who is absolutely adamant in his fact-free assessment of Paul Krugman, author of the 2007 book The Conscience of a Liberal. She/he can be serious about that much.

[SunSeeker]

126. Better believe it.

[DCBob]

51. President Obama has pushed the envelope...

and resisted making decisions based on pressure from either side of the debate. He has made some bold risky moves that could have easily come back on him if he failed. No doubt the country and the world has benefited from his calm, prudent, intelligent management of some very difficult crises and situations.

[Politicub]

55. Just wait until the Obama generation comes of age

His influence will be felt long after his presidency ends.

I believe he presided over a transformational time for progressive politics, and sowed the seeds for long term change. And did so with with most uncooperative House of Representatives in history.

He will also be remembered for his work for gay rights and presiding over the time when DOMA fell and DADT was consigned to the dustbin of history.

[hueymahl]

135. I believe this too

Like Reagan effected my generation, Obama will positively effect this generation's thoughts for years to come.

[DesertDiamond]

57. I think A- is fair, and glad he takes in the difficulty factor

[Knicks007]

64. I agree with his grade

History will judge him most favorably.

[Number23]

76. What??! That damn know-nothing Krugman. Why I just read on DU that we must not repeate the "terrible

mistake of 2008" and we have posters running around saying that's the one election they'd like to see overturned! And we all know that these folks represent educated "liberal" thought better than anyone else.

K&R

[freshwest]

88. Please tell me you're kidding. They wanted Paul? Barr? Palin? PUTIN?

But don't post a link. I don't think I'd be able to post on it without getting a hide...

[DFW]

138. Have no fear.

The post was most certainly made in jest.

[redqueen]

139. Actually I know who posted one of those and it wasn't in jest.

Someone asked which election would you most want to overturn. Most said Reagan one said Obama.

[DFW]

141. There's a scary thought. n/t

[1StrongBlackMan]

158. Yep, that's what he said ...

and explained it by ... "because we were duped" ... or something like that.

[freshwest]

142. DFW, I invoked your name here, can you help us with a question?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025259852#post114

[DFW]

152. Hope that helped! n/t

[freshwest]

154. You did! Eerie about sounding the same. I thought Sarah could only see Russia, not hear it!

Last edited Mon Jul 21, 2014, 03:23 PM - Edit history (1)

[Number23]

163. Sadly, DFW... neither one of those comments was made in jest.

About the "terrible mistake" we made in 2008 or the poster, who litters this forum almost daily with OPs as if he belongs here, who said in a thread of which election in America's history they'd like to see overturned, that it was the 2008 election they'd like to see done over.

Both said. Both in earnest. Both still posting on DU.

[DFW]

168. That is rather depressing to hear n/t

[1StrongBlackMan]

157. And ...

And we all know that these folks represent educated "liberal" thought better than anyone else.

Are members of the 1% (if not, .1%) that they constantly trumpet their hatred of.

I would say: ... But: is better suited for their recing crew.

[Number23]

164. I know. Isn't it the darndest thing? How many "former" Republicans are running around DU

touting themselves as the foremost experts on "liberal" thought and opinion????????

[1StrongBlackMan]

170. My Mom always told me ...

When someone tells you who they are ... BELIEVE them, especially, when their actions conflict with their newly touted persona.

[sheshe2]

86. Excellent thread Hekate....

and no flames from me.

He has given us ACA, a life saver for many. Also our feminist President with the Lily Ledbetter act and more, he stands for women. Ha! And our first gay president pushing through DOMA and ending DADT. He has made it possible for people to live as they wish and love as they wish and have a family if they so wish. I love him for all of this and so much more.

Just got home from work and tired, yet had to leave a few thoughts here.

Thanks Hekate

[sadoldgirl]

90. I have and have read PK's book

Indeed he sounded rather liberal, but does he stand with our President on outsourcing and trade policy?

[Hekate]

107. Aside from his columns, PK has authored "The Conscience of a Liberal" (2007). Here's a link

...where his thoughts are further elucidated.

Nobelist, Professor of Economics, columnist for the NY Times -- he's a busy man. Many here were keen to see him in the Obama administration before Obama took office, but I'm glad he's not. He's a nervous and twitchy public speaker and interviewee, which is not so great for this media-driven age. He is, however, very much worth listening to and reading.


http://topics.nytimes.com/top/opinion/editorialsandoped/oped/columnists/paulkrugman/index.html

[Jamaal510]

91. K&R

[blue neen]

92. Excellent.

K & R.

[Cha]

93. Hey Hekate.. thanks for reporting the news of Paul Krugman's assessment of

President Obama so far.

Gratefully neither of your predictions came to be.

[Doctor_J]

95. one of our few liberal journalists has jumped the shark

Obama rates a c- or d+. His record on education, the environment, healthcare, income inequality, foreign affairs has been atrocious. I guess if you give up on considering him a Democrat, and label him a republican, he would rate an a-

[CTyankee]

97. I think Krugman has nailed it. He's a realist. But he is also someone who wants a better,

more equitable society, so I give him all kinds of applause...where in his writing does he disappoint you?

[Doctor_J]

98. He used to be in favor of public education, uhc, the environment, fair wages,

and so on - everything Obama is against. He abandoned his liberal background and joined the personality cult, cheering for a president who is far to the right of Reagan. Obama's presidency has been a disaster for everyone except the corporations

[CTyankee]

100. I don't know where you are coming from with his...read his blogs on the NYT website...

I am certain you will come away with a different reading...he has a very liberal stance on so many issues...

and please, Obama is not to the right of Reagan...be serious

[Doctor_J]

102. I have been reading Krugman for 20 years

He would never have praised mandatory for profit health care 10 years ago. Now he thinks heritage care is the most wonderful thing ever. Sold his soul to Obamamania. Reagan would never have gotten away with heritage care, race to the bottom, fracking, TPP, xlp.... it takes a phony democrat to enact such disasters.

[CTyankee]

105. are you sure you are reading Krugman?

I have a very different read on him...must be some disconnect here...

[Hekate]

108. >sigh< profound disconnect, but he's not alone in that nt

[Cosmocat]

133. Be honest

and consider the below question ...

First, I will note, I agree that he has been a disappointment with education, being too cozy with big business and allowing the NSA to run rampants. I disagree on health care, the man got the first health care reform in 4 decades done, bit the bullet and used all of his political capital to do it. WE may not like it, but it was a small step in the right direction and the very best that could get done. I think he has been exceptional in foreign affairs.

I don't know about an A-, but Krugmans point in grading him such stands - the only president who has come close to the level of deranged partisan hatred and flat out sedition from the opposition party is Clinton.

I think he has been a good president, not putting a specific grade to it.

But, the question is ...

What could ANYONE have done any differently the last 6 years with the same virulent opposition from the republicans, the media EAGERLY lapping up and advancing their bullshit and democratic pols leaving the POTUS out there all alone with no one supporting the POTUS or fighting to push forward any kind of progressive legislation to counter the endless stream of republican witch hunts ...

[certainot]

147. are you factoring in the obstruction from the criminal treasonous republicans?

[rury]

111. I'm in agreement with Krugman!

President Obama is a consequential president and the BEST in my lifetime!!

[JEFF9K]

112. Is it necessary to call Krugman "Professor?"

It comes off like conservatives calling Carson and Krauthammer "Doctor."

[Hekate]

114. He is one, and was asked to give a "grade" so it seemed appropriate....

...in the moment. Pick any title you like: Dr., Professor, Nobelist in Economics, columnist for the NY Times, author.

[JEFF9K]

117. It's enough to call him Paul Krugman.

He is smarter than 99.9999999999% of professors, while Ben Carson and Charles Krauthammer are stupider than 99.99999999999% of doctors.

[Cha]

113. Kick!

[mikekohr]

115. President Obama has proved to be a great president, prompting outrage and infuriating

haters on the lunatic right, the ungrounded on the far left, and some cranks in between.

Asshats all.

[Number23]

118. I cannot +100 this post enough

prompting outrage and infuriating haters on the lunatic right, the ungrounded on the far left, and some cranks in between.

Asshats all.

Well done, sir. Well done.

[Iliyah]

121. Ditto

Read that some from the far left are joining with Rand Paul who both hate Pres O, and shocking, turning against Warren as well, but have always hated HC. What a world.

[freshwest]

144. One is known by one's enemies. Especially if they join forces. And they have done so since 2010.

[blkmusclmachine]

119. If you love Trickle Down Reaganomics, Corporate ConservaDem, bipartisanship to a fault, BHO is an A+

In our Lib/Progressive househould, BHO ranks a sorry D/D+

[Prophet 451]

120. Given the vandalism from the GOP.....

Given that the GOP have gone to unprecedented lengths to destroy Obama by any means necessary, he's done about as well as could be expected. While I have a few criticisms (such as not pushing hard enough for the public option), they're mostly nitpicking an otherwise decent reign. My frustrations are mainly with a completely broken system which prevents utterly necessary legislation (i.e. another stimulus and a whole package of climate change measures) from even coming to a vote.

[Iliyah]

122. Remember when the GOP/fake news complained that disrespecting the President

was un-American. Speaking against the President in a other country was un-patriotic.

WOW only for GOP Prez, Dems are fair game. I see a pattern here where the GOP party want a one party system, ummmmmmmmmm sorta like a dictatorship.

[nikto]

123. Unfortunately...

You've got to fo with the president you have, instead of the one you wished you had.

Obama is the best America can do, so he's all we've got to stem the tide of Conservative regression,
although Obama does a mediocre job of that, at best.

Obama still beats out the GOP alternative, for sure.

[rpannier]

124. What does Krugman know???!

He was wrong about banking deregulation
He has been in with Obama since day 1
He's an apologist
It's easy for him to say those things because he has money

I had more to write, but they slipped my mind

Allow me, in case there is any misunderstanding

(just cause I like guitars)

Thanks for sharing
And I do agree with Dr Krugman, for the most part.
Though I'd go B

[Hekate]

125. eeeps. Good think you remembered the sarcasm thingie.

There's way too many denizens of this board who unfortunately don't have a clue about Krugman, his liberal politics, his value to our side. And some of them are reeeeeeally adamant about not wanting to know any better.

Glad to share.

[SunSeeker]

127. I agree. Thanks for the post, Hekate. nt

[Major Hogwash]

128. Interesting.

But, not unexpected.
The level of obstruction that the Republican party has engaged in for the last 5½ years is unprecedented, and will be their undoing this fall.

[Cosmocat]

134. Yeah, not so much

agree on the point about obstructionism, stating the obvious frankly.

But, it won't be their "undoing" in the fall, unless you mean their undoing will be maintaining a majority in the House and possibly taking the Senate.

[PatrickforO]

129. Considering he is the first African-American President...

he has governed very carefully, as a centrist, because of that. This has been rather disappointing to many progressives who would far prefer Senator Warren's agenda (which indeed would be EXCELLENT for the American people). Still we have to be honest here. The Republicans actually colluded on Obama's inauguration night in 2009 to refuse to cooperate with him in any way. I call that despicable treason.

When you think about where this nation actually WAS at the beginning of 2009 when Obama first took office, and the genius of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, otherwise known as the 'stimulus,' I have to give him an A- as well. He did a darned good job pulling us out of the fire and it is too bad most Americans are so shallow and easily swayed that they forget that. Because that one thing earned him the A- right there.

And, again being honest, I dislike Obama's drone policy, and his extension of much of the neocon foreign policy agenda. I really hate the NSA and all the power he's let them get, and I feel very uncomfortable with him keeping the sweeping powers Bush had instead of putting some of them back in Congress, where this nation's founders wisely put them in the first place.

I'm also not a big fan of the Affordable Care Act either. Even though the Dems were in majority in both houses of Congress and we had Obama in the White House, and every thinking person in this country knew that simply expanding Medicare coverage to all Americans was the way to go, instead we got a giant welfare program for insurance companies and still have rationed healthcare.

Those things aside, Obama's done a good job. He got us out of Iraq, though he's now been tricked into sending in 'advisors' to 'help' Iraq out of the situation our invasion got them into. He got Bin Laden. That counts for something.

He has been FAR better than McCain OR Romney would have been, and until the pendulum swings far enough back left so we can get a Warren in the White House, even an Establishment Democrat like Clinton would be OK. But just OK.

You hear that, Sen. Warren?

Sen. Warren?

[Cha]

131. KICK!

[Android3.14]

132. Definitely consequential

Definitely the lesser of two evils.
I don't regret my vote. I just wish an Obama win would have had more impact.

[mikekohr]

136. "We elected a president, we did not anoit a king"

We did not give President Obama the votes in Congress he needed to complete his vision and agenda. In-spite of that crippling fact he accomplished enough, thus far, to be rated as among our most important presidents.

There was a tremendous projection upon this man and his presidency: blind hatred and obstructionism from those on the lunatic Right that deserted America's best interests in favor of craven hyper-partisanship. Reality free disappointment from those on the far Left that thought it would be rainbows and unicorns for everyone when President Obama took office.

I support President Obama not because he is Black, nor because he is Irish. I support him because he is a good, decent, principled family man. A leader of men who inspires hope in millions and steadily, without fanfare, continues to amass a record of accomplishment in the face of bitter vitriol and unprincipled, baseless opposition.

We elected a president; we did not anoint a king. President Obama will be judged by his record, not by the ankle biting character assassins that are clustered at the far ends of the political spectrum and sprinkled sporadically in between.

President Obama's is not without substantial and substantive accomplishment. Those accomplishments are magnified a hundred fold when judged against the backdrop of historic and unprecedented Republican obstructionism in the House and Senate.

President Obama's critics are without perspective. Their bile and malice is woven out of lies, false outrage, and reality free expectations. History will smile upon President Obama because history favors the steady drumbeat of civility and principled discipline of achievement over the shrill, raucus, rabble of the bitter, the unbalanced and the unrealistic.

[DFW]

140. The "without perspective" observation is not a little deal

If you watch the talking (screaming is more like it) heads and read the hate editorials (Krauthammer, et al), you get the idea that their bile is contrived and their message (such as there is one) is coordinated. They all have the same phrases, tone, and lack of coherence in their arguments. It is emotional, which stands to reason, as no logic plays any part of their ranting. Too bad that it connects with such a large portion of our population. It is wrong to play down the "saturation factor" attributed to untold billions allocated for phony anti-Obama propaganda. Too many otherwise rational people fall into the trap of intellectual laziness, and prefer to accept it as truth in order to have time for Monday Night Football.

[certainot]

146. that's the left's fault, for continuing the worst mistake in political history- ignoring RW radio

[stupidicus]

143. I'd ask him to define "consequential"

for a starter.

It seems to me for example, that it could reasonably be argued that Bush's spectacular successes at failure on matters both foreign and domestic eclipse those of BHO and Raygun.

And if he's talking about crystallizing an enduring mindset in their respective political parties and/or ideology, well, BC set the standard and remains the leader of the "Third Way" mentality so many around here defend with the ferocity and in much the same manner, as well as method and means, as rightwingnuts do their nuttery.

That was your motive and point behind this posting wasn't it -- another platform from which his critics could be bashed with the same ole...?

"Just wanted to share."?

too funny

[certainot]

145. correct grade considering circumstances. could have done a lot more if

the liberal organizations and the dem party stopped ignoring the right's best weapon for managing media, crating alternate reality distractions, and enabling the obstruction.

as long as the left ignores rw radio it cannot collectively say it's getting obama's back. nor can he be evaluated accurately.

for eg, anyone who blames obama for not getting single payer through has no clue that 1000 unchallenged radio stations have enjoyed 20 years of blasting the country with lies about european and canadian health care. that is what made single payer politically impossible.

the screamers at the town halls that enabled the right to stop the public option were inaccurately called tea party activists- they were the same talk radio base that's always screamed on cue for their talk radio gods.

[McCamy Taylor]

149. Love that the people who did not buy the hype in 2008

like President Obama's performance. That includes me. Those that bought the hype are often less than satisfied. I guess they wanted a president that would be all about the message and were not really interested in what kinds of things presidents really do.

[TheKentuckian]

150. I am a fan of the professor but if the NSA overreach, the race to the bottom in education, blowing

and covering for BP as they fucked up the gulf, pushing fracking in T. Boone Pickens like fashion, aiding and abetting the radicalization and destabilization of Libya, declaring himself judge, jury, and executioner of American citizens, repeatedly putting Social Security "on the table", pushing the proliferation of drones, diligently working on more destructive and sovereignty impacting free trade deals, allowing more meddling in South and Central America, a stupid and worthless "surge" of his own, embracing to big to fail and holding the banks utterly unaccountable, wealth disparity growing, corporate capture increasing, his cabinet choices a bunch of Turd Way clowns and open Republicans, unions under further assault with nary a comfortable walking shoe but rather Arne and Rahm upping the ante, busting pot dispensaries while "looking forward" and fetishes for "bipartisanship" with the main architects of our deep problems is A material then did Bush pass, does Raygun at least get a C+? Nixon a solid B?

Foolish, if this is an A then virtually anything is at least passable moving forward.

[stupidicus]

151. well, as you've likely noticed

isolating what he has a large measure if not exclusive control (if only by a veto threat) over makes their "repub obstructionism" argument irelevant and meaningless, which is why their assaults on those noting them are generally the most egregious and baseless.

It's not like we critics of all those things have lodged any objections to the EO he issued today, or any of the other things he's done that have led to the betterment of he quality of life of gays, women, the formerly uninsured, ect, we just prefer to "grade" his presidency on the totality of his actions and inactions.

[Hekate]

153. If you listen to the interview (the link is in this thread) and read columns by Krugman you will see

...that the comparison to Reagan (nowhere is Nixon mentioned) is NOT for purposes of approval. Krugman is no fan of Reagan's, but simply acknowledges what many others who detest St Ronnie acknowledge: he transformed the scene and we are still living with the consequences. There is a difference between seeing and approving.

As to Obama -- again, I recommend seeing the interview, which was not overlong -- Krugman gives a two-part "grade," one part on what he actually has accomplished so far ("How many answers did you complete correctly on this test?&quot and the other on the difficulty of the task (insanely hard). Thus if it were only part 1, Obama would get a B-; but given the insane difficulty of the test, he gets an A-.

To reiterate: Nowhere is Nixon mentioned; he was not relevant to this discussion. Reagan is relevant, so he was mentioned. Krugman (a liberal through and through) does not approve of RR, but transform the scene he most certainly did.

Krugman's assessment of Obama is that he is definitely a "consequential president," and although Krugman in the past (in both his writing and his interviews) has articulated his issues with the President's individual proposals and actions, he's intelligent enough to not let that color every single other thing about Obama, like so many here.

[TheKentuckian]

166. My mentions of other Presidents was not that Krugman had but rather a rhetorical question to him

If Obama merits an A then what grades would go to the others?

I've got zero concept of why you are under the impression that I was stating that Krugman was comparing Reagan or Nixon or anyone except as a lame tangent to launch your rebuttal from. Sure isn't what I said.

That said, a B- is no less absurd for the same reasons the A is a joke. Race to the Bottom alone merits a C- at best, the civil liberties assaults should be auto fail, blatant and willful violation of the oath of office.

Even grading kindly on the obstruction curve, a C- is all he merits. Look at those cabinets he has appointed, looks like left to his own devices not much would be different. Maybe a minor additional stimulus chock full of ineffective tax cuts, less stupid on extending unemployment benefits, a fascist "infrastructure bank".

Still would be blowing the banks, still would be fracking like T. Boone was President, TeaPubliKlans haven't held up education, deform an iota, Treasury, Interior, Education, Energy, and Commerce would still be corporate subsidiaries. 8th you have never been a Thug then it is don't call us, we'll call you for anything defense related.
TeaPubliKlans aren't forcing drones and clandestine shenanigans other than loving them as always.

I see what he does in areas where he has a free hand and it is far from encouraging.

[SidDithers]

155. DU rec for pissing off all the right people...nt

Sid

[Major Hogwash]

159. Yes, her evil plot worked!

Talking positively about the Democrat president draws more trolls than announcing a new forum built just for trolls!

[Hekate]

161. Bwa-ha-ha-ha >rubs hands together<

I've been found out!

[stupidicus]

171. why would anyone get "pissed off"

but thanks for confirming the OPers intent.

I find Krugman's grade pretty amusing in light of his column today. WHy would someone who tirelessly and stupidly pursued this http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/21/opinion/Paul-Krugman-An-Imaginary-Budget-and-Debt-Crisis.html?ref=opinion&_r=1 deserve an "A-" I'd ask.

I suppose we can thank the rightwingnuts from saving us from his stupidity, no?

But then, this kinda stuff is usually well over the heads of those with primary interests like annoying others.

[Hekate]

172. I've been posting here for 12 years. I don't do it to annoy -- that comment was a joke.

J.O.K.E.

Nice to make your acquaintance......stupidicus

See you around.

[stupidicus]

174. well

I wasn't referring to you with that parting observation/remark. A lot of us stir the pot as they say occasionally, and there's certainly no point in getting "pissed off" about or at any particular poster over that.

On the other hand, some like the poster I directed that at, rarely play the bully role and suffer the consequent heat should it arise, but are frequently found egging them on in a supportive role and in the manner seen and addressed here. He obviously knows his limitations, and I just attempted to outline roughly what they are.

I've been "around here" for at least that long myself, I just started participating a couple of years or so ago.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

167. thanks for this. :) n/t

[Marr]

177. By those parameters, I'd give him A, too-- and I think he's been a huge disappointment.

I think the anger directed at Krugman here is a bit misplaced-- like interpreting Time's "Person of the Year" award as a ringing endorsement.

There's no denying that Obama has been incredibly effective, considering the lunatic opposition party he's had to deal with. He's moved his agenda forward with real political skill.

That agenda happens to be almost completely concerned with coddling big business and the 1%, and saving them from the disasters they created, but still-- he's been very effective at accomplishing those goals.