Krugman To Brooks: The Reason We Have Dysfunctional Politics Now-Is The RADICALIZATION Of The Repubs

[kpete]

KRUGMAN: This is a longer term story. It's not just what's happened during these negotiations. The underlying reason we have dysfunctional politics right now is the radicalization of the Republican Party. I mean, Bruce Bartlett, a Republican, or maybe now an excommunicated Republican just said basically Obama is a moderate conservative. He's basically governing to the right of Richard Nixon. But what's happened is that the Republican Party has gone so far off into an extreme right wing position that we have gridlock because basically one party cannot say yes.

They cannot say yes to anything that might be coming from the other party. In a basic sense they don't accept the legitimacy of government by the other party.

............

This is a crazy... uhh... this is what is making America ungovernable. It is the extremism of one party. You actually have an extremely accommodating, I would say alarmingly accommodating Democratic president, but a Republican Party that just won't deal.

the rest plus Video:
http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/paul-krugman-calls-out-david-brooks-playin

[Tippy]

1. K&R

[OneGrassRoot]

2. K&R n/t

[givemebackmycountry]

3. "alarmingly accommodating Democratic president, but a Republican Party that just won't deal".

OK, then stop dealing.
Time to take them to the woodshed.
All the President has to do is tell the truth about them.

BUT, it seems he is reluctant to do so.

[tridim]

6. You should probably rewatch his press conference from the other day.

He's not reluctant any more.

And from what I'm seeing this morning, nobody is. The teabaggers are going down.

[JHB]

28. No, you need to watch his next few, and see if he keeps it up...

...both now and after whatever deal is reached.

Unless it is constantly repeated, then his Friday presser will just be a blip, forgotten in less than a month.

It doesn't even have to be him, personally, doing it; there are others who have and will, just don't undercut them in the name of "bipartisanship".

[BumRushDaShow]

4. So Krugman

insults the President in dozens of commentaries and then writes one commentary that FINALLY explains why certain strategies were followed and decisions made, and in one fell swoop, he invalidates his previous remarks. Does he even read what he writes or is he just trying to get attention? :crazy:

[tridim]

5. My thoughts exactly.

Someone as smart as Krugman should have understood the actual problem long ago. It had me questioning his authenticity for the past month. Not good.

Watching Meet The Press and they're talking about the same problem. Unfortunately MTP has also ignored the problem for two freaking years.

I guess the good news is, today is the beginning of the end of the teafucker party.

[Flubadubya]

10. You guys whine and cry all the time that the Dems you have labeled...

"leftist" don't criticize the Rethugs enough. Then, when they do, that just makes them even crazier... and untrustworthy.

Yeah, this smilie certainly is appropriate: :crazy:

[tridim]

11. No Democrat I know has whined about Democrats criticising Republicans.

That is exactly what should be happening. What the heck are you talking about?

I do have a huge problem when Democrats criticise good Democrats when clearly the problem is with radical Republicans, AKA teabaggers.

Here's my smiley for your strange post. :shrug:

[Flubadubya]

16. I'm sorry, I think you may have misread what I said...

I said the complaints come when so-called "leftist Dems" DON'T criticize Republicans, not when they do. Actually, I was probably more responding to BumRushDaShow's comment about Krugman "insulting the President" and then invalidating his insults by the comments he made about the Republican party on MTP.

The main point I am trying to make is that, as Bruce Bartlett (himself a Republican) observed that Obama is basically "a moderate conservative" and is governing "to the right of Nixon", this is what Krugman criticizes about President Obama. Any President who runs as a Democrat, wins as a Democrat, and then governs like a Republican deserves a HEAP of criticism by his Democratic base. It's hard to even get at the egregious behavior of "Republicans" when you've got your own behaving like them sometmes. :shrug:

[BumRushDaShow]

18. The problem here

has to do with acknowledging the problem (teabaggery and general repuke instransigence) and THEN offering/critiquing (not hurling god-awful insults and other RW talking-point type assaults) the strategies on how to go about GOVERNING in this environment.

It's obvious that many many people have an issue with Pres. Obama's strategies for getting around a Congress that is intent on waiting out the 2 years until the next election when they can throw him out. So how does one continue to GOVERN in that environment? Sure, he could veto every single piece of crap that comes to his desk. But the problem is, very little is even reaching the desk because the clueless Congress can't seem to get their act together and then they throw the ball into the Pres.'s court and demand that he "do something". And then when he does, they and probably half of DU sits back and hurls the tomatoes at him without offering a solution that doesn't throw the whole nation under the bus. We need a solution to GOVERN the country and keep the cogs moving until the next election.

Right now the damn FAA appropriations have LAPSED, 4000 gov't employees have been furloughed, and the gov't is losing almost $20 million PER DAY in revenue not collected while the greedy airlines keep their ticket prices the same and pocket that $$$ originally destined for the gov't coffers.

So what would Krugman do in this situation? Bloviate some more I suppose? :crazy:

[Doctor_J]

26. I wish you people would stop making shit up

and adjusting the facts to fit your view that the president should never be criticized. Krugman says

1. The Repukes are radical right-wing nuts
2. Obama gives them way too much

There is nothing inconsistent about his opinions. All of us liberals believe this. The Repukes are terrorists, and the president is caving in to those terrorists every time he concedes something else.

[mazzarro]

17. So telling it like it is equates to insolence?

Can Obama supporters ever concede that he has brought this on himself with the over zealous accommodation of rethugs in his quest for bi-partisanship?

[Aerows]

30. No they can't

and if he loses the election it will be the fault of everyone who ever criticized the quest for bipartisanship.

You are just supposed to shut up and praise Obama regardless of whether he gives the store away.

Republicans have gone crazy, and negotiating with crazy people only results in more craziness.

[Ilsa]

7. There are alot of these radicals in Texas.

A friend was telling me about her sister near Houston. Getting close to retirement. Very middle class. She and her husband are nonprofessional, no college, Southern Baptist, very religious (but they do imbibe alcohol!), and they have Tea Party literature in the house and attend events. They extrapolate their knowledge of their household budget to macroeconomics. They support the far right GOP's radicalism, even if it brings down the country they claim to love.

[mwb970]

27. I'm sure they are nice people, but they sound very shallow. /nt

[BeyondGeography]

8. Brooks said as much two weeks ago

Then he realized, as he always does, that without manufacturing false equivalencies, he'd be out of a job.

[Volaris]

9. "...they don't accept the legitimacy of government by the other party."...

Then they don't need to hold positions IN that elected government. I think that's whats coming for them, and I think they know it, too. And if they don't, I have no sympathy for them. They need to spend some time in a TRULY powerless Legislative minority for a few years until they re-learn how to CO-GOVERN, and the notion sinks in that when the other guys win the election, the losers don't get to be the one's in charge. They have GOT to get out of their heads' the idea that they have been hand-picked by God Almighty to lead the sheep. (And EVEN IF THEY WERE, it matters not, God's not in charge of who gets to Govern this country, that's left for the MAJORITY to decide.)

I swear some days I think the ONLY thing stopping them from becoming like the Taliban and leading an armed, religiously-motivated domestic insurgency campaign against this LEGITIMATELY elected President is that they know firsthand exactly how much money they give to the Federal Army for turning raw and Honorable Patriotism into cold-blooded Professionalism, and they know the guys in the Kin-tucky backwoods (yes, Mitch, I'm talking to YOU,) would get so killed so fast that in less than a month every elected Republican and half the Nation's "god-hates-America-cause-of-the-gays" lunatic preachers would be on trial for High Treason.

[WinkyDink]

14. Sure, they do; they just don't want YOU to.

[Volaris]

15. well, they are going to be sorely disappointed come January of 2013...

The whole lot of'em can kiss my ass

[emulatorloo]

12. Kick and Rec n/t

[WinkyDink]

13. The R. Party is COMMITTED to the destruction of the D. Party. HENCE, NO "Obama win" WILL BE ALLOWED.

EVEN if it would be "peace in our time."
Or maybe especially.

[Ruby the Liberal]

19. "they don't accept the legitimacy of government by the other party"

Beautiful. Succinct and to the point.

[FourScore]

20. This needs to be shouted from the rooftops!!! n/t

[Kablooie]

21. And I thought the Bush Republicans were radical.

These new guys almost make the neocons look rational..

[Enthusiast]

23. But behind it all, behind all the craziness,

we still have the neo-cons directing the entire operation.

Most of the craziness being generated to give cover for an extreme right wing legislative agenda. Just like during the 1990s when we were distracted by blow jobs and crazy allegations while the Telecommunications act, NAFTA and Gramm-Leach Bliley were enacted. It worked so successfully that they are doing it again.

[Enthusiast]

22. K&R "alarmingly accommodating"

That would be accurate.

[PurityOfEssence]

24. Asymmetric warfare

They call him a socialist and he says ameliorative things about them. After punking him repeatedly when he had a huge groundswell from the election and sizable majorities, their appetites are whetted.

Republicans play for keeps. They do not recognize the "right" of others to exist; as reactionaries, they consider "others" to be a threat to civilization itself and deserving of any retaliation available.

Bill Clinton didn't get this, and neither does Barack Obama.

[quaker bill]

25. a Republican Party that just won't deal

this is the essence of it. Yes, it is crazy. Lots of folks here seem to like imagining that there is some rabbit President Obama can pull out of his hat. There isn't, and they don't like bunnies anyway.

[Major Hogwash]

29. I thought Krugman said it was ALL Obama's fault!

I wish Krugman would be more consistent because shooting his big mouth off for the last 6 months about what a douchebag Obama is didn't help us any.

[JHB]

31. There's an app for that:

July 23, 2011, 12:33 pm
My Name Is Legion (Self-indulgent)

Reading some of the comments here and elsewhere, I have to admit that I’m impressed by the range of sins I have apparently committed. I’m someone who always wants to run bigger deficits AND I’m inconsistent because I said deficits were bad under Bush but good under Obama. I’m a slavish admirer of Obama AND someone who has had it in for the president ever since the primary, when I kept warning that he wasn’t really committed to progressive ideas.

I really do get around.

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/07/23/my-name-is-legion-self-indulgent/