Krugman writes: "For Mr. Rubio is a rising star, to such an extent that Time magazine put him on its cover, calling him 'The Republican Savior.' What we learned Tuesday, however, was that zombie economic ideas have eaten his brain."
New York Times columnist Paul Krugman. (photo: NYT)
Rubio and the Zombies
15 February 13
he State of the Union address was not, I'm sorry to say, very interesting. True, the president offered many good ideas. But we already know that almost none of those ideas will make it past a hostile House of Representatives.
On the other hand, the G.O.P. reply, delivered by Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, was both interesting and revelatory. And I mean that in the worst way. For Mr. Rubio is a rising star, to such an extent that Time magazine put him on its cover, calling him "The Republican Savior." What we learned Tuesday, however, was that zombie economic ideas have eaten his brain.
In case you're wondering, a zombie idea is a proposition that has been thoroughly refuted by analysis and evidence, and should be dead - but won't stay dead because it serves a political purpose, appeals to prejudices, or both. The classic zombie idea in U.S. political discourse is the notion that tax cuts for the wealthy pay for themselves, but there are many more. And, as I said, when it comes to economics it appears that Mr. Rubio's mind is zombie-infested.
|
THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community. |
Comments
We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.
General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.
Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.
- The RSN Team
This past election was encouraging, it wasn't validation of Obama's right of center policies, it was a rejection of the failed conservative agenda. Romney was campaigning on $5 trillion more in tax cuts and an increase in military spending. He probably believed it was the right course of action, that is how pervasive this cult is, lunacy.
Slightly more than half the electorate is seeing the light. The truth will prevail, I only hope we can survive until it does.
Where do you think Obama is on the spectrum?
He's to the right of Nixon.
Far from the center.
What I don't get is: If the Right has to spend that much money, make that much of an effort, has to rig elections with voter suppression and crooked redistricting, how can anyone claim to be "intelligent" if they don't realize that the majority of the people don't want what they're selling? I guess they are intelligent right up until common sense kicks in. Then they are just plain crazy.
..
The next time you read something that the tea pot heds say is a blockbuster revelation, check it out first. And when you do, a bit of friendly advice about handling Tea pot hed information. Wear boots and gloves, otherwise you will wind up with shit all over you like that woman scientist in Juraissic Park.
Harvard isn't the only university who helps fund a particularly promising student. I ran out of money during my last year in grad school and my university stepped in and helped me through.
Further, the most interesting thing about your posts on this subject is the ongoing emphasis you place upon Obama's grades and his college funding. Why is this so important to you? It shouldn't be. Are you a 'birther' also?
Superior intellect and student loans and scholarships. 'K?
Can we investigate Bush on same reasons? He was a 'C' student and pretty much AWOL during most of his presidency including the crucial month before 9/11 while on that day, as you look at his vacuous expression, he was clearly 'missing in action' in the most literal sense of the word as the worst crises of recent national history unfolded. and there never has yet been a full investigation done on that-at least not 'officially'. And from all that came our descent into Fascism: drone assassinations, rendition, torture,destruc tion of the Bill of Rights. If you want to look at history, look at all of it.
Tom, your whole little blurb there was nothing but Racist, ignorant claptrap. I bet you will exclaim that you are not Racist and that you judge people by their character. To that, I say, BS.
I was gonna say more, but I would just end up getting the RSN censors ticked off, and they would probably be right.
Thanks for saying it anyway; I guess that my response was a bit rich or strident for their tastes and didn't make it through the censors.
Quote # 1: "most probably had no idea what he stood for"
They did know what he stood for - they voted for him because he is on their side.
If Obama had been a Republican making the same sort of corporate boilerplate speech that Rubio did, he would have gotten very few votes from the "black population".
Quote # 2: "Latino's are liable to vote 98% for the man from their Tribe, and he will win".
We shall see about that. If you think Latinos are so simple minded that they will vote against their best interests, I am afraid that you and the rest of your ilk are in for an even more rude awakening.
Rican, Mexican et al) do not agree with Republican Cuban ideology, generally.
Republicans are losing because they've embraced bigotry with all of its ugliness. It was bound to fly back in their faces eventually. The culture war is nothing but a continuation of their racist Southern Strategy, they've been at it so long that they've trapped themselves in their own muck.
They can't win an election without the bigot vote and now they can't win an election with it. All they have left to sell is Reaganomics which is like a sad joke after all that's happened in recent years.
Never heard of synesthesia? 8^)
Progress! Bob Johnson
www.deism.com
Neither party is offering realistic long-term solutions, but the Democrats have the upper hand at the moment, due to the stimulatory effects of the ongoing deficit spending. But sooner or later, all the accumulated debt will come home to roost. High debt levels are already dampening the anticipated effects of the ongoing fiscal and monetary stimulation.
I think you are talking about government debt, as an accumulation of deficits. If not, and you mean individual debt, then you have identified a problem.
But since Krugman's article was about government debt I would have to say that anyone that is concerned with the debt is worried about the wrong thing.
What we need to "worry" about is answering this question; Is there a way to allow all persons that are in the US to have an expectation of a decent life, the liberty to choose how they want to live that life and pursue a life of liberty and happiness.
If the government cannot make that guarantee, then America has failed. Throughout history when a government concerns itself with itself ahead of the needs of it's inhabitants failure is sure to follow. So, worry America to death, if you really want to be worried about the debt.
All excessive debt, both individual and government is a problem, as it either has te be paid off or defaulted upon, though governments have the additional option of defaulting via inflation. Do I support further stimulative deficit spending if it is carefully invested in infrastructure and programs to better our future? Yes. If it is spent on wars and wasted consumption? No. My bottom line is that both sides need to stop letting politics override the facts, or we are never getting out of the mess we are in.
However, a job creation stimulus is the only sensible course to follow. It's only doubtful whether the Democrats have the spine for an out-and-out fight, taking their case to the public.
As Obama and Reid already showed, even before the inauguration, talk is not only cheap but not particularly reliable.
What is most revelatory about the savior of the GOP is that there was nothing revelatory about his speech. It was almost verbatim of Romney's many misleading stump speeches and full of the old tired GOP line.
Rubio who's stated as a Tea Party favorite apparently isn't that much of a fav as the GOTP had to have Rant Paul in his continuing heroic striving to claim the right to become the next mediocre gop candidate for president who has come up with a new Obama slam. He's no dictator or socialist... he's a king.
Rubio hates government assistance... unless it helps Rubio, or his parents. So in the end Rubio lets us know that above all Rubio is for a government by Rubio, for Rubio.
The reason for Republican hypocracy is obvious, their stated policies do not and never worked. Just look at the first two years of both the Reagan and Jr. Bush administrations , both had to greatly increase spending to improve the economy or face defeat.
History has shown that implemented Republican philosophy leads to failure. Absolutely!
The US has had three major economic Depressions, 1873, 1929 and 2007, ALL under Republican administrations!
Anyone who votes for a Republican candidate has not had a credible high school Economics and/or American History education.
To vote Republican and with the Republican Party is actually treason.
Excellent question!
His age, minimal experience, complete arrogance and wrong positions on everything surely do not make him a "savior" for the Republicans, and certainly not for the nation.
If the party really believes this, the future is almost as bleak as a Paul Ryan "savior."
Let's face it. The GOP is witnessing its own demise. Hopefully that will be sooner rather than later.
Fortunately, most hispanics are eith lucky enough, smart enough, or both to live in areas where Democrats rule and help them and others geta decent education. The majority are not fooled by guys like Rubio.
As one said above - I too know and am related to some GOPbaggers who SHOULD know better but have their heads in the sand and they worry me more than Rub-cube
In Rubio's same old speech he suggested opening federal lands for drilling & resource extraction.
But what would the GOP say if ownership of the land and all natural resources was retained by the people? The Corporations rather than owners would be paid contractors receiving a small % of the profits. The majority ownership (75%)of the land, equipment, product & revenue generated would instead belonged to "We the People" The profits generated from our natural resources used to fund education, health care, infrastructure & social safety net programs rather than lining the pockets of the wealthy few.
Under those circumstances do you think the GOP & their corporate sponsors would be in favor of opening our federal lands to exploration & mining?
For decades public lands have been given to wealthy patrons whose projects are funded by the tax payers but unlike other investors we don't share in the profits.
When are we going to wake up & realize the market is just a front for redistribution of public wealth to the wealthy.
We need to follow other nations & adopt an economic system that benefits the all the people not just the privileged few.
We also need conflict of interest law, which prohibits legislators from proposing or voting on legislation that benefits donors.
RSS feed for comments to this post