The New York Times—aka the Walter Duranty Papers [1]  has an all-embracing and tortuous history of apologizing for Communism, propping up losers like Al Gore[2] or the Princeling of Wails[3], celebrating AIDS along with the perverted practices that spread this horror, practicing the wanton tax whoring for higher taxes for any implausible reasons, praising African and South American dictators and despots in their opinion columns and scrounging for original new ways to reinvent Marxism as a new-fangled and magical solution to achieve a great society. The Times has relentlessly praised any leftist parasite or pervert who will openly parade their dishonor in our now degenerated society.  Today, the Times revisit, again, their revered Rooseveltian Memorabilia to propagandize us on the glory of the Democratic Party when they partied over the misery during the Great Depression.

 Our newest, but least proficient igNoble Leechette[4][5][6], has previously inculcated us with his special insights on recessions and a sweeping denunciation of Republican economics and their leadership paralysis while he heaps more praise upon the statues and legends of Franklin Del Ano. [7] He has a new New Deal for us to pay for.

 But, a recent analysis of the tautological krugmaniacal screeds suggests that maybe Paul Krugman has forgotten some of his previous erroneous opinions.  Not that someone of his high stature might be disallowed a change of his views, given an analysis of the facts.  We should be able to tolerate some latitude here, within reason, if the reversals were influenced by the guiding illumination of the facts and, or, more importantly, in light of the current political crisis, whatever that might be.  But, we can only go so far. So in a departure from my normal procedure, I post some of his previous comments and recommendations before we examine his newest and brightest advice and counsel for advanced liberalism.

 A little prep from one of his recent screeds is thusly revisited where he mumbles about the  Del Ano, tax increases, spending and war as the ‘solution’ to ending the depression:

 “Well, it wasn’t as major as you might think. The effects of federal public works spending were largely offset by other factors, notably a large tax increase, enacted by Herbert Hoover, whose full effects weren’t felt until his successor took office. Also, expansionary policy at the federal level was undercut by spending cuts and tax increases at the state and local level.”[8]-- Paul Krugman [Emphasis is mine in all quotes.]

So, no tax increases during a steep recession or depression? Spend?"

“What saved the economy, and the New Deal, was the enormous public works project known as World War II, which finally provided a fiscal stimulus adequate to the economy’s needs.”[9]-- Paul Krugman

So, we need another “enormous public works project?”

 “The economic lesson is the importance of doing enough. F.D.R. thought he was being prudent by reining in his spending plans; in reality, he was taking big risks with the economy and with his legacy. My advice to the Obama people is to figure out how much help they think the economy needs, then add 50 percent. It’s much better, in a depressed economy, to err on the side of too much stimulus than on the side of too little.”[10]-- Paul Krugman

 This looks like spend, spend and spend some more.[11] Hey just add 50% to some unknown number. That is Krugman Economics at its best.

 Okay, now from today:

 “Everyone’s talking about a new New Deal, for obvious reasons. In 2008, as in 1932, a long era of Republican political dominance came to an end in the face of an economic and financial crisis that, in voters’ minds, both discredited the G.O.P.’s free-market ideology and undermined its claims of competence. And for those on the progressive side of the political spectrum, these are hopeful times.”[12]--The Lame-Duck Economy by Paul Krugman Op-Ed Columnist Published: November 21, 2008

 What is the alternative to free-market ideology we might wonder? Protectionism? Subsidizing our failing industries?[13] High tariffs?

 Now, we dump on the Republicans:

 “…the emergence of a power vacuum at the height of the crisis…yadda… How much can go wrong in the two months before Mr. Obama takes the oath of office? …yadda…Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index has now fallen more than 50 percent from its peak. …yadda…no new rescue plan is in sight. …yadda…clear deflationary pressure on the U.S. economy right now……yadda…”—Krugman Published[today]: November 21, 2008

 But a prediction from 2002 from our economist:

 “And so the threat of deflation is worse now than it was a year ago.”[14]-- Crisis In Prices? By Paul Krugman Published: December 31, 2002

 He predicted this malady 6 years ago? He is indeed a sage and soothsayer. Gee, are there any time constraints or boundaries of reason or guessing that we might apply to the incoherent rants of the igNoble Leechette? No. This is the "Jeane Dixon effect." [15] All he has to do is guess every possible outcome and then claim ownership of any prediction that comes ‘true.’ There are only two absolute—cut in stone and guarded by The Ugliest San Francisco Harpies—Grand Precepts from our krugmaniacal one:

 [1] High taxes and more taxes are always necessary and [2] Big government is best  and bigger government is much better.

 Everything else in the economic basket is subject to a little sculpture and some quickie patina washes so as to put the usual spin and a little glitter on the leftist view. But, remaining true to the unions who worked with due diligence to get Obama elected we read:

 “I’m concerned, in particular, about the two D’s: deflation and Detroit.”

 Here we go! A bailout for the unions.[16]

 “There’s now a real risk that, in the absence of quick federal aid, the Big Three automakers and their network of suppliers will be forced into liquidation — that is, forced to shut down, lay off all their workers and sell off their assets. And if that happens, it will be very hard to bring them back.”

 This is the Chapter 7 version, which nobody is advocating. Chapter 11, however—and our sputtering igNoble Leechette knows this—would allow judges to meet with  labor, creditors, auto executives and such and formulate a plan for restructuring. It is clear that the Big Three cannot compete with anybody in the world with their $80 per hour labor costs. This is where we see the liberals drift off into space: No matter what we must subsidize greedy unions because they are political partisans. No matter that there is no way to compete unless those labors costs are truncated some 65% to get a sound business plan—we need some “quick federal aid,” to fix this up. [17]

 Even the Reptile of San Francisco[18] a loathsome, vindictive Marxist parasite also known as Spartacus[19] in honor of the Marxist heroine Rosa Luxemburg the former chair of the Marxist Progressive Caucus[20] or Congress' Red Army caucus[21] wants to see a business plan that works, or offers lies to that effect.

 “Until we see the plan…we cannot show them the money,” said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.[22]

 Why wouldn’t Nancy and Harry just dump a few hundred billion into Detroit so as to erect a permanent socialist empire there? Krugman has no problem with this. Whatever it costs just dump in 50% more.

 This appears to be just a freak show version of the Blame Game. If the Dems waste money then they will get the flak and lose seats in 2010 as they will surely do, since they will do nothing but sink us in debt in the next two years with the blessings of the IgNoble One. If they can blame Bush2 for inaction then the Dems win the current battle.

 There is one more slimy option: The Big Three Beggars and their Union Stooges might show up at some secret meeting with Nancy and Harry  shining in the splendor of their purple robes and hand off their ‘plan’ and then,  unread, the Two might announce that this is a done deal. Thus, the taxpayers get stuck with subsidizing failure, the only real option for the left in a capitalist economy.

 One missing link here: where is the soothing essay on tax hikes? Are we to accept the phony notion that Obama will NOT increase taxes on those who make less than $250,000 as he ‘promised’ and Plugs recited as he echoed his Master’s Voice?[23]

 Detroit has no future as a business center, as a non primitive society or even as a sanitary landfill. It is a rusty containment facility for losers, drug addicts and criminals of leftist persuasion.

 But, our hero sums up with this:

 “And it’s scary to think how much more can go wrong before Inauguration Day.”

 And, after Inauguration Day Obama will fix all this up with high taxation and wild spending. Sure.

 My analysis:

 What we are looking at here is an ideological socialist who willingly contorts any fundamental tenets anywhere in the theory or history of economics in a manner so as the service the expediency of the leftist political vision and echo the elements of the current political crisis. He is a crisis monger. Economic theory aside, he really does hop and clap when he hears his master’s voice. His view of economics is faulty if we read his works and note that tax cuts are never appropriate and government can never be too big or oppressive. There is no balance in this view as he omits any reference to market theory or fundamental capitalism. We can only celebrate and acknowledge him for his earned image as a trusty leftist lackey and heap praise upon him for fittingly performing his role as an ideological sycophant who deserves his Nobel Prize if it can be universally accepted for what it really is.

 Given his mechanical ideology and immunity from the basics of economics and reason, we can safely check out his noisy screeds as the first place to look for the wrong thing to do in our society.

 Great work Paul. You are to be celebrated as a Bellwether in Reverse.

  rycK

 Comments: ryckki@gmail.com