Krugman Pounds Away At Geithner’s Recycled Toxic Assets Plan
By SusanUnPC on March 25, 2009 at 9:15 AM in Economic Stimulus, Economy, Governance, Health Care, Obamatopia, Obamatopia Mirage, President Barack Obama, Toxic Assets, Workers
Here’s Paul Krugman, on camera, on Geithner’s “toxic assets” plan, announced Monday: “This is something they can do without legislation. They found a way that they can in effect put the public on the hook for a TRILLION DOLLARS for this stuff without actually getting any approval.” It can be done through the FDIC and with TARP “residue.” (See our discussion of Krugman’s same-day column.)
BELOW, you and I time-travel back to March 2008, to the sweltering primaries, to Hillary and Barack battling the “brain-spattering, windpipe-slitting art” of presidential primaries warfare. There, we see economics professor and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman, in March 2008, sizing up and dressing down Barack Obama: “Why has Mr. Obama stumbled when it comes to economic issues?” (And has anything changed, or has he learned anything, in one short year?)
First, here’s the Nobel Laureate as a blunt instrument hammering the plan on PBS’s Charlie Rose Monday (March 23rd) for “an update on the economy with Andrew Ross Sorkin, Paul Krugman and Joe Nocera.” Krugman’s condemnation of Geithner’s recycled-from-Paulson “zombie” plan is stunning:
Paul. You’re the man. You nailed it yesterday. And, Paul, one year and 16 days ago (March 8, 2008), you had it all figured out:
Why has Mr. Obama stumbled when it comes to economic issues? Well, on health care — which is closely tied to overall concerns about financial security — there is a clear, substantive difference between the candidates, with the Clinton plan being significantly stronger.
More broadly, I suspect that the Obama mystique — his carefully created image as a transformational, even transcendent figure — has created a backlash among those unconvinced that he’s interested in the nuts-and-bolts work of fixing things.
Ohio voters were more likely to say that Mr. Obama inspires them — but more likely to say that Mrs. Clinton has a clear plan for the country’s problems.
And Mr. Obama’s attempt to win over workers by portraying himself as a fierce critic of Nafta looked, and was, deeply insincere — an appearance particularly costly for a candidate who tries to seem above politics as usual.
Isn’t that remarkable. Paul predicted — perfectly — the central problems of an Obama presidency:
- A lack of interest in the “nuts-and-bolts work of fixing things”; and
- A lack of sincerity — in fact, he comes across as “deeply insincere.”
That sums it up for me. The major question is why the hard left, which had adored Paul Krugman for years, turned on him immediately when he dared to criticize Obama as unreal and disinterested in WORKING at governance.
Hell, during the Tuesday night press conference, he didn’t even want to be bothered with working at explaining what he’s not doing.
Here’s a second segment from Charlie Rose’s show Monday night. “The economy continued with Daniel Alpert is a managing director of Westwood Captial and Thomas F Steyer is Co-Managing Partner of Farallon Capital Management.”
FOR INVETERATE READERS ONLY: Boy, if you want to see some historic predictions made, glance through our archives from Spring 2008 on the primary battles involving Hillary, Barack and John (Edwards), and Paul Krugman’s and our commentaries on all three.
Paul Krugman had Obama pegged, and so did we at No Quarter.
And, you know, we’re not pleased that we’re correct. For the sake of this country, we wish we had been wrong.
But you can’t take a guy who’s never worked hard at anything — except campaigning so he can win something — and turn him into an intense, involved chief executive of the most powerful nation on earth and in history.
The guy either has the work ethic, or he doesn’t.
This guy doesn’t.
Worse than his laziness are his disinterest and his disconnectedness. Which showed during the March 24th press conference, as he got restless and his answers became more and more mechanical, and it was clear he wanted to be anywhere but there because the reporters’ questions bored him. It’s hard, make that impossible, to work hard at anything if you don’t care.
The guy either has the passion, or he doesn’t.
This guy doesn’t.
And neither 1) work ethic or 2) passion and caring can be taught, especially to a middle-aged dog, nor can they be imparted through a magic potion.
Most certainly, they cannot be feigned. Every sentient American has the sniff and scratch ability to detect a FRAUD.
P.S. Unless they wear rose-colored glasses, but those people don’t count because they’re hopelessly clueless, and rational dialogue is impossible until they rehabilitate themselves and rediscover their critical thinking capabilities.
, the basis for the Best Motion Picture Nominee (Golden Globes) starring Brad Pitt.
, the novel by John Le Carre, a new motion picture starring Gary Oldman and Colin Firth.
by 
* (Included in the 
* 
.by David Fredosso who wrote 2008's 
- You'll have access to 18 million movies, TV shows, songs, magazines, and books, as well as ultra-fast Web browsing with Amazon Silk -- faster than iPad. Full e-mail and document access and a keyboard. Fire can transmit what is on your screen onto a connected TV or monitor without an accessory. It runs Flash (iPad doesn't). 
