All errors should be reported to

Friday, February 14, 2020

Bernie isn't lefty enough for NYT???

Paul Krugman's latest masterpiece ("Bernie Sanders Isn’t a Socialist. But he plays one on TV. That’s a problem.") is the boy telling the stepfather, you're not my real father.

Krugman wrote, "Bernie Sanders isn’t actually a socialist in any normal sense of the term. He doesn’t want to nationalize our major industries and replace markets with central planning; he has expressed admiration, not for Venezuela, but for Denmark. He’s basically what Europeans would call a social democrat — and social democracies like Denmark are, in fact, quite nice places to live, with societies that are, if anything, freer than our own."

If Denmark were so nice and free, Krugman would live there. He's rich, and any university would hire him at the drop of a hat.

He greatly amuses me. He is the 21st century's Professor Irwin Corey, who billed himself as "The World’s Foremost Authority." Corey was a comic. Krugman is an economist. He has a Nobel Prize to prove it. But to me, he is a bigger laugh than Corey, whom Lenny Bruce called "one of the most brilliant comedians of all time."

Upon the election of President Donald John Trump, Krugman wrote, "It really does now look like President Donald J. Trump, and markets are plunging. When might we expect them to recover?

"Frankly, I find it hard to care much, even though this is my specialty. The disaster for America and the world has so many aspects that the economic ramifications are way down my list of things to fear.

"Still, I guess people want an answer: If the question is when markets will recover, a first-pass answer is never."

The Dow Jones Industrial Average is up 60% since then.

In this column, he wrote, "Why does Sanders call himself a socialist? I’d say that it’s mainly about personal branding, with a dash of glee at shocking the bourgeoisie. And this self-indulgence did no harm as long as he was just a senator from a very liberal state."

Sanders calls himself a socialist because communist is a real political career killer. He belonged to a Kibbutz in Israel, and later married an honeymooned in Moscow back when it was the capital of the USSR and in good standing with American liberals.

Nevertheless, Krugman attacked Sanders for not being socialist while at the same time complaining that running a socialist will re-elect President Donald John Trump.

Krugman wrote, "But if Sanders becomes the Democratic presidential nominee, his misleading self-description will be a gift to the Trump campaign. So will his policy proposals. Single-payer health care is (a) a good idea in principle and (b) very unlikely to happen in practice, but by making Medicare for All the centerpiece of his campaign, Sanders would take the focus off the Trump administration’s determination to take away the social safety net we already have."

It was an interesting piece in which Krugman said Medicare isn't socialized medicine but that Medicare for All is. It is also interesting that he believes Medicare for All is a deal killer among voters but cutting back social program is a deal maker.

That inadvertently informs readers of the truth. America really will never be the socialist state that Krugman and the New York Times, for which he writes, want. By calling Sanders a phony, Krugman and the Times seek to undercut his support in the hope of nominating a candidate who will be more subtle about fundamentally transforming the united States of America into something we do not want to be.

Rich Lowry wrote today, "A Bernie Sanders win spells the end of America's center-left, which is already a global trend." He said what is deep in the heart of Krugman because the childish rant at the stepfather comes from the pain in knowing you cannot have your real father.


  1. Is it time for me to swoop in and save the day?


    1. I read a hypothesis a few days ago (and you might've even commented on it too, Don) where the dnc is hoping for no outright winner so they can annoint mini-mike in a brokered convention. So if you're planning to shtup, er swoop, you'll have to plan the arkancide soon.

    2. Mister Trouble never hangs around
      When he hears this Mini sound.

      "Here I come to save the day"

      That means that Mini Mike is on his way.
      Yes sir, when there is a wrong to right
      Mini Mike will join the fight.
      On the sea or on the land,
      He gets the situation well in hand.

    3. And how many of us sang the tune while reading this?

  2. Krugman did not win a Nobel Prize.

    Alfred Nobel established five Nobel prizes. Chemistry, Literature, Peace,
    Physics, and Physiology or Medicine.
    There is no Nobel Prize for economics.
    It is the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel.
    It's a prize sponsored by the state bank.
    That's like winning the Federal Reserve Bank prize.

    1. I try to point that out every time I hear the Nobel Prize coupled with Krugman. Also Krugman as usual is wrong. Sanders talks a good game and points to the Nordic countries as being socialist to disguise his real intentions, but when you look at his history and the policies he's proposing he's a Fascist or a Menshevik at best.


    2. Yes! to Tars; and Don phrased it well when he said "Sanders calls himself a socialist because communist is a real political career killer."

      And we need to expose Buttigieg's Marxist background too-- he's another one who's probably hiding his real beliefs. This past week, someone twice posted in the comments on this blog an article from the Washington Examiner about Buttigieg's background-- it was an excellent article. Here's the link:

  3. This is a good time to remind everyone (especially the younger folks too young to remember it) that back in Soviet times, those people called themselves "socialists," called their system "socialism," and referred to their various countries as being "fraternal socialist countries." (And it was the "USSR," not the "USCR.")

    As to the Scandinavian/Nordic countries that people like Mr. Sanders claim to be wanting to emulate, four critical things that he and his ilk won't tell you:

    (Like the four laws of thermodynamics, it's best to number them 0 - 3).

    0) People in those countries generally object - strenuously - if you call their countries "socialist." They insist (see point 3 later) that they have built "welfare states" but that they are not "socialist" since (as per the Professor K) they don't have state ownership of the means of production and such.

    1) Whatever we may think of them, their systems were not implemented via (violent) revolution, but by consensus. There was no Eugene Debs of Sweden or any other similar country.

    2) The systems are not funded by trying to "tax the rich" (sic) so that everyone else can benefit. In those countries, EVERYONE pays extremely high taxes on EVERYTHING - as it's the only way to cover the cost of the welfare state. In a welfare state country, EVERYTHING is taxed to the point that everything is at mini-bar prices - and if you don't believe me, just go have dinner (and/or a beer) in Copenhagen or Oslo. (Many of my Estonian friends, when encountering an item that seems to be grossly overpriced, refer to that as "a Finnish price"; there's a reason for that.)

    3) Despite the high taxes, these countries all score very well in surveys of economic freedom - because they may have high taxes but they really do have light regulation. It seems that there are still people there who realize that heavy regulation destroys the economy and you can't afford your welfare state. Show me a domestic (U.S.) "socialist" who calls for Danish levels of regulation so that we can pay for a welfare state.

    No, the domestic "socialists" really are Soviet-style socialists in tooth and claw. Don't let them fake you into believing that they advocate Denmark; if you look at the details, they are advocating not Denmark, but Venezuela.

  4. "By calling Sanders a phony, Krugman and the Times seek to undercut his support."

    Or maybe Krugman seeks to make Sanders more palatable to the general public by un-branding him as a socialist.

  5. "and later married an honeymooned in Moscow"

    The 'an' should be 'and'.


  6. >>> My wife lived under the old USSR until she was eight years old, along with the generations of her family (R.I.P. to her 93 yr.old grandmother who passed back home in Belarus three days ago).
    Anyone who wants to hear the horrors of 'socialism', go to the ones like my wife, who will school any idiot on living in the workers' paradise! ZBest