Economist Krugman on Scarborough about Bipartisanship

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Former Rep. Joe Scarborough (R-Fla.) argued this morning that policymakers should adopt a "mixed" approach to an economic recovery package, and not just go "all left or all right in these times of crises." Ironically, Scarborough, who seems oddly detached from current events, had no idea that President Obama proceeded with this exact assumption in mind. Scarborough may not have been paying attention to the news, but the White House not only engaged congressional Republicans directly, but deliberately added unstimulative tax cuts to the package to help bring GOP lawmakers on board. Obama's plan isn't "all left" in the slightest.

Paul Krugman set the record straight, not only pointing out the ways in which Obama's plan isn't progressive enough, but by pointing out the difficulties in negotiating with reckless lawmakers who've apparently lost their minds. Krugman explained, for example, that the Senate just voted on a measure to scrap the stimulus altogether and replace it with an all-tax cut plan.

"We got 36 out of 41 Republican senators voting for that, which is completely crazy," Krugman said. "So, how much bipartisan outreach can you have when 36 out of 41 Republican Senators take their marching orders from Rush Limbaugh?"

Good question. The answer, I suspect, is that you can't have any real bipartisan outreach at all.

It's similar to a point John Cole made very well yesterday: "I really don't understand how bipartisanship is ever going to work when one of the parties is insane. Imagine trying to negotiate an agreement on dinner plans with your date, and you suggest Italian and she states her preference would be a meal of tire rims and anthrax. If you can figure out a way to split the difference there and find a meal you will both enjoy, you can probably figure out how bipartisanship is going to work the next few years."

It's painful to think about, but we're facing the kind of crisis most of us have never seen before. The opposition party, when it's not blatantly lying about the recovery plan, is offering ideas that are a) nonsensical; B) dangerous; or c) nonsensical and dangerous.

It makes the prospect of "bipartisanship" kind of silly.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Imagine trying to negotiate an agreement on dinner plans with your date, and you suggest Italian and she states her preference would be a meal of tire rims and anthrax.

[Rocky_nBullwinkle 6]

Yep. Saw that show this morning. It was the first time a liberal guest did not have any friends on MSNBC. He was blowing smoke out both his holes!

--Bullwinkle

[Scott & Lai 12]

Imagine trying to negotiate an agreement on dinner plans with your date, and you suggest Italian and she states her preference would be a meal of tire rims and anthrax.

So, letting people keep more of their own money is comparable to eating tire rims and anthrax? And it's the Republicans who are insane???

Edited February 6, 2009 by Scott & Lai

[mawilson 2,133]

Imagine trying to negotiate an agreement on dinner plans with your date, and you suggest Italian and she states her preference would be a meal of tire rims and anthrax.

So, letting people keep more of their own money is comparable to eating tire rims and anthrax? And it's the Republicans who are insane???

The government can spend your money better than you can, you see? The problem with giving

you money back is that you may decide to save it instead of spending it... whereas the government

will most definitely spend it!

[Dan J 277]

Imagine trying to negotiate an agreement on dinner plans with your date, and you suggest Italian and she states her preference would be a meal of tire rims and anthrax.

So, letting people keep more of their own money is comparable to eating tire rims and anthrax? And it's the Republicans who are insane???

The government can spend your money better than you can, you see? The problem with giving

you money back is that you may decide to save it instead of spending it... whereas the government

will most definitely spend it!

That is kind of in essence what needs to be done. Money needs to be spent.

If you give money to businesses and consumers, most (except those at the lowest end of the income scale) will save it or pay off debt. That behavior isn't bad, but it will do little to stimulate the economy as we need right now.