Krugman Takes On Greenwald and FDL

Posted on 02/19/2011 at 6:30 pm by Bob Cesca

CORRECTION: This is from January of 2010. I didn’t look at the date and and discovered it because Greenwald was debating @OTOOLEFAN about it on Twitter earlier today. Nevertheless, it’s worth repeating anyway.

Paul Krugman rattled the firebagger hornet’s nest and took on their “crusade” against White House healthcare economist Jonathan Gruber. Greenwald and the others have been accusing Gruber of being a paid propagandist, cut from the same cloth as Armstrong Williams and other Bush era shills. In the process, Greenwald attacked Krugman for defending Gruber. Krugman responds:

And here’s the thing: by claiming that there’s a huge scandal when nothing worse happened than insufficient care about disclosure, Greenwald and the people at FDL are actually reducing our ability to call foul on real corruption. After all, if everything is a scandal, nothing is a scandal. One of these days, perhaps soon, we’ll have a genuinely corrupt administration again — but when whistleblowers try to call attention to the misdeeds, you can be sure that there will be claims that “even liberals said that Obama did things just as bad or worse.”

I’ve never really been clear about the endgame for this gang. What do they intend to achieve? If it’s accountability at all costs, do they recognize the repercussions — if successful — in taking down the most liberal president in generations? I think they do because, despite being kneejerk opportunists, they’re smart. And if they’re willing to destroy progress, whatever the speed, with their “everything is a scandal” approach, can they really call themselves “progressives?”

Furthermore, they clearly see scandals where there aren’t any — as Krugman detailed above. In this regard, I don’t believe they can be trusted as honest writers/journalists. From there, we can only deduce that they’re being instigators for the sake of personal gain, and their bodies of work, no matter how accurate, should be reevaluated.

This entry was posted in Healthcare and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • http://twitter.com/OsborneInk OsborneInk

    Makes two of us, Bob. Thanks for having the courage to stand up to the cool kids.

  • Lexaburn

    Heh, a latent Pete PUMA calling out two others for showing off.Well, whatever. The half-activism is a bit demeaning to the cause, especially now that open class warfare is in full swing.

  • Dan Halen

    My problem with the “Professional Left” is that they want so badly for Obama to behave like Bush, but for Progressive causes. They want him to use any means necessary to achieve a progressive utopia.Obama can’t be like Bush because the conservative corporate media will not allow it. There has been 30+ years of propaganda attack on liberal ideas and many Americans seems content to continue buying the GOP’s simplistic talking points.Obama is an adult trying to lead a country where half the elected government behaves like spoiled 2 year old children.

  • http://www.politicalruminations.com/ Nicole473

    krugman:

    One of these days, perhaps soon, we’ll have a genuinely corrupt administration again — but when whistleblowers try to call attention to the misdeeds, you can be sure that there will be claims that “even liberals said that Obama did things just as bad or worse.”

    Exactly my concern. They are so completely over the top (much like the far right), reality seems to have escaped them. They need to understand that holding someone accountable does not mean roasting them over a fire.Oh, and you nailed it, Bob. I have never felt that they had any cred, and now I am seeing that their credibility amongst people who matter is also waning fast.

  • me.yahoo.com/a/gy6hm6onnYJfg8aAgW5Y4YLVBIgY

    Cesca proves again why he’s a joke, and why the progressive movement – any movement – doesn’t take him seriously. He can’t even get his dates right, printing old news as if it’s new. The retraction doesn’t remove the embarrassment.Bob says FDL isn’t progressive. FDL raised over 50k for Russ Feingold’s re-election campaign. What did Bob Cesca do again? Oh right, I forgot: nothing. Unless you consider re-printing everything Glenn Beck says doing something.Bob’s and his Cescabots personal jihad against anyone who dares question his dear leader. First it was accusing FDL of racism by re-printing the posts of a single pissed-off black woman, now it’s re-printing something that was an accurate description of the situation – a year ago.Nevermind that Bob’s personal cheerleading for the Health Care debacle has landed us in the situations we’re in: namely, it’s a 50/50 chance the whole thing gets repealed. Where was Bob when we were fighting against this joke of a bill? Cheerleading as usual, and also saying we can fix it later. How’s that working out for you Bob? Have you fixed it yet?Bob just doesn’t get it. He’s deranged. And dangerous. The Health Care debacle is evidence of that. Bob always likes to complain that “it’s never good enough” for those who want accountability. There may be some truth in that. But that’s a better place to be than where Bob Cesca lives, where ANYTHING is good enough and must be supported. That strategy has failed. Bob has failed, and he STILL can’t admit it. Even though we’ve got a Republican House, even though health care is in the balance again. This is the fault of people like Bob, who Obama and the Democrats turn to again and again for unconditional support. And Bob’s right there, bending over every single time.You truly are a disgrace. An embarrassment.(Also: Your silly morning posts of prog-rock is evidence. If there was ever a group of pseudo-intellectuals on the planet, it’s prog-rock fans.)

  • http://www.politicalruminations.com/ Nicole473

    Shut up, Frederick, you pseudo-asshole hipster. No one here gives a rat’s ass what you think about anything.Ya know, I’m beginning to think that rather than being a deluded and dumbass Hamsher suck-up, you are Jane herself.Now that would be blogger news heaven. Jane Hamsher trolling Lib blogs to defend her pathetic POV. bawahahah..By the way, maybe if they had stayed away from Feingold, he could have won his race.

  • ec

    Hey me, grow up.

  • Allanbrauer

    Hi Bob, and thanks for this.I was the source of the offending tweet that Otoolefan and others RTed. Greenwald came after all of us, but he seemed to single Otoolefan out for special wrath, probably because he’s far better known, and therefore his network of followers poses more of a threat to his reputation than my couple hundred do.In response to Glenn’s demands, I took back one word from my original tweet, “now,” after I too realized that the link went to a Jan 2010 post instead of a 2011 one. I was multi-tasking, and simultaneously arguing with a Dominionist on the whole “America is a Christian Nation” lie. But I stand behind the rest, because I did not say Glenn typed the word “Obot” to describe Krugman; it was a characterization of the tone of his comments that is all to familiar to those who read Greenwald.Anyway, though I will not apologize to Glenn, I did reach out to others who had also been slammed by him to offer my apologies for dragging them into this, and ended up getting several new mutual followers.Again, thanks for addressing this matter. The funny thing is, people who are media figures get far worse said about them all the time, but only the especially thin-skinned and self-righteous ones, like Glenn and Sarah Palin, have such a knack for attacking down and making themselves look smaller for it.PS I recently joined the team at Angry Black Lady Chronicles, and we really appreciate your favorable comments on your show the other day.

  • http://www.politicalruminations.com/ Nicole473

    @AllanGreenwald “attacks down” more often than not. He is an immature fool, among other things.I’m also not convinced that our resident firebagger troll (me.yahoo up ^^there) is not actually Greenwald or Hamsher. Sad.

  • me.yahoo.com/a/gy6hm6onnYJfg8aAgW5Y4YLVBIgY

    There’s something else at work here, with Bob’s hatred of FDL. Jealously. Take a look at the “Top Blogs in Politics” rankings, which are kept up-to-date on a monthly basis:http://www.wikio.com/blogs/top/politicsWhere is FDL? #12. That’s right, #12 out of 100 political blogs. It’s quite popular, effective and even influential – what with politicians even referencing Jane Hamsher. TV shows book Jane as well. Why? She provides political analysis, not cheerleading.Where does bobcesca.com show up on the list. Nowhere. Not even in the top 100. Know who else is in the top 100? Glenn Greenwald, Paul Krugman, atrios, digby, Balloon Juice, etc …No Bob Cesca though. Know why? Because Bob’s a loser. A loser with his little cheerleading echo chamber of a dozen dead-enders.Bob’s bitter and jealous of Jane Hamsher, and even Glen Greenwald. His failed site is proof of that. Too bad Bob doesn’t get a shrink to work out his anger instead of taking it out on successful bloggers – you know, the one’s that actually do their homework, provide cogent analysis, and generally get the job done. Perhaps Bob could learn from them and actually start doing some honest work instead of cheerleading and re-printing Glenn Beck quotes all day long.

  • LTMidnight

    Wow, kid. So now we’re using the Fox News tactic of “we’re getting more ratings than you” now?Well I guess it’s okay now since she appeared on Fox news after scolding other Democrats for doing so and “giving them legitimacy”.

  • http://www.politicalruminations.com/ Nicole473

    Ye Gods, frederick, the scrabbling is amusing, but really, what a waste of your time.Oh, and Reason Magazine is right below FDL on that list, while CNN’s Political Ticker is #1. Why I do believe that might mean that the list is basically crap as far as ratings on content are concerned.

  • Allanbrauer

    Yeah! We should decide who’s right about everything by who has the highest ratings. FoxNews, #1 in cable news, must, therefore, be the best and most reliable source for information intelligent Americans need to make their decisions.I got almost all the way through typing that sentence without barfing. ‘Scuse me while I go clean up.

  • LauraNo

    Sometimes I feel that the ‘professional left’ is really just a bunch of immature, emotional 5 year olds (immature for 5 year olds, even). If I wanted some exact opposite version of Bush I could get behind them but I don’t. I prefer to make things better, as better as we can manage when the electorate is largely ignorant and uncaring and buys into the right wing rhetoric because we make no effort to negate that crap. What are you going to do? The best you can. Throwing hissy fits doesn’t help.

  • Lexaburn

    Well, ,well, well, the troll/coward shows up looking to settle a disagreement on who’s more popular. It just so happens that Mr. Cesca is a blogger (perhaps, “fellow” blogger – hmm?), so the troll desperately uses that as an excuse to say that Cesca’s jealous of the left-wing demi-activists’ influence. In turn, it gives the troll an excuse to come here to pester this so-called “jealous” individual.Blaaaahahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!Whatever…Hey, troll/coward, I can’t stand Hamsandwich either. I guess I’m jealous, too, eh?Oh, it’s because she has some choice words for our president, hmm?Here’s the situation: I voted for Obama, and I assume she did, too. She can talk all the ish she wants about Obama and it will mean nothing to an individual like me. See, I actually based my vote on principle, not out of professional courtesy like some of the demi-activists you see on TV, print media, blogs, and what-have-you.Besides that, I don’t like witnessing liberals taking the media dork litmus test and failing before my eyes. When Hamsandwich was on C-Span some months back, she had the opportunity to dismantle a loaded question regarding “bipartisanship.” Basically, the host perceived her as a rabid liberal that only associated with such, and in order to disarm the host she discussed how she and Grover-fucking-Norquist shared a few common interests. This mostly revolved around petty grievances regarding Obama’s cabinet, I gather. It was hysterical watching her wrack her brain for conservascum names in order to assuage the fear that she was one of THOSE liberals. Ha!She gave that intellectual charlatan props for what? Oh, because she did not want to be seen as one of those rocking the boat just for the libs. No, no, she’s doing it for the American people, doggonnit. It’s the right thing to do. Man, by the time the cock crowed thrice, she would’ve been claiming she had martinis with that under-fed ferret-looking bitch Malkin as they discussed how Pelosi and Reid wanted nanny states on the moon. Hamsandwich is one of those good liberals that can actually hold conversations with actual conservaknave icons AND criticize the Democratic president.Yes, the great online liberal hero stared into the sun and blinked like all the others. I can only hope Cesca is of better stock, but I just don’t know.I’m saying, it’s not like the Cons are going around bragging about the libs they hang out with. Not if they don’t want to continue beguiling the otherwise scatterbrained teatards. Those Republinitwit constituents know nothing besides who the lib-lovin’ RINOS are.I can give a couple more examples (out of a catalog) why I see the woman as, sadly, just another casualty of not only establishment media flattery, but the mere threat of its scorn.There’s no need for me to attempt making sense of the “popularity = righteousness = Cesca jealousy” angle your star-fucking poser ass threw out in order to intimidate us Cescans, you Rove-like worm. The shit is lame and smacks of teatard logic I wipe my ass with.Oh…I’m a professional shrink, ya troll/coward, and I’d like to ask YOU about the anger you direct toward Mr. Cesca. I’d also like to ridicule you for your oblivious hypocrisy.I’m only here to help.

  • David Robinson

    Lexaburn,From someone that lives with a person suffering with Schizoaffective Disorder I have come to realize that there are day’s nothing they say makes any sense, rhyme or reason.As displayed by me.yahoo.com. there is just anger for no reason.Tho to him/her there is a perceived reality within his/her thought process….yet there will never be any process of reality within his/her thought’s until he/her understand there is no help for them unless they acknowledge they have an illness to begin with.Either that or he/she stops getting paid to troll.

  • Zasta Krockett

    Stalker Allen Frederick, you can’t have it both ways.Either Bob is irrelevant and no one reads him or takes him seriously, or his “personal cheerleading for the Health Care debacle has landed us in the situations we’re in”.Either he has influence or he doesn’t. You can’t say both things in the same posting. You have to decide, or else all this doublethink is going to damage your brain – and the next thing you’ll be doing in your personal vendetta is criticizing Bob’s taste in music or somthing… oh wait.

  • Lexaburn

    First off, David, continue being the rock in that person’s life. Do go at it alone. Professional help is always available. Check your local mental health care providers and be choosy. Both patients and doctors are unique. If they are not compatible, seek help somewhere else, but don’t give up. That’s preamble/advice I give to all those seeking my services, and it’s not just for you but anyone here in a similar situation.The routines committed by our resident troll/coward are not the product of a mental disorder. More likely they’re the product of his establishing his own political identity to himself. If this is the same fool that always comes to this blog just to be insulted, yes, it’s very clear that he’s attempting to reinforce who he is to himself, not to any of us that feel he’s just shy of a nuisance. The pathetic chest-thumping insult to Bob’s popularity above shows this.What does it matter how popular Mr. Cesca is if the fool visits this very blog on a regular basis? Even if it is to get his musty, dusty cranium rocked by other members, he’s pretty much a regular visitor contributing to the community. If he really wanted to insult Bob’s popularity, he’d spare himself the indignity of coming here to comment like a ninny. Shit, he’s actually insulting Hamsandwich giving Bob all this undivided attention. Shit, she may get jealous herself, going by the troll’s logic.Yeah, the bozo thinks he’s fighting to establish FDL’s superiority, correct? However, what he’s actually doing is the equivalent of a football player switching jerseys and playing with the other team in order to aim invectives at them. The fact that he’s here carrying on the way he does, while touting his support for FDL, only proves Bob’s point regarding the professional lefties. In essence, the troll/coward is helping Bob score a touchdown.The troll/coward is very dense and desperate in his mission to offend Mr. Cesca. It’s quite apparent that he suffered a slight, and is compelled to let Bob know it. The problem is the troll/coward is to proud to admit that he himself was offended, and too dense to investigate whether said insult was applicable.Don’t mind me, though. I just like kicking Internet trolls because it’s what they ask for subconsciously. Do not be one of those who’ll deprive a troll of copious amounts of rhetorical ass-kickings out of some moral compulsion.”Feeding the trolls” is one thing. It involves wasting perfectly good mental energy attempting to reason with them. No, “kicking” them sends the message that nothing they do or say will convince you that they’re superior to you. See, it’s a mental feats of strength that the trolls are pursuing, but these folks are much too lazy to actually task themselves with thinking beyond what they came in with. They seek to diminish those they mean to pester because they feel, on some level, that they believe themselves to be superior in the same manner of the troll. It is the entertaining of a form of paranoia, but not true paranoia itself. If it were true paranoia, perhaps, the troll would indulge us with his identity. Nope, he’s anonymous like the most of us here.Reaction is a one way street rife with wrecked vehicles. We’re establishing our identities to ourselves as much as the troll/coward. The difference is that we never sought to broadcast it to anyone that did not care. We assume everyone here is curious, yet intelligent enough to accept each other. Curiosity is the key to enlightenment.I accept that a troll/coward is here to be kicked. Will the troll accept that he’s worthy to be kicked?Levity, David Robinson.Stop taking the troll/coward seriously, folks.

  • http://www.politicalruminations.com/ Nicole473

    David and Zasta…….good points.Lexaburn, so good to see you, dude! :)

  • roxsteady

    I’m with Krugman. I don’t read Greenwald or the firebaggers anymore. It’s like an alternate reality. No matter what’s really going on they’re always off on some bullshit conspiracy theory.

  • Maria Ellicott

    You ever notice how the troll Frederick rears its ugly head whenever Bob (and others) call people like him out on their bullshit?

  • langx

    Greenwald is an important voice in the community. If he wasn’t there wouldn’t be security firms looking to take him down.The problem as I see it is that Obama is not really a progressive. A progressive would have never allowed the rich to get tax cuts. He would have raised taxes on the rich. Clinton isn’t all the way progressive but he understood the argument. Reagan understood to raise revenues you need to raise taxes sometimes.My problem with Obama is he continues to give the Republican arguments legitimacy when they have none. Tax cuts have never created a job.Neither has cutting social programs or increasing the debt on people in college. Yet he’s making that argument.He also wants to end Fannie and Freddie. What’s next. Privatizing SS.You can’t sign a bill for tax cuts for the rich then cut a program that helps the poor get heat.You can’t run a justice dept that won’t prosecute the CEO of Country Wide or any of the crimes of the Bush admin and call yourself a progressive.If you can support a WH that does those type of things I have to wonder.If that’s your reality you might not be living in the real world after all. .