******************** THIS BLOG HAS MOVED TO WWW.LEGALINSURRECTION.COM ********************

This blog is moving to www.legalinsurrection.com. If you have not been automatically redirected please click on the link.

NEW COMMENTS will NOT be put through and will NOT be transferred to the new website.

Thursday, May 6, 2010

Racist and Misogynistic Haters, by Paul Krugman

Hate Springs Eternal, by Paul Krugman (emphasis mine):
"Racism, misogyny and character assassination are all ways of distracting voters from the issues, and people who care about the issues have a shared interest in making the politics of hatred unacceptable."
Racism, misogyny, character assassination, and the politics of hatred. Sounds like a Eugene Robinson and Paul Krugman analysis of the Tea Parties.

But in fact, Krugman penned that column in February 2008, and was talking about Democrats in the 2008 Democratic primary:

... [T]hese days even the Democratic Party seems to be turning into Nixonland.

The bitterness of the fight for the Democratic nomination is, on the face of it, bizarre....

I won’t try for fake evenhandedness here: most of the venom I see is coming from supporters of Mr. Obama, who want their hero or nobody. I’m not the first to point out that the Obama campaign seems dangerously close to becoming a cult of personality....

But most of all, progressives should realize that Nixonland is not the country we want to be. Racism, misogyny and character assassination are all ways of distracting voters from the issues, and people who care about the issues have a shared interest in making the politics of hatred unacceptable.

The internet sure does have a long memory. For those who know how to use Google.

Note: With this post I officially start a "Paul Krugman" tag. Because his material is priceless.

Related Posts:
So, Mr. Krugman, Who Incited This Violence?
Krugman Plays The Hate Card
Bush Hid Ice Images From People Who Can't Use Google

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook
Bookmark and Share


  1. The republicans have had exactly 5 black representitives in the house and senate since the end of reconstruction. That is due mostly to the "southern strategy" conservatives adopted during the civil rights era, which appealed to whites that didn't want to see the south recognize that all men are created are equal. Turning that wheel back isn't going to be easy. There are plenty of people who will vote against their own interests because of fear or, because they are led to believe that the party of the rich will help them out too. The hard part for the republicans is that the number of people who would like to see bp,exxon, goldman sachs and massey mines making the rules is diminishing. It will diminish even more as it becomes clear that halliburton was in charge of capping the well that broke,goldman was betting against it's own investors and massey mines has for years, been playing regulators for fools.

  2. "The republicans have had exactly 5 black representitives in the house and senate since the end of reconstruction."

    Because Democrats lynched black Republicans who won elections after Reconstruction.

    I love how you try to blame that on Republicans. Democrats are shameless in their endless quest to bury their own history.

  3. If you think the problems the republicans have had in attracting minority voters has nothing to with civil rights legislation and the ensuing southern strategy, you are mistaken. Just ask Michael Steele.

  4. Forget the past, today Democrats are in charge of tar and feathering (all Teapartiers are racist) and lying like hell(health care will save us money and you will still have private health care options). Today we discovered that large corporations like AT&T and Caterpillar have decided it's cheaper to pay a government fine than pay for private health care for their workers. We are slowly beginning to realize the it's a race war that is being carried out against the white "conquerors" by the Mexican activists who, on May 1, were very up front and a bit violent in expressing their desire for revolution and "reconquista." They want amnesty and open borders not in order to have a road to citizenship but because they do not recognize our laws or our sovereignty. They want to spread their culture and have us speaking just Spanish. Hasn't anyone followed the words and policies of the Mexican Presidents since 2000? True corporate America needs reeling in but not toppling by a mob to spread the wealth. Democrats are for scrapping and restarting. Republicans of today are not your grandfather's Republicans, OK George. Asice from the occasional Senator that throws a hissey fit, we are not the party of no. We are here to maintain balance and the two party system. The Republican party is the thinking person's party, not the mob mentality party.

  5. What's your point? He's exercising his Constitutional right to free speech as an individual. He's not an office holder. I didn't vote for him for anything. He's not even a representative of the Democratic party. Just like you, he can be wrong about as much as he pleases. The Constitution guarantees his right to express his opinion, as ill-informed as it may be.

  6. Dominick - who were you addressing - Sam Henry? Are you defending George's right to his opinion? If so, he surely has that. My point is pretty clear - Republicans have been misrepresented and therefore have a harder time of attracting minorities. We have been branded as upperclass, elitist nabobs for decades. We only garner followers when people get burned by the Democrats in some way. I used to be a Democrat and voted for Obama so labels are meaningless. I'm an independent Republican. My job on this post is to dispossess those who would label all Republicans as racist and or devoted to Exxon and company. LOTS of stockholders go against company policies and are very vocal about corporate wrongdoing. A lot of Republicans are for fiscal and corporate governance reform that will retain a modicum of flexibility and freedom that will allow or initiative and invention (Pharma companies). Sorry If I was not more straightforward. I did not mean to appear shrill, George. I see red when I see the word "Democrat" followed by encomiums. I see Reid and THAT WOMAN.

  7. Let me clarify; I am a Democrat and my reference was to Mr. Krugman, a private individual exercising his Constitutional right to Free Speech.

    I probably would be a Republican if they, as a party (there are a very few notable exceptions as individuals), appeared to have any clue as to the real issues.

    The real issues are run amok financial profiteering and fundamentally uncompetivie ownership concentrations. These are in danger of turning the United States into a third-rate banana republic, and far from tackling it head on, the Republicans, as a party, seem to embrace them unquestioningly.

    Get familiar with Kevin Phillips' book "Bad Money". It's clear that the lack of reasonable oversight of the financial sector has brought us to the point where behemoth investment banks marketing opaque Frankenstein securities are bringing the house down and getting the common man, the individual taxpayer to foot the bill. Republicans and Democrats, but let's be real, mostly Republicans have enabled this for over 30 years through short-sighted and selfish deregulation policies.

    It is simply not realistic to claim that there is a type of democracy of the markets. We've already seen how the large investment banks get treated differently than anyone else in the bailouts. And Edward N. Wolf's study showed during the three years ending 2004 the wealthiest 20% of Americans increased their percentage of stock ownership to OVER 90 (NINETY) PERCENT OF ALL SHARES. And that's just raw # of shares, without a more detailed analysis of voting rights of particular classes of shares.

    A very uncompetitive market dynamic, ironically similar to that which killed the Soviet Union's command economy, has taken root in the U.S.A. That is the real challenge. Not whether you personally like Harry Reid or Nancy Pelosi or Barack Obama or Krugman.

    The Democrats have many shortcomings but they are at least pointed in the correct general direction--levelling the playing field. Republicans, again as a party with very few individual exceptions, are instead preoccupied with amateurish attempts at character assasination and hopelessly locked in to a platform of failed policies of economic deregulation.

    If you really want a strong Republican party, one with a realistic chance of occupying the White House in the next 40 years, you have to come to grips with reality and clear away the dead brush.