For such a despicable liberal hack, the above descriptive term is within the realm of civility. Personally, I liken Krugman to the toxic, bacterial laden contents that depart said orifice, but I digress.
On Friday night’s episode of Fox News show “Red Eye,” pollster (and non Kool-Aid drinking Democrat) Pat Caddell accurately describes Krugman.
From The Daily Caller:
That is the “flat-out” truth, spoken clearly and concisely. Caddell points out an example or two, but there is a litany of despicable comments the former economic adviser to Enron, Krugman, has made in years past. Things he has said since the horrific Tucson massacre have further exposed him as the a$$-hole he truly is.
Nile Gardiner of the London Telegraph has posted on this which includes Krugman twice.
#1)Paul Krugman–We don’t have proof yet that this was political, but the odds are that it was. She’s been the target of violence before. And for those wondering why a Blue Dog Democrat, the kind Republicans might be able to work with, might be a target, the answer is that she’s a Democrat who survived what was otherwise a GOP sweep in Arizona, precisely because the Republicans nominated a Tea Party activist.
#5)Paul Krugman–So will the Arizona massacre make our discourse less toxic? It’s really up to G.O.P. leaders. Will they accept the reality of what’s happening to America, and take a stand against eliminationist rhetoric? Or will they try to dismiss the massacre as the mere act of a deranged individual, and go on as before? If Arizona promotes some real soul-searching, it could prove a turning point. If it doesn’t, Saturday’s atrocity will be just the beginning.
He is not only wrong about this, and about pretty much everything else he comments on, but polling numbers from many sources confirm it.
From Yossi Gestetner, AZ Shooting Polls are Bad News for Libs, Media(links at the source):
A CBS News Poll shows that 57% surveyed, including 57% Independents, do not associate political rhetoric with the shooting.
A Rasmussen Poll released Thursday, January 13, 2010, writes that 62% survey think that stricter gun rules would not have avoided the Arizona shooting, and 58% say so in the above CBS Poll.
56% in the above Rasmussen poll say that the United States does not need stricter gun laws.
Only fifteen percent, again: only 15%, in a Quinnipiac Poll taken January 10-11, say that Overheated Political Rhetoric was a main reason for the Arizona Shooting, and only 9% say lax gun laws was the main reason. IN FACT, 40% in this poll say this shooting could not have been prevented!
36% in the above poll say that liberals are more responsible for heated political rhetoric, versus 32% who say Conservatives are more responsible.
As for Krugman’s statement “If Arizona promotes some real soul-searching, it could prove a turning point. If it doesn’t, Saturday’s atrocity will be just the beginning,” he was actually prescient, but not in the way he foresaw.
From Gateway Pundit, the neo-libturd Charles “Nancy” Johnson’s latest man crush, Eric Fuller, was arrested at a Tucson “soul searching” forum for threatening the life of the leader of the Tucson Tea Party patriots.
As for the a$$-hole Krugman, I’m confident the 50 or 60 subscribers the NYSlimes has support his false and iniquitous claims, unreservedly. Which insures he will never behave any differently.
Some how the rest of us will manage to survive without his caustic partisan rhetoric and distortions of reality. We have managed to do so quite nicely so far, for one simple reason.
He’s an a$$-hole.
*Cross posted at Urban Grounds*