Krugman: Conservative Views About Debt Ceiling Should Be Censored From News Reports
By Noel Sheppard | July 27, 2011 | 10:14
New York Times columnist Paul Krugman on Tuesday said it was a "moral issue" for the press to censor conservative views about the debt ceiling.
Quite shockingly, the Nobel laureate took to his blog to complain that the news media are being too fair and balanced in their coverage of this highly contentious issue:
Watching our system deal with the debt ceiling crisis — a wholly self-inflicted crisis, which may nonetheless have disastrous consequences — it’s increasingly obvious that what we’re looking at is the destructive influence of a cult that has really poisoned our political system.
And no, I don’t mean the fanaticism of the right. Well, OK, that too. But my feeling about those people is that they are what they are; you might as well denounce wolves for being carnivores. Crazy is what they do and what they are.
No, the cult that I see as reflecting a true moral failure is the cult of balance, of centrism.
Wow! Balance and centrism is a "true moral failure":
So what do most news reports say? They portray it as a situation in which both sides are equally partisan, equally intransigent — because news reports always do that.
I'm not sure what news reports Krugman has been watching, but the ones we've been monitoring at NewsBusters concerning this matter have been anything but balanced.
The take for weeks has been that taxes must be raised to solve this problem and that it is the Republicans - and, in particular, Tea Party freshmen in the House - that are refusing to "compromise."
A new Media Research Center study on this issue found that ABC, CBS, and NBC have consistently cast the GOP as the villains in this debate.
But Krugman in his strange world doesn't see it that way:
What all this means is that there is no penalty for extremism; no way for most voters, who get their information on the fly rather than doing careful study of the issues, to understand what’s really going on...And yes, I think this is a moral issue.
So, in Krugman's view, it has become a "moral issue" for the news media to only report the side he agrees with. To solve this, he is advocating the press censor reports attempting to present the view from the right.
And he works for one of the largest newspapers in the country.
It's getting really scary out there, folks.
(H/T Hot Air Headlines)
- Noel Sheppard's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
#1 How about we censor you
Submitted by ricklail on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 10:22am.
How about we censor you ignorant arse.
#2 → Cowardly Lion
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 10:32am.
Does this idiot have to sing "If I Were King Of The Forest" every time he opens his mouth?
He that lives upon HOPE will die fasting - Ben Franklin
#3 Don't censor Krugman -- let him rant for all to see
Submitted by Galvanic on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 10:47am.
Americans understand what's at stake when a supposedly learned Leftist promotes censorship. Air these quotes --
KRUGMAN: " . . . it’s increasingly obvious that what we’re looking at is the destructive influence of a cult that has really poisoned our political system."
Sounds like he's quoting Mao or Castro -- even Chavez. Or Hitler.
KRUGMAN: ". . . And no, I don’t mean the fanaticism of the right. Well, OK, that too. But my feeling about those people is that they are what they are; you might as well denounce wolves for being carnivores. Crazy is what they do and what they are. . ."
That's right. Ship off the 'crazies' to Stalin-esque psychiatric institutions where no one will ever hear from them again. They can't be reformed or re-educated, so we must remove them from society.
KRUGMAN: ". . . No, the cult that I see as reflecting a true moral failure is the cult of balance, of centrism."
A-ha! So they allowing opposing voices to speak is immoral.
Well, he's a Nobel Prize winner, so it must be true, no?
#4 The cult of balance.
Submitted by The Vet on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 12:21pm.
We are waiting for that comet that is supposed to arrive on August 3rd. The ghost of Ronald Reagan is in a spaceship behind the comet. Join us everyone! No snip snip to join. Not like that other weird cult with the comets and the spaceships.
#5 He deserves a prize for being
Submitted by tinydancer on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 1:13pm.
He deserves a prize for being the biggest schmuck in America.
#6 Someone should photo shop him
Submitted by OldJarhead77 on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 3:43pm.
in a cheerleaders uniform with the Obama sybol on his chest and pig pink fluffy pom poms.... yelling "YEA! OBAMA!!"
#7 You mean it isn't?
Submitted by theduck6 on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 1:39pm.
I thought that was the genesis of this site in the first place.
I was wondering when someone was going to actually say it though.
#8 Libs love the first amendment-
Submitted by johnsonl on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 10:32am.
as long as it only applies to them.
#9 You beat me to it!
Submitted by Dave81 on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 10:41am.
You beat me to it!
#10 Elitism at it's best (worst)...
Submitted by retrocon on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 10:36am.
He is simply saying "I'm smarter than you, so shut up and do what I SAY!"
This is what all Libtards think and want.
#11 Time to call MIB
Submitted by ItchyZ on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 10:37am.
He needs to return to his home planet.
#12 Quite shockingly!
Submitted by dytigaf on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 10:43am.
The "Quite shockingly" comment shocked me!
Why would anyone be shocked by what this nut-ball would say....
#13 And didn't this MORON
Submitted by hbnolikeee on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 10:50am.
get a Nobel Prize in Economics? After Yassar and BO it's not a surprise really, only further disappointment as another metric of excellence now resides in the sewer.
#14 and the Nobel goes to...
Submitted by Agnostic on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 12:22pm.
The Nobel Prize in economics over the past couple of decades has often gone to the person who could best prove that socialism works in some fashion. Usually, IMHO, they seem to be saying that socialist ideas work in a mixed economy to enhance the social and economic structure.
#15 Good point, Agnostic
Submitted by Galvanic on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 7:30pm.
And that description fits Krugman..
#16 So the problem is not the debt
Submitted by Comrade Jim on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 3:46pm.
It is freedom of speech. Are the debt-ridden European countries collapsing because of too much free speech? Of course, why didn't I think of that?
Well, we should just abolish the First Amendment and appoint Paul Krugman the Premiere Commissar of the "Correct Speech Commissariat" to protect us from all these confusing messages. Clearly NB will have to go.
Paul Krugman seems to agree with V I Lenin who said the most important function of the media is to “serve as an instrument of socialist construction.”
#17 Manifest Destiny
Submitted by motherbelt on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 11:09am.
.... no way for most voters, who get their information on the fly rather than doing careful study of the issues, to understand what’s really going on...And yes, I think this is a moral issue.
Liberals see it as their moral duty to just take over and impose their will on the ignorant.
For their own good, of course.
#18 So much for 'the free
Submitted by Slyrr on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 11:13am.
So much for 'the free marketplace of ideas'.
This is what liberals will do if they are allowed to reign unchecked much longer folks. Tyranny.
Maybe Krugman should be 'censored' out of the news business.
#19 Thank you for the example, Mr. Krugman.
Submitted by almostacowboy77 on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 11:15am.
Now, use the word "fascism" in a sentence.
#20 .
Submitted by Soldat44 on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 12:41pm.
.
#21 Isn't this the one and very
Submitted by Kenyon Schraeder on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 11:16am.
Isn't this the one and very same "economist" whose advice to this administration has helped to get our economy to where it is today?
If our economy was already in trouble, unsteady on its feet and slip-sliding dangerously toward a nasty fall, this mighty economic "brain" has repeatedly demanded "More grease! More grease!"
#22 Don't forget Enron
Submitted by JeffC... on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 11:24am.
Krugman was also an advisor to Enron. How did that work out?
#23 Enron fell off a cliff and
Submitted by jkwtrading on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 12:13pm.
Enron fell off a cliff and Krugman is holding on with only a single finger before he falls.
#24 The NYTs is a soap box for
Submitted by rbosque on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 11:35am.
The NYTs is a soap box for idiots like this. He thinks that beause he has a column in the paper he must be some sort of god; but he is less than a man. We should all ignore him since he's off his nut, without readers he'll whither away beause there's nothing to him.
#25 Newspeak is alive and well.
Submitted by c5then on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 11:37am.
Geo. Orwell would be proud (or more likely throwing up in fear).
Krugman declares that it is a moral issue and the press should take sides, and then advocates for his personal political view which is the immoral side of the debate. It is completely immoral to continue borrowing and loading up the future tax burden in those yet unborn in order to feed the insatiable desire of the federal Government to spend on everything it can think of.
Krugman can't even see the lesson of the old Soviet Union. They took all of the vast wealth that the Tsars had accumulated over centuries and all of their vast natural resources and burned through all that in less than 100 years. Socialism took Russia from one of the most wealthy countries on the face of the planet in 1900 and had them completely bankrupt by 1985. That is the path that Krugman wants us to follow.
Part time Congress with term limits! - No more professional politicians. Let's start rebuilding the Republic!
#26 Krugman got this idea from
Submitted by DaChew on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 11:40am.
Krugman got this idea from the BBC's announcement that they would no longer be treating skeptic opinion on climate change as worthy of inclusion in their reporting. The line here is that "balance" isn't reasonable when the other side (that would be the skeptic or conservative side) don't hold a rational opinion in the matter. And, of course, if you disagree with those wise leftists and AGW believers, you're not rational. We should note, this is the same line of thought that led to "reeducation camps" in so many parts of the world last century. You see, you people aren't stupid, you just don't have your minds right.
On the other hand, the fact that Krugman is going completely nuts like this is a good sign that even he knows his side is losing.
#27 On the other hand, the fact
Submitted by jkwtrading on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 12:09pm.
"On the other hand, the fact that Krugman is going completely nuts like this is a good sign that even he knows his side is losing".
you nailed it, they are losing and the wolves are in their own hen house.
#28 Don't go to lunch Mr. Sheppard.
Submitted by The Vet on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 11:44am.
Unlike this nasty bitter little man that insults the right, left and middle, Fred Barnes compares our situation with what Canada went through in 1993. And he does it without insulting anyone.
How Spending Cuts—Not Higher Taxes—Saved Canada
When Jean Chretien became prime minister in 1993, Canada faced a fiscal and economic breakdown. The government's share of the economy had climbed to 53% in 1992, from 28% in 1960. Deficits had tripled as a percentage of gross domestic product over the prior two decades. Government debt was nearly 70% of GDP and growing rapidly. Interest payments on the debt took up 35 cents of every tax dollar.
Mr. Chretien and his finance minister, Paul Martin, took decisive action. "Canadians have told us that they want the deficit brought down by reducing government spending, not by raising taxes, and we agree," Mr. Martin said. The new administration slashed spending. Unemployment benefits were cut by nearly 40%. The ratio of spending cuts to tax increases was nearly 7-to-1. Federal employment was reduced by 14%. Canada's national railway and air-traffic-control system were privatized.
Okay sir. Now you can head off for the lunches. Enjoy!
#29 That was a great post! Thanks
Submitted by tinydancer on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 1:18pm.
That was a great post!
Thanks
#30 Of course, the first lie that
Submitted by jdhawk on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 11:51am.
Of course, the first lie that has been repeated over and over is that the debt ceiling crisis is a wholly self-inflicted crisis. The real issue is run away spending. No matter how much you tax - rich or otherwise - eventually federal spending uses every dime that Americans produce.
The American rating agencies, S&P Comstock, Moodys, and Fitch has all said that spending is brought under control or the downgrade our debt. Several foreign rating agencies have already downgraded the US.
So, if the debt ceiling is raised, but nothing is done to attenuate spending, the above rating agencies will downgrade.
By the way, the present Reid and Boehner plans don't attenuate spending. The reason that they don't is that they don't touch Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. These are the programs that must be reformed.
The other lie that has been repeated over and over is that Americans are too stupid to understand that you can't spend more than you make. Yeah, this is a difficult concept . . . . Nobody but the likes of Krugman can grasp this concept!
Of course, Krugman is wrong that there is no penalty for extremism. He must have forgotten about the most recent election, November 2010. Then there is that pesky business about the president'e polling data - it is falling like a rock! There is even talk about duhbama facing a primary for the upcoming presidential election in 2012. Yeah, extremism does have penalties and we are seeing in spades happening to the left.
#31 Pauls problem
Submitted by MidAmerica on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 12:04pm.
He imagines he got a Nobel for being smart when actually he got it for being Liberal. Two different things entirely.
#32 Paul Weasel
Submitted by AgentAmerican on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 12:14pm.
There are some times I wished McCarthy would come back from the grave and wreak his vengeance upon this scourge. That's right I said it. I'm a McCarthyite!
#33 You are not alone!
Submitted by tinydancer on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 1:21pm.
I wish the same thing.
Everyone should read "Witness" by Whittaker Chambers,
and "Thirty Years of Treason" by Frank Rich.
Then check out the interviews with Charlotte Iserbyte on YouTube.
#34 Patronizing Media
Submitted by clairesolt on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 12:15pm.
I was married to two TV directors and the media is entirely based on the conviction that the people are ignorant, indifferent, and inattentive. They all pitch everything they do at what they think is sixth grade reading level, Newspapers are written thus and TV follows. Few have much of a notion of how curious sixth graders can be, though.
Think about how often their analysis asserts that we have a celebrity culture or audiences have a short attention span. Huh? The celebrity culture is a fabrication of movie industry PR. They blame a short attention span for their laziness in covering the background of stories. Anyway Marx abolished history for class warfare.
We need a free press, and that means government needs to take its mutts off the scales. Abolish the FCC and its licenses. That is how the censorship and lib bias is achieved.
#35 The old FCC
Submitted by IdahoJim on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 1:52pm.
I would not abolish the FCC, but I would regress it back to its roots. Frequency allocation of the airwaves was the FCC's original purpose and for some reason, it started to monitor and regulate content as well. Now they are making noises about controlling the internet.
If the FCC sticks to it original intent, frequency allocation, then I would not mind keeping it around.
IdahoJim
http://idahoandy.net
#36 Oh that MSM and their love of Conservative proposals
Submitted by Gary Hall on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 12:24pm.
I'm still waiting for a single national mainstream reporter to ask - in public - of the White House, Obama, a Democrat Party leader, etc., a simple question or two. For example:
Q: Mr. President. How do you respond to last weeks CNN poll which shows that 67% of voters nationally supported the Cut, Cap and Balance Bill which passed in the House?
Q: Sen. Reid. When a super majority of voters in the country support a bill, like the Cut, Cap and Balance Bill, how can you possibly refuse to bring it up for discussion and debate in the Senate?
Q: It seems that in every poll out there, a super majority of Americans really don't want the debt ceiling raised at all. How do you respond to the citizens? Mr. President? Mr. Reid? Mrs. Pelosi? Mr. Carney?
Q: To every anchor out there -- why is our national MSM not asking questions which represent the views of the majority of Americans? Why are they hiding the majority views?
(;~> gary
#37 Sorry.
Submitted by IdahoJim on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 2:06pm.
The only poll that really counts is when we vote. I find popularity polls interesting, but not interesting enough to affect policy decisions.
Voting is the chance we have to fire these idiots and hire people that represent what we really think.
IdahoJim
http://idahoandy.net
#38 You may be a whiner!!!
Submitted by Pilgrim1949 on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 12:25pm.
Geez, Paulie... ya want some gummint cheese to go with that sniveling, panties-in-a-wad, Libtard whine?
Somebody please get his Binky out of the dryer and back into his trembling little hands before he throws another my-way-or-else, Stalinist/Maoist/Statist-wannabee snot-flinging temper tantrum.
Life sure is hard whenever someone doesn't immediately kowtow to you and blabber on and on about how sweetly fragrant your farts smell.
It's the most insecure and easily-psychologically-threatened that often seem the most violently-reactive whenever there's so much as a ripple of opposition that disturbs the calm, smooth surface of their mental cesspools.
Ya can't always have your way, Paulie. Put on your big boy pants and get over it.
"Ye canne change the laws of physics....." but some politicians believe that with the right legislation you can pretend they don't really apply to your own pet projects...
#39 Forget about the idiocy that
Submitted by killa37 on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 12:35pm.
Forget about the idiocy that comes out of this fools mouth for a minute.......................why does every photo I see of him make him look crazy as a loon???
#40 maybe because he is
Submitted by ohio granny on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 1:15pm.
Maybe because he is crazy as a loon. You don't even have to listen to him. All you need to do is look at him,
#41 Krugman
Submitted by alvin on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 12:48pm.
Mommy, Mommy, they're making fun of me again.
There there, poor right winger. Now you just go and write a hard hitting blog post and everything will be all right.
Another example of right wing victimhood
#42 Well...
Submitted by IdahoJim on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 1:44pm.
Another example of left wing condescension.
Go pound sand for awhile.
IdahoJim
http://idahoandy.net
#43 I thought... waitaminute...
Submitted by DumbCanuck on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 12:58pm.
I thought Pravda went out of business with the old soviet union!
The Pravda Times?
The New York Tass?
"There... Are... Four... Lights!"
#44 Would you buy a used Prius
Submitted by Jack Bauer on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 1:01pm.
Would you buy a used Prius from this man?
All of the above Mr Obama? --- How about ALL OF THE BELOW, instead.
#45 I wouldn't take
Submitted by UpNorth on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 8:25pm.
a new, or used Prius from him.
Actually, Krugman looks like he should be hanging out in an alley, whispering, Hey, mister, wanna meet my sister?
#46 Why does Krugman always look
Submitted by Vdip72 on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 1:12pm.
Why does Krugman always look like he needs to take a shower?
#47 Shower and a laxative.
Submitted by Jack Bauer on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 1:17pm.
Shower and a laxative.
All of the above Mr Obama? --- How about ALL OF THE BELOW, instead.
#48 Since when
Submitted by kevtheweb on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 1:14pm.
Since when has it ever been "non-moral" to consider both sides of an argument. I would think doing this very thing would be the "moral" thing to do.
In fact, how is one suppose to argue his side over another without even acknowledging the other's side.
What goverment comittee is going to be created to determine which viewpoints and arguments are OK to air on the news, and who the hell will be serving on it?
#49 BBC is already doing something like that.
Submitted by IdahoJim on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 1:39pm.
The BBC has announced that it will no longer put skeptics or "Climate Change Deniers" on the air because in the opinion of the BBC staff, anthropogenic (?) climate change science is settled and anybody that says different is automatically not credible.
I do not think of Krugman, or any MSNBC host to be credible either, so I censor them by not listening or reading any of their crap.
IdahoJim
http://idahoandy.net
#50 britain is screwed
Submitted by g00se99 on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 5:33pm.
I listened to that the other day in a video clip. Uk is just messed up these days.
#51 Here's what he's really concerned about...
Submitted by msouth on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 1:59pm.
I'll translate Krugman for you:
"I remember a time...sob...when the far-left view was shouted so consistently and uniformly across the networks that you practically *had* to think that was what all the rational people thought. It didn't work for everyone, but, dammit, we were able to *steer* things because we could sway enough people in enough cases to make the difference. [Pause for composure.] Now there are OTHER VIEWS that can't be silenced by lack of access! WE ARE LOSING OUR STRANGLEHOLD ON THE CONVERSATION! AAAAAAAAAIIIIIIIIIIIGGGGGGHHHHHHH!"
That's the truth. What he actually believes is that the leftstream *has* always presented *the* rational viewpoint. The only one. And now it has been forced to acknowledge the crazies that disagree. He actually sincerely believes this, I have no doubt, and he is surrounded by people all day that think the same thing.
#52 My sister censors Krugman using the "bird cage" method.
Submitted by drsamherman on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 3:50pm.
Her parakeet expresses their mutual opinion of Krugman every day when she changes the cage liner.
#53 We're not idiots, Paul
Submitted by CobraMan on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 4:35pm.
"What all this means is that there is no penalty for extremism; no way for most voters, who get their information on the fly rather than doing careful study of the issues, to understand what’s really going on...And yes, I think this is a moral issue."
So, the poor unwashed masses still can't comprehend what is going on? We still need the guidance of the enlightened, like yourself, Paul? Well, take that condescending attitude and shove it, Paul. We, thanks to world wide high speed communications and universal information access, are the most informed, most involved generation EVER! We don't need you anymore. We don't need you to define and explain things to us anymore. We don't need you to "solve" problems for us any more. We're more than capable of doing that ourselves. But that's the problem, isn't it? It's interfering with your elitism, is it not?YOU don't get to force YOUR views of "morality" and "understanding" on us anymore. We're FREE to do that ourselves. Journalistic elitism is quickly disappearing, and you're no longer necessary. Man, that's GOT to hurt an egotistical elitist like yourself, Paul
So, Paul, take your "moral" censorship somewhere else, like Cuba, where people are truly uninformed and don't know what censorship is and what information is being withheld from them. We're wise to you, and we're getting wiser every single day.
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
#54 amen brother amen
Submitted by g00se99 on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 5:29pm.
Amen
#55 this is just scary
Submitted by g00se99 on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 5:27pm.
Its one thing to be rude or opposit view. Its off to Scaryville when people say that over 50% of the population should be ignored or silenced. Krugman is one messed up dude. Dictators would love him.
#56 Indictment of the Nobel...
Submitted by apf2 on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 6:43pm.
Every time this jerk speaks he demonstrates the absolute worthlessness of the Nobel prize. He is just another political hack from the radical left.
#57 Go ____ yourself, comrade Krugman
Submitted by Dave. on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 6:58pm.
-Dave
#58 HItler with a beard and belly...
Submitted by MightyMouth on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 9:14pm.
Nice. Your view counts all others must be suppressed. We get it Paul.
#59 civil discourse
Submitted by michiganruth on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 10:08pm.
I am SO GLAD we're back to civil discourse in this country! not.
"crazy is what the Right does"? no stereotyping there. that's right, Krugman, anyone who is to the right of you politically is crazy.
and while I usually don't go ad hominem, I really have to say that Krugman and Friedman are two insufferably pretentious little garden gnomes, grown fat from living large while lecturing us to be more like China. geez!
#60 Doesn't Krugman know that GOP views are already censored?
Submitted by Nightfly on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 10:53pm.
Wow.... Don't hear the GOP views discussed honestly on any 'establishment' media outlets. The WH controls their talking points.
#61 Gun Walker Scandal....
Submitted by adamsmith on Thu, 07/28/2011 - 11:01am.
This really is a huge smokescreen to keep Obama and Holder from being investigated in the Gun Walker Scandal, which when you think about it, is 100 times worse than Watergate ever was. That's being censored with no lefty outfit even reporting on it.
#62 So now we're Higher Debt
Submitted by Chris Norman on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 11:09pm.
So now we're Higher Debt Ceiling Deniers?
#63 The End of Truth
Submitted by Simplicity101 on Wed, 07/27/2011 - 11:48pm.
Having just finished Hayek's book The Road To Serfdom for an online class, I remember one chapter in the book called The End of Truth.
In it Hayek basically says in order for socialism to work, in order for a planned economy to work, the government needs to control all aspects of the issue. There can be no doubt, no wavering, no hesitation. Anyone who opposes the plan must be quickly and ruthlessly disposed of. Men, having abandoned their moral standards in pursuit of the "greater good", will stop at no ends to do such a thing.
Scary times indeed.
#64 I don't care for Krugmans
Submitted by buddyc on Thu, 07/28/2011 - 8:11am.
I don't care for Krugmans views. However, rightly or wrongly he is a Nobel Prize winnder and works at the NY Times. He has some responsibility to this country. He should apologize for his irresponsible comments.
#65 I thought this was 2011, not 1984?
Submitted by ljacone on Thu, 07/28/2011 - 8:20am.
"Don't you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought?... The whole climate of thought will be different. In fact, there will be no thought, as we understand it now. Orthodoxy means not thinking -- not needing to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness."
- George Orwell, 1984, Book 1, Chapter 5
#66 Lol Paul, you aren't supposed
Submitted by amyshulk on Thu, 07/28/2011 - 6:26pm.
Lol Paul, you aren't supposed to say everything you think!!!
Ronald Reagan
#67 He's Not Kidding
Submitted by IrateNate on Thu, 07/28/2011 - 8:57pm.
"As one of the Enlightened Ones, the one thing we should never tolerate is intolerance."
Krugman's Dog