If anyone doubts that Hillary is the establishment candidate, just read Krugman's article,

[ProSense]

curiously titled "Hate Springs Eternal"? Krugman, an economist, starts off criticizing Obama's health care plan, but somehow the "cult" meme, which is being pushed in the media and by bloggers like Hillary shill Taylor Marsh, winds up the centerpiece of his article (and the title makes this clear).

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. We’ve already had that from the Bush administration — remember Operation Flight Suit? We really don’t want to go there again.

Something and someone is driving this meme, and I bet it's Hillary's campaign.



edited typos.

[BayouBengal07]

1. Don't you get it?

Anyone who inspires optimism and energy is a cult leader. We can't be too excited; it's uncool.

[Thrill]

2. You aren't allowed to be excited or inspired in politics

Damn Hopemongers


:)

[Demeter]

3. I Thought Krugman Addressed the Issue Even-Handedly

I only question his belief that Hillary's health care plan is better. Neither candidate is willing to bite the universal, single payer health care bullet and fix a serious infrastructure problem that holds this country back every day and in so many ways.

Both Democratic candidates are trying to get elected on charisma, because that's what the media will sell. The media doesn't do policy.

Since the GOP candidates have no charisma, they go with that old GOP stand-by: fear. Media likes to sell fear even better.

[Thrill]

4. Even after this line?

"I won’t try for fake evenhandedness here"

[Hobarticus]

5. As in, "I won't say they're both doing it"

[Demeter]

8. He Used that Line to Report Accurately What He Sees, as Opposed to the MSM

which will seek out "the opposite view" in a bid to prove that there is controversy over black is white, or Creationism is science, or any other patent lie.

And I find that any cultish tendencies on the part of Obama supporters is more than offset by the Clinton smear campaign. Hillary has not been a clean candidate.

[jackson_dem]

14. Something Obama himself has spoken about in his book

Krugman is a media voice who is calling the truth likes he sees it, not feigning that both sides are equally correct.

[Tatiana]

11. HA!

:rofl:

[ProSense]

6. "Obama campaign seems dangerously close to becoming a cult of personality. We’ve already had...Bush"

That's not even-handedly. That's bizarre fear mongering by criticizing all Obama supporters.

"most of the venom I see is coming from supporters of Mr. Obama, who want their hero or nobody."

Yet yesterday the polling showed 63% of Hillary supporters saying they would not vote for Obama.

Krugman is completely with out credibility here.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

10. Hillary's health care plan is better and here is why...

#1 it covers everybody where as Obama's leaves millions without and his also fines needy people for not having it.

#2 Hillary's plan has built into it the infrastructure that will make it an easy transition into universal health care at no extra cost

[Thrill]

13. Its fine to disagree with his Health plan but where does he

get off attacking Obama's supporters?

[jackson_dem]

17. Maybe the fact Obamites have attacked him for weeks had something to do with it?

Besides he isn't the only person who has noticed these tendencies among some Obama supporters. Even newspapers as far as Asia and Australia have been seeing the same thing.

[ProSense]

26. Maybe he's just unprofessional. n/t

[Hobarticus]

7. Right, we all get it...Krugman's a fascist, yadda yadda yadda...

Next topic....please.

[hfojvt]

9. she has Krugman's endorsement, that's pretty clear

but you have not established that Krugman is part of the establishment.

Previously he seemed to be supporting Edwards.

[Hobarticus]

15. Apparently not fawning over certain candidates

makes you "establishment".

That's my best guess.

[jackson_dem]

12. Krugman was a corporate mole all along

:sarcasm:

[ProSense]

19. Judith Miller! NYT! Get it? n/t

[cottonseed]

16. Take 1 part Fonzarelli, 1 shark, and 2 skis. Mix liberally.

If he's mad at a couple mean comments he's been getting on his blog, or that he's been reading on the internet, that's one thing, but to send this article out for the New York times is entirely another.

[FrenchieCat]

18. My letter to Mr. Krugman....

I read your column "hate Springs Eternal" and was astounded to find that the venom was coming from your pen, and it nearly kept me from finishing your work.

In your column, you casually point a finger at Obama supporters without proof, and label them a cult. Although it is clear this is being said to discourage the enthusiasm that so many Americans are feeling in their support of Sen. Barack Obama (since you well know that a Cult is never a good thing to be a part of), you yourself are going down the low road that you ironically warn others about.

Perpetuating this Cult nonsense is simply ridiculing millions of Democrats and Independents who's votes the Democratic party will need in November. I believe that this meme of "Cult personality" which you are helping grow for whatever your personal reasons are is exactly the type of politics of hate that Barack Obama warned all Americans about. For you to take this opportunity to cut off Democrats' collective noses to spite their faces by defaming millions of voters is what is scary, and borders on political insanity.

A reporter uses the verb Pimp in the same sentence as a grown woman who's last name happens to be Clinton, and that is unacceptable. In the meantime, you slander millions of voters and that's all Ok-dokey.

Mr. Krugman, you, evidently have taken your eyes of the prize, and I hope it will be worth it to you. I personally think that it will not.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Member of the Obama 2008 Cult aka an American Voter

[donheld]

20. If Krugman isn't biased then tell me why

He never ever picks apart any part of Hillary's ideas or plans. No candidate's plans are totally above criticism. As a newspaper economic opinion writer he should be analyzing all the candidates ideas and reporting what he likes and dislikes. He should not be constantly attacking one candidate and only one.

[uberblonde]

21. Gee....

You think maybe he figures you can find articles attacking Clinton just about anywhere?

[uberblonde]

22. Gee....

You think maybe he figures you can find articles attacking Clinton just about anywhere?

[ProSense]

23. "Paul Krugman really, really, really doesn’t like Barack Obama -- or his supporters."

Paul Krugman really, really, really doesn’t like Barack Obama -- or his supporters.

Krugman needs to get a grip!

[ProSense]

24. Actually, maybe the NYT is avenging Judith Miller. Roger Cohen spews:

The New York Times’ Roger Cohen looks at the problems Obama's facing in the Jewish community. "The attacks, mainly anonymous e-mails, have woven together various threads -- his middle name ‘Hussein;’ schooling in Muslim Indonesia; his Chicago pastor’s embrace of the anti-Semitic leader of the Nation of Islam, Louis Farrakhan; and his calls for dialogue with Iran -- to portray Obama as the Muslim Manchurian candidate. Leading American Jewish organizations have denounced these ‘hateful e-mails.’ Obama has condemned Farrakhan’s anti-Semitism and made clear he disagrees with his pastor, the Rev. Jerermiah A. Wright Jr., whose magazine honored Farrakhan last year. But he’s not broken with Wright, the man who ushered him to his Christian faith.”

link

The lunacy!

[Peace Patriot]

25. I always thought Krugman was a good guy, until the weeks after 11/2/04,

when he went on vacation during the election fraud fight in Ohio. Very dark days, those, when the 2004 election theft investigation was just getting under way, driven entirely by the grass roots--including those of us here at DU looking at the exit polls vs. the official results, and finally grokking the reason for the fast-tracking of all those new electronic voting systems, all over the country, run on 'trade secret,' proprietary programming code, owned and controlled by rightwing Bushite corporations, with virtually no audit/recount controls. A difficult moment for all of us--realizing that the system was totally fucked.

Public questioning of the results--and of this extremely riggable system--by folks like Krugman--one of the few seeming advocates of the people in the corporate press (or anywhere)-- was desperately needed. The story was being black-holed in the corporate "news." I'd been reading Krugman's columns for some time, at that point, and thought him very intelligent, and a great writer, who would immediately smell a rat and investigate non-transparent vote 'counting,' and massive suppression of black votes, and write about it, in the NYT.

He went on vacation. He was off in Europe somewhere, while we were all sweating Diebold bullets. I'll never forget it. And I haven't read him since--because he never recouped. Okay, so someone needs a vacation. I'll give him that--if he comes back, takes a look at this thing, and THEN writes about it. He never said a word, not one word about the extraordinary corruption around these e-voting contracts, nor the truly mind-boggling non-transparency of the system, nor about Democratic Party leaders' collusion in putting it in place.

What he's doing now, on behalf of establishment candidate Clinton, is no surprise to me--well, a bit of a surprise, but not much of one--because of that memory. We've had so many betrayals, I don't know why that one sticks in my craw so much. But it does.

I'm not endorsing Obama. In fact, I'm not sure about Obama. This talk about "cult" and "hate speech" is just bullshit. What's more important is whether or not his supporters' perception of him--opposed to the Iraq War, and a fresh, new, youthful, creative face of change for the better--will translate into significant change, IF the Dark Lords permit him to be elected. And IF they permit him to be elected, is that not strong evidence that he is not what he seems?

It's real hard to judge people in this nutso delusional BushWorld fascist/corporate media atmosphere. I don't trust anyone in this "Alice in Wonderland" America. But it might be significant that Obama has won 10 out of 11 caucuses, where the votes are not counted on Diebold/ES&S voting machines, and has won only 9 out of 21 primaries, where the votes are 'counted' with "trade secret" code. We're getting pure grass roots American opinion in the caucuses, and manipulated vote totals in the primaries?

They have the capability to do it--the easy capability. Would they? (--yeah, that's a given--they would.) Better question: why? to what end? because H. Clinton is more defeatable by the outright fascists? because H. Clinton is the "made" candidate of the outright fascists? because Obama is a fox (has kept his head down pretty much) but in truth can't be bought? Dunno. Really, I don't. But I like that kids are enthusiastic, because it takes far more than a president to change a country. It takes the whole country. And political involvement is a very great positive--even if he bitterly disappoints them--or even if they steal it from him. If they steal it, we have a whole new generation asking why. And then we might be able to change things--starting with the non-transparent, Bushite-corporate controlled voting system.

[rinsd]

27. Why is it surprising that Krugman points his finger at Obama supporters?

Have you ever seen his comments section for his articles?

Most of them are Obama fans attacking him. Not his article....him