"One depressing aspect of American politics is the susceptibility of the political and media establishment to charlatans. You might have thought, given past experience, that D.C. insiders would be on their guard against conservatives with grandiose plans. But no: as long as someone on the right claims to have bold new proposals, he’s hailed as an innovative thinker. And nobody checks his arithmetic.

Mr. Ryan has become the Republican Party’s poster child for new ideas thanks to his “Roadmap for America’s Future,” a plan for a major overhaul of federal spending and taxes. News media coverage has been overwhelmingly favorable; on Monday, The Washington Post put a glowing profile of Mr. Ryan on its front page, portraying him as the G.O.P.’s fiscal conscience. He’s often described with phrases like “intellectually audacious.”

But it’s the audacity of dopes. Mr. Ryan isn’t offering fresh food for thought; he’s serving up leftovers from the 1990s, drenched in flimflam sauce.

Mr. Ryan’s plan calls for steep cuts in both spending and taxes. He’d have you believe that the combined effect would be much lower budget deficits, and, according to that Washington Post report, he speaks about deficits “in apocalyptic terms.” And The Post also tells us that his plan would, indeed, sharply reduce the flow of red ink: “The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that Rep. Paul Ryan’s plan would cut the budget deficit in half by 2020.”

But the budget office has done no such thing. At Mr. Ryan’s request, it produced an estimate of the budget effects of his proposed spending cuts — period. It didn’t address the revenue losses from his tax cuts."

More at: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/06/opinion/06krugman.html?src=me&ref=general

:lol: :lol: :lol: An NYT Op-Ed from Paul Krugman, do you think people do NOT realize how slanted the information is that you are throwing up all the time.

Are you so Myopic in your intellectual process, that you read the opening lines;
One depressing aspect of American politics is the susceptibility of the political and media establishment to charlatans. You might have thought, given past experience, that D.C. insiders would be on their guard against conservatives with grandiose plans. But no: as long as someone on the right claims to have bold new proposals, he’s hailed as an innovative thinker. And nobody checks his arithmetic.
And NOT realize this is exactly what the Democrats did with their Universal Health Care?

Serously, the argument here is, watch out for the Republicans, sometimes they are 1/10th as bad as the Democrats, thats why you need to go with the Democrats. :lol:

Who do you think you're fooling with this stuff?? Most people are more critical thinkers than yourself.

The counterpoint from the opposite side of the spectrum:
Top Ten most Left-Biased American Journalists – #3: Paul Krugman, The New York Times (http://rightwingnews.com/2010/07/top-ten-most-left-biased-american-journalists-3-paul-krugman-the-new-york-times/)
Given this week’s revelations about the JournoList, we now know Krugman either participated in a media conspiracy to get Obama elected or at least witnessed it first hand and did nothing to stop it. Consider this fact merely the latest insight into a man who’s done more consistently left-biased journalism than nearly anyone in America.
Yes, the reference is a right wing website, certainly take that into consideration. (Are you taking NOTES Nonno, your credibility wouldn't be so bad if you noted the bias of your sources instead of presenting them as legitimate and objective.) Just google Paul Krugman's name, you'll see there are lot of people that agree with the idea he is a left winger that is very biased in his columns. The point of the reference, he was involved in JournoList, and if you don't know what that issue is, just google it, notice it didn't get a lot air time except for on Fox News, hmmmm, that horrible Fox News, how they hurt the American People bringing them the news that other networks refuse to bring to the people.

[QUOTE=Nonno;4345023
It didn’t address the revenue losses from his tax cuts."
[/QUOTE]

If only the wealthy could invest their money in expanding business and hiring more workers to grow the economy, thereby increasing the tax base and reducing the deficit. What a novel idea.

Idiot, but I repeat myself.

"One depressing aspect of American politics is the susceptibility of the political and media establishment to charlatans. You might have thought, given past experience, that D.C. insiders would be on their guard against conservatives with grandiose plans. But no: as long as someone on the right claims to have bold new proposals, he’s hailed as an innovative thinker. And nobody checks his arithmetic.

Mr. Ryan has become the Republican Party’s poster child for new ideas thanks to his “Roadmap for America’s Future,” a plan for a major overhaul of federal spending and taxes. News media coverage has been overwhelmingly favorable; on Monday, The Washington Post put a glowing profile of Mr. Ryan on its front page, portraying him as the G.O.P.’s fiscal conscience. He’s often described with phrases like “intellectually audacious.”

But it’s the audacity of dopes. Mr. Ryan isn’t offering fresh food for thought; he’s serving up leftovers from the 1990s, drenched in flimflam sauce.

Mr. Ryan’s plan calls for steep cuts in both spending and taxes. He’d have you believe that the combined effect would be much lower budget deficits, and, according to that Washington Post report, he speaks about deficits “in apocalyptic terms.” And The Post also tells us that his plan would, indeed, sharply reduce the flow of red ink: “The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that Rep. Paul Ryan’s plan would cut the budget deficit in half by 2020.”

But the budget office has done no such thing. At Mr. Ryan’s request, it produced an estimate of the budget effects of his proposed spending cuts — period. It didn’t address the revenue losses from his tax cuts."

More at: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/06/opinion/06krugman.html?src=me&ref=general

What diference does it make what a budget plan does, when the Democrats this year don't even have the balls to pass a budget.

We go into this election year without a budget, because the Democrats fear their budget may hurt them at the ballot box.

Now that is a new and original idea from the Democrats.

Pretty good, huh??/