Liberal commentators, lawmakers are not amused

By the looks of things, if there is finally a debt deal, liberals must feel like they’ve had their head rammed into the ceiling fan.

While The Wall Street Journal may have called the late-night agreement a “victory for the cause of smaller government, arguably the biggest since welfare reform in 1996,” not everyone is jumping for joy. Some are mourning, some are angry, and some are just flat-out disappointed at a president who campaigned on a platform that went beyond partisan fights between red states and blue states.

To Huffington Post namesake Arianna Huffington, the bipartisan agreement represents exactly the opposite of what politics is all about: making compromises.

“I think this is a real breakdown of our political system,” said Huffington Monday on “Morning Joe.”

Paul Krugman, however, was the first liberal commentator to scowl. In his New York Times column, which started the avalanche of complaints, Krugman wrote that the deal was a “disaster” and a complete failure on President Barack Obama’s part.

“Make no mistake about it, what we’re witnessing here is a catastrophe on multiple levels,” Krugman wrote. “It is, of course, a political catastrophe for Democrats … Mr. Obama has thrown all that away. And the damage isn’t over: there will be more choke points where Republicans can threaten to create a crisis unless the president surrenders, and they can now act with the confident expectation that he will.”

Krugman was more subtle than the New York Times editorial board, which wrote that apart from averting a “catastrophic government default” the debt deal is “nearly complete capitulation to the hostage-taking demands of Republican extremists.”

And who is being held hostage? “Reasonable people … forced to give in to those willing to endanger the national interest.”

The Times also picks up on a theme — echoed in the New Republic, The Daily Beast and The Nation — that could bring even lower approval ratings for the president: Obama chickened out.

Titled “Obama Gives It All Away” the morning piece by The Daily Beast’s Michael Tomasky goes downhill from there.

With the deal, Tomasky sees a “horrible precedent” for both sides that threatens a bleak future of less government spending and Republicans in charge of Capitol Hill.

“Would Democrats do something similar to a Republican president — demand that she or he support dramatic tax increases? That wouldn’t be any more right than the other way around,” write Tomasky, who then oddly concedes that Democrats don’t have that Elephant-like backbone. “Of course Democrats, given their different DNA, might well be afraid to do something that … mean — which suggests that this precedent will have extremely conservative impacts on our politics for years to come.”

Just for good measure, Tomasky also throws in a reference to the Republicans’ criminal act of issuing “hostage-takers’ demands.”

  • scott hutchinson

    None of these commentors seem to realize the simple fact that:


    The cuts are fictitious because the numbers they start with are from the congressional budget office’s proposed future budgets, which already contain increases over last year. Even the Republican proposal actually increases the budget by $1 trillion.

    Using fudged numbers makes for a big media circus and makes all the sheeples either
    outraged or happy because it sounds like there are budget cuts happening, so they all go on their various blogs and either gloat or celebrate or complain or sit at home worrying.

    The use of a ten year period is part of the fraud, it makes the numbers bigger. The only budget that matters is this year’s budget, because next year they throw it all out and start the fraud all over again.

    Obama going on tv threatening little old ladies with their soc sec checks and threatening to dee-fault is simply a shameful lie. We have a $200 BN monthly income which would allow us to pay interest on the debt, soc sec, military wages and pensions, then have $80 BN left for whatever other gov’t we wanted until congress got it’s act together.

    It’s all a big hyped up media frenzy and a huge lie, so curb your enthusiasm, folks!

    Hereis a video of someone I hope you agree is trustworthy, who knows economics backward and forward & right to left, talking to a former budget official. It’s Kudlow vs. Ron Paul. Kudlow immediately grunts when Paul reveals the fiction, because as a former budget official he’s now conspicuously part of the media club that’s dumbing us down. Then he agrees about it several times, each time more emphatically to try to shut Paul up, then it’s good-bye Dr. Paul we’re
    out of time…….and next up? The Boehner Bill!


  • Ray Orbison

    Don Corleone insists on hearing bad news at once…;-)

  • Anonymous

    What Huffington leaves unsaid is that she and Krugman’s idea of a political system is a Soviet Politburo upon which they sit as privileged Elitists, directing the lives and economy of the workers.
    They, along with the Dems, have a very limited definition of “compromise.”  In their version of the political system, “compromise” means that if you do what they tell you to do, then they will compromise by not sending you off to the Gulag.

  • Anonymous

    How they crow then they pass important legislation by with the comment “pass this bill and see what is in it,” and squeal like stuck pigs when they don’t have the votes.

    Sorry,  the Democrats and Obama have only themselves to blame for messing up everything that they have laid their hands on.