Been kind of a Kthug day around here, but here is a great video of Krugman and Stephanie Cutter shredding that idiot Fehrnstrom:
At around 3:55, Fehrnstrom claims that the reason Republicans are savaging the economy is because Obama was mean to them and demonized the Ryan plan and how when Romney was governor, he watched movies with Democrats. I laughed out loud, and Cutter did a good job rejecting that nonsense. Then, immediately after that bit, Fehrnstrom was asked, straight forward, whether the Ryan plan was the Romney plan, and his response was priceless- “At least he has a blueprint.”
Thoughtcrime
But what about fingerprints?
Xecky Gilchrist
At least it’s an ethos.
David Koch
Kthug = movie star
youtube.com/watch?v=G8ZHYhKV0Wo
AxelFoley
I want to have Stephanie Cutter’s babies.
SatanicPanic
Fehrnstrom is just pathetic. I don’t know if it’s because he’s got such a week candidate to defend or if he’s just an idiot. Probably both.
cathyx
A magic asterisk, love it.
slag
I wonder what Fehrnstrom thought he was going to get out of asking Kthug that question. Was he hoping Kthug would equivocate on that response to show that nobody supports Obama’s plan or what? Maybe he’s just really dumb?
Frankensteinbeck
Who is Stephanie Cutter? Because that was amazing. Just amazing. Her SMIRK. I’d want to get a more mushy middle person’s reaction to be sure, but she radiated ‘I’m listening to an idiot spew bullshit and when he runs down I’m going to slap him for it’ every time Wornstrom opened his mouth. And then she would slap him. Hard. She’d get real specific. She gave a strong impression of dominance, which I think is important in someone carrying our message. Who is she, and is she always this good or is this a lucky interview?
Mark S.
Bringing up Romney’s tenure as governor is attacking movies.
bemused
@SatanicPanic:
He could say the sky is purple with pink polka dots and Republican voters would say it sure does if you look at it the “right” way.
BGinCHI
The fucking Titanic had a blueprint too.
Rabble Arouser
@Frankensteinbeck: Wernstrom! /shakes fist
SatanicPanic
@bemused: Sure, but his job is to convince the other 73% of us that Romney isn’t a joke. I don’t think he’s doing a very good job.
burnspbesq
What Ryan plan? That’s not a plan, it’s a PowerPoint deck with nothing but place-holders.
If Ryan were to release his actual plan, it would guarantee Obama’s re-election.
Hill Dweller
@SatanicPanic:
It doesn’t matter. The media will do Romney’s work for him.
They’re hammering Obama today for having a fundraiser with celebrities. I guarantee that is at the behest of Republicans behind the scenes trying to mitigate the damage from the Trump fundraiser.
The same thing happened after Fox ran that Obama attack ad last week. Politico came to their rescue with a ridiculous story about liberal media bias, which cable was more than happy to trumpet.
We’re fucked.
S. cerevisiae
@Rabble Arouser: OK, that got a laugh. Good thing I had put down my Slurm.
Trakker
Grrrr. If Obama is re-elected, unless the Dems also win big in Congress (doubtful) we will have four more years of gridlock and Republican thuggery, and the economy will just limp along, and the middle class will continue to shrink. And that’s the BEST case scenario.
The only angry people in this country now are the tea partiers – and a handful of liberals who have been successfully demonized as dirty hippies. Something has got to happen soon or we’re fked. Thank Pasta for Krugman, but he’s been on fire for a decade to no avail.
NancyDarling
Basically Krugman is saying that Ryan’s plan = Underpants Gnomes’ plan.
SatanicPanic
@Hill Dweller: They tried that with McCain too, Obama still won.
Linnaeus
The whole “Obama is mean to Republicans” just cracked me up. The president has consistently tried to work with the Republicans (almost to a fault) and they’ve flipped him off each time.
FlipYrWhig
@Linnaeus: I like it when Obama talks about how Republicans don’t even vote for their own ideas anymore. Now, that irks the blogosphere left because it reminds everyone that Obama has incorporated Republican ideas, but IMHO in a divided government you’re _supposed to_ have to incorporate some of what the other side wants. And even with a Democratic majority you have to placate the large numbers of nominal Democrats who want pretty much exactly what Republicans also want.
piratedan
@Linnaeus: even after Myrtle McDonnell stated the first week of Obama’s term that the Republicans number one objective is to make him a one term president. Screw what’s wrong with the country, the most important thing that needed to be done, as far as any Republican was concerned, was to get the black man out of the highest office in the land… all other concerns are secondary.
David Koch
Feelings,
Wo-o-o feelings
Wo-o-o feelings
Again in my heart
Feelings,
Wo-o-o feelings
Wo-o-o feelings
RP
I really wish some democrat (either from the admin. or the media) would just say “when were all of the tough republicans replaced with whiny little babies?” when this topic comes up.
Ocotillo
Fehrnstrom, holy cow that guy got his lunch handed to him. If I were RMoney, he could enjoy firing that guy but that’s not going to happen. No harm, no foul.
Real Murkins will never see what we just watched as they are in church when this chatfest is going on.
And when church is over, the NBA playoffs or Tiger is playing or something else is going on while Rome burns.
Hill Dweller
@SatanicPanic: There were some in the media that tried, but for the most part Obama got a fairer shake than most Dems in the last 30 years in ’08. Not ideal, granted, but it wasn’t horrendously one-sided.
They’ve got the knives out for Obama this time. They don’t like him because they know he thinks they’re pathetic. I’ll have to look for it, but I just saw a study over the weekend showing Obama hasn’t had a week of positive media coverage in over a year. Romney, despite lying incessantly, has gotten far more favorable press.
Furthermore, Obama has the two most politically influential business sectors(oil/gas/coal and Wall Street) wanting to destroy him.
I think people underestimate what Obama is up against, especially post-Citizens United. In my humble, worthless opinion, he has a 50/50 shot, at best, of winning reelection.
Yutsano
@Hill Dweller:
If the Republicans had anywhere near a decent candidate I’d agree with you. Instead they have Willard. You cannot win an election by opposition of the incumbent. You have to give a positive reason for voting for the other guy. No one has made a case yet for why they should vote for Willard, other than he’s not Obama. That is giving me hope.
Southern Beale
Dang, Krugman better take his B vitamins, poor guy has been going like gangbusters lately. He’s a fucking national treasure.
This clip from his visit to the BBC was full of awesome.
AxelFoley
@Frankensteinbeck:
This is Stephanie Cutter:
mediaite.com/online/obama-truth-team-calls-out-republican-superpac-bs/
And this is Stephanie Cutter:
socialcam.com/v/SeFNDpVJ
Again, I want to have her babies.
SatanicPanic
@Hill Dweller: You could be right. I just don’t see it though. Corporate America has marketed a lot of crap successfully, but they’ve have some failures too and Romney is a tough sell, even to Republicans. I’m not too worried.
Mike E
@S. cerevisiae: You can put down a Slurm? /guzzle
Cutter is best suited to this pund-fest role, adroitly stepping up the GOP anxiety over not having their masculine authority respected at Daddy levels. Moar pleez!
EconWatcher
@Southern Beale:
Is it inappropriate to mention that she’s not only whipsmart, but also easy on the eyes?
Comrade Dread
Really?
So Congress can’t pass a piece of legislation that would create jobs and help reduce human misery because the President is saying mean things about them.
Oh, if only he would say nice things, then they’d get off their lard butts and do something to address the suffering of American people.
What’s that? They’re a legislative body? They can pass laws to do just that? Laws that include just enough things the President will like that he’ll sign them and alleviate the economic woes of millions of Americans? But they won’t?
Why… that would mean that their either:
a.) Full of s***
b.) Completely indifferent to the suffering of their fellow man out of pettiness and meanness of soul.
c.) a useless pack of ****s.
d.) All of the above.
Mike E
@Yutsano: If bed-shitting were an Olympic event, Willard would score multiple golds. That, and own goal scoring. Too.
Linnaeus
@FlipYrWhig: @piratedan:
Yeah, it’s pretty clear to anyone paying attention that the Republicans have been nothing but obstructionist. Their idea of “work with us” is “give us everything we want and even some things we didn’t dare ask for.”
Valdivia
@David Koch:
because this never gets old!
youtube.com/watch?v=lf3BNRF9ICc
MikeJ
@Yutsano: I was amazed, but not surprised, how quickly every single Dem online went to permanent doom and gloom because of one sub par jobs report.
Yutsano
@Comrade Dread: But you see, if he only made TIME for them! Coddled their delicate fee-fees and gave them everything they asked for then everything would be be just peachy and we’d all have unicorns that shit gold by now! But NO!! He’s Angry Black Man! So we just HAVE to get rid of him you see! Natural order and all.
@MikeJ: They still have a plastic Mormon as their standard bearer. Who also can’t campaign to save his life. Obama isn’t too concerned. Wary because people iz dumb, but not concerned.
Valdivia
Can you guys please explain to me why so-called liberals or progressives are saying this?
yeah not only is Romney serious and moderate he will be a better dem because he will be able to tell the Republicans what to do. what????
harlana
@AxelFoley: i’ll have her babies for you
Comrade Dread
@Yutsano: Oh, I get it. It doesn’t make them look noble. It makes them look like a pack of sociopaths who assume I’m dumb enough to buy that s*** of an excuse.
EconWatcher
@Valdivia:
It’s grotesque, but it might be true.
Comrade Dread
@Valdivia: Makes perfect sense, well, aside from the fact that I haven’t seen an inkling of a backbone from Romney, plus every position he’s taken which has been rabidly hard core, and even if he tried to moderate now, who knows how his magic 8 ball might tell him to govern tomorrow.
President Obama has several flaws, but he is the better candidate.
And given the choice between four more years of gridlock and four years of the Republican “plan” for America’s economy (summary: “Take all you can, give nothing back!”), I think I’d take the former.
pragmatism
@Valdivia: ezra is hedging his bets. he relishes his role of viewed by the righty/glibertarian confab as “anyone to the left of ezra should be ignored”. he’ll be a full fledged villager yet!
Valdivia
@EconWatcher:
so basically the argument now is that we always need to have a Republican in power otherwise they will destroy the country out of spite? and yet, when they are in power they destroy everything anyway.
I want to see Romney getting a trillion dollar stimulus. The first thing he will pass will be more tax cuts for the rich and break our bank for three generations.
or @Comrade Dread: what you said! :)
West of the Cascades
I’d read the transcript of this but it is sooo much more powerful in video – the last 60 seconds of this clip (where Krugman calls the Ryan Plan a “fraud” and says that at least the President’s plan “is not insane”) would make a nice little campaign ad for OFA.
How did the producers at This Week mess up and put two brilliant, articulate (and clean!) liberals up against two right-wing morons? Aren’t they always supposed to have a 3 to 1 GOP tilt on these shows (and where was John McCain?).
Yutsano
@Valdivia: Holy fuck does Ezra make some basic errors there. And that is an amazingly stupid column. He conveniently forgets the teatards want all austerity all the time and Boehner has zero control over his caucus. Nothing suggests that will change under Willard. Ezra has now gone full Villager. No hope for him remains.
harlana
assuming republicans are smart, they actually want Obama to win. during the next 4 years, they will exorcise themselves by destroying the country state by state and then blame the aftermath on Obama and democrats.
Lolis
@EconWatcher:
That is a big might. Romney is campaigning on the Ryan budget and conservatives will hold him accountable to that. I don’t think House Republicans will just cave to Romney because they already mistrust him. I am disturbed by this new meme among liberals. We should not be pushing the line that the economy will improve under Romney.
Valdivia
@pragmatism:
@Yutsano:
my thoughts exactly. Willard will put an end to the tea tantrums? Really? It’s bordering on the idea that we are now a one party state run by nihilistic terrorists we need to give in to. We are their bitchez!
AxelFoley
@harlana:
NO! I want to experience that honor!
Seanly
@Valdivia: Ezra is a wannabe Villager tool. He used to make some good points on healthcare when he was with The Prospect, but he’s drunk the Villager Kool Aid.
The Dangerman
@Valdivia:
Feature, not bug; it proves government can’t do anything (other than fight wars, of course).
I’m still stunned Romney has a transition team before he’s won anything; couple that with him shopping for a place to stable the horses near DC, well, one could almost sense that a fix was in.
harlana
and i keep hearing ACA was based on a Heritage Foundation plan. how much of that is true?
pragmatism
@Valdivia: i still am pissed at myself for giving in to the “you support the terrorists” meme back in the bad old days of late 2001 to 2002. took me years to shake that off. to quote our leader at the time, “fool me once, shame on — [pauses] — shame on you. Fool me — [pauses] — You can’t get fooled again.”
EconWatcher
@Lolis:
I’m not pushing a line to the public; I’m considering a grim possibility, here among friends.
I’ve been around long enough to have seen earlier versions of the Teabaggers. The incoming Republican class of 1995 was much the same: lots of firebreathing rhetoric about small government. But when they actually seized power, they discovered that the best way to keep it was by redirecting government funds to greasing their corporate supporters. Yes, the poor suffered because they were no longer a priority. But the government did not get smaller.
That could happen again, if Republicans no longer have the incentive to tank the economy to make the president look bad. And so it is conceivable that a united Republican government could end up more Keynesian than a government with Obama opposed by a Republican Congress.
It’s grotesque, and only a possiblity because of the extraordinary cynicism and opportunism of the other side. But that doesn’t make it wrong.
I’d throw a question back to you: Do you think the Teabaggers are fundamentally different from Repubicans past? If so, why? And if not, why do you expect them to behave differently this time?
Comrade Dread
@The Dangerman: It also lets them continue to pillage the economy.
These men are not free market capitalists, they are locusts who will devour everything they can and then move on to the next market when there’s nothing left.
Valdivia
@The Dangerman:
well its traditional to get a transition team ready in June. Obama did too, and he caught hell from the Village. How presumptuous they yelled. Romney? Not a word right?
I do think Romney is putting the cart before the horse right now. They think they have it in the bag and can just walk away with it without doing the hard work.
@pragmatism: I know. But now they are basically saying that when the terrorists are them well you have to coddle them. ugh.
someone shoot me now.
bemused
@SatanicPanic:
He is worse than pathetic. The 27% don’t even notice. There are still plenty of other Republican voters who know they have a stinking candidate but will vote for Mitt anyway.
Valdivia
@Seanly:
that makes me sad, because he is not an idiot but how fast they get swallowed by the Village Borg eh?
butler
@harlana: The individual mandate was championed by Heritage as early as 1989. If I may quote from one of their positions papers on the health care system:
Element number 1. As in the most important idea they had for “reforming” the health care system in this country.
Turgidson
@Yutsano:
You’re probably right – the teatards seem to actually believe the crazy shit they and their mouthpieces are saying…but nevertheless, tribalism is nearly as strong among the mouthbreathers on the right as ideology is. If they think there’s advantage to be gained by passing a raft of Keynesian spending bills and growing government, they might have some convenient amnesia about how scary the deficit is until a Democrat is in charge again (as they’ve been doing for the past several decades).
Thing is, their Keynesian ideas will be housed in bills written by corporate and military/industrial complex interests.
Lolis
@EconWatcher:
I think the teabaggers are more extreme for several reasons: Fox Media and all the money they have pouring in from people like Koch. The level of Senate obstruction is unprecedented in US history, so I think it clearly shows they have changed. Their ideology has become a religion for them and it scares me. They don’t seem to care about this country at all.
Lolis
@EconWatcher:
I think the teabaggers are more extreme for several reasons: Fox Media and all the money they have pouring in from people like Koch. The level of Senate obstruction is unprecedented in US history, so I think it clearly shows they have changed. Their ideology has become a religion for them and it scares me. They don’t seem to care about this country at all.
The Dangerman
@Valdivia:
I don’t recall either fact; maybe there’s some truth to alcohol killing brain cells (NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO).
cat48
Emma Anne
@EconWatcher:
I think it’s fine. Krugman is pretty cute too.
muddy
@Emma Anne: I think he has the kindest face.
Bludger
How the fuck is Romney going to debate Obama with this trope? Cutter just destroyed Fehrnstrom.
Valdivia
@The Dangerman:
I only remember because Ambinder (whatever happened to him? Not that I miss him) did a huge post at the Atlantic that won the day about Obama’s presumptuousness in getting a team ready.
MarkusR
Fernstrom had all those GOP talking points, destroyed again and again. They are like zombies. And I hate to think about the only way to deal with zombies…
joes527
@Bludger: The true believers thought Palin out debated Biden. Seriously. They saw starbursts.
Mitt doesn’t have to out-debate Obama. All he has to do is put the hay where the goats can see it, and they will declare him philosopher-king.
AxelFoley
@joes527:
Try tried that with McCain, too. The American people said otherwise, though.
JPL
@BGinCHI: I am stealing that line.
For those who think Romney will lose a debate, remember Bush jr. and Al Gore’s smirk or Kerry’s elitism.
harlana
@butler: yes, that’s a pretty big effing point, one that people need to be reminded of when we start hearing the S word being tossed around. so the Heritage Found’n is so$shulist? independents (embarrassed repubicans) especially need to be reminded and asked, specifically, why they now oppose it.
FlipYrWhig
@MikeJ: It’s been percolating. The lefty blogosphere has its default mode set to “keening and lamentation.” Well, OK, that’s not quite fair. The default setting is “snark,” but that’s just one click away from utter desolation. I thought I was the world’s leading pessimist until I started reading blogs, whereupon suddenly I seemed like Johnny Sunshine by comparison.
harlana
@joes527: Mitt is going lose his cool within the first 5 minutes of the debate. It’ll be all downhill from there for Obama. And we get to see repeats.
kay
@Valdivia: p
substance aside, how gross is it that they adopt the same theme at the same time?
Dowd, Klein and Feinman all had the same ephipanny at 6 PM in Saturday night. Perhaps others! We’ll know soon!
It’s just disgusting all by itself, apart from the merit of the “theme”.
Yutsano
@harlana: I don’t think he loses his cool right away. He will go through the smiling and stammering phase first. Then he’ll spout talking point like the question had never been asked, then try to attack Obama (which O will deflect) and then the meltdown begins. Willard cannot handle a real challenge.
Quaker in a Basement
NOT INSANE!
Yesss!
harlana
@Yutsano: both painful and delightful to watch – something to look forward to
AxelFoley
@JPL:
For those who think RMoney will win a debate, remember McCain. The media tried to push the meme that McCain won all 3 debates with Obama, but those instant polls showed the American people thought otherwise.
Jay S
@JPL: That’s likely to work against Romney. I get the sense that much of the press dislikes Romney as much as they did Gore and Kerry.
jefft452
@Yutsano: “You cannot win an election by opposition of the incumbent”
Harding did, but in general – yeah
Djur
@harlana: The Heritage Foundation plan was based around an individual mandate, but that’s where the similarity ends. The plan required (and provided tax subsidies for) catastrophic health insurance. It had none of the regulatory apparatus of the ACA, nor the expansion of Medicaid, nor the additional subsidies, nor the exchange system.
Suffern ACE
@Comrade Dread: Taking someone on a movie date is a no brainer. Safe as hell. You don’t have to risk messing it up by talking too much to your date. You can appear to be a big spender by going for the raisinettes, although really they’re only five bucks.
Frankensteinbeck
@Djur:
The new regulations and price controls are the big difference. The big, big difference. The ACA uses a visible mechanism Republicans proposed, but uses it in exactly the opposite way they wanted.
Valdivia
@kay:
I am so glad I am not the only one noticing. I guess TPM was two days late since they only noticed today.