TexasCHLforum.com

For those that don't know who he is, Paul Krugman is a liberal/leftist economist. He has been feted, awarded, fawned over and treated like a demi-god. But, today he had an article in the NY Times that highlights who he really is. He could have waited until tomorrow to write his article, but his sorry attitude wouldn't allow him that much decency...now, what does this have to do with firearms? Simply that he is one of that same group of people who despise regular citizens like us having the right to defend themselves and the means at hand to do so. He probably wouldn't like this forum much at all, either, and wouldn't be above getting it abolished if he could...now, just so you don't think I'm hyping about nothing, go there and read his delightful little article yourself...like I said, he could have written it tomorrow and it would have been a whole 'nother matter...and of course he wouldn't allow comments, his opinion is better than everyone else's.

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/0 ... &seid=auto

Thanks for letting me know what he is up to.

I don't need to go to the nytimes and read the original to know I loath everything he stands for. I won't give the newspaper the satisfaction of getting my web traffic for their advertisers.

He knows how wrong he is in writing it as he will not allow comments.

This is all I have to say on this as if I voice what I am really thinking I will be kicked off the forum.

I know I shouldn't let it get to me, but after all the blood, sweat, and tears that have been shed due to the horrific events of those villainous acts ten years ago...and this guy has the gall to say that stuff today? Simply outrageous...and the terrible thing is that some will agree and believe him to be somebody even more special because he had the "guts" to write that today...I already didn't like the NY Times but after their decision to publish that, they make me sick to my stomach.

Heartland Patriot wrote:I know I shouldn't let it get to me, but after all the blood, sweat, and tears that have been shed due to the horrific events of those villainous acts ten years ago...and this guy has the gall to say that stuff today? Simply outrageous...and the terrible thing is that some will agree and believe him to be somebody even more special because he had the "guts" to write that today...I already didn't like the NY Times but after their decision to publish that, they make me sick to my stomach.

It's a problem when you don't let something like this get to you.

This knuckle head has spewing this junk from his pie hole for years now.
This trash was titled "The Conscience of a Liberal". As soon as you see the "L" word, be prepared for nonsense to follow.
Make the world a better place...punch Paul Krugman in the face!

I've read Krugman for a while, and, quite bluntly, I consider him to be insane.

Seriously. It's more than just a difference of opinion, I think this guy is out of touch with reality.

He thinks .gov should spend more - MUCH more - than it is spending now, and increasing deficits are a GOOD thing. Were he an alcoholism counselor, he'd recommend a daily fifth of booze - maybe more - for his patients so they could drink themselves sober.

Insane.

"I’m not going to allow comments on this post, for obvious reasons."

Because he knows the majority of Americans would be trying to stuff his feet down his throat.

He's like a troll on the forums - specifically trying to get someone(s) started.

Trash.

As unpopular as this may be this sick individual has a right to his opinion ... And he has a right to be insane and reprehensible ...

Hopefully sane people see this for what it is and realize this type of thinking, albeit not this extreme, is purvasive in left leaning circles!

"Lot of people made it political and took advantage and it split the country, and thats a shame and now we dont' really remember what its about", seems like thats what he's saying. I think so, it was pretty short, didnt' seem to be any secret message there.

Anyway I probly don't agree on much with him, but I dont' see anything wrong in what he wrote there.

Bullwhip wrote:

"Lot of people made it political and took advantage and it split the country, and thats a shame and now we dont' really remember what its about", seems like thats what he's saying. I think so, it was pretty short, didnt' seem to be any secret message there.

Anyway I probly don't agree on much with him, but I dont' see anything wrong in what he wrote there.

Let's see...happen to remember crowds of folks chanting stuff like "Bush Lied, They Died"? Yeah, that's not making things political in the least, right? See, Paul Krugman makes it seem as if the Bush administration was just making a big deal about nothing...does four hijacked aircraft seem like nothing to YOU? Does two skyscrapers in a pile of rubble seem like nothing to you? Does a massive chunk ripped out of the Pentagon seem like nothing to you? And what about that smoking hole in the ground in Pennsylvania? Nothing to get worked up about there either, huh? Yeah, he can have his view...and that's fine...but he did it on purpose on a day that should have been about remembering the victims, and the heroes...and THAT isn't POLITICAL? Give me a break.

It was short and concise, and I could not find anything to object to in its content.

The guy may be a jerk, a liberal and so on, but I found nothing to disagree with in the article.

Purplehood wrote:It was short and concise, and I could not find anything to object to in its content.

The guy may be a jerk, a liberal and so on, but I found nothing to disagree with in the article.

Now I'm wondering if I read the same article...
I'm not praising Kerik or Giuliani, but to read this he places all the blame on the conservatives. Leftist' apparently had no part in the "shenanigans". It's all the republicans fault. In fact, Bush obviously orchestrated the whole attack!!!

Paaalease. Makes me want to vomit.

Purplehood wrote:It was short and concise, and I could not find anything to object to in its content.

The guy may be a jerk, a liberal and so on, but I found nothing to disagree with in the article.

I disagree, vehemently.