Mr. Krugman describes Donald trump with the dismissive term “birther,” although Mr. Krugman lets that appelation hanging in space without bothering to address the question of why President Obama has never been able to produce a valid birth certificate, or the even more interesting question of why he felt obliged to photo shop a fake birth certificate.
Krugman next attacks Scott Walker for saying he isn’t sure whether the President is a Christian. I have breaking (for him) news for Mr. Krugman. Scot Walker was being diplomatic. He, along with everyone else in this country who’s been paying attention knows that the President is NOT a Christian. It’s an open secret that Obama is, in fact, a Christian hating Muslim – although I’m not surprised that Paul Krugman would be unaware of (or unwilling to admit) that obvious fact.
Mr. Krugman then returns to Donald Trump and chastises him for suggesting that all criminal infiltrators, AKA “illegal immigrants,” should be rounded up and deported, contending that that ‘would require deep violations of civil liberties.” Another news flash for Mr. Krugman: criminals forfeit their civil liberties when they break the law. Furthermore, the criminal infiltrators in our midst are not U.S. citizens and therefore cannot legally be afforded the civil liberties guaranteed to and fought for by Americans. This is a very simple and obvious fact that seems to be incomprehensible to people like Paul Krugman who think with their emotions and not with their brains.
Krugman goes on to attack Rand Paul for “join[ing] in the ‘witch hunt’ against Planned Prenthood.” I will dispense with the emotive pejorative “witch hunt” as beneath contempt and not worthy of comment, however it should be pointed out that five separate videos have recently been released proving that Planned Parenthood is knowingly breaking the law. But I suppose if Mr. Krugman is insensible to criminal infiltrators breaking the laws of the United States, he would be insensible to prenatal killers breaking the law.
Next, Mr. Krugman attacks Marco Rubio for being a “climate change denier.” A point of order for Mr. Krugman: you can’t be a denier of something that doesn’t exist. So-called “climate change” is a chimera – an invented hysteria – it simply doesn’t exist. I challenge Mr. Krugman to show me one place on this planet where it’s gotten warmer in the last fifteen years. In fact, I would challenge Mr.Krugman –or anyone else – to show me one place on this planet where its not gotten cooler over the past fifteen years. I shan’t go into the technical details here of why climate change has to be a farce. I’ll simply let the facts speak for themselves.
Mr. Krugman then Attacks the entire Republican party, quoting from Mann and Ornstein: “the GOP has become an insurgent outlier .. Unpersuaded by conventional understanding of facts, evidence, and science.”
Republicans are indeed unpersuaded by “the conventional ‘understanding’ (i.e. ‘political distortion’) of facts. Republicans are persuaded only by the facts themselves, and they know that facts are not subject to “conventional understanding.” As to the charge that Republicans are not persuaded by evidence, I would refer Mr. Krugman and the reader to the previous paragraph on global warming. I think Mr. Krugman may be validly compared to a black pot calling a clean kettle black.
And science, Mr. Krugman, is not knowledge. It is the evolution of knowledge. But then I would not expect someone who confuses Economics with Keynesian Fascism to appreciate the difference.