Their agreement proves nothing of course – you have to go to the science, to prove anything – but it’s nice to see the word is starting to spread!

Sooooo true!

Motto of the Left 2009: “Dissent is the highest form of Terrorism.”

“By having integrated economies of scale into explicit general equilibrium models, Paul Krugman has deepened our understanding of the determinants of trade and the location of economic activity.” – Wikipedia

And this relates to trade policy how….?

that

he may actually

be

channeling

moonbats.

How am I supposed to get my hot Martian babes and my Banth skin rug past customs if Krugman is watching.

And are radium pistols covered under the second ammendment?

I think Krugman may have seen the movie ‘The Arrival’ a few too many times; the movie where Global Warming was an alien plot to wipe out humanity so they could take over the planet.

Climate change zealots are a cult… next thing you know, they’ll be speaking in tongues (like Al Gore).

My bet is that Krugman lives pretty well – all the creature comforts that accompany wealthy, pious liberals. Krugman is just frustrated that we proles just don’t know our place.

“Given this contempt for hard science, I’m almost reluctant to mention the deniers’ dishonesty on matters economic. But in addition to rejecting climate science, the opponents of the climate bill made a point of misrepresenting the results of studies of the bill’s economic impact, which all suggest that the cost will be relatively low.”

That’s right. The fact that anyone would commit the unspeakable heresy of doubting the Left’s foundational spiritual doctrine has Krugman in such a convulsive tizzy that this ECONOMIST can barely summon the strength to discuss the ECONOMICS of the “energy bill,” but if he must, this ECONOMIST states the (dare I say, dubious?) conclusion that the cost of cap and trade will be “relatively low.” Krugman, an ECONOMIST, then goes right back to his histrionic ranting about the coming environmental apocalypse.

This is what liberalism does to people. It causes people to categorically reject the objective certainties and established axioms of their chosen fields in favor of collective, hysterical delusions to the point that their rhetoric becomes virtually indistinguishable from the angry mutterings of the street corner derelicts that we cross the street to avoid. (Side note: try not to pee yourself laughing, but Krugman actually published a book titled, “The Conscience of a Liberal”–and no, shockingly it was NOT pamphlet-sized.) So, to the NYT I say, “GIVE US MORE!!!!!” The best advice you can possibly give to anyone you care about that is dabbling with liberalism is: read Krugman. They’ll start reading his column believing that it contains the wisdom of a Nobel Prize winning economist and once they’ve finished they wouldn’t trust the loon to make change for the parking meter.

Then again, all this probably explains why the Krugster was awarded a Nobel Prize for Economics. Only damn fools, intellectuals, and Nobel committee members could uncritically accept the templated Scheisse dished out by Krugman on a weekly basis.