By Mr. Curmudgeon

President Obama has figured out a winning strategy for Democrats heading into November: attack Republicans for attacking Social Security. In fact, the headline for Paul Krugman’s New York Times column was “Attacking Social Security.” Funny how these hyper Keynesian socialists are on the same wavelength.

Paul Krugman insists GOP “attackers claim that they’re concerned about the program’s financial future. But their math doesn’t add up, and their hostility isn’t really about dollars and cents. Instead, it’s about ideology and posturing. And underneath it all is ignorance of or indifference to the realities of life for many Americans… So let’s beat back this unnecessary, unfair and – let’s not mince words – cruel attack on working Americans.”

In his weekly radio address, Obama claimed Republicans are “pushing to make privatizing Social Security a key part of their legislative agenda if they win a majority in Congress this fall,” calling such a move “an ill-conceived idea that would add trillions of dollars to our budget deficit while tying your benefits to the whims of Wall Street traders and the ups and downs of the stock market.”

This is the same big government that devised the Community Reinvestment Act, which started the ball rolling in the direction of sub-prime lending, which popped the housing bubble, which destroyed home values and caused Wall Street to crash, destroying your real retirement 401k and mutual fund investments.

Democrats are counting on the greatest asset in their arsenal: your ignorance. And that ignorance has served them well, from FDR to Obama. Here’s a few uncomfortable facts the donkeys in Washington and at the New York Times would rather you not know:

• 1. Which president and political party changed the protected “trust fund” status of Social Security, dumping all that cash into the General fund to pay for unsustainable Great Society programs? President Lyndon Johnson and his Democrat controlled Congress.
• 2. Which political party ended the tax deduction for Social Security withholding? The Democratic Party.
• Who extended Social Security payments to immigrants who never paid into the system? President Jimmy Carter and his Congressional Democratic majority.
• 3. Which political party began taxing Social Security annuities? The Democrats under Bill Clinton, with Vice President Al Gore casting the tie-breaking vote in the U.S. Senate.

According to Krugman, “Conservatives hate Social Security for ideological reasons: its success undermines their claim that government is always the problem, never the solution.” The “success” of Social Security, at least for Democrats, is that it serves as a slush fund to buy the votes of targeted constituencies at the expense of America’s vulnerable elderly. Now that’s what Democrats call compassion.

The Associated Press reports that, “…Democrats have been able to seize on the issue because of a proposal by Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, the top Republican on the House Budget Committee that would allow younger people to put Social Security money into personal accounts.”

Now that the Democrat’s policies have destroyed both Social Security and the American economy, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Barney Frank ask that you continue allowing them to manage your retirement “today, tomorrow and forever,” as President Obama put it.

Personal accounts would only keep your lovely money in your hands and far from the reach of “compassionate” Democrats.

Younger Americans should remember the name Ernest Ackerman. Why? You see, Ernest was the first Social Security beneficiary. In 1937, Earnest received a whopping Social Security lump-sum payout ­in the amount of 17 cents.

At least Earnest got something. Young Obama voter should be so lucky.

By Mr. Curmudgeon

The Obama recovery isn’t all the mainstream media assured us it’s cracked up to be. “The Federal Reserve will meet on Tuesday faced with a pivotal decision about whether to abandon its presumption that the economy is gradually picking up steam and begin to consider new steps to keep the recovery from sputtering out,” reports the New York Times.

Worse still, the crisis Obama didn’t want to go to waste seems to be worsening. “A string of developments, including the weak jobs report last Friday, has altered the sentiment within the central bank, leading Fed policy makers to stop worrying for the moment about the increasingly remote prospect of inflation. Instead, they are increasingly focused on the potential for the economy to slip into a deflationary spiral of declining demand, prices and wages.” In other words, hello Great Depression II.

As the nation completes the initial two year shock of what is shaping up to be another economic depression, the Fed needs to re-examine the Keynesian presumptions that said massive government intervention in the economy is what got us out of the last one. Bush and Obama’s bailouts and “stimulus” didn’t jumpstart the economy, stop the loss of jobs or stabilize the housing market. The reason? Because the economic ills now besetting us are the result of government interventions.

Obama would have us believe “Bush policies” alone caused the crash. The reality of our situation is that our two-party political system failed the nation by burdening society and the economy with entitlements. The housing bubble, and the financial crisis that resulted from the bust, occurred because of a government policy that declared home ownership an entitlement. Isn’t that why banks were forced to make sub-prime loans? Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac bought those sub-prime loans in order to keep the Ponzi scheme rolling.

When the crisis hit, Rep. Barney Frank – who kept telling us Freddie and Fannie were solvent – blamed capitalism and championed financial reform so government could increase the scope of its economic intervention.

A year ago last June, President Obama held the first in a series of White House summits on health care reform…the same day the trustees for Social Security and Medicare announce the federal entitlement programs were nearing bankruptcy. Now, the Congressional Budget Office warns us that the nation’s entitlement spending is “unsustainable.” Gee, you think?

Thank you two-party system.

As the economic crisis deepens, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has called Congress back from recess to pass a $26-billion “jobs bill” to bailout teacher and state public employee unions. Big government sure takes care of the little guy…big-government little guys. More insidiously, it signals that our big government ruling class is circling the wagons. Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Olympia Snowe and others among Washington’s bipartisan big-government establishment seem to be consolidating their political base in advance of our worsening depression. And that base is not “We the People” but the bureaucratic class…America’s permanent and unelected rulers.

Abraham Lincoln said, “…as a nation of free men, we will live forever or die by suicide.” Free men, it appears, chose suicide.

Americans may not be able to articulate why they are angry with Washington or why they have an especially strong anti-incumbent rage this election season. But they need reminding that our melting entitlement nation is all their doing…no one in big-government Washington, Republican or Democrat, shot their way to power. You put them there.

However, in the elections to come, the nation has a chance to redeem itself and start to dig out of the financial and political hole we find ourselves. Americans need to wake up to the disaster we face and remedy it by rejecting the destructive status quo with the Constitutional tools the Founders gave a free and not dependent people.

Tea Party! Tea Party! Tea Party!

By Mr. Curmudgeon

“I want this to work,” declared President Obama as Congressional Democrats began crafting their $862 billion “stimulus bill.” The new president made a big-hearted offer to Beltway Republicans by giving them a place at the stimulus trough. “…There is no pride of authorship. If members of Congress have good ideas, they have a project that would create jobs…then I’m going to accept it.”

One accepted project was the $71,623 of stimulus cash dedicated to saving a Wake Forest University School of Medicine research team. They’re working on a project titled “Effect of Cocaine Self-Administration on Metabotropic Glutamate Systems.” That’s a fancy way of saying, “we’re giving monkeys cocaine and standing back to see what happens.”

This raises several questions: were the monkeys trained to self-administer their daily dose of cocaine? Is there a “stimulus” cartel providing the cocaine in question? Exactly how many monkeys are hooked on Obama’s stimulus blow? And, more importantly, can we reasonably expect a barrel of simian cokeheads to pull America out of its economic tailspin? 

Obama insists we not notice the high level of unemployment that persists in spite of his wasteful stimulus and instead think how much worse things would be without his and Nancy Pelosi’s expensive brainchild.

Candidate Obama told Joe-The-Plumber, “I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.” In Obama’s transformative America, ”everybody” includes a lab full of tremulous, cocaine-crazed monkeys.

By Mr. Curmudgeon

Maxine Waters is in trouble. The House Ethics Committee is scheduled to hand down an indictment of sorts for alleged violations of House ethics rules by the 20-year member of Congress sometime in September. According to the Los Angeles Times, Waters is said to have met with then Secretary of the Treasury Henry Paulson, urging him to speed taxpayer bailouts to minority-owned banks on the verge of collapse. According to Paulson, Waters failed to mention that her hubby, Sidney, had a financial stake in one of these minority-owned banks (OneUnited) estimated to be between $500,000 and $1 million. At least we can now put a name to one beneficiary of the Bush bailouts.

And the Bush administration weren’t the only ones helping Waters through her personal financial crisis. “According to a memo summarizing an interview with [Barney] Frank, investigators wrote that Waters told him she was ‘in a predicament because Sidney had been involved in the bank, but OneUnited people were coming to her for help. She knew she should say no, but it bothered her.’ Since the bank was based in Frank’s home state [Massachusetts], he offered to have his staff look into the institution’s problems. Waters’ spokesman said the conversations with Frank took place weeks after the meeting with Treasury Department officials.”

The House Ethics Committee tried to spare Barney embarrassment by not specifically identifying him in their report. So they referred to him as “Representative A.” But the report let the cat out of the bag by describing “Representative A” as the “chairman of the House Financial Services Committee”…a post Barney has held since 2006.

According to a 2004 Los Angeles Times story, Congresswoman Waters has used her public office for her family’s private profit. Daughter Karen Waters started a company that prints sample ballots mailed to her mother’s softheaded constituents called the “slate mailer,” which prints voting suggestions.

“She [Karen Waters] also has been paid by a nonprofit organization she and her mother set up, funded in part by special interests her mother helps in Washington, that throws parties her mother hosts at Democratic conventions. Waters’ husband has collected fees for opening doors with his wife’s political allies on behalf of a bond firm seeking government business. Son Edward Waters has shared in the slate mailer proceeds and has occasionally worked as a consultant to campaigns his mother supported.”

Aren’t you happy your tax dollars have played such an important role in the Waters family success? And as the Times reported back in 2004, “The practice has accelerated as tougher ethics laws make it harder to offer favors directly to members of Congress.”

Oh, just in passing. That old Times story also mentioned another familiar name. “The Times has identified five House members and seven senators whose family members have worked for clients that benefited from the lawmakers’ official actions. They included two sons and a son-in-law of Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.), the newly named minority leader, who in 2002 introduced legislation to free up public land in Nevada that benefited their lobbying clients.”

So, that’s what Democrats mean when they say government should go all-out to help “working families.”

At a 2005 pro-abortion rally held in DC, Rep. Maxine Waters yelled, “George W. Bush, go to hell!” But in her hour of financial need, Waters knew who to turn to…a compassionate conservative administration with a perpetual “kick me” sign taped to its back.

Waters hasn’t the class to say it, so it’s left to us overburdened taxpayers…thanks George!

By Mr. Curmudgeon

The Democrats were looking for House Republicans to provide them political cover. They didn’t. That got Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY) hopping mad. Beltway Republicans are not supposed to do this.

The legislation in question would have provided New York City $7.4 billion over ten years to pay 9/11 emergency response workers who have developed health problems they claim resulted from working in and around the fallen World Trade Center.

“This is not something that got rushed through,” Wiener yelled from the House well. “This is nine years in the making. Nine years worth of people getting sick and dying when the only thing they did wrong, so to speak, was to come to Ground Zero and helping dig out neighbors. Unfortunately, the ‘Party of No’ hit a new low last night.”

There is only one problem with Weiner’s girlish screeching. “A simple majority goes through,” said Rep. Peter King (R-NY). And, of course, King is right. Until November, Democrats are the majority. The problem with the legislation was that Democrats included a provision to grab taxes from foreign corporations earning profits and creating jobs in New York. Imbued with a rare case of fiscal sanity, a majority of Republicans (not all) voted against the measure.

You see, Nancy Pelosi didn’t want a tax hike and job-killing measure to pass on a simple Democratic majority vote, so she raised the stakes by requiring a two-thirds majority vote to pass the measure. It was a win-win for Democrats.

If the measure passed, New York City got a bailout from US taxpayers with a sizable number of Republicans onboard to provide cover. If it failed, a New York Democratic he-man named Weiner could shriek that mean old Republicans were denying another Democratic special interest a taxpayer provided payoff.

The problem for Democrats is that today’s taxpayer – you know, the ones showing up at huge Tea Party rallies – aren’t falling for the usual class warfare drivel uttered by Democrats desperately clawing to maintain power. That’s because, thanks to big government, Americans now belong to one social class…the screwed.

Just in passing, the Democrats hid a tax hike behind a measure claiming to aid sick and dying 9/11 workers so as to make it harder for soft-headed Republicans to say no to more spending. The measure was called “H.R. 847: James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act of 2010.”

A quick synopsis in the New York Times reads, “…New York City Detective James Zadroga died as result of inhaling dust from Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on World Trade Center while working as rescuer.”

However, New York City’s chief medical examiner, Dr. Charles S. Hirsch, reported that Zadroga’s lung condition was the result of “prescription drug abuse” and not terrorist dust.

Not to worry, Democrats will find some other way to squeeze more money out of us. Where there’s a Weiner, there’s a way.

By Mr. Curmudgeon

For Democrats Rep. Barney Frank and Sen. Christopher Dodd, financial reform means never having to say you’re sorry. And since government by its nature is incapable of competence, the next best thing is to hide its incompetence…and corruption.

Our current economic depression, caused by big government Federal Reserve low interest rates (meant to boost housing prices) and big-government sub-prime lending, was supposed to be addressed by the recently enacted “financial reform” legislation signed into law by President Obama. There is just one hitch to the new law, Frank and Dodd snuck in a provision that exempts the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) from having to answer Freedom of Information Act requests.

Their thinking goes: If idiot voters can’t see how lousy big government is at regulating anything more complicated than the temperature in the House and Senate chambers, we can keep feeding said idiots the line that big government solutions can cure big government disasters.

According to an SEC statement, “Because registrants insist on confidential treatment of their documents, this new provision also removes an opportunity for brokers, investment advisers and other registrants to refuse to cooperate with our examination document requests.”

In other words, regulating Wall Street chicanery can only succeed outside the sunshine of public scrutiny.

Remember Countrywide? They’re the sub-prime lender that established a special unit to provide “Friends of Angelo” (Countrywide CEO Angelo Mozillo) special low interest loans designed to keep our public-spirited big-government regulators from looking too deeply into the sub-prime Ponzi scheme.

According to CBS News, then Fannie Mae CEO Jim Johnson got sweetheart loans totaling $10 million. Other recipients of Countrywide payoffs included Fannie Mae’s Vice Chairman Jamie Gorelick (a Clinton appointee). In all, Countrywide purchased 42 officials at Fannie Mae.

According to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, “With Countrywide-originated loans serving as fuel and Government-Sponsored Enterprises (“GSEs”) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac acting as a furnace, the alliance of companies created an enormous fire that eventually consumed the American economy. Many of the people in positions to reform the GSEs and extinguish the flames before the danger spread were receiving perquisites from a VIP loan program…two Senators with legislative jurisdiction over the issues at heart of the emerging financial crisis – Christopher Dodd and Kent Conrad.”

Countrywide’s refinancing of Dodd’s Connecticut and Washington, D.C., homes saved the Senator $75,000.

The disclosure rendered Dodd’s re-election prospects zero. So he opted for ignominious early retirement rather than face voter wrath. But as a parting gift to all Congress men and women that choose to follow in his corrupt footsteps, Dodd made sure nosy media (read Fox News) won’t have the tools to shine light on our big-government “protectors.”

Because, as Christopher Dodd can tell you, there’s too much easy “protection” money to be had.

By Mr. Curmudgeon

When the city manager of sleepy Bell, California, Bob Rizzo, was reported to earn a hefty $800,000 a year, with the part-time city council pulling in a tidy $100,000 annual salary, Bell’s residents awoke from their California dreaming and literally mobbed city hall, demanding answers…and blood.

In the end, old Bobby Rizzo boxed his Pez dispensers, finished the last swig of bourbon from the hidden bottle in his desk drawer, and put in for early retirement.

And that’s when things got interesting.

You see, Bob is a public employee…and the public in beautiful sun-drenched California – a.k.a., taxpayers – pay handsome pensions to retired public servants such as Bob.

In fact, Bob’s pension was so handsome it even got the attention of California’s Attorney General Jerry Brown…because it’s a whopping $600,000 a year…for life.

Sweet!

A spokesman for the California Public Employee’s Retirement System told the Los Angeles Times they are “working closely with the attorney general on this matter and not a dollar will be paid until we have the full and complete picture.”

What do you want to bet that when the smoke clears old Bob gets his pension? After all, he just followed the time-tested W.C. Fields dictum, “never give a sucker an even break.”

At every university commencement speech, President Obama urges rosy-cheeked graduates to put aside entering the grubby private sector in favor of noble public service. And Bob would agree.

It’s hard to feel sorry for Bell’s citizens. They were too busy and didn’t take the time to see how Bob was managing as city manager. And Bob took their lack of interest to mean he could manage their tax dollars into his bank account. Bob’s public employee union did not raise an eyebrow when they saw what Bob’s lifetime pension payout would be when he stopped all his managing and entered quiet retirement.

Bob used to be Bell’s problem. As the highest paid public employee pensioner, Bob is now bankrupt California’s problem.

Is there a moral to Bob’s story? You bet: “Manage your government or it’s Bobs will surely manage you.”

By Mr. Curmudgeon

The quasi-governmental financial institutions Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae may be next on Congress’ to-do list now that President Obama signed the financial regulatory reform act into law. The two agencies at the heart of the global financial crisis were conspicuously left out of the overhaul of the nation’s financial system. And there was a reason…Rep. Barney Frank and his Congressional friends needed first to establish a replacement.

Deep in the new financial regulations is a provision establishing a fund that will funnel billions of dollars into small banks for the lofty purpose of making loans to small businesses. The big-government Santa Clause headquartered at the Fed will grant loan requests provided the “applicant’s business strategy and operating goals will allow it to address the needs of small businesses in the areas it serves, as well as a plan to provide linguistically and culturally appropriate outreach…” Huh?

Small business will have access to the government’s $300 billion fund provided they are willing to become a branch of ACORN. Remember the Community Reinvestment Act that forced banks into making sub-prime loans that Freddie and Fannie bought and repackaged as mortgage-backed securities? The new Small Business Lending Fund assures the practice continues. The more loans these specialized banks make that meet Obama’s criteria, the more money they will have access to – with the Federal Reserve taking the place of Freddie and Fannie.

The monstrosities that emerge, replacing America’s productive small business – which once employed over 80% of Americans – will be replaced by Obama-approved redistributors of income. Now that’s what I call transformative change.

Once upon a time, the business of America was business. In Obama’s brave new world, with a big assist from the Federal Reserve, the business of America will be community organizing.

By Mr. Curmudgeon

President Obama was riding high after signing his Wall Street reform legislation into law. Then Neil Barofsky, special inspector general for the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), came along to rain on the president’s parade. Barofsky’s report to Congress estimates that US taxpayers are on the hook for $700 billion this year (heaped atop an already staggering $3.7 trillion), resulting from the administration’s effort to stem the growing foreclosure rate. And the culprits?

“The increase was largely due to the government’s pledge to supply capital to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, to buy their securities and guarantee mortgages to prop up housing,” reports the Reuters News Service. It’s funny how the President’s “sweeping financial reform” accidentally left out Freddie and Fannie…on purpose.

Barofsky lived up to his reputation for being Rep. Barney Frank and President Obama’s worst nightmare. “…I fear that the growing public suspicion that this program is an outright failure will continue unless and until Treasury…comes clean with what its goals and expectations are.” Ouch.

And while the president and his party howl about compensation for executives at the nation’s largest banks and brokerage houses, CEO’s Michael Williams (Fannie Mae) and Charles Haldeman Jr. (Freddie Mac) are both pulling in $900,000 a year. Where big government is concerned, nothing succeeds like catastrophic failure.

And speaking of failure, Obama’s “sweeping financial reform” just gave “too big to fail” the weight of US law. Now Barney Frank and friends can continue feeding the beats Freddie and Fannie tax dollars so as to continue their destructive behavior.

When conservatives criticize Obama’s new draconian law for overburdening our damaged economy, he will no doubt don his trusted fig leaf for cover. “I didn’t create TARP,” he’ll say, “Bush did.” And, sadly, he will be right.

Remember John Snow? As Bush’s Treasury Secretary, he once testified before Washington’s lawmakers, saying they needed to draft “legislation to create a new Federal agency to regulate and supervise the financial activities of our housing-related government sponsored enterprises [Freddie and Fannie].” He was ignored by his president and a Republican controlled Congress. A Wall Street Journal poll of leading economists declared Snow an ineffective Treasury secretary by a margin of two to one. Bush eventually fired him.

During the 2008 campaign, John McCain suspended his politicking to participate in legislative negotiations that began the “too big to fail” bailouts. “Now is the time to come together,” said McCain to the adoring press, “Democrats and Republicans – in a spirit of cooperation for the sake of the American people.”

Obama’s White House Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel, once said, “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.” The economic crisis that now engulfs our nation, and that Obama uses as an excuse to radically transform America, is the handiwork of Democrats and Republicans working together in a “spirit of bipartisan cooperation.”

Yesterday, senior economist at CoreLogic, Sam Khater, told the Associated Press, “The Economy and the housing market are going to remain stagnant for a long time. There’s nothing that’s going to propel sales anytime soon. It’s all about jobs and income growth.”

Obama’s transformative socialist agenda makes certain that jobs and income growth will remain a distant mirage. And we can thank that damned “spirit of bipartisan cooperation” for it.

America, is it beginning to dawn on you why the Tea Party is so important? This is a drum I will continue to beat until I stop hearing how the Republican Party is the answer to all our problems. They controlled Congress for twelve long years. There was even a Republican president in the White House for six of them. Where were they?

If John McCain returns to Washington after the midterms, do you really believe he will work to undo the horrific damage done to the American people by Obama? Or will he revert to “maverick” mode and obstruct every rational attempt to repeal our current socialist transformation? You know the answer.

There are currently 178 Republicans in the US House of Representatives. Twenty-eight formed a “Tea Party Caucus” giving lukewarm support to the principle of limited government. The question is, Where was the Republican leadership?

“He hates being politically labeled,” said POLITICO.com of Republican House Minority Leader John Boehner. “That’s why he avoids joining caucuses. For example, earlier this week he passed up the opportunity to join the House Tea Party Caucus.” The last thing a man of conscience wants to do during a time of great crisis is take sides in an epic moral struggle to save his country. President Obama and Nancy Pelosi, on the other hand, were all to quick to choose the distructive dark side.

Tea Party, Tea Party, Tea Party!

By Mr. Curmudgeon

Until the other day, I was extremely pessimistic about the economic future of America. Then I read Paul Krugman, Nobel-winning economist and weekly contributor to the New York Times. He announced in his column that the country is in the early stages of a third Great Depression. And the reason for his pessimism? The assembled nations at the G-20 economic summit held last weekend in Toronto, Canada, listened to Obama’s Keynesian plea to spend, spend, spend and said, “drop dead.”

“…At last weekend’s deeply discouraging G-20 meeting,” lamented Krugman, “governments are obsessing about inflation when the real threat is deflation, preaching the need for belt-tightening when the real problem is inadequate spending.” Actually, they are obsessing over debt, not inflation. They prefer not to see general chaos in the streets, their citizens setting the police ablaze with Molotov cocktails. Instead of denouncing some in Europe for their unusual bout of sanity, Krugman needs to tell the Greeks to please ixnay on the riots-nay. They’re giving reckless Krugsian spending a bad name.

With American lawmakers already losing faith in Obamanomics (the Democratic majority refused to pass a bill extending unemployment benefits out  into infinity), the stage is set for a humdinger of an election debate on whether the U.S. should follow Greece down Krugman’s road to economic oblivion or elect Tea Party rationalists who believe Thomas Jefferson’s dictum, “In questions of power then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the constitution.”

A year ago last April, Krugman was absolutely delighted that tongue-tied compassionate conservative Republicans posed no threat to the president’s socialist agenda. “For now, the Obama administration gains a substantial advantage from the fact that it has no credible opposition, especially on economic policy, where the Republicans seem particularly clueless.” He was certainly right back then. Unfortunately for Krugman and President Obama, the Tea Party came along to fill the vacuum left by go-along-to-get-along Beltway Republicans. Tea Party candidates seem to be sweeping Krugman’s “clueless” Republicans into the ashbin of history.

A recent Rasmussen poll found that only 11% of Americans believe the government should increase the budget deficit, ala Krugman, to stimulate the economy. According to Rasmussen, “59% think Keynes had it backwards and that increasing the deficit at this time would hurt the economy rather than help.” If that wasn’t bad enough, the survey also found “most Americans (56%) believe that cutting the deficit is the way to go.”

And then, the cruelest cut of all, “Eighty-three percent of Americans, in fact, say the size of the federal budget deficit is due more to the unwillingness of politicians to cut government spending than to the reluctance of taxpayers to pay more in taxes.”

No wonder Krugman is talking about a depression. After November, he’ll need a psychiatrist to deal with his own.