- Insists that the thirty-eighth President of the United States was “a young Jimmie Walker”
- Refers to the Supreme Court decision ending school segregation as The Kennedys v. a Klan of Racist Rightwing Nutters who Hate America
- Attributes the theory of relativity to “my very brilliant friend, Lanny Davis”
- Criticizes the Israelis for “illegally occupying” several dorm rooms during the 1972 Munich Olympics
- Is “pretty sure” Mumia is already free
- Winner of the 2004 World Series? The Cincinnati Bengals
- Claims Gloria Steinem not only piloted the first transatlantic flight, but that she did it “with one hand tied behind her back, and with her eyes completely shut”
- Argues that the 1929 stockmarket crash was caused by “a really big meteor”
- “And the winner is…Martin Scorsese, Goodfellas!”
*Background story here (h/t Glenn)
update: Others commenting: Brainster, G-man, Blogs for Bush, AnalPhilosopher, The Corner, Powerpundit, The Chief Brief, and Bill Quick.
10. “Karl Rove is Keyser Soze!!1!”
Jeff,
C’mon, you’re still quoting from that Carl Hudecek email, aren’t ya?
Cordially…
Krugman is a joke. sometimes it’s difficult to imagine how this guy can be employed by anything other than a conspiracy rag. Oh wait…
I like his little beardlette.
Your crack about the Bengals winning last year’s World Series is nothing but a cheap smear aimed at calling Professor Krugman’s masculinity into question, simply because he doesn’t follow “sports.”
I mean, just because he’s a tiny, bed-wetting, simpering, easily-frightened pantywaist of a…
Damn, I forgot where I was going with this.
No kidding, Sean. Even Krugman knows that the Bengals need to figure out how to get above .500 before they even start dreaming about their day with Lord Stanley’s Cup.
Remembers Jimmy Carter defeating Ronald Reagan, who went back to Hollywood to create the surprise TV hit of the 1980s, Death Valley Girls. Unfortunately with the millions that Reagan made off his profitable vehicle, he started a company that Krugman rails about to this day: Enronald.
Sadly, Krugman is technically correct on this one, assuming that when he says “full” recount, he means including the overvotes. In that case, according to the people doing the counting, Gore would have won by a small number of votes (maybe as little as 100).
Several problems with that though, as the people doing the study point out.
The first is that majority of the people making the determinations were democrats, and even in a dummy poll a bias in counting ballots occurs (well… duh). Very likely, in a state with equal numbers of Democrats and Republicans, the bias would have averaged out and not resulted in a significant enough shift to have given Gore a win.
Secondly, and more importantly, the inclusion of the overvotes would have been patently illegal under Florida state law. Thus there is no way this recount could ever have take place to start with.
This technical use of “truth” that Krugman does in his number games is perhaps what Daniel Okrent was referring to when he commented on Krugman’s “disturbing habit of shaping, slicing and selectively citing numbers”.
CHICKENJOCKS!!!!!
Thanks, Carrick. Yeah, that’s problem what Krugman meant, something that paraphrased might go: if we were allowed to count the votes in a way to make Gore win, Gore would have won.
We’ll never know what the result of a full recount would have been, since that would have involved recounting all ballots– and neither study so much as glanced at that great majority of ballots that were accepted by the machines. But this is more of a problem for Krugman’s side, since they’re the ones insisting that only manual inspection of a ballot is good enough. It’s wildly inconsistent of them to turn around and assume that the machines are perfect whenever they don’t show an under- or overvote. (For example, if we accept a dimpled chad as proof of voter intent to vote for a candidate, then someone who tried to vote for both Bush and Gore but only managed to punch out Gore’s chad and dimple Bush’s should have his ballot rejected, since his clear intent was to vote for both men. But the machine would have tallied his ballot, erroneously, as a vote for Gore.)
Turing sez: “just”, as in “Just let it go, Prof. K.”
And then there was the premature calling of the state by the networks while the polls were still open in the panhandle. That cost Bush enough votes to easily cover a crooked recount in Miami.
My old Granny used to say:
“If if’s and but’s
Was candy and nuts,
We would
All have a Merry Christmas!”
I hope poor Paul has a better holiday season this year.
This wouldn’t be an issue but for the PROVEN FACT that EACH AND EVERY PERSON who voted for Bushitler in Florida in 2000 was either a MASON or a member of SKULL AND BONES!!!!!!!!!!!
Everyone who WANTED to vote for him was either a member od OPUS DEI or the KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS!!!!!!
WAKE UP AMERICA!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Why is my spam word expected? Is that you in the van across the street??????!!!!?!?!?!
Jeff:
Thanks for the chuckle. I laughed before I didn’t.
I think you mean the Protocols of the Illuminati of Zion, there, maddad, not the KOC. And ixnay on the anvay, okay ? It’s just a meteorological study. Of your house.
I think the whole election deal has been fixed by the Papal hit man known as Regis Mysterium since 2000. With Sharon’s permission, of course.
And you thought AL GORE would let a golden opportunity like Cindy Sheehan go away. NO way.
“AL GORE CALLS CINDY SHEEHAN TO TONE DOWN HER DRIVE”
Does this guy have any shame?
This reminds me of my favorite Jonah Goldberg quote:
“There are other complaints as well. Take the two leading liberal columnists at the New York Times, Maureen Dowd and Paul Krugman. As we all know, one’s a whining self-parody of a hysterical liberal who lets feminine emotion and fear defeat reason and fact in almost every column. The other used to date Michael Douglas. “