is the title ofr this SCATHING column by Paul Krugman in today's New York Times. Yes, I capitalized that word. There is no other way to describe this column
Consider just the first two paragraphs:
John Boehner was a terrible, very bad, no good speaker of the House. Under his leadership, Republicans pursued an unprecedented strategy of scorched-earth obstructionism, which did immense damage to the economy and undermined America’s credibility around the world.
Still, things could have been worse. And under his successor they almost surely will be worse. Bad as Mr. Boehner was, he was just a symptom of the underlying malady, the madness that has consumed his party.
And Krugman is just getting started.
Quite obviously I am limited in what I can quote from the column.
And in the midst of a horrid weak at school (our internet was down, I don't yet after four weeks have my student computers, and the temperature in my room was in the mid-80s for most of the day) I really do not have a lot of time nor energy for blogging.
But this is a column that should be read and widely distributed.
In fact I was shocked that it was not featured already.
Consider a few more snippets.
After reminding us that after Obama took office Boehner opposed further stimulus saying that since the American people had had to tighten their belts the government should as well, Krugman writes
This was know-nothing economics, and incredibly irresponsible at a time of crisis; not long ago it would have been hard to imagine a major political figure making such a statement.
That is not merely blunt, but as I noted before, absolutely scathing.
Or how about this accurate description of the House under Boehner:
The Boehner era has been one in which Republicans have accepted no responsibility for helping to govern the country, in which they have opposed anything and everything the president proposes.
True enough, isn't it?
And then Krugman says it plainly enough:
What’s more, it has been an era of budget blackmail, in which threats that Republicans will shut down the government or push it into default unless they get their way have become standard operating procedure.
So why then is Boehner out?
Basically because the obstructionism failed.
Despite the obstructionism, the presidency of Barack Hussein Obama has largely been successful, although far less beneficial to the American people than it might have been had the Republicans not been so obstructionist.
I AM going to push fair use.
The penultimate paragraph reads:
But Republican leaders who have encouraged the base to believe all kinds of untrue things are in no position to start preaching political rationality.
My only problem with that is using the terms "political rationality" and "Republican leaders" in the same sentence. Not when having gained power by fomenting the worst fears of a base they then use that as an excuse for inaction and pointless obstructionism to maintain the support of that base - how many pointless votes to repeal the Affordable Care Act have there been already?
But it is Krugman's final paragraph that nails it. Read it, and if I had not already convinced you, perhaps you will then go and read - and distribute widely - the entire column.
Mr. Boehner is quitting because he found himself caught between the limits of the politically possible and a base that lives in its own reality. But don’t cry for (or with) Mr. Boehner; cry for America, which must find a way to live with a G.O.P. gone mad.