Paul Krugman, "Free to Die": Heartless Republicans

Paul Krugman today lambasts Republican's for their willingness to cut Medicaid and Medicare benefits in his New York Times op-ed entitled "Free to Die" (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/16/opinion/krugman-free-to-die.html?_r=1&hp). Krugman tells us that Republicans lack compassion as a matter of principle:

"Given the agreed-upon desirability of protecting citizens against the worst, the question then became one of costs and benefits — and health care was one of those areas where even conservatives used to be willing to accept government intervention in the name of compassion, given the clear evidence that covering the uninsured would not, in fact, cost very much money. As many observers have pointed out, the Obama health care plan was largely based on past Republican plans, and is virtually identical to Mitt Romney’s health reform in Massachusetts.

Now, however, compassion is out of fashion — indeed, lack of compassion has become a matter of principle, at least among the G.O.P.’s base."

That's pretty easy even for a lummox like me to remember: Democrats good, Republicans bad. It even rings similar to "Four legs good, two legs bad!"

A fly in the ointment? Always. In a September 13 article in Krugman's own newspaper (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/14/us/politics/obamas-expected-plan-for-entitlement-savings-worries-democrats.html), Robert Pear wrote:

"As Congress opens a politically charged exploration of ways to pare the deficit, President Obama is expected to seek hundreds of billions of dollars in savings in Medicare and Medicaid, delighting Republicans and dismaying many Democrats who fear that his proposals will become a starting point for bigger cuts in the popular health programs.

The president made clear his intentions in his speech to a joint session of Congress last week when, setting forth a plan to create jobs and revive the economy, he said he disagreed with members of his party 'who don’t think we should make any changes at all to Medicare and Medicaid.'

Few Democrats fit that description. But many say that if, as expected, Mr. Obama next week proposes $300 billion to $500 billion of savings over 10 years in entitlement programs, he will provide political cover for a new bipartisan Congressional committee to cut just as much or more.

And, they say, such proposals from the White House will hamstring Democrats who had been hoping to employ Medicare as a potent issue against Republicans in 2012 campaigns after many Congressional Republicans backed a budget that would have substantially altered Medicare by providing future beneficiaries with a subsidy to enroll in private health care plans."

Now I'm confused. Will we soon be hearing, "Four legs good, two legs better"?