Paul Krugman, "Love for Labor Lost": Using Labor Day to Attack Eric Cantor

I've done more than a few things over the course of my adult life. I have worked for others, including time spent as a menial worker, e.g., farm laborer, and have also held government and white collar positions. I have been a soldier. In addition, I have created two businesses: one succeeded, one failed. What was best and what was worst? I don't know, but I certainly don't regret any of it.

In his latest New York Times op-ed entitled "Love for Labor Lost" (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/02/opinion/krugman-love-for-labor-lost.html?_r=0), Paul Krugman takes the opportunity presented by Labor Day in the US to smear Congressman Eric Cantor. Krugman writes:

"Consider, for example, how Eric Cantor, the House majority leader, marked Labor Day last year: with a Twitter post declaring 'Today, we celebrate those who have taken a risk, worked hard, built a business and earned their own success.' Yep, he saw Labor Day as an occasion to honor business owners.

. . . .

So, this time around will we be hearing anything from Mr. Cantor and his colleagues suggesting that they actually do respect people who work for a living? Maybe. But the one thing we’ll know for sure is that they don’t mean it."

Hold your horses, Paul. Someone who created his or her own hardware store, restaurant, travel agency, home renovation service, or auto repair shop has not "built a business and earned their own success"? "Business owners" don't work for a living? The overwhelming majority of people who open their own businesses are not Bill Gates and Steve Jobs, and they sweat bullets every day and lose sleep every night in an effort to keep their businesses above water.

Having created two small businesses, I know this to be a fact.

And the fear of failure is palpable. Suddenly, you're also responsible for the livelihoods of others. It's not the same as receiving a weekly paycheck from a well-endowed university, or from a newspaper, which might ultimately be forced to file for Chapter 11, unless a certain administration, whose views its editorial staff regularly parrots, comes to its rescue.

Indeed, Eric Cantor paid homage to those who opened their own businesses. This is a reason for Krugman to spew venom?

Thomas Friedman's "The Clash of Generations": Shifting the Blame Away from Obama

In his latest New York Times manifesto entitled "The Clash of Generations" (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/17/opinion/sunday/17friedman.html?ref=opinion), Thomas Friedman, writing from Athens, compares the debt dilemma in Greece with the debt ceiling crisis in the US. Friedman questions whether baby boomer politicians, specifically Eric Cantor, are emotionally capable of dealing with such predicaments:

"That brings up another similarity between Greece and America: that the necessary may be impossible, that baby boomer politicians in the age of Twitter may not be up to addressing problems this big. The hole is too deep and power too fragmented. The only way out is by collective action — where ruling and opposition parties unite, share the pain and take the necessary steps. But that is not happening here or in Washington. There are Eric Cantors everywhere — reckless baby boomer politicians for whom no crisis is too serious to set aside political ambition and ideology."

So now it's all Eric Cantor's fault.

I would remind Tom of the words of another baby boomer Democratic senator, who, on March 16, 2006, opposed George W. Bush’s request to raise the debt limit, declaring:

“The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. . . . Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that 'the buck stops here.' Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better."

That senator was Barack Obama.

Moreover, before pinning the blame on Cantor, Tom should read Paul Krugman's July 7 op-ed entitled "What Obama Wants" (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/08/opinion/08krugman.html?hp), where Krugman acknowledges:

"It’s getting harder and harder to trust Mr. Obama’s motives in the budget fight, given the way his economic rhetoric has veered to the right.

. . . .

Almost all the high-profile economists who joined the Obama administration early on have either left or are leaving."

Bottom line: The US is now a rudderless ship, captained by a man, who, as acknowledged by those closest to him, struggles to reach decisions. Obama is the ultimate example of a baby boomer, steeped in "political ambition and ideology," who should have known that he lacked the experience and emotional maturity to assume the reins of power.

An angry painful compromise involving the US debt ceiling will ultimately be reached. Moreover, if the dialogue forces the Obama administration to engage in serious soul searching and proffer concrete solutions to the budget deficit, Cantor's stubbornness will have served the nation well. Any attempt, however, to saddle Cantor with the blame for this quagmire amounts to politicized tripe of the kind that has come to characterize Friedman's column.