I thought this AM I would sit, and as my brethren at the New York Times, write my Sunday editorial piece. With all that is going on in the world, there was one article that jumped out at me. An article that tickled my fancy for math, economics and people that believe they are smarter than everyone else…oh, and Donald Trump. Their supposed intelligence is then supposed to translate in their ability to lecture us mere mortals. The article that caught my attention was:
It was written by the aforesaid “genius” of economics Paul Krugman (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Krugman), a self-confessed hyper-liberal about Trump. Of course, about Trump because liberals and democraps can write about nothing else at present. Mr. Krugman does have the degrees that is for sure. He teaches at all of the liberal bastions on subjects that even he says only he understands. He has even written a book for us common folk that we can grasp. It begins by telling its readers to take off their shoes so they can count above 18, or is it 20. His article attacking Trump is full of “maybe’s”, “I suspects”, “could be’s” and “far from clears”. The problem is that for a man that “hangs his hat” on razor sharp intellect of economics and mathematical facts, he “can’t write a lick” as my High School English teacher used to say with his eyes crossed, and tongue thrown to one side. It was funny the first few times he did it, but after the hundredth time it was old, as they say. The same as these guys attacking Trump over and over on not being a good businessman. He is a BILLIONAIRE and has been for decades. Yes, he hit some low spots, but he brought the ship back. He is a billionaire with actual assets unlike the billionaires that are computer/IT created who have never shown a dime of profit and never will, but through the idiocy of MODERN ECONOMICS they can (as we in the criminology field used to call a Ponzi scheme) show themselves and their companies as worth billions. If you look at Hillary Clinton supporters, you will see many of these people sucking up to her. This is because Hillary made her money not by legal methods, but by, again, what we in the criminology business call CORRUPTION. Now, back to my man Krugman, he is what my grandfather used to say was a man who was “sharp as a tack, but dumb as a board”. He can’t help it, it is a “tell” of a liberal democrap. So, under the guise of this article, as we in the South would interpret it, Mr. Krugman would have you believe that Mr. Trump was BAD because he inherited some money and made more money with it, and he is a billionaire. Hillary Clinton would be GOOD because she didn’t inherit what we call, “a bucket of piss, nor a window to throw it out of” but she gained her money through CORRUPTION and GRAFT. This makes her, by Mr. Krugman, the hyper-economist estimate, a Presidential Candidate. I believe we all have the facts together now and can run the numbers through our little common minds according to Mr. Krugman, and I haven’t even taken my shoes off yet. There is a saying I use when talking with some people, whether way up the food chain, or paying for that food with a food card (it used to be food stamps, but Obama thought this was degrading so he and the likes of Mr. Krugman said that food stamp people should have a food stamp credit card and this would make them feel better about themselves). Anyway, I ask the people to stand and turn around and talk because I could hear them more clearer because they were talking out of their asses and their voices were muffled. This, I know you will be able to associate directly with Mr. Krugman’s article and its hidden/obvious meaning and backing of the criminal/traitor Hillary Clinton. On Krugman’s article I think we should substitute his name for Trumps and we would/will have a much clearer picture of what is going on in his “common/confused/elitist” mind at present.
That’s all I have today.
I hope everyone has a great, safe, and beautiful Sunday.
Emiel Fisher, PI, PPS