Monday’s exercise of critical thinking was definitely an awesome way to start the semester. With so much information today, readers are keeping up on current events through more entertaining media like the editorial page or comedy shows like “The Colbert Report” or “The Daily Show” rather than seeking hard news that’s found on page one. The truth is that it’s easier to simply absorb another’s interpretation of news rather than examining the facts and making critical observations.
Concerning Krugman’s editorial; ultimately his pieces are not intended to provide hard journalism to the masses, but rather are tuned to the ears of the educated, mostly metropolitan and perhaps liberal readership of the New York Times. Although he reasons that even Republicans once saw the urgency for government intervention in healthcare reform, his column will probably only serve to reinforce the views of his already converted readership.
However, what I kept asking myself was why did Kennedy reject Nixon’s proposal 35 years ago. Krugman writes the conservative opposition to today’s proposals off as “GOP extremism”, but obviously Nixon’s proposal received Democratic opposition of its own. I don’t doubt the extent of corporate pressure described, but maybe Krugman needs to step back and appreciate the obligations that these politicians have toward industry. Tom brought up a good point the other week when he mentioned the “Golden Rule”. Although we are hard pressed to change the current state of lobbyist ties, maybe in the future we should open dialogue to a system where campaign contributions are capped, keeping our representatives out of industry’s pocket.