Tag Archives: economy

Cincy Media Mostly Nix Ohio Gov. Strickland’s Reference to GOP as ‘Overrun by Extremist Elements’ at Labor Picnic

It’s interesting, and more than a little frustrating, to see how inflammatory words in speeches delivered by liberal and leftist politicians that might cast them in a bad light don’t seem to make much news. One such example occurred in a speech yesterday at Cincinnati’s Coney Island, on the occasion of the AFL-CIO’s huge annual picnic there. At that event, Ohio Governor Ted Strickland lashed out at the party of gubernatorial opponent John Kasich as, according to one local reporter, “overrun by extremist elements.” I don’t know that this is exactly what Strickland said, but it seems highly unlikely that veteran WLWT reporter John London would have strung those words together on his own.  Strickland’s characterization of his opposition as relayed by London, which you will find at this Bing video and also at WLWT’s own web site , “somehow” didn’t make it into the the station’s accompanying text report on the event, which, contrary to what I believe is the norm at the station, doesn’t in any way follow the script of the London’s coverage. The “overrun by extremist elements” reference also was not noted at either of the city’s two other news-following TV stations which covered the event ( here and here ), nor in Howard Wilkinson’s coverage at Gannett’s Cincinnati Enquirer. Imagine that. Here is the first 70% or so of the verbiage in the WLWT broadcast: Strickland (during speech): What we are fighting for is the middle class of Ohio and America! Jack Atherton (in-studio co-host): Governor Ted Strickland of Ohio. Labor Day usually means you get a day off from work. But too many Tri-Staters are out of work altogether, and the governor was reminded today campaigning at Coney Island. Sheree Paolello (the other co-host): Now with the poor economy and President Obama calling for another $50 billion program to improve roads and runways, people had a lot to say today, and News 5’s is John London is live with reaction to the Governor’s visit today. John? John London: Well, Sheree, he gave them matches for the bonfire. He blamed Wall Street greed for the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs in Ohio, declared the Republican Party has been overrun by extremist elements, shouted “Hell no, we won’t give the state over to them!” This was Governor Ted Strickland, gloves off, some three weeks before the start of early voting. (begin newsreel with John London voiceover) Ohio’s Governor arrived with a four-letter word on his lips: Jobs. Candidates of every political stripe can’t say it or promise it enough. Strickland (during speech): What we are fighting for is the middle class of Ohio — London: But can any of them deliver it? Erin Kramer, Director, SEIU Local 1: Our members do well when cities do well. And cities do well when people are working. London: As if to hammer home the point, many of these union workers and their families are suffering: laid-off, worried, discouraged. Here’s what Governor Strickland told us after blasting what he termed “Wall Street greed.” Strickland: This recovery is starting to take hold, but this is not a guarantee that, that we will not have a double-dip recession. London: The mood lightens out here if you let it. Pete Wagner’s orchestra sprinkled a little Dixieland into what is a combination event: one part picnic, two parts politics. Doug Sizemore, AFL-CIO labor leader: The economy that we’re in right now is due to the failed policies of the Bush administration. London: The Democrat candidates mine this turf each Labor Day — Thousands of union families within campaign reach, perhaps a little fewer this time as mid-term elections approach. As one worker put it: “There have been so many layoffs.” Strickland: Quite frankly, Ohio is starting to see signs of growth. London: And what the Governor means by that is that tax revenue in the state is exceeding projections, not by much, but by a little bit. He continues to acknowledge that unemployment remains a huge problem. … Anyone who knows anything about the hidebound Ohio Republican Party would double over in laughter at any description of them as “extremists.” The ORP was so hostile to and felt so threatened by Tea Party insurgent candidates for statewide office and its Central Committee — candidates who would only be considered unwanted “extremists” by people who also believe this country’s Founders were — that it spent large sums of money on misleading Tea Party-pretentious campaign literature and on Election Day poll watchers who handed out slate cards to defeat them in the May primary. Much of the rest of London’s report unfortunately segues to what I would describe as a “long hot summer” riff, even though summer is over, the message being that crime won’t come down until employment goes up. Going back to Strickland — It must be nice to be able to fire up the base mostly without having to worry about whether your inflammatory language will escape the confines of the venue where your speech is taking place. It’s highly unlikely that a Republican or conservative at an open event covered by the press would be that lucky. Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com .

Visit link:
Cincy Media Mostly Nix Ohio Gov. Strickland’s Reference to GOP as ‘Overrun by Extremist Elements’ at Labor Picnic

CNBC Money Honey Exaggerates Job Growth to Boost Obamanomics on Meet the Press

Erin Burnett, one of CNBC’s famed “money honeys,” exaggerated the relative strength of the economy Sunday in order to boost the success of President Obama’s stimulus plan. Appearing on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Burnett several times characterized this economic recovery as not only far stronger than any of the indicators suggest, but also “faster” than those in the recent past. “Our recovery started more quickly than after any other recession in the past 25 years,” the CNBCer told David Gregory and his panel. Burnett later elaborated on this preposterous claim as fellow panelist Rich Lowry of the National Review shook his head on screen (video follows with transcript and commentary): DAVID GREGORY, HOST: And big picture, the president maintains, in response to the jobs numbers, “Look, we’re going in the right direction here. We are part of the solution, not part of the problem.” But as I suggested to David Plouffe, there is a–an economic record there that is tough to run on. ERIN BURNETT, CNBC: Yes, very tough to run on. He’s right, though. I mean, I call it the “tortoise economy.” The economy’s growing. The numbers are coming out. We’re getting better – in fact, after this recession we have – our recovery started more quickly than after any other recession in the past 25 years. So it’s accurate to say we’re growing and we’re going in the right direction. Politically, though, how do you spin a 9.6 unemployment rate to have it be positive? That’s incredibly difficult. And it’s very hard politically to see how they’re going to make that case. ————————- MR. GREGORY: But, Erin Burnett, the big question on unemployment, if, if–and in 30 seconds, when is there a meaningful dent in the unemployment rate that can help these political fortunes? MS. BURNETT: Well, I think it’s interesting, because by the way, I don’t think the stimulus has been a failure, and I think that you are correct that it is perceived that way. But I don’t think it’s actually true. Without that stimulus, we would be significantly worse off than we are right now. There, there’s really no question about it. You can ask any economist on Wall Street or any CEO. I see you shaking your head, I know you disagree. But, but, but, but my reporting would show otherwise. E. J. DIONNE, WASHINGTON POST: Keep going. MS. BURNETT: I – look, I, I, I think the problem is you have the fastest job creation in this recovery than you have in any recession in 25 years, but it is still not enough. You aren’t going to win this on jobs, and that is the problem. It’s going to take a long time. I don’t know how you get around that problem, but technically speaking, this recovery has not been tepid. Really, Erin? And exactly how did you come to such a conclusion? Let’s begin our analysis of Burnett’s claim by first recognizing that the organization responsible for determing when recessions begin and end – the National Bureau of Economic Research – has yet to announce when the last recession concluded. In fact, as Fortune reported on August 6, NBER may be delaying its announcement to see if the economy double-dips: The National Bureau of Economic Research is known to be slow at declaring the starts and stops of a recession, but it looks as if it might have been right to hold off on any bold declarations this time around, potentially proving many policymakers and Wall Street analysts wrong. Many economists say the recession ended over a year ago — last June or July — even while NBER (the ones tasked to make the formal call) has hesitated from doing so. As early as April, the organization’s committee of academic economists said that it would be “premature” to declare an end to the recession that started in December 2007. Who knows when the NBER will declare the end of this latest recession. Whatever date it falls on, last summer certainly didn’t feel like the end of the recession even while many economists argue that it was. And in the coming year, it might feel even less like it. The NBER has never declared a double-dip recession, but believes it is basically one continuous recession with a period of growth occurring and then a slip back to a downturn. At the rate we’re going, it looks like a double-dip is plausible. As such, it is possible that months from now, the NBER data may indicate we are currently still in a recession making Burnett’s argument Sunday totally absurd. On the other hand, as the Gross Domestic Product did start growing in the 3rd quarter of 2009, let’s operate from the premise that the recession ended in June of last year. As NBER believes the recession started in December 2007, that means its duration was 18 months.  According to NBER, the early ’90s recession went from July 1990 to March 1991. Depending on how you calculate it, that’s a duration of eight to nine months. NBER views the early ’00s recession as going from March 2001 to November 2001, also a duration of eight to nine months. With this in mind, if the most recent recession ended in June 2009, it took at least twice the time to get out of it than the previous two recessions thereby completely refuting Burnett’s claim. As for job growth coming out of a recession, this “recovery” is by no means something to brag about. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, in the fourteen months since this recession theoretically ended, non-farm payrolls have decreased by 329,000. Even if you look at the “private sector” numbers the administration and their media sycophants have been trying to focus the nation’s attention on, this has shown a decline of 205,000 jobs since the recession “ended.” To be sure, both of these figures are better than what we saw during the early ’00s recession. However, non-farm payrolls increased by 45,000 in the first fourteen months following the end of the early ’90s recession while private sector employment declined by 220,000. If Burnett wants to hang her hat on this 15,000 private sector jobs “improvement” as a sign that this recovery is faster and stronger than the one in the early ’90s, it seems certain given all the data she’d be skating on thin ice. Of course, she’d certainly look good doing it, a fact that even Chris Matthews noticed three years ago: Yes, it appears something other than Barack Obama gives Matthews a tingle up his leg – at least that was the case in August 2007. As for Burnett, given that she represents one of this country’s foremost financial news networks, it would be nice if she did her homework before making such sweeping claims about the economy.

See the original post here:
CNBC Money Honey Exaggerates Job Growth to Boost Obamanomics on Meet the Press

AP’s Sidoti Laments Dems’ Prospects in Ohio, Is Convincing as HuffPo Zealot

In a post at National Review Online’s Battle ’10 blog last night , Mytheos Holt commented on a report seen at the Huffington Post: HuffPo Panics about GOP Sweep of Ohio Looks like the Huffington Post is buying into the “As Ohio goes, so goes the nation” meme this election cycle, based on a story out today. The HuffPo item is by Liz Sidoti. But Sidoti is a national politics writer for the Associated Press, and what Holt really read was what AP would like us to believe is a supposedly “objective” analysis of the electoral situation in Ohio right off the wire. Word for word, the item at HuffPo is the same dispatch as found  at the AP’s main site . The only clue as to its origin, which Holt missed (and it’s easy to see how), is the teeny-tiny AP logo where Sidoti’s byline appears. In other words, Sidoti’s stridency and Democrat-sympathetic viewpoint are so obvious that she passes the HuffPo zealotry test. Here are some examples of how Sidoti “successfully” came off as a  budding HuffPo pundit: Dems’ prospects threatened by economic woes Frustrated, discouraged and just plain mad , a lot of people who have lost jobs – or know someone who has – now want to see the names of Democrats on pink slips. And that’s jeopardizing the party’s chances in Ohio and all across the country in November’s elections. In this big swing-voting state alone, Democratic Gov. Ted Strickland is in a dogfight for re-election. Senate candidate Lee Fisher may be even worse off. As many as six House Democrats could lose their jobs this fall. Recession-fueled animosity is dominating every race, giving Republicans hope of huge victories. … In Ohio, like almost everywhere else, voters don’t much care for Washington, Wall Street or anything resembling the establishment. They grouse about every politician, including President Barack Obama, whom Ohioans played a critical role in electing. They fume over the nation’s teetering finances. … Republicans are hoping to capitalize on voters’ economic disillusionment, frustration with Obama and tea party-generated enthusiasm. Democrats are relying on a financial advantage, a robust get-out-the-vote operation and, mostly, the ghost of George W. Bush to curb an expected Nov. 2 shellacking. … at Suzzie’s Beechwold Diner, Steve Reither epitomizes the Democrats’ other big challenge: a fired-up electorate tilting toward the GOP. A Republican-turned-independent, Reither is sick of both parties and says: “They all talk about change and nothing changes.” But he saves his harshest words for Obama, whom he calls a socialist and a liar. This year, he says he’ll probably vote largely with the GOP in November – “I’ll hold my nose” – simply to fire Democrats. “This administration and his cronies are running this country into the ground,” Reither, 55, says as he finishes his breakfast. The owner of a small auto restoration business, he says he’s been struggling for the past two years, and he blames Obama’s policies that “hurt the little guy.” Democrats at all levels are sounding a populist tone, casting their races as helping voters on Main Street vs. Republican policies intended to help Wall Street. Republicans, in turn, argue that Democrats – led by Obama – are making a tough economic situation worse with a free-spending, big-government agenda. Of course Sidoti’s work looks like HuffPo punditry, as it’s all from the Democrats’ “woe is us, these terrible things are happening” perspective. Republicans are seen as the unworthies upsetting the apple cart. And voters? Well, they’re just “mad” and full of “animosity.” It’s quite instructive to see how an AP report is correctly interpreted as left-leaning output. And sad to say, Liz Sidoti isn’t anywhere near the wire service’s worst offender. Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com .

Here is the original post:
AP’s Sidoti Laments Dems’ Prospects in Ohio, Is Convincing as HuffPo Zealot

Tom Friedman Rips Obama: ‘Completely Over-read Mandate…Never Seen Worse Communicating Administration’

New York Times columnist Tom Friedman on Sunday accused Barack Obama of badly misreading his Election Day mandate, and said the current White House is the worst communicating administration he’s ever seen. Appearing on the Roundtable segment of ABC’s “This Week,” Friedman blasted the President saying, “I’m for more health care. I’m glad we’ve extended it to more Americans. But the fact is there’s a real, I think, argument for the case that Obama completely over-read his mandate when he came in.” Friedman continued, “He was elected to get rid of one man’s job, George Bush, and get the rest of us jobs. I think that was the core thing, and by starting with health care and not making his first year the year of innovation, expanding the economy and expanding jobs, you know, I think looking back, that was a political mistake.” Moments later, the Times columnist said, “I’ve never seen a worse communicating administration” (video follows with partial transcript and commentary): TOM FRIEDMAN, NEW YORK TIMES: Walter Shapiro had a column the other day which I think made a good point. Look, I’m for more health care. I’m glad we’ve extended it to more Americans. But the fact is there’s a real, I think, argument for the case that Obama completely over-read his mandate when he came in. He was elected to get rid of one man’s job, George Bush, and get the rest of us jobs. I think that was the core thing, and by starting with health care and not making his first year the year of innovation, expanding the economy and expanding jobs, you know, I think looking back, that was a political mistake. Not surprisingly, Friedman’s colleague at the Times blamed it all on Republicans. PAUL KRUGMAN, NEW YORK TIMES: He needs now to say it’s the other guys who are blocking action. He needs to lay out a philosophy. I’m not sure if there’s any way to save the House, but if he can, it can do it not by actually changing the economy in the few weeks remaining, but by making this an issue. Do you really want these guys’ economic plan? And then he has to campaign for it. Amanpour then referred to an article by Richard Cohen about to be published in the Washington Post talking about Obama as the incredible shrinking president. CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, HOST: He says, “The folks who ran a very smart presidential campaign in ’08 have left the defining of the Obama presidency to people on the edge of insanity.” But then he goes on to talk about his Oval Office address this week, about Iraq, about turning to Afghanistan and the economy. He says, “It was only his second Oval Office address, and so great importance was attached to it. He should have had something momentous to say.” Is that fair? FRIEDMAN: I think it is fair. You know, one of the criticisms certainly I’ve had and many others have had, this is not I think original, there’s been no narrative to this administration. To me, I think Barack Obama was elected for one thing – which I’m not sure he ever fully understood – to do nation building at home, to do nation building in America. That to me was the central tent pole. Under that was health care, jobs, you know, economy, innovation, education, energy, okay? He’s never tied it together it seems to me under one single narrative. And then, therefore, he’s fought each issue against a different constituency. There’s never been a unifying message. I’ve worked here since 1989. I’ve personally just as a reporter, columnist in Washington, I’ve never seen a worse communicating administration, just at the basic technical level of, hey, we’ve got a good plan, you know, maybe someone out there would be interested in writing about it, since I’ve been to Washington. More and more it’s becoming clear this President is losing his once gushing and fawning press. If only these same folks would have actually examined the junior senator from Illinois’ record before jumping on his bandwagon in 2007. I guess that would have been too much like journalism.  

View original post here:
Tom Friedman Rips Obama: ‘Completely Over-read Mandate…Never Seen Worse Communicating Administration’

Jay Leno Ribs Obama, the Clintons and the Economy

Jay Leno on Friday ribbed Barack Obama, Bill and Hillary Clinton, and the poor state of the economy. In his opening monologue on the “Tonight Show,” the comedian began with a lot of politics first joking about the President’s Middle East peace talks, then moving to the war in Afghanistan, and eventually a poke at airline security. On the day the Labor Department announced an uptick in the unemployment rate, Leno had a number of jokes about how bad the economy is. Finally, the monologue concluded with a nice tribute to a United States Marine Corps unit in the audience (video follows with commentary): It sure is nice to see the late night comedians feeling that this White House is no longer off limits. 

Read more:
Jay Leno Ribs Obama, the Clintons and the Economy

Robert Reich: Stimulate Economy With 90% Tax On Top Earners

Can you imagine what would happen to the economy if top wage earners were taxed at 70 to 90 percent? Former Clinton Labor Secretary Robert Reich can, and he thinks it’s a great idea. To be sure, many Americans were concerned that giving Democrats control of the executive and legislative branches of our government during an economic crisis could usher back in socialist tendencies first seen in this nation during the Depression. Fears of such a leftward shift sparked a new powerful movement called the Tea Party. With this in mind, Reich’s op-ed “How to End the Great Recession” published in Friday’s New York Times validates these concerns:  The rich spend a much smaller proportion of their incomes than the rest of us. So when they get a disproportionate share of total income, the economy is robbed of the demand it needs to keep growing and creating jobs. What’s more, the rich don’t necessarily invest their earnings and savings in the American economy; they send them anywhere around the globe where they’ll summon the highest returns – sometimes that’s here, but often it’s the Cayman Islands, China or elsewhere. The rich also put their money into assets most likely to attract other big investors (commodities, stocks, dot-coms or real estate), which can become wildly inflated as a result. Meanwhile, as the economy grows, the vast majority in the middle naturally want to live better. Their consequent spending fuels continued growth and creates enough jobs for almost everyone, at least for a time. But because this situation can’t be sustained, at some point – 1929 and 2008 offer ready examples – the bill comes due. And how does Reich see “us” paying that bill? If you said “higher and higher taxes,” give yourself a cigar: THE Great Depression and its aftermath demonstrate that there is only one way back to full recovery: through more widely shared prosperity. In the 1930s, the American economy was completely restructured. New Deal measures – Social Security, a 40-hour work week with time-and-a-half overtime, unemployment insurance, the right to form unions and bargain collectively, the minimum wage – leveled the playing field. In the decades after World War II, legislation like the G.I. Bill, a vast expansion of public higher education and civil rights and voting rights laws further reduced economic inequality. Much of this was paid for with a 70 percent to 90 percent marginal income tax on the highest incomes. And as America’s middle class shared more of the economy’s gains, it was able to buy more of the goods and services the economy could provide. The result: rapid growth and more jobs. 70 to 90 percent! He said it, didn’t he? 70 to 90 percent! But there’s more: What else could be done to raise wages and thereby spur the economy? We might consider, for example, extending the earned income tax credit all the way up through the middle class, and paying for it with a tax on carbon. Or exempting the first $20,000 of income from payroll taxes and paying for it with a payroll tax on incomes over $250,000. Yep. Let’s tax carbon and give the proceeds to lower and middle-income wage earners. There it is, folks. If you doubted the whole global warming scam was specifically designed to redistribute wealth, one of the left’s most-respected economic strategists just admitted it! But there’s still more: In the longer term, Americans must be better prepared to succeed in the global, high-tech economy. Early childhood education should be more widely available, paid for by a small 0.5 percent fee on all financial transactions. Public universities should be free; in return, graduates would then be required to pay back 10 percent of their first 10 years of full-time income. A 0.5 percent fee on all financial transactions! Does that mean if one buy’s stock or a house, the government gets a half of a percent? And another half when you sell? Does that include mutual funds, treasury bills, and money market accounts? And certificates of deposit? See where this could lead? Now just imagine if these socialists also get their way and a new valued added tax is implemented? At that point, any time you want to actually use your money, the government gets a slice kind of like a mafia kingpin or a union leader. And this is supposed to help the economy? But there’s still more: Another step: workers who lose their jobs and have to settle for positions that pay less could qualify for “earnings insurance” that would pay half the salary difference for two years; such a program would probably prove less expensive than extended unemployment benefits. Earnings insurance! Earnings insurance! As I hinted at the onset, this op-ed by Reich is a picture of the future if the Party in power and their media minions get their way.   Be afraid, America! Be very afraid!

See original here:
Robert Reich: Stimulate Economy With 90% Tax On Top Earners

Obama: "We cannot allow the corporate takeover of our democracy"

While the media buzzes about Beck, the so called continuing failure of our economy (despite reports saying otherwise), Republicans taking back the House, etc.. etc… our President tells us we need to end the corporate takeover of our country that has plagued us the past 50 years. Yet, no one will hear him, because it is a simple blimp at the bottom of the tv screen. Our so called “liberal” media decides its better to talk about Beck. After all, why would a corporation want to end corporatism?!?! It would seem there are no longer a Few Good Men. http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/08/21/obama-slams-corporate-takeover-o… added by: NickerBocker09

USAToday.com Notes Poll Showing Bush Blamed for Economy, Skips One Showing Voters Favor GOP On Issues

Yesterday the Gallup organization released a poll showing that Americans trust Republicans over Democrats on most major issues heading into the general election season. Today the same polling outfit released a poll that found a large number of Americans blame George W. Bush for the faltering economy.  Guess which one Gallup partner USA Today hyped? Here’s how USA Today staffer Susan Page began her September 2 online story (filed at noon today): Nearly two years after Barack Obama was elected president, Americans still are inclined to blame his predecessor for the nation’s current economic problems. In a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll taken Friday through Sunday, more than a third of those surveyed said George W. Bush deserved a great deal of the blame for economic woes and a third said he should get a moderate amount of it. Not quite another third called that unfair, saying Bush warranted not much or none of the responsibility. The 71% saying Bush should get blamed was a modest decline from the 80% who felt that way about a year ago, in July 2009. A search of the USAToday.com website failed to turn up a story specifically devoted to the September 1 Gallup poll that gauged voter preferences for the parties based on the issues. Staffer Susan Page did make a brief reference to the poll in a September 1 “analysis” article regarding President Obama’s Oval Office speech about the end of combat operations in Iraq, but that occurred in paragraphs 17 and 18 of her 20-paragraph story: But the Iraq war is no longer the driving issue for Americans facing job layoffs and home foreclosures. In a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll of 1,021 adults Friday through Sunday, those surveyed rated the economy, jobs, government corruption and federal spending as the top issues shaping their vote in November’s congressional elections — and preferred congressional Republicans over Democrats on handling the economy by double digits. The war in Afghanistan ranked eighth in a list of nine issues. Here’s an excerpt from Gallup.com’s website regarding the top issues poll: PRINCETON, NJ — A new USA Today/Gallup poll finds Americans saying the Republicans in Congress would do a better job than the Democrats in Congress of handling seven of nine key election issues. The parties are essentially tied on healthcare, with the environment being the lone Democratic strength. The Republicans’ advantage on most issues is an indication of the currently favorable political environment for the party. Of particular note is the parity between the two parties on healthcare, an issue on which Americans historically have viewed the Democrats as superior . A similar USA Today/Gallup poll conducted in October 2006, just prior to Democrats’ major gains in that fall’s elections, highlights the potential implications of these findings. That poll, which includes several issues measured in the current survey, found the Democrats leading on all eight issues tested at that time , including some usual Republican strengths like terrorism and moral values. In more bad news for liberal Democrats, Gallup.com released another poll today that shows that “Republicans Hold Wide Lead in Key Voter Turnout Measure” : PRINCETON, NJ — Two months before this year’s midterm congressional elections, Gallup finds 54% of Republicans, compared with 30% of Democrats, already saying they have given “quite a lot of” or “some” thought to the contests. This “thought” measure is an important variable in Gallup’s well-established classification of “likely voters,” which is put into use closer to Election Day. The current gulf in thought between the parties mirrors the partisan gap in Gallup’s voter enthusiasm measure that is tracked weekly. We’ll have to see how USA Today covers this later today or tomorrow, but I’m not holding my breath for the paper giving it much attention, if any.

Link:
USAToday.com Notes Poll Showing Bush Blamed for Economy, Skips One Showing Voters Favor GOP On Issues

HuffPo Climate Hysterics: BP Spill, Cap & Trade ‘Missed Opportunity’ is ‘Point of No Return’

With any luck, we’re going to be seeing a lot more commentary like Jim Garrison’s Aug. 31 Huffington Post piece . What’s positive about it isn’t the apocalyptic hysteria of his descriptions of “climate shock,” entertaining as they are. Rather, it’s his lamentation that President Obama, Al Gore and the global warming industry missed the perfect opportunity to dismantle the U.S. economy and severely curtail human freedom.

ABC’s Stephanopoulos Highlights Obama Blaming Media For Muslim Myth

On Monday’s Good Morning America, ABC’s George Stephanopoulos played up how President Obama “blamed many in the media for perpetuating…myths” such as he was born outside the United States, isn’t a Christian, and/or is a Muslim. “You can’t blame the President for wanting this to go away.” Stephanopoulos raised the President’s remarks about “these kind of myths,” as he put it, near the end of a panel discussion with Democratic strategist James Carville and Charles Schwab chief investment strategist Liz Ann Sonders eight minutes into the 7 am Eastern hour. He noted how “a third of Americans believe- question whether he is Christian- a fifth now believe he’s Muslim” before playing a clip of Mr. Obama from his recent interview with NBC’s Brian Williams , where the Democrat gave a light reply to Williams’s statement referencing these poll numbers: “Mr. President, you’re an American-born Christian, and yet, increasing and now significant numbers of American in polls…are claiming you are neither.” The President answered, in part, “I would say that I can’t spend all my time with my birth certificate plastered on my forehead.” Moments earlier in the interview, Obama stated that “there is a mechanism, a network of misinformation, that in a new media era can get churned out there constantly,” and this is the remark that the ABC anchor zeroed-in on: “You can’t blame the President for wanting this to go away. He also blamed many in the media for perpetuating these kind of myths. But is there anything more he has to do affirmatively to address this, or just hope that it goes away?” Somewhat predictably, Carville lashed out against those who believed in any of those: “That people are willing to go out and promote this kind of thing- it’s unfortunate. But the most unfortunate thing is that people are stupid enough to believe that out there.” Exactly two months earlier, on June 30, Stephanopoulos brought on liberal columnist Maureen Dowd who bashed the President as “thin-skinned” and unhappy with his media coverage. This prompted the anchor to acknowledge, ” And his press hasn’t been nearly as bad as he thinks .” One wonders if the former Clinton communications director would still admit that. The transcript of the relevant portion of the segment from Monday’s Good Morning America, starting at the 12 minutes into the 7 am hour mark: STEPHANOPOULOS: Let me bring James Carville back in here. James, before we go, the President did get those questions from Brian Williams about how- you know, a third of Americans believe- question whether he is Christian- a fifth now believe he’s Muslim. Let’s show again what the President said. OBAMA (from NBC News interview): Well- look, Brian, I would say that I can’t spend all my time with my birth certificate plastered on my forehead. (laughs) It is what- the facts are the facts. And so, it’s not something that I can, I think, spend all my time worrying about. STEPHANOPOULOS: You can’t blame the President for wanting this to go away. He also blamed many in the media for perpetuating these kind of myths. But is there anything more he has to do affirmatively to address this, or just hope that it goes away? CARVILLE: I think Abraham Lincoln said something to the effect that we know that the Lord loves poor people because he made so many of them. I think the President should have said we know the Lord loves stupid people because he made so many of them. (laughs) I mean, what can you do, if somebody like- contrary to every piece of evidence known to man, doesn’t think that he was born in the United States, or, contrary to all the evidence known, that he’s not a Christian. There’s nothing that can be done, and I think he was saying as much to that. That people are willing to go out and promote this kind of thing- it’s unfortunate. But the most unfortunate thing is that people are stupid enough to believe that out there. STEPHANOPOULOS: All right. James Carville, Liz Ann Sonders, thanks very much.

More:
ABC’s Stephanopoulos Highlights Obama Blaming Media For Muslim Myth