OK, So Obama's A Liar

The new politics of hope and change sure looks a lot like the old politics of smear and distort. [Side by side video here.]

Here we go:

(CNN) — John McCain's campaign is crying foul over what it characterizes as repeated distortions from Barack Obama, saying on Friday the Illinois senator is "recklessly dishonest."

The most recent dustup comes after Obama criticized McCain earlier Friday for comments the Arizona senator made in an interview on Bloomberg Television.

"John McCain went on television and said that there has been quote "great progress economically over the last seven and a half years," Obama told a Pennsylvania crowd. "John McCain thinks our economy has made great progress under George W. Bush. Now, how could somebody who has been traveling across this country, somebody who came to Erie, PA, say we've made great progress?”

The McCain campaign immediately took issue with the comment, noting the Arizona senator also said he knows families are facing "tremendous economic challenges."

“American families are hurting and Barack Obama is being recklessly dishonest," McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds said. "It is clear that Barack Obama is intentionally twisting John McCain’s words completely out of context. Obama is guilty of deliberately distorting John McCain’s comments for pure political gain, which is exactly what Senator Obama was complaining about just yesterday."

Let's interject a bit of reality so that the reality based side can see for themselves just what some of them are foisting on us.  Here is the McCain interview in question, my excerpt:

MR. COOK: I'm going to ask you a version of the Ronald Reagan question. You think if Americans were asked, are you better off today than you were before George Bush took office more than seven years ago, what answer would they give?

SEN. MCCAIN: Certainly, in this time, we are in very challenging times. We all recognize that. Families are sitting around the kitchen table this evening and figuring out whether they're going to be able to keep their home or not. They're figuring out whether they're - why it is that suddenly and recently someone in their family or their neighbor has lost their job. There's no doubt that we are in enormous difficulties.

I think if you look at the overall record and millions of jobs have been created, et cetera, et cetera, you could make an argument that there's been great progress economically over that period of time. But that's no comfort. That's no comfort to families now that are facing these tremendous economic challenges.

But let me just add, Peter, the fundamentals of America's economy are strong. We're the greatest exporter, the greatest importer, the greatest innovator, the greatest producer, still the greatest economic engine in the world. And, by the way, exports and free trade are a key element in economic recovery. But these are tough times, tough times, and nobody knows that more than American families including in small towns of Pennsylvania. They haven't lost their fundamental religious beliefs, their respect for the Constitution, their right to bear arms. They are still - keep America as a beacon of hope and freedom throughout the world.

For Obama to extract one sentence and argue that McCain is out of touch is shameless.

And by way of comparison, here is McCain when asked about Jeremiah (God DAMN America) Wright:

SEN. MCCAIN: Well, in the case of Reverend Wright, I have expressed in the past that I am sure that Senator Obama does not share the extremist statements that Reverend Wright made.

And he moved on the the "cling to their guns and religion and racism" controversy, which he does think is legitmate.

Obama is a liar and a punk - should make for an interesting race.  The Times has more fawning coverage.

THINGS TO DO:  If we are allowed to extract just one sentence and claim it is the candidate's view, I bet we can have fun with Barry.  Any takers?

Comments

[LibraryLady]

There's a Youtube video!

http://www.redstate.com/stories/elections/2008/obama_the_liar_pinocchiobama_does_it_again

[centralcal]

Thanks for the link, LibraryLady - Obama again looks the lying fool!

[Thomas Collins]

Although I view B_O as the weakest major party candidate in all the POTUS elections I have followed (I have followed them since '64), the fawning MSM coverage TM cites could push B_O over the top. Evan Thomas may have been exaggerating when he said MSM adds 15 points to the Dems' total, but it might only take a few points in key states to provide the US with its first leftist POTUS. Makes me long for the days of Dem moderates such as George McGovern! :-))

[Charlie (Colorado)]

[S]aying ... the Illinois senator is "recklessly dishonest."

Well, duh.

[ParseThis]

One sentence repeated many times. It's only recently that his handlers have told him that you might be a condescending jackass when you say things like this:

A lot of this is psychological. A lot of it’s psychological. Because I agree the fundamentals of our economy is still strong.

That's right. It's all in your heads, you silly rubes!

[Sue]

ParseThis,

So, I read the comments at the site you linked. I get the idea they think their candidate has a plan to fix the economy. What exactly is that plan? Higher taxes?

[GMax]

Supporter of THE Condenscending Jackass in the race declares another candidate the same. Project much?

[MayBee]

I've been reading Obama's speeches to see if he ever contradicts himself. I must say, I have yet to see one line that is positive about the past 20 years in America.

[Sue]

Maybee,

Not even last year when his income was over $4 million?

[Danube of Thought]

The Obama campaign for the presidency is over--he is certain to lose, and to lose badly. I hear no serious dissent from this obvious fact even from his most ardent supporters, who know full well what is coming. And he complains a lot--brother, does he ever complain. I suppose the lack of a father may account for his failure to understand one of life's most important rules: Real Men Don't Complain.

Watching the next six-plus months unfold will be hugely entertaining, but it is already established that he's a lightweight and a pussy, and is not at all good on his feet when he doesn't know what's coming and there's no teleprompter.

Toast.

[MarkO]

Meow.

[Enlightened]

ParseThis - As Obama, you also know absolutely nothing about our economy and why we are where we are at.

Study up Rube. Bernanke and Paulson are idiots that do not know what steps to take to stabilize inflation and their panic is spreading to the masses by dumbshits like the LAT that ask stupid questions like is a Depression over the horizon. These two idiots continue to make the worst possible decisions about our economy, and continue to allow the dollar to weaken. Mass hysteria about the housing market - trumpeted by our tabloid news services has morons like you salivating about a hoped-for depression. Go on - get your man Obama to promise to raise some taxes. It oughta do the trick.

[Enlightened]

Oh yeah - They know Obama is gonna get his ass whipped.....they are already on the hunt for dirt on McCain. The dirtier the better. Moving right back into their 6th grade playbooks.

[capitano]

I get the idea they think their candidate has a plan to fix the economy. What exactly is that plan? Higher taxes?

Nah, the taxes are just to steal rich people's money in the name of fairness. He'll fix the economy by talking to dictators and championing more government programs.

Here's another link to Obama's big lie -- a side by side video of Obama and McCain. What a uniter!

[Jnb]

The mass mystery was the hitler everyone likes me speaking thing. Maybe the mortgages were the trade..............

Then there was depression.

[MayBee]

Sue- ha!

I still think Obama should propose the Federal Book Contract for All Americans program. It is apparently a more honorable way to make lots of money than by being a CEO or a Wall Street person, and outsourcing would be difficult. The publishers don't seem to mind paying people that won't actually make them money, either.

[pagar]

"think their candidate has a plan to fix the economy. What exactly is that plan?"

What ever George Soros tells his puppet.

[Thomas Collins]

"You're likeable enough, Hillary."

That's my favorite B_O whopper of a lie. When he gave her the "Hawaiian good luck sign" at the last debate, he at least was being honest about his feelings!

[centralcal]

Fear. It is all about fear. Fear of what the first 45-50 minutes reveal in the debate. Fear of what the second half of the debate reveals. So the left loonies create a scene, hoping to distract. Two of their candidates favorite words - hope - and - distract!

His associations and his policies (first half and second half) show him to be UNQUALIFIED to be a Senator, much less President.

[SteveMG]

I'm starting not to like this guy.

Not a single shred of evidence that he's been able to transcend politics or race or any other factor and bring people together.

A 100% liberal voting record, associations with hard left figures; nope, sorry, that's not indicative of someone who wishes to overcome tribal politics.

[Ann]

"Fear of what the first 45-50 minutes reveal in the debate. "

How about 52 seconds?

IN 52 SECS WHY BARACK OBAMA CANNOT WIN A GENERAL ELECTION

I think this might be why Hamas' Ahmed Yousef endorsed Obama this week.

[ParseThis]

Bernanke and Paulson are idiots that do not know what steps to take to stabilize inflation and ... continue to make the worst possible decisions about our economy, and continue to allow the dollar to weaken.

McCain economic adviser: "The best course of action is to let the Fed handle it."

Mass hysteria about the housing market - trumpeted by our tabloid news services has morons like you salivating about a hoped-for depression.

Right. More cheerleading, please. And pass the baton.

[Enlightened]

Hahahhhhhahhahhaha - Keep trying. You must be on the newly appointed Get Dirt On McCain team. Bravo - Howeird Deaniac must be so proud.

Try again.

[Enlightened]

Bwaahahhahah - Think Progress? Keep trying.

Nothing like perfectly illustrating what I said - trumpeting by tabloid press.

Go back to Think Progress - trying some thinking next time.

[SaveFarris]

I think the early clubhouse leader is from his world-famous anti-war speech in 2002. Say hello to the 5th paragraph:

---"[Saddam Hussein Obama]'s a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him."

[Danube of Thought]

One of the very most delightful things about the coming tragic meltdown of the Boy Messiah is going to be how his diehards will dredge up this or that tidbit of his policy position on such-and-such, and contrast it with McCain's. None of them will have a clue about the larger picture, which is that people simply aren't going to elect Obama. This great land is filled nearly to bursting at this moment with dullards who don't yet know this. Watching them learn it as time goes by will give rise to great mirth, gloating and merriment here.

Oh, this is gonna be a good one!

[RRsafety]

Obama says that white males are "mediocre".

http://www.slate.com/id/2186944/

[RR safety]

Obama attacks own grandmother, claims she hated minorities of any group.

"My grandmother harbors ANY racial animosity"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/20/obama-grandmother-was-a-_n_92587.html

[MayBee]

SaveFarris-
From the same speech:
" I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences."

That could be 100 years!

[Ann]

I don't want to make you blush D(oT), but catching up on the threads, I have to add my adoration for you, too. I love your continued optimism and your soaring heart each day. :)

By the way, can Jimmy Carter run for a second term? He would solve the Super Duper dilemma, since neither one of these clowns can win in the general.

Think about It, he's won the Nobel Peace Prize, and it would let the Dems shed their pretense for being pro-American. He loves Hamas terrorists and put flowers on Arafat's grave.

The only downside is they can't call McCain old! LOL

[ben]

We have had some moderately intelligent trolls...ParseThis, alas, was born at low tide in the gene pool...

Obamamessiah proposes raising the capital gains tax, in effect penalizing 100 million people with investments or that own a home or a farm. This will decrease tax revenues in the long run, as has happened in the past. It will discourage investment, which impacts on jobs (construction, industry, services). He wants to curtail free trade, in effect raising the price of goods consumers pay for.
There is nothing new in Obamamessiah's economic plan that Mondale, Dukakis, Clinton, Clinton, Gore and Kerry didn't already propose.

[Enlightened]

Well, I did hear a rumor that arugula, when taken in large doses, effectively heightens 'splodeyhead syndrome, resulting in total Messiah Clarity. I think I read it on Think Progress.

[centralcal]

Interesting article by Harris/Vandehei at Politico about the media's infatuation with Obama.

"Many journalists are not merely observers but participants in the Obama phenomenon."

[Enlightened]

Another good article in the Politico vein -

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/wehner/3456

[Enlightened]

Fixed link I think

http://www.
commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/
wehner/3456

[Ann]

Cent,

I read that and immediately thought of "Operation Chaos". I don't think you can give RUSH all the credit because the Dems really have themselves to blame for their pathethic primary rules, but you have to give him some credit for this glorious turn of events where the media and Dems are going after each other.

How did you say it?: OH, Happy Day?!!! Ditto! Ditto!! Delightful!!!!

[Ann]

Enlightened Link

[Jane]

OT while I catch up: I was in Barnes & Noble this evening. They had a book about how the media is skewed in the favor of McCain (I forget the unmemorable title). The author was "media matters".

[Enlightened]

Tks - I'm a newbie at the HTML carp...

[narciso]

Remember that reference to that McClatchy story that referenced that supposed NDU study that called "Iraq a fiasco". You're
not going to believe this:href smallwarsjournal.com/blog/2008/04/pentagon-study-current-events/> they left some details out. I know you're as surprised as I am.

No, you may gather I'm a little bitter, at this time of year. Religion doesn't have much to do with it, although I'm a Catholic
and I did grow up in Jersey, and went to the the Poconos, many moons ago.

Gas and Milk at nearly $4.00 a gallon, the
bottom falling out of the real estate market, because the great sage Greensapn, didn't notice raising rates for 18 monthes can shatter a sub prime dependent market. The ironic thing, is that this shouldn't have been a new realization of the likely consequences. The reduction of tax deductability on interest, precipitated the
S&L crisis; a similar price and rate spike in the late 90s, popped the tech bubble
He was saving all his brainpower for that hefty memoir, and planning his second honeymoon with Andrea Mitchell. It's not like we paid his sala...actually we do, at
last count.

Meanwhile, the Democrats are at least nomimally in control of the House and Senate, and have done nothing to fix the problem. I understand I may be wrong, but at least two of the remaining presidential candidates, are actually Senators in the Majority. Meaning they could actually work for their f!@#@$%#$^&* paycheck. Actually, nothing would be an improvement, over their current posture. Thy've put their foot down, on drilling anywhere off the US coast (what do we care, we take the bus!)They've subpoenaed arch criminals Barry Bonds and Mark MacGuire,(I feel much safer, don't you) and they seem to be accepting the claims of Walter Mittyesque Mrs. Simpson as the next Donald Segretti. Oh yes, they're adamant that terrorist get 3 squares, Al Jazeera on their cable box, and make it impossible for us to listen to their conversation, track their financial transactions, or find out anything
else that might inform us, about what they might be plotting. Our esteemed governor is not only letting felons vote, plugging us whole hog into the ethanol/global warming scam. So I guess, I'm a little bit bitter.

[Ann]

Enlightened, All I can remember is the GOP debates where all the questions were about religion and how they went after Mitt Romney, IMO unfairly.

Someone should go back and compare the questions. It would be "enlightening". :)

[centralcal]

Enlightened, I had read that Wehner piece in Commentary earlier today. It was also mentioned on one of the Fox news shows this evening - can't remember which one.

Well, Ann, I cannot credit Rush for the media infatuation with Obama. They always get emotionally wrapped up in their candidates. How well I remember Judy Woodruff (CNN) openly bawling on camera on the night the election was called for Bush over Kerry.

Remember too, how they reacted after their candidate lost -- all the inside stories (ala Newsweek) slamming Kerry. When the veil falls from their eyes, they turn "bitter" and angry!

[ParseThis]

The candidates who are dead serious about politics, even wonkish, get abused by the press for it. Mr. McCain the ironist gets heaps of affection. In this race, though, it has forced some press contortions. While John McCain 2000 was praised for being the same straight talker off the bus as he was on it, John McCain 2008 is praised precisely because he isn’t the same man. Off the bus he plays to the rubes (us) by reciting the conservative catechism; on the bus he plays to the press by giving the impression that his talk is all just a ploy to capture the Republican nomination.

Yet the reporters, so quick in general to jump on hypocrisy, seem to find his insincerity a virtue. When an old sobersides like Mitt Romney flip-flops, he is called a panderer. When Mr. McCain suddenly supports the tax cuts he once excoriated, or embraces the religious right, or emphasizes border security over a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants, we are told by his press acolytes that he doesn’t really mean it, that his liberal cosmology will ultimately best his conservative rhetoric. “Discount his repositioning a bit,” Jacob Weisberg, the editor of Slate, wrote two years ago, “and McCain looks like the same unconventional character who emerged during the Clinton years.” The article was subtitled “Psst ... He’s Not Really a Conservative.”

This suggests that love is blind. It also suggests that seducing the press with ironic detachment, the press’s soft spot, may be the best political strategy of all — one that Mr. McCain may walk on water right into the White House.

[Danube of Thought]

Bless you, Ann--and thank you so very much. But optimism is easy here; this one's going to be a blowout.

I think I should add that in the Stones flick today lo and behold, the acutul Arugula woman appears. Not only that, she's damn good! (I really had no idea who she was, except that I recognize her name.) They did a duet of "Live With Me," and your narrator was doing lewd pelvic thrusts in the mercifully dark aisle all the while.

[Tom Maguire]

It also suggests that seducing the press with ironic detachment, the press’s soft spot, may be the best political strategy of all

I can't listen to Obamacons whine about the press coverage of their guy when Obama himself is afraid to go back and talk to reporters.

Is this complicated? McCain talks to reporters and they like him; Obama won't talk to him, and they still like him, but not as much as they might.

It's all right - one more thing for Dems to whine about after they lose.

[Danube of Thought]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but does Parse This appear to be whining and complaining? Does he think this is the avenue leading to respect and success? Does Parse This know how sharply the electorate detects, and forcefully rejects, whining and complaining in all their forms?

Parse This, tell us on this very date, as we approach the end of Paul Revere Day of 2008, do you actually believe that Barack Obama will be elected President of the United States? A simple yes or no will do...

[MarkJ]

"Well, I did hear a rumor that arugula, when taken in large doses, effectively heightens 'splodeyhead syndrome, resulting in total Messiah Clarity. I think I read it on Think Progress."

Arugula? I thought that was the name of a sodomizing, deviant Roman emperor. Oh wait, that was CALIGULA.

*Sigh* Given Obama's apparent knowledge of history, I'm sure it's all the same to him.

[Porchlight]

DoT, so you would recommend the Stones film? I am skeered of IMAX theatres, they're just so damn freaky. Also I'm not sure I want to see a recent Stones performance. Or Jack White in any proximity to musicians I like.

I enjoyed the Scorsese Dylan film, but it became predictable in spots and I thought the flashbacks were hokey. Maybe this one is a bit more straightforward.

[Ann]

Funny, Cent, I didn't turn on the T.V. or a radio the day of that election because I knew it would be an all out rout for Kerry. I new when Kerry came a hunting here in Ohio he was never going to carry the state. Remember "Can I get ah hunting license here?" Yeah, well I saved my sanity, and woke to "OH, Happy Day!!
Sorry, I missed the Judy Woodruff bawling on camera thing though.

You will appreciate my other election story for 2000. I watched every Florida Supreme Court ruling until I thought my head would explode from the recounts. So, again, the day of the U.S. Supreme Court Ruling I went shoppping all day. I was in line at a bakery when the news came over the bread line that Mr. Bush had won. There was a lady infront of me that dropped all her pruchases and stormed out of the store. I, on the other hand, was dancing in the aisle offering free cookies to everyone that I had not yet paid for. LOL

[Rick Ballard]

Parse - if you're under the impression that you're posting on a McCain fanboy site, you may want to do a modicum of research.

The choices are:

1. Weathervane "centrist" with occasional outbursts of very low intensity conservatism.

2. Very hard left socialist

3. Hard left socialist

Which one leaves a conservative standing closer to where they want to be in 2012? (Extra points for those who take judicial appointments into consideration.)

Free clothes pins to every conservative heading towards the voting booth!

If BHO is the candidate and is down by more than 7 on election day then a "none of the above" might make sense for a conservative in a very red or very blue state.

[Amber]

Obama and his double life scares me-- and I think this is just the beginning of bad things to come for him and his campaign....its just a shame this stuff didn't surface sooner....maybe people wouldnt have been hopelessly blinded by what I heard another blogger called "hopium"

[Joe]

I really appreciate this post-- I can't believe how everyone is carrying on that the first part of the debate with dealt with his multiple personalities was labeled "gotcha" politics...this stuff matters to me. I want to know what this guy really thinks when he doesnt have a speech writer and teleprompter at his disposal.

[Ann]

You know I was kidding about Jimmy being the Super Duper guy, but I do have a real question: Could he run again for another term?

And I meant purchases not pruchases on that last comment. ;(
I blame Clarice!

[ben]

"This suggests that love is blind. It also suggests that seducing the press with ironic detachment, the press’s soft spot, may be the best political strategy of all — one that Mr. McCain may walk on water right into the White House."

ParseThis needs an urgent reality check...

Democrats have the 3 major networks plus MSNBC and CNN. They have the NYT, the Washington Post, LA Times, USA Today, 90% of the other major dailies, and 90% of the anchors and commentators, Katie Couric and Oprah, Good Morning America, etc. Polls show that 90% of the press members consider themselves Democrats. Are Larry King, Wolf Blitzer, Tim Russert, George Stephanoupolous, Brian Williams Republicans? Mathews, Olberman, Cafferty? Then there is Hollywood...

The press favors McCain? Believe me, if McCain wins it will be despite the press, not because of it...in order to win McCain will have to defeat the biggest propaganda machine and overcome the largest financial disparity in the history of Presidential elections.

[centralcal]

Gotta run, but I loved your cookie story Ann!

[Foo Bar]

Even given the fact that McCain is aware that these are tough times, some may consider it amazing that McCain believes you can argue there's been great progress economically over the last 7 years. To cite that belief without noting the accompanying "tough times" characterization may not be the most generous description of his comments, but it's a long way from a lie.

Let's not pretend that McCain is above taking an excerpt from Obama and twisting it misleadingly, by the way. Remember when Obama said he might send troops back in if Al Qaeda was "forming a base" in Iraq ( which was clearly a rephrasing of Russert's hypothetical where Al Qaeda "resurges")? McCain's campaign put out a press release asking, "Is Sen. Obama unaware that al Qaeda is still present in Iraq"? Not that there was any doubt on that question, but for the record Obama referred to Al Qaeda in Iraq in his August '07 foreign policy speech.

Anyway, how does it make any sense for McCain to refer to millions of jobs as evidence of great progress economically when the unemployment rate is over 5 percent, a full percentage point higher than it was in 2000?. The economy needs to add almost 2 million jobs a year just to keep the unemployment rate steady, and in the aggregate over Bush's presidency it has failed to do that. You can look at the current jobs picture and try to argue that things aren't so bad at the moment in an absolute sense (5 percent is indeed pretty decent in the context of several decades of history). As evidence of progress since Bush took over, though? No.

TM, I would save the "lie" accusations for the actual lies. Otherwise, the accusation tends to lose its force when you really need it.

[MayBee]

try to argue that things aren't so bad at the moment in an absolute sense (5 percent is indeed pretty decent in the context of several decades of history).

What? What do you mean by an "absolute sense"?

---
We live in a country with a remarkable economy and well-shared high standard of living. It is not perfect for everyone. But if you can't find good in our economy over the past 25 years, as Obama apparently can't, you have impossible standards.

[Enlightened]

Hey Obama wasn't complaining about the economy at the Billionaire Row gala in SF. I daresay neither were his patrons. Arugula 'n all.

[Sue]

Hard times are indeed here. I read an article in my local paper today that teenagers are no longer able to afford Abercrombie & Fitch clothing and designer handbags. Sad times indeed. They are resorting to shopping for clothes at Target and Wal Mart. The trend for this started about the time democrats took over Congress. But don't pay any attention to the man behind the curtain. It is indeed all Bush's fault.

[Barry]

The Corner on National Review

It’s the Politics, Stupid:

Comparing Labor Market Data in 1996 and 2008

Democrats on the Economy in 1996:

“Our economy is the healthiest it has been in three decades.” (President Bill Clinton, State of the Union Address, January 23, 1996)

Democrats on the Economy in 2008:

“The bottom line is that this administration is the owner of the worst jobs record since Herbert Hoover." (Senator Charles Schumer, Press Release, March 7, 2008)

Key Labor Market Statistics in 1996 and 2008

March 1996 March 2008
1. U.S. Unemployment Rate 5.5% 5.1%

2. Number of Long-Term
Unemployed (million) 1.33m 1.28m

3. Average Weeks
Unemployed 17.3 16.2

4. Median Weeks
Unemployed 8.3 8.1

5. Not in Labor Force because
discouraged over job
prospects (thousands) 451 401

6. Democrats calling for
Extended Unemployment
Benefits? No Yes

7. President’s Party
Affiliation Dem Rep

[Enlightened]

Uh Oh - There goes that absolute sense again.

[Barry]

Hmm, well after carefully formating the rows and columns, it doesn't come out quite right. Click the NRO link.

So, foobar, less long term unemployed, for fewer weeks.

You are full of it.

[Enlightened]

Barry - It makes perfect - absolute - sense

[Sue]

if you can't find good in our economy over the past 25 years,

I don't know about Obama, but Foo Bar found the good during the 90s. A democrat was in office. Bush inherits a recession and it becomes his recession. According to the link from Parse This, we are in Bush's 2nd recession since taking office.

[Sue]

And don't forget, Clinton benefitted from cooked books. It helps to have a rosy economy when Enron and others hid their shady practices until a Republican took office.

[Barry]

Actually, considering the hits the economy took, the Enrons as Sue said, 9/11, starting his term in a Clinton recession, the economy has done remarably well.

Only a socialist could find it to be a bad economy. Of course, any economy that does not tax every last dollar of all us rich people is a bad economy. Just ask the messiah, who wants to raise capital gains taxes, not because it will increase revenue, but because it will be "fairer".

[Foo Bar]

What? What do you mean by an "absolute sense"?

I'm just acknowledging that one can argue that the employment picture, although worsening, is indeed still decent at the moment. That's the conciliatory part of my post! ;). However, no way is it better than it was when Bush took over.

So, foobar, less long term unemployed, for fewer weeks.

You are full of it.

The question McCain was asked in the excerpt TM has posted here was to compare how things are now to how things were when Bush took over. The relevant comparison point is late 2000 or early 2001, not 1996.

That said, I don't have a problem with someone bring up that comparison with 1996 for the sake of making the argument that things are not (yet) so bad at the moment (as I have acknowledged). One has to take into account the direction of the trends when understanding the mood then vs. now, though. Unemployment was over 7 percent when Clinton took over.

[Rick Ballard]

"The economy needs to add almost 2 million jobs a year just to keep the unemployment rate steady"

No. It doesn't. The BLS decadal projection through 2016 calls for an average annual increase of under 1.3 million jobs. Note that the projection is from 2006 - your canard has been flying on a busted wing for at least that long. The drop from 1.2% annual growth to .08% annual growth is a function of demographics unrelated to the state of the economy.

Here are annual total births from the Bubba years:

1992 4,065,014
1993 4,000,240
1994 3,952,767
1995 3,899,589
1996 3,891,494
1997 3,880,894
1998 3,941,553
1999 3,959,417
2000 4,058,814
2001 4,025,933

Total - 39,675,715

That gives you gross numbers of potential "entries" into the labor market over the next ten years.

Here's the potential "exits" over the next ten years - those born from '46 - 55.

1946 3,288,672
1947 3,699,940
1948 3,535,068
1949 3,559,529
1950 3,554,149
1951 3,750,850
1952 3,846,986
1953 3,902,120
1954 4,017,362
1955 4,047,295

Total 37,201,971

Difference - 2,473,744, call it 250K annual. The only way we get growth in employment at even the 1.3 million level is if Boomers stay on the tread mill in numbers higher than have ever been recorded.

That, and immigration.

Obviously, the numbers have to be adjusted according to participation rates but that won't make a truly significant change in what's going to happen. It doesn't matter who is elected or what "policy" they follow, we're going to be at full employment for the next 12 years.

[ParseThis]

I hope you guys noticed the link in my last post. It was a straight cut & paste job that seemed relevant to the discussion at that moment. Along those lines, here's a helpful chart of unemployment trends. And I'd add that real incomes may contribute to a perception of a precariousness, i.e. just glad to have a job but not optimistic about prospects.

[JM Hanes]

Foobar: "One has to take into account the direction of the trends when understanding the mood then vs. now, though. "

Moodwise, one mostly has to take into account unrelenting gloom & doom from Democrats and their pals at places like the New York Times which has elevated the construction of misleading economic headlines to a high art. If you're relying on trendlines, you'll need to revisit the happy picture you're trying to paint of early 2001. Actually, if you have to rely on trendlines, your argument has already tanked.

TM: "I can't listen to Obamacons whine about the press coverage of their guy when Obama himself is afraid to go back and talk to reporters."

What else can they do? Democrats have long been committed to the proposition that when bad things happen, it's always someone else's fault. I'll give the idea that the press can be seduced with ironic detachment points for originality though. The real irony here, of course, is that if true, it would be working to the anthropologist's advantage.

[Foo Bar]

No. It doesn't. The BLS decadal projection through 2016 calls for an average annual increase of under 1.3 million jobs

Well, OK. I should have been more precise. What's relevant to the assessment of the "progress" during the GWB presidency is the number of jobs the economy needed to add in '01 through '07 in order to maintain the unemployment rate that existed when GWB took over, not how many it will need in the future. Even if I was off by a few hundred thousand on what the yearly requirement was, the bottom line is that the unemployment rate increased by a full percentage point over that period, so the job creation of the economy fell short of what was required to maintain the '00 unemployment rate by a significant amount. That's why it doesn't make sense for McCain to talk about "millions" of jobs created as a sign of progress.

[Foo Bar]

If you're relying on trendlines, you'll need to revisit the happy picture you're trying to paint of early 2001

Actually, my point about trendlines was in response to Barry's posting of the comparison between '96 and now (which, by the way, was tangential at best to the original topic, where McCain was asked to compare '00 or '01 to now). I was explaining why people may have been feeling better in '96 than they're feeling now. So in the context of my response to Barry, why would I need to revisit '01?

[Barry]

My point, Foo Bar, is the statement by dems in 1996 about the great economy, one that was marginally worse then the current one. No matter how you attempt to parse it, or keep adjusting the goal line, the bottom line is the economy has done remarkably well during the current prseidents term of office. Recessions or cyclic. If we are on the threshold of another one, it will be just that, another dip of the cycle.

[Charlie (Colorado)]

I'm just acknowledging that one can argue that the employment picture, although worsening, is indeed still decent at the moment. That's the conciliatory part of my post! ;). However, no way is it better than it was when Bush took over.

Um, would you like to put some numbers where your mouth is?

[Cecil Turner]

TM, I would save the "lie" accusations for the actual lies. Otherwise, the accusation tends to lose its force when you really need it.

Okay, but how about: "repeated distortions"; "recklessly dishonest"; "deliberately distorting"; or "completely out of context"? Those seemed pretty fair to me. Just like you couldn't say ol' BHO was lying about that "100 years war" thing, but all those others would be pretty accurate, eh?

[Rick Ballard]

"When Bush took over" was the point at which the vapor jobs of the Bubba Bubble disappeared. Maybe you were out of the country when half of Bubba's dotcoms busted?

[Foo Bar]

Um, would you like to put some numbers where your mouth is?

I already http://justoneminute.typepad.com/main/2008/04/ok-so-obamas-a.html#comment-111301506>did, but here it is for you again.">http://www.bls.gov/cps/prev_yrs.htm">again. The unemployment rate in 2000 was 4.0% (4.2% in January '01), a full percentage point below the current rate of 5.1%.

[JM Hanes]

Foo Bar:

Sorry, misread the context. In terms of public mood, however, what intrigues me most are the polls indicating that most people feel pretty good about their own futures, they're just not so confident about everybody else. I credit that pessimism to the Democrats as a job well done.

Frankly, however, I think McCain's putative exaggeration pales in comparison to Democrats who assess Bush's economic record without bothering to mention, let alone factor in, the stunning effects of 9/11. The fact that there was nothing Bush could have done to prevent the dotcom bubble from bursting gets equally scant attention. Indeed, the glowing Clinton stats offer little hint of what lay just over the horizon -- which gives you a pretty good idea of just how useful they really are, trendwise and otherwise.

January '01 is such a convenient political starting point isn't it? Ignore 9/11 and you can basically ignore indisputably remarkable economic performance entirely in favor of nitpicking over whether rebounding from dual disasters more robustly than anyone predicted constitutes standardized statistical economic "progress."

[jimmyk]

how does it make any sense for McCain to refer to millions of jobs as evidence of great progress economically when the unemployment rate is over 5 percent

How does it make sense to take a single number from the present (5 percent unemployment) and conclude anything about progress over seven years? Of course there has been real progress since 2001: Something like 6 million additional jobs, and nearly 20 percent higher GDP, despite starting out with a recession. And the recession of 2001 cannot conceivably be laid at Bush's feet. The economy was staggering in late 2000, and Bush only took office in January 2001.

[JM Hanes]

When McCain explains that he just chose his words badly and should have said economic performance, instead of progress, I'm sure Obama will immediately scratch it off his list of talking points. Just like he did when he was publicly corrected multiple times by both McCain and the press on "100 years in Iraq." Oh, wait.

[Foo Bar]

How does it make sense to take a single number from the present (5 percent unemployment) and conclude anything about progress over seven years

His choice, not mine. Job growth was the single specific measure that McCain chose to mention in support of his assertion of progress (the "greatest exporter" stuff and so on in the next paragraph is an assessment of our standing but not of the progress made). Beyond jobs, McCain chose to illustrate his claim of progress with the highly illuminating "et cetera, et cetera".

[Cecil Turner]

His choice, not mine.

Not really. You're the one who chose that particular "rate" as a measure. And unless you want to claim that the 8 million jobs added from Mar 01 to Mar 08 are not a good indicator of progress, I think McCain has the better of this argument. The unemployment rate changes between cycles are far less dramatic than the changes within each cycle, and point rates don't mean much.

By the way, if folks want a nice graph, go to BLS stats, choose "Unemployment Rate (Seasonally Adjusted)," then expand the output options to 1960 (or so) and click the "include graphs" box. The thing that leaps out is that it's called a cycle for a reason . . . and choosing the point on the cycle is the most important single issue. (And Bubba has great timing in handing over the presidency just as the job picture is going south.)

[Foo Bar]

And unless you want to claim that the 8 million jobs added from Mar 01 to Mar 08 are not a good indicator of progress, I think McCain has the better of this argument

That's exactly what I want to claim. You also have 2 million more unemployed now than at the beginning of GWB's presidency, compared to a drop of 3 million over Clinton's presidency(check "Unemployed" here). Progress means improvement. A larger absolute number of jobs isn't an improvement if the population is growing and a smaller share of the population is employed.

point rates don't mean much.

If you want to observe it over a longer period, you can observe '98,'99,and '00 with rates of 4.5%, 4.2%, 4.0%,all of which are below the 4.6% and above since June.

[Cecil Turner]

You also have 2 million more unemployed now than at the beginning of GWB's presidency . . .

Oh, please. That's one of the lowest points on the rate curve, and the only reason was the stock bubble caused an artificial low in the rate. The economy was already shedding jobs at one of the steepest rates on the curve (possibly the steepest), and again, it speaks to Bubba's great timing in leaving office more than anything else.

If you want to observe it over a longer period, you can observe '98,'99,and '00 with rates of 4.5%, 4.2%, 4.0%

Might want to scale out a bit if you're actually trying to evaluate the jobless picture. How about '94, '95, and '96 with rates of 6.1, 5.6, and 5.4? What's that prove? (Not much.) Or 9.7 in '82? The cycle is far more of an indicator than any particular point on the curve. Evaulating the current cycle, it's a bit worse than the last. Big deal. It's a whole lot better than the two before that. Is that not "progress"? Or does each cycle have to trend downward to zero joblessness? Cuz hate to break it to you, but I don't think that's gonna happen.

[Elroy Jetson]

Foo Bar,
In any event, neither the current economy nor the 2004 version was the worst since Herbert Hoover. That's a meme the dumbocrooks love to harp, relying on the ignorance of the masses.

[Tom Maguire]

From the Times excerpts of Obama's speech:

“Here’s what happened since George Bush took office, here’s what John McCain calls great progress,” Mr. Obama said. “We went through the first period of sustained economic growth since World War II that saw incomes drop; 11 million more Americans don’t have health care; 2 million more Americans are out of work; millions of families are facing foreclosure. The poverty rate has gone up. You are working harder for less.”

“You’re paying more for tuition, you’re paying more for groceries, more at the pump. That’s what John McCain calls great progress,” Mr. Obama said. Later, he added: “Only somebody who spent two decades in Washington could make a statement as disconnected from the hard times that people are facing all across America.”

That is what McCain referred to as 'tough times". Sorry, Obama lied, and had to know he was lying. Well, unless he took the excerpt straight from Think Progress, which means he is irresponsible.

As to the "if AL Qaeda forms a bas e in Iraq", Obama was talking nonsense, and McCain called him on it. The notion that we will take our troops out but then reconsider *if* Al Qaeda forms a base in Iraq flounders on the fact that they already have such a base. Either Obama doesn't know that (unlikely), or his withdrawal plan is smoke founded on lies and misconceptions (more likely).

[Tom Maguire]

OK, how about "We have made great progress recovering from the tech bubble of the 90's and the horrific attacks of 9/11" - also outrageous?

Now, the next President can claim great progress in recovering from the housing bubble. Worked for Clinton in the post S&L recovery.

[Foo Bar]

Might want to scale out a bit if you're actually trying to evaluate the jobless picture. How about '94, '95, and '96 with rates of 6.1, 5.6, and 5.4? What's that prove

Unfortunately, that's not what the questioner asked. The questioner asked a version of the revered Ronald Reagan's "are you better off than you were 4 years ago?", except that the comparison points are now and the beginning of the Bush presidency. McCain cites jobs as evidence of progress from then till now. Even if you want to measure it over a year or 2 then and a year or two now, the comparison does not look good. If you think it's meaningless to do anything other than look at the average level in the entirety of a cycle, then Reagan's question probably didn't make much sense.

[Foo Bar]

OK, how about "We have made great progress recovering from the tech bubble of the 90's and the horrific attacks of 9/11" - also outrageous?

Now, the next President can claim great progress in recovering from the housing bubble

Indeed, a significant part of the rebound in economic numbers since 9/11 is attributable to a housing bubble.

[Bill]

Remarks for Senator Barack Obama: Building Trades National Legislative Conference

"In a global economy with new rules and new risks ... I ...will ... be able to save enough to send [my children] to college or plan for a secure retirement... my job ... will be there tomorrow... stand up for me..."

[Pofarmer]

Ya Know, isn't it the nature of capitalism to be constantly challenged??? Things come and things go. Cycles happen. What a bunch of wimps.

[Pofarmer]

Ya know, at least with the housing bubble you have something tangible. There's brick and mortar left to sell. With the Dot.com bubble you had, electrons. Nothing left.

[MikeS]

McCain will be asked the "are we better off" question over and over until November. In my mind the correct answer would go something like this.

According to the polls, 2/3 of Americans tell us they are doing quite well, but they and I are concerned about the other 1/3 of Americans.

So, let's talk about the next 8 years and how we are going to help the economy of the future.