By Maya

Sep 7, 2010 1:23pm

Today’s Q’s for O’s WH – 9/7/2010

From ABC News' Jake Tapper: TAPPER:  Your former budget director, Mr. Orszag, wrote in the New York Times today that the administration and Democrats should compromise with the Republicans in Congress and extend all of the Bush tax cuts for two years and then get rid of them. One of the reasons for that, he said, in terms of keeping the tax cuts in place, is, quote, "Higher taxes now would crimp consumer spending, further depressing the already inadequate demand for what firms are capable of producing at full tilt." So your OMB director is saying that if you guys go ahead with what you're proposing, which is allowing them to expire…
  
GIBBS:  I think — I think Peter was mostly — if I read the article correctly, I think Peter was mostly discussing the permanence of and the extension of those that involved the middle class.
  
TAPPER:  I'm — but I'm specifically talking about this one…
  
GIBBS:  I understand what you're…
  
TAPPER:  … on the — on the middle-class part?
  
GIBBS:  Yes, I think, in all honesty, in reading the article, I think Peter had a congressional relations hat on, in terms of what political price Congress might have to go through to extend different things. That's not the viewpoint that the president holds.  The president…
  
TAPPER:  Do you agree that higher taxes, in terms of the Bush tax cuts expiring, would crimp consumer spending?  Do you disagree with that?
  
GIBBS:  I — I think that if you make $250,000 a year in this economy, you're probably not putting off the purchase of a big screen TV.  I — I just — I don't think your consumer demand is, if you make a quarter-of-a-million dollars or $400,000 a year in this economy, I don't think you're putting off the purchase of a new suit or a new car — because you make $400,000 a year. If you make $40,000 a year, I think you're putting off a lot of purchases based on the fact that you don't have it, and that impacts consumer demands.
  
TAPPER:  So you disagree with Peter.
  
GIBBS:  Again, I — don't — I don't — the way I read the article, Jake, is that Peter's not making that argument about the high-end tax cuts.  He's making that argument — that argument about the middle class tax cuts, which the president certainly agrees that not extending them will certainly have an impact. The — the president will argue tomorrow that we should extend those — extend those middle class tax cuts, and not doing so would most assuredly hurt our economy. But again, I — I think if you're making $250,000 or $400,000 or $600,000 or $800,000 in this economy, you're not putting off the purchase of — there's not a great crush on or pull-back in your consumer demand.  That's — this economy's not hurting people who make $800,000 a year.  It's hurting families that are making $40,000 a year.
  
TAPPER:  If I could do a follow-up, there's a lot of polling out today, including ABC's-Washington Post poll that indicates more Americans feeling negatively about the president and his job performance, especially about the economy.  For the first time, numerically more Americans think the president's policies have hurt the economy than have helped the economy. Why — I assume you think that they're wrong — why are they wrong?
  
GIBBS:  Well, look, I — first and foremost, obviously, as I've said in here a number of times, there is and continues to be great frustration with where we are in this economy. Among those frustrated is the president of the United States.We've seen a — we've seen a recession unlike virtually anything that anybody has seen in any of their lifetimes, and it's going to take, as the president will discuss on Wednesday, more than a two-year or less-than-two-year time period to get out of that hole.   That's why what he'll talk about, he believes, will continue us on — on a road to recovery, but that that recovery will certainly take some time.  And I think in the end this president and this administration will be graded on — on what happens at the end of this road, not someplace in between.
  
I think — I'll be honest with you, I think the American people are not concerned about the president's poll numbers.  I think the American people are concerned about whether or not they have a job, how they're going to pay their bills, the future of their children.  I think that's what the American people are concerned about, and that's the task that the — the president will spend every day worrying about.
  
TAPPER:  But a plurality think that what the president's doing is making matters worse.
  
GIBBS:  Again, I — I think by virtually any measure our economy is in a better place than it was two years ago. Are there — there are, I think, Americans rightly concerned about our debt and our deficit, and the president understands that and has taken steps to introduce a budget that includes a freeze on non-security discretionary spending. And, obviously, we'll spend a decent amount of time in the next many months going through the immediate and long term — things that we need to do in the immediate and long term to get our debt and deficit under control. -Jake Tapper

User Comments

Gibbs said:
“If you make $40,000 a year, I think you’re putting off a lot of purchases based on the fact that you don’t have it, and that impacts consumer demands.”
If you make $40,000 a year you are not paying ANY federal income taxes, the Bush tax cuts are 100% irrelevant to you, except as a means to engage in class warfare.

Posted by: N2vip | September 7, 2010, 1:37 pm 1:37 pm

What part of “all the Bush tax cuts” refers only to those making under 250 thousand dollars??? Why can’t Gibbs just be honest and respond to the questions?

Posted by: J.R. | September 7, 2010, 1:40 pm 1:40 pm

Sorry for previous dupe submission…
If two years isn’t enough time, how long will it take? Another year? Two? Six?
If they don’t know, why don’t they know?

Posted by: N2vip | September 7, 2010, 1:42 pm 1:42 pm

After the elections and the vast investigations of this corrupt administration, and the MSM involvement with this corrupt WH…you are going to see all of Obamas radical left wing crowd start spilling their guts on this White House… The sound you now hear is of hard drives being tossed into the grinder…
Obama VS America

Posted by: Yep I said that | September 7, 2010, 1:58 pm 1:58 pm

“GIBBS: Again, I — I think by virtually any measure our economy is in a better place than it was two years ago.”
A stunningly stupid statement from gibbs. How about measuring unemployment, long-term unemployment, national debt, deficit spending, real gdp, unfunded pensions, unfunded liabilities or …
If you are better off than you were two years ago then vote democrat.

Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn | September 7, 2010, 1:59 pm 1:59 pm

Bozell: Congratulations to ABC News on Departure of President David Westin
Excellent article at newsbusters on the downfall of journalism at ABC..this is what happens when the radical left takes over..sinking ratings
Obama VS America

Posted by: Yep I said that | September 7, 2010, 2:10 pm 2:10 pm

Gibbs talks about how the President will be graded on what happens at the end of this road and not someplace in between. It seems like he is on a different road than many Americans- because for them, they already are at the end of the road.
I don’t know the length of the road the President has described, he should heed Keynes’ words that in the long run, we are all dead. Hopefully his initiatives bear some fruit sooner than that.

Posted by: Virtus2021 | September 7, 2010, 2:18 pm 2:18 pm

I’ve been trying to find out how many labor union jobs have been lost during this unemployment “crisis” as compared to non-union jobs, but I’m not making much headway with it. Do any of you folks posting here have some information about that?
I would think alot of people would find those facts very interesting (myself included). Somehow I’m thinking the job losses are going to be EXTREMELY lopsided on the non-union side. But it’s funny that this conversation doesn’t seem to be happening much in the political world. Wonder why?….

Posted by: Shoe | September 7, 2010, 2:33 pm 2:33 pm

“Excellent article at newsbusters on the downfall of journalism at ABC..this is what happens when the radical left takes over..sinking ratings”
Always amazing that the right wing associates good ratings with quality journalism.
I wonder if you guys are mad that the WWE gets better ratings than FoxNews?

Posted by: Ryan C | September 7, 2010, 2:45 pm 2:45 pm

Obama Says Jobs Are Coming, But His Team Says Not So Fast…..LMAO not even his “team” believes Obama
OBAMA VS AMERICA

Posted by: Yep I said that | September 7, 2010, 2:46 pm 2:46 pm

I see Aarons post and my reply got taken down… anyway Aaron great post
Obama VS America

Posted by: Yep I said that | September 7, 2010, 3:12 pm 3:12 pm

No, I got it. Right wingers think ratings equals journalism.
I pointed out that professional wrestling with a degree of integrity and honesty in the soap opera story lines greater than FoxNews has better ratings.

Posted by: Ryan C | September 7, 2010, 3:17 pm 3:17 pm

It’s the same everywhere, the rich get richer and the poor stay poor!

Posted by: Restaurants Almere | September 7, 2010, 3:50 pm 3:50 pm

“Always amazing that the right wing associates good ratings with quality journalism.”
Always amazing (well, not really) that the Lefties seek to divert and distract rather than defend…(not much ammo available to defend the performance of Prez Solid B+…he is an epic failure of Carteresque proportion)

Posted by: tjp612 | September 7, 2010, 4:10 pm 4:10 pm

BTW – Nice questioning of Spokesman Robert Fibbs today.

Posted by: tjp612 | September 7, 2010, 4:11 pm 4:11 pm

“I wonder if you guys are mad that the WWE gets better ratings than FoxNews? ”
Naw… I wonder if you are mad that the WWE or Foxnews gets way better ratings than MSNBC and CNN combined? lol

Posted by: Sigmonde | September 7, 2010, 4:17 pm 4:17 pm

@shoe — For the first time in history, public union employees now out number private sector unionized employees 7.9 million to 7.4 million. The average federal worker is now averaging $123,000 per year including $42,000 in benefits. The number of federal workers has increased 10% since the start of the recession compared to a loss of 6.8% jobs in the private sector.
Some eye-opening numbers…..

Posted by: Randy the A/C guy | September 7, 2010, 4:24 pm 4:24 pm

“Always amazing that the right wing associates good ratings with quality journalism.”
lol…You must be amazed that a brilliant journalist such as Rick Sanchez at CNN, gets such low ratings..

Posted by: Sigmonde | September 7, 2010, 4:27 pm 4:27 pm

The Obama administration’s prior economic forecasts require GDP growth to be much than it currently is for their estimates for deficits and future economic conditions (such as unemployment) to be true.
Since the economy has not experienced a high rate of growth, CBO estimates for recently passed legislation are also likely to be wrong.
The rhetoric from Obama is irresponsible. It is too self-serving to only be ‘frustrated’ with the consequences of failure. It is illogical too to call the economic situation a crisis, if we are also heading in the right direction.
If Obama was true to his rhetoric, he would fire all of his economic advisers for being wrong. They, just like “Bush”, failed to meet their own expectations. Instead, Obama has chosen to unconditionally support his failed policies.
The Obama boat has too much momentum and cannot be turned around. Even the media are unable to reflect Obama’s true image back to himself. Will the media show Gibbs that the emperor has no clothes, or will they allow Gibbs to pretend that nothing obvious is amiss?

Posted by: Mike, CO | September 7, 2010, 4:38 pm 4:38 pm

“I wonder if you are mad that the WWE or Foxnews gets way better ratings than MSNBC and CNN combined? ”
Actually its a little disheartening that WWE gets better ratings than all cable news combined but really what does one expect when cable news follows the professional wrestling script complete with manufactured outrages and heels/faces.
I would like to see cable news go back to reporting the news versus the personality driven shows now being put out.
But back to the central, why do right wingers think ratings equals good journalism?

Posted by: Ryan C | September 7, 2010, 4:50 pm 4:50 pm

Apples and oranges also taste differently. What’s your point comparing Fox News to WWE?

Posted by: Aaron | September 7, 2010, 4:52 pm 4:52 pm

“I would like to see cable news go back to reporting the news versus the personality driven shows now being put out. ”
Perhaps you should learn to discern opinion shows from news programming.

Posted by: Sigmonde | September 7, 2010, 5:02 pm 5:02 pm

“But back to the central, why do right wingers think ratings equals good journalism? ”
Although I haven’t seen anyone write that high ratings equals good journalism, as you claim, it seems fairly evident that high ratings of a program is a good indication the program is well received for its content. WWE for example, offers entertainment. Fox News offers credibility. Air America, on the other hand, offered nothing, I guess, except excellent journalism as you would suggest.

Posted by: Sigmonde | September 7, 2010, 5:15 pm 5:15 pm

But back to the central, why do right wingers think ratings equals good journalism?
Posted by: Ryan C | Sep 7, 2010 4:50:53 PM
Our friend Ryan C is working to divert and distract once again.
In analysis of coverage of the 2008 election conducted by the Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism (PEJ), Pew found the following:
FOX NEWS:
“Negative Coverage”:
- Obama: 40% of coverage “negative”
- McCain 40% of coverage “negative”
“Positive Coverage”:
- Obama: 25% of coverage “positive”
- McCain 22% of coverage “positive”
PRESS OVERALL (2,412 stories from 48 outlets during the time period from September 8 to October 16)
“Negative Coverage”:
- Obama: 29% of coverage “negative”
- McCain 57% of coverage “negative”
“Positive Coverage”:
- Obama: 36% of coverage “positive”
- McCain 14% of coverage “positive”
So, according to the “non partisan, non ideological and non political” Pew Research Center’s PEJ, is Fox News truly as unbalanced (and unhinged) as detractors suggest? Clearly not.
But, smearing of Fox News is a nice diversion from having to actually having to defend the failed policies of our Community-Organizer-in-Chief.

Posted by: tjp612 | September 7, 2010, 5:31 pm 5:31 pm

“Fox News offers credibility”
ROFLMAO!
Funniest line of the day!

Posted by: Ryan C | September 7, 2010, 5:39 pm 5:39 pm

“Perhaps you should learn to discern opinion shows from news programming.”
Where is the news programming, most shows are personality driven even if billed as news shows.
And I mean that as a general critique of all cable news.

Posted by: Ryan C | September 7, 2010, 5:46 pm 5:46 pm

“Fox News offers credibility”
ROFLMAO! “Funniest line of the day!”
How often do you watch Fox News?

Posted by: Sigmonde | September 7, 2010, 5:48 pm 5:48 pm

is Fox News truly as unbalanced (and unhinged) as detractors suggest? Clearly not.”
From the Pew study
“On Fox News, in contrast, coverage of Obama was more negative than the norm (40% of stories vs. 29% overall) and less positive (25% of stories vs. 36% generally). For McCain, the news channel was somewhat more positive (22% vs. 14% in the press overall) and substantially less negative (40% vs. 57% in the press overall). Yet even here, his negative stories outweighed positive ones by almost 2 to 1.”
And
“When it came to vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin, Fox News also stood out. Here, unlike most news outlets, the portrayal was more positive than not—though not as positive as that found on NBC News. In all, 37% of Palin stories studied on Fox were positive compared with 28% in the press generally. Another 27% of the stories were negative, less than the 39% found overall. And 37% of her coverage was neutral
or mixed, compared with 33% overall.”

Posted by: Ryan C | September 7, 2010, 5:51 pm 5:51 pm

“How often do you watch Fox News?”
I prefer reading my news personally whether in print or online and use cable news for major new events or speeches so I would say not often.
Here’s the lineup for FoxNews
Fox & Friends
America’s Newsroom
Happening Now
America Live with Megyn Kelly
Studio B with Shepard Smith
Your World with Neil Cavuto
Glenn Beck
Special Report with Bret Baier
Shepard Smith
The O’Reilly Factor
Hannity
On the Record w/ Greta Van Susteren
Red Eye w/ Greg Gutfeld
Even the “news” segments are personality driven.

Posted by: Ryan C | September 7, 2010, 5:57 pm 5:57 pm

Even the “news” segments are personality driven.
Posted by: Ryan C | Sep 7, 2010 5:57:57 PM
Interesting point. I actually like Shep Smith, but now that you mention it, his name is in the title of his show, personalizing his news hour. (Is his show the only news show? Its the only one that appears that way.)

Posted by: dawn_marie | September 7, 2010, 6:08 pm 6:08 pm

“Interesting point. I actually like Shep Smith, but now that you mention it, his name is in the title of his show, personalizing his news hour. (Is his show the only news show? Its the only one that appears that way.)”
I think Shep may do their version of the evening newscast but I am not sure.
Granted personality tends to drive news viewership (even on networks going back sometime) but there are ways of making one’s show a reflection of their personality and I see that far too much in cable news which has too much air time to fill.
And not just the usual chuckleheads on Fox but Rick Sanchez, Dylan Ratigan etc.

Posted by: Ryan C | September 7, 2010, 6:15 pm 6:15 pm

I watched CNN for 10 years until I finally woke up and really looked at the left wing bias that was cooked into every single broadcast. I switched to Fox News and even though some programs are totally right wing, the NEWS is not. Brit Hume and now Brett Baier are two of the top news anchors in this country and always present both sides. The rest of the “news” media suck, big time.

Posted by: Sunnyr | September 7, 2010, 6:27 pm 6:27 pm

Posted by: Shoe | Sep 7, 2010 2:33:24 PM
Posted by: Randy the A/C guy | Sep 7, 2010 4:24:20 PM
Thanks, Randy. Those are eye-opening numbers. I have been curious as to why this administration seemingly likes to hammer those who make enough money to consider them “rich”, yet completely overlook this little tidbit regarding “Mr. Union Boss” himself:
Richard Trumka increased his yearly salary by nearly $74,000—from $165,000 to $238,975— in the last four years. That amounts to a 44 percent salary increase. In addition, Trumka will also get an AFL-CIO pension equal to 60 percent of his top pay.
44% salary INCREASE? Really? In a time of exploding jobless numbers and wage cuts?
I wonder if Mr. Trumka will be one of those “willing to sacrifice” as Mr. Obama has asked of us. Or, maybe he can just fly under the radar of middle-working-class-superhero. How funny.

Posted by: Shoe | September 7, 2010, 6:28 pm 6:28 pm

“GIBBS: Again, I — I think by virtually any measure our economy is in a better place than it was two years ago.”
————————————-
What an IDIOT! How does this clueless creep get away with this crap?

Posted by: Sunnyr | September 7, 2010, 6:29 pm 6:29 pm

Don’t judge Fox News by Shep Smith. He’s a joke. He a far left wing nutball who always makes everything about HIM. That irritating music in the background drives me bonkers and I switch him off the minute he come on. Brett Baier is the man for news. Professional and unbiased.

Posted by: Sunnyr | September 7, 2010, 6:35 pm 6:35 pm

“Brett Baier is the man for news”
ROFLMAO!
Brett Baier is the man to pass on your talking points, not as dumb as Steve Doocy, not as crazy as Brit Hume(who would have thought Tiger would have exposed that one!).

Posted by: Ryan C | September 7, 2010, 7:03 pm 7:03 pm

“Brett Baier is the man to pass on your talking points, not as dumb as Steve Doocy, not as crazy as Brit Hume”
For someone who says he doesn’t watch cable news very often, you have strong opinions.
Tell us – who do you think is fair and balanced in presenting the news?

Posted by: Sigmonde | September 7, 2010, 7:23 pm 7:23 pm

Even the “news” segments are personality driven. — Ryan C.
You mean like Rick Sanchez’s afternoon “news” segment? Wolf Blitzer? John King? (I like Wolf well enough, and King isn’t bad, but Sanchez is a disaster) Andrea Mitchell Reports? Dylan Ratigan show? Daily Rundown with Chuck and Savannah? Let’s face it, Ryan C., it’s personality driven programming at ALL the cable news programs.
And having a show built around a personality does not HAVE to mean having a show that is biased or polemical. I would argue that Bret Baier and Wolf Blitzer are good newscasters. And I have a weakness for Neil Cavuto, personally, who puts his biases on record and shoots straight.

Posted by: moderate | September 7, 2010, 9:15 pm 9:15 pm

Brit Hume is not crazy, ryan. He is a man of deep faith, who wore that on his sleeve more than most of us consider appropriate, perhaps, during the Tiger Woods discussion. He spoke from his heart that day. But he is a solid journalist and a valuable asset to Fox News.

Posted by: moderate | September 7, 2010, 9:18 pm 9:18 pm

Stop stoking the class envy, Mr. Gibbs. What the just over 250,000 crowd is doing because of the threat of increased taxes that will impact the economy is postponing risk-taking in our small businesses, not taking advantage of bargains in housing to move into larger, more expensive homes, not indulging in luxury purchases we are finally able to afford, like motor homes or boats (who do you think builds the luxury items like motor homes, boats, vacation homes, etc.– that 40,000 crowd Gibbs pretends he’s concerned about). The most important to the economy is that first item– not expanding business. If we don’t stretch to make those extra dollars because we will be keeping fewer of them, if our fear of what will happen to the economy under this administration is combined with our reluctance to take on risk with a reduced reward, then we don’t hire new workers, we don’t build new locations, we don’t do the things that help the economy grow.

Posted by: moderate | September 7, 2010, 9:26 pm 9:26 pm

“GIBBS: Again, I — I think by virtually any measure our economy is in a better place than it was two years ago.”
————————————-
What an IDIOT! How does this clueless creep get away with this crap?”
Well, certain figures did go up. We just can’t speak about them because they are a surprise!

Posted by: More puppies! | September 7, 2010, 9:30 pm 9:30 pm

“GIBBS: Again, I — I think by virtually any measure our economy is in a better place than it was two years ago.”
I couldn’t stop laughing when I read this.

Posted by: Cracking Up | September 7, 2010, 9:49 pm 9:49 pm

“GIBBS: Again, I — I think by virtually any measure our economy is in a better place than it was two years ago.”
————————————-
What an IDIOT! How does this clueless creep get away with this crap?”
Posted by: More puppies! | Sep 7, 2010 9:30:51 PM
Actually he’s not an idiot at all. The economy was in free-fall collapse two years ago, 700,000 jobs being lost in a month, major banks and financial institutions imploding, the major american car companies in collapse, the stock market crashing . . . etc, etc, etc.
You have forgotten?

Posted by: Steve | September 7, 2010, 10:00 pm 10:00 pm

“You have forgotten?”
How could anyone forget that unemployment has stayed under 8%?

Posted by: More puppie! | September 7, 2010, 10:03 pm 10:03 pm

Posted by: More puppie! | Sep 7, 2010 10:03:12 PM
Have you forgotten what things were like two years ago?
The economy was in free-fall collapse two years ago, 700,000 jobs being lost in a month, major banks and financial institutions imploding, the major american car companies in collapse, the stock market crashing . . . etc, etc, etc.
Or do you just ignore all that and pretend?

Posted by: Steve | September 7, 2010, 10:06 pm 10:06 pm

Or do you just ignore all that and pretend?

My last name isn’t Romer. Or Gibbs.

Posted by: More puppie! | September 7, 2010, 10:07 pm 10:07 pm

Posted by: More puppie! | Sep 7, 2010 10:07:32 PM
Pretend all you want . . .
Regardless of what you pretent, the fact is two years ago the economy was in free-fall collapse, 700,000 jobs were being lost in a month, major banks and financial institutions were imploding, the major american car companies were in collapse, the stock market was crashing . . . etc, etc, etc.
Things are far better than that.

Posted by: Steve | September 7, 2010, 10:11 pm 10:11 pm

“Things are far better than that.”
So higher unemployment is a positive thing? Interesting…

Posted by: More puppies! | September 7, 2010, 10:21 pm 10:21 pm

Republicans lowered tax rates for the middle and lower classes, tax rates that Obama appears to want kept in place.
Posted by: Sigmonde | Sep 7, 2010 7:50:19 PM
The Republicans simply put all these upaid taxes on the national debt – with its huge interest payments – to China. Thanks a lot.
Oh, did I mention their policies also were the ones in place when the economy collapses destroying peoples’ savings, throwing hundreds of thousands out of work, throwing hundreds of thousands out of their foreclosed homes . … etc. Again, thanks a lot.

Posted by: Steve | September 7, 2010, 10:25 pm 10:25 pm

“The Republicans simply put all these upaid taxes on the national debt – with its huge interest payments – to China. Thanks a lot.”
Maybe we can get Geithner, Rangel and John Kerry to look into this unpaid taxes issue…

Posted by: Eyeareess | September 7, 2010, 10:28 pm 10:28 pm

Posted by: Eyeareess | Sep 7, 2010 10:28:40 PM
Bush’s cut taxes and didn’t pay for his expenditures, doubling the national debt and indebting us further to China, including doubled interest payments – HUGE interest payments.
AND Republican policies also were the ones in place when the economy collapsed destroying peoples’ savings, throwing hundreds of thousands out of work, throwing hundreds of thousands out of their foreclosed homes . … etc.
The definition of Republican success = overspending, under taxing the country into debt to China, and then ‘overseeing’ the economy as it collapss and all our investements, hard work and mortagaged homes go into the tank.
Again, thanks a lot.

Posted by: Steve | September 7, 2010, 10:33 pm 10:33 pm

Again, thanks a lot.
You’re welcome. And as my senatorial friend from Mass. said, “There’s nothing more to say about it.”

Posted by: Eyeareess | September 7, 2010, 10:36 pm 10:36 pm

“AND Republican policies also were the ones in place when the economy collapsed destroying peoples’ savings, throwing hundreds of thousands out of work, throwing hundreds of thousands out of their foreclosed homes . … etc.
The definition of Republican success = overspending, under taxing the country into debt to China, and then ‘overseeing’ the economy as it collapss and all our investements, hard work and mortagaged homes go into the tank.”
But luckily, our unemployment rate has stayed below 8%!

Posted by: More puppies! | September 7, 2010, 10:38 pm 10:38 pm

Posted by: More puppies! | Sep 7, 2010 10:38:45 PM
You must be proud of what six years of Republican attempts to make the economy ‘strong’ and ‘stable’ actually did. Sure it was ‘strong’ – it collapsed like a house of cards – 700,000 jobs being lost each month, major banks and financial institutions imploding, the major american car companies in collapse, the stock market crashing, we had all lost half of our investment savings, millions were losing their homes . . . etc, etc, etc.
We’ve been in – and are not out of – the biggest economic collapse since the Great Depression. The entire world is in the same condition basically.
Take some credit for what your ideology as practised by the Republicans has accomplished.

Posted by: Steve | September 7, 2010, 10:49 pm 10:49 pm

Posted by: Steve | Sep 7, 2010 10:49:20 PM
Steve, I want some of what you are smoking! It must be really nice in your world. Unemployment rate 9.6%, record housing forclosures, record number of people on some sort of gov’t assistance…etc. I’d say that isn’t much of an improvement from the beginning of 2009…

Posted by: TXmom | September 7, 2010, 11:00 pm 11:00 pm

“Let’s face it, Ryan C., it’s personality driven programming at ALL the cable news programs.”
Where is the news programming, most shows are personality driven even if billed as news shows.
And I mean that as a general critique of all cable news.
Posted by: Ryan C | Sep 7, 2010 5:46:08 PM
Where is the news programming, most shows are personality driven even if billed as news shows.
And I mean that as a general critique of all cable news.
Posted by: Ryan C | Sep 7, 2010 5:46:08 PM
“Granted personality tends to drive news viewership (even on networks going back sometime) but there are ways of making one’s show a reflection of their personality and I see that far too much in cable news which has too much air time to fill.
And not just the usual chuckleheads on Fox but Rick Sanchez, Dylan Ratigan etc.
Posted by: Ryan C | Sep 7, 2010 6:15:14 PM”
Gee why is the “moderate” supposed independent hyper defensive over FoxNews?
Does the propaganda label wear too well?

Posted by: Ryan C | September 7, 2010, 11:27 pm 11:27 pm

I am so sick of listen to these damn Rebublicans. How quickly do you idiots out there forget how we got into this mess. Obama wasn’t the President when the bottom fell out. He helped keep it from falling even further. We could be looking at total economic meltdown if Bush was still in there or those idiots Palin and Mccain. I used to vote for that guy he has lost it. I wish we could get something accomplished to help people. I don’t care who it is . At least Obama is trying. All the Rebublicans want to do is disagree at every turn . Just get something done already we are suffering out here .

Posted by: Bsmth | September 8, 2010, 12:08 am 12:08 am

“Obama wasn’t the President when the bottom fell out.”
No but Pelosi and Reid were running Congress since January 2007. Any thoughts on their involvement in this “mess?” Any thoughts on Barney, Chris and Maxine stonewalling during that time?

Posted by: MM | September 8, 2010, 12:45 am 12:45 am

Ryan, not hyper defensive, just joined the conversation late and did not see your statements about other cable networks. What I did see was your long list of fox shows and your usual, tedious mischaracterization of fox. I watch both fox and cnn and find both of them to be adequate but not outstanding at presenting the news well. I will admit the only show on msnbc I ever watch for more than 5 minutes is morning joe, and that is certainly not, nor does it pretend to be, an objective news broadcast. it’s entertaining, which i sometimes need in the morning. not going to suffer through Fox and Friends at that early hour, and I just can’t warm up to the cnn offering– not sure why.

Posted by: moderate | September 8, 2010, 8:26 am 8:26 am

Leave a Reply

Do you have more information about this topic? If so, please click here to contact the editors of ABC News.