Don't Be Fooled In 2012!!
Keep Up With The REAL News
Conservatives Need From FR
Help Keep It Going !!
Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!
Posted on 01/23/2012 2:20:24 PM PST by Qbert
House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) appeared on “Fox News Sunday” yesterday and argued that President Obama’s policies “have actually made our economy worse.” Then he said it again. And again. All told, the House Republican repeated the claim five times in one interview (and in each instance, host Chris Wallace offered no pushback whatsoever).
For those who care about reality, Boehner’s claim isn’t true. Since the president took office, every aspect of the American economy — job creation, economic growth, manufacturing, the stock market, etc. — has improved considerably. Repeating a lie five times doesn’t make it true.
But what I find especially important about this is the extent to which Mitt Romney, the likely Republican presidential nominee, disagrees with Boehner.
Consider this remarkable exchange between Romney and conservative radio-host Laura Ingraham late last week: (thanks to F.B. for the tip)
INGRAHAM: You’ve also noted that there are signs of improvement on the horizon in the economy. How do you answer the president’s argument that the economy is getting better in a general election campaign if you yourself are saying it’s getting better?ROMNEY: Well, of course it’s getting better. The economy always gets better after a recession, there is always a recovery. […]
INGRAHAM: Isn’t it a hard argument to make if you’re saying, like, OK, he inherited this recession, he took a bunch of steps to try to turn the economy around, and now, we’re seeing more jobs, but vote against him anyway? Isn’t that a hard argument to make? Is that a stark enough contrast?
ROMNEY: Have you got a better one, Laura? It just happens to be the truth.
I don’t think it’s an exaggeration to say this may be the most important statement Romney has made since launching his 2012 presidential campaign. Think about it: the likely GOP nominee argued, on the air and on the record, that the economy is getting better under President Obama, and it “happens to be the truth” that Obama took steps to turn the economy around, resulting in more jobs for American workers.
If Laura Ingraham had asked a Democratic ally of the president the same question, she likely would have heard a similar answer.
What’s more, as I noted over a week ago, Romney keeps saying this. He told voters in South Carolina and New Hampshire that under Obama, the economy is “getting better.”
Romney’s message, of course, comes with a catch: he believes the economy is improving, but he doesn’t want the president to get credit for it. But as Ingraham noticed, that’s an argument that will fail miserably.
A month into 2012, the Republican is effectively arguing, “Sure, Obama inherited a deep recession. And sure, he took a bunch of steps to turn the economy around. And sure, we’re now seeing more jobs being created and more economic growth. But vote against him anyway.”
This isn’t just a tough sell; it’s an impossible one.
What a confused message.
I see the Strategic Oil Reserve in peril. :(
Hussein's policies have made the economy worse--AND the economy is getting better.
The two statements are not necessarily contradictory.
Hussein has taken what would be a healing economy and broken its legs. So while the economy can hobble a bit, if Hussein hadn't been shoving his hatred for liberty down our throats, the economy would be RUNNING by now.
So this leftwing jerkoff is wrong about what Boehner's statement meant, and he is wrong about Romney thinking Obama deserves any credit for the pathetic activity in our economy.
Romney lost to the loser of the last election. A loser to a loser who now endorses that loser is a loser.
“Obama’s a good president. But, oh, uh, I’d be a little better, I think!”
"Of course it's getting better. The economy always gets better after the recession. There's always a recovery. There's never been a time anywhere in the world where an economy has never recovered. The question is how is recovered by virtue of something the president has done or has he delayed the recovery and made it more painful? And the latter, of course, is the truth."
"The president's policies have made the recession deeper and have made the recovery more tepid and more difficult on the American people. This is the worst recovery that we have seen from a recession since Hoover. And President Obama wants to take credit for things getting better, he's in fact made things worse. He's made this recovery take much longer, but, will our economy get better someday? Of course it will."
He has to make those points more forcefully and not give Obama any credit.
It's moot IMHO at this point because I think Newt is going to clean his clock. Romney, rather than staying on message about the economy and how specifally Bain worked in its favor, (and he does have some good answers to those attacks...he just has a hard time articulating them in front of a camera...he flounders around and just looks non-presidential while doing so)...any how, he has decided to try and attack Newt.
Big mistake. This is Newt's turf and in the debate Newt will eat him alive and make him look like he is floundering all the more and searching for something to say while Newt is quick on his feet, very self-assured and will defend himself well.
But these particular quotes, when you listen to the whole thing are not as bad as the cut outs make them sound.
The economy’s been getting better for Wall Street, just not for Main Steet. That’s a message Newt can take to the bank against both Mitt and Barack. Just look at home values and foreclosures or corporate profits vs. unemployment.
Newsmax
Romney Campaign Run by Charlie Crist’s Political Aides
Monday, January 23, 2012 02:06 PM
By: Andrew Henry
As Mitt Romney puts the South Carolina primary in his rear-view mirror and hits the accelerator in a bid to win Florida, he may discover himself crashing headlong into the bitter legacy of Charlie Crist, the former Florida governor who defected from the GOP and was soundly defeated for the U.S. Senate by Marco Rubio.
Romney’s “Charlie Crist” problem is this: Romney’s chief campaign strategist and several of his most senior campaign staff were Crist’s top political advisers — the same ones who crafted Crist’s moderate, ignore-the-tea-party strategy epitomized in Crist’s famous “hug” of President Barack Obama. That strategy led Crist, once the most popular Republican governor in the nation, to defeat.
http://www.newsmax.com/PrintTemplate.aspx?nodeid=425195
What do you mean trimmed for effect? That didn’t change the meaning of the quote, and you yourself trimmed off the previous 3 lines which are even more damning. Mittbot?
No point in worrying about what Obama is going to run against Romney if he makes it to the general election. Once Romney is the nominee, the election has already been conceded to Obama.
It isn't getting good, but it's better than winter-fall of 2008-9, when it was dropping like a stone. Lessened downward momentum counts for something. It's paused in its descent, and had a small dead cat bounce.
That said, I'd be less surprised by either a long subpar spell, or even another downward slide than a real recovery.
Reason #284 not to vote for Mittens.
Thanks Jeff. Well reasoned, and honest post. We must not lose sight of the real enemy here.
There’s too little honesty in discussion as tempers rise. There’s a sleeping dragon in this nation. I think they called it the silent majority the last time we reached this point. I do think it’s a lot more vivid and visceral this time around. And I also think we’re at the end game. This election is crucial if this republic is to survive as a beacon of liberty, self reliance, individual freedom, and opportunity.
We will see this nation on the road to recovery, or the road to tyranny very soon. We will do what we can, and we will pray.
And yet the Lying media keep telling us that it’s only doublespeak mittens that can beat obama.
Go Newt!
“Romney: U.S. economy ‘getting better’ under Obama”
WHAT DID YOU SAY??????????????????????????????
No, he doesn't have good answers to those attacks. It's not a matter of delivery, he cannot tell the truth or he exposes himself as a corporate raider "buyout baron." He only talks about 2 or 3 companies that he invested a small minority stake in as venture capital. He doesn't talk about the 140 or so buyouts done with PRIVATE EQUITY in which Bain's successful business model was to drive those companies into debt, run away with the assets, let the companies survive in a weakened state or go bankrupt, and keep the profits under a different umbrella where the creditors couldn't get them back in the bankruptcy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.