Chris Matthews: Obama Deserves Credit For “This Amazing Economy”

[Guest]

by Philip Hodges

Every time Obama speaks, Chris Matthews “gets a thrill up his leg.” So we can only imagine what Matthews is experiencing now that Obama has created such an “amazing economy.”

When government officials say the economy is bad, liberals blame Bush. When government officials say the economy is good, liberals give Obama the credit. But this is Obama’s 2nd term. They’ve got to skew the data to make it look as good as possible and then give Obama all the credit. That’s what Chris Matthews is doing:

“[W]hen is President Obama going to get some credit—and this is like Rodney Dangerfield—when’s he going to get some credit for this amazing economy that’s coming back? It definitely is coming back, maybe not like gangbusters, but the unemployment rate really dropped again today, and there really are a quarter-million new jobs out there. It really is amazing… It seems to me when I look at the stock market breaking all records, when I look at 236,000 new jobs and I keep thinking when are the Republicans going to do what Rodney Dangerfield asked for all those years, ‘show a little respect.’ And what does this all mean? Don’t they secretly say ‘damn it, things are getting better!’ I mean what are they saying when they read this stuff?”

Well, one thing that we’re saying is that that the Bureau of Labor Statistics doesn’t include everyone who is unemployed. Howard Portnoy over at Hot Air made this observation:

“While 236,000 Americans found jobs in February, 296,000 stopped looking. Once an unemployed person has run through 99 weeks of unemployment compensation, moreover, he no longer exists in the eyes of the Labor Department’s statisticians, and is thus no longer counted as unemployed.”

A record 89.3 million Americans are no longer counted as unemployed. That includes people who have retired, but it also includes people who have simply given up looking for work.

Millions of people are in this category. When millions have given up looking for employment because not many businesses are hiring anymore, that indicates that the economy is not doing well at all, and that in reality, the unemployment rate is higher.

Matthews asks when Obama is going to get the credit. I give Obama much deserved credit for this failing economy. And I understand it’s not just Obama. It’s his entire team, including the media and even many on the Republican team.

Centralized economic planning doesn’t work. Well, it works to centralize power over the economy in the hands of a dictator, but it doesn’t work to make the economy thrive. The government can’t ever be a catalyst for economic growth, because all it does is interfere in the economy by taxing and regulating businesses out of existence and granting monopolies to the big corporations which write laws benefiting themselves. Of course, that’s what liberals like Matthews call “leveling the playing field.”

I have no trouble at all giving Obama credit for this economy. But we don’t have an amazing economy unless you live in the White House or work for MSNBC. As for Americans, many are struggling to make ends meet, many are underemployed and many more have given up looking for work. Those things are natural consequences under socialism. When’s Chris Matthews going to give Obama credit for those things?

http://politicaloutcast.com/2013/03/chri.../#ixzz2NM8XytQB

[joeb]

Only Chris Matthews could think our economy is "amazing" in a good way.... Our economy is "amazing" but it's amazingly bad, not amazingly good.

[OzarkWoman]

Only Chris Matthews could think our economy is "amazing" in a good way.... Our economy is "amazing" but it's amazingly bad, not amazingly good.

I think he took too much acid in his day. LOLOLOL

[Guest]

:)

[lazarus]

It's tough for GOP'ers to be in a position where they hope the economy will get worse. Good employment numbers are bad news for every republican in a marginal district.

[Ted Oplinger]

It's tough for GOP'ers to be in a position where they hope the economy will get worse. Good employment numbers are bad news for every republican in a marginal district.

It's also a tough thing to be so economically ignorant that empty political push points such as these look great.

Unemployment hasn't dropped to below those held by the Left's favorite boogeyman, so what exactly are "good" employment numbers - particularly when companies aren't hiring, and are still "restructuring" to take the Obamacare hit?

Oh, that's right - this is the "new normal"...

Blessings,

[lazarus]

It's also a tough thing to be so economically ignorant that empty political push points such as these look great.

Economically ignorant? LOL. Is that being ignorant in an efficient way? Strange turn of phrase.

I actually think the economy is in big trouble and neither left or right is going to do what it takes to fix it. Nevertheless what I said is true. Republicans, like Democrats have been in the past, are in the position where their fortunes rest on the things going bad. It would be naive to deny that.

[Guest]

Economically ignorant? LOL. Is that being ignorant in an efficient way?

No, it just means ignorant about the economy. And there's nothing efficient about that.

[lazarus]

So RLH, why do the think Conservatives are largely quiet about the FED spending $40b a month?

[OzarkWoman]

So RLH, why do the think Conservatives are largely quiet about the FED spending $40b a month?

Many of us are not quiet. I just don't come into this forum to moan and groan about politics, though I will post my remarks to threads already posted.

[lazarus]

Whilst I respect your opinion Oz I'm thinking of political figures and commentators.

[bonnie]

Whilst I respect your opinion Oz I'm thinking of political figures and commentators.

Probably because we have a medical miracle,republicans that can stand without a spine.In addition many liberals dressed up as republicans

Regardless of that Obama is president and having just the house they are not the ones in control.

Having a spine would certainly help

[Ted Oplinger]

Whilst I respect your opinion Oz I'm thinking of political figures and commentators.

Do not conflate being conservative with being "Republican".

While conservatives do run in the Republican party (a conservative's only viable option), that party is not run by conservatives, Laz.

It is run by Rockefeller elites who are nothing less than Democrat Lite, and are just as aristocratic and Big Government as the Democrat Party elite.

The conservative 55% of this nation have no real voice representing them. Any attempt to find such a voice is immediately set upon by BOTH parties as racist and extremist (Reagan in his day; contemporaneously, the Tea Party).

Political figures, Laz? Senators Rand Paul and Ted Cruz are two of such, whom the Republican establishment have not been able make subservient. While they are "uncontrolled", they are vilified as extremist more by the Republican party than by the media and the Democrats. They, like Jim DeMint, are left out of the positions of power on select committees, and thus are unable to effect any real reform.

Commentators, Laz? Show me one media commentator who is truly conservative, that hasn't been vilified and pronounced as not being part of the professional media.

FOX has only 5% fewer liberals on its staff, compared to the rest of the Alphabet soup tabloid organizations...and is deemed "right-wing extremism" because it dares to offer up both sides of issues and allow the informed viewer to decide for themselves. It is popularly viewed as "FAUX" news by your type.

Andrew Breitbart was one of the last liberal journalists who found the "JournoList" propaganda effort driving today's media to be unprofessional and dishonest. He noted correctly that conservatives did not have a strong voice in media, and resolved to balance that with an unabashedly conservative media outlet. His death in recent years has been one of suspicion, but the organization he started still grows with each month. And true to form, it is also deemed amateur tabloid journalism by the rest of the media, and deemed even more racist and extremist than any other conservative outlet and blog.

Simply put, Laz, those whom you want to see the conservative side having, are discredited and smeared by your alphabet soup tabloids. Were Goebbels alive today, he would be astonished how successful today's media are in the propaganda techniques he pioneered 80 years ago.

The media and the two political parties are enamoured with the power they have forged together over the last 50 years. That power structure is decidedly Leftist. No conservatives are allowed into their "polite society".

And you (and many others) buy into their feed hook, line, and sinker, Laz.

Blessings,

[Tom Wetmore]

Perhaps the real focus of Matthews' remark was the record high of the stock market this week...

[Guest]

"Dow Jones high should not be mistaken for growth in the US economy.

There is only one thing you need to know about finance: the stock market is not the economy."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/mar/05/dow-jones-stock-markets

But of course Chris Matthews doesn't know this, being the low information broadcaster that he is. Or does he?

Also:

http://clubadventist.com/forum/ubbthread...html#Post618102

[OzarkWoman]

Originally Posted By: lazarus

Whilst I respect your opinion Oz I'm thinking of political figures and commentators.

Do not conflate being conservative with being "Republican".

While conservatives do run in the Republican party (a conservative's only viable option), that party is not run by conservatives, Laz.

It is run by Rockefeller elites who are nothing less than Democrat Lite, and are just as aristocratic and Big Government as the Democrat Party elite.

The conservative 55% of this nation have no real voice representing them. Any attempt to find such a voice is immediately set upon by BOTH parties as racist and extremist (Reagan in his day; contemporaneously, the Tea Party).

Political figures, Laz? Senators Rand Paul and Ted Cruz are two of such, whom the Republican establishment have not been able make subservient. While they are "uncontrolled", they are vilified as extremist more by the Republican party than by the media and the Democrats. They, like Jim DeMint, are left out of the positions of power on select committees, and thus are unable to effect any real reform.

Commentators, Laz? Show me one media commentator who is truly conservative, that hasn't been vilified and pronounced as not being part of the professional media.

FOX has only 5% fewer liberals on its staff, compared to the rest of the Alphabet soup tabloid organizations...and is deemed "right-wing extremism" because it dares to offer up both sides of issues and allow the informed viewer to decide for themselves. It is popularly viewed as "FAUX" news by your type.

Andrew Breitbart was one of the last liberal journalists who found the "JournoList" propaganda effort driving today's media to be unprofessional and dishonest. He noted correctly that conservatives did not have a strong voice in media, and resolved to balance that with an unabashedly conservative media outlet. His death in recent years has been one of suspicion, but the organization he started still grows with each month. And true to form, it is also deemed amateur tabloid journalism by the rest of the media, and deemed even more racist and extremist than any other conservative outlet and blog.

Simply put, Laz, those whom you want to see the conservative side having, are discredited and smeared by your alphabet soup tabloids. Were Goebbels alive today, he would be astonished how successful today's media are in the propaganda techniques he pioneered 80 years ago.

The media and the two political parties are enamoured with the power they have forged together over the last 50 years. That power structure is decidedly Leftist. No conservatives are allowed into their "polite society".

And you (and many others) buy into their feed hook, line, and sinker, Laz.

Blessings,

[Tom Wetmore]

But of course, under a recent Republican president the performance of the stock market was also noted as a prime indicator or the health of the economy...

As long as it supported his agenda...

[bonnie]

But of course, under a recent Republican president the performance of the stock market was also noted as a prime indicator or the health of the economy...

As long as it supported his agenda...

And where have you seen any conservative here accept everything a "republican" candidate says or endorses?

Romney as the only other choice a conservative had was far better than this so-called smartest, most transparent man to inhabit the Whitehouse.

You seem to have real difficulty in understanding the difference between a republican and conservative

[Guest]

But of course, under a recent Republican president the performance of the stock market was also noted as a prime indicator or the health of the economy...

Not by me. And not by any true conservatives that I know.

[Guest]

Originally Posted By: Ted Oplinger

Do not conflate being conservative with being "Republican".

I liked it too.. ! )

[Tom Wetmore]

Originally Posted By: Tom Wetmore

But of course, under a recent Republican president the performance of the stock market was also noted as a prime indicator or the health of the economy...

Not by me. And not by any true conservatives that I know.

No true Scotsman argument...

[phkrause]

No true Scotsman argument...

It is funny, because I remember when watching FoxNews back during the Bush years and the stock market was tanking, they were saying how that was no indication of the economy! And I totally agree with that. But yet now when watching FoxNews the first thing that's brought up is the stock market! When it goes down its because of the economy but when it goes up there's never a word of the economy. I'm definitely a believer that the stock market is not a good indicator of the economy.

[lazarus]

Interesting points Ted.

Do not conflate being conservative with being "Republican".

Every single "Conservative" runs as a Republican.

Every Republican says he believes in "Conservative" principles.

"Conservatives" donate millions of dollars to the Republican party.

"Conservative's" almost always vote Republican.

Pardon me if I conflate.

Quote:

The conservative 55% of this nation have no real voice representing them.

Where do you get that figure from? If the conservative movement is so large why is it so impotent.

Quote:

Political figures, Laz? Senators Rand Paul and Ted Cruz are two of such, whom the Republican establishment have not been able make subservient.

Problem is that Rand Paul will eventually do something that even "conservatives" don't like, much like his father.

Haven't really paid much attention to Ted Cruz to comment.

How about Rush, Hannity, Prager, Hewiit, Savage et al? Talk radio is dominated by conservatives. George Will? Krauthammer?

I really don't think the real challenge is the left. I think its corporatism. Corporations don't care about conservative or liberal. They will give money to any politician, group or organization that will do their bidding. The coup d'etat has already taken place. It was in slow motion but it has already happened. IMHO.

BTW: Somewhere you mentioned Reagan. I can't find what thread you posted comments about him. You know he would be "primaried" if he were running these days, right?

[OzarkWoman]

Every single "Conservative" runs as a Republican.

Every Republican says he believes in "Conservative" principles.

"Conservatives" donate millions of dollars to the Republican party.

"Conservative's" almost always vote Republican.

Not true to the whole mess above. You really don't know any true conservatives then. I am sorry that your generalizations are shown to be wrong. but maybe you had better learn what a conservative is before making them.

[lazarus]

Ok then.