Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : President Barack Obama -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RetiredNow who wrote (106783)	1/3/2012 2:31:10 PM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 149317

When will the media demand that Mitt Romney back up his claims about jobs? washingtonpost.com By Greg Sargent I don’t know how to be any clearer about this, but here goes. It is now beyond doubt that Mitt Romney will be resting his case against Obama on two core claims. The first: At Bain Capital, Romney created over 100,000 jobs, which proves he has the job-creation experience to turn the economy around. The second: Under the Obama presidency, the country has actually lost jobs, which proves his record is a failure. These claims are absolutely central to Romney’s entire rationale for runing for president. Is it too much to expect reporters and news outlets to scrutinize them or to ask him to substantiate them? The Romney campaign is triumphantly circulating a quote that Romney gave to Fox News today. Asked about the Dem criticism of his Bain years, Romney replied: “This is a president who lost more jobs during his tenure than any president since Hoover. This is 2 million jobs that he lost as President. And by the way, when he was overseeing General Motors and Chrysler, how many factories did he close? How many dealerships? How many thousands upon thousands of Americans had to be let go in an effort to try and save those businesses? That’s what we did in our business. And I’m very happy in my former life; we helped create over 100,000 new jobs. By the way, we created more jobs in Massachusetts than this president’s created in the entire country. So if the President wants to talk about jobs, and I hope he does, we’ll be comparing my record with his record and he comes up very, very short.” It’s obviously too much to expect Fox to challenge these claims. But Romney has made this assertion about 100,000 new jobs in various other settings, too. As Steve Benen noted, his Super PAC is also making a very similar claim in ads. And as far as I can tell, only two lonely fact checking operations — one at the Post, the other at FactCheck.org — have scrutinized it. They have found that the assertion is at best unsubstantiated and that there may have been more layoffs than jobs created by Bain; there’s no way to tell for sure. When will reporters push Romney on this? Meanwhile, Romney’s claim that two million jobs were lost under the Obama presidency is based on the idea that there’s been a net loss of jobs since he took office. In other words, Romney is taking into account the fact that the economy continued hemorraghing jobs at a furious rate after Obama took office — before Obama’s stimulus passed. But the figures show that once it became law, monthly job loss declined over time, and turned around in the spring of 2010, after which the private sector added jobs for over 20 straight months, totaling around 2.2 million of them. You can debate whether the stimulus underperformed. You can debate whether the stimulus is the reason the economy did add private sector jobs. You can argue that public sector jobs loss should be factored in. But it is not debatable to claim that the overall net jobs loss number Romney cites is a fair measure of the success or failure of Obama’s policies. At an absolute minimum, Romney should be pressed to explain why he’s claiming this net loss figure as an indictment of those policies, when many of those jobs were lost before the policies were implemented. When NBC, to its enormous credit, pressed Romney to justify his debunked claim that Obama made the economy “worse,” the network made big news by getting Romney to backtrack. These latest claims provide another opportunity to do the same, people. By Greg Sargent \| 12:20 PM ET, 01/03/2012

To: RetiredNow who wrote (106783)	1/3/2012 3:37:16 PM
From: bentway	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 149317

You'll never be happy with any president for the rest of your life. You let your imagined perfect be the enemy of the good. NONE of the scenarios you project will come to pass.

To: RetiredNow who wrote (106783)	1/3/2012 6:55:54 PM
From: koan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 149317

Romney has a sociopathic personality and cares about no one except the rich; and he is a pathological liar. He is so dangerous. He has said he would attack Iran. Where is you logic? Obama will never attack Iran. So you like Paul because he wants to pull the troops out, but would like Romney who would start a war with Iran; and then also you like Paul who would dismantle the depts of EPA, education and social security and medicare which the old people really need. Obama is 10/100 times as good as Romney and a zillion times as good as Paul. Boy, mindmeld, you are out there again-lol.