Obama's Re-Election Case Rests On 5 Phony Claims

By JOHN MERLINE, INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY Posted 10/03/2012 05:06 PM ET

In making his case for re-election in the face of historically high unemployment and sluggish growth, President Obama has a simple and straightforward argument.

But each part of Obama's argument is based on claims that are not accurate:

• Bush tax cuts and deregulation caused the recession.
• I stopped a second Great Depression.
• My policies are working.
• A slow recovery was inevitable.
• Nobody could have done any better.

To get a sense of how dismal Obama's recovery has been, consider this: Since World War II, there have been 10 recoveries before Obama's. Had Obama's merely performed as well the average of all those recoveries, the nation's GDP would be a staggering $1.2 trillion bigger than it is today, and 7.9 million more people would have jobs.

Read More At IBD: http://news.investors.com/100312-627990-presidents-case-for-re-election-rests-on-five-claims-all-phony.aspx#ixzz28lBdRUpj

:can't hear Liberals: don't bother introducing facts, he is our messiah. We have given up on Christ and replaced him with our own prophet.

One mother, multiple fathers.
Incomplete history growing up.
Then makes one speech and is chosen.

otisptoadwater wrote: In making his case for re-election in the face of historically high unemployment and sluggish growth, President Obama has a simple and straightforward argument.

But each part of Obama's argument is based on claims that are not accurate:

• Bush tax cuts and deregulation caused the recession.
• I stopped a second Great Depression.
• My policies are working.
• A slow recovery was inevitable.
• Nobody could have done any better.

To get a sense of how dismal Obama's recovery has been, consider this: Since World War II, there have been 10 recoveries before Obama's. Had Obama's merely performed as well the average of all those recoveries, the nation's GDP would be a staggering $1.2 trillion bigger than it is today, and 7.9 million more people would have jobs.

Read More At IBD: http://news.investors.com/100312-627990-presidents-case-for-re-election-rests-on-five-claims-all-phony.aspx#ixzz28lBdRUpj

I read the link and it's a pretty good opinion piece, IMO. Good points made. If anyone from the Obama side cares to read it, I'd be interested in hearing their specific thoughts on it.

pineinthegrass wrote:

otisptoadwater wrote: In making his case for re-election in the face of historically high unemployment and sluggish growth, President Obama has a simple and straightforward argument.

But each part of Obama's argument is based on claims that are not accurate:

• Bush tax cuts and deregulation caused the recession.
• I stopped a second Great Depression.
• My policies are working.
• A slow recovery was inevitable.
• Nobody could have done any better.

To get a sense of how dismal Obama's recovery has been, consider this: Since World War II, there have been 10 recoveries before Obama's. Had Obama's merely performed as well the average of all those recoveries, the nation's GDP would be a staggering $1.2 trillion bigger than it is today, and 7.9 million more people would have jobs.

Read More At IBD: http://news.investors.com/100312-627990-presidents-case-for-re-election-rests-on-five-claims-all-phony.aspx#ixzz28lBdRUpj

I read the link and it's a pretty good opinion piece, IMO. Good points made. If anyone from the Obama side cares to read it, I'd be interested in hearing their specific thoughts on it.

Those 5 lies would be hard to argue... I hope someone here tries (not holding my breath).

pineinthegrass wrote: [If anyone from the Obama side cares to read it, I'd be interested in hearing their specific thoughts on it.

I ould be interested in seeing pigs fly but it's not going to happen. rofllol

Blazer Bob wrote:

pineinthegrass wrote: [If anyone from the Obama side cares to read it, I'd be interested in hearing their specific thoughts on it.

I would be interested in seeing pigs fly but it's not going to happen. rofllol

Pigs can fly, but they have an extremely short and very ballistic glide slope. Perhaps under ideal conditions a very flatulent pig could take flight from a standing start with a proper ignition source and a little effort to expel some gas...

I'm fairly confident that one of the left wing wienies that posts here will proclaim the referenced site and post are biased and/or simply reject the information as false because it is anti-Obama - no research required, facts be damned, just deny, deny, deny.

otisptoadwater wrote:

Blazer Bob wrote:

pineinthegrass wrote: [If anyone from the Obama side cares to read it, I'd be interested in hearing their specific thoughts on it.

I would be interested in seeing pigs fly but it's not going to happen. rofllol

I'm fairly confident that one of the left wing wienies that posts here will proclaim the referenced site and post are biased and/or simply reject the information as false because it is anti-Obama - no research required, facts be damned, just deny, deny, deny.

You're wrong, they won't touch this with a ten foot pole because none of it can be blamed on Bush or Romney.

Gee, I believe Merline's case about as much as you guys believe the "jobs numbers truthers"...

Yes, "opinion piece" pretty much sums it up...

Democracy4Sale wrote: Gee, I believe Merline's case about as much as you guys believe the "jobs numbers truthers"...

Yes, "opinion piece" pretty much sums it up...

Case in point; anything that is anti-Obama, anti-liberal, and/or otherwise objectionable to the left is automatically dismissed as not true.

Just following your lead: Anything that is anti-Romney, anti-conservative and/or otherwise objectionable to the right is automatically dismissed as not true.

Case in point: the polls (unless they show Romney ahead), the unemployment figures, the jobs numbers, Obama's citizenship, Obama's religion.