|

John Boehner falsely claims that every economist thinks spending cuts are the key to creating jobs

Is House Speaker John Boehner a liar?

THIS GUY says he is:

Contrary to Boehner’s spokesman’s claim that “every economist” agrees with the need for immediate cuts in government spending, there is an essentially limitless supply of economists on the left, on the right, and in between who argue the exact opposite. Nobel Prize-winning economists. Economists who have run the OMB and CBO and CEA and Treasury Department; economists who work at investment banks and elite universities. 

There is simply no conceivable way that John Boehner and his spokesman don’t know this. They must. They’re lying. And it’s a lie that has driven the nation’s economic strategy for two years, as policymakers and politicians in both parties have prioritized deficits over jobs, with negative consequences for both. Not only does a wide array of the nation’s most accomplished economists disagree with the Boehner approach, the actual results of that approach have shown it to be a failure.

Share:

21 Comments

  1. smarterthanyou

    I can’t believe that a blog associated with Media Matters criticizes a republican. Here are 49 lies told by your master King Obama:
    http://www.politifact.com/personalities/barack-obama/statements/byruling/false/

    I guess you forgot to mention President Liar in your article. Just because someone writes it on the internet does not make it worth plagiarizing.

  2. I thought the article was about Boehner. I must have mis-read it.

  3. Like Pat’s claim that Obama graduated with honors from two (key word is TWO) Ivy League colleges.
    Prove it!

  4. Wait the quote from the link “As every economist and every rating agency has made clear, getting our deficit under control is the first step to help get our economy growing again and to create jobs,” said Michael Steel, spokesman for Boehner.

    So a spokesman misspoke which you misleadingly attribute to Boehner claiming in your headline leading one to believe it is a quote directly from Boehner.

    Change the headline to read, Pat Cunningham falsely claims that Boehner claims that every economist thinks spending cuts are the key to creating jobs.

  5. smarterthanyou (a misnomer if there ever was one): This is the second time you’ve falsely accused me of plagiarism.

    When I link to an article, it is NOT plagiarism.

    Plagiarism is defined as “the practice of taking someone else’s work or ideas and passing them off as one’s own.”

    Clearly, the article to which I linked and from which I quoted was not passed off as my own work.

    You are really a dimwit.

  6. Terry C

    Pat’s line-

    “Is House Speaker John Boehner a liar”?

    I think we can logically assume that since he is a successful politician, then of course he is a liar. Pat should have followed this with: “Is (fill in the blank with the name of any politician higher than the level of dog catcher) a liar”?

  7. Wilson: Two things:

    1) Are you saying that Boehner should fire his spokesman for a misstatement? It’s been four days since his spokesman made that statement, and Boehner has not disowned it or corrected it. He either believes that nonsense himself or he’s a liar.

    2) I stand corrected with regard to Obama’s graduate honors. He graduated from Columbia without honors, but he also graduated Magna Cum Laude from Harvard Law School.

    It seems to bug you that this black guy is so well-educated.

  8. Terry C

    “It seems to bug you that this black guy is so well-educated”.

    Actually, Pat, he’s not black (or white, for that matter, even though he was raised by white people for 90% of his youth). He’s a mulatto.

    mu•lat•to
    noun
    \mə-ˈla-(ˌ)tō, mu̇-, myu̇-, -ˈlä-\
    plural mu•lat•toes or mu•lat•tos
    Definition of MULATTO
    1
    : the first-generation offspring of a black person and a white person
    2
    : a person of mixed white and black ancestry

    http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mulatto

  9. Not at all it bugs me when you make things up, which you have a propensity for doing.
    You seem to want to infer that anyone who differs with your opinions and our Presidents political philosophy as racist.

    1). So are you advocating his removal for a misstatement that wasn’t racial or incites violence and basically harmless? If so, then why aren’t you advocating the firing of Ed Shultz, or those Democratic operatives that wanted to Kill Romney?

    He probably should have said a majority, I think it is 56%, so what?

    Let’s see the new budget plan you told me about like 5 months ago that never appeared after I pointed out the President’s budget didn’t get one vote.

  10. Wilson: Your claim that I “seem to want to infer that anyone who differs with your [my] opinions and our Presidents [sic] political philosophy as racist” is utterly preposterous.

    Thousands upon thousands of commenters here have differed with my opinions and with Obama’s political philosophy without my accusing them of racism.

    In this case, I merely suggested that it “seems to bug you that this black guy [or mulatto, as Terry C. would have it] is so well-educated.” And it DOES seem to bug you.

    By the way, I suspect that you’re using the word “infer” incorrectly. The speaker or writer “implies.” The listener or reader “infers.” Of course, the speaker or writer usually bases his implication on an inference, but I don’t think that’s what you meant.

    Now that your grammar lesson is over, sit up straight, take the gum out of your mouth and behave yourself.

  11. Why would you say it bugs me? What proof do you have? There you go again making things up. When I ask a legitimate question and you IMPLY I am a racist.
    I thought this was about Boehner, not my lack of education from district 205.

  12. I have an and that shouldn’t be there..so jump on that

  13. Wilson: “District 205″? What does that have to do with anything?

    And I said it SEEMS to bug you. Why else would you get your undies in a bunch over Obama’s education?

    Oh, by the way, you’re a bit hyocritical with your umbrage at what you see as my implication that you’re a racist. I seem to recall a comment from you in which you suggested that “many (not all) progressives are subconsciously racist to a degree.”

    Anyway, I’m tired of arguing with you about this crap.

  14. Wilson: One last thing:

    Twice today (in this thread and another one), you’ve implied that I’m a product of School District 205.

    I’ve never attended any schools in Rockford, public or private. In fact, I’ve never attended any public schools anywhere.

    In other words, you just conjured that assumption out of thin air.

    Again, is there any wonder why you find Glenn Beck “informative”?

    CORRECTION: I attended kindergarten at a public school in 1947, but not in Rockford. Thereafter, my education (grade school, high school and college) was only in private institutions.

  15. Yea, if I was wrong I’d give it up too.
    I assume I won’t hear any criticism of Perry or Bachman or Romney’s education from you.

    To a degree in what context? I recall a few things you have said, which you later retracted\removed.

  16. Wilson: Still one more thing:

    None of your ranting and raving here has anything to do with the contention by John Boehner and/or his spokesman that “every economist” subscribes to his theory that spending cuts create jobs.

    The claim by the speaker’s office in that regard is demonstrably false, as the article to which I linked (or from which I plagiarized, as the pinhead at the top of this thread would argue) makes amply clear.

    You don’t defend Boehner’s office on the central point of this post, because their position is indefensible. Instead, you go off on irrelevant tangents.

    And don’t bother arguing whether spending cuts do or don’t create jobs. Again, that’s not the point. What this is about is the utter falsehood that “every economist” agrees with Boehner on that point.

  17. Mr. Indignant!

    It’s so cute to see you play your silly political games.

    How about the “utter falsehood” that has been oft repeated by the President of the United States?

    You know the one where he says he wants to raise taxes on millionaires and billionaires and yet somehow the few plans he has introduced are raising taxes on families making 250,000 a year?

    He is either a liar or stupid and he ain’t stupid…..

  18. doc (or cod, as per your new name): You, too, apparently have nothing to say about the crapola peddled by Boehner’s office. So you, like Wilson, belabor irrelevancies.

    Incidentally, Obama has always been clear about raising taxes on those making more than 250k a year — which, of course, includes millionaires and billionaires.

    Where did you get this crazy notion that Obama has lied about that stuff? His intentions have been reported over and over and over again. Are you really that dumb? (Don’t answer that question. In fact, don’t say anything if you can’t defend the claim by Boehner’s office that “every economist” agrees with him on spending cuts and jobs. Cue the crickets.)

  19. Obama has been so clear that he promised “no new taxes” on those making more than 250,000 a year repeatedly. Even allowing that the new healthcare mandate is not a tax he is now repeatedly talking (only obliquely) about raising income tax rates on those families too.

    Now who’s a liar?

  20. doc: Have you gone completely bonkers? Your claim that Obama “promised ‘no new taxes’ on those making more than 250,000 a year repeatedly” is just plain false.

    The Internet is rife with tens of thousands of articles about Obama’s call for higher taxes on people making more than $250k.

    Here’s one from six weeks into his presidency, referring to “President Barack Obama’s tax proposal — which promises to increase taxes for those families with incomes of $250,000 or more…”:

    http://abcnews.go.com/Business/Economy/story?id=6975547&page=1

    Here’s one from five months before Obama was elected, which says Obama “favors allowing the tax cuts to expire as scheduled for Americans earning more than $250,000 a year”:

    http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/06/mccain_vs_obama_on_taxes.html

    Your hatred of Obama is so pathological that you claim he has said the exact opposite of what he actually said. And you call him a liar to boot.

    You need professional help, doc.

  21. I don’t hate Obama at all. Not one iota. In fact I would love to play golf with him someday.

    I just disagree with some of his politics and policies. I know for a liberal that means hate but that isn’t my fault.

    In this case you are right and I am wrong. The millions vs hundreds of thousands thing has me all confused.

    I am sure you would be willing to acknowledge that candidte Obama did firmly promise not to raise taxes on any family making less than 250,000 per year and he has broken that promise repeatedly. See how easy it is to get confused?

    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/promise/515/no-family-making-less-250000-will-see-any-form-tax/

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

CAPTCHA Image

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>