Do WaPo editors read their own newspaper?

posted at 11:21 am on May 29, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Newspapers and other media sources insist that their mission is to keep Americans well-informed and cognizant of the facts.  Those tasks fall to editors, who are supposed to exercise discretion and judgment on articles that appear in their publication.  The Washington Post even employs a well-read fact checker, Glenn Kessler, who receives both praise and scorn from both sides depending on whose ox he’s goring at the moment, but one in whom the editors apparently have confidence.

That brings us to today’s column from Eugene Robinson.  Robinson picks up on a MarketWatch report to accuse Mitt Romney of “lies” in his campaigning and of distorting the truth:

There are those who tell the truth. There are those who distort the truth. And then there’s Mitt Romney.

Every political campaign exaggerates and dissembles. This practice may not be admirable — it’s surely one reason so many Americans are disenchanted with politics — but it’s something we’ve all come to expect. Candidates claim the right to make any boast or accusation as long as there’s a kernel of veracity in there somewhere.

Even by this lax standard, Romney too often fails. Not to put too fine a point on it, he lies. Quite a bit.

“Since President Obama assumed office three years ago, federal spending has accelerated at a pace without precedent in recent history,” Romney claims on his campaign Web site. This is utterly false. The truth is that spending has slowed markedly under Obama.

An analysis published last week by MarketWatch, a financial news Web site owned by Dow Jones & Co., compared the yearly growth of federal spending under presidents going back to Ronald Reagan. Citing figures from the Office of Management and Budget and the Congressional Budget Office, MarketWatch concluded that “there has been no huge increase in spending under the current president, despite what you hear.”

Now, this statement sounds pretty strong, only … the same newspaper that published it today debunked that claim last week.  Glenn Kessler gave the Obama campaign three Pinocchios for adopting MarketWatch’s flawed analysis:

Under these figures, and using this calculator, with 2008 as the base year and ending with 2012, the compound annual growth rate for Obama’s spending starting in 2009 is 5.2 percent.  Starting in 2010 — Nutting’s first year — and ending with 2013, the annual growth rate is 3.3 percent. (Nutting had calculated the result as 1.4 percent.)

Of course, it takes two to tangle — a president and a Congress. Obama’s numbers get even higher if you look at what he proposed to spend, using CBO’s estimates of his budgets:

2012: $3.71 trillion (versus $3.65 trillion enacted)

2011: $3.80 trillion (versus $3.60 trillion enacted)

2010: $3.67 trillion (versus $3.46 trillion enacted)

So in every case, the president wanted to spend more money than he ended up getting. Nutting suggests that federal spending flattened under Obama, but another way to look at it is that it flattened at a much higher, post-emergency level — thanks in part to the efforts of lawmakers, not Obama. …

In the post-war era, federal spending as a percentage of the U.S. economy has hovered around 20 percent, give or take a couple of percentage points. Under Obama, it has hit highs not seen since the end of World War II — completely the opposite of the point asserted by Carney.

Kessler wasn’t alone, either.  The Associated Press ripped claims from the Obama White House on spending a couple of days later.  So did Jake Tapper of ABC News.  But it’s the complete disregard for the Post’s own analysis that is so stunning in the decision to publish Robinson’s column.  Robinson does mention one fact checker, but it’s not Kessler, who dismantled MarketWatch’s analysis; it’s from PolitiFact, which has been roundly criticized for its “Mostly True” score on this point. It’s as if Kessler doesn’t exist at all at the Washington Post, which Kessler himself must find either amusing or somewhat disturbing this morning.

In that light, Robinson’s column looks like an exercise in projection.  Robinson calls Romney a liar, and then offers this amusing accusation as well:

[Romney] seems to believe voters are too dumb to discover what the facts really are — or too jaded to care.

On both counts, I disagree.

Maybe Romney thinks that certain columnists are too dumb to discover what the facts really are on their own, or are too partisan to care.  On both counts, at least in regard to Robinson, Romney would be correct in thinking so.  It’s at least the most glaring example of projection in the media in quite some time.

The larger question remains, though: do Washington Post editors read their own newspaper?  If so, how did they approve a column with claims which their own analyst had already proven false?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Hey Eugene, while your in there do you mind checking Obama’s prostate?

Kataklysmic on May 29, 2012 at 11:27 AM

*you’re

Kataklysmic on May 29, 2012 at 11:27 AM

Do WaPo editors read their own newspaper?

Better question, do they read at all?

America’s established Fourth Estate needs to be foreclosed and soon…and replaced by a more competent entity…us, the people.

coldwarrior on May 29, 2012 at 11:29 AM

And this surprises who? Oh, you thought . . ., nnnnno.

FineasFinn on May 29, 2012 at 11:30 AM

The ONLY thing that matters for Eugene is the skin color..

hillsoftx on May 29, 2012 at 11:32 AM

Better question, do they read at all?

coldwarrior on May 29, 2012 at 11:29 AM

Yes.

The problem is, all they read are the white house talking points.

Rebar on May 29, 2012 at 11:32 AM

Hay, hey, hey, there the Washington Post pays Mr. Robinson a lot of money to write this gibberish. It is a consistent story line….Obama and Democrats good and Republicans bad…Facts be damned….

DVPTexFla on May 29, 2012 at 11:33 AM

The real scandal is how TARP in 2008 and the stimulus in 2009 became part of the baseline budget.

This is ridiculous. They were supposed to be one off stopgap spending measures which became the new starting point to make further budgets from.

The Democrats took Congress in Jan 2007, check the Spending BEFORE and AFTER this happened and you will know which party is the economic catastrophe.

DavidM on May 29, 2012 at 11:34 AM

Do WaPo editors read their own newspaper?

Better question, do they read at all?

America’s established Fourth Estate needs to be foreclosed and soon…and replaced by a more competent entity…us, the people.

coldwarrior on May 29, 2012 at 11:29 AM

America no longer has a Fourth Estate, it was subverted by Marxist ideologues decades ago and is now a full on Fifth Column Treasonous Media Complex.

SWalker on May 29, 2012 at 11:34 AM

The only thing that matters to the raciest Eugene is skin color. Thus this article.

Becuase he and Obama share the same skin tone Eugene will play the partisan hack until he knees wear off his legs

Skwor on May 29, 2012 at 11:36 AM

What a dilemma – is ol’ Eugene is channeling Baghdad Bob, Charlie Sheen or the Black Knight from the Holy Grail?

So many ‘winners’, so little time.

NeoDawg on May 29, 2012 at 11:36 AM

bah racist not raciest

Skwor on May 29, 2012 at 11:36 AM

Let’s learn by example and go sit on his front lawn.

ultracon on May 29, 2012 at 11:37 AM

Do WaPo editors read their own newspaper?

silly rabbit

cmsinaz on May 29, 2012 at 11:38 AM

Citing figures from the Office of Management and Budget and the Congressional Budget Office, MarketWatch concluded that “there has been no huge increase in spending under the current president, despite what you hear.”

.
There’s a reason Rex’s last name is Nutting. He is aptly named. To add fuel to the moniker, Rex means “king” in Latin, so this roundly debunked financial columnist is literally “King Nutting.” Cute, huh?

ExpressoBold on May 29, 2012 at 11:41 AM

Yeah, but didn’t Michelle plant some real nice arugula?

kirkill on May 29, 2012 at 11:41 AM

Do WaPo editors read their own newspaper?

That rag? They have better things to do with their time.

CJ on May 29, 2012 at 11:41 AM

If so, how did they approve a column with claims which their own analyst had already proven false?

that’s a great question, Ed. I’m going to conjecture that Eugene Robinson’s columns wither as much scrutiny at the WaPo as Liz Warren’s cheekbones did at Harvard.

Maybe Eugenie’s mother told him that his column was great….?/

theories.

ted c on May 29, 2012 at 11:42 AM

[Robinson] seems to believe Washington Post readers are too dumb to discover what the facts really are — or too jaded to care.

On both counts, I agree.

Fixed for reality

MNHawk on May 29, 2012 at 11:42 AM

More evidence that Robinson’s writing sucks. The WaPo doesn’t even read it.

turfmann on May 29, 2012 at 11:47 AM

Robinson is not readable. The WaPo editors show good taste. He is not there for his genius.

That said, Robinson seems to have no acquaintance with the world at large. I can often get three paragraphs into Dionne, but rarely past one for Robinson.

Blagden Alley on May 29, 2012 at 11:49 AM

There are few things more entertaining in life than Eugene Robinson when he discusses fiscal policy. For comedy’s sake, let’s hope he never finds his way into a remedial math class.

http://www.fiscalwars.wordpress.com

stout77 on May 29, 2012 at 11:50 AM

Dear leader,

Whatever lie you tell, I’ll swear to.

Your pal,
Eugene

antipc on May 29, 2012 at 11:52 AM

Yeah projection. Eugene Robinson is truly dumb. The editors, dumb. I would like to hear them backtrack on this one.

jake49 on May 29, 2012 at 11:53 AM

More lies from Eugenius.

I.

Am.

Shocked.

pain train on May 29, 2012 at 11:56 AM

Just to think that we are just one simple regulation away from being forced to read WaPo and NYT, in absence of any alternative news sources…

Archivarix on May 29, 2012 at 11:56 AM

Here is the tweet I sent to him: “@Eugene_Robinson Mr. Robinson, the Washington Post http://goo.gl/MxaE3. Washington Post, Mr. Robinson. Thought you two should meet.”

Zaggs on May 29, 2012 at 11:57 AM

They need to start publishing these love letters to Obama in the section with the horoscopes and Dear Abby. They have about the same substance and intelligence quotient.

waterytart on May 29, 2012 at 11:57 AM

May their own words ensnare them.

AubieJon on May 29, 2012 at 12:00 PM

The larger question remains, though: do Washington Post editors read their own newspaper? If so, how did they approve a column with claims which their own analyst had already proven false?

How is any intelligent person supposed to take a paper seriously that announces conclusions like this:

….True but False.

The MSM’s activism has rendered it stupid and irrelevant.

Baxter Greene on May 29, 2012 at 12:01 PM

Mr Morrissey appears to have no clue that there are different departments within newspapers and that there is little attempt to have a cohesive whole. OR that most papers run newswire crap from the AP with little or no content alteration and often with headlines that grossly distort the content of the article.

rayra on May 29, 2012 at 12:01 PM

do Washington Post editors read their own newspaper? If so, how did they approve a column with claims which their own analyst had already proven false?

Obama is still claiming it is true on the campaign trail. Who do you think the WaPo works for?

Happy Nomad on May 29, 2012 at 12:02 PM

I am getting so tired of this garbage. Just tired of it.

Voter from WA State on May 29, 2012 at 11:24 AM

Yeah, it does get very tiresome. Liberals spout the same mantras over and over again. Their talking point almost write themselves. Hmmmm… maybe they just copy and paste, copy and paste….

chai on May 29, 2012 at 12:02 PM

They need to start publishing these love letters to Obama in the section with the horoscopes and Dear Abby. They have about the same substance and intelligence quotient.

waterytart on May 29, 2012 at 11:57 AM

Dear Abby and the Washington Post Astrologer have had their attorneys forward this letter of intent to sue for Libel as they feel that any suggesting that Eugene Robinson constitutes an equal degree of substance or Intellectual prowess to them constitutes a vicious and malevolent attack on their creditability…

SWalker on May 29, 2012 at 12:03 PM

“Since George W. Bush became president, the Republican Party has presided over massive, out-of-control government spending, converted a federal budget surplus into a half-trillion-dollar deficit, and looked the other way while Wall Street’s greed and stupidity turned the hallowed free market into scorched earth.”

Eugene Robinson, 2008

Bad things in 2008 = good things in 2012.

How does Eugene feel about the 2,500-page Dodd-Frank bill that cancels itself out with a loophole that may well have been written by JP Morgan?

stout77 on May 29, 2012 at 12:03 PM

FYI, the MarketWatch link included in the post above goes to a page that contains the Rex Nutting’s “Pinocchios and projection” commentary, but does not include readers’ comments.

A better link, which includes readers’ comments, is:

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/obama-spending-binge-never-happened-2012-05-22

ITguy on May 29, 2012 at 12:03 PM

This is why it’s pointless to argue with a Democrat.

Democrat institutions spend millions manufacturing utter lies in order to support their inane and corrupt policies.

Democrats present these fabrications as “facts” and slander you as ignorant if you refuse to accept them.

It’s utterly pointless to listen to a Democrat or to engage them in conversation. Their concept of the “truth” is whatever it takes to push their ideas.

NoDonkey on May 29, 2012 at 12:04 PM

Testing, 1, 2, 3, 4.

ITguy on May 29, 2012 at 12:05 PM

I’ve got a comment hung up in moderation for some reason.

ITguy on May 29, 2012 at 12:06 PM

They need to start publishing these love letters to Obama in the section with the horoscopes and Dear Abby

I haven’t read the Post in quite a while, so I’m not sure if they still carry ads for the kind of business that Robinson’s running on behalf of Obama here…

JEM on May 29, 2012 at 12:06 PM

A better link to Rex Nutting’s commentary (a link that includes readers’ comments) is:

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/obama-spending-binge-never-happened-2012-05-22

ITguy on May 29, 2012 at 12:07 PM

How does Eugenics Robinson feel about taxpayer funds being used to fund Planned Parenthood?

stout77 on May 29, 2012 at 12:07 PM

How does Eugenics Robinson feel about taxpayer funds being used to fund Planned Parenthood?

stout77 on May 29, 2012 at 12:07 PM

Obviously he wouldn’t want anyone to be punished with a baby…

SWalker on May 29, 2012 at 12:09 PM

The hubris of calling Romney a liar is astounding. If Romney’s pants are on fire, Dear Leader Obama’s are the hottest blazing objects in the universe.

Jurisprudence on May 29, 2012 at 12:10 PM

Do WaPo editors read their own newspaper?

No, but honestly, can you really blame them?

RINO in Name Only on May 29, 2012 at 12:13 PM

SWalker on May 29, 2012 at 12:03 PM

LOL!

waterytart on May 29, 2012 at 12:15 PM

The Dems know that they won in 2006 and 2008 because they were successful in fooling enough voters into believing that Democrats are the more fiscally disciplined party.

The Dems know that they lost in 2010 because voters believed that Republicans are the more fiscally disciplined party.

The Dems know that their only hope of winning in 2012 is to once again fool enough voters into believing that Democrats are the more fiscally disciplined party.

So, the Dems dishonestly blame ALL of FY 2008 and 2009 on Bush, even though it was Pelosi and Reid in the driver’s seat that whole time, and a majority of the FY 2009 spending was signed by Obama, not Bush (just one example: Cash for Clunkers). Then, after dishonestly blaming Bush for sending spending through the roof, the Dems act like maintaining that high spending level is actually a good thing… because they didn’t INCREASE it much!

ITguy on May 29, 2012 at 12:16 PM

A columnist basing his argument on contested statistics? I await your criticism of conservative columnists engaged in similar behavior. No breathholding.

plewis on May 29, 2012 at 12:17 PM

For those who have seen this a hundred times, I apologize, but this needs to be said over and over to reach those who might be seeing it for the first time…

===========================================

What Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats promised in 2006 in order to win the 2006 elections and control of Congress:

Over the past decade, the Republican controlled Congress took our nation in the wrong direction. Too many Americans are paying a heavy price for those wrong choices: record costs for energy, health care and education; jobs shipped overseas; and budgets that heap record debt on our children. For millions, the middle-class dream has been replaced by a middle-class squeeze…

Democrats are proposing a New Direction for America…

With integrity, civility and fiscal discipline, our New Direction for America will use commonsense principles to address the aspirations and fulfill the hopes and dreams of all Americans. That is our promise to the American people….

Our federal budget should be a statement of our national values. One of those values is responsibility. Democrats are committed to ending years of irresponsible budget policies that have produced historic deficits. Instead of piling trillions of dollars of debt onto our children and grandchildren, we will restore “Pay As You Go” budget discipline.

Budget discipline has been abandoned by the Bush Administration and its Republican congressional majorities. Congress under Republican control has turned a projected $5.6 trillion 10-year surplus at the end of the Clinton years into a nearly $3 trillion deficit– including the four worst deficits in the history of America. The nation’s debt ceiling has been raised four times in just five years to more than $8.9 trillion. Nearly half of our nation’s record debt is owned by foreign countries including China and Japan. Without a return to fiscal discipline, the foreign countries that make our computers, our clothing and our toys will soon be making our foreign policy. Deficit spending is not just a fiscal problem – it’s a national security issue as well.

Our New Direction is committed to “Pay As You Go” budgeting – no more deficit spending.

What Nancy Pelosi promised on January 4, 2007 when she became Speaker of the House:

After years of historic deficits, this 110th Congress will commit itself to a higher standard: pay-as-you-go, no new deficit spending. Our new America will provide unlimited opportunity for future generations, not burden them with mountains of debt.

- New Speaker Nancy Pelosi, 01/04/2007

Nancy Pelosi was Speaker of the House from January 4, 2007 to January 3, 2011.

How much new debt was created during her 4 years as speaker?
Over $5.3 TRILLION!

Go to Debt to the Penny, and search on the period 1/4/2007 – 1/3/2011.
01/03/2011 $13,997,932,781,828.89
- 01/04/2007 $8,670,596,242,973.04
———————————————–
$5,327,336,538,855.85

Pelosi and the Democrats promised

Instead of piling trillions of dollars of debt onto our children and grandchildren, we will restore “Pay As You Go” budget discipline… no more deficit spending.

And what did they deliver?

In just 4 short years as Speaker, Pelosi added over $5.3 TRILLION in new debt, increasing the total national debt by over 60% in just 4 short years.

And it didn’t end there. Democrats still control the Senate and the Presidency. And therefore, Democrats still have majority control over the budgeting and spending process.

The most recent debt numbers are:
05/15/2012 $15,716,115,612,805.06
- 01/04/2007 $8,670,596,242,973.04
———————————————–
$7,045,519,369,832.02

The 5 worst fiscal year deficits in the history of this country have ALL come at the hands of a Democratic majority in Washington, D.C. after they promised “no more deficit spending”!

Democrats have increased the total national debt by over $7 TRILLION after they promised “no more deficit spending”!

They are LIARS and cannot be trusted.

They promised fiscal discipline and “no more deficit spending”, but have increased the total national debt from $8.67 Trillion to over $15.71 Trillion (an increase of over 81%) in less than 5 and a half years. And they haven’t passed a budget in over 3 years.

Any voter who wants fiscal sanity MUST vote Republican in November.

To vote for a Democrat and expect fiscal discipline is INSANE (doing the same thing over and over, expecting a different result).

ITguy on May 16, 2012 at 7:03 PM

ITguy on May 29, 2012 at 12:22 PM

“Pinocchios and projection”

A consise, elegant, and accurate definition of today’s Democrat Party.

ITguy on May 29, 2012 at 12:25 PM

Robinson is a partisan hack. He has no redeeming values at all. Let us reflect on his Santorum attack;
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2012/01/05/partisan-politics-santorum-stillborn-baby/
“The second point is the casual cruelty of Robinson and those like him. Robinson seems completely comfortable lampooning a man and his wife who had experienced the worst possible nightmare for parents: the death of their child. “

pat on May 29, 2012 at 12:25 PM

Eugene Robinson is the south end of a northbound horse…

Khun Joe on May 29, 2012 at 12:28 PM

The larger question remains, though: do Washington Post editors read their own newspaper? If so, how did they approve a column with claims which their own analyst had already proven false?

Why on earth would you expect a few incovenient facts to change the worldview of a liberal rag like WaPo?

You know better than all of us that they always retreat back to ideology when threatened.

Tim_CA on May 29, 2012 at 12:30 PM

The Democrats did everything they could to maximize outlays in FY 2009, knowing full well that they would blame it all on Bush and then use that astronomical spending level as their new baseline.

Is it honest to blame Bush for bills that were passed by the Pelosi House, Reid Senate, and signed by OBAMA?!?!?

No, it’s highly dishonest to do so. Yet that is exactly what they are doing when they blame FY 2009 spending on Bush.

Who signed the Omnibus Appropriations Act for FY 2009 on March 11, 2009?

Who signed the Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2009 (which included “Cash for Clunkers”) on June 24, 2009?

Hint: (it WASN’T Bush!)

ITguy on May 29, 2012 at 12:31 PM

A columnist basing his argument on contested statistics? I await your criticism of conservative columnists engaged in similar behavior. No breathholding.

plewis on May 29, 2012 at 12:17 PM

“contested statistics” = demonstrable lies that leftards want to push to cover the abject failure of their ideas.

No breathholding

Breathe easy with an 0bama “breathalyzer”.

Dr. Carlo Lombardi on May 29, 2012 at 12:32 PM

No breathholding.

plewis on May 29, 2012 at 12:17 PM

.
Then you must already be purple…. HA HA HA
.
Seriously, you must be a selective reader of this blog if you think Mitt Romney has carte blanche among conservative readers here and, while there are exceptions, you would be hard pressed to serve up even one liberal opinion writer who didn’t react with emotion and partisan ideology in place of rational thought to conservative ideas and principles.
.
Differences of opinion can exist among reasonable people but if think the likes of Robinson, Blow, Markos Moulitsas and their ilk are reasonable after some of the proven incendiaries of the ideological left, you are too far gone to even contemplate. Øbama is the worst, most divisive, most protected of all AA hires and WaPoo and NYT writers and editors continue to protect him for fear of being called “racist” (and since the Time cover, homophobe and sexist).

ExpressoBold on May 29, 2012 at 12:33 PM

Democrat rule-book – “repeat a lie often enough and it will become accepted as the truth.”

Jay Mac on May 29, 2012 at 12:34 PM

…Eugene Robinson’s nose isn’t nearly long enough!
He should be able to pole vault with it!…Bigot!

KOOLAID2 on May 29, 2012 at 12:36 PM

“Pinocchios and projection”

Democrats aren’t just lying (Pinocchios), they are pointing at those who expose the truth and calling them liars (projection).

ITguy on May 29, 2012 at 12:49 PM

At what degree of incompetance does WaPo get rid of Eugene? Are we there yet?

In baseball, a pitcher making this egegious a mistake goes back to the minors or is released. What does a newspaper do? Certainly, they don’t continue to publish the columnist after a piece like this one. Right?

MTF on May 29, 2012 at 1:01 PM

What I don’t understand is – Can you name one major media outlet that is doing better now than they were 4 years ago? Carrying water for Obi and the progs has not made them money that I can see. So why give away the advertizing when Obi PACs can and should be paying for it?

I just don’t get it!

koaiko on May 29, 2012 at 1:03 PM

How does Eugenics Robinson feel about taxpayer funds being used to fund Planned Parenthood?

stout77 on May 29, 2012 at 12:07 PM

Obviously he wouldn’t want anyone to be punished with a baby…

SWalker on May 29, 2012 at 12:09 PM

The horror, the horror.

I love the liberal approach to “choice”. If your choice turn out to be a bad one someone else will have their freedom of choice infringed upon to correct it. Freedom is slavery – see how that works? Liberalism, with no moral constitution, has degenerated into one big circular reference in which any behavior or activity can not only be justified but also be rationalized into somehow being always morally superior. Whatever the particular activity or behavior, it is morally superior simply by virtue of being practiced primarily by people who describe themselves as liberal. Do what feels good first and foremost; plug it into the circular reference machine and voila – we can all do whatever we want when we want as long as we use the right words in public. The path of no resistance is rather seductive isn’t it?

http://www.fiscalwars.wordpress.com

stout77 on May 29, 2012 at 1:06 PM

NEVER knew Robinson would dare PLAGIARIZE STUPID!

JayMac1 on May 29, 2012 at 1:19 PM

Eugene Robinson is an inferior writer and an inferior mind. You can find these sort of fundamental distortions and errors in every single column he’s written.

Of course, he is only a small part of the reason the paper lost on average over 7% of its circulation and 17.5% of its advertising revenue since 2011, and why it lost over $22 million in the first quarter of this year, but he is a part of it.

Adjoran on May 29, 2012 at 1:30 PM

Eugene Robinson is Charles Blow’s twin ‘brother’.

Schadenfreude on May 29, 2012 at 1:36 PM

In answer to the question: no? Why would they? It’s not an actual newspaper anymore. WaPo is a nothing but a propaganda rag for the DNC/Socialists.

dogsoldier on May 29, 2012 at 1:42 PM

Hmmm. Eugene Robinson is clearly an Obama propagandist.

He’s also a proven hypocrite – he’s the guy a few years back who used his gun to shoot an intruder to his DC home. Meanwhile, he was using his WaPo-provided soapbox to speak out against gun owners and gun ownership.

He is a disgusting POS.

CatchAll on May 29, 2012 at 1:49 PM

“Pinocchios and projection”

And Obama takes the cake…

“I’m running to pay down our debt in a way that’s balanced and responsible. After inheriting a $1 trillion deficit, I signed $2 trillion of spending cuts into law,” he told a crowd of donors at the Hyatt Regency. “My opponent won’t admit it, but it’s starting to appear in places, like real liberal outlets, like the Wall Street Journal: Since I’ve been president, federal spending has risen at the lowest pace in nearly 60 years. Think about that.”

Obama was referring to an analysis released this week by Rex Nutting, a reporter for CBS MarketWatch who is also affiliated with the Wall Street Journal. Nutting concluded that Obama has presided over the slowest growth in federal spending in decades.

“Government spending under Obama, including his signature stimulus bill, is rising at a 1.4 percent annualized pace – slower than at any time in nearly 60 years,” Nutting wrote, citing data from the Congressional Budget Office, Office of Management and Budget and an independent financial firm.

The big surge in federal spending happened in fiscal 2009, before Obama took office. Since then, spending growth has been relatively flat,” he wrote. “Over Obama’s four budget years, federal spending is on track to rise from $3.52 trillion to $3.58 trillion, an annualized increase of just 0.4 percent. There has been no huge increase in spending under the current president, despite what you hear.”

The Obama campaign circulated Nutting’s article by email and posted it on its website Tuesday. The president picked up on the theme again today to hammer the point home.

“I just point out it always goes up least under Democratic presidents. This other side, I don’t know how they’ve been bamboozling folks into thinking that they are the responsible, fiscally-disciplined party. They run up these wild debts and then when we take over, we’ve got to clean it up.

“They point and say look how irresponsible they are. Look at the facts, look at the numbers. And now I want to finish the job – in a balanced way,” he said, referring to his plan to reduce the deficit through a combination of spending cuts and tax hikes.

http://news.yahoo.com/president-obama-denounces-republican-wild-debts-im-not-234658455–abc-news-politics.html

Nutting is blaming almost everything in FY 2009 on Bush, including bills that were passed by the Pelosi House, Reid Senate, and SIGNED BY OBAMA!

Let’s see Obama quote from the Wall Street Journal’s response to Nutting’s post

“Mr. Nutting claims that spending is rising at 1.4% annually, versus 8.1% for George W. Bush’s second term. How did he manage to suss out the insights that have eluded every other human being who has spent time with the historical budget tables? His accounting methods are, er, unusual.

Mr. Nutting claims that Mr. Obama is only responsible for $140 billion worth of spending in his hyperactivist first year in office because . . . the fiscal year technically begins on October 1, 2009. Therefore he says Mr. Obama had no control over the budget, though in February 2009 he did famously manage to pass an $800 billion stimulus that was supposed to be a one-time deal.
Mr. Nutting then measures Mr. Obama’s spending growth rate against an inflated 2009 baseline that includes the spending Mr. Obama caused but which he attributes to Mr. Bush.

This is like an alcoholic claiming that his rate of drinking has slowed because he had only 22 beers today and 25 beers yesterday.”

ITguy on May 29, 2012 at 1:52 PM

Do WaPo editors read their own newspaper?

Is that a joke question ? Answer= OF COURSE NOT – they know full well that their rag is nothing but leftist lies, propaganda, misrepresentations, slime attacks and bs. Why would they waste time reading THAT ?

TeaPartyNation on May 29, 2012 at 1:55 PM

If they censored Robinson the New Black Panthers would be on WAPO doorsteps that morning. Address provided by Eric Holder.

FireBlogger on May 29, 2012 at 2:05 PM

Eugene Robinson: We don’t need no stinkin’ fact checkers…I’ve got propaganda to spew!

d1carter on May 29, 2012 at 2:19 PM

Robinson and Charles Blow, two of the worst writers and worse thinkers with access to still somewhat valuable (but fading fast) channels. How do such lightweights get floated up to such lofty heights knowing as little as they do?…Oh. Oh yeah.

curved space on May 29, 2012 at 2:59 PM

People had comments about the 5500 word treatise on Romney the Barber!

Wa Po posts columns and some other entries online. Frequently they will have a comment section. I was told that comments on several stories were so negative about Wa Po that they pulled the story or, as they do here, just erased the comments they did not like. Now they seem to keep all or most comments but have their favorites presented first.

They have burned me more than the twerps here.

IlikedAUH2O on May 29, 2012 at 3:25 PM

Eugene Robinson is a flagrant hack, with a bad sinus problem. I cannot listen to him. He doesn’t speak, he honks. He’s one of the most pathetic, and blatant racists around. He beats Leonard Pitts, but both are basically in the same camp when it comes to excusing ANYTHING from their black brother.

I am so sick of these smug jerks…

mountainaires on May 29, 2012 at 3:32 PM

eugene is such a lap dog, his next independent thought will be his first. i have serious doubts that he even writes his own pieces; just another liberal hack that I wouldn’t even consider to use as TP

burserker on May 29, 2012 at 5:00 PM

Wa Po posts columns and some other entries online. Frequently they will have a comment section. I was told that comments on several stories were so negative about Wa Po that they pulled the story or, as they do here, just erased the comments they did not like. Now they seem to keep all or most comments but have their favorites presented first.

They have burned me more than the twerps here.

IlikedAUH2O on May 29, 2012 at 3:25 PM

WaPo has the most pathetic columnists writing for them. Robinson’s not the worst. EJ Dionne is a smarmy dunderhead, Van der Houven is an out and out communist, Sargent can’t put two coherent thoughts together. I am a regular in their comments section and I get flamed regularly. The only people who are worse than these pathetic columnists are the dopes who praise them in their comments section.

NOMOBO on May 29, 2012 at 5:50 PM