Obama cites a “nonpartisan economist” — who also happens to be a campaign donor

posted at 6:01 pm on July 16, 2012 by Erika Johnsen

President Obama is continuing his campaigning this week, this time swinging back through crucial swing-state Ohio. During a speech in Cincinnati, the president cracked a jobs-related joke at Mitt Romney’s expense, referring to an economic analysis which, he informed the audience, is a product of a “nonpartisan” study.

“We have not found any serious economic study that says Governor Romney’s economic plan would actually create jobs, until today,” Obama said. “I’ve got to be honest: Today we found out, there’s a new study out by [a] non-partisan economist that says Governor Romney’s economic plan would in fact create 800,000 jobs. There’s only one problem: The jobs wouldn’t be in America. They would not be in America.”

So… does that mean that Democratic campaign donors now qualify as “nonpartisan” sources? From the Weekly Standard:

At a speech earlier today in Cincinnati, Ohio, President Obama cited economic analysis conducted by one of his campaign donors, Kimberly Clausing, and called her a “non-partisan economist.” Clausing, a college professor from Reed College, has donated to President Obama and several Democratic politicians and causes over the last dozen years. …

As we detailed earlier, “Clausing, according to donor records, gave Obama for America $250 on May 18, 2012. Likewise, on September 14, 2011, Clausing gave $242 to Obama for America, records reveal.” …

In addition to her financial support for Obama, Clausing has donated money to the Democratic Party of Oregon ($250), the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee ($500), the Democratic National Committee ($500), John Kerry for President ($1,000), Dean for America ($300), Gore and Gore/Lieberman ($1,500), and many others.

You’d probably be hard-pressed to find any well-off academic who hasn’t made a campaign contribution of some sort in their lifetime, but why does President Obama feel the need to insist that his sources are “nonpartisan”? (I, for one, will always remain highly skeptical that the elusive “nonpartisan” beast actually exists.) As Daniel Halper points out, chalk it up to “crony economics.”


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

…Oh NO!…not more LIES?

KOOLAID2 on July 16, 2012 at 6:04 PM

Next he’ll claim Pelosi and/or Reid is non-partisan and his sycophants will swallow it.

gsherin on July 16, 2012 at 6:04 PM

Hey the Obamamedia is supposed to be “nonpartisan”, right?

Chip on July 16, 2012 at 6:05 PM

What a dimwit.

CW on July 16, 2012 at 6:05 PM

…calling the trolls…calling ALL trolls!

KOOLAID2 on July 16, 2012 at 6:05 PM

Dude is losing it.

Bye, Obama. Bye.

Key West Reader on July 16, 2012 at 6:05 PM

like politifact, that kind of non partisan.

we call those hacks in flyover country

Slade73 on July 16, 2012 at 6:07 PM

Next he’ll claim Pelosi and/or Reid is non-partisan and his sycophants will swallow it.

gsherin on July 16, 2012 at 6:04 PM

…ohhhhhhh!…they’re swallowing alright!

KOOLAID2 on July 16, 2012 at 6:07 PM

Well this is a shocking development

workingclass artist on July 16, 2012 at 6:07 PM

This is silly. But not as silly as a story I just saw on Drudge. Dems want to link Romney to the Bane villain in the new Batman movie. I kid you not!

ThePrez on July 16, 2012 at 6:07 PM

Lead-ins used by Obama just before he drops a huge stinking lie: “I’ve got to be honest” and “Let me be clear” and “Let me repeat that” and “some folks say” and “hello” and “thank you” and “good morning/afternoon/evening” and . . .

natasha333 on July 16, 2012 at 6:08 PM

zoinks Batman!

Slade73 on July 16, 2012 at 6:08 PM

Obama lie? c’mon!

DanMan on July 16, 2012 at 6:09 PM

I like this title at AOSHQ
“$100 Million In Negative Ads, And All Obama Managed Was A Deadlock
—Ace”
http://minx.cc/?post=331026

Bleed Em’

workingclass artist on July 16, 2012 at 6:11 PM

bayam!

Del Dolemonte on July 16, 2012 at 6:12 PM

we’ve always know that barry will be all in with the AKs against the Rs

the only, single, question is will this country go further into the socialist decline or not? It is really simple.

the voters can wise up about the lies broadcast daily…or not

r keller on July 16, 2012 at 6:12 PM

Remember when non-partisan economists said the stimulus would keep unemployment under 8%?

El_Terrible on July 16, 2012 at 6:14 PM

Obama’s been doing this for years. He constantly uses hyperbolic claims like “even conservative economists say our plan….” and then lies about what his economic proposals will do.

This is silly. But not as silly as a story I just saw on Drudge. Dems want to link Romney to the Bane villain in the new Batman movie. I kid you not!

ThePrez on July 16, 2012 at 6:07 PM

I saw that. No surprise there. I’ve been joking about Bane/Bain for a long time now, and it shouldn’t shock anyone that the Dems would be this bankrupt as to use a comic book movie in a desperate attempt to hurt Romney.

Here’s the element the Dems have apparently overlooked. Granted, I haven’t seen the movie yet and have tried to avoid spoilers, but it seems quite clear that Bane sparks a revolution in Gotham in no small part by using class warfare and turning the have-nots against the haves(or 99% against the 1%).

Chris Nolan himself has said the movie is inspired by A Tale of Two Cities which was set against the backdrop of the French Revolution. If you’ve read that novel, the revolutionaries don’t exactly come off as noble people. In fact, almost every protagonist in that book is a member of the privileged class. And in Dark Knight Rises, who is Gotham’s savior? A billionaire playboy. I think the Dems better find other pop culture material to hammer Romney with.

Doughboy on July 16, 2012 at 6:14 PM

Obama cites a “nonpartisan economist” — who also happens to be a campaign donor
================

And, top Campaign Bundlers,get Government positions again,
if Dopey/Hopey gets back in,gawd forbid!!

canopfor on July 16, 2012 at 6:15 PM

Nonpartisan in NewSpeak simply is shorthand for a Progressive.

It is all the rest who are anti-Progressive who are the partisans…like, you know, the partisans who fought in various places in WWII. Obstructionists who prevented the forces of enlightenment from controlling the world. Partisans.

If only all of us would happily embrace the wisdom that is Barack Hussein Obama the entire world would be at peace and the only problems we’d have to face is the occasional shortage of Skittles…

OK…everyone…all together:

He said that all must lend a hand
To make this country strong again
Mmm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama

He said we must be fair today
Equal work means equal pay
Mmm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama

:-)

coldwarrior on July 16, 2012 at 6:15 PM

Uhh, Reed College is a small liberals arts school in Portland which makes UC Berkeley look like a bastion of conservative thought. I don’t think non-partisans are legally allowed to teach there, for their own personal safety.

JamesB on July 16, 2012 at 6:15 PM

Regardless of what the topic is, I like to go back to this quote

If I don’t have this done in three years, then there’s going to be a one-term proposition.

I hope we hear it a lot this fall.

El_Terrible on July 16, 2012 at 6:15 PM

Why does Obama think that we are all so stupid regarding claims like this?

FACT CHECK, Mister President, FACT CHECK!!

Khun Joe on July 16, 2012 at 6:16 PM

ABC’s Political Punch blog reported this as a “Playful” townhall. That Devin Dwyer is no Jake Tapper. The blog seems to have only a few reporters covering Obama’s campaign and Obama’s presidency and Obama’s ads, but not much straight reporting on Romney.
Jake’s blog has really lost something, and that’s sad.

MayBee on July 16, 2012 at 6:16 PM

And his moocher audience laps it right up.

I’m so sick of being lied to by this no-talent grifter and his cabal!

Naturally Curly on July 16, 2012 at 6:17 PM

To be fair to O’Bumbles, this is probably how he thinks. People who agree with him are “non-partisan”. Anyone else is a right-wing nutjob.

beancounter on July 16, 2012 at 6:17 PM

Obama lied again? Yawn, nothing to see here, move along. Wake me up when he slips up and tell the truth about something.

SWalker on July 16, 2012 at 6:18 PM

instapundit minces not words

A PARASITE ON THE BODY POLITIC, TRYING TO PRETEND HE IS THE HOST: Obama Channels Elizabeth Warren. In fact, everything in the public sector — which now resembles a bloated, immobile tick — comes from the wealth created by the private sector.

in linking to the althouse piece.

short, pithy…i like it

r keller on July 16, 2012 at 6:18 PM

YUP: And Obama is also non-partisan.

reliapundit on July 16, 2012 at 6:20 PM

It took about 8 years to get past Carter’s damage. Who’s going to carry a generation of these Obama losers?

DanMan on July 16, 2012 at 6:21 PM

Why does Obama think that we are all so stupid regarding claims like this?

FACT CHECK, Mister President, FACT CHECK!!

Khun Joe on July 16, 2012 at 6:16 PM

For the same reason that the Fifth Column Treasonous Media do it.

SWalker on July 16, 2012 at 6:21 PM

Because all this guy does is LIE! His whole life is a LIE. A Composite in HIS words.

I am sorry, actually I am not, but these SUPER-PAC’s NEED to revisit what was NOT covered in 2008 about Obama and let people know who this guy is ON TOP of what his last 3 years has been or more correctly, what it HAS NOT been. This will allow Romney to “remain above the fray” and pound him on economic issues.

g2825m on July 16, 2012 at 6:21 PM

There’s only one problem: The jobs wouldn’t be in America. They would not be in America.”
========================

Maybe Obama should consult the Great OutSourcing of Stimulus Loot
Country List,where all that cash went around the planet,with….

…Sweet F/A to show to any job improvement to the US of A!!!

canopfor on July 16, 2012 at 6:22 PM

And, top Campaign Bundlers,get Government positions again,
if Dopey/Hopey gets back in,gawd forbid!!

canopfor on July 16, 2012 at 6:15 PM

and lots more taxpayer monies

cmsinaz on July 16, 2012 at 6:24 PM

Where is Team Romney…?

Seven Percent Solution on July 16, 2012 at 6:26 PM

So how many Pinocchio’s will this rate? Got to hand it to Barry – his lies are getting more blatant each day.

GarandFan on July 16, 2012 at 6:32 PM

Obama is a hogwash wrapped in a lie inside a fabrication.

VorDaj on July 16, 2012 at 6:35 PM

Reed College is non-partisan. That’s the funniest thing I’ve read all day. When they defined the term Liberal Arts, Reed was the model.

shooten on July 16, 2012 at 6:37 PM

So how many Pinocchio’s will this rate? Got to hand it to Barry – his lies are getting more blatant each day.

GarandFan on July 16, 2012 at 6:32 PM

Obama left Pinocchio in the dust long ago and has now lapped Joe Isuzu.

VorDaj on July 16, 2012 at 6:38 PM

Khun Joe on July 16, 2012 at 6:16 PM

The fact that 52% voted for him and he still is polling around 46% might just give him that idea about the stupidity of the American voter.

chemman on July 16, 2012 at 6:39 PM

Say it isn’t so…

PatriotRider on July 16, 2012 at 6:40 PM

Democrats have positioned themselves that they are the mainstream, no matter who whacky the views of some in their ranks. Therefor, they don’t believe there is such a thing as the far left.

There are only a ‘right-wing extremists’, of course. Which means anyone donating to them is a partisan hack. Donating to Dems is not seem the same way, it’s a ‘vote for America’ or something.

Liam on July 16, 2012 at 6:41 PM

Obama’s whole life is a phantasm wrapped in an illusion inside a delusion.

VorDaj on July 16, 2012 at 6:42 PM

Adherents to Obamariah [Obama Shariah] are fundamentally and unalterably opposed to the survival of the Constitution of the United States, and most particularly it’s Bill of Rights. Obamariah is based on the teachings of Karl Marx, Benito Mussolini, Bill Ayers, Jeremiah Wright, the Queen of Hearts and Joe Isuzu. Obamariah commands that democrats carry out mendacity, calumny and psychosis indefinitely against all opponents until the House of the Constitution, which is alien to Obamariah, is not tolerated, and all Americans are brought under the domination of the House of Obama, where Obamariah is strictly enforced.

VorDaj on July 16, 2012 at 6:43 PM

Yeah. The fun part is that economists have now followed the media over the shark; does anyone really think economists are non-partisan anymore? E.G. How could anyone who is not an already a completely deluded liberal actually follow Keynes? It’s not like they arrive at that position in a series of logical steps.

So I don’t give a damn if your economist has political views. I’d just like to know ahead of time what those views are. If you ever get a right-leaning economist to back you up, then call a press conference, Barry.

TexasDan on July 16, 2012 at 6:43 PM

Doughboy on July 16, 2012 at 6:14 PM

Dickens made knitting creepy

Madame Defarge knit one pearl two

workingclass artist on July 16, 2012 at 6:45 PM

Baghdad Bob is now Obama’s spiritual adviser.

VorDaj on July 16, 2012 at 6:45 PM

Is it the same “economist” who said that if we passed the stimulus unemployment was guaranteed to be below 6% by now & if we didn’t it was guaranteed to be over 8%?

Dark Star on July 16, 2012 at 6:51 PM

brett talking about this on special report…

AB stuttering on her response

cmsinaz on July 16, 2012 at 6:53 PM

we call those hacks in flyover country

Slade73 on July 16, 2012 at 6:07 PM

We call them Uppereastbuttcrack right here on Hot Air.

BigWyo on July 16, 2012 at 6:59 PM

VorDaj on July 16, 2012 at 6:43 PM

He has failed.

Key West Reader on July 16, 2012 at 7:05 PM

I”m more concerned with where she came up with these 800k jobs that won’t be in America. Does Mitt have a plan to send astronauts to space at a faster pace than Obama? Does Mitt have a plan that will give government grants to manufacturers outside of America at a higher pace than Obama does?

Or are these 800k jobs just imaginary numbers made up from a donor?

What exact policy of Mitt’s would create these alleged jobs?

ButterflyDragon on July 16, 2012 at 7:05 PM

What exact policy of Mitt’s would create these alleged jobs?

ButterflyDragon on July 16, 2012 at 7:05 PM

Simply winning the election?

Del Dolemonte on July 16, 2012 at 7:15 PM

Democrat definition of non-partisan: “Agrees with me.”

ProfShadow on July 16, 2012 at 7:16 PM

What exact policy of Mitt’s would create these alleged jobs?

ButterflyDragon on July 16, 2012 at 7:05 PM
Simply winning the election?

Del Dolemonte on July 16, 2012 at 7:15 PM

Del, you are 100% correct. Businesses are holding their collective breath. If Obama loses we’re home free and you will see a boom on par with Reagan’s.

If Obama wins, there will be a complete meltdown.

So, to all you parents that have grown up basement dwellers sucking you dry, on election day 2012, lock ‘em in the basement with some Cheetos and Cokes and don’t let them out until the returns are in.

Key West Reader on July 16, 2012 at 7:19 PM

It wasn’t really her, so it’s not partisan.

“If you’ve got a business study — you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.”

forest on July 16, 2012 at 7:32 PM

Adherents to Obamariah

VorDaj on July 16, 2012 at 6:43 PM

Rhymes with diarrhea?

kbTexan on July 16, 2012 at 7:44 PM

If Obama wants to talk about job creation, let’s talk about how many jobs would have to be created for him to get back to the levels of employment we enjoyed under George W. Bush and the Republican Congress.

The last month of the Republican House, Senate, and Presidency (December 2006), the Employment-Population Ratio was 63.4%.

If we had the same rate of employment now as we had when the Democrats (including Pelosi, Reid, and then-Senators Obama, Biden, and Clinton) took majority control of the House and Senate, over 11.7 Million more people would be employed right now, given our current population and the Republicans’ 63.4% Employment-population ratio.

Employment status of the civilian noninstitutional population 16 years and over

Current (June 2012) civilian noninstitutional population aged 16 years and over: 243,155,000
243,155,000 * 63.4% = 154,160,000 jobs
Actual employment: 142,415,000
Difference: 11,745,000 jobs

Got that?

Over 11.7 Million jobs are missing from Obama’s “stabilized” economy.

Even if we use the average Employment-Population Ratio from the entire 96 months of the George W. Bush Presidency (62.7%), there are over 10 Million jobs missing from Obama’s economy.

Do you want HOPE?
Do you want CHANGE?

Then vote Republican this November.

Put the party that gave you higher employment back in control of the House, Senate, and Presidency, and watch the Employment-Population Ratio start going back up again.

ITguy on July 16, 2012 at 7:56 PM

The O has become Baghdad Bob. What a farce!

WhatNot on July 16, 2012 at 8:20 PM

One of the things that contributes to ignorance, is being locked in a bubble and refusing to get out of it. Barack Obama has surrounded himself with liberals for most of his adult life. He really has no clue how an economy WORKS, he has a vague idea of how liberal academia believe it works so, when he pontificates about the economy and taxes, he can’t relate to any discussions about plus and minuses to any policy because I doubt he gets much in the way of minus.

He is leading the Democrats off the cliff with his tax policy, but he doesn’t care because he can’t comprehend what will happen. There’s not excuse for all the Democrats playing politics with the budget, they really should be ashamed but they’re not. They’ve been playing with the budget for 3 years and have held the levels articifically high by passing continuing resolutions, instead of a budget.

It’s time for the Republicans to tell the Democrats, if they want to change the tax structure, put out a budget with the numbers in it, have it scored, have it voted on and the Republicans will take the budget to reconciliation. The Democrats won’t do that for 2 reasons, 1: It would expose how much Obamacare money has been wasted these past 2 years, and 2: There is a considerable amount of waste built in that hasn’t been discovered because budgets are not being submitted only continuing resolutions.

Call their BLUFF, Republicans.

bflat879 on July 16, 2012 at 8:58 PM

why does President Obama feel the need to insist that his sources are “nonpartisan”? (I, for one, will always remain highly skeptical that the elusive “nonpartisan” beast actually exists.)

getting to be a very common descriptor as people tend to ignore any message from either party. on its face, it simply means the group is not directly affiliated with a party and I guess it worked for a while. but one only needs to read a line or two of their story to realize the disguise doesn’t work.

curious to see what the disguise will be and how long it lasts.

teejk on July 16, 2012 at 9:04 PM

Reed College?

They call it Weed in these parts. To cite an “econominst” from Reed is pretty hilarious. Obama is just hoping he can get a professor gig there when his days in the WH are over.

ORconservative on July 16, 2012 at 9:18 PM

They call it Weed in these parts. To cite an “econominst” from Reed is pretty hilarious. Obama is just hoping he can get a professor gig there when his days in the WH are over.

Heh. I used to work at a resteraunt at 44th and Woodstock before I joined the Army 20+ years ago and we would get “Reedies” in all the time. The women would be barefoot and have hairy legs. I think they considered Communists to be too right wing for their taste.

kwbrownie2003 on July 17, 2012 at 1:09 AM

Only that which disagrees with Obama is “partisan”. He really believes this. It’s part of his narcissistic personality disorder.

swinia sutki on July 17, 2012 at 7:08 AM