Cutter: Obama has created more jobs than the Reagan recovery

posted at 4:41 pm on August 22, 2012 by Erika Johnsen

Obama deputy campaign manager Stephanie Cutter made another appearance on MNSBC Wednesday morning, promoting some mighty interesting ideas about job creation and the economy.

…Well, I think that worker probably has a good understanding of what’s happened over the past four years in terms of the president coming in and seeing 800,000 jobs lost on the day that the president was being sworn in, and seeing the president moving pretty quickly to stem the losses, to turn the economy around, and over the past, you know, 27 months we’ve created 4.5 million private sector jobs. That’s more jobs than in the Bush recovery, in the Reagan recovery, there’s obviously more we need to do, and as I said to Mika at the at beginning of the program, I think that unemployed worker probably sees one person in this race trying to move the country forward and that’s the president…

“There’s only one candidate today who cares for that unemployed worker and has plans on the table to help him get back to work”? …No. Stay with me here, people.

We’ve had almost four years of President Obama’s ‘plans to put unemployed workers back to work,’ and it is more than evident that they haven’t worked. Public-sector “investments” for things like “job-training programs” or “education plans to ensure that young people have every opportunity… for the jobs of the future” are some of the lamest, most paltry excuses for action-items out there. And as for helping small businesses out with tax cuts? President Obama is touring the country harping about how Mitt Romney wants to cut [insert pet Democratic cause here] in exchange for ‘tax cuts for the wealthy,’ but President Obama’s master plan is nothing more than a tax hike that will harm small businesses and cut America’s job creators off at the knees.

Ryan and Romney want to foster an economy from the “top down,” while Obama wants to grow the economy from the “middle out”? What does that mean? Team Obama’s distortions of economic terminology are enough to make your head spin! Yes, top-down economics were a huge problem in initiating our financial crisis — but what that really means is that the federal government was getting way too meddlesome and butting its fat nose into everything and distorting market signals while encouraging rent-seeking (Example: Hey, we think it’d be a great idea and really help us win more votes if every American owned a home! End result: Housing bubble. Pop.) We do not need more government, we need less — that’s the only route for encouraging the entrepreneurship, ingenuity, innovation, and freedom that nurtures robust economic growth.

President Obama has created “more private-sector jobs” than the ‘Reagan and Bush recoveries’? Okay, first of all — the government does not create jobs. The government can either hinder job creators, or set them free. Secondly, let’s talk a little real talk about net job creation during Obama’s tenure, which isn’t nearly so rosy. And if you don’t want to get into an argument about when exactly President Obama became accountable for jobs gained and lost and for our overall economic activity (although, according to him, we still haven’t hit that point), that’s just fine. Let’s look at some more reliable indicators about our economy’s health after almost four years of Obamanomics: The labor force participation rate is at three-decade low, and economic growth is piddling along at a 1.5 percent annual rate as of the second quarter (and multiple sources are predicting that it’s only about to get worse!).

Sorry, Ms. Cutter — I remain unconvinced that President Obama’s policies are doing anything to move this country “forward,” and you may put that in your pipe and smoke it.

Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air



Trackback URL


She needs to go back to gargling spunk for a living, she’s probably better at that.

Wolfmoon on August 23, 2012 at 2:22 AM

Ignoring the fact that the claim is a lie the jobs counted as being created by the Reagan recovery were in the USofA, didn’t last only until the money from the government loans was p!ssed away.

Slowburn on August 23, 2012 at 2:33 AM

Erika, please keep in mind that a plane in a nose dive is still going “forward” as in towards the nose of the plane. Personally I’d prefer to be gaining altitude over being in a nosedive, myself,


herself on August 23, 2012 at 3:00 AM

Oh, the irony.

Dante on August 22, 2012 at 11:11 PM

Pal, did you see this post?

I don’t know about Stephanie Cutter but those 27 months add up to 8,302,000. Or about double what you claim the Messiah did. You can find the numbers here

Capitalist Infidel on August 22, 2012 at 5:29 PM

And remember the quote from the NYT about Reagan, where they praised him for his last two years, not of what he accomplished but how much he actually achieved, the most productive president the last two years of his administration. While you were saying he was drooling, even his nemesis, the NYT had to praise him for his brilliance.

Facts are hard to follow for fools like you…

Oh the irony indeed…keep posting you are f’in brilliant…

right2bright on August 23, 2012 at 7:27 AM

These people are almost as good as the old soviet union or the third reich in their propaganda and lies they spew.

Considering that they do have to combat the internet, some actual independent thinkers, and talk radio they have been truly, truly remarkable. Half the cud chewing cows in the country believe this nonsense.

However, the third reich only had 10 years to indocrinate and teach the masses how to think and act. The liberals here have controled the schools, media and handed out money and housing for over 50 years so they had a lot longer time frame to program the US.

acyl72 on August 23, 2012 at 7:36 AM

If you repeat the lie often enough, loud enough, people will begin to accept it as truth.

Kardashian/DWTS voters will believe this jobs BS spewed by this LIAR is true by November.

Besides, Abortion/contraception is the most urgent problem confronting voters this election cycle.

More nuts for the squirrels, please.

FlaMurph on August 23, 2012 at 7:45 AM

She said it on MSNBC. This leads to the philosophical question; “If a political hack lies on an outlet no one watches is it really a lie?”

conservativecaveman on August 23, 2012 at 8:08 AM

MSLSD should be required to admit that they are the official stenographers and propaganda discriminators of the democrat national committee.

tom daschle concerned on August 23, 2012 at 8:11 AM

And remember the quote from the NYT about Reagan, where they praised him for his last two years, not of what he accomplished but how much he actually achieved, the most productive president the last two years of his administration. While you were saying he was drooling, even his nemesis, the NYT had to praise him for his brilliance.

Facts are hard to follow for fools like you…

Oh the irony indeed…keep posting you are f’in brilliant…

right2bright on August 23, 2012 at 7:27 AM

Right2bright is the embodiment of “fools rush in”.

Obama has been productive as well. That isn’t a good thing.

Regan came into office promising a lot of things, and he did the exact opposite. Instead of abolishing departments, he created them and added 230,000 federal employees to the books.

But let’s look at what Reagan achieved:

“In 1980, the last year of free-spending Jimmy Carter the federal government spent $591 billion. In 1986, the last recorded year of the Reagan administration, the federal government spent $990 billion, an increase of 68%.”

“But even taking these percentages of GNP figures, we get federal spending as percent of GNP in 1980 as 21.6%, and after six years of Reagan, 24.3%. A better comparison would be percentage of federal spending to net private product, that is, production of the private sector. That percentage was 31.1% in 1980, and a shocking 34.3% in 1986. So even using percentages, the Reagan administration has brought us a substantial increase in government spending.”

“Jimmy Carter habitually ran deficits of $40-50 billion and, by the end, up to $74 billion; but by 1984, when Reagan had promised to achieve a balanced budget, the deficit had settled down comfortably to about $200 billion, a level that seems to be permanent, despite desperate attempts to cook the figures in one-shot reductions.

[As of late 1987, when this was written] This is by far the largest budget deficit in American history.”

” At the very beginning of the Reagan administration, the conservative Republicans in the House of Representatives, convinced that deficits would disappear immediately, received a terrific shock when they were asked by the Reagan administration to vote for the usual annual increase in the statutory debt limit. ”

“Even less edifying is the spectre of Reaganomists who had inveighed against deficits—that legacy of Keynesianism—for decades. Soon Reaganite economists, especially those staffing economic posts in the executive and legislative branches, found that deficits really weren’t so bad after all. Ingenious models were devised claiming to prove that there really isn’t any deficit. Bill Niskanen, of the Reagan Council of Economic Advisors, came up with perhaps the most ingenious discovery: that there is no reason to worry about government deficits, since they are balanced by the growth in value of government assets. Well, hooray, but it is rather strange to see economists whose alleged goal is a drastic reduction in the role of government cheering for ever greater growth in government assets.”

“In the first place, the famous “tax cut” of 1981 did not cut taxes at all. It’s true that tax rates for higher-income brackets were cut; but for the average person, taxes rose, rather than declined. The reason is that, on the whole, the cut in income tax rates was more than offset by two forms of tax increase. One was “bracket creep,” a term for inflation quietly but effectively raising one into higher tax brackets, so that you pay more and proportionately higher taxes even though the tax rate schedule has officially remained the same. The second source of higher taxes was Social Security taxation, which kept increasing, and which helped taxes go up overall. Not only that, but soon thereafter; when the Social Security System was generally perceived as on the brink of bankruptcy, President Reagan brought in Alan Greenspan, a leading Reaganomist and now Chairman of the Federal Reserve, to save Social Security as head of a bipartisan commission. The “saving,” of course, meant still higher Social Security taxes then and forevermore.”

“Not only were taxes increased, but business costs were greatly raised by making business expense meals only 80% deductible, which means a great expenditure of business time and energy keeping and shuffling records. And not only were taxes raised by eliminating tax shelters in real estate, but the law’s claims to “fairness” were made grotesque by the retroactive nature of many of the tax increases. Thus, the abolition of tax shelter deductibility was made retroactive, imposing huge penalties after the fact.”

“But the bottom line on the tax question: is what happened in the Reagan era to government tax revenues overall? Did the amount of taxes extracted from the American people by the federal government go up or down during the Reagan years? The facts are that federal tax receipts were $517 billion in the last Carter year of 1980. In 1986, revenues totaled $769 billion, an increase of 49%. Whatever that is, that doesn’t look like a tax cut. But how about taxes as a percentage of the national product? There, we can concede that on a percentage criterion, overall taxes fell very slightly, remaining about even with the last year of Carter. Taxes fell from 18.9% of the GNP to 18.3%, or for a better gauge, taxes as percentage of net private product fell from 27.2% to 26.6%. A large absolute increase in taxes, coupled with keeping taxes as a percentage of national product about even, is scarcely cause for tossing one’s hat in the air about a whopping reduction in taxes during the Reagan years.”

Dante on August 23, 2012 at 8:37 AM

Here’s how you know liberalism is an illness — they believe this lies of Cutter, despite the facts hitting them in the face daily.

sadatoni on August 23, 2012 at 9:22 AM

Now that everything is true
I believe in me and you
What I see in magazines
I believe in everything

I believe in politics
When we’re playing pick up sticks
I believe in five year plans
I believe it in advance

I believe in innocence
College boys wash your hands!
I believe in one night stands
No-one gets a second chance

I believe that dogs are bit
Even fakes are counterfeit
I believe the BBC
I believe in everything

So if the times don’t fit
You can’t go look for another
Use the colour from the tube
There is nothing else to do

So if the times don’t fit
You can’t go look for another
Use the colour from the tube
There is nothing else that you can do
(There is nothing else that you can do)

Now that everything is real
I believe I really feel
Even hear the churchbells ring
I believe in everything

I believe in Postman Pat
I’ll leave my kidneys to the bank
I believe in even tans
I believe in everything

So if the times don’t fit
You can’t go look for another
Use the colour from the tube
There is nothing else to do

So if the times don’t fit
You can’t go look for another
Use the colour from the tube
There is nothing else for you to do
(There is nothing else for you to do)

“Colour From The Tube” (Gang of Four)

Pest on August 23, 2012 at 9:25 AM

They keep trying to hang that initial job loss around Bush’s neck (yeah, I know – big surprise) but those losses came BECAUSE clown-nose, jug-eared jeark-off was elected! Think back to that heady period after he won and before he was inaugurated – businesses were unloading costs because they SAW the trainwreck presidency coming.

News stories were all over the place about it. Heck, my boss announced there would be no raises for the foreseeable future and cut our hours back by 45 minutes a day because of it!

PJ Emeritus on August 23, 2012 at 9:25 AM

It’s decided. Obama should win 49 states, then.

cantaffordcollege on August 23, 2012 at 12:28 PM

A few more of these Bon Mots, and Stephanie will have to be locked-up for her own protection, and the protection of others, for she will have proven herself witless.

Another Drew on August 23, 2012 at 3:54 PM

You are stupid if you expect an honest word to come out of this whore’s mouth. Just laugh at her and walk away. I think people will get the message.

Extrafishy on August 24, 2012 at 5:33 AM