Video: Axelrod dodges the “better off four years ago” question; Update: Video fixed

posted at 11:01 am on September 2, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Want a preview of the presidential debates?  Then spend two and a half minutes with this clip from today’s Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace and David Axelrod.  Wallace asks Axelrod the quadrennial question: are voters better off now than four years ago?  When the man running Team Obama tries to run away from the question by talking about the tough environment Barack Obama inherited, Wallace lays out the comparison on economic statistics between January 2009 and today, and asks Axelrod again: are voters better off now than four years ago?   Answer: Er ….

Here are the stats Wallace uses:

  • Unemployment: 7.8% then, 8.3% now
  • Median income: $54,983 then, $50,964 now
  • Gas prices: $1.85 per gallon then, $3.78 now
  • National debt: $10.6 trillion then, $15.9 trillion now

Expect Mitt Romney to memorize these statistics, and perhaps toss in the civilian participation rate, which was at 65.7% in January 2009 and in June 2009 at the start of the “recovery,” but fell to a 30-year low of 63.6% in April and is at 63.7% now.  That’s actually the best measure of the Reagan Metric.  If this question doesn’t come from the moderators at the debates, you can bet your bottom dollar that Romney will ask it himself — and that Obama’s (non-)answer will be just as effective, and just as revealing, as Axelrod’s today.


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

Comment pages: 1 2 3

CorporatePiggy on September 2, 2012 at 12:28 PM

And unlike any other field or profession I know, his “profession” will absolutely not penalize him for wrongdoing, unless it becomes too scandalous to sweep under the rug. See “Ward Churchill” and “Elizabeth Warren”, who were (and still are) allowed to function in academia using falsified credentials.

Del Dolemonte on September 2, 2012 at 1:11 PM

….or unless the offense is plagiarism (they take that offense more seriously in the academia), and sooner or later libfree will be caught with the hands in the cookie jar…that one does not have a single original thought in his tiny skull, for most part he recycles garbage from various sources…

jimver on September 2, 2012 at 1:37 PM

Heh. I almost peed your pants too!

Lanceman on September 2, 2012 at 1:34 PM

…sh!t…now I wet ‘em!

KOOLAID2 on September 2, 2012 at 1:37 PM

…laying people off, cutting wages, eliminating pensions and other cost-cutting measures that are the direct result of greed
 
libfreeordie on September 2, 2012 at 11:50 AM

 

I’m less versed in economic nuts and bolts
 
libfreeordie on June 1, 2012 at 1:31 PM

rogerb on September 2, 2012 at 1:38 PM

….or unless the offense is plagiarism (they take that offense more seriously in the academia), and sooner or later libfree will be caught with the hands in the cookie jar…that one does not have a single original thought in his tiny skull, mostly he recycles garbage from various sources…

jimver on September 2, 2012 at 1:35 PM

I have two words for you… Lawrence Tribe

SWalker on September 2, 2012 at 1:39 PM

Bishop is the sarcmeistser of HA. Pay attention.

Schadenfreude on September 2, 2012 at 1:35 PM

R. Platt only comes in in the mornings, whereas Bishop is a whiteowl. I mean nightowl.

Lanceman on September 2, 2012 at 1:40 PM

sh!t…now I wet ‘em!

KOOLAID2 on September 2, 2012 at 1:37 PM

Make up your mind brother!
/ok I’ll do it this time just in case

VegasRick on September 2, 2012 at 1:41 PM

Bishop is the sarcmeistser of HA. Pay attention.

Schadenfreude on September 2, 2012 at 1:35 PM

R. Platt only comes in in the mornings, whereas Bishop is a whiteowl. I mean nightowl.

Lanceman on September 2, 2012 at 1:40 PM

Be careful what you call Bishop… You do after all, have to start your car sometime… ;p

SWalker on September 2, 2012 at 1:43 PM

People should also ask the Ax about the declining wealth of our seniors whose investments have plummeted since they took office That’s as disgraceful as the unemployment, one from which they’ll not likely recover from.

scalleywag on September 2, 2012 at 1:50 PM

When the unemployment rate was anywhere over 6 percent when President Bush was in office, according to the MSM, it was the worse economy since the Great Depression and a stain on America’s reputation. Now that its been over 8 percent for the last forty gazillion months, it’s the new normal.

Fred 2 on September 2, 2012 at 1:56 PM

…laying people off, cutting wages, eliminating pensions and other cost-cutting measures that are the direct result of greed

libfreeordie on September 2, 2012 at 11:50 AM

Professor, you make intelligence and insanity indignant. You are truly clueless.

Here are a couple of tips:

- mild does not come from the grocery store
- money does not come from banks
- electricity does not come from the wall outlets
- water does not come from the tap
- children really don’t come from storks
- money does not simply get printed (unless you are a clueless leftist inept moron)
- etc

How shameful that they system ‘brought you up’ this way.

Schadenfreude on September 2, 2012 at 1:57 PM

mild = milk

Schadenfreude on September 2, 2012 at 1:57 PM

Bishop is a whiteowl.

Lanceman on September 2, 2012 at 1:40 PM

You “racist” you!

Schadenfreude on September 2, 2012 at 1:59 PM

Head.

A**.

You’re adults. You can figure this one out.

madmonkphotog on September 2, 2012 at 2:00 PM

There really is a difference between your Liberal Dogma regarding business and the Real World.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YlVDGmjz7eM

jaydee_007 on September 2, 2012 at 1:37 PM

Indeed…to think that hard working people sustain such fools is really pathetic.

Schadenfreude on September 2, 2012 at 2:01 PM

scalleywag on September 2, 2012 at 1:50 PM

Agree ++++
Sad, big time sad.

pambi on September 2, 2012 at 2:02 PM

Romney is starting his preparations for the upcoming debates

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/mitt-romney-to-spend-week-of-democratic-convention-preparing-for-debates/2012/09/01/5827f874-f468-11e1-b74c-84ed55e0300b_story.html

Romney’s approach to school and his subsequent in businees was profiled in this NYT article.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/25/us/politics/how-harvard-shaped-mitt-romney.html?ref=politics&pagewanted=all

Instead, Mr. Romney threw his energy into being the best. Nearly all business school students formed study groups to help them digest the constant flow of cases, but Mr. Romney recruited a murderers’ row of some of the most distinguished students in the class. “He and I said, hey, let’s handpick some superstars,” said Howard Serkin, a classmate.

Every day for an hour, the all-male group — there were relatively few women in the program back then — sat at a semicircular table outside the classroom and briefed one another on the reading material. It was an exercise in mutual protection, since any of them could be called on in class and their performance would affect their grades. Mr. Romney served as a kind of team captain, the other members said, pushing and motivating the others.

“He wanted to make straight A’s,” Mr. Serkin said. “He wanted our study group to be No. 1.” Sometimes Mr. Romney arrived early to run his numbers a few extra times. And if his partners were not prepared, “he was not afraid of saying: ‘You’re letting us down. We want to be the best,’ ” Mr. Serkin added.

The students were experiencing the most unusual, distinguishing aspect of a Harvard Business School education: in every class, even accounting, there were no textbooks, no theories of management, just the school’s vaunted set of cases — one-page summaries of real-life corporate situations.

The case study method “doesn’t start with the theory or even principles,” said Kim B. Clark, a friend of Mr. Romney’s who later became dean of the school. “It starts with ‘All right, what is going on? What does the data tell us?’ ”

The cases did not even lay out questions. Students had to analyze the material, sometimes just a paragraph long, figure out the company’s problems and pose solutions. “The case study method is like trying to train doctors by just showing them [sick] patients, rather than by showing them textbooks to depict what a healthy patient should look like,” said Mr. Brownstein, the former classmate.

Mr. Romney was in his element. His class performances were outstanding; his peers described him as precise, convincing and charismatic. He won the high grades he craved, becoming a George F. Baker Scholar, a distinction awarded to the top students in every business class, and would graduate from the law school with honors as well.

From another NYT article on Romney and the dual business-law degree program at Harvard

One of the most exclusive clubs in academe is a Harvard University dual-degree program allowing graduate students to attend its law and business schools simultaneously, cramming five years of education into four. On average, about 12 people per year have completed the program — the overachievers of the overachievers — including a striking number of big names in finance, industry, law and government.

I am heartened by Romney diligently starting his preparations for those very important debates early, and if he come out as well prepared as his history leads you to believe, he will do well.

bayview on September 2, 2012 at 2:04 PM

….or unless the offense is plagiarism (they take that offense more seriously in the academia), and sooner or later libfree will be caught with the hands in the cookie jar…that one does not have a single original thought in his tiny skull, mostly he recycles garbage from various sources…

jimver on September 2, 2012 at 1:35 PM

I have two words for you… Lawrence Tribe…

SWalker on September 2, 2012 at 1:39 PM

Yes, some Leftists who Plagiarize get away with it, or get a slap on the wrist.

Doris Kearns Goodwin, for example, was busted for plagiarizing in 2002, but barely 3 years later was awarded a prestigious book award for another of her works.

The NY Times-owned Boston Globe fired Mike Barnicle for plagiarizing, but he had no problem finding another job.

And even though C-BS “fired” Dan Rather, not for plagiarizing but for “reporting” a story based on forged documents, his “journalistic” peers as well as academia rewarded him with awards and tributes, and he also had absolutely no problem finding another job.

Del Dolemonte on September 2, 2012 at 2:05 PM

Obama’s approval at 44% for the past week on Gallup, NYT publishes a piece on Jarrett’s oversized influence on Obama with many reader comments negative, Romney and Obama tied on RCP for the first time this year, are the wheels coming off he Obama train?

breffnian on September 2, 2012 at 2:09 PM

…laying people off, cutting wages, eliminating pensions and other cost-cutting measures that are the direct result of greed

which is the only way to save a company-UNLESS YOUR GENERAL MOTORS.

gerrym51 on September 2, 2012 at 2:10 PM

I’d hate to say it but, after watching Axelrod on Fox News Sunday, the Democrats will be in trouble if that’s the best they can do. I looked at the President’s plan and it’s an embarassment, investing in jobs for teachers and first responders again? It really sounds like his last plan, on less so. When he talks about growing the middle class, it appears he wants to do it by lowering the income of a lot of upper class people to middle class levels instead of increasing the incomes of lower class people.

I’d hate to bring up an old phrase, but the Democrats are going to have to put a lot of lipstick on this pig to try and sell it, but it’s still a pig.

bflat879 on September 2, 2012 at 2:17 PM

I’m just now catching Axelrods “masterful” performance on FOX, and good grief! Is he a tool or what? Team Obama literally has nothing to say other than, “wah, wah, it’s Bush’s fault, or Ryan cheats, Romney’s mean!”. They’re a bunch of losers than haven’t developed past a middle school mentality.

BettyRuth on September 2, 2012 at 2:18 PM

MUSTREAD: Had to lift this from NationalReview.com. There is no trackback and it’s just too good. Author said OK.

The day the Democrats took over was not January 22nd 2009, it was actually January 3rd 2007,the day the Democrats took over the House of Representatives and the Senate, at the very start of the 110th Congress. The Democratic Party controlled a majority in both chambers for the first time since the end of the 103rd Congress in 1995. For those who are listening to the liberals propagating the fallacy that everything is “Bush’s Fault”, think about this: January 3rd, 2007, the day the Democrats took over the Senate and the Congress: The DOW Jones closed at 12,621.77 The GDP for the previous quarter was 3.5% The Unemployment rate was 4.6% George Bush’s Economic policies SET A RECORD of 52 STRAIGHT MONTHS of JOB CREATION! Remember that day… January 3rd, 2007 was the day that Barney Frank took over the House Financial Services Committee and Chris Dodd took over the Senate Banking Committee. The economic meltdown that happened 15 months later was in what part of the economy? BANKING AND FINANCIAL SERVICES! THANK YOU DEMOCRATS (especially Barney ) for taking us from 13,000 DOW, 3.5 GDP and 4.6% Unemployment…to this CRISIS by (among MANY other things) dumping 5-6 TRILLION Dollars of toxic loans on the economy from YOUR Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac FIASCOES! (BTW: Bush asked Congress 17 TIMES to stop Fannie & Freddie -starting in 2001 because it was financially risky for the US economy). Barneyblocked it and called it a “Chicken Little Philosophy” (and the sky did fall!) And who took the THIRD highest pay-off from Fannie Mae AND Freddie Mac? OBAMA And who fought against reform of Fannie and Freddie? OBAMA and the Democrat Congress, especiallyBARNEY!!!! So when someone tries to blame Bush… REMEMBER JANUARY 3rd, 2007…. THE DAY THE DEMOCRATS TOOK OVER!” Bush may have been in the car but the Democrats were in charge of the gas pedal and steering wheel they were driving the economy into the ditch. Budgets do not come from the White House.. They come from Congress and the party that controlled Congress since January 2007 is the Democratic Party. Furthermore, the Democrats controlled the budget process for 2008 & 2009 as well as 2010 & 2011. In that first year, they had to contend with George Bush, which caused them to compromise on spending, when Bush somewhat belatedly got tough on spending increases. For 2009 though, Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid bypassed George Bush entirely, passing continuing resolutions to keep government running until Barack Obama could take office. At that time, they passed a massive omnibus spending bill to complete the 2009 budget. And where was Barack Obama during this time?He was a member of that very Congress that passed all of these massive spending bills, and he signed the omnibus bill as President to complete 2009. Let’s remember what the deficits looked like during that period: If the Democrats inherited any deficit, it was the 2007 deficit, the last of the Republican budgets. That deficit was the lowest in five years, and the fourth straight decline in deficit spending. After that, Democrats in Congress took control of spending, and that includes Barack Obama, who voted for the budgets. If Obama inherited anything, he inherited it from himself. In a nutshell, what Obama is saying is “I inherited a deficit that I voted for, and then I voted to expand that deficit four-fold since January 20th.”

Rea1ityCheck on September 2, 2012 at 2:22 PM

Also- Where exactly are all these 4.5 million jobs Obama created in the last four years? This seems to be a big part of today’s pre-rehearsed talking points. I’m serious- what jobs are they referring to?

BettyRuth on September 2, 2012 at 2:25 PM

Not enough people, apparently, take the state of our economy as seriously as they should, or he wouldn’t even be at 44%. That right there is a disgrace. These Obama supporters are saying they don’t care about jobs, our sinking wealth, our nation’s credit rating, but boy oh boy, they care about making sure Sandra Fluke has condoms. Now that sure is better than 4 years ago when she couldn’t have free condoms.

scalleywag on September 2, 2012 at 2:26 PM

Axelrod: “Oh, look…SHINY!”

creeper on September 2, 2012 at 2:29 PM

Axelrod, ocommie’s favorite clown.

Wolfmoon on September 2, 2012 at 2:29 PM

bayview on September 2, 2012 at 2:04 PM

Thanks, I enjoyed learning that about Romney. The more I learn about the guy, the more I admire him.

Now, for comparable info about Obama, we go to…

petefrt on September 2, 2012 at 2:35 PM

Pic of the Day: No Racist Dog-Whistle Decoder or Assembly Required

http://predicthistunpredictpast.blogspot.com/2012/09/pic-of-day-no-racist-dog-whistle.html

M2RB: The Rolling Stones

Resist We Much on September 2, 2012 at 2:42 PM

So, how does he expect to fix an economy even worse than the one he has already admitted he cannot fix?
Wino on September 2, 2012 at 12:00 PM

“We just got to let him go.”

HellCat on September 2, 2012 at 2:48 PM

RWM, so glad you’re back, good lady.

Schadenfreude on September 2, 2012 at 2:54 PM

Resist We Much on September 2, 2012 at 2:42 PM

What a low standard he set. He shamed the blacks and other minorities, the inept narcissistic destroyer. The good ones will be hurt for years and years to come, due to such an empty suit and remorseless liar and charlatan.

To expect so little of the first half black president is the ultimate form of racism.

Schadenfreude on September 2, 2012 at 2:57 PM

So, how does he expect to fix an economy even worse than the one he has already admitted he cannot fix?
Wino on September 2, 2012 at 12:00 PM

He has no intentions to fix anything. He loves the destuction. He’d be happy with a deep recession in 2013. The worse off the fools, the more vote for him and his. This is a charlatan of high proportions.

Read this and send him to Hades.

Schadenfreude on September 2, 2012 at 3:01 PM

Also- Where exactly are all these 4.5 million jobs Obama created in the last four years? This seems to be a big part of today’s pre-rehearsed talking points. I’m serious- what jobs are they referring to?

BettyRuth on September 2, 2012 at 2:25 PM

A big chunk were temporary and FAKE census jobs. Then there were a ton of fake jobs created in non existent congressional districts and so forth. That 4.5 million number is nothing to brag about even if it was real.

Bear in find that when an unemployed person takes any part time work Zero counts that as a job. Any rational non socialist will not count it, because it’s not employment one can support oneself with.

The 23 million “official” count of the unemployed is inaccurate as well. We topped 30 million a while back.

On a related note; I took Mrs Dog out for Sunday Dinner and we noted the restaurants were deserted. So were the stores.

dogsoldier on September 2, 2012 at 4:20 PM

Remember if you’re on Twitter………or Facebook…

Tomorrow, September 3rd is “empty chair day”.

#emptychairday

Alinsky rule on ridicule……mmmm, what number was that again?

PappyD61 on September 2, 2012 at 4:23 PM

Over at “The Corner” Kevin D. Williamsom makes this observation about who cares for the poor:

Jay reminds us of an important point: The great achievement of the Reagan economy wasn’t that the rich got a lot richer (though they did, and good for them!) but that the poor got a lot richer, too. As Treasury figures from the era document, the vast majority (nearly 85 percent) of those who were poor in 1979 (meaning they resided in the lowest income quintile) were in a higher quintile by 1988; even more impressive, two-thirds of them had moved up two quintiles or more. And most impressive of all: Of the people who were in the lowest income quintile in 1979, more had moved to the top quintile by 1988 than remained in the bottom quintile. Which is to say, if you were on the bottom in 1979, you were statistically more likely to be on the top by 1988 than to remain at the bottom.

Some of that is of course the result of passing time: Most people’s incomes go up as they get older. But if you compare the Reagan years with any other stretch in postwar history, you’ll be hard pressed to find a time during which the poor did better. The poverty rate was cut by 16 percent in the Reagan years, and the total income of the bottom 20 percent more than doubled, rising from $181 billion to $476 billion.

Who wants to bet that the income of the bottom 20 percent will have doubled at the end of the Obama administration? If the Reagan years are what a “decade of neglect” looks like, then bring on the neglect, which produced considerably better real-world results than all of Barack Obama’s fine speeches combined.

So Obysmal and his promoters may try to mock going back to the good old days, statistics demonstrate that there is much to celebrated about them.

onlineanalyst on September 2, 2012 at 4:30 PM

They can’t say “We need more time!”.

Because the answer to that is “What the &*^$ have you (*&^^ been doing for over three years?”.

The two years of total Dem control never happened.

The R’s should take a magnifying glass to that.

IlikedAUH2O on September 2, 2012 at 4:57 PM

Can’t lie every time huh? YUSSSSS! Watch him get fired, haha!

Gatekeeper on September 2, 2012 at 5:14 PM

I have a question for Democrats: What if Bush had a third term and said that in order to fix the economy, he needs to spend 1 trillion dollars per year as opposed to 200 billion? That he needs to implement a huge entitlement program that will cost trillions? That he wants to raise taxes, the debt ceiling and never pass a budget?

Would you re-elect him for a fourth term if that were allowed? If not, why would you re-elect Obama?

MrX on September 2, 2012 at 5:50 PM

Here are a couple of tips:

- mild does not come from the grocery store
- money does not come from banks
- electricity does not come from the wall outlets
- water does not come from the tap
- children really don’t come from storks
- money does not simply get printed (unless you are a clueless leftist inept moron)
- etc

How shameful that they system ‘brought you up’ this way.

Schadenfreude on September 2, 2012 at 1:57 PM

Yes, you’re seeing the “wealth is magic candy that evil, top-hatted vampire capitalists (like Mitt Romney) are keeping us from” mentality of the left in full swing.

The “prof” is also moronic in failing to understand that large corporations by-and-large don’t like laissez-faire capitalism any more than he does. It forces them to keep justifying themselves through competition, which is why they want rent-seeking advantages from government that they shouldn’t have in order to shut off new competition in their fields. This idiocy was on display recently in a new McSweeney’s compilation where a hack “rewrote” Atlas Shrugged to sing the praises of “banksters,” dishonestly ignoring the fact that Rand would have denounced the government trying to make good on derivative failures by bailing out banks.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/10/kill_the_bailout.html

ebrown2 on September 2, 2012 at 5:53 PM

I am aware that we are all fallible.

But Eastwood was correct.

In my line of work (and probably yours unless you are an academic) – if you had executed your job like Barky executes his – you would have been let go.

I would be gentle about it. I am sure you are a nice guy. And I’m sorry about all this.

But this is not working out.

CorporatePiggy on September 2, 2012 at 6:00 PM

At this point we have a problem with the gentleman who some of us thought would be a decent leader.

Some people have more than one problem with him. And I sometimes do think maybe there is more going on here than is apparent.

But being a numbers type they tell you all you need to know.

This relationship is demonstrably not working out. And blaming that evil stupid Texan redneck racist for it 4 years later? Sorry son, that’s not going to wash.

CorporatePiggy on September 2, 2012 at 6:03 PM

Watching Axeldodge sidestep the question right now. This is hilarious. Yeah, we suck, but Mitt has not offered a better solution. If this is the best the Democrats can do, no wonder this country is falling apart.

Now Chris is hitting him with the hard numbers. Axeldodge still tap dancing. Barry’s clear agenda for the future, blah blah. Romney’s tax returns – DRINK! Last decade brought economy to its knees – Blame Boooosh – DRINK!

He and Martin O’Malley must have coordinated their lies today. Unemployment getting “smaller” LOL. Of course, when the denominator is smaller….

Auto workers jobs saved (by the taxpayers), blah blah. We have a lot of work to do, tax cut for the wealthy, Medicare into a voucher program. Well, David, at least it would exist if it were a voucher program. You drained it dry for socialistcare.

Philly on September 2, 2012 at 6:07 PM

This is just painful. Pay down the deficit and “invest”. Invest means spend more money, so how do they propose to pay down the deficit and spend more at the same time? Why, TAXES on everyone, that’s how. It’s like nails on a chalkboard at this point.

Philly on September 2, 2012 at 6:09 PM

So that would be a “no?”

morganfrost on September 2, 2012 at 6:09 PM

Wallace lays out the comparison on economic statistics between January 2009 and today, and asks Axelrod again: are voters better off now than four years ago? Answer: Er ….

Not only are we worse off than we were four years ago, we are officially worse off than we were under Jimmy Carter.

Since the numbers for August won’t be released until Friday morning (mere hours after Obama’s speech on Thursday night!), I’ll use July numbers.

Employment-Population Ratio (the % employment of our noninstitutional civilian population age 16 and over):

January 2009: 60.6%
July 2012: 58.4%

And what was it in July 1980, when Jimmy Carter was running for re-election? 58.8%.

So the % of our population that is employed is not only lower than January 2009 but also lower than it was at the same point of Jimmy Carter’s failed Presidency.

The average Employment-population ratio during Carter’s Presidency: 59.1%

The average Employment-population ratio during Obama pResidency: 58.7%

Obama is officially worse than Carter.

ITguy on September 2, 2012 at 6:10 PM

Employment-Population Ratio:

The worst month under President Bush was better than the best month under pResident Obama.

ITguy on September 2, 2012 at 6:12 PM

I watched it, and called it “Axe Goes Ape.” Wow, did he look desperate!

PattyJ on September 2, 2012 at 6:12 PM

“They talk about facing those problems and they just don’t do it.” Well, Axeldodge, they are not in the White House so they can’t. Please have your boss step aside and leave so Mitt and Paul can get to work.

I don’t see a bounce, says David. LOLOLOL. Snarky bromides is all that came from the RNC convention. This guy is delusional. It looks like Chris wants to laugh in his face. Amazing.

Philly on September 2, 2012 at 6:16 PM

Axelrod looked like a sweaty, rambling mess. It’s looking pretty bad for Barry.

Philly on September 2, 2012 at 6:17 PM

Invest means spend more money,
Philly on September 2, 2012 at 6:09 PM

More taxpayer money on public sector boondoggles.

Thank you for pointing this out.

When socialists say ‘invest’ what they mean is ‘spend YOUR cash on non-profitable public sector projects that will never break even because they don’t have to and btw why should they?’

You invested in GM. Along with the rest of us.

Did your investment adviser ask you if you were interested in taking a stake in GM?

No he didn’t.

He pulled a Madoff on you.

So you are a shareholder in a loser car company you never had an interest in anyway.

I see a pattern.

Chains.

CorporatePiggy on September 2, 2012 at 6:21 PM

Villarigosa is pouring on the hyperbole. A platform from another century. Obama’s was from another universe – heal the planet, slow the rise of the ocean. I doubt the libs would know common sense if you heard it. Mitt stated his platform clearly – his promise is to us and our families. Since liberals are clearly anti-family, they would not know how to relate to that line of reasoning.

Philly on September 2, 2012 at 6:21 PM

I caught that moment on the morning FOX broadcast. No surprise.

Who actually answers the question posed? Rather, politicians and lawyers answer the question they wanted asked, regardless.

maverick muse on September 2, 2012 at 6:54 PM

Soon to be a confirmed loser. Never to be thought of again. No accomplishment for the history books worth reading. Loser!

Bmore on September 2, 2012 at 6:58 PM

CorporatePiggy on September 2, 2012 at 6:21 PM

So true, Piggy. If GM goes belly up again, and certainly if it happens before the election, the torches and pitchforks will come out. Especially if the governmnent wants more money for a bailout. We’ve wasted enough money to give the unions control of Government Motors while non-union employees and stockholders lost everything.

Enough.

Philly on September 2, 2012 at 7:05 PM

A platform from another century.

Yep, Marxism is that.
Marx 1818-1883

And Karl didn’t even originate communism. He just applied his name to what he codified as if his Manifesto were authentic.

Rousseau’s Social Contract was published in 1762, before the American Revolution that preceded the series of French Revolutions.

Villaraigosa is an ignorant buffoon who doesn’t know his front from his backside.

The Democrat party agenda is “in your face” deceit, ignorance and barbarity at home and abroad. At least the Republicans apply “good manners” to the same.

“You hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy of you, when he said: “‘This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’”” Matthew 15:7-9

maverick muse on September 2, 2012 at 7:09 PM

Saul Alinsky Axelrod began lying at 0:35 and didn’t stop lying until 2:36

When I look into Axelrod’s eyes it’s like looking into the dead, inhuman, cold eyes of a shark.

CatchAll on September 2, 2012 at 8:12 PM

Good job Chris! The Hitler clone had no answer for you. He sounded like a Robot searching for words! Liars just can’t re-act fast enough!!!

Jersey Dan on September 2, 2012 at 8:38 PM

Also- Where exactly are all these 4.5 million jobs Obama created in the last four years? This seems to be a big part of today’s pre-rehearsed talking points. I’m serious- what jobs are they referring to?

BettyRuth on September 2, 2012 at 2:25 PM

If you listen to the soundbite, Axelrod and the dems say Obama created those jobs in the last 29 months (or two years, 5 months).

But, Obama has been in office over 43 months.

It sounds to me like they started counting new jobs after the large amount of job losses bottomed out.

kakypat on September 2, 2012 at 10:19 PM

They want to compare differences? OK.

Bush was incessently bad-mouthed in the MSM when he did not get to N.O. as sonn as hurricane Katrina struck. Zero STILL has not gotten there and only plans to do so Monday (what, 5 days later?) because Mitt Romnet has already been there!

And what was our Dear Leader doing that was so important? Campaigning. Just like always.

IrishEyes on September 2, 2012 at 10:56 PM

If you listen to the soundbite, Axelrod and the dems say Obama created those jobs in the last 29 months (or two years, 5 months). But, Obama has been in office over 43 months. It sounds to me like they started counting new jobs after the large amount of job losses bottomed out.
kakypat on September 2, 2012 at 10:19 PM

Even that is a lie. Of course there aren’t 4 million more JOBS now than there were 29 months ago. There are 4 million people who’ve dropped off the Unemployment rolls. And, by a complete coincidence there are almost that many more people who have suddenly decided they’re “disabled.”

Frankly, after all the he’s gotten away with so far, I’m surprised Obama doesn’t take credit for THAT statistic. After all, that’s a skill any former bag man for the daley machine should be proud to have: kneecapping people.

logis on September 2, 2012 at 10:58 PM

You’d think that broom on nimrod’s upper lip would keep some of the filth from coming out of his mouth, but that’s what I get for thinking.

Sherman1864 on September 3, 2012 at 12:58 AM

The Obama camp is sticking to their talking points and refuse to admit their failures of the president. We are not idiots out here, and the facts and non-actions speak for themselves. New leadership will be coming soon. They will all be packing their things soon. One term.

Amazingoly on September 3, 2012 at 7:41 AM

If you are among the 50% that did not pay taxes, and if you are among the 50% that did not pay federal taxes and received some kind of economic help (food stamps, EBT, affordable housing) YOU ARE NOT MIDDLE CLASS. Let’s just get that straight.

Fleuries on September 3, 2012 at 10:55 AM

Okay, so the argument is the economy was so bad that its going to take some time to work through it. But when Reagan took office his economy situation was much worse and he turned the economy around within his first term of office. And that was even without the government spending cuts he wanted. I hope Romney will take lessons from Reagan on how to turn an economy around and we shall see

lwssdd on September 3, 2012 at 11:51 AM

The fact that you HotAirhead Republicans are stuck on a rhetorical jibe from 1980 is exactly why you’re going to get your butts handed to you in November.

2012 isn’t 1980.

The majority of the American public still rightly places the blame for today’s economy on the big-spending Bush/GOP policies of 2000-08 and its useless war in Iraq. They also understand that a vote for Romney/Ryan is a return to those disastrous policies.

Romney isn’t even a businessman. He’s a born-to-wealth banker whose money is secretly stashed every on earth but in America. He miraculously makes the Indonesian-raised Kenyan-American Obama looked 1,000% more representative of what it means to be American.

You’re going to lose in November.

bifidis on September 3, 2012 at 12:37 PM

Crooks.

Dr. ZhivBlago on September 3, 2012 at 1:14 PM

“We’re in a better position…”

.. to implode the economy, nullify the Constitution, and establish totalitarian rule.
FORWARD, COMRADES!

Kenosha Kid on September 3, 2012 at 5:27 PM

You’re going to lose in November.

bifidis on September 3, 2012 at 12:37 PM

Here’s looking forward to a crystal goblet filled with your wonderfully bitter tears in November.

Sweet, sweet nectar that will be.

Midas on September 3, 2012 at 10:11 PM

Just a thought David.
http://homicides.redeyechicago.com/

diogenes on September 3, 2012 at 10:12 PM

Are we better off than 4 years ago David? How about the price for gasoline? I guess talk is cheap though.
http://www.gasbuddy.com/gb_gastemperaturemap.aspx

diogenes on September 3, 2012 at 10:35 PM

Romney isn’t even a businessman. He’s a born-to-wealth banker whose money is secretly stashed every on earth but in America. He miraculously makes the Indonesian-raised Kenyan-American Obama looked 1,000% more representative of what it means to be American.

You’re going to lose in November.

bifidis on September 3, 2012 at 12:37 PM

LOL
THIS from the idiots that put up rich boy John Kerry…too funny

Strike Hornet on September 4, 2012 at 4:00 AM

Axlerod gets creepier everytime I see him.

onomo on September 4, 2012 at 5:57 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3