About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

"Fundamentally" wrong: CNN's King twisted facts in linking Obama to McCain's "fundamentals of the economy are strong" comment

March 14, 2009 8:13 pm ET

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED

SUMMARY: On Anderson Cooper 360, John King alleged: "The president today said there were fundamentally sound aspects of the economy. He says we'll get through this because of the innovative entrepreneurs, companies that are making good products, workers, American workers who are so productive. Almost exactly the same message he criticized John McCain for during the election." In fact, Obama criticized McCain for broadly stating that "the fundamentals of our economy are strong." Indeed, it was only after Obama criticized McCain that McCain revised his comments to assert that by "fundamentals," he had been referring to "the American worker, and their innovation, their entrepreneurship, the small business."

46 Comments

During the March 13 edition of CNN's Anderson Cooper 360, guest host and CNN chief national correspondent John King alleged: "The president today said there were fundamentally sound aspects of the economy. He says we'll get through this because of the innovative entrepreneurs, companies that are making good products, workers, American workers who are so productive. Almost exactly the same message he criticized [Sen.] John McCain for during the election." In fact, Obama criticized McCain in September 2008 for broadly stating that "the fundamentals of our economy are strong," not for, as King claimed, specifically pointing to entrepreneurs, companies, and American workers as "fundamentally sound aspects of the economy." Indeed, it was only after Obama criticized McCain that McCain revised his comments to assert that by "fundamentals," he had been referring to "the American worker, and their innovation, their entrepreneurship, the small business."

Moments after misrepresenting Obama's criticism of McCain, King also falsely suggested that Obama had broadly stated in his March 13 remarks that "the economy is fundamentally strong." In fact, Obama did not comment on the broad "fundamentals" of the economy. As King had noted earlier, Obama pointed to specific "fundamentally sound aspects of our economy," including, in Obama's words, "all the outstanding companies, workers, all the innovation and dynamism in this economy."

Fox News host Alisyn Camerota similarly mischaracterized Obama's remark during the March 14 edition of Fox & Friends, asserting that "this week, he [Obama] said the economy is fundamentally sound." Later in the program, Camerota aired Obama's remark, making clear that he had specified "fundamentally sound aspects of our economy" and had not made the broad statement that Camerota attributed to him. Camerota also hosted Fox News contributor Karl Rove, who claimed that "Senator John McCain last fall when the Dow was at 11,000 and unemployment was about 6 percent sa[id] essentially what President Obama said in the Oval Office this week."

According to a March 14 New York Times article, the Republican National Committee also referenced McCain's September 2008 remarks on the economy:

The Republican National Committee sent out an e-mail message comparing the condition of the economy today against where it was when Mr. McCain spoke of fundamental soundness last September.

When the Democrats ridiculed Mr. McCain for that remark, the Dow was at 10,917, compared with 7,170 at the market's opening on Friday, the Republicans pointed out. Unemployment is at 8.1 percent, compared with 6.2 percent in September, and the national debt is $1.35 trillion higher.

From Obama's March 13 speech:

If you've been laid off your job, if you've lost your home, then, you know, right now is very tough. But we're providing help along the way. That's why we put a housing program in place; that's why we're going to be announcing additional steps to help small businesses.

But if we are -- if we are keeping focused on all the fundamentally sound aspects of our economy, all the outstanding companies, workers, all the innovation and dynamism in this economy, then we're going to get through this. And I'm very confident about that.

From McCain's September 15, 2008, speech:

As you know, there's been tremendous turmoil in our financial markets and Wall Street, and it is -- it's -- people are frightened by these events. Our economy, I think, still the fundamentals of our economy are strong. But these are very, very difficult time. And I promise you, we will never put America in this position again. We will clean up Wall Street. We will reform government.

During the March 13 Anderson Cooper segment, King aired a clip from a November 3, 2008, campaign appearance in which Obama said of McCain's remarks: " I know that not only was John McCain fundamentally wrong, it sums up this id-- the fact that he's out of touch." The Obama campaign also immediately criticized McCain's remarks. In a speech in Grand Junction, Colorado, hours after McCain's remarks, Obama said, in part:

It's not that I think John McCain doesn't care what's going on in the lives of most Americans. I just think [he] doesn't know. He doesn't get what's happening between the mountain in Sedona where he lives and the corridors of Washington where he works. Why else would he say that we've made great progress economically under George Bush? Why else would he say that the economy isn't something he understands as well as he should? Why else would he say, today, of all days -- just a few hours ago -- that the fundamentals of the economy are still strong? Senator -- what economy are you talking about?

As numerous media outlets documented, McCain changed his message on the economy after the Obama campaign criticized his comment. Indeed, later that day during a campaign stop in Orlando, Florida, McCain said: "And my opponents may disagree, but those fundamentals -- the American worker, and their innovation, their entrepreneurship, the small business -- those are the fundamentals of America, and I think they're strong." During the same appearance, McCain also reportedly said: "The fundamentals of our economy are at risk. ... And those fundamentals are threatened, they are threatened and at risk because some on Wall Street have treated Wall Street like a casino.''

From the March 13 of CNN's Anderson Cooper 360:

JOHN KING (guest host): And Joe [Johns], what about the political risk to the president? When they're talking up the economy -- and they have a few good days like this -- and God bless, we needed them. What's the risk next week if we say the market goes down some?

JOHNS (CNN correspondent): Well, the risk is ridicule. You don't want to appear that you're in the White House and you're out of touch with everyday Americans. You know what happened to John McCain when he talked about the fundamentals of the economy being sound.

Today, the president saying something that sounds pretty similar to that. So there's always that issue of people looking at the president and saying, "What is he thinking about? Look at what I'm going through right here on Main Street."

You know, the other thing, too, is that economists and people on TV can make fun of you. You know, economists are not necessarily comedians, but I know that joke that's been out there again and again about the highest-ranking official in the administration being a woman named Rosy Scenario.

It's a joke, it's pretty funny, and yeah, that's the kind of thing he wants to avoid.

KING: Well, Katie, another thing the administration tried to do this week is not just talk up the economy but to try to make peace with business leaders.

KATIE BENNER (Fortune magazine): Sure.

KING: There's a perception in town and perhaps a perception on Wall Street that business and the Obama administration won't get along.

How important is it that the president goes into the room and says, "Hey, I want to listen to you, and kick the tires when you want to."

BENNER: Well, it's very important. Because there is a perception amongst the business community, bankers, Wall Street traders that the Obama administration has been extremely fractured in its message and has just not known what it's doing.

Now they need business to have faith in them because they're going to be working together. Undoubtedly, the government will have to pour more money in this economy, and they want to do it on the same side as business.

They don't want to be struggling with people, fighting with people. They're going to need companies and banks to participate in certain government programs and help the government out. Because, you know, Wall Street does need to participate in these bailout programs.

KING: And Joe, I want to come back to the point you were just making about what Obama said today, as opposed to what candidate Obama said during the campaign. The president today said there were fundamentally sound aspects of the economy.

He says we'll get through this because of the innovative entrepreneurs, companies that are making good products, workers, American workers who are so productive. Almost exactly the same message he criticized John McCain for during the election.

Let's listen to Senator McCain. This is Obama talking about Senator McCain back in November.

OBAMA [video clip]: He said, and I quote, "the fundamentals of our economy are strong." You don't need to boo, you just need to vote. Florida -- Florida, you and I know that not only was John McCain fundamentally wrong, it sums up this id-- the fact that he's out of touch, this out-of-touch, "on your own" economic philosophy.

KING: Joe Johns, a couple hundred thousand jobs lost since Obama became president, the unemployment rate going up. John McCain was out of touch then, but Barack Obama can say the economy is fundamentally strong now?

JOHNS: Well, you know, people look at you and laugh. And as I was saying, I mean, peop-- there is a lot of ridicule out there. There are a lot of people saying, "What is the president talking about?" We've had two or three days that look a little promising.

I think what the administration is pointing to mainly is this issue of the appearance that confidence, consumer confidence is going up just a bit. But in the long run, the president's going to have to try to point up that the economy is doing well whenever the economy is doing well and console Americans when the economy is not doing well. It's an issue of riding out the volatility of the markets in a lot of ways, John.

KING: So Katie, a little different challenge being president than being a candidate.

BENNER: Of course, of course.

KING: All right, we'll leave it there for tonight. Katie Benner, thank you very much, and Joe Johns as well. Enjoy your weekend.

From the March 14 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends:

CAMEROTA: We're going to be soon talking to Karl because first, President Obama said that we were in an economic crisis. Then, this week, he said the economy is fundamentally sound, that we shouldn't all be panicking. Which one is it? We're going to ask Karl Rove.

[...]

OBAMA [video clips]: The greatest economic crisis in our lifetime. ... Credit crisis. ... Economic crisis. ... So that a crisis like this never happens again. ...Crisis. ... This crisis ... Crisis ... I don't think things are ever as good as we say, and they're never as bad as they say. And things two years ago were not as good as we thought because there were a lot of underlying weaknesses in the economy. And they're not as bad as we think they are now.

CAMEROTA: Well, then stop using the word "crisis." It seems the White House is giving off mixed messages about our economic situation. Are we in a crisis or are we not? Joining me now is Karl Rove, former deputy chief of staff, of course, to President Bush and Fox News contributor. Karl, it was interesting because it was President Obama who had used the word "crisis" and said that we were in pretty dire straits, but then this week, he said something quite different. Let me play for you what he just said.

OBAMA [video clip]: If we are keeping focused on all the fundamentally sound aspects of our economy, all the outstanding companies, workers, all the innovation and dynamism in this economy, then we're going to get through this.

CAMEROTA: Karl, what's going on with the message?

ROVE: Well, I think the White House came to understand that they sounded like they were talking down the American economy and they want to put a positive face on this. But it really is interesting to me -- I saw a clip on YouTube of Senator John McCain last fall when the Dow was at 11,000 and unemployment was about 6 percent saying essentially what President Obama said in the Oval Office this week. And then they played a clip of then-candidate Obama, Senator Obama, attacking John McCain, saying, "What universe is he living in? How out of touch is he to say those things?" Now, remember, that's when the Dow was at 11 -- nearly 11,000. Now it's at 7,000. That's when unemployment was at 6; it's now at 8.

I do think that frankly the American economy -- if you look at the American innovator and the American entrepreneur and the American worker and you look at our productivity and our innovation and our competitiveness that, look, the American economy is going to come out of this.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by LuvLuLu (March 14, 2009 8:37 pm ET)
         
      There is a huge difference between - But if we are -- if we are keeping focused on all the fundamentally sound aspects of our economy, all the outstanding companies, workers, all the innovation and dynamism in this economy, then we're going to get through this. And I'm very confident about that. - And - The fundamentals of the economy are strong. - It's like apples and oranges. "Fundamentally" is used as an adjective to describe the good parts of our economic structure. "Fundamentals" are the parts of our economy, good and bad, sound and not so strong and really bleak looking.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by LuvLuLu (March 15, 2009 11:38 am ET)
           

        John King did it again, as did David Gregory, both on their Sunday morning talk shows. King had Carville and Bill Bennett on, and David Gregory had top economic advisor to President Obama named Romer on.

        There are fundamentally sound aspects of our economy. Put in a different adverb, and one could say that there are aspects of the economy that are essentially sound.

        That is not the same, at all, as saying that the fundamentals of the economy are sound. There's a huge difference between saying that the economy is fundamentally sound and saying that there are aspects of the economy that are fundamentally sound!

        Of course, after McCain said something that was undeniably false, his team came back and 'clarified' that he 'really' meant what Obama said this week - that there are aspects of the economy that are sound, and Obama didn't disagree with that comment! He disagreed when McCain said that the fundamentals of the economy are strong, because it wasn't true and was misleading and was meant to call Obama's concerns about the economy into question.

        And that's the whole point. McCain was trying to act like Obama was crying wolf. We now see that Obama wasn't crying wolf. Instead, Bush was sitting on his hands while our economy crumbled around him! And McCain was saying that we shouldn't acknowledge reality when it came to discussions about the economy! We're still hearing that today from Republicans saying that Obama is wrong for being realistic about where the economy is today.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by Floyd (March 16, 2009 9:58 am ET)
             

          The AP notes that during the 2008 campaign, Barack Obama "relentlessly
          criticized his Republican opponent, Sen. John McCain, for declaring, 'The
          fundamentals of our economy are strong.' Obama's team painted the veteran
          senator as out of touch and failing to grasp the challenges facing the
          country." But on Sunday, "that optimistic message came from economic adviser
          Christina Romer." On NBC's Meet The Press, Romer said, "Of course the
          fundamentals are sound in the sense that the American workers are sound, we
          have a good capital stock, we have good technology."
          http://www.usnews.com/usnews/politics/bulletin/bulletin_090316.htm

             What is meant by that statement by Obama's economic adviser? Doesn't that sound like Obama is stating the economy is fundamentally sound? How can this be reworded into meaning Obama does not believe that our economy is fundamentally sound?

          Report Abuse
          • Author by skeptical (March 16, 2009 3:18 pm ET)
               

            Context baby!  What's the question and what's the complete answer?

            Transcript please?

            Report Abuse
            • Author by Floyd (March 16, 2009 4:01 pm ET)
                 

                 You mean there's a difference between McCain saying the economy is 'fundamentally sound' and when Obama says the economy is 'fundamentally sound'? Which question/answer was McCain statement related to?

              Report Abuse
              • Author by roundhouse (March 17, 2009 3:26 am ET)
                   

                You just wish McCain had been talking about working people instead of Wall St.

                Report Abuse
    • Author by wolf kotenberg (March 14, 2009 10:26 pm ET)
         
      the fossil also said he knew nothing about economics.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by pauldd (March 15, 2009 4:39 pm ET)
           

        The fossil?  Isn't that Larry King?

        Anyway, this further contradicts the fasle liberal MSM meme (at least for those who have taken an objective looks at it).  I guess right-wing talking-point propaganda seeps into the mainstream subconciously.  It's great that MMFA continues to point it out but until liberals invest more in media it will continue to be an uphill battle.  The majority of the public still believes that print and TV media have a liberal bias.

        Thanks MMFA

        Report Abuse
    • Author by princeofwheels (March 14, 2009 11:16 pm ET)
         
      Does Senator McCain realize that millions of people are on welfare and not counted as UNEMPLOYED. That did not exist in the 30s' ergo, long lines at soup kitchens and people doing anything to make a buck. Welfare was developed as a safeguard to keep the very poor from rioting just to feed their families. If we disband all welfare programs tomorrow, what would the unemployment/jobless rate be, a fundamental of our economy. And don't the economic gurus on Fox realize that our economy is now global and that the US isn't the only game in town. Reaganistasseem to forget that facing his recession, China wasn't interested in capitalism, Russia was broke and our jobs were high paying. The above poster is right, this Administration knows how to fix it and one of the ways is to keep the Republicons out of the way. Class warfare they complain..well, it has always existed and now another class is winning.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Limit Corp. Ownership (March 14, 2009 11:45 pm ET)
           

        You make a good point prince....

        And let's not forget that our unemployment rate is "fundamentally" significantly understated.  Folks who have stopped looking for work are also excluded from the unemployment numbers.  Also, those who are working part-time but say they want more hours are also excluded from the unemployment numbers.

        The corporate media doesn't want to alarm anyone. How thoughtful.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by progressiveright (March 15, 2009 11:51 am ET)
             

          Another group that in not included is people like me who are on either social security disability or va disability and labled as unemployable.

          Report Abuse
    • Author by ButteryPat (March 14, 2009 11:27 pm ET)
         

      Well, I guess it's "almost the same" in that they both used the word "fundemental". This is a joke, right? Certainly part of John King's job description requires having a "fundemental" knowledge of the "fundementals" of the English language. OH NO! I SAID THE SAME THING I CRITICIZED JOHN MCCAIN FOR SAYING!!!!!

      Report Abuse
    • Author by fmbanker87 (March 15, 2009 12:04 am ET)
         
      Obama is a fool. He should not talk about the market or investments. He doesn't understand them, and even if he did, he risks any credibility, which is not much to begin with, on the outcome of his investment advice. Bush never did that, he knew better. Obama is just winging it. What a joke.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by sportsguydave (March 15, 2009 12:18 am ET)
           

        Thanks as always for the minority view from Planet Wingnut.

        60-plus percent of your countrymen disagree.

        And of course, after eight years of the moron you no doubt voted for, the bar WAS set pretty low ...

        Report Abuse
      • Author by wolf kotenberg (March 15, 2009 1:26 am ET)
           

        appreciate your commentary........from lalaland of the lemings. In the world of your supreme leader either you are with us........or you are not. Bush fooled you so bad and completely, you can't admit he did this, and masterfully.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by captfoster2 (March 15, 2009 3:24 am ET)
             

          I'm curious clown....

          What makes you think that you can come in here to MMfA, talk stupid and not expect to be called on it?

          I have to admit though... that your right about one thing... Bush never bothered to tell us anything about investments... he didn't want any of us mythical little people to have any hope... he was too busy telling us to go shopping instead of asking all of us to collectively sacrifice in the name of this pathetic War on Terror (that was sold to us as the end of America if we didn't waste our time and effort fighting it)...

          So you and any other brainless Bush defenders... go on typing away your idiocy... the rest of us will live here in what I call... reality!

          Report Abuse
          • Author by captfoster2 (March 15, 2009 3:26 am ET)
               

            oops.... I tagged a reply to the wrong guy....

            Sorry Wolfkotenberg... NOT YOU BUD!...

            I was aiming for FMBANKER87...

            Report Abuse
            • Author by wolf kotenberg (March 15, 2009 11:58 am ET)
                 

              Ooops.

              Report Abuse
            • Author by wolf kotenberg (March 15, 2009 8:33 pm ET)
                 

              yeah, I was scratching my head a little trying to rationalise where that bomb came from. I knew calling Buffet a buffoon could raise concerns about my sanity but i didn't think it had lasting effects. Ha.

              Report Abuse
      • Author by princeofwheels (March 15, 2009 1:35 am ET)
           

        bankerperson, I am not like the rest of the posters here to who would even consider critizing you but the opening line of your combative post is slightly incorrect. You wrote,"Obama is a fool." I must correct you, it should read "Obama IS the President of the United States." Now, correct me if I am wrong. Otherwise, why are you always trying to show off your wisdom here at MMFA? You would be a genius at NewsMax or Freeperville. But, your comments are welcome here and are a breath of fresh air. I makes me feel correct at least 90% of the time.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by princeofwheels (March 15, 2009 1:39 am ET)
             

          I forgot, Bush "never knew" is all you can say about President Bush, he NEVER KNEW.

          Report Abuse
      • Author by magnolialover (March 15, 2009 9:27 am ET)
           
        Obama is a fool: Well, your first statement is wrong. You don't identify what you think Obama is a fool about. If he is a general fool, then you're really wrong. I mean, top of his class at Harvard, and during his undergrad time, first black person to be editor of Harvard Law Review, ran probably one of the most disciplined campaigns for President ever. He is no fool. He should not talk about the market or investments: Why not? Isn't it, you know, good to hear your smart president talk about things like that? God forbid our President appear to be, you know, smart, or knowledgeable about something. I mean, the last guy didn't appear to be intellectually stimulated by much of anything. How do you know he doesn't understand them? he risks any credibility which is not much to begin with: With this one, you're joking right? Because last time I checked, well over 60 percent of this country believed he was doing a pretty good job of running it thus far (it's still early in his administration of course), and that also goes to show that his credibility is good, as in, people trust him. Obama is just winging it. What a joke: What is he winging? You mean the large scale comprehensive recovery plan that his administration lobbied for, got passed in the House and Senate and is now being injected into our economy as we speak? That kind of "winging it". Mr. fmbanker, you're a right wing talking points dream. You repeat them so often, that I'm sure that you've convinced yourself that you're correct.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by progressiveright (March 15, 2009 12:00 pm ET)
             

          I have to say that any one intelligent or unintellegent can be a fool.  A fool is the oppisite of a wise person all foolishness is is a lack of wisdom. Intelligence is what you know. Wisdom is the ability to use what you know. Any one can gain intelligence however only some people have wisdom. And yes Obama is wise. Bush was not wise but might not have been a fool even though he did a lot of foolish things. I think the ost foolish thing Bush did was to put himself into a job that was over his head on purpose.

          Report Abuse
    • Author by jjamele2880 (March 15, 2009 9:39 am ET)
         

      Obama is NOT a fool, he's clearly a very intelligent man; however, I object to the pointing to degrees from Harvard and other paper indications of intelligence as proof of this.  If we should have learned anything from the past decade, it's that there are a lot of total idiots out there with pieces of paper from institutions of alleged higher learning  framed and mounted on their walls.  I no longer accept someone as an expert on economics because they have an MBA from Yale, and I know longer assume a high IQ from someone just because they were handed a piece of parchment.  I consider Alan Keyes to be one of the biggest idiots on the planet, and he has a PhD.  Michael Savage and Mark Levin are drooling neandertals with advanced degrees. 

      Education and Intelligence are two totally different things. Enough said.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by jeannie352415 (March 15, 2009 1:45 pm ET)
           

        Your statement is spot on.  Matriculation will be upon me in about two months.  Most of my professors are to be commended for their ability to inspire and educate; others are indeed intelligent within their field, but lack a common sensibility to interact in "real" society.  I will forever remember the few professors whose inappropriate behavior in their classrooms was defended by their claim of "preparing" me for what it's like in the "real world."  I was in the "real world" for nearly 15 years prior to re-entering college.  Those professors have absolutely no clue how miserably they would fail should they ever have to survive in the "real world."  Wow, how did I get soooo off topic?  Perhaps I'm harboring resentment, eh?

        Report Abuse
      • Author by juliajayne (March 15, 2009 4:30 pm ET)
           

        JJ, you make a very good point. Having a degree is not synonymous with intelligence, except perhaps to people who prize titular authority above all else. I've never understood employers who require a degree in a job that would more than likely require little more than on the job learning. It depletes a whole pool of smart, but non degreed people. I'm sure they would argue there are other factors in wanting a college graduate in a certain job. I have heard the arguments and most of those arguments I consider pretty fallacious. 

        One familiar canard I've heard is that a person who completes a degree somehow has more discipline or stick-to-itiveness. There's plenty of counter arguments to that naturally, but it's a popular belief among the hiring class as conventional wisdom. Methinks there just may be some lazy and uncreative thinking going on. ;-) And an overreliance on authoritarian type paradigms.

               

        Report Abuse
    • Author by jeannie352415 (March 15, 2009 1:30 pm ET)
         

      Point One:  This is the "Media Narrative" at work, working to make all of us dumber than coal buckets if we limit our news sources to MSM.  The more I know, the more disgusted I become. Point Two:  Liberal Media Bias, again I'm having trouble comprehending how the CNN crew and David Gregory are engaged in Obama Worship.  Point Three:  Conservatives will Parrot This Phrase, again, again, again, and again, till they believe it (along with a few more independent voters) themselves.  I would quote Obama's phrase, but thankfully, it can't be quoted verbatim - "fundamentally sound _______ ____ _____ economy."  Ugh!

      Report Abuse
    • Author by wesley (March 15, 2009 2:18 pm ET)
         

      Fundamentally wrong...concerning Pres.Obama.

      The sloppiness or planned misrepresentation of facts is not limited to the media. PolitiFact has deemed Obama's statement on American education as "false":

       -- "In 8th grade math, we've fallen to 9th place." -- Pres.Obama

       -- But it was misleading to say they had "fallen" to 9th place. In 1995, they came in 28th. In 1999, they moved up to 19th. In 2003, they climbed to 15th. So rather than falling, U.S. students have actually improved in the past decade.

      We considered giving the president partial credit since American students did come in 9th. But the point of his statement was that they had "fallen" to that position and that mathematics performance in the U.S. is getting worse relative to other countries. And that's just plain False. -- PolitiFact

      Report Abuse
      • Author by clams casino (March 15, 2009 3:30 pm ET)
           

        Look up "non sequitur" in the dictionary and there's a picture of your post next to it.

        Report Abuse
      • Author by pbg (March 15, 2009 4:08 pm ET)
           

        You are correct, sir.

        Bob Somerby, who has been a lion for well over a decade on right-wing lies and misinformation, has nonetheless been even more of a lion in dealing with misinformation on all fronts about education. 

        I encourage everybody to read Bob regularly in general, but he tackles this issue here:

        http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh031109.shtml

        Report Abuse
        • Author by wesley (March 15, 2009 6:49 pm ET)
             

          Thanks for the link...and following that trail produced this from Gerald Bracey at Huffpo concerning Pres.Obama's speech on education:

           -- a lot of the speech contained flat out errors....

          "Just a third of our 13- and 14-year-olds can read as well as they should." This is outright garbage...

          There's that weasel phrase again, "advanced education or training." It's meaningless except as propaganda...

          I voted for Obama. I canvassed for him. I registered voters for him. But on education, he has yet to hit the basket... -- Huffpo

          Yep, he's a politician...and just like most politicians...Pres.Obama can fast and loose with the truth.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by roundhouse (March 16, 2009 3:52 am ET)
               

            You're ridiculous.

            Wild eyed crushed idealist you reveal yourself to be, you  allow your cynicism control you. You didn't even have nerve enough left to believe that your country could produce a person of truly decent values to guide us through these times. So little faith had you in the will of the people in your own Party to find a genuine  leader, let alone the rest of the country to identify the real deal, that you couldn't even bring yourself cast a real vote. You had to pencil in a childish act of ridicule on your most honored moment of citizenship. Well done, Wesley

            So all  you're really left with  now is to endeavor to hammer some manufactured deficiency into Barack Obama. It simply smacks of bitter resentment.

            Really, what are you arguing against? That the President is giving  his best effort to empower us all by working to re-establish U.S. education as the finest in the world? And why shouldn't the president do everything possible to facilitate each and every one of us with the equality of opportunity our founding fathers cherished above all else? If you had within your ability and moral vision, the mandate and  the resources to build, through quality education, a better future for generations to come, why would you not see to it that you give your best effort to make it possible, for even the most humbly possessed among us, to pursue a fulfilled, productive life?

            Why would you not want that?

            Report Abuse
    • Author by trelan1701 (March 15, 2009 3:15 pm ET)
         

      This was a poor choice of words however you cut it.  I can only believe it was intentional but I can't imagine WHY he would give the GOP fodder of any kind.  Maybe he threw them a bone to chew on to keep them distracted with irrelevant stuff?

      Report Abuse
    • Author by Eric Jaffa (March 15, 2009 3:55 pm ET)
         

      I agree with the opinion that there isn't much difference between saying that the fundamentals of the US economy are strong, and saying that the US economy has "fundamentally sound aspects...all the outstanding companies, workers, all the innovation and dynamism in this economy, then we're going to get through this. And I'm very confident about that."

      It's not exactly the same, but still.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by ButteryPat (March 15, 2009 6:06 pm ET)
           

        How? How, besides using the word fundamental do the two statements fall in line? One statement is essentially cheerleading for the country, saying that even though the economy is crap, the workers, the innovation and dynamism are "fundamentally sound" and can help us get out of the mess. The other amounts to a statement that the "fundamentals" used to shape the economy that fell apart are strong and shouldn't be changed.

        Report Abuse
    • Author by jmmartin3402 (March 15, 2009 4:35 pm ET)
         

      King is an idiot.  He did an interview with Cheney that smacked for pre-censorship: he didn't ask the tough questions; didn't take issue with the ex-Veep's now thoroughly discredited notion that the Iraq War was worth its price in money and blood; didn't bring up the Hersch report on Cheney's running a kind of international Money, Inc. in the White House.  Yes, I know he was on NBC, but where is Tim Russert now that we need him?  (Not that Cheney would have agreed to go on that show in the first place.)  I can't wait for the memoir Cheney's writing.  It might get nominated for the National Book Award for fiction.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by clams casino (March 15, 2009 5:01 pm ET)
           

        Tim Russert? Really? Russert was one of Cheney's favorite lapdogs. Cheney has famously said that Russert's show was one of his favorite venues for disseminating propaganda, because Russert was always one to play along. Cheney said that he "controlled the message" on Russert's show.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by ButteryPat (March 15, 2009 6:10 pm ET)
             

          True. And we can't deny this just because of Russert's unfortunate death. He was particularly evocative of Beltway journalism's uselessness and corruption. The fact that he's now held up as a great example of how journalism should be is terrifying at best.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by NiceguyEddie (March 16, 2009 8:42 am ET)
               

            Agreed.  I've always thought Russert to be rather partisan, myself.  He only appeared objective in comparison to Fox.  (Alhough he was better than Mathews.)  But I think the only reason that nobabdy saw this side of Russert was just the whole "liberal media" myth, which made HIM appear objective.  Personally I never really bought it.  Though better than mathews, I'd say - only slightly, and really just less obvious about it. 

            Report Abuse
    • Author by NiceguyEddie (March 16, 2009 8:39 am ET)
         

      There's another difference too: McCain said it the day before the stock market plunged 700 points.  Obama said it just before a week in which we had a net 600 point gain.  Luck?  Coinicdence?  Possibly... but then all the stupid, RW talking heads should stop the trying to pin this recession (completely nonsensicly) on Obama.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by The Scarlet Pimpernel (March 16, 2009 10:02 am ET)
         

      First time visitor to MMFA comments section. Read the stories in a reader but haven't visited the website until now. It's very interesting how some progressives let themselves be led astray from the primary jist of the article by a few wingnuts who don't want to discuss the corporate control (ergo wingnut control) of the MSM. John King is a wingnut who is the darling of the 'New' CNN, the one that is trying to out-Faux News Faux News. A while back, John showed who and what he is when he got all snotty and defensive when he was called on a similar wingnut position in an email exchange that really defined King's credentials as a resident wingnut.

      As to the President's statement, as a progressive, I wasn't to happy with his sucking-up speech to the Business Roundtable. He really SHOULD NOT listen to those of his advisors who tell him to abandon the grim news personna for the visit to Disney World with an emphasis on Fantasyland and the happy faces of the 'It's a Small World After All' crowd. Oh damn! Now I am going to sing that damn song in my head all week again.

      The progressive economists tell us that we are a long way from the bottom of this mess and even that uber-capitalist Warren Buffet is saying that things are really scary. Lets keep to the subject that we are good at: calling the wingnuts on their mismanagement and outright fraud of the greatest economy the world has ever seen, wrecking it with Milton Friedman's neo-liberal capitalism.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by SMTDL (March 16, 2009 1:40 pm ET)
           

        Good observation TSP!!!!! King is really showing his true colors.He must be smart enough to see the difference in the 2 comments as others have pointed out already!!!!It will be interesting to see how reaction to the recent stock market upturn and Bernake's comments yesterday will be "spun"!!!

        Report Abuse
      • Author by foghornleghorn (March 16, 2009 10:59 am ET)
           

         reduction of corporate tax to increase employment —

        In case you missed it, this reduction leads only to more corporate profits with the jobs going overseas.  Wrong again.

        Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.