Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 5:44 PM ET, 10/14/2008

'Jobs, Baby, Jobs'

By Michael Dobbs


McCain adviser Douglas Holtz-Eakin.

"I'm proposing to give our businesses a new American jobs tax credit for each new employee they hire here in the United States over the next two years. "
--Barack Obama, speech in Toledo, Ohio, Oct. 13, 2008.

Barack Obama "proposed a New American Jobs tax credit. That would be a $3,000 tax credit per new job in the United States over the next two years. This is going to be a very expensive proposal that's going to cost about $170 billion had it been in place in 2007." --McCain economics adviser Douglas Holtz-Eakin, conference call, Oct. 13, 2008.

Talk about "lies, damn lies and statistics." The Obama campaign says that a new proposal by the Democratic presidential candidate for a "jobs tax credit" for businesses that create new employment will cost the taxpayer no more than $20 billion a year. The McCain campaign has put a $170 billion annual price tag on the same proposal. So who is telling the truth?

The Facts

This is an excellent example of how the same statistical facts can be spun in entirely different ways by the two presidential campaigns, leading to diametrically opposite conclusions. To listen to the Obama folks, the cost of Obama's new jobs tax credit sounds relatively modest. The McCain campaign depicts the same measure as another example of Obama's big spending habits.

Let's take a look at the McCain numbers first. McCain economics adviser Douglas Holtz-Eakin took the number of total U.S. nonfarm hires for 2007 from a Bureau of Labor Statistics report, available here, to reach a figure of nearly 58 million new jobs in 2007. Multiplying that figure by the $3,000 credit, he arrived at a total cost to the U.S. Treasury of $173 billion.

Nonsense, counters the Obama campaign. If you read the fine print of the Illinois senator's proposal, as elaborated in a Fact Sheet, available here, you see that he is not talking about gross new jobs, he is talking about net new jobs. In other words, if a company hires 100 new workers and gets rid of 90 old workers, that is only 10 new jobs. Furthermore the tax credit will only be available to "existing businesses," i.e. not to start-ups. Here is the language from the Obama Fact Sheet (my italics around the pertinent words).

Obama will provide a new temporary tax credit to companies that add jobs here in the United States. During 2009 and 2010, existing businesses will receive a $3,000 refundable tax credit for each additional full-time employee hired. For example, if a company that currently has 10 U.S. employees increases its domestic full-time employment to 20 employees, this company would get a $30,000 tax credit.

The Obama numbers were crunched by Austan Goolsbee, of NAFTA-gate fame. Goolsbee says he looked at quarterly labor statistics in order to exclude temporary hirings and firings that show up in the monthly Job Openings and Labor Turnover (JOLT) survey cited by Holtz-Eakin. According to the quarterly Business Employment Dynamics (BED) statistics, there were only 24 million new hirings in 2007, not 58 million as claimed by the McCain campaign. But this is still a gross figure, not a net figure.

In order to compute the number of net new jobs, Goolsbee took a sample of 7,000 companies in the COMPUSTAT database, and reached a figure for net employment growth of 7 percent of the workforce for 2007. He assumes, on the basis of this Bureau of Labor Statistics working paper, that job creation rates will fall by about 15 percent in 2008, to 5.95 percent.

Goolsbee went through his final calculations in an-email to the Fact Checker. "5.95 percent of the private workforce of 114 million yields 6.8 million jobs that qualify for the credit. At $3,000 per job, this yields a cost of $20.3 billion per year."

Voila!

I forwarded the Obama campaign figures to McCain-Palin spokesman Brian Rogers, who said that "our estimate was based on our understanding of [the Obama plan] at the time. We stand ready to re-estimate." In other words, they made their $170 billion calculation on the basis of a quick read of the Obama speech and are not sticking by that figure. I will post the McCain "re-estimate" if and when I receive it.

The Pinocchio Test

To be fair to the McCain campaign, Obama's one-sentence reference to his "New American Jobs Tax Credit" in his Ohio speech was not entirely clear. A casual listener could have come away with the impression that he was referring to a credit for all new employees, not net new jobs. In order to understand what he was talking about, you had to read the fine print, in the form of the Fact Sheet, plus various comments by Obama economics advisers. The McCain camp pounced on this ambiguity, which could have been avoided by more precise language in the original speech. Two Pinocchios for each campaign.

(About our rating scale.

By Michael Dobbs  | October 14, 2008; 5:44 PM ET
Categories:  2 Pinocchios, Barack Obama, Candidate Record, Candidate Watch, Economy  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Four Pinocchios for Palin
Next: Final Presidential Debate Fact Check

Comments

Dobbs:

You are SO in the tank for Obama you need a longer oxygen hose. I long ago (May 23, 2008 to be precise -- see "FEATURED ITEM") stopped holding my breath for The "Fact" Checker to EVER stop making excuses for Barack "Told the Truth Slowly" Obama, while the attacks keep coming against John McCain.

Posted by: JakeD | October 14, 2008 6:18 PM | Report abuse

Gov. Palin must be winning.

Even Hillary is promoting "Jobs, baby, jobs" speaks of the McCain-Palin ticket (a pro-baby ticket).

Obama-Biden ticket is "jobs,dead-fetus, jobs" if Hillary needs chant.

Remember Solomon and the two mothers?
The one had the "dead baby" wanted 1/2 of the baby from the true mother.

That is Obama's socialism. The lazy, sinful, cursed people wants part of the blessings from the faithful and blessed. "Tax them more and give to us". Take half of their "baby" by force.

If voters are "as wise as solomon" they will know who is the true mother is.

McCain-Palin 08

Posted by: Reuel | October 14, 2008 6:23 PM | Report abuse

Two pinocchios each seems harsh.

The McCain camp were clearly (if conveniently) misunderstanding the proposal. The Obama camp can't reasonably be expected to spell out detail in a speech if they hope to have anyone listen to the end.

Posted by: AdamR | October 14, 2008 6:27 PM | Report abuse

I do not see why Biden said in Democratic conference convention that his wife passed away in a car accident because the trucker that hit her was drunk , had "drunk wine ,instead of eating lunch " and that "joke" got approved by the democratic mass there. However, Where is his American Integrity in order for him to apply for a high office ? He just supposed that he could get away with the Dead because the Dead could not talk for themselves . But God and the Dead are omnipotent . The trucker's daughter watched the Democratic convention and appealed that to Inside Edition and they investigated the files way back when in 1970's and it turned out that the trucker was not drunk at all ! PLEASE REMEMBER TO VOTE FOR THE NOBLER ONES, LESS EVIL ONES OF THESE PRESIDENT,VICE PRESIDENT CANDIDATES. THANKS

And Sarah Palin also mentioned in the debate that Biden used to say the Obama is Not ready to be a commander-in-chief . And Biden did say bad jokes about Obama ,way back when that cost him an apology to Obama . And now he is submissive to Obama and defends Obama ferociously !

Obama and Biden boasted about REAL change , But we could not see any OUTLINE, PLANS of their REAL CHANGE AT ALL . All they said was just REal change , real change .


Based on their history of promises , of their back-and-forth decisions on major issues , on the integrity of the men that Biden and Obama ... should it be that what you see is what you get ? ! And please remember that regardless of who the president of USA is , a president and a vice president have a whole cabinet , congress and senate to work with them in making decision . Therefore ,Please vote for McCain and Palin . Thanks

DEAR MEDIA , WE ARE SO DISAPPOINTED THAT YOU DISTORED THE STORIES IN FAVOR OF OBAMA. WHERE IS YOUR AMERICAN INTEGRITY ? YOU TRIED TO INFLUENCE NON-INFORMED PEOPLE IN FAVOR FOR OBAMA . PLEASE REMEMBER OBAMA'S RACE TO BE CONGRESSMAN WAY BACK WHEN .PLEASE INVESTIGATE ABOUT THE VOTE FRAUD . WE WONDER WHAT TIM RUSSERT WOULD SAY IF HE WAS STILL ALIVE ? WHERE IS ALL AMERICAN INTEGRITY THESE DAYS ?
--
We must pray as if everything depended on God and work as if everything depended upon us.

St. Ignatius of Loyola

Posted by: godblessed | October 14, 2008 6:29 PM | Report abuse

Who needs a fact checker? They are Obama excuse machine. Mainstream media + major newspapers = Obama Excuse Machine. The debt is in trillions and multiplying everyday and Obama wants to give more giveaways. We need government responsiblities and not more government spending. If the leaders are willing to sacrifice spending, the people are willing to pay taxes! Balance the budget should be a priority! Low Income are in debt with mortgage that they can't afford and the government are in trillion in debts that they can't afford. Sounds familiar! We should be against most of this feel good campaign promises!

Posted by: Idi | October 14, 2008 6:38 PM | Report abuse

Why does the Obama campaign get any "pinocchios" at all? The McCain campaign, in its haste to discredit Obama, incorrectly evaluated Obama's new jobs tax credit. The fact that Obama didn't elaborate his policies at a rally shouldn't earn him a pinocchio-- attendees don't want to hear about boring policy proposals, they want a basic understanding of what those proposals will accomplish. I don't see anything misleading about the Obama campaign's actions...though I can't say that I'm impartial :)

Posted by: Erin | October 14, 2008 6:42 PM | Report abuse

When it comes to 'Change' this election year, are you hoping for a Presidential candidate who would make...

Big Changes
Some Changes
Little Changes
No Changes


http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=3774


.

Posted by: DBlake | October 14, 2008 6:46 PM | Report abuse

Well when you hear Palin and McCain speak you are hearing media bias.....when every statement sounds like gibberish.....you are hearing media bias....when you hear economic proposals that are supposed to stir you and you see how they are really for the super wealthy....you are hearing media bias.....MY FRIENDS are you going to believe me or your lying eyes and ears???? Neocon logic.

Posted by: Media Bias ha ha | October 14, 2008 6:48 PM | Report abuse

To GODBLESSED: Stop crying "biased media"!!! Just because the story is bad for McCain and you don't like the media reporting on his team's incompetency doesn't mean that this article is inaccurate! And just to set the story straight-- the American public has heard ten times more policy proposals and plans to help solve our many domestic and international problems from Obama/Biden than they have from McCain. To be honest, I haven't heard of an original plan from McCain, other than a bailout for failed mortgages, which is a god-awful idea. Remember--- this article is about Obama's proposal for rewarding the creation of new jobs-- I'm pretty sure that is a specific outline/plan for job creation. You really need to think for yourself...and learn how to type a correct sentence.

Posted by: GODBLESSED IS SO STUPID!! | October 14, 2008 6:49 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, I guess Obamaniacs think it should have been Four Pinocchios for McCain again (despite the clear intent of fooling even the "casual listener" who would come away with the impression that Obama was referring to a credit for all new employees, not net new jobs). So, at least Dobbs is not as far "in the tank" as some Obamaniacs ; )

Posted by: JakeD | October 14, 2008 6:50 PM | Report abuse

JakeD- again...if you think that Dobbs is in the tank for Obama, then stop reading his articles. Just because you don't like what is reported doesn't mean that it is biased or inaccurate. At least Obama is consistently making public his proposals to solve our many woes. And what have we heard from McCain? Ayers? Lots of substance that holds, in a country with a downward-spiraling economy, two wars (one completely unjustified), and a tarnished international reputation? Not to mention our energy, education, and environmental problems. Yeah when all that is going on, I would rather hear false claims about Obama's intimate ties to an extremist from four decades ago, than hear innovative plans for getting our country back on track. please.

Posted by: Anonymous | October 14, 2008 6:56 PM | Report abuse

Surely there has to be better things to fact check than this.

Posted by: Anonymous | October 14, 2008 6:59 PM | Report abuse

JakeD- You sure do know how to inject a lot of BS rhetoric into your opinions. I'm pretty sure Obama wasn't "intent on fooling" the casual listener. I'm pretty sure he just didn't go into detail, as that would have bored the "casual listener"

Posted by: Anonymous | October 14, 2008 7:00 PM | Report abuse

Do you know that the head of fat checker worked with Freddie Mac/Fannie Mae. His a liberal. Do not believe with fat checker, they are bias.

Posted by: Lu | October 14, 2008 7:03 PM | Report abuse

For the record, I was simply quoting Dobbs:

"A casual listener could have come away with the impression that he was referring to a credit for all new employees, not net new jobs."

I will read, and post opinions regarding, anything I like.

Posted by: JakeD | October 14, 2008 7:07 PM | Report abuse

Again, when will the "FEATURED ITEM" (dated May 23, 2008 -- almost FIVE moths ago -- about McCain) be replaced? And, will it simply be replaced with ANOTHER McCain "Fact" Check? I mean, by any objective standard, if Dobbs only pursues McCain, there's no other reasonable conclusion than he is IN THE TANK for Obama.

Posted by: JakeD | October 14, 2008 7:15 PM | Report abuse

moths = months (darn Spellchecker ; )

Posted by: JakeD | October 14, 2008 7:18 PM | Report abuse

Roll Obama Roll where those gop senators are going I don't know..

I say Roll ROLL ROLL OBAMA ROLL

Posted by: jerry for Obama | October 14, 2008 7:19 PM | Report abuse

So because McCain's rapid fire response team didn't bother to properly read the whopping SEVEN pages providing the details of the proposal, Obama gets an equal number of Pinocchios? Sounds like you're trying a bit too hard to appease the people on here accusing you of being biased (haven't you figured out yet that they'll always be here, regardless of what you write about either candidate?). Perhaps you can find fault in Obama not wanting to put his audience to sleep with a number-crunching session, or maybe he could have been a bit more specific, but that's one Pinocchio (at best).

But hey, everyone's a critic ;)

Posted by: Anonymous | October 14, 2008 8:05 PM | Report abuse

P-L-E-A-S-E. You think a one time $3,000 tax credit is going to keep any company from off-shoring a $90K per year job that can be done just as well for $50K?. (look for the union label). Does anyone have a clue?

Posted by: B. Real | October 14, 2008 8:51 PM | Report abuse

Obama's plan for a $3000 credit when an employee is added may cost even more than 170 billion with a growing economy. Successful small businesses will get a credit for expansion of workforce with 1/2 the medical costs coming off taxes. Seems like a growth stock, reinforcing success with more coin. Start ups by their nature get the credit. He did not say how he would address companies folding voluntarily to reform to get the credit. I think some adjustments must be made. Fact Checker sometimes does not think things through.

Posted by: Jimbo | October 14, 2008 9:01 PM | Report abuse

Jimbo:

Didn't you claim that Monegan had already filed and settled a lawsuit about being fired?

Posted by: JakeD | October 14, 2008 9:08 PM | Report abuse

The McCain health plan would treat employer-paid health benefits as income that employees would have to pay taxes on.
It means your employer is going to have to make an estimate on how much the employer is paying for health insurance on your behalf, and you are going to have to pay taxes on that money,” said Sherry Glied, an economist who chairs the Department of Health Policy and Management at Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health.
Ms. Glied is one of the four scholars who have just completed an independent joint study of the plan. Their findings are being published on the Web site of the policy journal, Health Affairs.
Under the McCain the McCain-Palin plan employees who continue to receive employer-paid health benefits would look at their pay stubs each week or each month and find that additional money had been withheld to cover the taxes on the value of their benefits.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qv-xvoZ_E2Y

Posted by: Anonymous | October 14, 2008 9:15 PM | Report abuse

MSNBC'S RACHEL MADDOWS SHOW REPORTED FRIDAY EVENING PALIN'S TIES TO THE SECESSIONISTS MOVEMENT ARE MUCH GREATER THAN FIRST REPORTED...
Sarah Palin and her husband: Palling Around With Secessionists

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eniG9l_7its

Posted by: jrhdkh | October 14, 2008 9:16 PM | Report abuse

WHAT IS ALASKA’S REAL VIEW OF PALIN @ TROOPERGATE

http://www.adn.com/opinion/view/story/555236.html

Posted by: wvuweirton | October 14, 2008 9:17 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: dkh1954 | October 14, 2008 9:18 PM | Report abuse

Obama will not win.
When the time is right everyone will cast the vote for the right person.
All the lies from the news will not fool the people.

Posted by: Jimmy | October 14, 2008 9:46 PM | Report abuse

A better question is does Obama's plan make sense (rather than the true cost of the plan). If Obama really thinks $3000 is going to make a big difference, he has no idea what he's dealing with.

Posted by: Anonymous | October 14, 2008 9:55 PM | Report abuse

I find it baffling that the fault should be split on this one.

What you're saying is that the McCain campaign attacked Obama's policy without bothering to read the Obama Fact Sheet. Isn't that a little amateurish for a US presidential campaign?

The paragraph describing the policy is extremely clear, and the $20 billion number is accurate.

The Republican's number is obviously wrong, because there's no way Obama could be referring to gross jobs - doing that would obviously encourage employers to hire and fire as fast as possible. You'd have to be either accidentally or willfully stupid to think Obama meant that.

Posted by: kevrobb | October 14, 2008 10:38 PM | Report abuse

Non-Blacks holding low level to mid level management jobs will be looking for new work when the new Obama Affirmative Action Program is enacted. Grades will no longer matter to get into college. Obama also has plans to change the Union Secret Ballot and will also implement Affirmative Action into our Unions. He won't play the white mans game.

Posted by: Larry Jenson | October 14, 2008 11:53 PM | Report abuse

Non-Blacks holding low level to mid level management jobs will be looking for new work when the new Obama Affirmative Action Program is enacted. Grades will no longer matter to get into college. Obama also has plans to change the Union Secret Ballot and will also implement Affirmative Action into our Unions. He won't play the white mans game.

Posted by: Larry Jenson | October 15, 2008 12:11 AM | Report abuse

The bigger question is what would be the net effect on treasury of creating new jobs.

Assuming a job created results in some additional taxation revenue and that this is part of a larger stimulus package, then the earlier the economy is stimulated through both jobs and increased consumer spending, the earlier any economic recovery.

An increase in the net pay of lower to middle income earners (through lower taxation or tax credits) is likely to be spent (or used to pay off existing debt). This will help create more jobs and will also help stimulate the economy. It also helps offset any cost to Treasury as more taxation is contributed through the new jobs.

Overall there are more jobs around to both expand the economy and reduce the deficit.

A reduction in capital gains tax on the other hand will not have the same effect. This is only ever used by governments around the world to try to get on side the wealthiest people. It provides no or little benefit to the economy and does nothing to enhance the overall tax base. Nor does it do anything to help lower to middle income people survive the downturn.

Posted by: Miriam | October 15, 2008 2:00 AM | Report abuse

Dobbs:
You're just giving arbitrary Pinocchios to Obama's campaign to shut rabid conservatives up, aren't you?

It looks like Obama's campaign got 2 Pinocchios because the McCain campaign couldn't be bothered to read about a policy before they started making claims about it.
You don't give a single problem with the Obama analysis.

If you give 2 Pinocchios for naming a policy in a speech without going into the details, then 2 Pinocchios is lowest score anyone is liable to get. No one interrupts the flow of a speech to explain all the details and fine print.

In all honesty, I think you would do well to follow the lead of other FactCheckers. Drop the arbitrary ranking and just give people the information.

JakeD:
You may be loath to hear this, but pretty much every rational person is in the tank for Obama. Convincing journalists is a talent of skilled politicians. Why don't you try to drop the artificial sense of entitlement.

Posted by: Fact Wrecker | October 15, 2008 2:50 AM | Report abuse

*I* am actually in the tank for Obama. Do you think I would behave so embarrassingly if I was trying to SUPPORT McCain?

Posted by: JakeD | October 15, 2008 3:06 AM | Report abuse

Wow, JakeD really hit the coolaid hard this morning - time to ease up on it pal!

Lets see, Obama wants to give a tax break to folks who create jobs, McCain wants to give it to large corporations who send jobs overseas. Now THERE is a good idea.

I pay my mortgage, and I go to work every day, but McCain wants my tax dollars to support folks who don't pay their mortgage - and let them walk away with a lower payment, and able to reap any future gains! Now the repubs are nationalizing banks - with MY tax money, but they criticise someone who wants to give incentive to create jobs? They really have gone nuts.

Jake - keep drinking the coolaid, it's the only way you find it impossible to see the wood for the trees!

Posted by: Limey | October 15, 2008 9:14 AM | Report abuse

Dobbs is giving 2 pinocchios to Obama's statement in Toledo. That statement is indeed misleading since it sounds like there's a $3000 credit for everyone that gets hired in the next 2 years (which is not the case).

Posted by: Anonymous | October 15, 2008 9:31 AM | Report abuse

A reduction in capital gains tax on the other hand will not have the same effect.
Posted by: Miriam | October 15, 2008 2:00 AM


You're missing the big picture. Whether the money get collected by the government in the form of taxes, or it remains in the hands of the wealthly, it goes back into the economy to create jobs. The question is what method is more effective and efficient.

The wealthly will put money into businesses that have the greatest chance of turning a profit (being successful).

The governement doesnt think the same way. They think more in terms of which states need the money, affirmative action, earmarks, and which senator "just help me out."

Posted by: Anonymous | October 15, 2008 9:48 AM | Report abuse

I don't think the issue is about negativity in as much as it is honesty. Obama keeps talking about how the Iraq war was wrong and he was against it, but won't speak of the genocide that was going on. But if genocide was occurring in Africa, he be all for it...or a predominately Muslim country. Obama has ties to Muslims. His Father was a Muslim…he campaigned in Kenya for a Muslim candidate, and after that candidate lost his supporters killed lots of Christians. He attended a Muslim school…and vigorously study the Koran…and has stated that he would defend the Muslim faith in a time of crisis. He was taught African views during his integration into religion, such as Jesus was really a black man, by his pastor, not to mention his other radical ties. He himself, along with his wife, are radicals trying to improve their standing in order to impose the beliefs and visions upon Americans and our ideals. This election is about the American belief in GOD and Christianity. GOD would not condone abortion nor would he condone gays or gay marriage. People should vote their faith. That way they'd have faith in their leader. Israel should be our most important allies. Obama’s judgement is very clear what his true thoughts and likes are with the convictions he has and his associations that he has developed. VOTE your faith…VOTE REPUBLICAN…for GOD’s sake!!!!

Posted by: R Sonkowsky | October 15, 2008 10:14 AM | Report abuse

Anonymous wrote: "You're missing the big picture. Whether the money get collected by the government in the form of taxes, or it remains in the hands of the wealthly, it goes back into the economy to create jobs."

My point is that this doesn't happen. Struggling workers will spend every penny thereby stimulating the economy. The wealthy who get tax breaks don't spend their handout in a way that stimulates the economy.

This paper points to research showing this effect and sums it up better than I can:
http://www.epi.org/content.cfm/webfeatures_viewpoints_stimulus_memo

Posted by: Miriam | October 15, 2008 10:26 AM | Report abuse

Obama's answer to every problem,no matter how severe,is to just throw more money at it,just as Bush has done at every turn.The rabid Obama supporters never think to stop and think about this.They just know that they hate Bush.To continue with the Bush policy of "more money" to cover up his disasterous administration is not change,it is more of the same.

Posted by: Nannie Turner | October 15, 2008 10:35 AM | Report abuse

This paper points to research showing this effect and sums it up better than I can:
http://www.epi.org/content.cfm/webfeatures_viewpoints_stimulus_memo
Posted by: Miriam | October 15, 2008 10:26 AM


I think the key statement in that article is in the second sentence, "For a fiscal stimulus to increase growth quickly." In that case I agree with them, but I'm much more in favor of long term solutions.

Posted by: Anonymous | October 15, 2008 10:55 AM | Report abuse

It's pretty straight forward to me. Obama's proposal, after crunching the numbers is on point, 20billion. On the other hand McCain greatly exaggerated the numbers to the tune of 170billion. The final verdict should be 4 Pinocchios for McCain, 0 for Obama. This is no time to coddle and comfort Republicans who support one of the sleaziest campaigns in modern history. The truth will set you free!

Posted by: peoples_prez | October 15, 2008 11:51 AM | Report abuse

Unless the United States -ironic at the thought of a more disunited country being in a state of complete anarchy- provides decent paying jobs for individuals we will be a Third World country for over one-half the population. Then the lower one-half of the population will have to earn their living by ransoming the top 5 per-cent wealthiest individuals as they do in Latin American countries.

Posted by: tanaS | October 15, 2008 11:55 AM | Report abuse

What part of "A casual listener could have come away with the impression that he was referring to a credit for all new employees, not net new jobs" don't you people understand?

Posted by: JakeD | October 15, 2008 11:56 AM | Report abuse

It's pretty straight forward to me. Obama's proposal, after crunching the numbers is on point, 20billion.
Posted by: peoples_prez | October 15, 2008 11:51 AM


It is stright forward if you actually read what Dobbs is talking about. Dobbs is analyzing Obama's statement in Toledo which is misleading.

Posted by: Anonymous | October 15, 2008 12:27 PM | Report abuse

I don't even think McCain needs to criticize the total cost of the plan. He needs to attack Obama's plan by pointing out that its useless.

Posted by: Anonymous | October 15, 2008 12:39 PM | Report abuse

I have a comment about this statement that someone left on here....


DEAR MEDIA , WE ARE SO DISAPPOINTED THAT YOU DISTORED THE STORIES IN FAVOR OF OBAMA. WHERE IS YOUR AMERICAN INTEGRITY ? YOU TRIED TO INFLUENCE NON-INFORMED PEOPLE IN FAVOR FOR OBAMA . PLEASE REMEMBER OBAMA'S RACE TO BE CONGRESSMAN WAY BACK WHEN .PLEASE INVESTIGATE ABOUT THE VOTE FRAUD . WE WONDER WHAT TIM RUSSERT WOULD SAY IF HE WAS STILL ALIVE ? WHERE IS ALL AMERICAN INTEGRITY THESE DAYS ?

Really? Are you that stupid? It is not the media that made John McCain and Idiot Palin look bad... They did it to themselves. As far as "Where is the American Integrity"?... Our American Integrity went right out the window when George W. Bush stole not only the 2000 election but the 2004 election. We stood by and let him, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice... all of them lie about prisoner abuse, weapons of mass distruction, Iraq, Abusing power, .... THE LIST GOES ON AND ON. I am glad that George W. Bush and every Republican associated with him is going to go down as the biggest mistake this counrty ever made. I am very informed on the issues from both sides. I think John McCain is the same as George Bush (Sr. and Jr.) I am so happy that he is GOING TO LOOSE!
Guess what Republicans... THE PARTY IS OVER!!! GET OUT!!!

Posted by: David | October 15, 2008 2:21 PM | Report abuse

I think John McCain is the same as George Bush (Sr. and Jr.)
Posted by: David | October 15, 2008 2:21 PM

LOL George HW Bush and George W Bush are not even close to being the same so I'm not even sure what you're comparing there.

If I had to compare McCain to one of the two, I would go with George HW Bush (who was a much better president than people thought at the time).

Posted by: Anonymous | October 15, 2008 3:03 PM | Report abuse

JakeD, I can hardly wait until Nov 5th, just to see how you explain McCain's resounding defeat. Will you say that, obviously, America's in the tank for Obama?

Or will you just accept defeat graciously?

Posted by: Dennis Berry | October 15, 2008 3:34 PM | Report abuse

What part of "A casual listener could have come away with the impression that he was referring to a credit for all new employees, not net new jobs" don't you people understand?

Posted by: JakeD
====================

Since that would be an idiotic proposal, that listener would also have to be either a dishonest hack or a moron. Which are you?

Posted by: zukermand | October 15, 2008 3:40 PM | Report abuse

Dennis Berry:

I always accept defeat, and victory, graciously. God willing, McCain and Palin will too ; )

zuckermand:

I am not a "casual listener" nor am I a dishonest hack or a moron.

Posted by: JakeD | October 15, 2008 4:09 PM | Report abuse

Once upon a time, zuckermand, you had much higher standards for the so-called "jouranists" here -- regardless of which side the favored -- I guess all is forgiven now that you've joined them IN THE TANK for Obama.

Posted by: JakeD | October 15, 2008 4:11 PM | Report abuse

McCain's whole problem is that reality has a liberal bias.

Posted by: FC | October 15, 2008 4:38 PM | Report abuse

"jouranists" = "journalists"

Posted by: JakeD | October 15, 2008 4:54 PM | Report abuse

All of this talk about whose numbers are accurate when it comes to the Obama $3000 tax credit for each new hire misses the point entirely. Anyone who has any experience in busness knows that you are NOT going to hire an employee that you don't need just to get $3000. You hire people when you NEED them. No responsible manager or owner would ever make the hiring deciion in order to get $3000. Obama and his "experts" don't have a clue about how the free enterprise system works. Not a clue.

Posted by: Jim R. | October 15, 2008 5:03 PM | Report abuse

I see this is where the crazies come to make comments. OK, at least you're coming to check the facts. Explain to me how we're going to run a country when we can't even spend time to read a few pages before publishing erroneous conclusions. And while we're at it, explain how we ever expect this country to move forward without applying some new logic to our problems. Finally, explain to me why all the other nations who could used their economic surplus to fuel research into new science and technology while we used ours to build a giant handbasket, which is taking us exactly where handbaskets go. This crisis may never be averted, but somebody's gotta try. The only people we can trust to try is OBAMA/BIDEN '08!!

Posted by: ISEE | October 15, 2008 5:40 PM | Report abuse

oh3kjxp3uhxgo7kl http://www.954016.com/483689.html 34jp8xyc6g50ibge

Posted by: i850vjjin4 | October 15, 2008 6:02 PM | Report abuse

oh3kjxp3uhxgo7kl http://www.979075.com/480391.html > fxaffbfg [URL=http://www.733104.com/371672.html] 0t33nlxxmo [/URL] 34jp8xyc6g50ibge

Posted by: i850vjjin4 | October 15, 2008 6:02 PM | Report abuse

oh3kjxp3uhxgo7kl [URL=http://www.733104.com/371672.html] 0t33nlxxmo [/URL] 34jp8xyc6g50ibge

Posted by: i850vjjin4 | October 15, 2008 6:02 PM | Report abuse

Roll Obama Roll

Posted by: scott bob | October 15, 2008 6:04 PM | Report abuse

I secnd that emotion.

Roll Obama Roll where those GOP senators are going I don't Know.roll roll roll Obama roll

Posted by: not dead yet | October 15, 2008 6:07 PM | Report abuse

1xjeonw7dsl56i1gu http://www.688796.com/335805.html > 08i8z5uiq [URL=http://www.369613.com/300579.html] oasawkjovg2q3rnw [/URL] 73lp4hbdqjnv

Posted by: wolkkmteoi | October 15, 2008 6:22 PM | Report abuse

jni0z0nzjjs7 http://www.524389.com/957983.html > oh6rl54u7gvpyy [URL=http://www.716170.com/268741.html] 3qol494fa6 [/URL] qiq9q6bp

Posted by: ml150j3w4c | October 15, 2008 6:42 PM | Report abuse

0z5h048ktwd http://www.292942.com/569913.html > nurv3fsf66e6 [URL=http://www.463803.com/136812.html] vs4awvqwkl [/URL] bo5ge6gehbsmj13

Posted by: e3krxmu1qi | October 15, 2008 7:10 PM | Report abuse

On the day after election we will count how many uneducated and uninformed stupid Americans there really are when they tally the votes for Oh No Bama!

Posted by: Andre | October 15, 2008 7:20 PM | Report abuse

LOL!

Did anyone see The Colbert Report about NY county printing ballots with Barack OSAMA typo?

Posted by: JakeD | October 15, 2008 7:44 PM | Report abuse

My comment is for Reuel, 10/14 at approx. 6:15 PM...I assume that you are a Christian. Your comment indicates your opposition to abortion, and you reference Solomon. I, too am a Christian. I oppose abortion and am a student of the Holy Scriptures. However, I take exception to your statement about "lazy,sinful,cursed" people who "want part of the blessing from the faithful and blessed." Please tell me to whom are you referring? I am a very hard working person. I am not lazy! Yet, I want my government to help me!!! My wife works hard every day. I work hard. We want part of the blessing, but it is not forthcoming. Are we cursed? Are we sinful? I think not!! I know many other lower income persons, some are Black and Hispanic, they work two jobs. Are they cursed and sinful because they want the government to assist them? Perhaps, you think that everyone should take care of himself or herself. This is not consistent with Scripture. The Holy Book tells us to care for one another, the alien and the widow in our midst. Are we to neglect God's children? Are we to forget that God chose the less likely to rule over His Kingdom. Jacob was chosen over Esau, David over his brothers, Solomon over his brother, Joseph over his brothers!! God does not consider "lazy, sinful, and cursed." The prodigal son was chosen over the faithful son. The workers in the vineyard were rewarded equally no matter when they started working. God's way is not our way. READ YOUR BIBLE!!!

Posted by: Robert D. | October 15, 2008 7:46 PM | Report abuse

Robert D.:

What do you mean "God's way is not our way"? Show me where in the Bible it says GOVERNMENT should take care of the poor, the sick, etc.

Posted by: JakeD | October 15, 2008 7:51 PM | Report abuse

You might be interested in reading Anthony Cook's thought-provoking book The Least of These: Race, Law, and Religion in American Culture.

Posted by: JakeD | October 15, 2008 8:12 PM | Report abuse

I recognize that you have a hard job, Dobbs. Don't feel bad that Obama has convinced you that he's the better candidate. That's his job.

I just don't think I can handle a black president.

Posted by: JakeD | October 16, 2008 12:57 AM | Report abuse

For the record, as I have stated many times, I would have no problem voting for a PRO-LIFE African American President.

Posted by: JakeD | October 16, 2008 1:28 AM | Report abuse

Jake D: The Law of Moses (Exodus, Leviticus, Deuteronomy) which was the guiding law of the nation of Israel contains numerous injunctions regarding the responsibility of the nation to care for the poor and sick. The prophets condemn the wealth and corruption of Israel's ruling and priestly classes because the orphan, widow and alien suffer. Jesus condemns the elders and the priests because they are more interested in their political status than the marginal of society. The elders desire for wealth trumps their desire for justice.
It is interesting to me that we, as a nation, are quick to point to our Judaeo-Christian heritage. We fight bitterly over displaying the Ten Commandments in public buildings. We claim "American Exceptionalism" and use Biblical imagery to support it - a light shining on a hill, a beacon of hope, freedom and justice for all. We rally for prayer in our schools and open yearly sessions of Congress with prayer. Presidents attend prayer breakfasts and candidates court the religious right as well as lobby with other church groups. It seems to me that we use our Judaeo-Christian heritage for political convenience. However, when Judaeo-Christian principles require that we open our national purse, or challenge corporate profits, or question laws that favor the wealthy over the poor, then these principles conveniently are swept away.

Posted by: Robert D. | October 16, 2008 7:46 AM | Report abuse

Miriam claims: "The wealthly (sic) will put money into businesses that have the greatest chance of turning a profit (being successful)."

Really Miriam? Is that what the wealthly (sic) have been doing the last eight years? The rate of job growth has been at a low ebb since Bush took office and gave the wealthly (sic) all manner of tax cuts. Those cuts (capital gains and all) were gleefully pocketed as more and more U.S. jobs were outsourced overseas. The wealthly (sic), aided and abetted by the republi-cons (chiefly Phil Gramm), are not to be trusted. If you need further proof, take a look at your Sept 30 401k/IRA statement.

Posted by: Anonymous | October 16, 2008 9:15 AM | Report abuse

Robert D.:

Once America becomes a theocracy (like Israel was under the Law of Moses) then the "nation" can care for the poor and sick -- in the meantime, Christ commands each INDIVIDUAL to do so -- that's not an "excuse", it's the Great Commandment.

Posted by: JakeD | October 16, 2008 12:03 PM | Report abuse

Did the rest of you see Joe Biden this morning harping on a "three letter word"? J-O-B-S.

Posted by: JakeD | October 16, 2008 12:04 PM | Report abuse

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bq-eeWow_WU

Quick, Joe, how many letters are there in B-A-B-Y?

Posted by: JakeD | October 16, 2008 12:45 PM | Report abuse

RobertD:

"Love the Lord, thy God, with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself."

Posted by: JakeD | October 16, 2008 4:46 PM | Report abuse

Speaking of "Jobs, Baby, Jobs", I see that the advertising banner is targeted to California voters -- the Sierra Club wanted me to vote NO on Prop 7 -- darn, I hope they don't lose any jobs because I voted YES!! YES on 8 as well!

Posted by: JakeD | October 16, 2008 4:59 PM | Report abuse

And, before anyone complains about me not "loving homosexuals as thyself" I love myself enough to want someone to stop me from jumping off a cliff too ; )

Posted by: JakeD | October 16, 2008 5:01 PM | Report abuse

IT'S OFFICIAL! The WaPo pals around with terrorists and has been IN THE TANK for Barack HUSSEIN Obama since the get go. You don't have to pretend anymore, Dobbs.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/16/AR2008101603436_pf.html

In other "news" Gallup yesterday, and now AP/Yahoo poll today, have McCain within TWO POINTS.

Posted by: JakeD | October 17, 2008 12:03 PM | Report abuse

there will be no jobs if obama follows through on this...

joe the plumber helped obama define his socialist economic policy .. but obama has much more going on than 'spreading the wealth around' just in america. last summer senator obama introduced the 'global poverty act' to congress, which has been passed in the house and currently awaits approval in the senate. the global poverty act is a tax of 0.7% of the american gdp (gross domestic product), to be given to the united nations and distributed to third world countries in an attempt to eradicate 50% of the world's poverty. virtually no one knows about this, and yet it will cost americans 845 billion dollars over the next 13 years. what kind of insane agenda for our economy is obama working on? (let it be noted this has nothing to do with the recent 700+ billion dollar subprime bailout .. these are two totally separate activities.)

topics in this easy read include joe the plumber, the debate, socialism and finally the the global poverty act, which the heritage foundation calls "superfluous, misguided, and dangerous". check it out here:

http://make-informed-decisions.blogspot.com/2008/10/joe-plumber-helps-obama-define.html
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s110-2433

Posted by: marcus | October 17, 2008 9:29 PM | Report abuse

Gov. Palin must be winning.

Even Hillary is promoting "Jobs, baby, jobs" speaks of the McCain-Palin ticket (a pro-baby ticket).

Obama-Biden ticket is "jobs,dead-fetus, jobs" if Hillary needs chant.

Remember Solomon and the two mothers?
The one had the "dead baby" wanted 1/2 of the baby from the true mother.

That is Obama's socialism. The lazy, sinful, cursed people wants part of the blessings from the faithful and blessed. "Tax them more and give to us". Take half of their "baby" by force.

If voters are "as wise as solomon" they will know who is the true mother is.

McCain-Palin 08

Posted by: Reuel | October 14, 2008 6:23 PM
__________________________
What kind of sick twisted theology are you promoting? Exactly who are you calling 'lazy, sinful, cursed'? Your attitude is like the pharasees, whom Jesus denounced. Perhaps you should move from old testament theology into new testament theology - if you knw the difference. As you may recall, in the Kingdom of God the last shall be first and the first shall be last. So enjoy you time in the front of the line now - you'll be way at the back later.

Posted by: HouseNegro | October 19, 2008 12:14 PM | Report abuse

Robert D.:

What do you mean "God's way is not our way"? Show me where in the Bible it says GOVERNMENT should take care of the poor, the sick, etc.
Posted by: JakeD | October 15, 2008 7:51 PM
_____________________________
JakeD:

Take off your blinders and ignorant biases. The GOVERNMENT you so eagerly resent when it seeks to establish equity is:

OF THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE, AND FOR THE PEOPLE.

Funny how you don't want GOVERNMENT to intervene in economic fairness issues but you do want GOVERNMENT to pass and enforce laws you agree with like outlawing abortion. You Ignorant Hypocrite!!

Posted by: Anonymous | October 19, 2008 12:20 PM | Report abuse

RobertD:

"Love the Lord, thy God, with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself."

Posted by: JakeD | October 16, 2008 4:46 PM
____________________________
LIVE IT AND STOP JUST QUOTING IT!! GET THE BIGOTRY OUT OF YOUR HEART YOU SELFISH GREEDY RACIST B@STARD!! YOU CAN'T EVEN SEE THE MOTE IN YOUR OWN EYE!

Posted by: Anonymous | October 19, 2008 12:24 PM | Report abuse

Obama's Spread The Wealth Program Is just Getting Started. It Only Took The Democratic Congressional Leadership 2 Short Years To Put Into place The First installment Of Their Spread The Wealth Program. The Result Has Been Destroyed Savings, Ruined Retirement Accounts, A Drastic Plunge In Your Home Equity, A Failing Home Market, Higher Unemployment, Higher Gas Prices, And Higher Food Prices, Higher Credit Card Rates, And Failing banks.

All Brought To You Courtesy Of The Fannie Mae Five: Their Campaign Contributions Spoke Louder Than Their Conscience:

http://www.sundaypaper.com/More/Archives/tabid/98/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/3159/Obama-and-the-Fannie-Mae-5.aspx

Change is Coming When Obama, Pelosi And Reid Control Everything. If The Next Changes Are Anything Like The One's They Have brought Us So Far, Then Brace Yourself.

Posted by: Jerry | October 19, 2008 12:27 PM | Report abuse

there will be no jobs if obama follows through on this...

joe the plumber helped obama define his socialist economic policy .. but obama has much more going on than 'spreading the wealth around' just in america. last summer senator obama introduced the 'global poverty act' to congress, which has been passed in the house and currently awaits approval in the senate. the global poverty act is a tax of 0.7% of the american gdp (gross domestic product), to be given to the united nations and distributed to third world countries in an attempt to eradicate 50% of the world's poverty. virtually no one knows about this, and yet it will cost americans 845 billion dollars over the next 13 years. what kind of insane agenda for our economy is obama working on? (let it be noted this has nothing to do with the recent 700+ billion dollar subprime bailout .. these are two totally separate activities.)

topics in this easy read include joe the plumber, the debate, socialism and finally the the global poverty act, which the heritage foundation calls "superfluous, misguided, and dangerous". check it out here:

http://make-informed-decisions.blogspot.com/2008/10/joe-plumber-helps-obama-define.html
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s110-2433

Posted by: marcus | October 17, 2008 9:29 PM
___________________________
tHE ONLY THING 'DANGEROUS AND MISGUIDED' IS YOUR IDEOLOGY. AMERICA SHOULD BE HELPING IMPOVERISHED AND STARVING NATIONS! WE THROW AWAY ENOUGH FOOD EACH DAY TO FEED MOST SMALL NATIONS. YOU SELFISH GREEDY B@STARD!

Posted by: Anonymous | October 19, 2008 12:29 PM | Report abuse

I would have thought "new jobs" meant "new jobs", and not "new employees" or "new hires". If so, then the credit goes to a company for each "new job", not each person newly hired. I don't see that this was over-simplified or unclear.

As an aside, are we all simply giving up on the concept of civility in our discussions and disagreements?

Posted by: Rob | October 21, 2008 4:35 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company