Obama lied - Economists cried

Rick Moran
You heard our Porker in Chief last night?

Obama: That’s why the figure that we initially came up with of approximately $800 billion was put forward. That wasn’t just some random number that I plucked out of—out of a hat. That was Republican and Democratic, conservative and liberal economists that I spoke to who indicated that, given the magnitude of the crisis and the fact that it’s happening worldwide, it’s important for us to have a bill of sufficient size and scope that we can save or create 4 million jobs.

Just who were these "consensus economists" who support the bail out?


The Obama administration has claimed that virtually all economists support their approach to "stimulus" spending. This is patently untrue. Nobel Laureates Ed Prescott, James Buchanan, and Vernon Smith recently joined 200 other economists signing a letter opposing the legislation. Other notable economists critical of the stimulus package include Nobel Laureate Gary Becker, as well as Robert Barro, Greg Mankiw, Arthur Laffer, and Larry Lindsey.  Martin Feldstein, who had been the only notable conservative economist loudly supporting the stimulus, has since changed his mind.

More liberal economists such as Alice Rivlin and Alan Blinder have also strongly criticized certain aspects of the spending bill.

Even President Obama's own economic advisers—who are leading the fight for the "stimulus" bill—previously criticized the bill's economic underpinnings.

In fact, many conservative economists do support the idea of a stimulus but with far more emphasis on tax cuts and much less pork barrel spending.

A blatant lie? Or a misunderstanding? It is very difficult to believe that the president doesn't know full well that opposition to his bail out bill is nuanced and targeted. Most economists agree that something must be done and that government should do it - just not Obama's porked up monstrosity.

And while we're on the subject of lying...

But as we've learned very clearly and conclusively over the last eight years, tax cuts alone can't solve all of our economic problems, especially tax cuts that are targeted to the wealthiest few Americans. We have tried that strategy time and time again, and it's only helped lead us to the crisis we face right now.

This is a deliberate falsehood. Obama knows full well that the Republican alternative to his bail out bill contains spending as well as tax cuts. And the outrageous claim that tax cuts are responsible for the economic crisis is insane. It is a charge he repeated two more times during the press conference - either a blatant lie or evidence of unbelievable ignorance.

Which is it, Mr. President?


 




You heard our Porker in Chief last night?

Obama: That’s why the figure that we initially came up with of approximately $800 billion was put forward. That wasn’t just some random number that I plucked out of—out of a hat. That was Republican and Democratic, conservative and liberal economists that I spoke to who indicated that, given the magnitude of the crisis and the fact that it’s happening worldwide, it’s important for us to have a bill of sufficient size and scope that we can save or create 4 million jobs.

Just who were these "consensus economists" who support the bail out?


The Obama administration has claimed that virtually all economists support their approach to "stimulus" spending. This is patently untrue. Nobel Laureates Ed Prescott, James Buchanan, and Vernon Smith recently joined 200 other economists signing a letter opposing the legislation. Other notable economists critical of the stimulus package include Nobel Laureate Gary Becker, as well as Robert Barro, Greg Mankiw, Arthur Laffer, and Larry Lindsey.  Martin Feldstein, who had been the only notable conservative economist loudly supporting the stimulus, has since changed his mind.

More liberal economists such as Alice Rivlin and Alan Blinder have also strongly criticized certain aspects of the spending bill.

Even President Obama's own economic advisers—who are leading the fight for the "stimulus" bill—previously criticized the bill's economic underpinnings.

In fact, many conservative economists do support the idea of a stimulus but with far more emphasis on tax cuts and much less pork barrel spending.

A blatant lie? Or a misunderstanding? It is very difficult to believe that the president doesn't know full well that opposition to his bail out bill is nuanced and targeted. Most economists agree that something must be done and that government should do it - just not Obama's porked up monstrosity.

And while we're on the subject of lying...

But as we've learned very clearly and conclusively over the last eight years, tax cuts alone can't solve all of our economic problems, especially tax cuts that are targeted to the wealthiest few Americans. We have tried that strategy time and time again, and it's only helped lead us to the crisis we face right now.

This is a deliberate falsehood. Obama knows full well that the Republican alternative to his bail out bill contains spending as well as tax cuts. And the outrageous claim that tax cuts are responsible for the economic crisis is insane. It is a charge he repeated two more times during the press conference - either a blatant lie or evidence of unbelievable ignorance.

Which is it, Mr. President?