Comments about ‘Letter: Obama vision will not grow market economy in four more years’

"The pinnacle of their success, "GM is still alive," was accomplished by restructuring through managed bankruptcy, which is exactly what Mitt Romney proposed."

Not remotely true. Romney wanted private banks to invest in GM, at exactly the same time that private banks were going belly-up and loans where impossible to find, even for firms in perfect health.

"Rhe other side of the Obama vision is to stimulate the economy with large government grants and guarantees (noticeably to donors of large political gifts) for favored industrial projects."

Also completely untrue. There is no credible evidence to support the charge that grants and loan guarantees were given as political favors. The conservative echo chamber likes to believe this lie, but the fact is it is a fabrication.

"The creation, course and demise of Newsmax, Solyndra, other failed companies and absence of shovel-ready jobs have fizzled away huge sums of tax revenue."

More conservative fantasy. To date just 8% of these federal investments have failed. Compare that to the 22% failure rate of Bain Capital.

Today's conservatives value ideological certainty and political conformity more than they value the truth. That's got to stop.

Thanks Blue for making the points I wanted to make. Another way to approach the ballot box is to consider Mr. Romney's plan and his unwillingness to state specifics. Mr. Romney promises to reduce income tax rates by 20% and to raise defense spending while balancing the budget. To do so, he would reduce other spending — unspecified — and take away deductions — unspecified. One study he cited, by Harvard economist Martin Feldstein, said Mr. Romney could make the tax math work by depriving every household earning $100,000 or more of all of its charitable deductions, mortgage-interest deductions and deductions for state and local income taxes.

But Mr. Romney won't say that he favors those deductions. He did take issue with Mr. Feldstein’s definition of the middle class saying he would protect households earning $250,000 or less. In which case the Feldstein study did not vindicate the Romney arithmetic — it refuted it. Yet the candidate continues to cite the study.

Mr. Romney's entire campaign has shown nothing but contempt for the American public by thinking they won't remember his past flip flopping or that they are capable of doing simple math.

More lies from the right.

We'll find out how outlandish they are if (Heaven forbid) Romney wins next Tuesday and he falls flat on his face as President. Election of Mitt will spell disaster for all of us.

The real reason for Obama's "failure?" Google "paul conrad congressional bipartisanship cartoon" for a perfect explanation.

Wall Street Journal article today shows Presidents Obama's job creation to date at +194000 jobs. So the government spent 800 billion dollars on stimulus to make less than 200,000 jobs, and if we assume that every job created during Obama's term was created by his stimulus (which is doubtful), that means the government spent over 400,000 dollars for each job created. The average job last year paid just under 43,000 in salary.

So our government took 4 hundred thousand dollars from taxpayers to make each job paying and average of forty-three thousand dollars. How could anyone think this is a good deal? How can anyone think this will lead to growth? The private sector could make far more jobs if that money had been left in their hands.

1.1 million jobs were created under President Bush in 8 years, and he weathered a recession in both his terms. If President Obama were to match that pace, there should have been over 500,000 created by now, but at his current rate he won't get there by the end of a second term, if he were elected again.

Mr. Jackson is right on the money!

Any thinking, intelligent, observant American can easily see that Obama is trying to sell his 4 years of failures as successes. He promised so much and has delivered nothing. Every economic indicator is lower today than when he took office and yet he says we have, "come to far to turn back now". The truth is, if we don't turn back now we are going to go bankrupt if for no other reason than the national debt he continues to pile up day after day. Then there are the scandals and the cover-ups of fast and furious, the White House leaks and now, Benghazi that he refuses to come clean on! Its time for honest Americans to demand more of our President; more honestly, more accountability and more leadership and less excuse making, less blaming others and less cover-ups! The long Obama nightmare is nearly over!

The question really should be, "Why has Obama 'Failed?'"

What kind of progress and good might have come if Congress had worked WITH Obama instead of trying to destroy him -- and in the process -- our nation?

Mountanman,

Considering where Obama started and where we are today, I would consider his four years a moderate success. The key to the whole Republican campaign this cycle is to try to get Americans to forget history, and some, like Mr. Jackson, seem perfectly willing to do so.

And thank you, Blue, for explaining Mitt Romney's completely unrealistic proposal for the auto industry. It would not have worked, for the reasons you list. And just because he keeps "airbrushing history," as someone put it, doesn't mean we should believe him.

Christian 24-7 Asking the WSJ for an opinion about President Obama is equivalent to asking Greg Miller which NBA team he likes best. The twisted logic that he and you have used to calculate jobs created by Obama could be turned around just as easily by recalling that in January of 2009, the month the president was sworn into office, our economy lost more than 700,000 jobs in that month alone. Last month the economy created 176,000 jobs for a net turn around of more than 876,000 per month. Now I could crow about what a spectacular turn around that was but it would mean as much as the WSJ's claim.

The CBO and others have calculated that the stimulus was responsible for creating or saving between 2.0M and 3.0M jobs and let's not forget that of the $788B stimulus bill, $248B went toward a tax cut. I always thought Republicans supported tax cuts, or is it just the ones they propose?

Here is a fact - businessmen like Mitt Romney are not in the business if creating jobs, only making profits. And jobs can sometimes be the victims of making profits.

What's Romney's vision again?

Oh yeah, give tax cuts to the rich, increase military spending, and the rich will decide finally to share some of their record profits with us... Or maybe they'll continue to ship jobs overseas (something that Mitt is an expert at).

But that's okay folks, he'll get rid of Big Bird and that'll save our country for sure.

We don't have to wait four more years, or 40. It's growing now.

When asking the question how would Romney's policies be different than those of Bush, guess what you get? No answer. So if you do not want a repeat of the Obama's four years go ahead and opt for the Bush policies of deregulation and Wall Street calling all the shots. I cannot believe these people are real.

George, George, George, time to turn off Beck and do your own research. If private US investors are sitting on 20 plus trillion overseas then who is left to invest in the US economy and R&D? Please find a defendable argument.

Republicans will not be happy until the middle class makes as much as Chinese workers and forgets about health insurance, safe work conditions, weekends and overtime.

Nice to see a letter in the DN that manages to be wrong on every possible point. Well done, sir.

@Blue:

"Romney wanted private banks to invest in GM, at exactly the same time that private banks were going belly-up and loans where impossible to find..."

Not true. Romney wanted GM to go through normal bankruptcy procedures where union wages and benefits would have to take a share of cuts. As it turns out, unions kept their (obscene) wages and benefits intact plus they gained contolling interests while bond and stock holders got essentially nothing.

"There is no credible evidence to support the charge that grants and loan guarantees were given as political favors."

That's because Obama and his friends have elaborate cover-up schemes.

"To date just 8% of these federal investments have failed. Compare that to the 22% failure rate of Bain Capital."

A 78% Bain Capital success rate is dang good. Obama's job creation rate while in office is negative.

"Today's conservatives value ideological certainty and political conformity more than they value the truth. That's got to stop."

What's gotta stop is the Obama Administration before the country collapses in total ruination.

@ECR:

"Another way to approach the ballot box is to consider Mr. Romney's plan and his unwillingness to state specifics."

I like Obama's specifics... 'Hope & change.' Now, there's something you can hang yer hat on.

"Mr. Romney's entire campaign has shown nothing but contempt for the American public by thinking they won't remember his past flip flopping..."

Are you sure you're not thinking about Barack Hussein Obama? Oh, that's right, Obama doesn't flip-flop, he 'evolves.'

@one old man:

"Election of Mitt will spell disaster for all of us."

Re-election for Barack Hussien Obama will spell socialism for America. He got us part way there. We need Romney in the White House to get us back on track.

"What kind of progress and good might have come if Congress had worked WITH Obama instead of trying to destroy him...?

Call it pay-back for the Democrat controlled (super majority) Congress pushing the unwanted Obamacare onto the American people... while Republicans were totally shut out of the process.

@ECR:

"Here is a fact - businessmen like Mitt Romney are not in the business if creating jobs..."

Romney's Bain Capital was in the business of saving companies... and it saved dozens, and the jobs along with them.

@Henderson:

"...he'll get rid of Big Bird and that'll save our country for sure."

First time I've seen Obama being called 'Big bird.'

wrz,

Go to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics web site and look up monthly unemployment rates for the past decade, with particular attention the the unemployment rate during the Obama administration. It's also important to remember that the economy doesn't heal itself overnight, and that we're just now climbing out of a recession that is far more severe than anything since the Great Depression.

Also, it is false to state that autoworkers didn't sacrifice pay and benefits as part of GM's rescue. Here's the reality:

Sixty-five thousand union workers agreed to sweeping givebacks, including eliminating dental and eye care benefits for retirees. Auto workers will see no cost of living adjustments and no performance bonuses - and must promise not to strike in the next six years.

In return GM agreed to keep open two of 16 plants targeted for closure and offer buyouts to all blue collar workers. They'll give the union a 17.5 percent stake in the company and about $4 billion in IOUs to pay for health care starting in 2013.

How is that a a giveaway to the UAW?

wrz, I feel very sorry for people who allow themselves to be deluded as you have been.

We do not need a bubble other than the soon to burst gold bubble.