Yesterday on Fox New Sunday, Chris Wallace put both Rep. Paul Ryan and Austan Goolsbee, former chairman of the president's Council of Economic Advisors, in the political equivalent of a boxing match ring over which candidate has a better plan for getting Americans back to work. If you missed today's show, you can see it or read the transcript at: http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/fox-news-sunday/2012/05/20/ryan-goolsbee-debate-obama-romney-economic-records#ixzz1vSr9PR7g, from which the following excerpts were taken and all italics are my formatting.
Round 1 was a discussion on the Obama commercial on Bain Capital. Wallace easily won this round between him and Goolsbee when he asked him this question:
WALLACE: Mr. Goolsbee, can you tell me a major CEO in this country that doesn't see the main job as creator wealth for his investors?
GOOLSBEE: I don't know the answer to that. I think that when I saw Stephanie Cutter's statement, it was in response to one of the Bain Capital partners who that said, our was job creation for the investors.
My italics to stress a freshman response coming from a top economic advisor. No wonder we're in such a fine mess! Does he know anything about economics and business? Goolsbee then went on to say that Bain should disclose their financial records as if they have something to hide in the case of the investors making a ton of money at the expense of workers. Wouldn't we all like to see past records of the incumbent such as college transcripts, etc.
Round 2, same topic with Rep. Ryan's turn to respond to the Bain commercial and he gives a great right hook in the sentence I italicized below and wins the round:
WALLACE: Let me follow up with Congressman Paul Ryan.
Because the Obama campaign says the point of Romney economics is to make money for Bain, to make money for their investors, even if all of the workers get wiped out. And in this particular case, with the steel mill in Kansas City, the workers and that plant went bankrupt. The 750 workers were laid off and Bain did make millions of dollars in profits.
RYAN: You know what's ironic about this, Chris, Mitt Romney was running the Olympics during this time. He wasn't even running Bain during the time period in question.
I think the individual if I'm not mistaken who was running Bain is a big Obama contributor.
But for the point, Chris, what Bain did was they used private capital to help struggling businesses. What President Obama is doing is he's gambling with taxpayer money and giving money to corporate contributors, to campaign contributors like Solyndra and he's losing taxpayer money.
So, what we have in the Obama administration is this crony capitalism, this corporate welfare where President Obama thinks it's right that we taxpayer dollars to give to private companies and take bets on these private companies. That's wrong.
Just a few more statements that I won't put in full context as you can read it for yourself, but this sentence from Goolsbee was weird: "On the picking of winners, it is absolutely not the Obama philosophy to try to transform the government into only picking winners."
This is a very strange statement in that no one had mentioned a philosophy of transforming the government and yet he said it and also alluded to a philosophy of picking losers to transform the government, as if it's an equal opportunity funding policy. I always try to figure out what their left-speak means when they accidentally tell the truth. In this case, another team Obama reference to transforming this county. Clearly an unforced error from Goolsbee.
Round 3, Wallace let Goolsbee speak and he punched himself in the mouth! This was just after the dialog above and now here is where the "Forward" slogan comes in with the true meaning (again my italics for emphasis). This is no different than the Super-Pac idea for a commercial on Rev. Wright that never aired and now they don't want anyone to go through the stimulus line by line. Horror that someone might do that and my what a waste of time to uncover the real recipients of taxpayer dollars. We must not look back at Obama's record, that doesn't count, and that just wouldn't be playing fair! Let's just move forward and pretend the last three-plus years didn't exist, therefore we shouldn't use those fictitious years to judge what the future will hold under this administration, or so we're told by those that want to cover it up.
WALLACE: I think wait a minute. Without speaking for him, I think he's talking about things like Solyndra.
GOOLSBEE: Well, look, in the case of Solyndra, he's citing there that the lead investor was an Obama supporter. The second investor was a McCain supporter.
So, I mean, the argument that we should go back to stimulus from three years ago and have an argument about each and every line in the stimulus rather than ask starting from right now what does the economy need. Does it need giant tax cuts for high income people and crushing of Social Security and Medicare, or do we want a balanced plan that involves some new revenues with a 3-1 ratio of spending cuts with taxes, I think that's the relevant question that we ought to be asking.
Round 4, Goolsbee falls down on his own accord, knocks himself out and is declared the loser! After sparring a bit more on the candidate's records on job creation, debt, and budgetary matters, this was yet another classic Obama blame someone else tactic. As you'll see, Goolsbee basically said that things were done in a bi-partisan basis from 2008-2010- where was he?
WALLACE: The fact is, Mr. Goolsbee, that under this president, the debt increased by $5 trillion or almost 50 percent.
GOOLSBEE: Look, I don't dispute that the deficit has increased. I would say two things about that. First is all objective analyst -- forget about the campaigns -- acknowledge that the vast majority of the increase and deficit, some $750 billion out of $1 trillion increase in the deficit came about from the business cycle and then the policy choices that were done on a bipartisan basis. And so, at the end of 2010, with both parties vote to extend the Bush tax cuts, everyone understood that that was going to keep the deficit large, we just decided collectively that the economy needed that.
And so we can see how the Left is best at knocking themselves out of the political ring when asked the right questions. Chris Wallace is an excellent interviewer as we saw when he interviewed Axelrod on April 16th, just a month ago, when he too revealed a stunning admission on this administration's failed policies, from (http://nation.foxnews.com/david-axelrod/2012/04/16/axelrod-rocked-fox-news-sunday):
WALLACE: And that is, David, if I may, I wanted to ask you in the final question I have. In one paragraph, two or three sentences, what's the choice in this election?AXELROD: The choice in this election is between economy that produces a growing middle class and that gives people a chance to get ahead and their kids a chance to get ahead, and an economy that continues down the road we are on, where a fewer and fewer number of people do very well, and everybody else is running faster and faster just to keep pace.
And ever since O rolled out his new "Forward" campaign slogan that was supposed to be more hope and change if you just give me four more years, it's really just his latest tactic to put blinders on the voters in the election. His sleight of speech will work on some unfortunately, but my guess is not enough to win him the election, especially as more of his surrogates speak the truth occasionally as they try to paint a happy but false picture of this president's record and policies.
From Obama's speech in Albany, NY on May 8, “We’ve got to move forward to an economy where everybody gets a fair shot, everybody gets a fair share, everybody plays by the same set of rules,” he said. “And that’s what you guys are doing here in Albany. You are investing in your future. You’re not going backwards. You’re going forward.”
The only forward I want to see is when mail addressed to Mr. Obama at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. is stamped, "NOT AT THIS ADDRESS". Now that would be progress!