Wolf Blitzer: Liar on the Liar Network

The only question with Wolf Blitzer is whether he knows he is lying when he lies (when you might consider it not a lie if he does not know), or is just bonde deep stupid. I vote for BOTH. This Thursday afternoon/evening contained more than one Blitzer LIE that illustrates the point.


Wolf Blitzer was interviewing Debbie Wasserman Schultz (sp.?), the chairman of the DNC, or Democratic campaign committee, or some such thing--in any event a Congresswoman with a leadership positon in the Democratic Party. She was telling Wolf about how GREAT Obama was doing on the economy, and how the "improvement" in the economy is ACCELERATING, as the economy gets better and better under Obama. sNo challenge from Wolf Blitzer, who just kept nodding. This is reallyl a LIE BY BLITZER, to let those kind of statements go unchallenged at all, as if they are not objectively false. See my prvious articles this week, about how BAD this week's economic news has been.


It was too much for David Gergen. He told Wolf that--leftist that he is--he "likes" the woman who made thses ridiculous statements to Wolf, but that that she was WRONG (obejectively wrong) about the streght of the economy. Gergen mentioned the TERRIBLE economic news this week.


Did Blitzer acknowledge the problems with the economy? Not on your life. Anthony Weiner has nothing on Wolf Blitzer, LIAR, when it comes to trying to evade the issue with mroe lies. Rather, Blitzer said: "David, that may be true, but you have to say that the economy is better now than when President Obama took office--that at least we are heading in the right directon." That, of course, is an Obama propaganda "talking point", and Wolf Blitzer knows it. Q.E.D. Blitzer is both a LIAR, and bone deep stupid (for thinking you can get away with that obvious a lie).


Is what Bliltzer said an obvious lie? Sure it is. Is the country "headling in the right direction" because people are generally better off now than they were in the Great Depression? I am serious. We are NOT "heading in the right diretion" just because the country, and our economy, is better off now than it was in the depts of the Great Depression. Yes, that is the "logic" Blitzer was tlrying out on David Gergen, to get around Gergen's point that the economy is HEADING IN THHE WRONG DIRECTION. Yes, the ecoonomy is better off that in was in the depths of the recession. But Obama has now been in office almost two and one half years. What Gergen was accurately saying is that the early, slow "improvement" in the economy has STALLED--taht we are no longer "heading in the right direction".


For example, in the last quarter of 2009, the economy grew at something like 5%. In the last half of 2009, the economy grew at more than 4%. What about last quarter? The econmy (GDP) grew at 1.8%. That is NOT "heading in the right direction". It is heading in the WRONG direction. Look at housing. The housing market seemed to be stabilizing, and even improving some, during parts of 2010. The numbers now are the WORST they have been in the recession. People are openly saying that the housing market has already entered a new recessioni. Housing sales are DOWN. Housing prices are DOWN. Figures are equla to, or worse than, the LOWS of the recession. Again, we are going in the WRONG direction, even if the ecconmy is not yeat as bad as it was. Blitzer mentioned the STOCK MARKET, to try to counter Blitzer. The stock market has also been "heading in the wrong direction" this week, but there is no doubt it is up from the deptsh of the recession quite a bit. Is not that interesting? Blitzer is saying that Obama has been GOOD FOR WALL STREET, but not for the American worker. Yes, Blitzer has confirmed my point that the people on Wall Street are NOT "enemies" of Obama, but consider themselves in a "parntership" with Obama (economic fascists that they all are--"socialism with a caoutakust vebeer""). Does Blitzer really want to say that making money for Wall Street, while people suffer, is "heading in the right direction"?


See my previious articles this week. Every single economic report has been BAD. New unemployment claims? A BAD number, continuing 8 straight weeks of bad numbers? The AP did an article that the unemployment rate is really 11.5%, and that the supposed "improvement" is really fiction. As Gergen told Blitzer, there are now 7 million FEWER jobs than at the time the recession began. The official unemployment rate is stuck at 9%, and not improving (tomorrow's number should remain around 9%). ADP reported a miniscule private job "gain" of 38,000 in May--the WRONG directiion from April. Consumer confidence fell. Gas prices are way up. FOOD prices are way up. Exactly how are we "heading in the right direction"? The manufacturing report this week was BAD. The planned company hiring was BAD. No good news anywhere, and that was what Gergen tried to tell Blitzer that Blitzer was ignroing--suggesting that Blitzre FAILED as a "journalist" in this interview (an absolutely correct view, which I am willing to state, whether Gergen would put it that bluntly or not).


Do you see the real LIE in what Blitzer said? It is not so much that the evidence is conclusive that we are "heading int he wrong direction", even though the evidence is pretty darn strong. The point is that it DOESN NOT MATTER how bad the eeconomy was when Obama took office as President (Obama AND the Democrats had controlled Congress for the previous two years, and that control is the only difference in the government before and after economic disaster). The question is whether President Obama has been able to keep his promises, and ut the economy into a strong recovery. In other words, the question is whether we are "heading in the right direction" NOW, and it is irrelevant (despite Blitzer's attempt at a clumsy lie) to that question whether we were worse off when Obama took office. On unemployment, of course, AND as to the housing market, we aRE worse off (by the numbers) than when Obama took office (when unemployment was about 7%). But that, too, is not as important as to whether we are NOW "heading in the right direction". Whehter tings were once worse is just as irrelevant to that question as it is to say that we are better off now than we were in the Great Depression. That obviously does not mean that we have been "heading in the right direction" ever since the Great Deparession, and yet that is what Wolf Blitzer's LIE tried to say.


Yes, I know that Obama blames it all on Bush, even though Obama was in a Democratically controlled Congress at the time. But that is a DIFFERENT argument from the LIE that we are "heading in the right direction" because things were so bad then. In other words, Obama can try to make the argument that the situation he "inherited" (even though he was part of the government that created the problems) from President Bush was so bad that Obama could not have done any better. I don't like that argument, but it does NOT support in any way the assertion that we are "heading in the right direction" (even if the argument has any merit). "Heading in the right direction" refers to DIRECTION NOW. Blaiming Bush refers back to the past,. Blitzer deliberately--echoing Obama--confused the two in his LIE. Again, we KNOW it was a lie, and not just stupidity, because Gergen tried to tell Blitzer that Blitzer was ignroing recent bad economic data.


Yep. By November of 2012, it will be even more obvious whether we are "heading in the right direction". If things are much better, then Obama has a good chance to get reelected. However, if we are still LIMING along, even if there is minor "improvement", Obama is going to be in trouble. That is where Blitzer's stupidity comes in. The LIES he and CNN tell NOW are not going to help Obama. And yes, what I tell you now is not really going to hurt Obama.


I am telling you that Obama, Bernanke, and the Democrats have pupt us in a position where a STRONG "recovery" is impossilbe. Blitzer's attempted LIE about us already being in a strong recovery is not going to matter if Obama and the Democrats prove me wrong by 2012 (which would be good for the country). It is more likely that I will either be proven right, or that the situation is gong to be inconclusive at that time. If the situation is inconclusive, then it is going to come down to a real fight about DIRECTION of this country. That is, do we want to go in the DIRECTION of ever bigger and all powerful government, or do we want to go int the direction of freedom and a free economy. Yes, even if Obama and the Democrats were to have a roaring economy in place in Noveber of 2012, without substantial inflation (which I would regaard as imossible), I would still oppose Obama for pointing us in the WRONG DIRECTION of Big Government and Big Debt. But I would expect Obama to win the election, IF the economy is ROARING. It is the situation wheere the economy is doing substantially better (including housing and employment) but not well, that it is really going to be a contest of philosophy. Then the wuesitn will truly be what is the "right direction", without conclusive proof one way or the other. If the economy is obviously in grfeat shape, I would not give up the fight, but I would not expect to win (at least in 20112--unless Repubicans somehow convince people they are responsible for the good results). If the econmy is in about the shape it is in now, or worse, I expect Obama to LOSE--no matter what "philosophical" dreiction the epole want for the size of the Federal Government.


You should be able to see just how much of a LIAR Blitzer is, because he only sees things from a position of partisan propaganda. He either does not even see that the issues discussed above exist. or he does not care because he is a partisan liar. As stated above, I think this exmple shows he is both.


P.S. No proofreading or spell checkng (bad eyesight). And yes, if Wolf Blitzer is not even willing to challenge a Democrat on the state of the economy this TERRIBLE week, then he and CNN never will. I have never been impressed with Gergen, but at least he is able to see the obvious. That is true of very few other people, if any, on CNN. The economic data tomorrow cannot be "good". It can only be "not as bad as feared". The economy has to do better than this, or we are in real, real trouble (as if we were not in real trouble before). And Obama's "answer" is TAXES ON THE RICH--the "answer' to the debt, to Medicare, to Social Security, to health care, and to everything else. It is simply sad that we have a President that clueless. I ALMOST wish Obama would get his way. Nothing would make economic disaster more certain.