Skip to main content
  • CNSNews.com
  • MRC TV
  • Biz & Media
  • Culture & Media
  • Take Action!

Join Us @:
Facebook
Twitter
Amazon Kindle

Free email alerts!

NewsBusters logo
June 20, 2013
  • Home
  • Blogs
  • About
  • Forum
  • Take Action
  • Contact
  • Donate
  • Search
  • RSS

Hot Topics

  • Obama ScandalWatch
  • IRS Targets Tea Party
  • Censoring the News
Home » Blogs » Brad Wilmouth's blog
  • MSNBC: Obama and Merkel Are the New 'Ronnie and Maggie'; Matthews Sees Conspiracy to Push Hillary 2016
  • NBC's Todd Excuses Obama's Poor Speech Performance: Crowd Too Small, 'It Was Hot'
  • Chris Matthews Whines About Sun Harming Obama's Berlin Speech
  • MSNBC's Hayes Slams 'Shameful Spectacle' of 'Anti-Food Stamp Jihad' by Republicans
  • The Inconvenient Suffering of China’s Laogai Prisoners
  • Bozell Column: Censoring the 'Anti-Gay' Viewpoint
  • Martin Bashir, Who Compared Conservatives to Hitler, Now Decries Nazi Comparisons
  • Bob Herbert: There Would Be Tons of Outrage on Left if Bush-Cheney Pursued Obama’s Policies

ABC’s Klein Adopts Euphemism ‘Investments’ to Refer to Obama Spending Proposals

By Brad Wilmouth | January 24, 2011 | 00:30

A  A

  On the January 23 World News Sunday, ABC News Senior Washington Editor Rick Klein used President Obama’s euphemism for spending as "investments" as he and anchor Dan Harris discussed how Republicans will likely respond to Tuesday’s State of the Union Address. Although the setup piece by correspondent David Kerley did allude to Obama’s word choice to call his plan "cut and invest" as having significance, noting that it "worries Republicans," after the piece had ended, Klein twice used the term "investments" as if it were straight, nonpartisan terminology. Klein:

But when you get down to the policy, the President talking about the targeted new investments, that is going to be such a tough sell in the current environment. Republicans are busy preparing long lists of budget cuts. That's going to be their focus. So, regardless of what the applause looks like on Tuesday night, it's going to be very difficult for the President to get any Republican support for any even very targeted new investments.

Kerley’s report had played a soundbite of House Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s skeptical response to the term "invest":

DAVID KERLEY: President Obama will stride into the House promising to cut spending and invest in the future. "Cut and invest," they call it. Which worries Republicans.

ERIC CANTOR, HOUSE MAJORITY LEADER: We want to cut and grow. Because when we hear "invest" from anyone in Washington, to me, that means more spending.

Below is a complete transcript of Kerley’s report, followed by the segment with Klein from the January 23 World News Sunday on ABC:

DAN HARRIS: And, as we all know, the shooting of Gabby Giffords set off cries for more civility in Washington. But today, top Republicans were making it clear as politely as possible that some of the ideas that President Obama plans to propose in Tuesday night's State of the Union Address are unacceptable to them. David Kerley is in Washington tonight.

DAVID KERLEY: President Obama will stride into the House promising to cut spending and invest in the future. "Cut and invest," they call it. Which worries Republicans.

ERIC CANTOR, HOUSE MAJORITY LEADER: We want to cut and grow. Because when we hear "invest" from anyone in Washington, to me, that means more spending.

KERLEY: And Republicans question if the President will cut enough.

MITCH MCCONNELL, SENATE MINORITY LEADER: I'm happy that the President's pivoting. We all know why. But it is kind of a trust but verify moment. Let's see if he's really willing to do it.

KERLEY: Even with high unemployment, President Obama is much higher in the polls than he was just weeks ago. His charm offensive with business, appointments of business-friendly staff and a productive lame duck session have put him on a roll. And Republicans know it.

SENATOR JOHN MCCAIN (R-AZ) CLIP #1: I think the President has already changed a great deal.

MCCAIN CLIP #2: He's going to be talking about cutting spending. That's what the message of the November election was.

KERLEY: Moving to the center, talking about cutting spending, creating jobs, is working.

DAVID GERGEN, POLITICAL ANALYST: The State of the Union is an enormous opportunity for him to continue this rebound, this comeback. He's got a chance now to really provide a theme for his presidency for the last two years.

KERLEY: After President Obama proclaims-

PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: Our union is strong.

KERLEY: -expect a theme he's mentioned at least eight times in the past five days.

OBAMA CLIP #1: We are competitive.

OBAMA CLIP #2: Global competition.

OBAMA CLIP #3: Even more competitive.

KERLEY: And he will use that other word, "investing," when he talks about education and research. Civility will be a big part of this speech, and that call for Republicans and Democrats to sit together, a date night of sorts, is gaining some momentum. Already, there are 60 members who will be red and blue couples, bipartisan partners, but the top Republican in the Senate, Mitch McConnell, says he will not take part. Now, there could be some awkward moments, Dan. What's going to happen when the Democrat stands up to applaud and the Republican they're sitting next to sits on their hands? It will be something interesting to watch.

HARRIS: Indeed. David Kerley, thank you. We want to talk more about this with Rick Klein, who’s our senior Washington editor. Rick, this whole date night thing, is it empty symbolism or substantive symbolism?

RICK KLEIN: I don't see a single policy implication to the choice of seat-mates. I think it is symbolic, but it’s a symbol and a new look that the White House would much rather talk about than the fact that President Obama is going to have a Republican House Speaker over his shoulder for the first time. But when you get down to the policy, the President talking about the targeted new investments, that is going to be such a tough sell in the current environment. Republicans are busy preparing long lists of budget cuts. That's going to be their focus. So, regardless of what the applause looks like on Tuesday night, it's going to be very difficult for the President to get any Republican support for any even very targeted new investments.

HARRIS: Lots going on, and it could end up being one of the more interesting State of the Unions we've seen in some time. Rick Klein, thank you.

  • Budget
  • State of the Union
  • Congress
  • David Kerley
  • Eric Cantor
  • Rick Klein
  • ABC
  • World News
  • Brad Wilmouth's blog
  • Login to post comments
  • Printer-friendly version
Stop George Soros

Comments

Yeah - when a short-sighted

Submitted by Slyrr on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 12:35am.

Yeah - when a short-sighted moron who earns only $20,000 a year decides to rack up $500,000 of credit card debt, he's 'investing'.

The sooner this odious man and his tax-and-spend tyrants are thrown out, the better.  I only hope the GOP will have the backbone to put the brakes on Obama's crazed policies of destruction.  And that the GOP will have the fortitude to withstand the inevitable onslaught of lies from Obama's media slaves.

If a Liberal/Democrat politician/media figure wants to put their arms around you, or pat you on the back, all they're doing is looking for a good place to stick a knife.
  • Login to post comments

Like the leaves from an October tree.

Submitted by NeoKong on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 12:56am.

Another bit of credibility flutters away in the wind.

DAVID KERLEY: President Obama will stride into the House promising to cut spending and invest in the future. "Cut and invest," they call it. Which worries Republicans.        Just how much of this must we tolerate...?    And just how he managed to work Gabriel Giffords into that story is beyond me.


 
Follow me on Twitter
  • Login to post comments

Funny, because when I invest money it's a voluntary

Submitted by lsudolemite on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 12:55am.

transaction on my part.  When the government forcibly takes my money by threat of fines. penalties, liens, or imprisonment, that's coercion, aka taxation.

"Liberalism is hideous.  It is the antithesis of being pro-human.  It looks at life as a burden in and of itself to be managed, rather than as a blessing to be explored and lived to the fullest." --Rush Limbaugh
  • Login to post comments

Clinton-ese: investment = taxes

Submitted by Galvanic on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 1:01am.

At least as far back as his first year in office (and probably his first Presidential campaign),  Slick Willie referred to taxes as investments.  This was certainly first tried out on focus groups, who found the word more positive.

Other words that the Left loves to throw around include:

moving (or going) forward

social justice

economic justice

stakeholder(s)

pivot

Truth to Power (ugh!)

  • Login to post comments

Taxes = Investment?

Submitted by Jer on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 1:32am.

I don't recall that.  Link?

Jer

  • Login to post comments

If private capital is not

Submitted by robert108 on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 1:15am.

If private capital is not risked to make a profit, with penalty for failure, its not an investment, it's just more wasteful spending of taxpayer money that would be better left in the hands of those who earned it.

  • Login to post comments

Right. Lousy investments like...

Submitted by Jer on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 1:40am.

the space program, Interstate Highway system, the Marshall Plan, etc:  Complete flops.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

→ Jer

Submitted by Cool Arrow on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 1:55am.

Maybe you've hit upon something.
Since suing the Federal Government is such a tough row to hoe, maybe the Doctors should just accept their positions as employees of the state and allow their fears of malpractice to slip away from them.

Furthermore, Doctors wouldn't have to worry so much about misdiagnosis since the government will be pressing them more to practice on the prevailing hunch than those niggling tests that get in the way of real medicine, huh?

Can't wait.

  • Login to post comments

Those were good investments for the benefit of all, but...

Submitted by Red Jeep on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 9:10am.

... taking money from one class of people to give away to another class of people isn't investing, it is legalized stealing.

Also the space program, the interstate highway program, etc. were not done to insure the re-election of a certain political party.

Obamacare is a vote buying scheme, not an investment. Obamacare is also a power grab.

It is an Apples and Oranges argument that true investments like the space program and the interstate highway program are the same type of investment as Obamacare, welfare and other Democrat vote buying scams.

  • Login to post comments

I didn't say that all govt

Submitted by robert108 on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 9:22am.

I didn't say that all govt spending was bad, I just pointed out that it's not investment.  The fact that the private sector has made good, profitable use of all those govt spending programs does not accrue to the govt, but to individual Americans.

  • Login to post comments

Jer

Submitted by dmaley1714 on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 9:33am.

Do have any examples of investments that are less than 40 years old?

  • Login to post comments

Still "investing," Jer!

Submitted by CobraMan on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 1:02pm.

It's interesting that of all the "investments" you're citing, only the "Marshall Plan" actually lead to a REDUCTION of U.S. tax payer "investments."  The others, the space program, the Interstate Highway system, and a lot of others that you failed to mention, are all multi-billion dollar a year "investments"that, guess what?, keep GROWING year after year even though Obama himself has mentioned that, especially in the sciences, we are no longer being competitive globally.

So, well over a trillion dollars of taxpayer "investment" into the "space program" in the last 20 years alone and yet we STILL need to "invest" in "sciences and technology" in order to stay competitive?  Yea, let's throw even more taxpayer money into apparently unproductive federal scientific research and development. Now that's a GREAT idea!

Here's an idea:  Let's increase our "investments" in PRIVATELY FUNDED research and development, also known as capitalism, the same privately funded research and development that lead to the PC, the Cellphone, the Flat Screen TV, the Dishwasher, the Car, the Hair Dryer, the Lightbulb, ect, ect, ect.

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution

Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court

Or Anwar al-Awlaki.

  • Login to post comments

So how many military

Submitted by Dan The Man 2 on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 1:31pm.

So how many military investments have we made lately?  Those are all military investments.

Nuke em til they glow; then shoot em in the dark
  • Login to post comments

Investment has been re-defined.

Submitted by sybilll on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 1:37am.

To largesse. 

  • Login to post comments

McConnell nailed it

Submitted by Cool Arrow on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 1:40am.

This morning on FOX News Sunday, Mitch McConnell said Americans should beware of the President calling "spending" by this new name "investment".

He clairvoyant or he has already been introduced to the President's new paradigm to prosperity.

  • Login to post comments

George Will Calls SOTU a "Pep Rally"

Submitted by Boil It Down on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 2:14am.

I think George is absolutely right and pep rallies require euphemisms. I think Klein only parrots "investment" from the talking points memos. Klein is, after all, one of the important useful idiots.

I hope someone does the work for me and writes a piece on the word counts of the euphemisms and other telling terms. Investing - competing - bipartisan - tone - civility - "I/me references" -  "centering references". This SOTU comes at a time when he is in heightened campaign mode. This address will most certainly be primarily about Obama and very little about the State of The Union.

When Obama talks about a stronger union I immediately assume he's talking ab out organized labor, his first love.

  • Login to post comments

more word games?

Submitted by 3strikes on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 3:26am.

  Just like "Obama has created or saved an estimated 1.9 million jobs."  Really?!

  • Login to post comments

Tea Party House GOP Aiming to Defund the United Nations

Submitted by im41 on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 4:12am.

TIP

Tea Party House GOP Aiming to Defund the United Nations

http://conservativeblogscentral.blogspot.com/2011/01/tea-party-house-gop...

  • Login to post comments

Invest...you hopefully get a pay back...worth investing in Army?

Submitted by jorae on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 6:10am.

From the tax payer side, it would be ....Tax

From the Government side, it would be income

I don't know...saying "investing" in the military seems right...the word was tax before it got to the Treasury...now it is spent ... and hopefully on investing in America...Not in waste like Farm subsities, and Bail out from people who arrive in private planes...It seems we always have money for some ... but  never questions how much goes out to no bid contracts and  farms subsities...that are corporat owned.  How come we got so use to seeing the established rich as deserving our tax dollars?  There is something wrong with this picture.

  • Login to post comments

Investments indicate that a capital object is formed

Submitted by TheHistorian on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 6:59am.

Investing can happen in bridges, dams, tanks, rifles, etc.

Investing in people is another name for welfare, paying off pension funds, etc.

The two have very different end results for the taxpayer.  The first one is a single or periodic investment.  The latter is a continued drain on our economy.

As of today, because President Obama did so much of the second, particularly to his cronies in state and local governments, we have no money for the first.  Believing him that he will actually do the first is a "willing suspension of disbelief" to quote the White House Cookie Baker in another discussion.

“Liberals tend to put the onus of your success on society and conservatives on you and your family.”

Dennis Prager

  • Login to post comments

That's An Important Distinction Historian

Submitted by Boil It Down on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 12:18pm.

I'm glad you reminded us of the point that we need to see solid results if it is to be called an investment. Show me the goods, show me value, noble sounding causes are too often like smoke in the wind.

Obama and the Congress have burned their bridges when it comes to proposing any further intangible investments.

  • Login to post comments

Klein said, "...targeted new

Submitted by Kevpot on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 12:26pm.

Klein said,
"...targeted new investments...."

Targeted? That's pretty harsh scary rhetoric.

  • Login to post comments

The Big Problem

Submitted by CobraMan on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 1:27pm.

The Big Problem with Obama's (or any other politician, for that matter) "investment" idea is that the federal government decides who and what will receive the US Taxpayers money in the form of "investments" and that those "investments" are targeted according to political ideology. It's interesting to note that those "investments" are also defined and debated by means of political ideology and that the "results" of those "investments" also vary according to political ideology.  It all depend on which party is in power at the time.

For example:  Regan's "Star Wars" defense program  "investments" were a bad idea, according to the political "experts" in power right now (Missile defense is not a "proven technology," according to Obama, therefor the federal government will not "invest" in it.),  while Obama's "Solar Power" or "Green" "investments" are a good idea, according to those same "experts." ( Advanced battery technology is a "good" investment and shall receive federal funding, according to Obama, even though that, too, is an "unproven" technology as those "improved" batteries haven't even been invented yet. And then there's fetal stem-cell research...) Both involved "investments" into science and technology yet one "investment" is better than another due only to political ideology.

Do we REALLY want political ideology to decide what is a "good" or "bad" "investment" of the taxpayers money? If political ideology is involved, and it can't help BUT be involved when politicians control those decisions, then it is automatically a bad investment for all you'll be investing in is political rancor and division.

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution

Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court

Or Anwar al-Awlaki.

  • Login to post comments

Investments

Submitted by djaymick on Mon, 01/24/2011 - 1:28pm.

Like the "investment" we made in Brazil to send $2B for oil exploration?  Like the "investment" in green jobs that have seen some of the largest recipients going belly up?  Like "investments" in education that have produced more drop outs and lower test scores?

Hopefully, Republicans will defund the Brazilian money and keep it for us to do this.  Great, union jobs (unfortunately) that reduce our foreign dependence.  This one will surely win over both sides of the aisle.  However, we will not hear a peep from the liberal environmentalists on this.

  • Login to post comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Stop Censoring The Gosnell Trial!

Editors' Picks

  • The regulated states of America infringe on pursuit of happiness (Niall Ferguson)
  • The rationale for wind power won't fly (Jay Lehr @ WSJ)
  • President Obama parrots false 'equal pay' statistic (Bader @ OpenMarket.org)
  • Whose war on women? (FRC)
  • Romney's revenge (Avik Roy @ NRO)
  • Relax, the Arizona voter registration ruling was narrowly drawn by Scalia (Hans von Spakovsky)
  • Snowden loses his moral authority with dangerous leaks (Rothman @ Mediaite)
  • Rapper Lil' Wayne stomps on American flag (Rare)
  • Apple releases information about data requests from NSA, other agencies (LA Times)
  • Five myths about privacy (Solove @ Washington Post)
Chuck Norris's picture
Chuck Norris
Chuck Norris Column: The Superman of Dads and Grads
Cal Thomas's picture
Cal Thomas
Cal Thomas Column: Broadcast Nets, Ailes Is What's Good for You
Ann Coulter's picture
Ann Coulter
Coulter Column: If the GOP Falls for 'Immigration Reform' Ruse, It Deserves to Die
Walter E. Williams's picture
Walter E. Williams
Walter E. Williams Column: Let People Sell Their Organs to Sick, Needy Recipients
Michelle Malkin's picture
Michelle Malkin
Malkin Column: Anthony Weiner's Underage Girl Problem
More >

RSS FeedAmazon KindleFacebookTwitter

Stop Censoring The News!

Audit the Man of Steel?!
more cartoons
  • NewsBusters Interview: Amity Shlaes on Coolidge, Media, and Neo-Keynesianism
  • Facebook Photo Shows Kennedy Girl Shooting Baby Seals
  • Slate Says Lack Of Emotionalism Sunk Gun Control Bill
  • Serena Williams Slams French Taxes: 'Seventy-Five Percent Doesn't Seem Legal'
  • O’Reilly: Obama Could Be Impeached If Evidence Shows Intel Agency Read Emails Without Warrant
More >
NewsBusters

Executive Editor
Matthew Sheffield

Editor at Large
Brent Baker

Senior Editors
Tim Graham
Rich Noyes

Managing Editor
Ken Shepherd

Associate Editor
Noel Sheppard

Contributing Editors
Tom Blumer
Geoffrey Dickens
Dan Gainor
David Limbaugh
Mithridate Ombud
Clay Waters
Scott Whitlock

Senior Contributor
Mark Finkelstein

Contributing Writers
Matthew Balan
Michael M. Bates
Erin R. Brown
Jack Coleman
Kyle Drennen
Douglas Ernst
P. J. Gladnick
Stephen Gutowski
Matt Hadro
D. S. Hube
Kathleen McKinley
Dave Pierre
Amy Ridenour
Julia A. Seymour
Terry Trippany
Rusty Weiss
Brad Wilmouth

Publisher
Brent Bozell

Site Design
Dialog New Media

 

  • Home
  • Blogs
  • About
  • Forum
  • Contact
  • Donate
  • Search
  • Account
  • rss
  • CNSNews
  • MRC TV
  • Biz & Media
  • Culture & Media
  • Take Action!
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Amazon Kindle
  • Advertise
  • Jobs

Copyright © 2005-2013 NewsBusters.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use