MSNBC’s Alter: No Jobs from Bush’s ‘Massive Tax Cuts,’ Tea Partiers Would Support Obama Budget
On Wednesday’s The Ed Show, MSNBC analyst and Bloomberg View columnist Jonathan Alter claimed that the "massive tax cuts" of the Bush administration did not create jobs, and went on to credit former President Clinton for the low unemployment rate that existed during the Bush years. He ended up lecturing fellow panel member Judson Phillips of Tea Party Nation that Tea Party activists would support President Obama’s budget plan if polled and that they are "not as obsessed with tax cuts as you are."
As panel members Phillips and Leo Gerard of the United Steelworkers of America argued over whether jobs were created by the Bush tax cuts, Alter injected: "First of all, the massive tax cuts at the beginning of the Bush administration did not create jobs in this economy. There were very few jobs created during his eight years in the White House."
After Phillips pointed out the low unemployment that had existed around the middle of the decade, Alter responded: "Because we had 20 million jobs created in the Clinton administration."
He continued: "Another point, just, this is really essential because I think that Mr. Phillips is out of touch with his own voters. If you go and talk to Tea Party supporters around the country... And you ask them a choice: Would you like to cut $4 trillion from the debt? Or would you like to protect loopholes for wealthy corporations? Would you accept a deal that closed those loopholes and cut $4 trillion from the deficit?"
Alter concluded: "They all would take the deal. It’s only their leadership - people like you and some of the folks on Capitol Hill - who don’t realize where the real mainstream Republicans are on this issue. They’re not as obsessed with tax cuts as you are."
Below is a transcript of the relevant portion of the Wednesday, July 13, The Ed Show on MSNBC:
JONATHAN ALTER, BLOOMBERG VIEW COLUMNIST: I just wanted to make a couple of points to Mr. Phillips. First of all, the massive tax cuts at the beginning of the Bush administration did not create jobs in this economy. There were very few jobs created during his eight years in the White House.
ED SCHULTZ: Would you agree with that, Mr. Phillips?
JUDSON PHILLIPS, TEA PARTY NATION: Oh, yeah, right, tax cuts didn’t create jobs? And please tell me why in 2004 and 2005 we had full employment. We were down below five percent unemployment.
ALTER: Because we had 20 million jobs created in the Clinton administration. Another point, just, this is really essential because I think that Mr. Phillips is out of touch with his own voters. If you go and talk to Tea Party supporters around the country and you ask them, and let me give you a choice-
PHILLIPS: Funny, I actually talk to them probably more than you do.
ALTER: Excuse me, let me finish my sentence. And you ask them a choice: Would you like to cut $4 trillion from the debt? Or would you like to protect loopholes for wealthy corporations?
Would you accept a deal that closed those loopholes and cut $4 trillion from the deficit, they all would take the deal. It’s only their leadership - people like you and some of the folks on Capitol Hill - who don’t realize where the real mainstream Republicans are on this issue. They’re not as obsessed with tax cuts as you are.
- Brad Wilmouth's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
This must the the Jonathan
Submitted by Beukeboom on Thu, 07/14/2011 - 7:01am.
This must the the Jonathan Alter from a parallel, bizarro dimension.
Or just a brazen liar.
No kidding!
Submitted by jon_torlin on Thu, 07/14/2011 - 7:18am.
I was looking for Rod Serling to show up.
He must be using the meme that Government was the creator of jobs and not businesses. So to him, there weren't that many jobs to be had.
-Jon
Alter-nate reality
Submitted by nkviking75 on Thu, 07/14/2011 - 9:35am.
Talk about your Alter-nate reality...
“Always love your country — but never trust your government!" -- Bob Novak (1931-2009)
When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.
What plan?
Submitted by WhoIsJohnGalt on Thu, 07/14/2011 - 7:14am.
As far as I've heard, Obama has not actually put forth a plan, just a few platitudes.
Apparently part of Obama's
Submitted by Beukeboom on Fri, 07/15/2011 - 7:56am.
Apparently part of Obama's "plan" is to angrily walk out of meetings with the Republicans.
If we raise taxes to 100% we will have "full" employment!
Submitted by Red Jeep on Thu, 07/14/2011 - 7:18am.
Liberal logic:
1.) Clinton's magical tax increases created a booming economy (not the country computerizing itself and other factors.)
2.) Clinton's magical tax increase created low unemployment.
3.) 1 + 1 = 11
You forgot #4 -- if anything
Submitted by Beukeboom on Fri, 07/15/2011 - 7:57am.
You forgot #4 -- if anything goes wrong it must be Bush's fault.
It was all Clinton and higher taxes.
Submitted by NeoKong on Thu, 07/14/2011 - 7:26am.
It had nothing to do with the Gingrich Congress and the high tech boom that was making millionaires out of janitors. Then of course Janet Reno decided to sue Microsoft because they were too profitable and the next thing you know we had the market crash at the end of Clinton's term. Alter could have mentioned that.
Pure Freakin Fantasy
Submitted by scottyusmc on Thu, 07/14/2011 - 7:28am.
We need some form of accountability on these idiots!
Can we officially start a Book of Economic Facts
Submitted by Red Jeep on Thu, 07/14/2011 - 8:19am.
Alternate title: Economics for Dummy Politicians
Why do we have to relearn the same "stuff" decade after decade, year after year depending on which political party is in power?
If low tax rates creates more tax revenue and high employment, then let's engrave that in stone or enter it in the Official Book of Economic Facts. If the reverse is true then enter that.
But let's end this constant political football on economics.
Although they weren't titled
Submitted by ricklail on Thu, 07/14/2011 - 9:47am.
Although they weren't titled Economics for Dummies, Dr. Thomas Sowell has written numerous books on economics. Libs won't read them because he is a libertarian.
Reporters should read these books...
Submitted by Red Jeep on Thu, 07/14/2011 - 10:15am.
...then quote from them when interviewing politicians. Hit them with some truth.
Empirical truth doesn't mater in a relativist, MSNBC world
Submitted by MoYo on Thu, 07/14/2011 - 7:40am.
Fortunately, MSNBC and crew are so irrelevant that even a criticism of them serves as a boost to their ratings.
Some things are still self evident....
"motherbelt's axiom"
Submitted by motherbelt on Thu, 07/14/2011 - 7:42am.
applies here
Does Alter even realize
Submitted by HockeyKid on Thu, 07/14/2011 - 8:07am.
that "Tea Party" began as "TEA Party", as in Taxed Enough Already?!
If not, he's hardly qualified to lecture on the topic.
If so, he's just another lying D-bag propping up Obysmal Inc.
"Beauty is only skin deep, but liberal's to the bone." - me
"Alter-ed" reality
Submitted by Galvanic on Thu, 07/14/2011 - 8:55am.
Telling an organization's leader that all of its members are in disagreement with the leader? Yeah, right.
I would've asked Alter right there to name three bona fide Tea Party members -- not elected officials who claim Tea Party support -- and then inform Alter that I would personally contact those folks, ask them for their responses to Alter's proposition, and post the responses on my website.
This Tea Partier doesn't
Submitted by Free Stinker on Thu, 07/14/2011 - 8:17am.
This Tea Partier doesn't support Obama's budget
/// Sarah Palin Fan since July 11, 2007 /// خال
And neither does his own Party
Submitted by Boudin on Thu, 07/14/2011 - 8:52am.
Thats why it was voted down unanimously, as well as bipartisanly (for those who are counting)
Yet more elitist
Submitted by dr-go on Thu, 07/14/2011 - 8:41am.
snobbery "if you go and talk to....."
Jonathan certainly won't let facts ruin a good talking point.
The TEA Party would support
Submitted by Scuba Dude on Thu, 07/14/2011 - 8:43am.
The TEA Party would support Obamas budget? Either Alter is the absolute dumbest guy out there or he is lying his arse off so as to make the Republicans in Congress look bad. I choose both with him being the dumbest being the leader.
I would love to see him support this 20 million jobs created under Clinton. I am sure he is following the libturd manual to just make up a number and not have anything to back that number up.
All libturds are liars.
His lips are moving SCUBA
Submitted by Tomorama on Thu, 07/14/2011 - 9:11am.
"Some people" or the tried and true "there are people that suggest".... axioms that these (D)-bags use when they want to interject THEIR opinion in without saying it is their opinion.
Fact of the matter, Clinton stepped in sh** while in office, a once in a lifetime DOTCOM boom because of the Obambi named "internets".... and I admit a great time for all, but just like the Roman empire............
Greed and gluttony took over and the boom went BUST and Boooooosh was left with a recession day one he took office.
Alter lacks the balls to talk to a real tea partier as Granny would kick his little pu%%y progressive rear end.
What is Obambi's budget anyway, the one that got shot down 97-0, that one?
Or is it the one where he talks about it while saying absolutely NOTHING in regards to specifics?
Serious Lack of Reality
Submitted by BMorgan53 on Thu, 07/14/2011 - 9:48am.
Between 2001 and 2008, the Bush years, the US Unemployment Rate was
2001 4.7
2002 5.8
2003 6.0
2004 5.5
2005 5.1
2006 4.6
2007 4.6
2008 5.8
Between 2009 & 2011, the unemployment rate was / is:
2009 9.3
2010 9.6
2011 9.2
Don't believe me, see http://www.bls.gov/cps/prev_yrs.htm
BMorgan - Something to put in front of Alter's beady little eyes
Submitted by Gary Hall on Thu, 07/14/2011 - 12:38pm.
The measure of the Clinton era:
The left would only want to talk about that, if a Republican would have been president then.
Also interesting to note, that during the Clinton era, AKA the dot.com bubble of irrational greed and corporate fraud, AKA the Enron era, that the income of the top 1% of earners soared from 13.7% of all income earned to 21% in 2000. During the Bush years, after falling -- following the his inheritance of the collapse of the Clinton economy, in March of 2000, the ratio fell for a few years before finally climbing up to 22.83%.
So, under Clinton, CEO pay went meteoric and the income of the top 1% made gains (up 53%) not seen since the roaring 20's. Under Bush, CEO pay fell, compared to average worker pay, fell for 8 straight years, and the income percentage of the top 1% (up 5%), couldn't keep up w/ inflation.
Is there a soul in the national MSM that would ever challenge the Democrats on the history?
(;~> gary
BMorgan, I got a chart.
Submitted by upcountrywater on Thu, 07/14/2011 - 1:03pm.
Jobs
Democrats can tear down America faster than Republicans can build it up.
You Didn't Build That.
indeed.
Submitted by jon_torlin on Thu, 07/14/2011 - 1:18pm.
It's always been easier to destroy than to build.
-Jon
'Jonathan' is an effeminate version of 'John.'
Submitted by ChrisNH on Thu, 07/14/2011 - 9:27am.
Leftists are a limp-wristed lot, we all agree.
'Jonathan' this and 'Timothy' that.
What an incapable bunch of people Obama's regime and its breast-feeding media represent.
Idiot
Submitted by Richard.Halavais on Thu, 07/14/2011 - 9:35am.
Jonathan Alter is a blithering idiot. How do such stupid people get jobs beyond digging ditches? Oh yea, I forgot for a second. Look at Obama. the crooked Chicago community organizer, Do these liberal fools even know what a community organizer is? Wouldn't he be better described as childish fool rabble rouser?
I've got a smart kid, measured IQ of 185. He's pretty well given up. Makes his living professionally playing computer games but that's what happens when schools are reduced to the lowest common denominator. To paraphrase Reagan, a lowering tide sinks all boats and with liberals in charge the tide is going out fast.
Instead of calling them the
Submitted by BMorgan53 on Thu, 07/14/2011 - 9:36am.
Main Stream Media, Lame Stream Media, or Old Media. Address them by their present obsession the Fellatio Media.
Not needed
Submitted by goodone91 on Thu, 07/14/2011 - 9:25pm.
That comment at the end wasn't needed.
May I ask,
Submitted by hbnolikeee on Thu, 07/14/2011 - 9:42am.
Who controlled the congress when clinton's economy was doing well. Ummmm, the GOP. And in 2006 who controlled the congress, when our unemployment was at under 5% and the spending ramped up? Ummm, the Democrats.
Case closed, save the crap, not buying today.
CLS?
Submitted by Chris Norman on Thu, 07/14/2011 - 9:51am.
So, now in addition to blaming Bush for all things bad (BDS), we have praising Clinton for all things good (CLS - "Clinton Love Syndrome")?
The alternate universe of
Submitted by jkwtrading on Thu, 07/14/2011 - 9:57am.
The alternate universe of Jonathan Alter.
covering for democrats
Submitted by ohio granny on Thu, 07/14/2011 - 10:11am.
All these idiots can do is try to cover for obama and the democrats. if this country becomes the place these fools want it to, there will be no one to buy their products or services. I still remember seeing women in Russia standing in lines to try to buy bread and other essentials. No jobs, no money, and no heat for their homes. Is that really what you want.
the whole democrat party and most of the so-called MSM are nothing but a bunch of lying, cheating thugs and hypocrites. They need to be defeated just like the Nazis were. That is the only way we will ever get back the country our ancesters fought and died for.
You people are despicable.
democrats and MSM = liars, cheats, crooks, and hypocrites. bullies and thugs too.
Barry's Birthday
Submitted by iveseenitall on Thu, 07/14/2011 - 10:24am.
Drudge reports that Barry's birthday bash will cost $35,800 per couple (can you say Fund Raiser). As for the "little people, "Let them eat cake" ,eh, Barry boy. And you, Alter, should be ashamed of yourself. You would be if you weren't a "liberal"--- but you are, and therefore you know no shame. Disgusting!
NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal"
Failure as a Specialty
Submitted by redherkey on Thu, 07/14/2011 - 10:27am.
I actually worry for people like Alter, along with the rest of the mainstream media. When the Church of Hope and Faith, and the general societal myth that believes in this progressive metaphysics, finally fails (all objects eventually are required to believe in gravity and reality, one way or another), we're going to be left with tens of thousands of utterly unemployable losers.
This story needs a beverage
Submitted by danbo on Thu, 07/14/2011 - 10:31am.
This story needs a beverage warning.
"You lie!" Rep. Joe Wilson R-(SC)
An idiot from Newsweek
Submitted by NotFondOfLibs on Thu, 07/14/2011 - 10:46am.
I can understand why Newsweek has had financial problems when they employed people like Jonathan Alter, a pathetic excuse for a journalist.
... and Eleanor Clift
Submitted by Red Jeep on Thu, 07/14/2011 - 11:32am.
.
The MSM Talking Heads
Submitted by Kenyon Schraeder on Thu, 07/14/2011 - 11:19am.
are engaging in the wishful thinking style of commentary. If they keep spewing the propaganda in the friendly and skewed confines of their own media camp and without any face-to-face on-air rebuttals to deal with, they believe that more and more people will eventually agree with them.
No sane individual, regardless of his or her party affiliation, would actually believe any of this nonsense unless there was validity in the saying that "people often learn (become indoctrinated) by osmosis".
What did you expect
Submitted by John21 on Thu, 07/14/2011 - 11:45am.
Mr. Alter is a far left liberal elitist, which means fact and truth are meaningless unless it supports his masters theme of the moment. MSNBC is a leader in the Obama PR department so whatever propaganda is necessary to support the “Golden Child of the liberal DNC” is right facts and figures mean nothing unless can be twisted to meet the agenda. There hasn’t been an honest report on this channel for 5 or 6 years unless by mistake.
2 points -
Submitted by almostacowboy on Thu, 07/14/2011 - 12:59pm.
Point 1 - There is no "Obama Plan".
Point 2 - unemployment was around 5% during most of Bush's presidency, a level which is considered by most economists (even Keynes) as "full employment".
Wasn't that 5% unemployment called....
Submitted by drsamherman on Fri, 07/15/2011 - 7:55pm.
..."frictional" unemployment? Maybe I have the economic terminology wrong, but I do remember the economics professor saying anything under 5% actually represented OVERemployment and economically unfeasible because it artificially inflated wages and prices.
That class was only four decades or so old!
since when does the 1st Amendment cover lying?
Submitted by wizardjr on Thu, 07/14/2011 - 8:14pm.
These people just outright lie on national TV and nothing happens..??!!?? WTF?
As much as I don't like the government in much of anything we need a Truth in the News law much like the Truth In Advertising law - only with a death penalty.
Has anyone really asked any
Submitted by WarEagle66 on Fri, 07/15/2011 - 7:49pm.
Has anyone really asked any of the Demmunists about how a company is to stay in business if it makes NO money?