Really, a Romney advisor thinks the CBO works fo Obama
 

Good God, can a high level communications director for a Presidential campaign be any more ignorant. She just was expecting a softball interview from AC, who I really don't like, and she actually got asked a question. She immediately moved to talking points but that did not work.

Really, you want Romney as your President if this is his idea of hiring a good communications director. She thinks the CBO works for Obama. :confused:

http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/...ney-adviser-cb

Oh the first comment is priceless:

This is the person Romney chose for one of his advisers? That should tell you something. She came on the show with a rubber knife and Anderson was armed with a sharp mind. She sounds like a little kid trying to convince daddy that she didn't break the vase when she was the only one in the room at the time. Weak and uninformed are the best words I can use for her performance on this show

It's not to say that many of these political consultants/advisors are worth a sh!t. Bunch of geeky Student Government/Cheerleader types.

Oh, I've heard the phrases, "Obamas FDA", "Obamas DEA"..........:confused:

Dave

And right next to that article;

""Related posts,

Gingrich: Abolish So(c)ialist CBO

Michael Steele: CBO report, "That's a Lie!""

Anyone see a pattern here?

The CBO releases figures these clowns don't like and it becomes "Obamas CBO", "So(c)ialist CBO" and a CBO that "lies".

Ahhhh, the villification of all that don't hop on board the wingnut train..........

I'm sure Obama would be readily claiming credit if those enitities did something that made him look good. Presidents have chiseled out a large domain of power in Washington such that most anything emanating from the federal government can be attributed to them IMHO. Personally, I'd like to see less presidential power. I didn't think the girl did that bad in the interview. Anderson was obviously attempting to shake her up by his questioning. In an interview, one should attempt to slow the pace as much as possible, however, that is possible only if the one being interviewed has more clout gravitas than the interviewer. Reagan and Clinton were experts at this and it.

I'd rather listen to her than the conniving, snickering Axelrod despite her use of a possessive pronoun instead of the definite article regarding the CBO.

I've never seen her interviewed. I suspect that she was simply nervous and misspoke and lacked the experience to tactfully recover.

Those articles are old and were likely put up automatically as relating to the CBO. The CBO is constrained by the inputs and use models for projection that may not be an accurate reflection of reality. Their scenarios, like most future predicting economic models, have been consistently wrong more than right even in the relative short term; hence, they are useful for politiicians to use, both sides, to make a point wrt legislation and policy. Given their current funding ($~45M/yr), I'm surprised they can keep up as well as they do in just generating reports, let alone model all the economic variables for our macroeconomy.

Of the two I'll put my faith in the mouse. Ok, Ok - crappy attempt at levity but nobody has a real crystal ball but I would accept the CBO's guesstimates in the absence of anything concrete coming from it's detractors. There's too much of the Cantoresque withering disdain and/or Bidenisms being tossed at the CBO without any defensible calculations/graphs/projections being pointed to.
We can chip at the assumptions used in modeling but to dismiss the CBO as partisan hacks is kinda ridiculous to me.

It's not the POTUS but the SCOTUS you ought to be worried about. Ever since Marbury v. Madison they've been a law unto themselves and ever since Nixon nominated Lewis Powell to the Court they've been about the business of turning the US into an oligarchy.

Yeah, I thought she did pretty well too...... for a girl.

How is it "attempting to shake her up" to point out that "Obama's CBO" is actually part of the Legislative Branch and not the Executive? "The girl" just kept on going though, repeating and repeating the same mendacious talking point, never answering a totally legitimate question. I suppose I have to give her credit for being pretty tenacious though.

Her use of the possessive pronoun, apart from being simply wrong, was calculated to reinforce the talking point that Obama "lied" when the CBO predicted that unemployment would be around 6%. The definite article wouldn't have been effective.

And the remarks about Axelrod are uncalled for,even if they're completely to be expected.

John

That campaign has been "misspeaking" for months.

John