Whoa — Actual Fact Checking

Filed in National by on May 12, 2011

One source of frustration for dirty bloggers is the inability of Democrats to articulate a counter-narrative to the dominant Republican narrative. It feels like lately the tide has really turned. We are now hearing that Social Security cuts and Medicare cuts are off the table and the Senate Democrats deficit reduction plan has moved to the left of President Obama’s plan. Now we are seeing that news services (other than Politifact and similar sites) are doing actual fact-checking on claims by Republicans. Bloomberg did actual fact-checking on the following claims by John Boehner:

Boehner said in his May 9 speech to the Economic Club of New York that government borrowing was crowding out private investment, the 2009 economic-stimulus package hurt job creation, and a Republican plan to privatize Medicare will give future recipients the “same kinds of options” lawmakers have.

Bloomberg talked to actual economists and looked at actual charts and data. An economist discusses Boehner’s assertion that government spending is preventing private investment.

“Look at interest rates. Look at capital spending,” said Nariman Behravesh, chief economist of IHS Inc., a research firm based in Englewood, Colorado. “It’s very hard to come to a conclusion that there’s any kind of crowding out.”

The cost of borrowing is low by historical standards. Yields on 10-year Treasury notes were 3.21 percent and yields on 2-year Treasury notes were 0.59 percent at 5 p.m. in New York yesterday, according to Bloomberg Data. Average spreads on investment-grade corporate bonds have narrowed from 1.64 a year ago to 1.39 on May 9, according to Barclays Capital.

The TED spread, the difference between what banks and the U.S. government pay to borrow for three months, fell 2.2 basis points since May 9, the biggest drop since April 5. A narrowing spread means banks are more willing to lend. The 23.87-point spread is just below the two-year average.

The article also points out that Boehner’s rhetoric on the Medicare proposal is just plain wrong. The article also discusses taxes (and the Clinton prosperity) and Boehner’s assertion that Fannie and Freddie caused the mortgage crisis.

Steve Benen hits on the reason why it’s so hard to get the establishment to examine Boehner’s claims more deeply.

These claims aren’t just wrong; they’re ridiculous. It has nothing to do with Democrats vs. Republicans, or left vs. right. This is Boehner vs. reality.

At an almost instinctual level, the political establishment tends to strongly resist this. I more or less understandable why — considering Boehner’s rhetoric at face value, and assuming he means what he says, is almost terrifying to think Boehner is so painfully confused.

But here we are. We’re left with the discomforting fact that it appears the Speaker of the House, Congress’ most powerful official, when dealing with the nation’s most important issue, is functionally illiterate, bringing the sophistication of a slow child to the debate.

Exactly. The establishment media wants to believe it’s just “politics.” I remember how much Paul Krugman was ridiculed for pointing out that Bush’s governing vision was rather radical, a conclusion he came to by actually reading Bush’s proposals. A lot of times I wish the media would ignore the politics (who’s winning and who’s losing) to discuss the merits of proposals. I guess that seems too partisan since it’s the left that is proposing actual ideas that could work (like balancing the budget with actual cuts and tax increases) but it is uncomfortable for the media to say so. They need to get over this fear, fast.

Tags: , ,

About the Author ()

Opinionated chemist, troublemaker, blogger on national and Delaware politics.

Comments (13)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. skippertee says:

    I wanna laugh, but I’m afraid I’ll never stop ’til they hit me with the cattle-prods and Thorazine.

  2. jason330 says:

    If this signals a change in the media environment, I’m all for it, but I doubt that there will be any real move away from the lazy “he said/she said” narrative.

    Therefor, I’m more pleased to see actual fight in some Democrats. At long last, Democrats (like New Jersey’s teachers for example) have accepted that institutional Republican corruption and malfeasance will not be moved by the old rules of normal democratic discourse.

  3. skippertee says:

    Just to clarify, the laughing that would carry me to the Cackle Factory is Boehner’s continuing blatant lies.

  4. anon says:

    I’m more pleased to see actual fight in some Democrats

    If Reid holds the vote on the Ryan budget, that’s how we will know this fight has legs and isn’t just a flash in the pan. Republicans know they shit the bed and are already begging for mercy. A Senate vote on the Ryan budget would be the coup de grâce.

  5. Aoine says:

    “We’re left with the discomforting fact that it appears the Speaker of the House, Congress’ most powerful official, when dealing with the nation’s most important issue, is functionally illiterate, bringing the sophistication of a slow child to the debate”

    well, that makes sense – I mean, look who voted him in…….not exactly the brain trust of America

    So, I suppose they supported him becoz he’s at the same intellectual level (the sophistication of a slow child) and they can relate…

  6. Jason330 says:

    A vote on the billions of dollars in tax payer subsidies to very profitable oil Cos. would be nice as well.

    C’Mon Harry Reid!! Republicans only understand conflict.

  7. anon says:

    A vote on the billions of dollars in tax payer subsidies to very profitable oil Cos. would be nice as well.

    That strategy didn’t work out so well for the tax cuts for the rich last December. Before you dare the Senate to do something crazy, first make sure Obama is prepared to veto it.

  8. jason330 says:

    My assumption is that the Democrats would vote on a bill to eliminate those subsidies, not increase the subsidies.

  9. anon says:

    Me too. I’m just not sure enough Democrats would vote FOR that bill. It would be hard to run against Repubs on that vote if Dems helped kill it.

    Good point though; that takes a veto out of the picture.

  10. Jason330 says:

    Landreiu would defect and maybe some other oil state dems, but fuck them. Every Democrat challenging a Republican in an election gets to say, “My opponent, who keeps saying that we need to cut medicare to pay down the deficit, voted to give oil companies HUGE tax subsidies. The same companies that are ripping you off at the gas pump are getting billions in tax payer money thanks to this guy.”

  11. Jason330 says:

    Democrats over think everything. It is well past time to attack Republicans and put hem to votes that will haunt them on election day.

  12. cassandra_m says:

    These claims aren’t just wrong; they’re ridiculous. It has nothing to do with Democrats vs. Republicans, or left vs. right. This is Boehner vs. reality.

    And you know what? If Nancy Pelosi had been out and about in public saying that BushCo specifically detonated some of the buildings at Ground Zero (to pick something as ridiculous as Fannie and Freddie causing the crash), the media lynching would have been fast, furious and gleeful. Because look at that crazy lady who is supposed to be in charge of something! She’s just playing to the loonies in her party! She owes more to Americans than this!

    Part of this is that Democrats just aren’t as good at feeding the media the Fight Club narrative that the current media environment seems to think is news. But Boehner knew what he was doing — his audience in NY were likely rolling their eyes, but the media reporting this will just run what he said with no context and no fact-checking reporting. It is certainly how I heard it on NPR yesterday. So what these guys know that Democrats don’t is that you can get away with lying as long as your words are intact through a media cycle or two.

  13. liberalgeek says:

    It really is hard to believe that Boehner is two heartbeats away from being President.