Hillary’s ‘You Didn’t Build That’ Moment: If It Happened, Why Are Only Conservatives Reporting It?
Can’t find a word about it on MSNBC or NBCNews.com, nothing on CBSNews.com or ABCNews.com.
There’s nothing on Daily Kos, or Talking Points Memo, or Thinkprogress.org or anywhere else that I can find in the non-wingnut media.
But I’ve seen the video. Here’s what UPI reports.
Hillary Clinton was in Boston on Friday showing support for Democrat gubernatorial candidate Martha Coakley, and her comments on economics have stirred controversy.
“Don’t let anybody tell you it’s corporations and businesses create jobs,” Clinton said. “You know that old theory, ‘trickle-down economics,'” she continued. “That has been tried, that has failed. It has failed rather spectacularly.” She also jested that she tells people her husband brought arithmetic to Washington, D.C.
The context of the statement is unclear, as the video only shows just over 30 seconds of the speech. A Clinton aide told Politico she was referring to unnecessary tax breaks for profitable corporations. Some are calling it her “You didn’t build that” moment, similar to comments President Barack Obama made while running for reelection in 2012.
You can see the video here. It’s a minute and 27 seconds long. It appears unedited. Politico buries it toward the end of this story.
Clinton leaned in hard to modern progressive economic views in the speech. But one statement as she transitioned from a tough critique of trickle-down economics — “Don’t let anybody tell you that it’s corporations and businesses that create jobs” — later was singled out by Republicans and blasted around on Twitter. It drew private whispers from a few Democrats that she was trying too hard to embrace populist rhetoric. A Clinton aide said she had been referring to tax breaks for corporations.
Meanwhile, the rightwing nutjob media is screaming about it. Breitbart.com, Twitchy, all the usual suspects.
When they howled about Obama’s “You didn’t make that” remark, the media could point to the rest of Obama’s remarks about how all that construction would have been impossible without government-funded infrastructure, highways, communications, transportation, all of that. Not to mention the tax incentives businesses get with new expansions that provide new jobs. That was an easy shoot-down, although the right wing did try to turn it into a bludgeon to use on Obama that low info (meaning “stupid”) voters would buy.
The fact of the matter seems to be…
SHE SAID IT!
She could have added one word to the statement and made it perfectly acceptable.
“Don’t let anybody tell you that it’s ONLY corporations and businesses that create jobs.”
It doesn’t matter what she meant.
It matters what she said.
And it matters that the corporate-owned media seems bound and determined to “not report” what she said.
That should be very disturbing to anyone who has fought against the meme that the MSM is a left-wing tool.
It sure looks like one this morning.
Click here for reuse options!Copyright 2014 Liberaland
By: Bill Schmalfeldt
I no longer use Twitter or Facebook because they are evil. I do continue to blog at http://Schmalfeldt.org, where you can get information about other stuff I do, like comedy/parody CDs and MP3 downloads and audiobooks and such. Get yours now. When I'm dead, there will be a drastic price increase.
44 responses to Hillary’s ‘You Didn’t Build That’ Moment: If It Happened, Why Are Only Conservatives Reporting It?
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Obewon October 26th, 2014 at 15:14
“You know that old theory, ‘trickle-down economics,’ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_4e8iAofnrw
M D Reese October 26th, 2014 at 17:08
I’m still waiting for my cup of treacle-down from the Reagan administration….
tiredoftea October 26th, 2014 at 18:58
We got treacle down with “The shining city on the hill”, Nancy and the astrologer, we didn’t get trickle down.
Obewon October 26th, 2014 at 15:14
You know that old theory, ‘trickle-down economics? “Don’t (trickle) down my back and tell me it’s raining.” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_4e8iAofnrw
M D Reese October 26th, 2014 at 17:08
I’m still waiting for my cup of treacle-down from the Reagan administration….
tiredoftea October 26th, 2014 at 18:58
We got treacle down with “The shining city on the hill”, Nancy and the astrologer, we didn’t get trickle down.
KB723 October 26th, 2014 at 15:45
Yet she had nothing to say about Banks??? http://www.byebyedemocracy.org/2014/10/elizabeth-warren-quoting-cenk-uygur.html
KB723 October 26th, 2014 at 15:45
Yet she had nothing to say about Banks??? http://www.byebyedemocracy.org/2014/10/elizabeth-warren-quoting-cenk-uygur.html
Roctuna October 26th, 2014 at 17:09
DEMAND, fueled by disposable income, creates jobs. Econ 101. Corporations and businesses respond to the demand. I know that’s hard for the conservative mind to grasp.
searambler October 26th, 2014 at 20:51
No, no, no. Everyone knows it’s corporate-Americans who, out of the goodness and benevolence of their corporate hearts, give out great paying jobs with benefits whenever it will benefit society as a whole. They don’t care about profit margins or details like that. They exist to serve mankind…..
R.J. Carter October 27th, 2014 at 08:46
Demand AND Supply create jobs. Right and Left like to take the old “Chicken or the Egg” argument, take a side, and then each tell the other that their side is the creating side, when it’s actually the whole cycle.
But it ain’t government.
mea_mark October 27th, 2014 at 09:02
Demand calls for supply, and yes the government can and does demand much creating jobs. Ever hear of the MIC, you know the war machine that builds all those things we use for killing and bullying people around the world. Our Government demands those things so suppliers supply them. Demand comes first. Disposable income from higher wages creates more demand which causes suppliers to supply more, which in turn creates more jobs. Basic economics. You are so wrong.
Roctuna October 27th, 2014 at 12:48
Thank you for writing the reply. All the profits and tax breaks in the universe won’t create demand if there are no consumers. That just means exploited labor and a richer 1%. The sad part is, so many like RJ are happy with feeding the MIC and the rest of the economy can just go pound sand.
Robert M. Snyder October 27th, 2014 at 13:53
“Demand comes first.”
Not always. Visionary business leaders sometimes create new markets and create demand for entirely new products categories.
Before the Wright Brothers flew at Kitty Hawk, nobody was asking for air transport. In fact, most people believe that it was impossible.
Bill Gates developed the operating system for the original IBM PC. Most people, including the executives at IBM, didn’t see a future in it and thought that personal computers would never be anything more than toys. IBM didn’t even bother to secure ownership of the operating system design, which allowed Microsoft to license MS-DOS to IBM’s competitors.
The people who attended the first Woodstock were not saying “Gee. I wish I had a wireless telephone with a built-in camera that would fit in my pants pocket. It would be so cool if I could take a selfie and send it instantly to my brother in Des Moines.”.
There is no demand for products that people have not yet imagined. A lot of people have trouble imagining a self-driving car. Google is taking a big risk. There’s a significant chance of failure. Sure, Googles benefits from the electrical grid, the highway system, the publically-subsidized education of its employees, etc. What Google “builds” is the value-added part, the intellectual property. If they figure out how to make self-driving cars a reality, those algorithms are what they will have built. And nobody can say “You didn’t build that”.
If you disagree, then what qualifies anyone for a Nobel prize? Does a Nobel-prize-winning physicist deserves less credit because she didn’t personally build the particle beam accelerator she used to conduct her experiments? Do the people who built the accelerator have a claim to her prize money?
Roctuna October 27th, 2014 at 18:05
And how many failed start-ups are there that failed to generate the demand for their new products? Tens of thousands? More? The jobs created by demand-free supply do not last or contribute anything to the economy.
Robert M. Snyder October 27th, 2014 at 18:40
Solyndra.
Roctuna October 27th, 2014 at 18:50
Pointless, yet automatic, tea response.
Roctuna October 26th, 2014 at 17:09
DEMAND, fueled by disposable income, creates jobs. Econ 101. Corporations and businesses respond to the demand. I know that’s hard for the conservative mind to grasp.
searambler October 26th, 2014 at 20:51
No, no, no. Everyone knows it’s corporate-Americans who, out of the goodness and benevolence of their corporate hearts, give out great paying jobs with benefits whenever it will benefit society as a whole. They don’t care about profit margins or details like that. They exist to serve mankind…..
R.J. Carter October 27th, 2014 at 08:46
Demand AND Supply create jobs. Right and Left like to take the old “Chicken or the Egg” argument, take a side, and then each tell the other that their side is the creating side, when it’s actually the whole cycle.
But it ain’t government.
mea_mark October 27th, 2014 at 09:02
Demand calls for supply, and yes the government can and does demand much creating jobs. Ever hear of the MIC, you know the war machine that builds all those things we use for killing and bullying people around the world. Our Government demands those things so suppliers supply them. Demand comes first. Disposable income from higher wages creates more demand which causes suppliers to supply more, which in turn creates more jobs. Basic economics. You are so wrong.
Roctuna October 27th, 2014 at 12:48
Thank you for writing the reply. All the profits and tax breaks in the universe won’t create demand if there are no consumers. That just means exploited labor and a richer 1%. The sad part is, so many like RJ are happy with feeding the MIC and the rest of the economy can just go pound sand.
Robert M. Snyder October 27th, 2014 at 13:53
“Demand comes first.”
Not always. Visionary business leaders sometimes create new markets and create demand for entirely new products categories.
Before the Wright Brothers flew at Kitty Hawk, nobody was asking for air transport. In fact, most people believe that it was impossible.
Bill Gates developed the operating system for the original IBM PC. Most people, including the executives at IBM, didn’t see a future in it and thought that personal computers would never be anything more than toys. IBM didn’t even bother to secure ownership of the operating system design, which allowed Microsoft to license MS-DOS to IBM’s competitors.
The people who attended the first Woodstock were not saying “Gee. I wish I had a wireless telephone with a built-in camera that would fit in my pants pocket. It would be so cool if I could take a selfie and send it instantly to my brother in Des Moines.”.
There is no demand for products that people have not yet imagined. A lot of people have trouble imagining a self-driving car. Google is taking a big risk. There’s a significant chance of failure. Sure, Googles benefits from the electrical grid, the highway system, the publically-subsidized education of its employees, etc. What Google “builds” is the value-added part, the intellectual property. If they figure out how to make self-driving cars a reality, those algorithms are what they will have built. And nobody can say “You didn’t build that”.
If you disagree, then what qualifies anyone for a Nobel prize? Does a Nobel-prize-winning physicist deserves less credit because she didn’t personally build the particle beam accelerator she used to conduct her experiments? Do the people who built the accelerator have a claim to her prize money?
Roctuna October 27th, 2014 at 18:05
And how many failed start-ups are there that failed to generate the demand for their new products? Tens of thousands? More? The jobs created by demand-free supply do not last or contribute anything to the economy.
Robert M. Snyder October 27th, 2014 at 18:40
Solyndra.
Roctuna October 27th, 2014 at 18:50
Pointless, yet automatic, tea response. Come on, throw Benghazi!!!!! in there, just for the hell of it.
dave-dr-gonzo October 26th, 2014 at 18:10
Riiiight.
It’s Hitlery’s “You didn’t make that” moment.
Just like that time that the Bush boy wore a codpiece and stood in front of a “Mission Accomplished” banner, which proved he was a ‘Popular Wartime Preznit®”!
Tell me another one…
dave-dr-gonzo October 26th, 2014 at 18:10
Riiiight.
It’s Hitlery’s “You didn’t make that” moment.
Just like that time that the Bush boy wore a codpiece and stood in front of a “Mission Accomplished” banner, which proved he was a ‘Popular Wartime Preznit®”!
Tell me another one…
Anomaly 100 October 26th, 2014 at 18:43
I’m not buying it either. I do have issues with Hillary though. Mostly, I just want us to stay out of other countries. I don’t want a war and I fear that she might be open to that.
Anomaly 100 October 26th, 2014 at 18:43
I’m not buying it either. I do have issues with Hillary though. Mostly, I just want us to stay out of other countries. I don’t want a war and I fear that she might be open to that.
tiredoftea October 26th, 2014 at 19:03
OK, the fringie’s shriek about something. Next.
tiredoftea October 26th, 2014 at 19:03
OK, the fringie’s shriek about something. Next.
mmaynard119 October 26th, 2014 at 20:20
I’m not a big HRC fan, either, but this is much ado about nothing. If you want to get technical about this – who is the largest employer and buyer of goods and services in the World? If you include the military as part of it, it’s the US Government.
mmaynard119 October 26th, 2014 at 20:20
I’m not a big HRC fan, either, but this is much ado about nothing. If you want to get technical about this – who is the largest employer and buyer of goods and services in the World? If you include the military as part of it, it’s the US Government.
ExPFCWintergreen October 26th, 2014 at 20:25
“Reporting” is not a word that should be used to describe mouth-breathers like Drudge or Twitchy (a gift from Michelle Malkin to her p*ssy-whipped houseboy, er, husband to play with). The technical term for what they do is, “pull it out of their asses.”
Guest October 26th, 2014 at 20:25
“Reporting” is not a word that should be used to describe mouth-breathers like Drudge or Twitchy (a gift from Michelle Malkin to her p*ssy-whipped houseboy, er, husband to play with). The technical term for what they do is, “pull it out of their asses.”
tracey marie October 26th, 2014 at 20:55
Why are the large corporations cutting workers, raising their own salaries and moving overseas?
R.J. Carter October 27th, 2014 at 08:43
Why is Centene opening a new claims processing center in Ferguson, which will create 200 more jobs in the community?
tracey marie October 27th, 2014 at 11:40
that is all you have, one location and 200 jobs. I trump you hundreds and thousands of jobs being outsourced
tracey marie October 26th, 2014 at 20:55
Why are the large corporations cutting workers, raising their own salaries and moving overseas?
R.J. Carter October 27th, 2014 at 08:43
Why is Centene opening a new claims processing center in Ferguson, which will create 200 more jobs in the community?
tracey marie October 27th, 2014 at 11:40
that is all you have, one location and 200 jobs. I trump you hundreds and thousands of jobs being outsourced
arc99 October 27th, 2014 at 11:45
It has always been my contention that the whole “liberal media” storyline was and is the biggest hoax since Clifford Irving’s biography of Howard Hughes.
It is just another example of conservatives attempting to define other people, regardless of what those people actually think and believe in. The right wing noise machine is very good at what it does which is to generate propaganda for their viewpoint. A moral foundation or the truth can be disposed of when convenient.
Is someone who shoots at the police a criminal who deserves what he gets? It depends. Randy Weaver or David Koresh can help right wingers further their talking points. So no, those men were not just criminals who deserved what they got. What about Michael Brown in Ferguson. Oh he was a black kid and you know how they are. Likely he got just what he deserved, even if he did not have a gun.
Is someone who blows up a building with innocent people a terrorist? Muslims in New York City, yes. A white guy in Oklahoma City, no. And the so-called liberal media goes right along with it, eagerly transforming every right wing talking point into a major news story.
The glitchy website rollout of the ACA was a sure sign that the program was going to collapse under its own weight, the noise machine told us. The major corporate media dutifully complied with their right wing masters and flogged the story for weeks. When it was all said and done, the problems were fixed, the rollout moved ahead smoothly and the right wing had to fall back on the fairy tale about a Benghazi stand down order, with the requisite Congressional hearings.
No Virginia, there is no liberal media. At least not in the sense that the right wing noise machine claims there is. CNN ABC, NBC and CBS are not liberal. I would also go as far to say that MSNBC is not really liberal either. With Rachel Maddow and Chris Hayes, they are the most liberal-friendly news network. But a truly liberal media outlet does not concern itself with trying to be balanced. You report the facts as accurately as you can, and provide analysis from a leftist perspective. You do not hire Joe Scarborough and others trying to effect some sort of balance.
arc99 October 27th, 2014 at 11:45
It has always been my contention that the whole “liberal media” storyline was and is the biggest hoax since Clifford Irving’s biography of Howard Hughes.
It is just another example of conservatives attempting to define other people, regardless of what those people actually think and believe in. The right wing noise machine is very good at what it does which is to generate propaganda for their viewpoint. A moral foundation or the truth can be disposed of when convenient.
Is someone who shoots at the police a criminal who deserves what he gets? It depends. Randy Weaver or David Koresh can help right wingers further their talking points. So no, those men were not just criminals who deserved what they got. What about Michael Brown in Ferguson. Oh he was a black kid and you know how they are. Likely he got just what he deserved, even if he did not have a gun.
Is someone who blows up a building with innocent people a terrorist? Muslims in New York City, yes. A white guy in Oklahoma City, no. And the so-called liberal media goes right along with it, eagerly transforming every right wing talking point into a major news story.
The glitchy website rollout of the ACA was a sure sign that the program was going to collapse under its own weight, the noise machine told us. The major corporate media dutifully complied with their right wing masters and flogged the story for weeks. When it was all said and done, the problems were fixed, the rollout moved ahead smoothly and the right wing had to fall back on the fairy tale about a Benghazi stand down order, with the requisite Congressional hearings.
No Virginia, there is no liberal media. At least not in the sense that the right wing noise machine claims there is. CNN ABC, NBC and CBS are not liberal. I would also go as far to say that MSNBC is not really liberal either. With Rachel Maddow and Chris Hayes, they are the most liberal-friendly news network. But a truly liberal media outlet does not concern itself with trying to be balanced. You report the facts as accurately as you can, and provide analysis from a leftist perspective. You do not hire Joe Scarborough and others trying to effect some sort of balance.