Tuesday, June 5, 2012

Even more on double standards

Stephanie Cutter lays it out:


5 comments:

  1. I am not clear why you think is this a double standard. Both sides are blaming the other side for blaming their predecessor when it comes to slow or negative job growth. Sounds like the same standard to me.

    ReplyDelete
  2. It's not that I think it is a double standard. The point is that the Romney campaign is clearly applying a different standard to judge Obama's performance than they are applying to their candidate's performance. And they are making excuses for Romney's performance as governor that they are not allowing for Obama's performance.

    You think Obama is applying a double standard also, but I don't see that. One reason is that in assessing a governor's performance, you have 49 other states to compare to. And by that standard, Romney's record in job creation was 47th out of 50. Also when you put Romney and Obama head to head in number of jobs created in the state of Massachusetts alone, as the video shows, Obama is far ahead of Romney in job creation.

    ReplyDelete
  3. << You think Obama is applying a double standard also >>

    Please, I didn't say that. I said just the opposite. There is no double standard. That is why I asked for clarity. I said "Both sides are blaming the other side for blaming their predecessor when it comes to slow or negative job growth."

    ReplyDelete
  4. Let's say you and I run a bike race, in which the winner is whoever has the best average miles per hour. Let's say the first half of the race is mostly uphill and the second half is mostly downhill. Then at the end I say we don't count the first half of the race for me, but we count it for you. That is a double standard. That is exactly what the Romney campaign is saying.

    ReplyDelete
  5. This is bureaucratese ... at best.

    ReplyDelete