Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

Obama Blog's Sneak Attack on the Government Accountability Office



November 19, 2009 – Comments (12)

As we may have discussed here in the past. Comrade BO uses his staff of whitehouse bloggers to fight back against any media reports that dare question the White House's official, sunny estimates of the usefulness of the billions in stimulus money rammed through congress.

The painful irony here is that Obama claimed this massive money injection would be subject to rigorous oversight. Trouble is, whenever that oversight says something inconvenient for his polling or reelection chances, he directs his flunkies to dispute the inconvenient information in official white house channels. A couple of recent examples before we get to Obama's preemptive strike on the GAO.

Obama's lackeys complained loudly when studied cash for clunkers and determined it to be a horribly inefficient program that put taxpayer subsidies of tens of thousands of dollars per extra car sold.

Obama's propaganda office also took issue with the AP's criticism of its nonsensical "jobs created or saved" data, which are based not only on bad numbers, but invent an entirely new and undefined data point ("jobs saved") for the express purpose of obfuscating the numbers and taking his reelection campaign forward a few years.

Which brings us to today, when Obama's entourage went to war with the rest of the government on that same data. There's a pre-emptive strike on the white house blog about the bogus jobs data. It labels as "Fiction" the reports that these numbers are riddle with errors.

FICTION: The reports recipients of Recovery Act funds filed are riddled with errors.

Why would it do that? Why today? Maybe because the Government Accountability Office published a report today that pretty much says that these reports are riddled with errors.

GAO's fieldwork and initial review and analysis of recipient data from, indicate that there are a range of significant reporting and quality issues that need to be addressed For example, GAO's review of prime recipient reports identified the following: Erroneous or questionable data entries that merit further review: (1) 3,978 reports that showed no dollar amount received or expended but included more than 50,000 jobs created or retained; (2) 9,247 reports that showed no jobs but included expended amounts approaching $1 billion, and (3) Instances of other reporting anomalies such as discrepancies between award amounts and the amounts reported as received which, although relatively small in number, indicate problematic issues in the reporting. Coverage: While OMB estimates that more than 90 percent of recipients reported, questions remain about the other 10 percent. Quality review: While less than 1 percent were marked as having undergone review by the prime recipient, over three quarters of the prime reports were marked as having undergone review by a federal agency. Full-time equivalent (FTE) calculations: Full-time equivalent (FTE) calculations: Under OMB guidance, jobs created or retained were to be expressed as FTEs. GAO found that data were reported inconsistently even though significant guidance and training was provided by OMB and federal agencies.


In other words, the data being received are too lousy to allow anyone to be making any claims about how effective the stimulus money has been. But,of course, that hasn't stopped the Obama propaganda office from claiming otherwise, over and over again.

Unfortunately for the GAO and others, Obama's team of young social-media experts (the ones who poured water on Hillary and melted her, then won the election) are way ahead of the GAO's stodgy reporting process. The slick blog with little pictures saying things like "reality check" will probably be much more effective than the GAO's paragraphs of boring gray text. Never mind that the political hacks in the white house are in no position to judge what reality is, and the GAO, which is better equipped for the job, is actually, by the legislation's own text, responsible for providing oversight.

Inconvenient truths are easily disposed of these days. Especially when those burying the bodies know better how to harness The Internets to do it.

12 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On November 19, 2009 at 2:09 PM, chk999 (99.96) wrote:

(the ones who poured water on Hillary and melted her, then won the election)

Best phrase of the week!

Report this comment
#2) On November 19, 2009 at 2:20 PM, catoismymotor (< 20) wrote:

Excellent post. Do you have any ideas on what steps can be taken by the GOA to beat these young whipper snappers at their own game? 

Report this comment
#3) On November 19, 2009 at 2:42 PM, TMFBent (99.17) wrote:

Hire some teenagers to help them set up blogs?

Report this comment
#4) On November 19, 2009 at 3:10 PM, catoismymotor (< 20) wrote:

Maybe some can be lured away from Obama's camp with Mountain Dew and Hot Pockets?

Report this comment
#5) On November 19, 2009 at 3:16 PM, TMFBent (99.17) wrote:

That's it. The GAO needs to offer: Mountain Dew and Hot Pockets, plus you can do your Tweeting and blogging on Facebook from your Xbox in between matches of COD2 modern warfare and Assassin's Creed 2.

Report this comment
#6) On November 19, 2009 at 3:20 PM, catoismymotor (< 20) wrote:

It's so crazy it might just work!

Report this comment
#7) On November 19, 2009 at 3:27 PM, catoismymotor (< 20) wrote:

All kidding aside, Obama is going to have one nasty fight on his hands in 2012 because of stupid (bad word) like this.

Report this comment
#8) On November 19, 2009 at 3:48 PM, Blakjak87 (< 20) wrote:

What a bunch of shoddy *Obamaganda©


*Royalties paid on a per-usage basis of the copyrighted term "Obamaganda©" can be sent to my attorneys. Please make the checks payable to Mr. I. Toll-Yuso or Mr. Hu Didntseethiscomingfromamileaway

Report this comment
#9) On November 19, 2009 at 4:55 PM, blake303 (28.47) wrote:

Do you think any other president would behave differently, albeit through another medium? Given that an entire global news network has become the voice of the opposition, a party whose leaders knowingly spread lies (stop laughing - I mean in a manner that I consider far more sinister than normal political promises and misrepresentations) and refuse to disavow any anti-Obama misinformation, I can't fault the White House for attempting to offer an alternative voice.

I have mixed feelings on the blog's use. While I am in agreement with your statements on the White House's job claims, I also believe that Edmunds was way off and the WH had every right to defend itself from Edmunds' nonsensical math. Frankly, the content of the blogs is far less egregious than the absurdities that have come out of the mouths of White House Press Secretaries of the past. I'm not defending the practice, just saying this is nothing new and really not worthy of childish name calling. The GAO has just as many flunkies, lackeys, and hacks, but why attack a "non-partisan" office when it is much easier to get recs by implying that the President is a communist?

Report this comment
#10) On November 19, 2009 at 5:19 PM, blake303 (28.47) wrote:

Sorry, my last sentence didn't make sense. What I was trying to say is that non-partisan groups have no shortage of people that fit into those three categories, so their interpretation may be no more valid than the White House's. I stand by the red scare criticism though.

Report this comment
#11) On November 19, 2009 at 7:36 PM, TMFBent (99.17) wrote:

I didn't mean to imply that the president is a communist because of these blogs. (He's a neo-communist because he thinks government can create jobs by handing out money for ridiculous stimulus programs like cash for car-dealers.)

I meant to imply that he's a thin-skinned opportunist who's more interested in slick propaganda and childish fights with the media that got him elected than actually examining the results of the policies he's pushed for. I'm not sure what -ist that makes him.

You get thin skinned, opportunist, propaganda-mongers from the commies as well as your fascists, your oligarchs, your folksy talk-radio hosts, your web-enabled preachers, tech bloggers, and stock pickers. The difference is that Obama likes to try to pretend he's above it, while he's got a large staff of flunkies engaging in the same kind of bogus media-bashing that made Shrub such a laughingstock.

I'll take the GAO's flunkies any day.

And BO is just too funny not to use.


Report this comment
#12) On November 19, 2009 at 10:05 PM, blake303 (28.47) wrote:

Sure, Seth. I forgot that the term comrade has returned the hipper portion of the English vernacular as a synonym for friend or companion. Ignore all cold war communist connotations. Comrade is the new homey, right? You know exactly what was implied, but will probably find that information inconvenient and I know you would never use your blog to dispute inconvenient information while condemning others for it.

As fun as this is, I'm off to the bar for some beers with my comrades. Don't tell Glenn Beck.

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners