I see the early talking points have been issued.
Shame Republicans can't put as much energy into fixing the country as they do hating the President.

Yes, U.S. troops have left Iraq, in part because the Obama administration was unwilling or unable - take your pick - to extend a security agreement with Iraq. Since the U.S. departure, Iraq has descended into violence as the government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has targeted Sunni opposition figures. The country at times appears to teeter on the edge of a new outbreak of sectarian violence.

Which has nothing to do with the actual statement of US troops aren't in Iraq for the first time in 9 years. This is not fact checking, it's an editorial.

and so the carefully phrased claim of "we lost another four million before our policies were in full effect" is a stretch.

This is not fact checking, it's an editorial.

And he says "we've put in place" new rules on Wall Street, glossing over the fact that it had little Republican support and the GOP candidates have all vowed to repeal the Dodd-Frank law.

This is not fact checking, it's an editorial.

These are clearly lines crafted by political operatives. Few economists would blame "outsourcing" for the economic crisis;

This is not fact checking, it's an editorial.

"Phony financial profits" is also a bit puzzling. Perhaps it was not supposed to make sense.

That's not even an editorial, that's just another way of saying 'Meh, I didn't want to actually look up what he said.'

The claim that "some" wanted the auto industry to die is a bit of a straw man

No, Republicans were really cheering for GM to die. This is not fact checking, it's an editorial.

You know what? You get the idea. THIS IS NOT FACT CHECKING, IT IS AN EDITORIAL.

Come back with some actual fact checking, k?

Yeah, there are a lot of quotes and the some vague passages that really dont show any kind of dishonesty. Im pretty unclear what im supposed to be mad about here.

The passage about soliders in Iraq is the best example. The author appears to be challenging that statement, hence pulling it, but his rebuttal never actually condradicts what the president said. Weird article.

jncgrasshopper: I was really hoping for a few facts he was wrong about.

Which there was. The opening bit about outsourcing was way too vague about how any of that actually works. That would have been a decent thing to talk about and demonstrate a lack of facts. But that wasn't as easy to write an editorial with I guess.

Talk about crying over spilt milk.

So when do we impeach 0'Bastard?

CPennypacker: State_College_Arsonist: Still no plan to actually prevent the US from defaulting on our debts, I see.

Here's a plan:

Stop cockblocking the debt ceiling for political gain

If there is one thing I've learned from late-night bankruptcy lawyer commercials, it is that we can always borrow our way to prosperity.

GameSprocket: I_C_Weener: If there is one thing I've learned from late-night bankruptcy lawyer commercials, it is that we can always borrow our way to prosperity.

Actually, I think you may have learned that the path to prosperity is to just stop paying your bills.

I also learned a lot about RonCo products. Set it and forget it.

How about this one--

FACT: The volume of Right Wing Butt Hurt^* on the various intertubes this morning indicates that the President knocked it out of the park last night.

^*Preview of this November?

"Let us stipulate that all of these job-creation claims are fairly bogus, given how every president is at the mercy of the business cycle, but it appears to be central to our politics."

A more general statement that says job losses, too, are at the mercy of "the business cycle" would have been better.

While the Post had a lukewarm reaction, but it was a weak luke-warm and not terribly well supported.