[oldembed width="420" height="245" src="https://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32545640" flashvars="launch=47582071^188395^275971&width=420&height=245" fid="2"]

Carly Fiorina on the Meet the Press panel:

I find the attack surprising from many perspectives. First of all, capitalism has lifted more people out of poverty than any other economic system in the history of the world. The way you do that is with a job. Third, successful companies create jobs. Failing companies destroy jobs. I think President Obama is indicating what many of us have suspected for some time: he actually doesn’t understand how the economy works.

How ironic from the person who drove not one, but TWO companies into the ground and still has the chutzpah to position herself as an economic adviser.

But she's not alone.

Fiorina's comments seem eerily familiar to anyone forced to watch the Sunday shows. To wit:

Rudy Giuliani on CNN's State of the Union:

Well, I mean, the reality is that President Obama can talk about his record as president if he wants to look at something where he theoretically thinks he succeed, but he doesn't talk about his record as president. You know and I know that his campaign is running away from his record as president and basically they want to attack Romney.

When Ronald Reagan was running for re-election in '84, they spent a little time criticizing Mondale, but most of it was Morning in America, how he had turned around the country, the great successes he had because he had a record to run on. President Obama is running against -- and we have found what a president who has no experience is going to give us.

He's going to give us tremendous failure, the largest debt we've ever had, the highest levels of sustained long-term unemployment since the depression. I mean, our economy is a disaster under Obama. He vaguely knows what he's doing with regard to our economy.

And Newt Gingrich on Meet the Press:

Let’s start down that road. Why has unemployment come down? Unemployment’s come down because participation in the workforce is at the lowest point it’s been in three decades. People are retiring early because they can’t find a job. People have given up looking. If you look at the Gallup surveys, the number of those who are underemployed and quit looking is 19%. This is a disastrous administration, and candidly, if you want to get into a fight over debt, from 47% in the economy to 74% in three and a half years. This is why Obama will have a hard time this fall. He can’t fight over jobs because he isn’t creating them. He can’t fight over debt, and he has policies that people find unacceptable and Romney has a straightforward case. Can you afford four more years of Barack Obama? Can you afford four more years of this economy? And can you afford four more years of this kind of debt? As David pointed out, the unemployment rate under Romney down. The fact that he was able to balance the budget as he had to under the law of Massachusetts, and the fact is he does know a great deal more about job creation than Barack Obama.

Ed Gillespie on Face the Nation (a two-fer with an "Obama doesn't understand" AND a reference to Solyndra):

There is a-- there is a correlation, Bob, between making money and growing a company and job creation. That's what President Obama doesn't understand because he has never been in the private sector, he doesn't really understand how it works. I think that's why his policies are so hostile to job creation, in his view we'd be better off if we had political appointees making decisions on where our money was spent. Like in Solyndra which just two years ago yesterday he touted as a success story from his stimulus bill, his failed stimulus package, it's gone bankrupt. Over a thousand employees have lost their jobs and taxpayers lost five hundred and thirty-five million dollars over half a billion dollars, because that's their view of the world. We'd be better off with political appointees deciding to put our taxpayer money at risk and reward campaign donors as was the case in Solyndra than to put private capital at risk. I don't think most Americans agree with that.

Hmmm...noticing a trend?

I'm thinking of instituting a new Sunday feature, identifying the specific weekly talking points and the biggest perpetuators. But I'm going to need your help identifying them. And then hopefully, you can point out this regular feature to your less media savvy friends and neighbors.