A couple of weeks ago, a professional golfer was disqualified from an international tournament after his caddy was caught trying to hide a club in the course's landscaping shrubbery. Pro golfers are only allowed to carry 14 clubs in their bags, but this particular player was trying to gain an advantage by carrying an additional club. After the golfer's 15th club was noticed, and his caddy was seen attempting to cover up the indiscretion by concealing the evidence, he was kicked out of the tournament for cheating.
In politics, as in golf, there are certain rules that everyone is expected to follow, but some folks can't help but cheat.
For example, presidents have always been judged on their job creation policies by measuring the jobs created and the unemployment rate, among other economic indexes. Yet, in 2009, Barack Obama's Administration changed the measuring stick for job creation by including the number of "jobs saved." The Wall Street Journal quickly labeled the Obama unemployment figures "pure fiction," because "the administration has no way to measure how many jobs are actually being saved."
Fast forward to the June 2012 employment summary, which found the unemployment rate mired at 8.2 percent and job creation struggling to reach 80,000 during the month. These numbers, while startlingly high, are actually much better than they should be because they rely on bogus methods to figure job creation and unemployment.
June's 8.2 percent unemployment number removes a huge segment of unemployed Americans from the data. In fact, no one defined by the Bureau of Labor Statistics as "Persons Not in the Labor Force" are counted as "unemployed." This includes people who are:
• Unemployed but had a job in the past year;
• Not asked if they want a job;
• So discouraged by the job market that they haven't looked for work in the past month;
• Want a job and are "marginally attached to the labor force;" or
• Without transportation or childcare, making it difficult for them to actively job hunt.
This group of unemployed "persons" makes up almost 88 million individuals -- none of whom count towards Obama's unemployment figures.
After the real unemployment figures are analyzed, including all people who would traditionally be considered "unemployed," Americans can actually see the lies hidden in the Obama Administration's bag.
When all the facts are pulled out of the shrubs, the accurate unemployment rate is 14.9 percent. There's no way to get to Administration's invented 8.2 percent unemployment number and inflated job creation numbers without cheating. Now it's up to voters to decide if Obama should suffer the same fate as the disqualified golfer for attempting to dupe the American people.
related articles »
With more unemployed people re-entering the labor market last month, the jobless rate in May edged higher in Tennessee and ...
Unemployment fell last month in Tennessee and Georgia to the lowest level in more than three years, although the decline ...
The latest report on declining joblessness and unemployment in January was unambiguously good news. The nation's unemployment level fell again, ...
Jobs-strapped Dalton, Ga., saw a slight break in unemployment for February, according to Georgia Department of Labor figures released today.
You had your chance to make this claim stick when it was Reagan's statistics.
Did you criticize him? Or either Bush? No? What about Nixon, Johnson, Kennedy or Eisenhower?
Guess who did:
http://www.nytimes.com/1989/10/30/business/accuracy-in-short-supply-in-flood-of-us-statistics.html
http://www.harpers.org/archive/2008/05/0082023
You're a bit late to the party.
PS, speaking of somebody who doctored the results to present a better picture, try SuperHit.
I didn't realize President Obama changed the formula for calculating the unemployment rate. He's certainly clever.
Speaking of fudging the numbers, I recall Owebama claiming that 50 jobs were created or saved when $1,047 in stimulus money was spent purchasing a lawnmower from the the Toro Company to cut the lawn at the Fayetteville National Cemetery in Arkansas.
I wonder how many jobs were created to spread this manure?
Are you saying the Bush Administration's Bureau of Labor Statistics used a different methodology to calculate unemployment? No. I didn't think so.
But, you twist the truth to criticize Obama and say he's "cheating" for doing the same thing as his predecessor.
I'd love to be able to have honest discussions with Republicans about the problems facing our nation, but their penchant for distortion and false analogies makes it almost impossible. And, for that, they deserve no respect.
moon4kat,
It's the Fox News syndrome. Propaganda, lies and misinformation goes it, the same crap comes out of their mouth.
The unemployment rate is what it is. It's calculated the same no matter who is in office. Trying to say different is just a lie.
The true unemployment was 15.2 in 2011, 16.6 in 2010, 17.1 in 2009, 13.5 in 2008, 8.8 in 2007, 7.9 in 2006, 8.6 in 2005, 9.2 in 2004, 9.8 in 2003, and 9.8 in 2002.
See a trend here?
Answer : the true unemployment rate has been significantly higher since Owebama has been president.
http://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet
The trend is actually going down. Lol!
Good catch, Easy. As you've observed, unemployment peaked just as Bush Jr. was leaving office. Obama has driven it down from there.
The math is not that hard. In the fourth year of Owebama the U6 rate is 15.9 while the last four years of Bush the U6 9,7.
Obama' 15.9 U6 is significantly higher than Bush's 9.7.
conservative,
The trend was going up with Bush and down with Obama. You're the one that mentioned trends. You don't even need to use math. Just look at the trend. Keep digging.
conservative probably thinks that the government instantly transformed into whatever Obama wanted on the day of inauguration without even a bit of lead time.
Surely conservative can't expect Obama to have instantly transformed America into what Obama wanted on the day of his inauguration without even a bit of lead time...
To this date, Obama's only had 2 years of a Democratic House and Senate before his inauguration, two years of his presidency with the Democratic House and Senate since his inauguration, and now George Bush is still the blame and causing him problems.
Chatt,
You fail to realize how big of a hole Bush Jr. put us in.
To this date, Obama's only had 2 years of a Democratic House and Senate before his inauguration, two years of his presidency with the Democratic House and Senate since his inauguration, and now George Bush is still the blame and causing him problems.
No, now the blame goes to all the "NO" Con jobs of Republicans trying to ruin our economy because they dont like who WE elected. It goes to the politicians that got elected on jobs jobs jobs but only wanted women's rights legislated away. The blame goes to all the politicians that didn't educate the public on what these things are really doing to our democratic republic. The blame goes to the faux watchers for being fooled because they are too lazy to do some real research and see they are being lied to. And the blame goes to trolls that go out and disrupt good conversation of the problems we have. The Republican party has been a bully and we don't like bullies in this country.
You're right, JOW, the Obama administration is the "all inclusive", willing to listen to anyone, let's all work together, administration. Bull$h!t.
Easy, Obama has been there three and a half years now. Does he, or you, yet have a expected date that they can overcome Bush's mistakes?
I didn't think so...
Do you all really know how incompetent that makes you, and Obama look, after all this time?
Chatt,
You fail to realize how big of a hole Bush Jr. put us in. It doesn't make anyone look incompetent. It makes you look like an impatient child for thinking that the economy, unemployment, etc. can be fixed overnight.
So no date, Easy? Maybe you have a date on closing Gitmo or becoming transparent on important bills like he promised? I guess GWB is the problem with those too?
Three and a half years later? Jimmy Carter could have done a better job. Dang, did I just write that?
Easy, he's a friggin falure, and you're too ignorant to realize it. Get used to it!
Does Romney have a date? Didn't think so.
You can blame Gitmo on Bush too.
What bills are you referring to?
You want Obama to be a failure. But you're too out of touch with reality to see what's really happening. You're brainwashed by Fox News and the Right-wing propaganda machine. I have grown accustomed to ignorance from the Right. It's like clockwork.
Nope, Romney hasn't given any that I know about. Hopefully, he's smarter than that.
How can you blame Bush for Obama not being able to close Gitmo when he promised? Did Bush flamboozle him on that too. Obama sure is easily flamboozled, isn't he?
You would think the guy running for President would have enough sense to know about the situation, or realize he didn't know enough about the situation to give dates.
The bills I am referring to, are the ones he promised transparency on, and all would be posted on the internet for 5 days for the people to see.
You seem to know me so well. You liberals are SO much smarter than everyone else. Are you sure three and a half years isn't long enough to stand on your own record, or to begin one?
Bush's Republican cronies and even some Democrats drug their feet on closing Gitmo.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/guantanamo-bay-how-the-white-house-lost-the-fight-to-close-it/2011/04/14/AFtxR5XE_story.html
Name some of those bills and I'll debunk your claims. Most of those "non-transparency" claims are lies. But, by all means, name some of these bills you are referring to.
"You liberals are SO much smarter than everyone else."
It's very big of you to admit that.
Obama has a pretty solid record. But Rome wasn't built in a day. And it's going to take a lot longer than 3.5 years to get us out of the economic mess we were in.
Well, Mr. Linkman, some of what I see in your link is...
Indeed, the failed effort to close Guantanamo was reflective of the aspects of Obama’s leadership style that continue to distress his liberal base — a willingness to allow room for compromise and a passivity that at times permits opponents to set the agenda.
It was a fittingly quiet coda to the effort to close the military detention center. For more than two years, the White House’s plans had been undermined by political miscalculations, confusion and timidity in the face of mounting congressional opposition, according to some inside the administration as well as on Capitol Hill. (this while it was a Democratically held congress)
Obama has conceded that Guantanamo will not close anytime soon.
Administration officials lay blame for the failed initiative on Congress, including Democrats who deserted the president, sometimes in droves.
As far as bills of (no) transparency,
MARCH 30, 2009 Land Bill Becomes Law Without Web Review Obama signed the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 today, the same day it was posted on the WhiteHouse.gov blog for comment.
MARCH 20, 2009 No Review For Two More Bills Obama signed a bill extending various Small Business Administration programs set to expire today and another bill extending a measure allowing foreign-born doctors and religious workers to remain in the U.S. Both bills were posted for comment on WhiteHouse.gov, but not for the requisite five days. While the two bills were certainly time-sensitive, it's not obvious they qualified as emergency legislation either.
FEBRUARY 17, 2009 Obama Signs Stimulus After Four Days Obama signed the economic stimulus bill [PDF] into law four days after it was posted online.
FEBRUARY 04, 2009 Obama Signs SCHIP Bill Within Hours Of Passage Obama signed an amendment to expand the State Children's Health Insurance Program, the second bill to cross his desk, hours after it was passed by the House. Although Obama did not wait the promised five days after passage, the White House did post the legislation online three days ago, after it was passed in the Senate.
JANUARY 29, 2009 First Bill Turns Up Online -- After Obama Signed It Obama signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act into law today, the first bill to pass across his desk as president, without having first posted it online. It was posted to WhiteHouse.gov later that day.
And then this one... JANUARY 22, 2009 Ethics Agenda Section Disappears The page on WhiteHouse.gov detailing Obama's ethics pledges, including this one, was replaced with a message telling readers to "please check back soon" for updates related to the president's executive order placing limits on lobbyist activity.
Just keep grasping, rookie!
Easy123 said... "The trend is actually going down. Lol!"
What an idiot. Are you CHET123 after replacing the keyboard with the stuck Caps Lock button?
Chattman,
Omnibus Public Land Management Act:
House agreed to Senate amendment on March 25, 2009, Signed into law by President Barack Obama on March 30, 2009. That's 5 days.
The March 20th accusation doesn't mention any bill by name.
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act:
Passed the Senate on February 10, 2009, Signed into law by President Barack Obama on February 17, 2009. That's 7 days.
Children's Health Insurance Reauthorization Act
On January 29, the Senate passed the house bill by a 66-32 margin, with two amendments. The House accepted the amended version on a vote of 290 to 135, and President Obama signed the bill into law as Pub.L. 111-3 on February 4, 2009. That's 5 days.
The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act was not given a 5 day review. It was signed 2-3 days after it passed the House.
Ethics agenda section? That's not a bill. Nice try.
Keep digging, sweetie.
chattman,
As for GItmo, you can clearly see that Obama was heavily opposed by Congress and his willingness to compromise WITH REPUBLICANS on the issue. But please, keep placing all the blame on Obama. It only adds to your ignorance. Now you are informed. :-)
BRP,
I guess you don't understand trends. You must have been in the "special" math classes in school.
Easy, you're really going to have to sharpen up, here. The Republicans didn't matter then. He didn't have to have the Republicans to pass this thru. He passed ACA without the Republicans. Thank goodness there were enough Democrats to know better, and oppose him on closing Gitmo. I think there were enough Democrats to know better on ACA, but they caved to the party pressure.
About your transparency bills... Our discussion was about Obama promised to have all the bills posted on the internet for 5 days for all to see, not how many days between the time it was passed, and the time he signed it. I understand the Ethics Section is not a bill, but the reason I included it, is that's where they stated the five day promise, until that section was removed Jan 22, 2009.
You and he, lose again.
Actually, no, it was the "conservative" Democrats who made the PPACA be compromised according to their whims.
Oh and an "independent" or two .
But thanks for admitting you don't really want Gitmo closed, but are just trying to exploit a promise for something you don't really want.
It shows your lack of integrity.
chattman,
So you are bitching about him not closing Gitmo but you didn't want him to in the first place? That makes complete sense...NOT! Obama was receiving pressure from Republicans AND Democrats about closing Gitmo. How can you blame Obama for that? You wanted it open anyway!
The transparency bills are online after they pass. Not necessarily on whitehouse.gov but usually the Library of Congress website. We can argue semantics but the "promise" isn't exactly one that you or I truly give a damn about. You just want to bitch about Obama "breaking a promise".
LOL! You conservatives always love to claim victory. This isn't a competition. I'm not sure why you folks like to thump your chest when you have done absolutely NOTHING. But I'll join in.
YOU LOSE!!! AGAIN!!!
With the likes of your two schools of thought, no wonder we're in the mess we're in, and you don't even realize what the debt is doing to us. Let's just add to it until it's gone... what a plan.
Easy, the bills were either up for 5 days or they weren't. Not all were, and he lied, again.
Bulbs, how does that show my lack of integrity? I was never complaining about the outcome, I was giving an example of Obama's "fudging the numbers", and still blaming Bush for his shortcomings.
Arguing with you both is reminding me I need to watch the movie "Dumb and Dumber" again. Thank goodness it doesn't affect our country's outcome.
chattman,
Please explain what the debt is doing to us, Mr. Economist.
Many were up for 5 days. But do you really care? Politicians lie. OMFG! You're like a child.
Obama didn't fudge any numbers in the Gitmo situation. You can really blame Congress for it not being closed. I'm not sure how you haven't grasped that yet.
I would love to compare your argument to something but I don't think there is a reference that would accurately describe your ignorance and incessant whining about stuff that you don't even care about or even things you agree with like Gitmo not closing. You have no cogent argument. You aren't arguing from passion or about anything you actually give a damn about. You just argue to argue. You want Obama to fail. You don't care about any of the good he does. You just like to bitch and moan.
You think arguing with you is meaningful? The sad thing is so many people like you do get into office. It's why we have so much debt, and yet cutting taxes is the message of the day.
Case in point, the Republicans who like you are busy complaining that Obama hasn't done things you just admitted you prevented him from doing as if that showed a fault in Obama.
It doesn't say anything other than that Obama listens to you. Which I do consider a fault, but I suspect you don't.
Next you'll be endorsing Mitt Romney's plan to cut taxes AND increase defense spending. Or can you see the flaw in that plan?
Easy, the debt will allow China to own us in the future, and our grandchildren will be digging themselves out of a larger hole than you think Bush put is in. Do you not watch the news? Do you see anything about Greece?
Happy, refer to the other post. This is getting nowhere, I'm done with you both.
Chattman,
The whole "China will own us" claim is a myth. And we aren't Greece.
Don't run away you big coward!
chatt_man, you know you're not done with us. You can't make us go away, no matter how much you fume and rage over it.
But if you want to stop China from owning so much US Debt, the solution is simple. Reverse the continuing pattern of tax cuts after tax cuts.
Start charging for services rendered. The US military has been serving corporations and their lust for international trade, why shouldn't the beneficiaries be able to pay if they have the capacity to do so? Or are they really doing so poorly that they only have several hundred billion in cash in the bank?
Greece and the US are in no way comparable. Why? Because Greece has been dependent on tourism for its economic driver, whereas the US has numerous natural and human resources. There are parts of the US like Greece, but even states that are highly dependent on tourism have their own resources. California ALONE is the EIGHT LARGEST Economy in the world.
We aren't poor. We aren't impoverished. We aren't suffering from anything except a self-inflicted wound.
But you'd rather cover your ears, close your eyes, and pretend you're just leaving a discussion where it's OTHER PEOPLE who are at fault, not you.
Or login with:
New Account