I know somebody who didn’t get a job last month, so therefore the jobs numbers are false.
I wouldn’t sweat the hyperbole too much. But, no, I don’t thjink it’ll be a lede any longer and will take a back seat to the jobs report and other issues.
Not that pointing out the immediate contradiction will do any good. Saint Cad [del]is[/del] was a laid-off teacher who blames Obama for cutting public sector employment and thinks that Romney is going to get him his job back.
I just LOVE that this new unemployment rate marks the death of the GOP talking point of “over 40 months of 8% unemployment.” Considering that Romney’s fundamental fucking argument is that Obama needs to be unseated due to the 8%+ unemployment rate, he is now inadvertently arguing that Obama deserves reelection because the rate has fallen below that threshold.
That is, of course, until Mittens shakes that Etch A Sketch.
This comment needs to be in big bold red letters. It is spot on, and really highlights the essential problem with the Republican party today; They have grown accustomed to ignoring factual information. They even have a news network to assist them in ignoring facts.
It goes beyond quirky or amusing, and is now bordering on dangerous. You ignore factual information at your peril. When half the country starts believing in fantasy - really truly believing in complete fabricated falsehoods - and as you say, forms policy based on deliberate falshoods, then you’re in serious trouble.
Oh all the comments on cooked numbers… (not on this thread). Lots of reports saying that the numbers reflect more people taking part time or dropping out of the labor force all together. I looked at the report. Participation up, unemployment down, part-time workers being added in declining amounts every month, the number of marginally attached working going down every month and more importantly, number of discouraged workers steadily declining. How is this report bad? I haven’t nitpicked it, but this seems like an all around good thing. Maybe someone on here can look at it and given me some perspective.
That first sentence made me chuckle.
Let’s not forget that in 2008 one of the talking points was how the mere thought of Obama getting elected was causing the stock market to crash and the unemployment figures to skyrocket, because somehow the concept of Obama becoming president was enough to cause business owners to set fire to their stores in panic or something.
I’m just thinking what this number could have been if Obama didn’t get elected in 2008… 12% and higher. The man is doing a fantastic job, no he doesn’t control the numbers but yes the government helps the conditions for it.
Fox News, via Stuart Varney, weighs in:
Also from the article:
It didn’t take them long from ignoring the report for at least 30 minutes until they got this out.
What, like they care about consistency? They don’t. The only thing that matters is putting the appropriate pro-Republican/anti-Obama spin on the news. If we’re talking about this or treating it as a dispute worthy of note instead of what it is - whining, petulant lying - that’s a success for them. Which is not to say you can’t discuss the meaning and value and interpretation of these reports, just that the conspiracy theories should be sharply mocked and quickly dismissed.
Lower participation was true last month, but not this - participation is up, as you say.
I don’t think anyone (sane) is saying that this report is bad, overall. The negative parts are:
[ul]
[li]114,000 new jobs is still weak. 200k+ is generally viewed as the level needed to make significant dents in unemployment[/li][li]the upward revisions of July and August were due to government jobs and therefore no indicator of improvement in the ecnomy overall[/li][li]er, that’s it[/li][/ul]
Granted. My point was that we don’t know the real numbers until a month later.
“Obama” stood for Obama’s administration/executive bureaucracy not the man himself and I know my reply was a bit snarky but no one can deny that job reports the last few years have been heralded with a flourish of trumets and front page news while the fact that those job reports weren’t really as good as reported (last two months excepted) barely makes page 10 in the B section of the newspaper.
[Rush Limbaugh] Which once again my frieeeeeends shows the left-wing media conspiracy is activly tryiiiiiiiiiing to put Obama back in the White House. <taps papers on the desk> [/RL]
Did I wrongly assume that mocking and dismissal weren’t required of the latest nonsense from Fox News?
Ummm… just to clarify THAT thread. My point was that a prominant Colorado Democrat was being interviewed on the radio and said that anyone who got a job should vote for Obama because it proves his policies work. My question in the thread was if the inverse of that statement also applies in that those of us that DIDN’T find a job should vote for Romney. It a logic thing.
And I never blamed Obama for cutting public sector jobs. I mentioned in one thread that Obama promised an army of educators to be hired but the INCREASES on the DoE spending were not tied specifically to hiring teachers and so at the state/LEA level teaching jobs were being cut, but Obama’s blame in that was assuming and not requiring that the increased money go to teaching jobs. I think I’ve been in this game long enough to know that it is the state/districts that control teaching jobs more than the President.
That’d be the Labor Department. In context, that was a really bad piece of shorthand.
I’ll be happy to deny that because I do not believe it at all. And economic reports are always revised after the fact.
My new favorite word: mumpsimus
1.adherence to or persistence in an erroneous use of language, memorization, practice, belief, etc., out of habit or obstinacy ( opposed to sumpsimus).
2.a person who persists in a mistaken expression or practice ( opposed to sumpsimus).
In other words, someone who persists in a belief or practice even after their shown it’s wrong. I thought I’d get a lot of us out of the word…turns out that was a severe underestimate.
I love the story’s closing paragraph:
Oh, I’ll just bet he is! 
Anyway, a whole parade of Twits has lined up behind the conspiracy-theory crazy train. In addition to the original:
we now have:
In my mind’s ear, I’m hearing all these statements with “White Rabbit” being played as a background sountrack.
Canada produced 52,000 jobs in September with 10 times less population, taxes to choke on and universal health care.
Does anybody really think that lowering taxes or repeal Affordable Care Act would really make difference?
The Republicans will continue to campaign on it, so I’m not sure if it matters if they believe it or not.