I was watching CNN’s Anderson Cooper last night and they had a piece on Sarah Palin. Cooper interviews a reporter and asks about the Governor’s private jet that Sarah Palin sold. The reporter said that the jet sold for $600,000 less than what it was worth. The insinuation was that Sarah Palin’s “sale” may have been great for her own personal publicity, but was a poor deal for the state.
Not true. NOT TRUE! The jet sold for $600,000 less than it’s new purchase price. That is a huge difference. Things tend to sell for a little less when they’re used, Anderson.
Thanks to Sarah Palin’s personal decision as incoming Governor, the state of Alaska had $2.1 million dollars that it otherwise wouldn’t have had.
The snide allusions are simply unrelenting.
You literally have to already know the news in order to watch the news anymore.
Having said that, consider carefully what you believe in the avalanche of bad press about the Bush economy. It aint the best it’s ever been, that’s true. It aint even the best it’s ever been during the Bush years. But in the grand scheme, it just aint that bad.
The Gateway Pundit had this to say a few months ago:
Bush Unemployment at 5.0%- Bad… Clinton Unemployment at 5.4%- Good
Something you will never hear from the mainstream news…
The average unemployment rate during the Bush years is running lower than during the Clinton years.
Numbers from US Misery IndexJune 7, 1996– Here is how the mainstream news (Dan Rather) reported that the unemployment rate jumped up to 5.6%:
“The government came out today with its latest report on unemployment. It says the unemployment rate rose slightly, 2/10ths of a point last month, up to 5.6 percent – still low overall. And the numbers, pure and simple, can be misleading. Economics correspondent Ray Brady tonight has the story behind them.”
January 4, 2007– And, here is how the AP reported on the current unemployment rate of 5.0% today:
Hiring practically stalled in December, driving the nation’s unemployment rate up to a two-year high of 5 percent and fanning fears of a recession.
Employers last month added the fewest new jobs to their payrolls in more than four years, according to the employment report released Friday by the Labor Department. The report showed that employment conditions are deteriorating, strained by a housing slump and credit crunch that are sapping economic strength.
“The economy is getting hit by some body blows. The big question is whether the economy can withstand it or will it take a fall,” said Ken Mayland, president of ClearView Economics.
UPDATE: Here’s CNN’s headline today:
“Jobs weak, unemployment soars”
Since when is a 5% unemployment rate described as soaring?MORE… The clueless call this a disaster.
So just let me make mention of the fact that the media are overwhelmingly snide, snotty, smarmy, and flat-out ideologically biased.
The media routinely misrepresent the economy, and they have been doing it for years.
When you consider the economy decade by decade, the unemployment rate this decade is better than it was during the 1990s, better than the 80s, better than the 70s, and better than the 60s.
Tags: Bill Clinton, Economy, George Bush, John McCain, Media, misery index, Sarah Palin, unemployment, unemployment rate
September 9, 2008 at 11:41 am
In the European original Germanic languages [German, Flemish, Nederlands] when a storage unit [a trunk, or a box or a bin] is full to the brim we say the storage unit is laden [like in English fully laden]. So here we would say:
Osama: bin Laden. Obama: bin Empty.
September 9, 2008 at 1:45 pm
He’s empty of one kind of thing (useful ideas that will bring this country success) and full of another kind of thing.
I am delighted to meet a fellow conservative brother from Belgium.
The United States and Europe are both stronger when we can unite behind conservative principles in order to advance both a strong defense (against terrorism and tyranny) and a strong economy based on democratic principles and fiscal conservatism.
February 8, 2009 at 12:36 pm
Average unemployment rates:
Reagan 7.54%
Bush1 6.30%
Clinton 5.21%
Bush2 5.27%
February 9, 2009 at 7:34 am
Desertphile,
I don’t remember my own article very well, but do know that it didn’t include the stats from the meltdown.
There’s only so much you can draw from an “average” rate like this. For example, I wrote an article describing the near 12% unemployment rate that Carter left Reagan with. The economy was in a shambles. He turned it around, but it took time, and the “average” was affected. There was a bad market crash in 87 that hurt Bush going into his term. Clinton, on the other hand, benefitted from the fact that the economy had started to recover BEFORE he took office, and Bush II was harmed by the fact that Clinton left Bush with an economy stumbling into recession.
Right now, for instance, Obama’s “average” unemployment rate aint looking very good. Whether you choose to lay the blame at his feet, or blame Bush, is and largely WILL be subjective.