My Final Say On Why Barack Obama Does NOT Deserve Reelection

Obama has added a fourth dimension to dishonesty.  They used to say, “There are lies, damn lies, and statistics.”  Now it’s “There are lies, damn lies, statistics and Obamanomics.”  Because Obama’s entire economic policy is a giant turd.  And while it looks like a turd, smells like a turd, and feels like a turd if you’re idiot enough to touch it, Obama tells you it’s actually gold-plated.

The unemployment rate is HIGHER than it was when Obama took office.  It is HIGHER than it EVER WAS under George W. Bush.  But in spite of that reality, it somehow never stopped Obama from just demonizing Bush.  Obama has never taken personally responsibility for anything.

George Bush’s unemployment rate was 5.26% over eight years.  At this point near the very end of Obama’s failed first (and hopefully ONLY term), Obama has given us an average unemployment rate of over 9 percent (9.03%).

You’d think that a man who never came CLOSE to George Bush’s unemployment rate – and frankly a man who never WILL come close to Bush’s unemployment rate – wouldn’t talk so much smack about George Bush.  BUT THAT’S ALL OBAMA DOES.  And the reason that’s all he does is simply because it’s all he has: demagoguery and demonization and blame and Marxist class warfare.

I suppose I can understand why those monthly unemployment rates under Bush looked bad to Democrats.  Because people would expect them to get off their lazy little roach asses and get a damn job back then instead of Obama giving them food stamps for life.  Obama has increased food stamps by 53 percent under his presidency; and what the hell, if you go back to when Nancy Pelosi took over the House of Representatives and Harry Reid took over the US Senate in 2007, Democrats have increased food stamps by 70 percent.  And all you welfare parasites ought to really like that trend – at least until you’ve sucked more blood out of the increasingly few Americans who are actually producing anything and the country implodes and you starve because Obama trained you to be completely dependent sponges.  It will be bad for you then, but then again none of you have EVER been capable of thinking about tomorrow and actually taking steps to avoid catastrophe before, so why start now?  You don’t need a damn job; YOU’VE GOT OBAMA.

You also need to understand that Barack Obama has in no way, shape or form lowered the unemployment rate.  What he has done is massively increase the number of discouraged workers – who don’t count in the official unemployment rate calculations.

There’s a vital statistic called the “labor force participation rate.”  What is it?  It is the percentage of working-age Americans who actually have a job.  And that rate has plunged and plunged and plunged every single year of Obama’s presidency.  I’ve written about this: if you look at November of 2010, the labor participation rate under Obama was at a 25-year low (i.e., worse than it EVER was under Bush) at 64.5%.   The next year, 2011, the participation rate was at a 27-year low at 63.9%.  In May of this year, the participation rate was at 63.6% and was the worst in thirty years.  And at that point just a few months ago the labor participation rate for men was the lowest it had EVER been since they started keeping records in 1948.  By August of this year it declined yet again to 63.5% to the lowest level in thirty-one years.

When our unemployment rate drops precipitously because four discouraged workers give up ever getting a job under this failed presidency for every one who actually gets a job, you need a new president.

If we applied the labor force participation rate that George Bush handed off to Obama, the unemployment rate would be well over 10 percent.

And what about the businesses that would be creating jobs if it weren’t for the fact that a turd is sitting in the White House where a president ought to be?

What is true of the labor force participation is also true of business start ups in America under Obama.  Two years ago – and this being during the so-called Obama “recovery,” the number of U.S. business start-ups and dropped 24% – and how the hell does that happen in a “recovery” when you’re supposedly coming out of a recession that you blame Bush for?  Last year the number of business start-ups had plunged to a 25 year low – which was THE LOWEST level ever measured since the statistic began to be tracked in 1986.  Now under Obama’s utterly failed leadership and under his Marxist class warfare, the number of business start-ups is at a 30 year low.

Obama isn’t adding anywhere NEAR enough jobs to keep up with the 10 million people who have joined the workforce by virtue of becoming adults during his presidency.

I don’t understand.  Why do so many Democrats want America to weaken, to fail and to implode?  What is it about this country that so many people call “The Great Satan” that you Democrats despise so much?

You can look at America’s global competitiveness under Obama and see the same failure.  Last year, America dropped to fifth place.  This year, thanks to Obama’s leadership, America has plunged to seventh place in global competitiveness.  And in fact we have dropped down the ladder under Obama every single year of his failed presidency in global competitiveness.

And wait, I’m not done, because the United States has now also plunged in a manner described as “unprecedented” to TWELFTH place in prosperity under Obama.

We were #1 in the world in global competitiveness when George Bush handed the presidency to Barack Obama.

If you vote Democrat, I guess you think our decline is good.  You clearly do, because you thought that our being number one in the world under George W. Bush was somehow bad.  You want America to drop to twelfth place, to twentieth place, to fiftieth place.  Why?  What is morally and psychologically wrong with you?

And don’t think for a second that Democrats want more money in the pockets of working people.  Because the median household income has dropped $4,520 since that evil day that President Obama took office.  Betting on Obama cost you 8.2% of the average American’s income.  That’s how much the average American has basically lost every year as a result of their lousy bet on Obama.  I don’t understand: why on earth do you want more of that?  Or maybe I should be asking you why on earth you want less and less money and freedom as long as you can have more Obama?

Democrats are NOT people who want more money in working people’s’ pockets; they’re bitter, hateful people who want LESS money in other people’s’ pockets; they’re Marxists who want more and more and more money in the government’s pocket instead.

Obama is spending this country into bankruptcy.  You first need to understand that Obama has added $6 trillion to the debt in only four years after demonizing George Bush for adding over $4 trillion over eight years.  If Obama is reelected, he is on pace to TRIPLE the George Bush debt that he demagogued.  And this from a president who promised he’d cut spending and would cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term but was upbraided by Tom Brokaw who said Obama would have to answer for his “out of control” $1.1 trillion deficit “that happened on his watch.”  And let’s not even think about the fact that our REAL debt that will ultimately bankrupt us all is the $222 trillion we owe when we consider the unsustainable Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid debt that we have to pay.

On the foreign policy front, let me just sum it up this way: our Army, Marines, Navy and Air Force have massively lost confidence in Obama as commander-in-chief.  Obama paraded himself around as the president who got bin Laden (never mind that he depended enormously on the waterboarding-obtained intelligence that he demonized).  And Obama claimed that in getting bin Laden he had fatally wounded al Qaeda and that the war on terrorism was basically over.  And as a result Ambassador Chris Stevens was completely safe in Benghazi, Libya, and Obama could therefore cut his security even though the ambassador who was just about to be murdered in an al Qaeda terrorist attack was begging for MORE security.  The fact that Obama was utterly and completely wrong about his core foreign policy ought to matter.  But instead Obama has lied and then lied again when confronted with past lies such that the drip, drip, drip of Benghazi won’t hurt him until after the election is already over.  Which is exactly how a profoundly unworthy commander-in-chief would think.

Meanwhile, Obama’s cockroach media is working overtime to censor the news about this story so that Obama’s gamble will work.

Speaking of war zones, how about that Hurricane Sandy devastation?  Much of the country is lining up in gas lines that are taking as long as seven hours to get through.  Whole regions are devastated and thousands of victims have received absolutely no help at ALL.  Anger is beginning to increasingly erupt over the disastrous relief effort.  It’s always amazing to watch as the same media that pounded George Bush day after day over Katrina refuse to cover the suffering Obama is responsible for after Hurricane Sandy.  Obama got his photo op pretending to be “commander-in-chief” and now he can leave victims out in the cold.  Literally.

Oh, did I mention “gas”?  How about them prices?  Obama has made gasoline TWICE as expensive as it was when he took office.

Obama summed it up pretty well: Democrats are people who vote with a heart full of revenge; Mitt Romney is a man who says that Republicans vote because of love of country.

And that bit of deceit is frankly stunning: why the hell is Obama demanding that people take revenge on Mitt Romney WHEN IT WAS INSTEAD BARACK OBAMA WHO HAS IMPLODED AMERICA YEAR AFTER YEAR OVER THE LAST FOUR YEARS???  Just what did Mitt Romney do that Obama thinks people should take revenge on him for???  Why the hell doesn’t Obama realize that HE’S the man the American people need to take their revenge on, if they take revenge out on anyone at all???  Why is it that Barack Obama is that pathologically incapable of accepting any kind of responsibility at all???

Remember Obama’s ‘The Private Sector’s Doing Fine’ Remark? Manufacturing Just Crashed To Pre-‘Recovery’ Levels

The stink of a double-dip recession is heavy in the air and this time it’s going to take a whole lot more Kool-Aid to blame it on Bush.

But this is getting really wearisome to our messiah.  No matter what you hear, just remember: “The private sector’s doing fine.”

So if you hear something like, oh, say:

The trade group of purchasing managers said its index of manufacturing activity fell to 49.7. That’s down from 53.5 in May. And it’s the lowest reading since July 2009, a month after the Great Recession officially ended. Readings below 50 indicate contraction

and it occurs to you to think, “holy crap.  That sounds like the double-dip recession that conservatives predicted as a result of Obama’s stimulus being a sugar high that ultimately sucked money out of the private sector and then pissed it away on politically-connected government boondoggles.”

You just remember that your messiah said everything is “fine” and you just keep mindlessly supporting Obama.  Oh, and say a dozen “blame Bushes” before you go to bed tonight.

Jul 2, 5:05 PM EDT
US manufacturing shrinks for first time in 3 years
By CHRISTOPHER S. RUGABER
AP Economics Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) — U.S. manufacturing shrank in June for the first time in nearly three years, adding to signs that economic growth is weakening.

Production and exports declined, and the number of new orders plunged, according to a monthly report released Monday by the Institute for Supply Management.

The slowdown comes as U.S. employers have scaled back hiring, consumers have turned more cautious, Europe faces a recession and manufacturing has slowed in big countries like China.

“This is not good,” said Dan Greenhaus, chief economic strategist at BTIG, an institutional brokerage. Though the report “does not mean recession for the broader economy, it is still a terribly weak number.”

The trade group of purchasing managers said its index of manufacturing activity fell to 49.7. That’s down from 53.5 in May. And it’s the lowest reading since July 2009, a month after the Great Recession officially ended. Readings below 50 indicate contraction.

Economists said the manufacturing figures were consistent with growth at an annual rate of 1.5 percent or less. That would be down from the January-March quarter’s already tepid annual pace of 1.9 percent.

“Our forecast that the U.S. will grow by around 2 percent this year is now looking a bit optimistic,” said Paul Dales, an economist at Capital Economics.

Stocks fell sharply after the report was released at 10 a.m. But investors appeared to shake off the bad manufacturing news by the end of the day. The Dow Jones industrial average recovered most of its early losses to close down just 8.7 points at 12,871. And broader indexes ended the day up.

Most economists aren’t yet predicting another recession. Though the ISM report suggests manufacturing is contracting, it typically takes a sustained reading below 43 to signal the economy isn’t growing.

Still, U.S. manufacturing, which has helped drive growth since the recession ended, is faltering at a precarious time.

Americans have pulled back on spending, which drives roughly 70 percent of growth. Europe’s economy is likely in recession, which has hurt U.S. exports.

And China’s manufacturing sector grew in June at its slowest pace in seven months, according to a survey released Sunday by the state-affiliated China Federation of Logistics and Purchasing.

Manufacturing will likely stay weak for the next few months. The ISM’s gauge of new orders, a measure of future activity, plunged from 60.1 to 47.8. That’s the first time it has fallen below 50 since April 2009, when the economy was still in recession.

Fewer new orders reflect growing concerns of businesses. In addition to slower global growth and less spending by U.S. consumers, many companies worry that U.S. lawmakers won’t extend a package of tax cuts at the end of the year.

Bricklin Dwyer, an economist at BNP Paribas, said the uncertainty “has left businesses unwilling to invest.”

A gauge of production in the ISM’s survey fell to its lowest level in more than three years.

U.S. factories are also reporting less overseas demand. A measure of exports dropped to 47.5, its lowest level since April 2009.

A gauge of employment edged down but remained at a healthy level of 56.6. That suggests factories may still be adding jobs. Manufacturers have reported job gains for eight straight months.

Overall hiring has slowed sharply this spring. Employers added an average of only 73,000 jobs per month in April and May. That’s much lower than the average of 226,000 added in the first three months of this year. The unemployment rate rose in May to 8.2 percent from 8.1 percent, the first increase in a year.

Worries about slowing job growth are outweighing the benefits of lower gas prices. A measure of consumer confidence fell in June for the fourth straight month.

Slower job growth and falling confidence are weighing on consumers’ willingness to spend. Americans cut back on purchases of autos and other long-lasting factory goods in May, the government said Friday.

The sharp drop in U.S. factory activity overshadowed more positive news on housing.

Construction spending rose 0.9 percent in May from April, the Commerce Department said in a separate report Monday. It was the second straight monthly increase, even though the level of spending still isn’t healthy.

The increase was driven by a surge in residential construction. Home sales are up from the same month last year. Mortgage rates are at the lowest levels in history. And prices have begun to stabilize in most markets.

The economy could also get a boost this summer from lower gas prices, which have tumbled more than 60 cents per gallon since peaking in April. The result is that consumers have more money to spend on other goods, from autos and furniture to electronics and vacations, that fuel economic growth.

The article twice mentioned “lower gas prices.”  But why are gas prices lower?  Because the economy sucks which drives down demand.

“Demand is down, which ought to help drive up demand.” 

Just you remember that at least we don’t have that awful George W. Bush.  The unemployment rate was a terrible 5.3 percent:

Thank God those grim days are behind us.

Obama will probably talk about his 27 consecutive months of job growth.  Which is much better than George Bush’s pathetic 52 consecutive months of job growth.

I don’t doubt that Obama is going to blame Europe.  What’s funny, of course, is that Europe is blaming America.  But the bottom line is both Obama and the Europeans want to pile on more debt on top of their already utterly unsustainable debt.

One thing is for sure; Obama will NOT be talking about his shrinking labor participation rate, which has shrunk every year of his presidency and is now the worst its been in over thirty-one years.  Obama won’t talk about the fact that if the same labor participation rate that he inherited from Bush – 65.76 percent – were applied to Obama today, unemployment would actually be about 11.6 percent now.  He won’t talk about the fact that 88 million Americans of working age are out of the work force under his presidency.

He won’t mention any of that because the private sector’s doing fine.

That is an article of faith and if you don’t believe it, you’re a heretic.

And a racist, too.

Openly Socialist Hollande And Obama Share SAME Major Policies – So Obama Isn’t A Socialist WHY, Exactly???

“From each according to his ability, to each according to his need” – Karl Marx

I have frequently on this very blog demanded liberals to explain in detail just how exactly Barack Obama isn’t for the same thing (i.e., the major economic element of communism).  But let’s start with the French and get to Obama later.

Planet France is a place where fools have pretty much run things ever since 1789.  Two words that define France today are “socialism” and “surrender.”

Who did Planet France just elect?  And just what is this particular cheese-eating socialist surrender-monkey saying he’s going to do?

Hollande defeats Sarkozy in French presidency vote
Updated 04:05 p.m., Sunday, May 6, 2012

PARIS (AP) — Socialist Francois Hollande defeated conservative incumbent Nicolas Sarkozy on Sunday to become France’s next president, heralding a change in how Europe tackles its debt crisis and how France flexes its military and diplomatic muscle around the world.

Exuberant, diverse crowds filled the Place de la Bastille, the iconic plaza of the French Revolution, to fete Hollande’s victory, waving French, European and labor union flags and climbing the column that rises at its center. Leftists are overjoyed to have one of their own in power for the first time since Socialist Francois Mitterrand was president from 1981 to 1995.

“Austerity can no longer be inevitable!” Hollande declared in his victory speech Sunday night after a surprising campaign that saw him transform from an unremarkable, mild figure to an increasingly statesmanlike one.

Sarkozy is the latest victim of a wave of voter anger at government spending cuts around Europe that have tossed out governments and leaders over the past couple of years.

In Greece, a parliamentary vote Sunday is seen as critical to the country’s prospects for pulling out of a deep financial crisis felt in world markets. A state election in Germany and local elections in Italy were seen as tests of support for the national government’s policies.

Hollande promised help for France’s downtrodden after years under the Sarkozy, a man many voters saw as too friendly with the rich and blamed for economic troubles.

Hollande said European partners should be relieved and not frightened by his presidency.

“I am proud to have been capable of giving people hope again,” Hollande told huge crowds of supporters in his electoral fiefdom of Tulle in central France. “We will succeed!”

Hollande inherits an economy that’s a driver of the European Union but is deep in debt. He wants more government stimulus, and more government spending in general, despite concerns in the markets that France needs to urgently trim its huge debt.

Sarkozy conceded defeat minutes after the polls closed, saying he had called Hollande to wish him “good luck” as the country’s new leader.

Sarkozy, widely disliked for budget cuts and his handling of the economy during recent crises, said he did his best to win a second term, despite widespread anger at his handling of the economy.

“I bear responsibility … for the defeat,” he said. “I committed myself totally, fully, but I didn’t succeed in convincing a majority of French. … I didn’t succeed in making the values we share win.”

With 75 percent of the vote counted, official results showed Hollande with 51.1 percent of the vote compared with Sarkozy’s 48.9 percent, the Interior Ministry said. The CSA, TNS-Sofres and Ipsos polling agencies all predicted a Hollande win as well.

Hollande has virtually no foreign policy experience but he will face his first tests right after his inauguration, which must happen no later than May 16.

Among his first trips will be to the United States later this month for summits of NATO — where he will announce he is pulling French troops out of Afghanistan by the end of the year — and the Group of Eight leading world economies.

Hollande’s first challenge will be dealing with Germany: He wants to re-negotiate a hard-won European treaty on budget cuts that Germany’s Angela Merkel and Sarkozy had championed. He promises to make his first foreign trip to Berlin to work on a relationship that has been at the heart of Europe’s postwar unity.

Germany’s foreign minister, Guido Westerwelle, congratulated Hollande on Sunday night and said both countries will keep on cooperating closely in driving the European Union’s policies and be “a stabilizing factor and a motor for the European Union.”

At home, Hollande intends to modify one of Sarkozy’s key reforms, over the retirement age, to allow some people to retire at 60 instead of 62. He also plans to increase spending in a range of sectors and wants to ease France off its dependence on nuclear energy. He favors legalizing euthanasia and gay marriage.

Sarkozy supporters call those proposals misguided.

“We’re going to call France the new Greece,” said Laetitia Barone, 19. “Hollande is now very dangerous.”

Sarkozy had said he would quit politics if he lost, but was vague about his plans Sunday night.

“You can count on me to defend these ideas, convictions,” he said, “but my place cannot be the same.”

His political allies turned their attention to parliamentary elections next month.

People of all ages and different ethnicities celebrated Hollande’s victory at the Bastille. Ghylaine Lambrecht, 60, who celebrated the 1981 victory of Mitterrand at the Bastille, was among them.

“I’m so happy. We had to put up with Sarko for 10 years,” she said referring to Sarkozy’s time as interior and finance minister and five years as president. “In the last few years the rich have been getting richer. Now long live France, an open democratic France.”

“It’s magic!” said Violaine Chenais, 19. “I think Francois Hollande is not perfect, but it’s clear France thinks its time to give the left a chance. This means real hope for France. We’re going to celebrate with drink and hopefully some dancing.”

Planet France is a place where liberalism lives forever.  Planet France is a place where foolishness is wisdom, where night is day and where evil is good.

The markets already plunged on the fear that Hollande could win; now he’s won.  And the finance markets aren’t happy with “we will spend other people’s money until there is no more of other people’s money left to spend” policies:

Euro falls to three and a half year low amid market jitters at French and Greek elections
The Euro hit a three and a half year low against the pound as financial markets reacted to the election of Francois Hollande as France’s first Socialist president for 17 years and the new threat to a eurozone break-up posed by the post-election turmoil in Greece.
By Roland Gribben, Henry Samuel and Bruno Waterfield
11:24AM BST 07 May 2012

The Paris stock exchange CAC 40 index dropped 1.52pc in early trading with investors nervous about the growing pressure for a eurozone economic policy switch from austerity to growth, reflected in the French and Greek election results and President Hollande’s priorities.
 
The euro fell heavily across the board on Monday. Traders said the euro’s losses, which saw it hit a three-month low against the dollar, its lowest in 3 and a half years against the British pound and a 2 and half month trough versus the yen, were likely to be extended in coming days.
 
Stocks in Italy fell 2.2pc, the main Madrid index slipped 1.76pc while a 2.02pc drop in the DAX index of leading German shares was blamed on a local election setback for Chancellor Angela Merkel.
 
Political stalemate in Greece after the failure of any party to gain a majority saw shares on the Athens market slump 7.6pc.
 
The strength of the opposition to the Greek bail-out programme has raised fresh questions about continued eurozone membership.

Alexis Tsipras leader of the Syriza party, a coalition of the radical left which emerged as the second biggest after winning 16pc of the Greek vote, immediately drew the battle lines declaring: “The people of Europe can no longer be reconciled with the bailouts of barbarism.”
 
The euro fell its lowest level for almost four months to $1.2954 before showing signs of a rally to $1.301 while the interest rate on France’s benchmark ten year bonds rose.
 
Traders said there was no panic but the rising yield is increasing concerns about a run on French debt and a threat to the French deficit reduction programme. A widening in the spread between French and German bonds was seen as a ‘flight to safety.’
 
Germany’s 10-year yield fell to as low as 1.552pc, the second record in consecutive trading days.
 
Ratings agency Standard and Poor’s said President Hollande’s victory would have no immediate effect on its French rating.
 
The agency infuriated former President Sarkozy when it stripped France of its top triple-A rating in January.
 
A number of analysts felt markets had already taken account of a Hollande victory while others argued that a combination of the French and Greek results would increase pressure on eurozone debt.
 
World stock markets hit as France votes for first Socialist president in 20 years and Greece chooses a parliament with a majority of MPs from anti-bailout parties.

Some say that the market has already taken a Hollande win – i.e. a win for socialism, a win for liberalism, into account.  These are pretty much saying that Hollande will govern far more pragmatically than his liberal rhetoric suggests.  They’re saying that the world financial markets will prevent true socialism from emerging in France, and that Hollande will have to face reality given that he’s simply boxed-in by simple reality.   But even those people are saying, “We are quite pessimistic about the euro area in the short-term. We think that the GDP contraction will amplify in the second quarter. So, things will get worse in the coming weeks.”

I think that’s hogwash.  I think that Hollande will now believe he’s got a mandate to export his brand of socialist-liberal belief in unicorns and fairy dust to Germany and to the world financial markets.  His win was by about the same margin that Obama won by, interestingly, and both Obama and Democrats sure as hell thought THEY had a mandate which they foolishly exploited until the voters gave them a historic ass-kicking in 2010.  I also think that Hollande’s “Our way out of our massive debt is for our government to pretend we’re not in debt and quadruple down on our reckless, insane spending” mantra is the way to ruin.  And that ruin will surely ensue.  And, lastly, I think that the Eurozone’s complete and utter collapse is all but guaranteed now.

I said “quadruple down on our reckless, insane spending” in honor of our own socialist fool: Barack Hussein Obama.  Because Obama has spent FOUR TIMES AS MUCH AS BUSH DID:

“Austerity can no longer be inevitable!”

Our socialist fools in the Democrat Party in America are as determined to ignore reality as the sociliast fools on Planet France.

Compare and contrast openly socialist Hollande’s major policies to Obama’s: both want huge government stimulus programs; both oppose any constraints on government spending; both demand that we tax the rich; and both want a special tax on banks.  That’s because Barack Obama is a damn SOCIALIST!!!

The French election previews the U.S. November election contest between incumbent Barack Obama and challenger Mitt Romney in the following four ways:

1). Both Obama and Hollande offer almost identical leftist platforms (details on this below).

2) The bland challengers (Hollande and Romney) ignite electoral passions less than their more colorful opponents (playboy Sarkozy with his celebrity wife and Obama, the first black president).

3) The sorry state of the economy gives both challengers a hefty leg-up.

4) The French and American elections are foreshadowed by electoral disasters for the incumbent party in off-year races in 2010 and 2011. In both, the incumbent party lost long-held majorities in one house of Congress or parliament.

Read more…

And it’s no surprise that America under Obama is looking more and more like Europe and having the same long-term problems that Europe has had:

EDITORIAL: Obama’s euro-style unemployment
Welfare-state mentality fosters permanent joblessness
By THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Tuesday, June 14, 2011

It’s no secret that President Obama wants America to look more like Europe. He desires expanded powers for labor unions, higher gas prices for commuters and a diminished role on the world stage. So far, he’s been effective in fostering the conditions for European-style unemployment on these shores. […]

As we speak the unemployment rate just went down.  Why?  Because 115,000 jobs were created – nowhere near enough to even keep pace with population growth, mind you – and 342,000 gave up trying to find a job in complete despair.  We live in our own version of planet France when nobody could have a job and our president could boast of a 0% unemployment rate.

George Will pointed out a couple of facts as to just how terrible Obama is managing our economy this week on ABC’s “This Week”:

JAKE TAPPER: George, the president kicked off his campaign yesterday. Thoughts?

WILL: He kicked it off a day after we saw the emblematic achievement of the Obama administration, which is to make a decline in the unemployment rate bad news. It ticked down from 8.2 percent to 8.1 percent because 342,000 of Americans succumbed to discouragement with the Obama economy and left the economy.
 
Male participation rate in the economy today is lower than it has been at any time since we began keeping this statistic in 1948. Indeed, if the workforce participation rate were the same today as it was when Mr. Obama was inaugurated, the real unemployment rate would be measured at about 11 percent. That’s no record to run on.

Barry Hussein has been a jobs holocaust.

Bay Buchannon later made a statement about the planet France-like FOOLS who were instrumental to Obama’s 2008 victory: college students.

People who are graduating from college, 53 percent, do not get jobs when they graduate. We are going to lose that whole generation because, you know, when the jobs do come back, they’re going to hire college graduates just coming out.

Those idiot socialist fools deserve to suffer; it’s too dang bad the rest of the nation has to suffer along with them because of their vote for Obama four years ago.

I point out how simply godawful Obama has been for America.  Two years ago, due to Obama’s wildly failed policies, the labor participation rate measuring how many working-age Americans are actually WORKING was at a 25-year low.  Last year that participation rate had decreased to a 27-year low.  This year it decreased to a 31-year low.  Millions and millions of jobs have simply been vaporized under Obama and there is no sign that they will be coming back.

If you vote for Obama’s version of planet France, I can guarantee you that that rate measuring how many working-age Americans have any chance whatsoever of getting a job will continue to plunge.

P.S. The funniest damn thing of all is what I read after I got through writing this article but before I published it: that Obama is advising Hollande NOT to raise taxes and increase spending for the sake of the European economy.  WHILE OBAMA HIMSELF IS CAMPAIGNING ON DOING THE VERY THINGS HE’S TELLING HIS FELLOW SOCIALIST NOT TO DO.

New Jobs Figures A Real April Fools Day Joke On America

This is a joke that needs a little explaining.  But the real joke is on anyone fool enough to fall for the charades:

U.S. employment jumps in March, jobless rate falls
Apr 1, 2011
Lucia Mutikani

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – U.S. employment recorded a second straight month of solid gains in March and the jobless rate fell to a two-year low of 8.8 percent, marking a decisive shift in the labour market that should help to underpin the economic recovery.

Nonfarm payrolls rose 216,000 last month, the largest increase since May, the Labour Department said on Friday. January and February employment figures were revised to show 7,000 more jobs than previously reported.

The strong job gains come amid indications the economy suffered a minor setback early in the year as bad weather and rising energy prices dampened activity.

“All the evidence is pointing to a strengthening labour market,” said Bill Cheney, chief economist at John Hancock Financial Services in Boston.

First of all, remind me never, EVER to do business with John Hancock Financial Services.

Just to point out how incredibly and massively biased the “experts” who are spinning these numbers are, let me quote this same Bill Cheney from the same John Hancock from when Bush was president and the unemployment rate was more than THREE POINTS LOWER:

“We were expecting to celebrate New Year’s and instead got slapped with a pink slip,” said Bill Cheney, chief economist at John Hancock Financial Services.

The subtitle of that CNN Money article was “Jobs grow by just 1,000 in December, although unemployment rate drops to 5.7%.”

So, for those who are keeping score, when liberals are allowed to have a voice, 8.8% unemployment is good; 5.7% is bad.

I’m just saying: this couldn’t be more biased, full-of-crap propaganda by people who write the news based entirely on their leftwing ideology.  And they manage to track down economists who do the same thing.  And voilà: a expert-confirmed news story.

And this is just part of a very long, very well-established pattern of mainstream media “journalists” denouncing Republican economic data and blessing Democrat economic data even when the Republican data is BETTER than the Democrat numbers.

Here’s an interesting factoid that doesn’t seem to get any mention in the mainstream media: Unless I’m seriously mistaken, the unemployment rate has gone down every month since Republicans took control of The House in January:

Unemployment was if anything going UP.  And then Republicans took over, and whammo.  It started going down.  But Republicans didn’t receive so much as a scintilla of credit from the mainstream media.  It’s just amazing.

That’s first.  Second, there’s the facts that you have to dig for:

Still, the job gains haven’t led many people who stopped looking for work during the recession to start again. Fewer than two-thirds of American adults are either working or looking for work — the lowest participation rate in 25 years. […]

The unemployment rate has fallen a full percentage point since November, the sharpest four-month drop since 1983. Stepped-up hiring is the main reason. But a more sobering factor is that the number of people who are either working or seeking a job remains surprisingly low for this stage of the recovery.

People without jobs who aren’t looking for one aren’t counted as unemployed. Once they start looking again, they’re classified as unemployed, and the unemployment rate can go back up. That can happen even if the economy is adding jobs.

Just 64.2 percent of adults have a job or are looking for one — the lowest participation rate since 1984. The number has been shrinking for four years. It suggests many people remain discouraged about their job prospects even as hiring is picking up.

This magnificent unemployment rate success largely reflects the fact that more and more people are just dropping out of the employment picture altogether.  And three of the four years this has been going on have been going on under Obama.

Here’s a graph of the labor participation rate:

Note how it skyrocketed under Ronald Reagan.  Note how it went DOWN under Bill Clinton until the Republicans OWNED the Democrats in 1994 and took over both the House and the Senate.  Note how it went down under Bush following the Dotcom bust (and the 9/11 attack) that Bush inherited from Bill Clinton.

As I point out in a previous article:

George Bush inherited the policies that led to the 9/11 disaster only months into his presidency.  George Bush inherited the Dotcom disaster that wiped out 78% of the Nasdaq index along with $7.1 trillion in American wealth that was just vaporized as a result of Bill Clinton’s economy.  And rather than spend the next two years blaming his predecessor, Bush cut taxes and turned the economy around.  At least until Democrat policies such as the Community Reinvestment Act and Democrat refusal to reform and regulate Democrat-created Fannie and Freddie brought America crashing down.

Why don’t we blame the president who actually sued banks to force them to make bad loans to people who couldn’t afford the home loans that the banks were forced to provide???

By the standard the Democrats used to demonize George Bush in 2004, Barack Obama is the worst president in American history.

But the media prefers “the unexpected” to “the truth.”

You never hear how the first two years of Clinton were such a failure that he got the worst shellacking in fifty years; and then suddenly under Republican control things got mysteriously better as THEY cut spending and balanced the budget mostly over Clinton’s vetoes.  You just keep hearing that “Clinton balanced the budget.”

Note how Bush brought that declining labor participation back up after his tax cuts were passed and began to take effect.  And how that has happened AGAIN as the successful Republican-Bush tax rates were continued and things suddenly got miraculously better.

But let’s consider some other things.

We added 216,000 jobs last month.  Congratulations.  Here’s how many NEW unemployment claims were added every single WEEK in March:

Something just seems so wrong with this picture.  It makes that 216,000 jobs being added during the entire month of March just seem really, really sucky.

Somewhat similarly, the replacement rate due to population growth, etc. is 300,000 jobs a month:

“In order to make a real dent in the unemployment rate, economists estimate that at least 300,000 jobs need to be created each month.”

Meaning, we need to create 300,000 jobs a month just to stay even. But we created 216,000 jobs in March, which caused the unemployment rate to drop.  How’s that?!?!?

For the record, Gallup reported unemployment at a far more believable 10% in March.

What is truly being heralded here as a giant success is that millions of Americans are simply giving up and abandoning the work force altogether in Obama’s God damn America.

Unemployment Rate: At ‘Rate’ We’re Going, We’ll Have 0% Unemployment But No One Will Have An Actual Job

The last few months the unemployment rate has gone down even though the number of people who are participating in the workforce has gone down and down and down.  How can this be?

February 04, 2011
Labor Force Participation at 26 Year Low
Steve McCann

The headlines today trumpet a decline in the unemployment rate to 9.0%, however only 36,000 jobs were created.  The rate drop is due to the absurd policy of the Bureau of Labor Statistics not to count those who dropped out of the labor and ceased looking for a job.

A more important but unreported statistic is the massive drop in the labor force.  Today at 64.2%, the labor force participation rate (as a percentage of the total civilian noninstitutional population) is now at a 26 year low.  In January of 2000 it hit 67.5% by comparison.

 This  the lowest since 1984 and is the primary reason the unemployment rate has dropped to 9.0%.   Those not in the labor force has increased from 83.9 million to 86.2 million (a drop of 2.2 million on just one year).

In calculating the unemployment rate the BLS is now counting only 13.9 million as unemployed compared to 15 million two months ago when only 80,000 jobs created.  These are the disenchanted, no longer looking for a job and thus no longer on the BLS rolls.

The unemployment rate is a sleight of hand the reality is far worse.  There is no broad base recovery underway despite the best efforts to report otherwise.

Update from Steve McCann:

The Gallup Organization issues its own unemployment statistics which have been somewhat more accurate than the BLS and take into account more of the effect of those who have dropped out of the labor force.  Yesterday Gallup reported a U.S. unemployment rate of 9.8% up from 9.6% in December.

Further the underemployment rate (those unemployed and working part-time because they cannot find full-time work) in January was 18.9% down from 19.0% in December.  The closest number to this statistic issued by the BLS is the U-6 which showed 16.9% in January.

The summary in the Gallup report is:

Gallup’s measures paint a real-time picture of the current job realities on the ground.  Nearly 1 out of 10 Americans in the U.S. are unemployed nearly 1 out of 5 are underemployed, and the nation’s overall hiring situation has not improved over the past four to six months.

So, we have the dueling unemployment rates.  However Americans on Main Street know the situation for jobs has not improved over the past year as even more people enter the labor force each year.

At the rate that we are going given the bizarre measurements and the constant massaging of the data and the facts, we will literally have a zero percent unemployment rate.  With not one single person having a job in this completely failing and floundering economy.

The most meaningful measurement of our employment situation shows that we’re at 18.9%.  That’s Great Depression levels.  But just look here at this mainstream media headline and you’ll see that everything is fine, fine.  Nothing to see here, folks.

I think of the Soviet Union, which literally blamed the total failure of their entire political philosophy and the ruinous policies that philosophy entailed by claiming that their agricultural output had been adversely affected due to 72 years of bad weather.  And the Soviet Union has gone the way of the Dodo bird for that very reason.

Is America under Obama the next Dodo bird to fall apart while we’re assured that everything is fine while some suitable scapegoat bears the blame for every failure that can’t be ignored???