ITB - President Obama's team slams 'lunatics' who say unemployment stats were cooked

[bsteadman]

President Obama's team slams 'lunatics' who say unemployment stats were cooked

GOP fires back on chat shows that Obama can't make a case for re-election because he's failed

New York Daily News
Tracy Connor
10/7/2012

Excerpt:

"President Obama’s advisers attacked critics for suggesting the White House fudged jobs figures, comparing them to “lunatic” birthers.

The non-partisan Bureau of Labor Statistics released the 7.8% unemployment rate Friday, and former GE chief Jack Welch and several Tea Party figures claimed the numbers were cooked.

Obama campaign senior adviser Robert Gibbs called such comments “incredibly dangerous” and said Welch embarrassed himself.

“There's a number of people that believe the real unemployment report is somewhere in a safe in Nairobi with the president's Kenyan birth certificate," Gibbs said sarcastically on NBC’s “Meet the Press” Sunday.

Another senior adviser, David Axelrod, also compared Welch and company to right-wingers who believe Obama was not born in the U.S.

“They can join the lunatic fringe of birthers,” Axelrod said on CBS’s “Face the Nation,” calling the conspiracy theory “completely nuts.”

(bold emphasis added in the above three paragraphs)
............................................

View the complete article at:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nati...icle-1.1176980

[bsteadman]

Robert Gibbs: Real Unemployment Report In Nairobi With Obama's Kenyan Birth Certificate

Birther Report
10/7/2012

Excerpt:

Gibbs: Some People Believe Real Unemployment Report In Nairobi With Obama's Kenyan Birth Certificate - VIDEO (linked in post).

Speaking of the jobs report! Meet the Obama Donors at the Bureau of Labor Statistics(BLS) - DETAILS (linked in post.

View the complete Birther Report presentation, including video, at:

http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogs...nt-report.html

[bsteadman]

Free Republic is running a thread titled, 'President Obama's team slams critics of new unemployment statistics as 'lunatics', which was started 10/7/2012 by 'Nachum'

The thread references the 10/6/2012 New York Daily News article written by Tracy Connor - http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nati...icle-1.1176980

View the complete Free Republic thread at:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2941580/posts

[bsteadman]

Free Republic is running a thread titled, 'OBAMA MAGICALLY LOWERS UNEMPLOYMENT BY ELIMINATING WORKFARE', which was started 10/7/2012 by 'Texas Eagle'

The thread references a 10/7/2012 post on 'edtalkradio.com by Chriss W. Street - http://edtalkradio.com/Inside_Educat..._WORKFARE.html

Excerpt:

"All great magicians employ misdirection in creating miraculous illusions, leaving their audiences stunned and confused. President “Houdini’s” miraculous creation of 873,000 jobs in the month of September drove down the national unemployment rate from 8.1% to 7.8%, just as absentee voting begins. The trick left Republicans and economists equally befuddled, since the last time a similar monthly jobs increase appeared was June of 1983 when the economy was growing at an astronomical 9.3% annual rate. But looking behind Barack the Great’s smoke and mirrors reveals that the President’s highly controversial July suspension of the “workfare” requirements that welfare recipients must actually work to be counted as employed seems to have dramatically reduced the U.S. Labor Department’s unemployment rate."

View the complete Free Republic thread at:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2941527/posts

[bsteadman]

Us unemployment drops below 8% ? -- tpath

US UNEMPLOYMENT DROPS BELOW 8% ?

BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS FOLLOWS ORDERS WELL

TPATH - http://www.tpath.org/TPATH_UPDATE_LINKS.html#10812
10/8/2012

"October 8, 2012 TPATH - In the beginning of this year, Rush Limbaugh predicted the national unemployment number would drop below 8% this October. All of us who love and admire Rush know he is not a world class economist. And at the time he predicted this, there were no signs of the economy improving. Yet, he hit it out of the park. How did he do that?

He knew that Obama's policies were designed not to improve and grow the middle class or the economy, but to destroy it, and with the compliance of the media, blame Republicans and the free market.

What Rush is an expert on is history and leftist politicians.
Never in American politics has a sitting President been reelected with unemployment 8% or higher. Who else knows this? The person posing a "President of All the People", Obama.

Because the method and means the BLS use to crunch the numbers are kept under tight security, with just a few statistics revealed, they could very well have come up with any number the Obama demanded. And they did.

Here are some facts that fly in the face of all common sense relating to this bogus report these sycophants hoisted upon the American people this week.

1. How many times during the last 4 years has the monthly unemployment number been adjusted the following month?
Answer: Over 40 times.

2. How many times was the error in favor of Obama?
Answer: Just about 100% of the time

3. The two top Labor Statistic people who are charged with putting out the final numbers donated the maximum amount to what candidate?
Answer: Obama.

4. Economists agree that new jobs for any given month must total between 150,000 to 250,000 just to keep the unemployment rate from dropping. How many new jobs were created in September?
Answer: 114,000 (And the rate dropped to under 8%?).

5. What happens to the value of a quotient when the value of the dividend is reduced in relation to the divisor?
Answer: The value drops ( As in from 8.2 to 7.8).

6. How many people have been removed from the equation calculating the number looking for work (the dividend) since the beginning of this year?
Answer: 1,400,000 (that's people dropped and not counted).

7. It is a fact proven over and over again and agreed to by economists, that factory orders and production must rise in relationship to rising employment. How much did that number increase during the period that BLS tells us employment rose?
Answer: It did not rise, it fell.

8. Everyone knows that "government jobs" produce no growth in the economy. Conversely, they add to the burden of the taxpayer and every dime of those new salaries has to be paid for, now or in the future, by those actually producing something. If the government hired, let's say, 600,000 new employees over the last 3 months would that help the unemployment rate drop?
Answer: Ask the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

9. How many new government employees have been hired in the last 3 months?
Answer: 600,000 (How convenient!)

10. What are are the chances that when the October unemployment statistics are released in November, just after the election, that the 7.2% rate for September will be adjusted to back over 8%?
Answer: 100%

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
One more thing to ponder as we move towards November. It is very easy to elect a Marxist, nearly impossible to vote him out.
Just ask the poor souls down in Venezuela.
Win, lose or draw, Chavez is not going anywhere.

October 8, 2012 TPATH

[bsteadman]

Jack Welch: I Was Right About That Strange Jobs Report -- Wall Street Journal

Jack Welch: I Was Right About That Strange Jobs Report

The economy would need to be growing at breakneck speed for unemployment to drop to 7.8% from 8.3% in the course of two months.

Wall Street Journal - Online
Jack Welch
10/9/2012

Excerpt:

"Imagine a country where challenging the ruling authorities—questioning, say, a piece of data released by central headquarters—would result in mobs of administration sympathizers claiming you should feel "embarrassed" and labeling you a fool, or worse.

Soviet Russia perhaps? Communist China? Nope, that would be the United States right now, when a person (like me, for instance) suggests that a certain government datum (like the September unemployment rate of 7.8%) doesn't make sense. - (bold emphasis added in preceding two paragraphs)

Unfortunately for those who would like me to pipe down, the 7.8% unemployment figure released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) last week is downright implausible. And that's why I made a stink about it.

Before I explain why the number is questionable, though, a few words about where I'm coming from. Contrary to some of the sound-and-fury last week, I do not work for the Mitt Romney campaign. I am definitely not a surrogate. My wife, Suzy, is not associated with the campaign, either. She worked at Bain Consulting (not Bain Capital) right after business school, in 1988 and 1989, and had no contact with Mr. Romney.

The Obama campaign and its supporters, including bigwigs like David Axelrod and Robert Gibbs, along with several cable TV anchors, would like you to believe that BLS data are handled like the gold in Fort Knox, with gun-carrying guards watching their every move, and highly trained, white-gloved super-agents counting and recounting hourly.

Let's get real. The unemployment data reported each month are gathered over a one-week period by census workers, by phone in 70% of the cases, and the rest through home visits. In sum, they try to contact 60,000 households, asking a list of questions and recording the responses.

Some questions allow for unambiguous answers, but others less so. For instance, the range for part-time work falls between one hour and 34 hours a week. So, if an out-of-work accountant tells a census worker, "I got one baby-sitting job this week just to cover my kid's bus fare, but I haven't been able to find anything else," that could be recorded as being employed part-time.

The possibility of subjectivity creeping into the process is so pervasive that the BLS's own "Handbook of Methods" has a full page explaining the limitations of its data, including how non-sampling errors get made, from "misinterpretation of the questions" to "errors made in the estimations of missing data."

Bottom line: To suggest that the input to the BLS data-collection system is precise and bias-free is—well, let's just say, overstated.

Even if the BLS had a perfect process, the context surrounding the 7.8% figure still bears serious skepticism. Consider the following:

In August, the labor-force participation rate in the U.S. dropped to 63.5%, the lowest since September 1981. By definition, fewer people in the workforce leads to better unemployment numbers. That's why the unemployment rate dropped to 8.1% in August from 8.3% in July.

Meanwhile, we're told in the BLS report that in the months of August and September, federal, state and local governments added 602,000 workers to their payrolls, the largest two-month increase in more than 20 years. And the BLS tells us that, overall, 873,000 workers were added in September, the largest one-month increase since 1983, during the booming Reagan recovery.

These three statistics—the labor-force participation rate, the growth in government workers, and overall job growth, all multidecade records achieved over the past two months—have to raise some eyebrows. There were no economists, liberal or conservative, predicting that unemployment in September would drop below 8%.

I know I'm not the only person hearing these numbers and saying, "Really? If all that's true, why are so many people I know still having such a hard time finding work? Why do I keep hearing about local, state and federal cutbacks?"

I sat through business reviews of a dozen companies last week as part of my work in the private sector, and not one reported better results in the third quarter compared with the second quarter. Several stayed about the same, the rest were down slightly.

The economy is not in a free-fall. Oil and gas are strong, automotive is doing well and we seem to be seeing the beginning of a housing comeback. But I doubt many of us know any businessperson who believes the economy is growing at breakneck speed, as it would have to be for unemployment to drop to 7.8% from 8.3% over the course of two months.

The reality is the economy is experiencing a weak recovery. Everything points to that, particularly the overall employment level, which is 143 million people today, compared with 146 million people in 2007.
.......................................

View the complete article at:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...406091012.html

[AMERICAN ADVOCATE]

THE ONLY LUNATICS ARE THE FOOLS WHO VOTED FOR AND SUPPORT THE TREASONOUS , FRAUDULENT , LYING , SOCIALIST
WHO TEMPORARILY " OCCUPIES " OUR OVAL OFFICE AND WHITEHOUSE ~ badrack ' insane ' obummer ( aka barry soetoro )