In a Washington Post piece, E.J. Dionne muses about Obama's declining approval numbers and the Massachusetts special election tomorrow to fill Ted Kennedy's vacant senate seat. The piece is worth reading. I'll get to one of his conclusions later in this post.
In the Massachusetts election it looks like the GOP candidate, Scott Brown, just might defeat Democrat, Martha Coakley…….although the race still looks like it's 'too close to call.' A Brown win would eliminate the alleged filibuster proof majority the senate Democrats, at least, have on paper…..and possibly threaten passage of the health care reform legislation Congress worked on most of 2009.
I don't understand how the very blue state of Massachusetts could be seriously considering a poser like Brown for Kennedy's empty seat, but then this is America….where nothing in politics is predictable except the bribery.
First….let's look at Obama's numbers. 53% of Americans approve of Obama's handling of the presidency. Nothing unusual,….actually pretty good for the numerous catastrophes left over from the previous administration that Obama has been wrestling with.
But look at these numbers…..
Just 20 percent of Republicans approve of his overall job performance, compared with 87 percent of Democrats. That partisan gap is bigger than any that Presidents Bill Clinton, George H.W. Bush or Ronald Reagan ever faced among the general public. It's about on par with divergent ratings of George W. Bush across his second term.
Republicans detest Obama after less than a year in office at the same percentage that Democrats detested George W. Bush during his second term. Obama hasn't done anything to merit the high-hate levels from Republicans….but he didn't have to do anything….he was elected, he is a Democrat…and that's enough. Review the Clinton presidency for historical perspective. One of the leaders of the conservative and Republican machine, Mr. Rush Limbaugh, on the first week of Obama's presidency, declared that he wanted Obama to fail. Because the hate-speech artist, Limbaugh, is so influential with other media, his "wanting Obama to fail" declaration set the tone for the national narrative.
This Republican hatred isn't even based on Obama's policies or executive decisions. Most Republicans have no idea, and could care less, about what policies or executive decisions Obama's White House is promoting. It's clear from all of 2009…..no matter what Obama would recommend, Republicans would be against it before it was recommended.
Consider only the time that Obama spoke to schoolchildren via video-conference. Nothing unusual about a president speaking to schoolchildren, and yet when Obama did it, it became a national screed-fest of 'Obama is indoctinating our children on socialism, communism, or some other -ism.'
The keys on my keyboard are blue in the face from pointing out the numerous examples from 2009 when media quickly moved to pick-up some nutty, farcical conservative complaint about Obama, and then magnified that ridiculous complaint into a multi-day-week-or-month "story." Once again, this isn't anything new after a Democrat has been elected president. During the Bill Clinton presidency, we witnessed a similar dynamic, which finally resulted in hysterical and ridiculous impeachment proceedings.
However, during Clinton's presidency, Glenn Beck wasn't around, Fox "News" was in it's infancy, Rush Limbaugh wasn't heard or seen on nightly cable teevee, and the 'vast right-wing conspiracy' hadn't perfected their communication/propaganda machine.
In 2009, even the craziest, most bizarre and ignorant conservative complaint or objection against Obama has been examined and discussed at length by Big Media. Conservatives, the same ones who helped George wreck the country, outnumbered Democrats on the Sunday morning "news" shows….all year. No matter whether it was 'Obama is indoctrinating our children'….or 'it's perfectly fine to carry loaded weapons to political events'….no matter how insanely crazy the conservative action or accusation was, Big Media always took it Seriously, providing more than ample time to air the "controversy."
Now to something E.J. Dionne said in today's column….
Yet the truth that liberals and Obama must grapple with is that they have failed so far to dent the right's narrative, especially among those moderates and independents with no strong commitments to either side in this fight.
Obama and the Democrats have "failed so far to dent the right's narrative."
Wouldn't Big Media, who creates and spins the "narrative", be most responsible for what the "narrative" is? Doesn't Big Media get to decide what the "narrative" should be, don't they create it each and every day…..or am I mistaken? Is Chris Matthews, for example, correct when he says stuff like…'Cheney is always "grabbing those headlines? Do media narratives and headlines exist in their own mysterious-ether dimension where all people like Cheney have to do is reach out and "grab them?"
How in the hell could Obama and the Democrats "dent" the Big Media-created narrative when Big Media insists on giving ample coverage to pseudo-narratives like, 'Obama is indoctrinating our schoolchildren?'
How can a reality-based group of Democrats "dent" a Big Media-created narrative which insists there is a legitimate "debate" to be had over Obama's citizenship, whether loaded weapons should be carried at political events, whether Democrats plan to "kill grandma", or whether the incoherent Tea Partiers have a "point" worthy of lengthy and Very Serious panel discussions?
Shouldn't E. J. Dionne, and his fellow Big Media comrades, be the one's looking in the mirror when pondering why it is Obama and the Democrats haven't been able to "dent the right's narrative?"
Just asking.
{ 40 comments… read them below or add one }
E.J. Dionne isn't clever enough to dent anyone's narrative, and in my opinion you are really overestimating the impact of Rush Limbaugh.
But you say Obama has done nothing to earn disfavor ?
The $800 stimulus bill (unpaid for), supporting the TARP bailout of the rich, trying to mandate health insurance in ObamaCare along with all the new entitlements of that program, which will interfere with medical care at an unprecedented level. That's nothing ? How about the projected $9-10 trillion in debt that Obama is projected to run up ? Is that nothing again ? How about all the bribery and special deals for every special interest imaginable in ObamaCare, or spending $200 million to unnecesarily try KSM in New York City ? How about all the executive orders favoring the unions ? How about cap-and-trade on the horizon, which will drive up everyone's energy prices and make it even harder for American industry to succeed ? Are we still at nothing to complain about with Obama ? How about killing the school voucher program ? How about Obama stupidly blaming the police in the Gates incident without knowing the facts ? What about Obama's world apology tour ? What about Obama increasing federal spending by a trillion in his first year, and leaving deficits as far as the eye can see ? Still nothing ? What about his granting the unions a special favor on the Cadillac health care tax, a favor that non-union folk will not get, thereby splitting the citizens into Obama-favored and Obama-nonfavored factions ? What about breaking NUMEROUS campaign promises, including having the health care negoatiations of C-SPAN ? Instead, they were carried out in private. I could go on and on.
But I guess if you ignore almost every major initiative he has implemented (and a lot of minor ones), there is nothing to complain about with Obama. If you ignore almost everything, then it is just Republican noise, as you said. But that takes an awful lot of ignore-ance.
In a nutshell, the narrative is true, Reverend. It just hasn't been able to dent the whacked-out delusional bizarro world you live in, yet.
Sometimes the comments remind me of Rod Serling's stuff…..you know, you read them and you, just for a nano-second, think you're entered The Twilight Zone. Weird.
You left out one thing – you said Obama " he didn't have to do anything….he was elected, he is a Democrat…and that's enough. " You left out he is black , Many hated him before he even stepped in to office.
Then you got the people in MA their attitude is I got health care so why pay for yours – They are afraid they will be taxed more in a bad economy, although most of them will not see a penny increase in their taxes, they don't believe it.
The medias against Obama but it is more than that. There is a attitude that says don't make me pay for someone else 's thing when I am doing okay . A selfish short sighted America has taken over this country one that only looks out for themselves . Perhaps it is fear from this economy. They are worried they won't be able to afford the new Lexsus or flat screen TV with the blueray DVD.
Plus the democrats are too weak and the news reporters don't speak back when someone makes a wrong statement. They don't hold anyone accountable when they tell a lie.
Oh the race card from Andrea. How refreshing!
In psychology it is called projecting Larry.
Do you deep down inside wish they would have elected someone white Andrea? I think you and Rev and Walt actually hate Obama and his non-negro dialect. That is sad.
Andrea does your keyboard have a racism button? Because I think its stuck.
I love how the loony left they doesn't talk about anything the president has ACTUALLY DONE they just talk about how the media is shaping the narrative. Who talks like that? Who cares about, "denting the narrative". Perhaps if the president had actually done anything of merit the narrative would not be so un-dentable. The rev cannot point to a single thing this president has done that deserves rising poll numbers.
The Rev just cries about the media every day. Boo-hoo Rush, boo-hoo Beck, boo-hoo the bad man on the tv him sad.
joe…..this projection you're talking about….how does that work?
Rev,
If you had no response to what I wrote, why did you bother making a comment ?
One more thing. Did you notice in that E.J. Dionne article blaming Bush for the recession, that Dionne didn't name one thing that Bush did to cause it ? The only thing Dionne cited was that Bush ran up deficits. While bad, those deficits didn't cause the recession, and while bad, Bush's deficits are dwarfed by Obama's.
Another error Dionne made was saying the Republicans were in charge when the recession happened. Not accurate. The Democrats controlled Congress when it happened.
Example this morning of so called "Liberal " CNN media – Had on Jennifer Donahue and a very one sided conversation. Most people will not know who she is , she a republican political senior advisor – but they didn't say that on CNN. What she said (and no one questioned her remark ) was people do not want Obama's health care reform that's why the people in MA are voting for Brown and they want Obama to focus on jobs, that he's spent this year only focusing on health care not jobs. Hello? No one questioned this remark? They just let her get away with a lie?
This goes to Roy and Da king what is a stimulus package for ? JOBS and whose been complaining about it the -GOP. And maybe if it was larger we might have produced more jobs. The stimulus plan has helped us stop the job loss disaster economy caused by Bush. Remember him and remember where the economy was last December ?
What has Obama accomplished in so short a time – he stopped the run away train wreck that's all. And lets remember bush tax cuts for wealthy how many jobs were created ? It cost us – $800,000 per Job under Bush . That's what he spent to get one job. And nothing much else to show for it. Anyway I seem to recall the republicans saying a Presidents can't really create jobs when Bush was in office – but now that He's a democrat he can ?
And Obama favoring unions as in Job production Da King ? As in construction jobs and that bugs you. As for spending there was a article in Washington Post about how President Obama he actually has accomplished more CUTS in spending than Bush . In fact go read the article Da KIng . All Bush did was cut taxes while spending.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/01/washington_times_obama_more_su.html
Under the stimulas plan not only does it create jobs but new roads better highways things that effect all of us not just a few of us.
Problem is the media lets people like her frame things wrongly and allows them to get away with it.
Because the only issue of value to Big Media, Andrea, is the "controversy."
It is clear from Big Media Celebrities like Dancing Dave Gregory and George Stephanopolous…..their jobs in Big Media are not to tell readers or viewers who is lying and who is telling the truth. They have both said that's not their job.
Much of today's "journalism" is anything but…..and the real stuff rarely gets considered for prime time.
Yes, it's true Andrea, many Americans didn't vote for, and don't like Obama today, because he is black. Our more conservative friends are really, really sensitive about saying that some conservatives don't like Obama because he is black. I guess they feel self-conscious, or something.
Roy…"The rev cannot point to a single thing this president has done that deserves rising poll numbers."
When Obama escalated troop numbers in Af-Pak, neo-cons were overjoyed…some even said so….That was deserving of higher approval numbers from neo-cons…..did you say yes, you approve of Obama, when the pollsters called you?
And King's last comment is typical of what I've been seeing recently. A giant outbreak, mainly among more conservative Americans, of amnesia. It's disconcerting.
No terror attacks on America during Bush's presidency, no recession caused by Bush or any Republicans, deficits, though doubled under Bush, are Obama's fault and Obama is the only one responsible for our deepening debt, Cheney's medieval-horror-freak show kept us safe, American liberals picked on Sarah Palin more than any other human that ever lived.
I'm not sure amnesia is curable….so dabble with it at your own risk.
It's true that Obama turned his attention to the economy immediately, but he didn't stop any runaway train wreck. The job situation is much worse than he promised when he rammed through the profligate stimulus. He argues that he miscalculated the "depths" of the recession, though I suspect he simply made it worse. In either case, he failed.
Andrea, your post proves just how racist democrats are.
NOBODY gives one crap whether Obama is Black, we do care that he is a lying Marxist, hiding his past, and being aided by the Marxist media.
MSNBC’s SCHULTZ (23:02): I tell you what, if I lived in Massachusetts I'd try to vote 10 times. I don't know if they'd let me or not, but I'd try to. Yeah, that's right. I'd cheat to keep these bastards out. I would. 'Cause that's exactly what they are.
That is the rhetoric from the progressive marxist left on MSNBC, steal the election at all costs because we can not tolerate opposing ideas. Some country you are making here, oppose us, and you will be labeled a racist, bastard or other.
Rush Limbaugh as I and Beck and many many others see Barry the Liar as the culmination of 100 yrs of Progressive Marxist politics and as such must fail, if he does not fail, then everything that made this nation great and exceptional, personal freedom, economic equality, the right to protest and petition your government, the right to defend yourself, will all be a memory.
Here is something interesting for you free market haters:
Chile success story
http://www.glennbeck.com/content/videos/?uri=channels/338017/751812
Chile has been the fastest growing economy in Latin America during the last 15 years, with an average annual per capita growth rate of 4.1 percent over the fifteen years following the return of democracy in 1990 An economic depression that began in 1967 peaked in 1970, exacerbated by capital flight, plummeting private investment, and withdrawal of bank deposits in response to Allende's socialist program. Production fell and unemployment rose. Allende adopted measures including price freezes, wage increases, and tax reforms, to increase consumer spending and redistribute income downward.[26] Joint public-private public works projects helped reduce unemployment.[27][page needed] Much of the banking sector was nationalized. Many enterprises within the copper, coal, iron, nitrate, and steel industries were expropriated, nationalized, or subjected to state intervention. Industrial output increased sharply and unemployment fell during the Allende administration's first year.[27] Allende's program included advancement of workers' interests,[27][28] replacing the judicial system with "socialist legality",[29] nationalization of banks and forcing others to bankruptcy,[30] and strengthening "popular militias" known as MIR.[30] Started under former President Frei, the Popular Unity platform also called for nationalization of Chile's major copper mines in the form of a constitutional amendment
By early 1973, inflation was out of control. The crippled economy was further battered by prolonged and sometimes simultaneous strikes by physicians, teachers, students, truck owners, copper workers, and the small business class.
In the late 1980s, the government gradually permitted greater freedom of assembly, speech, and association, to include trade union and political activity. The government launched market-oriented reforms, which have continued ever since. Chile moved toward a free market economy that saw an increase in domestic and foreign private investment, although the copper industry and other important mineral resources were not opened for competition. In a plebiscite on October 5, 1988, General Pinochet was denied a second 8-year term as president (56% against 44%). Chileans elected a new president and the majority of members of a two-chamber congress on December 14, 1989. Christian Democrat Patricio Aylwin, the candidate of a coalition of 17 political parties called the Concertación, received an absolute majority of votes (55%).[42] President Aylwin served from 1990 to 1994, in what was considered a transition period.
Sound economic policies, maintained consistently since the 1980s, have contributed to steady growth and reduced poverty rates by over half.[4][6] The 1973–90 military government sold many state-owned companies, and the three democratic governments since 1990 have continued privatization, though at a slower pace. The government's role in the economy is mostly limited to regulation, although the state continues to operate copper giant CODELCO and a few other enterprises (there is one state-run bank). Chile is strongly committed to free trade and has welcomed large amounts of foreign investment. Chile has signed free trade agreements (FTAs) with a whole network of countries, including an FTA with the United States, which was signed in 2003 and implemented in January 2004.[52]
Over the last several years, Chile has signed FTAs with the European Union, South Korea, New Zealand, Singapore, Brunei, China, and Japan. It reached a partial trade agreement with India in 2005 and began negotiations for a full-fledged FTA with India in 2006. Chile conducted trade negotiations in 2007 with Australia, Malaysia, and Thailand, as well as with China to expand an existing agreement beyond just trade in goods. Chile concluded FTA negotiations with Australia and the expanded agreement with China in 2008. The members of the P4 (Chile, Singapore, New Zealand, and Brunei) also plan to conclude a chapter on finance and investment in 2008.[6] The economic international organization the OECD agreed to invite Chile to be among four countries to open discussions in becoming an official member.[53] It was invited to join the organization in December 2009, and accepted in January 2010.
How can that be, Chile, throwing off the shackles of socialism is flourishing? Those of us who believe in a free america, free of an overbearing government know how, but for some reason you Progressive marxists have not:
“Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.” — Winston Churchill
So it is Barry the Liar who wants this NATION to fail, Rush Limbaugh wanting Barry to fail is only correct and proper.
jeff…..if you think Chile has been a success….look at China
Rev, I did approve of the move in Afghanistan but I do not approve of Obamacare.
Two thirds of America does not approve of Obamacare either. Again, your post does not mention a single positive thing about the president. It was all media bashing.
Andrea, the stimulus package has been an utter failure. That stimulus package was a payoff to all of the states that Obama won. The economy has not been helped by these payoffs.
Brazil is doing very well also. Leave it to you to know nothing about the topic and lend support to the communists, the Chinese.
Yeah Walt look at the empire Clinton built in China with your families future.
China isn't doing overall as well as Chile or Brazil especially when it comes to standard of living of it's citzens and civil rights. These are 2 very strong emerging markets.
Leave it to you walt to know nothing of the subject and still comment.
Jeff no truer words ever spoken, good job – “Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.” — Winston Churchill
Roy a failure ? How was the housing market when he took over -diving – now leveled off – how was the stock market ? How much has it gone up now ? maybe 60 % UP or so
Maybe we don't have enough jobs yet but the stimulus gave people and businesses enough confidence to not panic and instead to make some cautious investments instead of continuing in free fall.
hey jeff no ones a racist huh not one single republican
http://washingtonindependent.com/73036/n-word-sign-dogs-would-be-tea-party-leader
Andrea – Really! Are you serious? The housing market dove during the election year Bush made many bonehead mistakes but he tried to stave off the financial and housing crash in Sept 2007 and the DEM CONGRESS didn't react! Infact they allowed it by letting energy cost get out of line causing millions of foreclosures and then sustaining that pain on middleclass america until they were assured the presidency..
Now jobs. Have you heard of peak oil? Well we are at a point of peak job loss and (almost 20% actual) we still lost almost 100k jobs in december a month that should have been up. Is that leveling off to you? Bush had 6 straight years of growth. It should have been managed by congress and the Fed, they failed and you suffer.
The stock market if you know anything about such things is being held up by threads right now in fact you are holding it up and not receiving the benefits. This isn't George Bush's or even Bill Clinton's stock market.
Tell me about the investments businesses are making. You can't, because they aren't. Govt is using your money to invest. Businesses are being held up because the govt is pumping money into them not because investors are investing(except for energy companies and that is becoming a huge sham) And the govt is picking and choosing which groups and business types. That won't happen until they find out what happens with "cap and tax".
As far a racism. It's through out our society. It's not a topic. Blacks are more prejudice than whites, why don't you talk about that. Mention how Obama took the side of a black college professor over a white cop without knowing all of the facts. This isnt new and it will never end.
First….. average…..please….."The housing market dove during the election year Bush made many bonehead mistakes but he tried to stave off the financial and housing crash in Sept 2007 and the DEM CONGRESS didn't react! Infact they allowed it by letting energy cost get out of line causing millions of foreclosures and then sustaining that pain on middleclass america until they were assured the presidency.."
Your lowest moment. Nothing, not one thing, except, "Bush made many boneheaded mistakes"……is accurate. Go stand in the corner.
Now to larry…
"It's true that Obama turned his attention to the economy immediately, but he didn't stop any runaway train wreck. The job situation is much worse than he promised when he rammed through the profligate stimulus. He argues that he miscalculated the "depths" of the recession, though I suspect he simply made it worse. In either case, he failed."
You do know about the run on cash in early October, 2008, right? Lehman went down. Immediately car dealers sales dropped 30-50%. Homes stopped being built and/or transacted. 700,000 a month laid off starting in December 2008. You know about all this, right?
What Obama did was ease the crash. And it helped. Teachers, cops, EMT's ddn't get laid off….unemployment monies were available, taxes cut for a year for working class, some transportation and infrastructure spending with accompanying jobs.
Some conservatives seem to believe that what happened in the fall of 2008 was just part of the regular, you know, business cycle. Government should have just let the chips fall wherever they fell, no matter what size financial tsunami resulted. Other conservatives think it was okay for Bush and Paulson to bail out the banksters but it's not okay for Obama to provide any help to working class American families.
No conservatives were in favor of a stimulus. So, I'm not understanding what it is that conservatives would do…..other than cut more taxes for the wealthy. The deregulated markets, the one Greenspan said at one time could be trusted to self-regulate because it was in the banksters interest to not cheat and take too much risk,……well now Greenspan says he was wrong about that. What about the rest of you conservatives? Do you agree or disagree with what Greenspan testified a while back?
What nobody wants to talk about on the teevee is how miserably the conservative model for America's economy, a model started under Reagan, has failed. Conservative financial policies of hyper-deregulation of anything that moves can no longer be on the national table. They go in the dumpster. They don't work.
Rev what about the 6 billion Bush wanted to inject into the mortgage banks to help prop tham up? It turned into a huge battle and a tax cut for hedgefunders and they took that money. As Obama said connect the dots.
When didthe housing market begin it's descent and show signs of problems? The spring of 2007.
joe….you said something about projection last night….I'm still interested on how that works
roy sez….."….they just talk about how the media is shaping the narrative. Who talks like that?"
"It's pretty sad when the majority of the media is part and parcel of the misdirection, isn't it ?"………Da King January 3, 2010 at 12:29 pm
just saying
this from the Australian Chile Country Brief……
Chile has registered solid economic growth in recent years (4.3 per cent in 2006, 5.1 per cent in 2007, and 3.4 per cent in 2008) on the back of record world copper prices. The Chilean government’s strong fiscal position allowed for the repayment of debt, and placed the government in a net creditor position. Between 2004 and 2008, Chile’s total external debt decreased from 45.8 per cent to 35.6 per cent of GDP. Lower prices for copper in 2008 led to the fiscal surplus declining to an estimated 5.5 per cent of GDP in 2008 (from 9.4 per cent in 2007).
CODELCO – the Chilean Copper Company and Chile's largest company – remains state-owned with no consensus on privatisation.
interesting Glenn Beck didn't mention the biggest driver of the Chile's economy is the state owned copper mine and Chile's largest company
The stimulus was a failure, Reverend. Obama said it was all about jobs and made a bottom line guarantee that it would keep unemployment below 8 percent. He either made a 25 percent miscalculation concerning the state of the economy at that time, or the spending did not work the way he thought it would. It has been a massively expensive failure.
Andrea,
Most people don't define success on the jobs front as 10% unemployment. The end.
walter,
Do you not know that the overwhelming majority of the media support the Democrats ? Apparently you don't.
http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/nine_out_of_ten_journalists_support_democrats_over_republicans/
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections2/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/majority_say_reporters_tried_to_help_obama
Da King – You cant blame Obama for the Bush economy . Takes time to reverse 8 years of a mess. If Mccain was President today you be saying you cant blame the president for job loss. Obama might be smart but he is no magician. The economy will improve and already the signs are that it is . END os story Da king
Exactly, Andrea.
Andrea,
I don't blame Obama for what he inherited, but don't tell me Obama has addressed jobs when unemployment is 10%.
When the Democrats took over Congress in january 2007, unemployment was 4.6%. Can I blame them for the 10% unemployment now, or are you sticking with the 'it's all Bush's fault' meme ?
I have to agree with Andrea and Reverend that Obama has addressed jobs, King. Unfortunately, his massively expensive answer to the problem has only caused further unemployment. What even Obama's economists thought would top out at 9 percent or so has gone over ten percent. In effect, Obama has spent $1.2 trillion taking jobs away from a million workers.
That's because it wasn't all the Bush economy. It was the Dem congress' economy. They had complete control when it took a dive and refused to respond to the crash.
joe sez….."Brazil is doing very well also."
let's see…..CODELCO is the largest corporation in Chile and is state owned and doing well
PETROBAS in Brazil is the 8th largest corporation in the WORLD and is state owned and doing well
but those evil Chinese….they own everything and are doing well
what's the commonality here?
It's official….George W. Bush was never president.
During the non-presidency of George W. Bush we were all kept safe,…..peace and tranquility broke out everywhere in the universe, more high paying jobs were created than there were people to fill them, taxes were eliminated entirely, and lions began laying down with the lambs. The new, dark president walked into a situation best characterized by the word, "paradise."
In a recent episode of "paradise", the new, dark president, who isn't George W. Bush, borrowed $1.2 trillion from China in order to eliminate millions of American jobs.
Sci-Fi Wingnut.
I guess you could argue that Obama cut about 7 million jobs, which would give him more bang for his buck, Reverend.
These were all jobs that George W. Bush had "saved" during his tenure, of course.
BLS website……http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:YEO_t4As8WoJ:www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf+us+job+loss+graph&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESiG4Ac6W-GQK90O9UTr1-r019Hao5kgrB79agrocXa1fQ7dv6iDTivM1KQ-AENQy8tAstefSidEAFA4OVI5XF8l2a41PHPrxCrGvPdaln7QydBNwAQLL0ZrN7Ihcu6sRg_0uk-l&sig=AHIEtbSLJ5gWvQL80Sfir6yMAP_8Qv_KjA
That's your most cogent post yet, walt. Glad to see some progress, finally.
that was to the Bureau of Labor Statistics website. It has a graph showing the recession and job losses starting in December 2007.
the congressional democrats took office in Jan 2007. joe says the democrats did something in their first 12 months in office that caused the recession. I was just wondering what that was
walter….the rules are different for Republicans when they are in power. Whatever damage GOP'ers do….and good gawd….from 2001-2009 they did a lot of damage….never happened. If there has been any damage done to America….it was Clinton's responsibility before Bush 2, or Obama's fault following after Bush 2.
It's the 3 monkey syndrome when GOP'ers control D.C……hear, speak and see no evil……and if anyone ears, speaks, or sees GOP evil, anyway….the Dems are responsible for it.
Just how it is.