Obama’s facts vs. Fact Checker McMannes

First of all, the job report numbers for August 2012 came in at 96,000 jobs. Horrific. But unemployment went down because, AGAIN, people are dropping out of the job hunting market. Obama knew these numbers last night…but didn’t say anything. Why? Well, of course, that’s why.

Second thing is the is a fantastic fib that Obama’s deputy campaign manager told about job growth under the current president. Here’s Stephanie Cutter’s quote in full from MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” just so no one can accuse anyone of taking anything out of context:
“Well, I think that worker probably has a good understanding of what’s happened over the past four years in terms of the president coming in and seeing 800,000 jobs lost on the day that the president was being sworn in, and seeing the president moving pretty quickly to stem the losses, to turn the economy around. And over the past, you know, 27 months we’ve created 4.5 million private-sector jobs. That’s more jobs than in the Bush recovery (or) in the Reagan recovery.”

You’d think that if the Obama campaign wanted to peddle outright fabrications, they’d at least do it so they weren’t so easily debunked. But you don’t have to look very hard to see that Cutter, as Obama might say, is “just making stuff up.”

She starts counting private-sector job growth under Obama in February 2010 and, sure enough, in the 29 months since then (not 27 as Cutter says), there have been 4.5 million private-sector jobs created, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

But keep in mind that February 2010 was fully eight months into the economic recovery. So Cutter has simply picked the worst month under Obama as her starting point, in order to make Obama’s job growth look as impressive as possible.

So, in fairness, let’s do the same for Reagan and Bush:

In the aftermath of the 1981-82 recession, private-sector jobs bottomed out in December 1982, the month after that recession ended. Twenty-nine months later, the private sector under Reagan had created 8 million jobs — nearly twice as many as under Obama.

How about Bush? Surely job growth during his administration was worse. After all, the president keeps telling us that his predecessor’s policies “resulted in the most sluggish job growth in decades.”

Except if you use the Cutter method, the private sector created 4.7 million jobs in the 29 months after July 2003, when the job market bottomed. In other words, Bush beat Obama by his own preferred measuring technique by 200,000 jobs.

It’s worth noting, too, that jobs started growing under Bush ONE MONTH after he signed his second major tax cut into law. It chopped capital gains and dividend tax rates and accelerated the schedule for the Bush income-tax rate cuts.

Posted on September 7, 2012, in history, politics, USA, World News and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 3 Comments.

  1. The economy is the single most important issue in the world today. In the US there are also social issues and civil liberties at risk in the election. As a woman, I cannot support any candidate who does not recognize my sovereignty over my own body. I cannot support a candidate who would leave vulnerable children and disabled adults without the relative safety that social programs offer.

  2. I can certainly see your point of view. I would add though that abortion is not illegal and contraception is readily available. For guys, contraception can be found in any bathroom of any gas station. The interesting thing that I see is that both sides argue these things but it’s not a federal issue. It’s a state issue. And Medicare is still there and works fine, to be honest. Outside of an election year, Medicare is never an issue. There are some things about Obamacare that I do like, though…but I just don’t agree with how he wants to pay for it. There is no government run program…not one….that runs better than one run by a private company. But outside of abortion, do you think Romney is anti-women? I’m just curious. I appreciate your comment. I hope to hear more of your point of view…

    • It would be unfair to say that he is anti-woman. I wouldn’t be surprised to learn he supports a patriarchal social structure but I can’t address that intelligently since it is not something I am familiar with. If he wants to win the election he has to explain what he is going to do and how he will do it; he needs to take the chance that some voters will not like all of his positions but they will respect him for defining them.

Leave a Reply to elroyjones Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: