By early November, 2004, the Twin Towers were gone after America suffered the worst terrorist attack inside the U.S. as Bush didn't lift a pinky to even attempt to thwart the attack (fail!), he had invaded a nation over WMD that weren't there (fail!), unemployment had risen from 4.2% to 5.5% as 2.2 million jobs disappeared ...
Are you senile? I already provided them.
Your non-sequitur doesn't even attempt to address the point I made that results don't matter to you, so you look absolutely ridiculous pointing out how results should matter to others.
Bush took unemployment from 4.2% to 7.8% ... that 3.6 point increase (compared to the 1.3 point increase under Obama) is not a percentage.
I can't help that you can't understand that a 3.6 point increase in the unemployment rate is not a percentange change. But in fact, I really don't expect someone who doesn't know the difference between nominal figures and real figures, who doesn't understand the difference between BLS's household survey data from payroll data, to grasp that.
Underemployment under Bush grew by some 11 million (compared to 3 million under Obama.) Did it matter to the 22 million who were underemployed when Bush left office?
Sheik Yerbuti said:
I found a strange post at Newsbusters, the conservative website that supposedly tracks liberal media bias. Today they put up a post with the following title: "MSNBC's Wolffe: Jimmy Carter Created More Jobs Than George W. Bush." So, I clicked on it expecting them say how wrong Richard Wolffe was, but when I got there they didn't refute the claim at all. Do you think this was an oversight on their part? What's going on here, Carter was in office only 4 years and Bush was in office 8 years. Surely Bush added more jobs than Carter did, right?
I'm curious, what's your education/vocational background? Either way, you had no basis to make claims about me when you knew fodderall about where I was coming from. It was rude and insulting, and for a supposed "adult" I should expect better from you.
The problem was that I wasn't talking about that! I wasn't posting in that comment about anything to do with you? Why did you feel the need to stick your nose in and paste the same tired blurb you kept on posting, when that wasn't the topic being discussed? Seriously man, keep on target. You were acting like a troll, plain and simple. Were you that upset that people dared have a conversation about something else in this thread? Could you not stand not being the center of attention? I swear, you're like my 3-year old nephew when my sister and I are trying to talk. Please, don't try to derail a conversation, especially with something that you've posted a dozen times over and over, when the topic has nothing to do with your cut and paste job. It's rude and its childish. Grow the **** up.
Can you explain why Newsbusters highlighted what Richard Wolffe said about Carter creating more jobs than Bush and not debunking what he said?
Carter was in office only four years, the inflation rate was much higher, indeed the misery index was much higher, the taxes were much higher and the population was much lower. So, is it even remotely possible that Carter created more jobs than Bush?
No, I do it because I like the color.
Bush signs his tax cuts on June 7, 2001 ...
Can you explain why Newsbusters highlighted what Richard Wolffe said about Carter creating more jobs than Bush and not debunking what he said?
It's not a diversion at all, I figured you would produce the numbers (like you usually do) to prove Richard Wolffe's statement was false , but since you haven't I can only conclude you think his statement is true. :thumbs: