• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

U.S. Jobless Rate Unexpectedly Declines to 8.6%

Only when I see annoying blue typing....


j-mac

You must be a glutton for being annoyed then -- no one is forcing you to read anything in blue.
 
Until now, congratulations Obama for making Bush look good

just when no one thought it possible.

When Clinton was doing his thing on the famous blue dress, I thought we could do no worse. Wrong.
When Bush was invading Iraq and running up massive deficits, I thought we could do no worse. Wrong again.
Now that Obama has run up even more massive deficits, dare we think we can do no worse?
 
WTF??? You're still pedaling that lie EVEV AFTER BEING SHOWN the BLS numbers which proved Bush never had 52 consecutive months of job growth??

I guess the only results you care about are the ones you make up.

Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey
Original Data Value

Series Id: LNS12000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Employment Level
Labor force status: Employed
Type of data: Number in thousands
Age: 16 years and over
Years: 2001 to 2011

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2001 137778 137612 137783 137299 137092 136873 137071 136241 136846 136392 136238 136047
2002 135701 136438 136177 136126 136539 136415 136413 136705 137302 137008 136521 136426
2003 137417 137482 137434 137633 137544 137790 137474 137549 137609 137984 138424 138411
2004 138472 138542 138453 138680 138852 139174 139556 139573 139487 139732 140231 140125
2005 140245 140385 140654 141254 141609 141714 142026 142434 142401 142548 142499 142752
2006 143150 143457 143741 143761 144089 144353 144202 144625 144815 145314 145534 145970
2007 146033 146066 146334 145610 145901 146058 145886 145670 146231 145937 146584 146272
2008 146407 146183 146143 146173 145925 145725 145479 145167 145056 144778 144068 143324
2009 142201 141687 140822 140720 140292 139978 139794 139409 138791 138393 138590 137960
2010 138511 138698 138952 139382 139353 139092 138991 139267 139378 139084 138909 139206
2011 139323 139573 139864 139674 139779 139334 139296 139627 140025 140302 140580
 
Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey
Original Data Value

Series Id: LNS12000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Employment Level
Labor force status: Employed
Type of data: Number in thousands
Age: 16 years and over
Years: 2001 to 2011

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2001 137778 137612 137783 137299 137092 136873 137071 136241 136846 136392 136238 136047
2002 135701 136438 136177 136126 136539 136415 136413 136705 137302 137008 136521 136426
2003 137417 137482 137434 137633 137544 137790 137474 137549 137609 137984 138424 138411
2004 138472 138542 138453 138680 138852 139174 139556 139573 139487 139732 140231 140125
2005 140245 140385 140654 141254 141609 141714 142026 142434 142401 142548 142499 142752
2006 143150 143457 143741 143761 144089 144353 144202 144625 144815 145314 145534 145970
2007 146033 146066 146334 145610 145901 146058 145886 145670 146231 145937 146584 146272
2008 146407 146183 146143 146173 145925 145725 145479 145167 145056 144778 144068 143324
2009 142201 141687 140822 140720 140292 139978 139794 139409 138791 138393 138590 137960
2010 138511 138698 138952 139382 139353 139092 138991 139267 139378 139084 138909 139206
2011 139323 139573 139864 139674 139779 139334 139296 139627 140025 140302 140580
Even the numbers you post show Bush never had 52 conecutive months of job growth ... why do you keep lying, even in the face of your own numbers?
 
Nor is anyone forcing you to reply to my posting either...But you did....Sooooo.


j-mac

Umm, I'm not the one who is doing things I find annoying, you are. Who knows why except I guess you like being annoyed.
 
just when no one thought it possible.

When Clinton was doing his thing on the famous blue dress, I thought we could do no worse. Wrong.
When Bush was invading Iraq and running up massive deficits, I thought we could do no worse. Wrong again.
Now that Obama has run up even more massive deficits, dare we think we can do no worse?

See the republican hopefuls?
 
Even the numbers you post show Bush never had 52 conecutive months of job growth ... why do you keep lying, even in the face of your own numbers?

It has been reported here that Obama had 21 straight months of net job growth. Please show those to us?

2009 142201 141687 140822 140720 140292 139978 139794 139409 138791 138393 138590 137960
2010 138511 138698 138952 139382 139353 139092 138991 139267 139378 139084 138909 139206
2011 139323 139573 139864 139674 139779 139334 139296 139627 140025 140302 140580

Private sector Job growth, NOT 21 straight months for Obama but 48 straight months for Bush then one month down before going up again

Employment, Hours, and Earnings from the Current Employment Statistics survey (National)
Original Data Value

Series Id: CES0500000001
Seasonally Adjusted
Super Sector: Total private
Industry: Total private
NAICS Code: -
Data Type: ALL EMPLOYEES, THOUSANDS
Years: 2001 to 2011

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2001 111634 111624 111555 111227 111146 110910 110737 110544 110276 109918 109575 109368
2002 109214 109054 108989 108892 108814 108824 108732 108671 108659 108772 108758 108595
2003 108640 108484 108286 108252 108274 108233 108231 108266 108421 108570 108611 108724
2004 108882 108913 109213 109437 109747 109841 109883 109984 110135 110465 110493 110624
2005 110718 110949 111095 111441 111583 111847 112122 112311 112392 112492 112796 112934
2006 113247 113533 113795 113961 113965 114049 114200 114347 114432 114438 114628 114803
2007 114993 115051 115251 115308 115419 115469 115486
115391 115396 115470 115568 115606
2008 115610 115482 115395 115209 114969 114752 114487 114170 113736 113245 112458 111822
2009 110981 110260 109473 108700 108374 107936 107649 107434 107221 106971 106937 106835
2010 106793 106772 106916 107145 107193 107258 107351 107461 107570 107713 107841 108008
2011 108102 108363 108582 108823 108922 108997 109170 109242 109462 109579 109719
 
Last edited:
I agree.

So, how does he get himself nominated? How does he gain the support of the Evangelicals who are hung up on his religion?

If they want to bring up Romney's religion it will renew Obama's 20 year relationship with the wacky Reverend Wright.

I doubt the Dems would want to go there.
 
If they want to bring up Romney's religion it will renew Obama's 20 year relationship with the wacky Reverend Wright.

I doubt the Dems would want to go there.

As far as the Dems are concerned...that issue was put to bed and Obama walks on religious water.

I bet they can't wait to bring up Romney's "strange religion". By they, the talking heads for the dems.
 
As far as the Dems are concerned...that issue was put to bed and Obama walks on religious water.

I bet they can't wait to bring up Romney's "strange religion". By they, the talking heads for the dems.

Then, if the majority of Americans fall for that strategy, the country deserves what it gets.

But I have more faith in the American people than that.
 
As far as the Dems are concerned...that issue was put to bed and Obama walks on religious water.

I bet they can't wait to bring up Romney's "strange religion". By they, the talking heads for the dems.


If that is the case I can't remember the last time we saw the first family coming out of any church or place of worship in DC....three years and still looking?


j-mac
 


September 19, 2010

President Obama and his family attended services this morning at St. John’s Church, which is on the other side of Lafayette Square from the White House.

St. John’s, often visited by presidents, is Episcopalian.

The visit comes a month after a Pew Research Center poll said that nearly one in five Americans erroneously believe Obama is a Muslim…

We have always thought that all the talk about Obama being a Muslim was utter nonsense. Everyone knows that Muslims were staunchly anti-Communist, because Communists tend to be staunchly atheist.

The first family members all went up for communion, led by the president.

Had they gone to ‘confession’ earlier?

This is Obama’s third visit to St. John’s Church. He also attended services there on Jan. 20, 2009, just a few hours before his inauguration.

Here are some more details from the pool reporter, Louise Radnofsky of The Wall Street Journal:

http://sweetness-light.com/archive/obama-and-family-finally-go-to-church

Wow, 4 times in three years....What a model Christian.


j-mac
 
If they want to bring up Romney's religion it will renew Obama's 20 year relationship with the wacky Reverend Wright.

I doubt the Dems would want to go there.

Not the Dems, the evangelicals. Before he can run against Obama, he has to get the nomination. Evangelicals, the Christian Right, wouldn't vote for a Democrat if he were running against Voldemort.
 
Not the Dems, the evangelicals. Before he can run against Obama, he has to get the nomination. Evangelicals, the Christian Right, wouldn't vote for a Democrat if he were running against Voldemort.

They might not vote for Obama ... and they might not vote at all if the choice is between Obama and a member of a cult.
 
I keep on hearing more good job news, every day.

Yep, I'll bet unemployment is down to 8% by June...mayb even March.
 
2) "Economy Made Few Gains in Bush Years", declared the Washington Post earlier this week. And while the story grudgingly acknowledged the 52-straight months of job growth, it dismissed any economic gains as the ephemeral product of the housing bubble and wild-spending consumers. Except ... that worker productivity -- the most important long-term indicator of the core health and competitiveness of an economy -- has risen at a really impressive 2.6 annual rate during the Bush years vs. 2.0 percent for Clinton and 1.6 percent for Reagan. (That factoid from the Wall Street Journal.) This is important stuff. It's one big reason why the World Economic Forum says the U.S. has the most competitive economy in the world. The economic rebound after the pro-growth 2003 tax cuts was no mirage.

WTF??? You're still pedaling that lie EVEV AFTER BEING SHOWN the BLS numbers which proved Bush never had 52 consecutive months of job growth??

I guess the only results you care about are the ones you make up.


Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey
Original Data Value

Series Id: LNS12000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Employment Level
Labor force status: Employed
Type of data: Number in thousands
Age: 16 years and over
Years: 2001 to 2011

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2001 137778 137612 137783 137299 137092 136873 137071 136241 136846 136392 136238 136047
2002 135701 136438 136177 136126 136539 136415 136413 136705 137302 137008 136521 136426
2003 137417 137482 137434 137633 137544 137790 137474 137549 137609 137984 138424 138411
2004 138472 138542 138453 138680 138852 139174 139556 139573 139487 139732 140231 140125
2005 140245 140385 140654 141254 141609 141714 142026 142434 142401 142548 142499 142752
2006 143150 143457 143741 143761 144089 144353 144202 144625 144815 145314 145534 145970
2007 146033 146066 146334 145610 145901 146058 145886 145670 146231 145937 146584 146272
2008 146407 146183 146143 146173 145925 145725 145479 145167 145056 144778 144068 143324
Help me out here, Con ... what am I missing? You claim we had 52 consecutive months of job growth but when I look at the numbers you posted, the most I see is 8 consecutive months.
 
Help me out here, Con ... what am I missing? You claim we had 52 consecutive months of job growth but when I look at the numbers you posted, the most I see is 8 consecutive months.

Addition and subtraction are a little bit above his pay grade. ;)
 
It has been reported here that Obama had 21 straight months of net job growth. Please show those to us?

2009 142201 141687 140822 140720 140292 139978 139794 139409 138791 138393 138590 137960
2010 138511 138698 138952 139382 139353 139092 138991 139267 139378 139084 138909 139206
2011 139323 139573 139864 139674 139779 139334 139296 139627 140025 140302 140580

Private sector Job growth, NOT 21 straight months for Obama but 48 straight months for Bush then one month down before going up again

Employment, Hours, and Earnings from the Current Employment Statistics survey (National)
Original Data Value

Series Id: CES0500000001
Seasonally Adjusted
Super Sector: Total private
Industry: Total private
NAICS Code: -
Data Type: ALL EMPLOYEES, THOUSANDS
Years: 2001 to 2011

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2001 111634 111624 111555 111227 111146 110910 110737 110544 110276 109918 109575 109368
2002 109214 109054 108989 108892 108814 108824 108732 108671 108659 108772 108758 108595
2003 108640 108484 108286 108252 108274 108233 108231 108266 108421 108570 108611 108724
2004 108882 108913 109213 109437 109747 109841 109883 109984 110135 110465 110493 110624
2005 110718 110949 111095 111441 111583 111847 112122 112311 112392 112492 112796 112934
2006 113247 113533 113795 113961 113965 114049 114200 114347 114432 114438 114628 114803
2007 114993 115051 115251 115308 115419 115469 115486
115391 115396 115470 115568 115606
2008 115610 115482 115395 115209 114969 114752 114487 114170 113736 113245 112458 111822
2009 110981 110260 109473 108700 108374 107936 107649 107434 107221 106971 106937 106835
2010 106793 106772 106916 107145 107193 107258 107351 107461 107570 107713 107841 108008
2011 108102 108363 108582 108823 108922 108997 109170 109242 109462 109579 109719

Why do you post LNS12000000 numbers for Obama but post CES0500000001 Numbers for Bush? In my world that's called comparing apples to oranges. :liar
 
Back
Top Bottom