> > In article <Jason-1210121728280...@66-53-218-50.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com>,
> >  Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

> > > In article <dfritzin-5067E2.18380712102...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> > > David Fritzinger <dfrit...@nospamtome.hotmail.com> wrote:

> > > > In article
> > > > <Jason-1210121411230...@66-53-212-104.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com>,
> > > >  Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

> > > > > In article <XnsA0EA9FB496613nomailcomcast...@216.196.121.131>,
> > > > > Mitchell
> > > > > Holman <nomailcomcast.net> wrote:

> > > > > > Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in
> > > > > > news:Jason-1210121324250001@66-53-212-104.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com:

> > > > > > > In article <hlwdjsd2-E6CC06.23365911102...@news.giganews.com>,
> Jeanne
> > > > > > > Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > >> In article
> > > > > > >> <Jason-1110122251170...@67-150-123-119.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com>,
> > > > > > >>  Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

> > > > > > >> > In article <XnsA0E9D43D7BCE2nomailcomcast...@216.196.121.131>,
> > > > > > >> > Mitchell Holman <nomailcomcast.net> wrote:

> > > > > > >> > > Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in

> news:Jason-1110121843470001@66-53-208-133.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com:

> > > > > > >> > > > In article <5MJds.33136$ql1.2...@fed12.iad>, Caranx latus
> > > > > > >> > > > <aug.r...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > >> > > >> Jason wrote:
> > > > > > >> > > >> > In article <nMEds.164$NT3...@fe43.iad>, Caranx latus
> > > > > > >> > > > <aug.r...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > > > >> > > >> <snip>

> > > > > > >> > > >> >>>>>> Repeating the question *again*: If you can't
> trust the
> > > > > > >> > > >> >>>>>> results from the BLS now, what makes you think the
> > > > > > >> > > >> >>>>>> results were *ever* trustworthy?

> > > > > > >> > > >> >>>>> I believe they were trustworthy until the last
> > > > > > >> > > >> >>>>> couple
> > > > > > >> > > >> >>>>> of
> > > > > > >> > > >> >>>>> months.

> > > > > > >> > > >> >>>> What leads you to the conclusion that the numbers
> hadn't
> > > > > > >> > > >> >>>> been manipulated earlier than that?

> > > > > > >> > > >> >>> They seemed to be in line with what I observed in my
> > > > > > >> > > >> >>> city.

> > > > > > >> > > >> >> Explain further, please. Tell me about your
> > > > > > >> > > >> >> observations.

> > > > > > >> > > >> > Lots of stores in major shopping centers that have
> gone out
> > > > > > >> > > >> > of business.

> > > > > > >> > > >> That's not much of an explanation, Jason. It's also not
> > > > > > >> > > >> much
> > > > > > >> > > >> of a sample size nor is it a representative cross section
> > > > > > >> > > >> of
> > > > > > >> > > >> society.

> > > > > > >> > > >> However, pressing on...

> > > > > > >> > > >> Could you explain the methodology by which you were able
> > > > > > >> > > >> to
> > > > > > >> > > >> use the number of stores closed to arrive at the
> > > > > > >> > > >> conclusion
> > > > > > >> > > >> that the BLS unemployment rates were generally correct?

> > > > > > >> > > >> I hope this doesn't turn out to be one of those

> well-my-left-knee-is-aching-so-the-unemployment-rate-should-be-
> > > > > > >> > > > a
> > > > > > >> > > > bout-8. 1% things.

> > > > > > >> > > > These are more of my observations:

> > > > > > >> > > > The Black unemployment rate is 13.2 percent; the Latino
> > > > > > >> > > > unemployment rate is 9.9 percent and the unemployment
> rate for
> > > > > > >> > > > people between the ages of 18-29 is ll.8 percent.

> > > > > > >> > > > The U6 Unemployment rate is 14.7 percent.

> > > > > > >> > > > Time Magazine is a very liberal magazine and they referred
> > > > > > >> > > > to
> > > > > > >> > > > the recovery as an anemic recovery.

> > > > > > >> > >     They are right.

> > > > > > >> > >     Bush and the Republicans wrecked the economy badly,
> > > > > > >> > > and it will take years to get back to the prosperity
> > > > > > >> > > we had under Clinton.

> > > > > > >> > >     And you want undo all that by voting Republican?

> > > > > > >> > > Romney�s team starts to look like Bush�s
> > > > > > >> > > Washington Times, May 10, 2012

> > > > > > >> > > Ed Gillespie served as President George W. Bush�s right-
> > > > > > >> > > hand man and now is a top political adviser to presumptive
> > > > > > >> > > Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney.

> > > > > > >> > > R. Glenn Hubbard and Greg Mankiwled Mr. Bush's Council
> > > > > > >> > > of Economic Advisers. Now they are Mr. Romney�s economic
> > > > > > >> > > brain trusts.

> > > > > > >> > > The same can be said for his foreign policy team, where
> > > > > > >> > > Mr. Romney boasts a number of faces from the Bush old
> > > > > > >> > > guard, including former CIA Director Michael V. Hayden
> > > > > > >> > > and former Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff.
> > > > > > >> > > Today, they are the former Massachusetts governor�s go-to
> > > > > > >> > > guys on counterterrorism.

> > > > > > >> > > Mr. Romney�s corps of advisers, in fact, is heavily
> > > > > > >> > > salted with figures who surrounded the 43rd president
> > > > > > >> > > as he watched over massive increases in federal spending,
> > > > > > >> > > the creation of more government programs and the invasions
> > > > > > >> > > of Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as the nation-building
> > > > > > >> > > efforts that followed.

> > > > > > >> > > "There are a couple of new faces, but not nearly as many
> > > > > > >> > > as there should be," Republican strategist Michael McKenna
> > > > > > >> > > said. "The terrible thing is that [Mr. Romney] is helping
> > > > > > >> > > Obama make his case: �Hey, we are going back to the Bush
> > > > > > >> > > administration.�"

> > > > > > >> > > http://tinyurl.com/8ucwgxn

> > > > > > >> > And Obama has had about 4 years to fix the economy and he has
> > > > > > >> > failed. Tell me again why you will vote for him.

> > > > > > >> He has not failed. The economy is much better than it was when
> > > > > > >> he
> > > > > > >> took office.

> > > > > > >> If the Republicans weren't so treasonously obstructionist,
> we'd be a
> > > > > > >> whole lot further along, but those are YOUR people. You
> > > > > > >> obviously
> > > > > > >> are
> > > > > > >> in favor of letting Americans suffer unnecessarily for political
> > > > > > >> gain.

> > > > > > > And all Americans would be better off if Obama extended the
> Bush2 tax
> > > > > > > cuts for another year.

> > > > > >      If the Bush tax cuts were so great why did
> > > > > > unemployment AND the debt go up after each one
> > > > > > of them?

> > > > > There are many factors responsible for unemployment rates. For
> > > > > example,
> > > > > if
> > > > > various countries such as Spain suffer downturns--they are less
> likely to
> > > > > order products from America so that could cause the unemployment rate
> > > > > to
> > > > > rise.

> > > > Jason, at the time of the Bush tax cuts, the economies of Europe and
> > > > Asia were doing quite well. Therefore, that bit of malarky just doesn't
> > > > fly. Try again.

> > > > > The debt always seems to go up regardless of what happens in the
> economy.
> > > > > There are many reasons for that--such as spending to fund entitlement
> > > > > programs.

> > > > Didn't go up at the end of the Clinton Administration. Even so, it took
> > > > Clinton about 6 years to dig us out of the mess Reagan and Bush Sr. got
> > > > us into. Why do you think Obama can get us out of the far worse mess
> > > > that Bush Jr. got us into in only 4 years?

> > > He promised us that he could do it doing his first campaign--did he keep
> > > that promise?

> > You didn't answer my question. Try again.

> OK--Clinton done a great job but he was making major progress after 4
> years. Is Obama making major progress?