Who do Americans trust and why we should elect a nurse for President

Conservatives—studies show they are better organized than liberals—are great at spreading cherry-picked facts (better known as propaganda, lies and misinformation) to fool and confuse America, and I read an example of this recently. I wasn’t sure it was an example until I did some Google digging.

Newsmax.com (March 23, 2014) reported a Fox News Poll that claimed President Obama’s Approval Ratings Keep Sliding. “The Fox poll shows 54% of Americans disapprove of how he has done his job.” Reverse that and he enjoys a 46% approval rating.

But what happens when we compare President Obama’s approval rating with others. For instance, the Republican Party.

Examiner.com reported in January 2014 that “According to a recent Washington Post-ABC News poll, 80 percent of Americans don’t trust the Republican Party.”

Wow, does that mean only 20% trust them—less than half Obama’s trust factor?

I wonder why neoconservative Rupert Murdock’s Fox News didn’t report that fact.

Did you know that the Libertarian Koch brothers are spending tens of millions to influence the 2014 Congressional elections? Probably not, but they are. You may want to read “Covert Operations” published in The New Yorker to discover just who these billionaire brothers are and how they are subverting democracy and don’t forget, they are libertarians.

The New Yorker says: The Kochs are longtime libertarians who believe in drastically lower personal and corporate taxes, minimal social services for the needy, and much less oversight of industry—especially environmental regulation.” In addition, “Koch Industries (is) one of the top ten air polluters in the United States.”

Do you trust the Koch brothers now?

Then I wanted to know how many American’s trust libertarians—after all the Koch brothers are the wealthiest, most powerful libertarians in America—according to Politico.com on September 11, 2013, “The poll surveyed all voters, not just those on the right, and overall 27 percent said they didn’t know enough to offer an opinion of libertarianism. About 40 percent of 18-to-32-year-olds view the word ‘libertarian’ favorably, although about a third don’t know what it means.” Having 60% of Americans either ignorant of what libertarianism means or against it still isn’t as good as the 46% who trust President Obama.

What about the tea party movement? After all, they are very loud. DailyKos.com says, “Americans still wouldn’t trust them with scissors.” A recent Bloomberg National Poll asked “Do you consider yourself a supporter of the Tea Party Movement?” Only 24% said yes and 66% said no. A recent NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll had the same results.

The Democrats don’t do much better with 72% of Americans lacking confidence in them—doesn’t say anything about not trusting them, just a lack of confidence. However, according to Politicususa.com, “Americans View Democrats as More Ethical and Honest. … Despite spending years attacking the character of President Obama and the Democrats, a new Pew Research Center survey found that the American people trust Democrats more than Republicans 41% to 31%.”

Is there anyone Americans trust more than Obama? Gallup answered that question with a December 17, 2013 poll. I think that’s recent enough to still be trusted.

Eighty-two percent of Americans trust Nurses and 70% grade school teachers. At the bottom are political lobbyists at 6% and members of Congress at 8%. Even newspaper reporters were trusted by only 21%. In fact, 34% think the wealthy are less honest.

I then wondered why a nurse or grade school teacher hasn’t run for president. But since we don’t have a nurse or grade school teacher as President, I guess we’ll just have to live with President Obama who does a whole lot better with the trust factor than everyone who’s badmouthing him in the media—like neoconservative Rupert Murdock’s Fox News and all those negative political ads the infamous libertarian Koch brothers are paying for to make democrats running for reelection look bad so Americans lose trust in them and vote for a Republican instead.

Since I was a teacher for thirty years and taught mostly 7th, 8th and 9th grades, I wanted to know what Americans thought about all public school teachers, not just grade school teachers. The Christian Science Monitor reported last August 2013 that “Americans remain largely critical of the US education system as a whole, but parents, especially, are increasingly pleased with their neighborhood schools and more displeased (unhappy) with the rising use of standardized, multiple choice tests to evaluate, and potentially punish, teachers, a new Phi Delta Kappa/Gallup poll suggests.” And “72 percent of respondents say they trust the men and women who are ‘teaching children in the public schools.’”

Maybe a nurse should run for president and a teacher for vice president. In fact, let’s fire Congress and fill those seats with nurses and public school teachers and let them run the country. In the meantime, President Obama still has the highest approval rating compared to both parties, Congress, the tea party people, the media, neoconservatives and libertarians. Do you think we can trust the media to report that?

_______________

Lloyd Lofthouse is the award-winning author of My Splendid Concubine [3rd edition]. When you love a Chinese woman, you marry her family and culture too. This is the love story Sir Robert Hart did not want the world to discover.

His latest novel is the multiple-award winning Running with the Enemy. He was a public school teacher for thirty years (1975 – 2005)

To follow this Blog via E-mail see upper left-hand column and click on “FOLLOW!”

Advertisements

Government Shutdown—no big deal—it’s all political razzmatazz

NPR.org says, “Drawn-out fights over spending bills are nothing new for Congress. But that’s where the fights used to stay: in Congress. The rest of the country didn’t have to pay much attention to countdown clocks and all this drama. In the ’60s and ’70s down until 1980, it was not taken that seriously at all,” says Charles Tiefer, a former legal adviser to the House of Representatives, who now teaches at the University of Baltimore Law School. 

If budget battles were pretty much ignored by the voting public before the 1980s, why is a federal government shut down such a hot-button issue today?

The answer is simple but shocking: after President Ronald Reagan’s veto killed the Fairness Doctrine in 1987—an FCC policy introduced in 1949 that was designed to keep the media more transparent and honest in its reporting and opinions—an industry that was dying, AM radio, saw the explosion of Rush Limbaugh and others like him as they launched conservative talk radio claiming to be the voice of a ‘silent majority’.

With the Fairness Doctrine gone, these conservative voices were free to mislead all they wanted. After all, the 1st Amendment that protects the freedom of expression in America from government intervention says nothing about being honest.

I think that most Americans have heard of the liberal media and its bias—after all the conservative media machine never let us forget—but few may realize that there is also a conservative media machine much larger than just AM talk radio.

The following list is not complete but it will give you an idea of how large and influential the conservative media machine has become: Source: Watch.org [to see a list of liberal news outlets, click on this link from Watch.org].

Accuracy in Media

Avinu News Avinu News.com

Citizens United

The Conservative Voice conservativevoice.com

Conservatives Forum conservativesforum.com

Constitution Society constitution.org

Cybercast News Service

Drudge Report

Ether Zone etherzone.com

The Federal Observer federalobserver.com

The Third Report ThirdReport.com

Federal Review federalreview.com

Fox News: Bill O’Reilly (O’Reilly Factor); Shepard Smith; Greta Van Susteren; Brit Hume; Rita Crosby

Free Republic

FrontPageMag.com

GOPUSA

Hannity & Colmes (Fox News)

Human Events Online humaneventsonline.com

LewRockwell.com lewrockwell.com

Media Research Center: “Tracking Liberal Media Bias Since 1996.”

MensNewsDaily.com

Move America Forward

Mullings mullings.com

National Review Online

NewsMax NewsMax.com

The Northern Right northernright.com

The Patriotist patriotist.com

The Third Report ThirdReport.com

Restoring America restoringamerica.org

RightMarch.com / rightmarch.com

Right Wing News rightwingnews.com

Rush Limbaugh

Sierra Times sierratimes.com

Talon News (see article)

Town Hall

Wall Street Journal Opinion opinionjournal.com

Washington Times

Weekly Standard

WorldNetDaily

Now that US citizens have been stirred up by these two battling media machines, how has this political propaganda influenced America?

On September 25, 2013, a CBS poll reported, “Eighty percent of Americans say threatening a government shutdown during budget debates is not an acceptable way to negotiate; only 16 percent think it is.”

A Washington Post ABC News Poll found that “Barely one in four (26 percent) approve of congressional Republicans’ handling of budget negotiation …”

Reuters reported, “Forty-six percent said that if government agencies and programs start closing on Tuesday, they would fault Republicans in Congress while 36 percent said they would blame Obama, the CNN survey found. Thirteen percent said both would be at fault.

“About 60 percent of the 803 U.S. adults polled said they want lawmakers to pass a budget agreement to avoid the shutdown, according to the telephone survey conducted over the weekend.” Note: Reuters is an international news agency headquarters in London, United Kingdom, and Reuters has a strict policy toward upholding journalistic objectivity.

The truth is there is nothing to worry about.  Gallup reported on October 1, 2013 that “History Suggests Shutdown Stakes May Not Be That High—As the U.S. government shuts down for the first time since 1996, historical Gallup data show the shutdown 17 years ago had either no effect or a short-term impact on Americans’ views of the U.S. and of the political players involved.”

In conclusion, I think the American people should be more concerned about the fact that the private-sector media in America is no longer free to report objective news and opinions, because the media is mostly controlled by one political machine or the other and there is little we hear or see that can be trusted.

_______________________

Lloyd Lofthouse is a former U.S. Marine, Vietnam Veteran and English-journalism teacher.

His latest novel is the award winning Running with the Enemy that started life as a memoir and then became a fictional suspense thriller. Blamed for a crime he did not commit while serving in Vietnam, his country considers him a traitor. Ethan Card is a loyal U.S. Marine desperate to prove his innocence or he will never go home again.

And the woman he loves and wants to save was trained to hate and kill Americans.

To follow this Blog via E-mail see upper left-hand column and click on “FOLLOW!”

National Debt Info-Graphic by President 1945 – 2012

By president, starting with Truman in 1945, this info-graphic shows the growth of the national debt, the growth of the interest on the national debt, the lowest and highest tax rates at the beginning of each president’s term, the average GDP per president and the average unemployment rate during each president’s term.

In addition, at the bottom, the senate and house majorities are included for each president. Red is for the GOP (Republicans) and blue is for the Democrats. This way, anyone may see which party held the majority in one or both houses of Congress during periods where the debt increased the fastest. Starting with Reagan to Obama but not including Obama, the fastest gains were when a Republican was president and the GOP held a majority in one or both houses of Congress.

Using all of the data on this info-graphic, you may discover who holds the most responsibility by president and/or Congress for the growth of the national debt.

Starting with President Carter, pay attention to the growth of the debt in comparison to the changing tax rates and you may discover one of the reasons for the more than $16 Trillion national debt.

Also pay attention to the average unemployment rates of each president and you will learn that as the taxes went down, federal spending went up, and unemployment climbed (on average).  Growth of annual GDP also started to drop as taxes dropped. From Truman – Ford, annual GDP averaged 3.85%, but from Carter to G. W. Bush, GDP averaged 2.96%.

Unemployment also went up as taxes went down. Truman to Ford, the average unemployment rate was 5.41% (and that includes the 8.09% under Ford).

From Carter to G. W. Bush, the average unemployment rate increased to 6.17%.

In fact, starting with Reagan, the total debt each president is responsible for includes the interest to December 2012.

Infographic on National Debt by President

– CLICK on INFO-GRAPHIC for LARGER IMAGE! –

* Reagan was responsible for lowering taxes from seventeen brackets to two brackets and those rates appear in G. H. W. Bush’s column

** The G. W. Bush tax cuts appear in President Obama’s column. However, in 2008, his last year in office, it was the worst year for jobs since 1945 and the unemployment rate was 7.2% in December. The total number of jobs lost in 2008 was 2.6 million. In addition, under-employment reached a record high from 715,000 to 8 million people, the highest since such records were first kept in 1955.  Source: CNN.com

Then in 2008, G. W. Bush’s last year as president, the average GDP for the 4th quarter dropped to almost a minus10%. Source: Treasury.gov

*** Unemployment reached a high of 10% in October 2009 while GDP retreated to a minus 2.6%.  The lowest unemployment rate reached 7.8% in September 2012 (Obama’s presidency does not end until 2016 so we do not have average unemployment for his term or a final average GDP). Source of data: bls.gov

Total GDP growth since 2009 to the first quarter in 2012 has been + 6.8%. Source: Treasury.gov

Data and facts mostly from primary sources:

Note: Deductions are not accounted for

  • Tax Rate in 1945 under Truman (listed tax rates and brackets apply to all taxpayers with twenty-five tax brackets) – average unemployment during his term was 4.26% while GDP grew + 4.82%. Note: During the Great Depression, unemployment reached as high as almost 25%.

23% on earnings up to $2,000 but not over – adjusted for inflation $24,931
50% on earnings of $14,000 to $16,000 – adjusted for inflation $174,517 – 199,499
75% on earnings of $44,000 to $50,000 – adjusted for inflation $174,517 – 199,449
94% on earnings over $200,000 – adjusted for inflation $2,493,107

  • Tax Rate in 1953 under Eisenhower (married filing separately with twenty-four/twenty-six tax brackets) – average unemployment was 4.89% during his term while GDP grew + 3%.

22.2% on earnings up to $2,000 but not over – adjusted for inflation $16,807
53% on earnings of $14,000 to $16,000 – adjusted for inflation $117,652 – 168,882
75% on earnings of $44,000 to $50,000 – adjusted for inflation $369,764 – 420,187
92% on earnings over $200,000 – adjusted for inflation $1,680,746

  • Tax Rate in 1961 under Kennedy (married filing jointly with twenty-four/twenty-six tax brackets) – average unemployment was 5.97% during his term while GDP grew + 4.65%.

20% on earnings up to $4,000 but not over – adjusted for inflation $30,017
50% on earnings of $32,000 to $36,000 – adjusted for inflation $240,139 – 270,156
75% on earnings of $100,000 – 120,000- adjusted for inflation $750,434 – 900,520
91% on earnings over $400,000 – adjusted for inflation $3,001,734

  • Tax Rate in 1963 under LBJ (married filing jointly with twenty-four/twenty-six tax brackets) –average unemployment was 4.17% during his term while GDP grew + 5.05%.

20% on earnings up to $4,000 but not over – adjusted for inflation $29,331
50% on earnings of $32,000 to $36,000 – adjusted for inflation $234,645 – 263,976
75% on earnings of $100,000 – 120,000- adjusted for inflation $733,267 – 879,920
91% on earnings over $400,000 – adjusted for inflation $2,933,067

  • Tax Rate in 1969 under Nixon (married filing jointly with twenty-five/thirty-three tax brackets) – average unemployment was 5.09% during his term while GDP grew + 3%

14% on earnings up to $1,000 but not over – adjusted for inflation $6,114
36% on earnings of $24,000 to $28,000 – adjusted for inflation $164,733 – 171,644
53% on earnings of $52,000 – 64,000- adjusted for inflation $317,922 – 391,289
70% on earnings over $200,000 – adjusted for inflation $1,222,777

  • Tax Rate in 1974 under Ford (married filing jointly with twenty-five/thirty-three tax brackets) – average unemployment was 8.09% during his term while GDP grew +2.6%.

14% on earnings up to $1,000 but not over – adjusted for inflation $4,551
36% on earnings of $24,000 to $28,000 – adjusted for inflation $109,231 – 127,437
53% on earnings of $52,000 – 64,000- adjusted for inflation $236,668 – 291,284
70% on earnings over $200,000 – adjusted for inflation $910,262

  • Tax Rate in 1977 under Carter (married filing Jointly with twenty-six/thirty-four tax brackets) – average unemployment was 6.54% during his term while GDP grew +3.25%

0% on earnings up to $3,200 but not over – adjusted for inflation $11,848
36% on earnings of $27,200 to $31,200 – adjusted for inflation $100,712 – 115,522
53% on earnings of $55,200 – 67,200- adjusted for inflation $204,385 – 248,817
70% on earnings over $203,200 – adjusted for inflation $752,375

  • Tax Rate in 1981 under Reagan (married filing jointly with sixteen/seventeen tax brackets) – average unemployment was 7.54% during his term while GDP grew 3.4%

0% on earnings up to $3,400 but not over – adjusted for inflation $8,393
37% on earnings of $29,200 to $35,200 – adjusted for inflation $73,806 – 86,888
54% on earnings of $60,000 – 85,600 – adjusted for inflation $148,105 – 211,297
70% on earnings over $215,400 – adjusted for inflation $531698

  • Tax Rate in 1989 under G. H. W. Bush (married filing jointly with two tax brackets) – average unemployment was 6.3% during his term while GDP grew 2.17%

15% on earnings up to $30,950 but not over – adjusted for inflation $56,004
28% on earnings over $30,950 – adjusted for inflation $56,004

  • Tax Rate in 1993 under Clinton (married filing jointly with five tax brackets) – average unemployment was 5.2% during his term while GDP grew 3.88%.

15% on earning up to $36,900 but not over – adjusted for inflation $57,298
39.6% on earnings over $250,000 – adjusted for inflation $388,200

  • Tax Rate in 2001 under G. W. Bush (married filing jointly with five tax brackets) – average unemployment was 5.27% during his term while GDP grew 2.09%.

15% on earning up to $45,200 but not over – adjusted for inflation $57,267
39.1% on earnings over $297,350 – adjusted for inflation $376,725

  • Tax Rate in 2009 under President Obama (married filing jointly with six tax brackets) – average  unemployment reached a high of 10% in October 2009 while GDP shrunk a minus – 2.6%.  The lowest unemployment reached 7.8% in September 2012 (Obama’s presidency does not end until 2016 so we do not have average unemployment or GDP for his term). Source: bls.gov

10% on earnings up to by not over $16,700 – adjusted for inflation $17,466
25% on earnings of $67,900 – 137,050 – adjusted for inflation $71,015 – $143,338
35% on earnings over $372,950 -adjusted for inflation $390,060

____________________________

According to Dave Manuel.com, “From 1948 through to 2009, the United States economy has grown by an average of 3.28% per year. … If we exclude Barack Obama due to incomplete data, then the worst performance was turned in by George W. Bush, as the economy grew by an average of 2.09% per year during his time as president.”

“Democrats have occupied the White House in 26 of the 62 years since 1948. Average GDP growth in the country over those 26 years has been 4.01%.

“Republicans have occupied the White House in 36 of the 62 years since 1948. Average GDP growth over those 36 years has been 2.75%.”

Do you know the difference between a primary fact gathering source, the media and an opinionated radio or TV talk show or Blog?

Answer: primary fact gathering sources are where the media, talk shows and Blogs get their facts. A few examples of primary fact gathering sources are the US Treasury, the Bureau of Labor Statists, the Centers for Disease Control, the FBI, the CIA Factbook and the World Bank.

However, then what the public hears may be distorted due to political and/or religious bias or political agenda.

The US Treasury reports that, “From 2009 to the present, federal revenues relative to the economy have been at their lowest levels in 60 years.

However, “Growth in the U.S. has outpaced that of other advanced economies (Germany, Euro area, Japan and UK) affected by the global financial crisis.

“Total GDP growth since 2009 to the first quarter in 2012 was + 6.8%.” But in the fourth quarter of 2008, G. W. Bush’s last year as president, average GDP was almost a minus10%.

Then by the 3rd quarter of 2009, GDP had returned to growth instead of loss and has stayed in the growth area since then. Source: Treasury.gov

Other sources used for this post:

Tax Foundation.org

Multpl.com – Unemployment

Truthful Politics.com

World Bank.org

Discover more from The Evolution of a National Burden

______________

Lloyd Lofthouse is the award-winning author of The Concubine Saga.

To follow this Blog via E-mail see upper left-hand column and click on “Follow”

The Accuracy of Nate Silver’s Predictions

Nate Silver is paid to write for The New York Times, but he doesn’t favor Republicans or Democrats in his predictions, because he predicts both Republican and Democratic winners in each state and in the national elections


– see what conservatives have to say about Nate Silver –
This video was published October 30, 2012.

Nate Silver’s forecast this morning has Obama winning 307 Electoral College votes to Romney’s 231 and this prediction is based on statistics collected from every political poll in America, and there are a lot of them from the local, state and national levels. Silver also has Obama winning the popular vote 50.5% to 48.3%.

In 2008, he correctly predicted the winners of all 35 Senate races and the presidential results in 49 out of 50 states. The only state he missed was Indiana, which went for Barack Obama by 1%.

In 2008, Silver projected electoral vote totals of 349 (based on a probabilistic projection) or 353 (based on fixed projections of each state).

Obama won with 365 Electoral College votes. Silver’s predictions matched the actual results everywhere except in Indiana and the 2nd congressional district of Nebraska, which awards an electoral vote separately from the rest of the state.

In 2010, Silver predicted 36 of the winners in 37 of the gubernatorial races—97.3% accuracy rate.

For the U.S. Senate Race of 2010, Silver predicted 6 of the 7 Republican winners—85.7% accuracy rate.

For the U.S. House of Representatives, Silver predicted 53 of the 63 wins by Republicans—84.1% accuracy rate.


– broadcast October 24, 2012 –

Silver’s prediction early this morning favors Obama 86.6% to Romney’s 13.4%.  Silver bases his predictions on computed mathematical formulas and the results change daily. He does not base his predictions on a hunch or his own feelings. This is not an emotional, gut-driven biased response.

If Silver is close a third time, he will become a legend.  By next Wednesday, we will know.

Discover Spinning Numbers to Manipulate Opinions

_______________________

Lloyd Lofthouse, a former U.S. Marine and Vietnam Veteran, is the award winning author of The Concubine Saga.

His latest novel is Running with the Enemy. Blamed for a crime he did not commit while serving in Vietnam, his country considers him a traitor. Ethan Card is a loyal U.S. Marine desperate to prove his innocence or he will never go home again.

And the woman he loves and wants to save was trained to hate and kill Americans.

To follow this Blog via E-mail see upper left-hand column and click on “FOLLOW!”

First 2012 Presidential Debate

I watched about fifteen minutes of the first debate then turned it off. I didn’t want to waste any more of my time. I had better things to do.

Instead, I waited for the fact checkers and the analysts to examine the claims made by Obama and Romney during the debate.

The morning after the debate, I learned that the perception was that Obama lost the first debate by a WIDE margin.

Further reading revealed that President Obama lost because he wasn’t as aggressive as Romney or should I say he only exaggerated and made half as many false claims as Romney did and many of Romney’s exaggerations were WHOPPERS.

For example: inflating the unemployment numbers from 12.5 million to 23 million compared to Obama inflating the number of jobs created to 5 million from the actual number of 4.63 million.

There is a HUGE difference between 370,000 jobs and 10.5 million unemployed people that did not exist.

Fact check.org said, “Romney came off as a serial exaggerator”.

I read the report from Fact Check.org and counted the exaggerations and false claims made by each of the White House contenders and discovered that Romney exaggerated twice as much as Obama and that Romney’s false claims made Obama look terrible, then President Obama stumbled defending himself against Romney’s false claims magnifying the perceptions of Americans watching the debates.


In fact, the exaggerations and false claims (a LIE  is a LIE no matter the term used to soften its impact) were so huge it is obvious that President Obama was not ready to deal with them.

If the majority of Americans that vote want the BIGGER liar to be its next President, the United States deserves who moves into the White House but beware the devil you do not know.

As an example, instead of regurgitating what Fact Check.org has already reported, I will point to one of Romney’s lies.  Romney claimed that Obama was responsible for an annual trillion dollar deficit without revealing the facts behind that claim (why would he?—the truth would sink his chance to move into the White House).

Romney said that the deficit doubled under Obama.  Not true. Obama inherited a $1.2 billion deficit and the deficits have remained (due to budget items mostly beyond any President’s control) at or above that level every year since because you cannot “get blood out of a rock” (my words).

What about the truth?

Fact Check.org said, “Obama added to the 2009 deficit, but not by much. We found that Obama was responsible at most for an additional $203 billion. The government ended $1.4 trillion in the red that year. The deficits were about $1.3 trillion each year for the next two years , and this fiscal year just ended with a shortfall of nearly $1.2 trillion.”

In one piece that I read this morning, it was mentioned that the Iraq  (2003 – 2011) and Afghan (2001 -) wars have been and are still being funded by borrowed money.

A point missed by everyone, it seems, was that no one made the connection that this borrowed money adds to the annual deficit and grows the interest on the annual deficit that adds to the national debt.

Cost of War.com says, “Total War Funding: $1.38 trillion has been allocated to date to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, including $121.1 billion in fiscal year 2012 (for a total of $1.5 Trillion—all borrowed adding to the national debt and the interest on that debt).

Let’s see what the interest is on debt that President Obama inherited and discover where the national debt comes from.

The National debt is currently $16 trillion and in 2012 the interest on that debt will be almost $360 billion. No matter how Romney or the GOP spins the facts, President Obama is not responsible for most of that national debt or its continued growth.

In fact, he inherited $13.76 Trillion (86%) of the national debt, and the interest that comes with that number. for 2012, the interest on each trillion dollars is $22.5 billion.  Do the math and you may discover that $309 billion of the interest on the national debt in 2012 comes from what President Obama inherited. In Obama’s first term (2009 – 2013), that adds up to $1.235 Trillion just in inherited interest.

To discover where all of the national debt came from by president, you may want to look at Table 4: Average annual deficit at Adelphi.edu to learn that the national debt we live with today started with Republican President Herbert Hoover, who left $42.5 billion in national debt when he was voted out of office in 1933.


Including President Hoover, GOP presidents are responsible for $8.73 Trillion of today’s national debt and $196.4 billion in interest for 2012, and Democratic presidents $5.02 Trillion in addition to $112.95 billion in interest for 2012.

F. D. Roosevelt and President Obama are the only Democratic presidents that added more than one trillion dollars to that debt and both presidents had to deal with war/s and each had an economic crisis that was inherited from GOP presidents.

When the Great Depression started in 1929, unemployment was less than 4%. During the one term that Herbert Hoover was President (1929 – 1933), unemployment exploded:

1929 – 3.2%
1930 – 8.9% unemployment
1931 – 16.3%
1932 – 24.1%
1933 – 24.9%

We cannot blame Hoover for the Great Depression. We can only blame him for how he handled the crises, but who did Hoover inherit the Great Depression from?

W. G. Harding (1921-1923) Republican
C. Coolidge (1923-1929) Republican

Then in 1933, F. D. Roosevelt (Democrat) was elected President and unemployment started to drop from Hoover’s high of 24.9%, and to achieve both putting people back to work and winning World War II, FDR borrowed $1.4 Trillion adding that sum to the national debt started by Hoover’s failed policies.

Unemployment under FDR:

1934 – 21.7%
1935 – 20.1%
1936 – 16.8%
1937 – 14.3%

In fact, by the end of 1941 when World War II started with the bombing of Pearl Harbor (December 7, 1941), unemployment was down to 10%. Franklin D. Roosevelt was President from 1933 – 1945 (he died in office).

How does President Obama’s unemployment numbers compare to the Great Depression era (NOTE: 2009 was the last year of President G. W. Bush’s policies and budgets—2010 marks the beginning of President Obama’s policies and budgets):

2008 – 4.70% unemployment
2009 – 7.30%
2010 – 9.90%
2011 – 9.8%
2012 – 8.10%

Compare and contrast unemployment for the early years of the Great Depression with President Obama’s first four years in office.  Because there has never been a financial crises equal to the Great Depression until the Great Recession in 2007-2008 inherited from Republican President G. W. Bush, we have nothing else to compare with.

Note that President Obama never had double digit unemployment rates.

Who did a better job keeping more Americans working during his first four years as President of the United States?

A. Barack Obama
B. Franklin D. Roosevelt
C. Herbert Hoover
D. Mitt Romney

Discover Twisting History for Fun and Profit – Maybe

_______________________

Lloyd Lofthouse, a former U.S. Marine and Vietnam Veteran, is the award winning author of The Concubine Saga.

His latest novel is Running with the Enemy. Blamed for a crime he did not commit while serving in Vietnam, his country considers him a traitor. Ethan Card is a loyal U.S. Marine desperate to prove his innocence or he will never go home again.

And the woman he loves and wants to save was trained to hate and kill Americans.

To follow this Blog via E-mail see upper left-hand column and click on “FOLLOW!”

Jobs: Digging for FACTS – Part 1/3

Reuters reported, “Jobs growth slowed sharply in August, setting the stage for the Federal Reserve to pump additional money into the sluggish economy next week and dealing a blow to President Barack Obama as he seeks re-election.”

This report from Reuters is very misleading as you will discover in this three part series. It all depends on how the reporter spins the numbers.

Let me explain.

Nonfarm payrolls increased (new jobs) only 96,000 last month, the Labor Department said on Friday, but in August 2012, there were 142,101,000 civilians working in the labor force while 12,544,000 were unemployed (an 8.1% unemployment rate). In addition, seven-million were job losers or persons who completed temporary jobs.

Another nine-hundred-and-forty-two thousand were labeled as lob leavers (they quit or retired).

What about the people that quit a job or retired and are being replaced—replacing people that quit or retire does not show as an increase in jobs because that job already existed and it isn’t a new job—it is an old job.

To make sense of all this, we will travel back in time to 2008.

In August 2011, there were 139,869,000 employed Americans working in the civilian labor force compared to 13,747,000 unemployed (an 8.9% unemployment rate).

In 2010, the civilian labor force was 139,064,000 and 14,825,000 were unemployed (9.6%).

In 2009, 139,877,000 civilians were employed and 14,265,000 were unemployed (9.3%).

In 2008, President G. W. Bush’s last full year in office and the year the global financial disaster exploded, 145,362,000 civilians were employed while 8,924,000 were unemployed (5.8%).

Now, let’s reverse the clock and move forward again:

By the end of 2009, 5.5 million civilian jobs were lost.

By the end of 2010, only 813,000 jobs were lost.

However, by the end of 2011, 805,000 jobs were added back to the civilian labor force and in one month, August 2012, 96,000 new jobs were created.

Even if new job creation stayed at the same rate as August, it means adding 1.15 million new jobs for 2012—another increase for the second year in a row, but 243,000 new jobs were added in January 2012; February saw a job gain of 227,000; March saw 120,000 new jobs; April added 115,000; May 69,000; June 80,000, and July 163,000.

ADD IT UP: For the first eight months of 2012, 1.113 million new jobs were added.

Someone that is stupid and/or ignorant will point at 2009, the year 5.5 million jobs were lost, the year President Obama was sworn into office, and claim, “Look what happened after he became president.  It is all his fault.”

NO, IT ISN’T!

The fact is that the 2009 budget, the financial disaster and the labor climate in the United States was inherited from President G. W. Bush. President Obama’s first budget was approved by Congress in 2010 and his stimulus package to create jobs still has not been totally implemented (and in some cases Republicans in Congress have blocked some of President Obama’s job stimulus plans). In fact, programs of this size are often phased in over several years. We will not see the results of much of what President Obama started until his second term. If he isn’t elected, any results we see in 2013 will be his—not the GOP presidential candidate.

Continued on September 8, 2012 in Jobs: Digging for FACTS – Part 2

_______________________

Lloyd Lofthouse, a former U.S. Marine and Vietnam Veteran, is the award winning author of The Concubine Saga.

His latest novel is Running with the Enemy. Blamed for a crime he did not commit while serving in Vietnam, his country considers him a traitor. Ethan Card is a loyal U.S. Marine desperate to prove his innocence or he will never go home again.

And the woman he loves and wants to save was trained to hate and kill Americans.

To follow this Blog via E-mail see upper left-hand column and click on “FOLLOW!”