Crazy Uncle Joe Travels to Michigan to Defend Stimulus (Where Unemployment is 14%) -Video
Posted by Jim Hoft on Tuesday, February 16, 2010, 4:42 PM
It’s an Obama world. Up is down. Square is round. Trucks are jokes. And, a 14% unemployment rate means the Stimulus Bill is working.
Joe Biden traveled to Michigan today to defend the Stimulus Bill that democrats passed one year ago.
The unemployment is 14% in Michigan today.
Biden insisted, “It’s working!”
The state lost another 162,000 jobs last year.
The Blog Prof has more on this thick coat of irony.
Only 6% of Americans believe the Spendulus bill created any jobs.
ADVERTISEMENT
-
Featured Story:
Busted!… Obama Headlined a DEMOCRAT SOCIALISTS OF AMERICA Event in 1996 **FLIER**
Published May 24, 2012 at 8:46 pm - 60 Comments
BigAlSouth commented:
Joe, if only balls were brains . . .
Chisum commented:
Joe Biden: Living proof of Obama’s incompetence
http://www.punditandpundette.com/2010/02/joe-biden-living-proof-of-obamas.html
Patman77 commented:
When you double speak; “it’s working. It’s working”, you double lie.
Ellie Light commented:
Remember only Obamao stands between us and Biden.
Is there really any difference?
Taqiyy. commented:
Hey Jim, what’s going on in the previous thread?
Swift boot is being requested. Starts at #11.
Betsy Ross commented:
Kinda like when US troops were arriving in Baghdad and Baghdad Bob was, like, what US troops, there are no US troops here…
that’s what Biden, et al remind me of…
Taqiyy. commented:
Ms. Ross, they’re all serving the same master. Right now, that is all they do. Just repeat whoppers, big ones, big obvious ones. Enough in the world are so blind that they don’t see, that this is effective.
The analogy now is way beyond the curtain scene (“Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!!”) in ‘The Wizard of Oz’ – these deceptions are on the scale of the Wizard saying, and people BELIEVING, “There IS no curtain!”
Betsy Ross commented:
…it almost feels like this Liberty thing is just a figment of my imagination…
Taqiyy. commented:
OT: The Solution!
http://rightwingnews.com/2010/02/moonbat-slackers-solve-worlds-problems/
“…Why don’t we drop the incrementalism and go directly back to hunting and gathering — except without the hunting, because it oppresses animals? Only if the government forces everyone to subsist by foraging for roots and berries can we eliminate income disparities and limit carbon emissions to breathing and flatulence.” -Van Helsing @ RightwingNews
avery commented:
162,000 jobs lost is good the unemployed rate will go down.That is what the union done to the state of Michigan and G.M.
LarryD commented:
Here’s an extra serving of irony: Auto Alliance (venture between Ford and Mazda) announced today that they’re cutting almost 1000 jobs from a Michigan manufacturing plant by summer 2010.
I blogged about it here.
blackelkspeaks commented:
The people of Michigan deserve every sick and twisted thing they are getting today from Hussein and his clown circus. They have been voting to enable the Democrats for generations. In the midst of a single-state recession with double-digit unemployment they voted to RE-ELECT an absolute a*****e for Governor (Granholm) by a 16 point margin! They have two of the most repugnant scumbags for Senators (Levin and Stabenow). They even RE-ELECTED Levin for the umpteenth time in the midst of voting overwhelmingly to elevate Hussein! There is no hope on earth for people such as these!
SoCal Pir8 commented:
Notice , he says the punch line (“The recovery act is working.”) twice trying to initiate an applause response and it fell flat of deaf ears.
Jo commented:
Joe does what he is told by the Bozo.
According to the mind of the Bozo, the recovery will take place when someone confident about the workings of economy gets elected into office.
PJ commented:
Note the complete silence of the audience. Not one sound of applause.
Chris Vehr commented:
Without the stimulus, perhaps they would have lost 250,000 jobs.
So, maybe it IS working!
Hahahahaha!
Fools!
Sojourner commented:
…ring the cow bell even louder, Joe.. it’s working, it’s working.. that oughta’ do it!
S. Wolf commented:
Chisum #2
From the link
“It’s working? Evan Bayh doesn’t think so”
Well, the thing is the “stimulus” is a Democrat reelection slush fund. Its intended to steal the midterm election and pack Congress with leftist Dems who will do Zero’s bidding. Why bother stealing an election for those like Bayh? So he and others were told to ‘retire’ to make way for more committed leftists. The American people are paying for their own subjugation with the “stimulus”.
jenny commented:
So this is part of the administration’s new pr reorganization. Giving speeches creates jobs, dontcha know. Stupid as stupid does.
Espresso Logic - The 6th Sense commented:
I think Joe’s asshat is a little too tight and has cut off the supply of O to his brain.
I see stupid people.
BurmaShave commented:
I feel sorry for young black men.
It must be particularly disappointing for them to endure so much unemployment at the hands of the person whom they thought would be a blessing for them.
I hope they will eventually understand that REGARDLESS OF HIS COLOR Obama is simply not a leader, and not cut out for the job of being President.
His being president is bad for everybody, even eventually crooked Chicago politicians. And on top of that, his incompetence is bad for progress concerning things racial. What a thorough going mess this is!
And as for Bumbling Biden, I can only shake my head.
seven commented:
Sorry union workers that spent all their dues on Obama’s election. It sure is not working. 2 carmakers insolvent. We can’t see financial statements from either. Korea is booming. Now Obama wants to send billions to create foreign green jobs and import windmills.
MainStreet commented:
He does have b—s. Chisum #2 mentioned the Democrats’ slush fund of 2/3rds of the stimulus package still to be spent. It has nothing to do with getting people back to work immediately, they want the jobs to become available just prior to the midterm elections. They don’t care about suffering now or that these are temporary one shot jobs as long as it is seen as working on election day 2010.
wth commented:
As Liz Cheney said:
“Vice President Biden has a famously tenuous relationship with reality”.
S. Wolf commented:
Put Washington D.C. on a Diet
“Here’s a small taste. The EU budget is essentially meant to take money from member governments and then redistribute the money back. It has gone from 4 billion in 1970 to over a 140 billion today. Yet the majority of the EU budget cannot be accounted for. For a decade and a half, the European Court of Auditors, whose role is to audit the EU, has refused to sign off on the EU budget. This is the model that many Democrats would have us embrace.
Obama’s first year was meant to implement the vertical integration of government and the Democratic party’s unions and business backers into a monopoly on many services and forms of employment. What that would do in practice is centralize everything from medical care to many forms of employment, that would require mandatory union membership, and various industries, through bailouts, and cap and trade, into a government-union-corporate complex run out of the White House.
While he has suffered some setbacks in that regard, the outrageous amounts of money he spent were not simply about corruption and greed, but about power. The reconstruction of America was and is part of a grand plan to create a tightly managed society, in which seemingly civilian non-profits, unions, corporations and government agencies would combine to create one vast infrastructure harnessing the public for its revenues and maintaining total political control over the country.”
Tom commented:
So what would unemployment have been without the stimulus package? If you have an answer to that question, please share it with us!
pontoon commented:
Go away Tom, Your a troll almost as bad as the selfproclaimedliberal. Tax cuts, tax cuts tax cuts.
Militant Conservative commented:
Damn, Pontoon ya beat me to the punch. We had log discussions about the role of presidents vs. congress.
Congress appropriates and spends (mostly spends these days) President can only sign what congress offers, or veto. NOW look at WHO held congress during the big spending sprees. One diff. GWB was not a conservative in fiscal policy and was a poor steward of the finacial pocketbook of America.
sandy commented:
Biden going into Detroit and telling the people the Stimulus helped them create jobs knowing they have 14% Unemployment once again shows they are tone deaf to American’s pain. When people are hurting normal people don’t rub salt into their wounds.
Charlie Gibson commented:
If they’re still getting their gubmint check, it is working!
Tom commented:
People should be aware that monthly job losses surged during the last ten months of the Bush administration, peaked in January, 2009, and have steadily diminished during the Obama administration.
Ladue Pundit commented:
“We have to spend money to keep from going bankrupt.”
Joe Biden, July 16, 2009
He was talking about the government raising taxes and spending YOUR money. Yessir, that’s how this whole thing is gonna get fixed.
Tom commented:
Tip of the hat to my Ladue homebrother!
Militant Conservative commented:
I believe that was sarcasim, Tom LOL.
This type of economic recovery has never worked.
EVER. FDR tried it 7 times with no good results.
Watch what happens and learn, I am prepared for tie worst are you?
Espresso Logic - The 6th Sense commented:
Tom
February 16th, 2010 | 7:19 pm | #31
So what would unemployment have been without the stimulus package? If you have an answer to that question, please share it with us!
I see stupid people.
Tom commented:
So from the lack of an answer to my question, I guess no one on here really knows whether unemployment would have been better or worse without the stimulus package. What we DO know is that the rate of job loss has steadily decreased since Obama took office.
These are just facts, people. If you can’t make a coherent argument without ignoring them, then maybe your argument isn’t that good.
Tom commented:
Oh, and the tip of the hat to Ladue Pundit wasn’t sarcastic in any way. We might disagree about some things, but once a Ram, always a Ram!
Go Bucks commented:
Screw Michigan. They are getting what they deserve. Look at their elected officals
Militant Conservative commented:
Ignore the one named TOM, He has no
economic education. He just spouts the “facts” of the MSM. Without in depth analysis any liberal could come to the same conclusion. Just watch Tom and your education might get a big boost from reality.
avery commented:
If there less jobs out their ever month then their should be less job lost ever month.
Tom commented:
Militant Conservative, do you have alternative “facts” to offer about the rate of job loss? Mine come from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Where are you getting yours? Or do you have any?
Solaratov commented:
Tom
February 16th, 2010 | 8:04 pm | #36
People should be aware that monthly job losses surged during the last ten months of the Bush administration, peaked in January, 2009, and have steadily diminished during the Obama administration.
The facts do not agree with your statement.
Jerry Magliano commented:
Talk about being out of touch with reality. If Obama and Biden actually believe the crap they are putting out they are worst than a bad joke. They are a couple of nutjobs. More likely, this is just more of the dishonest nonsense that continuously flows from their mouths.
Evan Bayh was more in touch with reality when he said, “If I could create one job in the private sector by helping to grow a business, that’s one more than Congress has created in the last six months.”
USMC Thomas commented:
They drilled those hair plugs to deep.
Tom commented:
Solartov, here are the facts from the BLS website.
U.S. Monthly Non-farm Job Losses
2008
January 10,000
February 50,000
March 33,000
April 149,000
May 231,000
June 193,000
July 210,000
August 334,000
September 458,000
October 554,000
November 728,000
December 673,000
2009
January 779,000
February 726,000
March 753,000
April 582,000
May 347,000
June 504,000
July 344,000
August 211,000
September 225,000
October 224,000
November (64,000)
December 150,000
January 20,000
S. Wolf commented:
Job Loss Rates Across Post WW2 Recessions
“At this point, in nearly every recession post WWII, except the one that began in 2001, we had fully recovered all jobs lost. Now we are celebrating “flat lining” at a level of massive job deficit.”
…
“Is anyone paying attention to the structural global changes that are happening under the surface that are (mostly) unstoppable?”
…
“Instead both the federal government and Federal Reserve are doing everything in their power, and layering countless more debt on our children to increase costs (prices).”…
Job Losses Could Drown Stimulus
“The nation is losing jobs so quickly that the government, racing to deal with the crisis, is having trouble keeping up.”
…
“Analysts increasingly view the administration’s actions so far as insufficient given the scope of the problem. The stimulus package was designed to “save or create” 3.5 million jobs, according to the administration. But the nation has already lost 4.4 million jobs since the start of the recession.”
…
“But even the current job-loss figures mask the degree of pain among American workers. A broader measure, which includes people who want a job and have given up looking and those working part time but who want full-time work, rose nearly one percentage point, to 14.8 percent.”
Employment, Hours, and Earnings from the Current Employment Statistics survey (National)
Tom commented:
S. Wolf’s last link brings up a BLS page with the statistics I laid out. If you don’t trust my transcription skills (which would not be unreasonable!), you can check out the numbers there.
Bear in mind that the article S. Wolf quotes about “Job Losses Could Drown Stimulus” is from March 2009.
wytshus commented:
Biden went on to say that we have always been at war with Eastasia….
Take a good hard look at Michigan, because it’s coming to a state near you! The Dems and the UAW killed the golden goose, and they are currently beating it with a stick to try to get one more egg. 14% unemployment is just the official government number. If you factor in people whose benefits have expired, those who did not qualify for benefits, and underemployment, the figure is closer to 30%
Detroit looks like a post apocalyptic wasteland, police are going door to door in Saginaw to collect city taxes, unemployment claims have a 40% fraud rate, and Joe Biden says we’re saved…
Chris commented:
“What we DO know is that the rate of job loss has steadily decreased since Obama took office.
These are just facts, people. If you can’t make a coherent argument without ignoring them, then maybe your argument isn’t that good.”
THAT’S your argument? “Job losses continue, but it’s not as bad as it was.”
That’s because at this point, businesses have no one left to fire. EUC payouts have gone up every month, and continue to set records, food stamp payments are at all-time highs, and the debt ceiling is 100% of GDP, and you’re arguing, with a U3 that’s stayed above 9.5% for months now, that things are getting “better”?
Demanding to know what the U3 would have been without the stimulus is a false dilemma. What we DO know is that Obama made a $700 billion hedge bet that the normal business cycle would kick in last year, and he lost. Our economy is 70% consumer-oriented, and guess what–those jobs aren’t coming back.
A better question, Tom, is what economic anchors are going to bring the employment/population ratio up from it’s current levels, which were last seen in the mid-1970s? The housing bubble was the last gasp of a ponzi economy that had its foundational supports kicked out from under it when inflation went into high gear after 1974.
Brag about “declining job loss rates” all you want, but only a fool would think that anything we do at this point, short of a global war that leaves us one of the last countries standing a la WW2, is going to “bounce back.” Obama’s political ADD should have been evidence enough of this for you.
Tom commented:
Chris, I’m not making an argument. I’m laying out facts so at least we can have an informed debate. Thanks for your contribution to it.
S. Wolf commented:
Tom #52 March ’09= Obama term, Obama ‘stimulus’. BLS stats= Obama stats, i.e. unreliable.
Chris commented:
“Chris, I’m not making an argument. I’m laying out facts so at least we can have an informed debate. Thanks for your contribution to it.”
What kind of passive-aggressive bull is that? You’re laying out ONE set of selective facts in an attempt to boost a failed administrative program–which any look at the U3/U6 and Obama’s predictions pre-stimulus would verify–while buttressing a logically fallcious argument.
Don’t try to beg off on this just because you came to fight with a popgun instead of a bazooka.
Tom commented:
Chris, it takes four rounds of postings just to get people to accept facts around here. Notice that S. Wolf is still denying the facts. So I aim for little steps. I don’t mind if people disagree — I just mind if they’re ill-informed.
Charlie Gibson commented:
You effing idiots. Do you honestly belief that job losses would have continued at the same rate regardless of the stimulus? You have no clue what you are talking about, and the statistics are meaningless unless you understand the sectors impacted.
Hey, without the stimulus, unemployment would have be 100%! We would have kept losing jobs at 750k/month until everyone was unemployed!
Nathan R. Jessup commented:
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
-Joseph Goebbels
Nathan R. Jessup
http://www.the-raw-deal.com
Nathan R. Jessup commented:
@Charlie Gibson #59
“Hey, without the stimulus, unemployment would have be 100%! We would have kept losing jobs at 750k/month until everyone was unemployed!”
(did you mean to hit the “post” button after you typed what you did?)
Ummm, not much to say really. Wow…
I change everything I’ve ever said about Obama and the recovery act. I don’t want unemployment to be 100%! Obama saved America.
Nathan R. Jessup
http://www.the-raw-deal.com
Militant Conservative commented:
Experiance guided by history and intellect. Tax cuts, there is a reason I did it 3 times. Corporate tax cuts, individual tax cuts and capital gains tax cuts. Reagan did this and got us a wonderful economy. The only thing Reagan did not do is reduce the spending. (That pesky seperation of powers thingee) You cannot spend your way out of a recession. I do not respond to you TOM, I talk AT you. Talking to you lowers my intelligence.
Chris commented:
“Chris, it takes four rounds of postings just to get people to accept facts around here. Notice that S. Wolf is still denying the facts. So I aim for little steps. I don’t mind if people disagree — I just mind if they’re ill-informed.”
So what’s your excuse for missing every other set of facts except the one group that happened to coincide with your thesis?
Militant Conservative commented:
I am a big believer in following history not pols nor studies. History teaches undeniable lessons.
Chris, bullseye, Tom Bull####. LOL
Militant Conservative commented:
OBTW IF employment is up, how is it that unemployment numbers are at 10%……
Not even counting the folks that have dropped off of the unemployeed radar. Why did we need to extend unemployment benifits?????? Me thinks the figures from the Fed are manufactured. Tom check out the later posts. LOL
Nahanni commented:
Tom,
Does the SEIU/ACORN or moveon.org pay you by the post or by the word?
Either way they are not getting their money’s worth. The only ones you are fooling are your fellow denizens of the “reality-based community”.
You best scurry back to the fever swamps before your poor widdle psyche gets hurt.
Tom commented:
Chris, I don’t have a thesis about the stimulus package. I’m just pointing out a fact and everyone’s falling all over themselves to either deny that it’s true, deny that it’s significant, or deny that it’s related to anything that President Obama has done. If everyone’s coming this unglued about objective data, it doesn’t seem to me this bunch is prepared to win a debate with anyone that doesn’t already share their point of view.
To the extent I have a thesis, it’s this:
If you can’t make a coherent argument without denying facts, then your argument isn’t very good, and probably won’t be very persuasive to an objective, informed listener.
I picked that particular unemployment statistic because it’s commonly used as a gauge of how quickly the employment picture is getting better or worse. If you’re going to engage in a debate about the effect of the stimulus package, it’s a statistic you’re going to have to deal with.
I suspect there are any number of facts I could have chosen to point out that would have led to a similar response. For example: the stimulus package included $280 billion in tax cuts over two years. That’s a fact you have to be prepared to deal with if you want to say that the stimulus package didn’t help AND that tax cuts are the best way to stimulate the economy.
I’m not saying that Obama is our savior and Bush is evil. I may disagree with you on one point or another — that doesn’t make me the enemy, nor does it make me stupid. I’m saying that you’re not doing yourself any favors (or persuading anybody) if you selectively ignore facts that don’t fit your hypothesis.
Nahanni commented:
Militant Conservative,
Me thinks the figures from the Fed are manufactured.
They are. In fact it is so obvious to everyone that no one in the business/financial world trusts any of the numbers coming out of the Obamao regime.
Tom commented:
Nahanni, thanks for proving my point.
Chris commented:
“Chris, I don’t have a thesis about the stimulus package.”
Stop lying. You created a false dilemma by asking what the U3 would have been without it. Your clear implication is that it would have been worse.
You’re full of crap, because Obama’s own team predicted that the U3 wouldn’t go over 8% if the stimulus passed. Your stupid initial question was completely irrelevant to the actual facts.
“I picked that particular unemployment statistic because it’s commonly used as a gauge of how quickly the employment picture is getting better or worse. If you’re going to engage in a debate about the effect of the stimulus package, it’s a statistic you’re going to have to deal with.”
Actually, the U3 and U6 is what is commonly used as a gauge of how quickly the employment picture is getting better or worse. Fewer job losses each month doesn’t mean jack squat IF PEOPLE AREN’T GETTING HIRED, you moron. Otherwise, EUC payouts wouldn’t be going through the roof while tax revenues are cratering.
“that doesn’t make me the enemy, nor does it make me stupid. I’m saying that you’re not doing yourself any favors (or persuading anybody) if you selectively ignore facts that don’t fit your hypothesis.”
You toad. I pointed out several facts that didn’t fall into line with your own argument, and you have the gall to lecture us about using selective data? You’re a disingenuous troll that has no connection with reality.
Scott commented:
Biden went to Michigan to say like Napolitano that “the system worked.” NO, the system did not work on any level except to employ more government workers who will further drain the economy…Obama and Biden sent their Secretary of Treasury to China to beg for loans that will be paid for by our children…And, they are squandering nearly a trillion dollars…The Feds are borrowing nearly 50 cents of every dollar they are spending…Who do they think they are fooling? Neither the public nor the Chinese who are dumping Treasuries as fast as they can…
Tom commented:
Chris, I’ve been perfectly civil throughout this discussion. I would ask you to do the same.
I’m sorry if you don’t like the facts that I’m pointing out. But they ARE facts, and ones that you have to be able to explain if you want to make a point about the effect that the stimulus package has had on unemployment.
Bear in mind, this thread began with a post mocking Joe Biden for saying the stimulus package was having a positive effect on unemployment. So many posters in here are acting as if that’s a laughable concept, but then they have no explanation for the reversing trend in the rate of job losses. When I so much as point out the data, the respond as if they’ve been personally attacked.
If you have an explanation for the data, then please share it. I don’t doubt that you have thoughts on the matter, but so far all you’ve done is assume that I have a thesis and then tell me that my “thesis” is incorrect. No, Chris. I’m just pointing out a fact that posters in here aren’t addressing. Including you.
My question about what unemployment would have been without the stimulus package was directed at people who said the package had no effect. I wanted to know what they thought unemployment would have been WITHOUT the stimulus package. Notice that no one gave an answer to the question. In other words, no one has supported their assertion that the stimulus package had no effect on unemployment.
A perfectly reasonable explanation could begin with something like “I acknowledge the BLS data, and I agree that it’s impossible to know what unemployment would have been WITHOUT the stimulus package, but here’s the reason I think the improving BLS data doesn’t actually indicate that the stimulus had a positive effect…”
I’m sure you could offer an explanation of that sort, Chris, so why don’t you? By the way, “Fewer job losses each month doesn’t mean jack squat IF PEOPLE AREN’T GETTING HIRED, you moron” is not an explanation. Of COURSE emergency unemployment claims are going up; people are still getting laid off. We have to stop the net loss of jobs before we can see a net gain in jobs. But fewer job losses each month is better, period, and you need to deal with the data on that if you’re being intellectually honest.
I wonder, Chris… why are you annoyed with me and not with the people who are making completely unsupported claims? You seem like a rational person — why are you so outraged that I might quote BLS data in here, but have no problem with people who say the BLS is falsifying the data for the benefit of the Obama Administration? Why don’t you take issue with the people who say that tax cuts always stimulate economic growth — uh, except for the tax cuts in the stimulus package? Could it be that your obviously keen intellect is being clouded by your ideology?
Militant Conservative commented:
Run for office TOM, you blowviate too much. I’m quite sure your world has unicorns too. You cannot make a coherent thought in a few sentences.
There are no tax cuts in the stimulus package, dolt. Man TOM your head is gonna explode when the truth finally penetrates it. LOL
The NOTUS is a serial LIAR. The public sees this, the only one’s on his side ARE the idealogues. READ, STUDY, LISTEN, LEARN.
Tom commented:
Militant Conservative, if you don’t know the stimulus package included one of the biggest tax cuts in history, you have really and truly drunk the kool-aid. Here’s the Wall Street Journal’s summary of the cost of the bill:
http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/STIMULUS_FINAL_0217.html
Notice the biggest single line-item in the summary? $300 billion in tax cuts. Maybe you need to take your own advice and read, study, listen, learn.