RUSH: Jeff in Maplewood, New Jersey. It's great to have you. You're up first today. Hello, sir.
CALLER: Hi, Rush. Great honor. First-time caller, and I just wanted to bring up something. I'm sure you were gonna mention it. But the first time jobless claims "unexpectedly" rose again to 386,000.
RUSH: How about that? Unexpectedly!
RUSH: That's back.
CALLER: And, as you would say, "If it's Thursday, it must be time to revive the previous figures."
RUSH: Exactly right! Exactly! It's Revision Thursday every Thursday. Boy, you are up to speed.
CALLER: (chuckles) Yeah, thank you. And they bumped up last week's figure to, like, I think it was 380,000.
RUSH: You're exactly right. It was revised up to 380 from 377. Exactly what we predicted last week would be the number.
CALLER: Yeah. But the point that I really wanted to bring up... And I know callers can say anything, but you gotta trust me. I am not a conspiracy nut. I am not. I hate it when people -- I loathe it when people -- assume that there's some deep, dark hand working behind the scenes or something. But I honestly believe that they're criminally playing with numbers at the Labor Department. Because, going back to 2011... I don't have the exact figures, but I believe it's like 72 out of 75 weeks the revision has always been upwards. Now, that's not just random screw ups where you go back and you correct something.
RUSH: Yeah, look, I understand what you're saying. The problem is if they're messing with the numbers, then they've gotta be much, much worse than what they're reporting because they're reporting bad numbers.
CALLER: Right. Well, there's a limit to how much you can mess. I mean, you start looking like a complete jerk. Like if you played with the unemployment number and said there's 4% unemployment? I mean, people may be suspicious now, but --
RUSH: Hey, we're already doing that when people leave the labor force, when people stop looking for work, and the unemployment rate goes down. On the surface that doesn't make any sense. But the way they calculate it, it does. But, Jeff, you're right. You're up to speed. Here are the numbers: "The number of Americans filing new claims for unemployment benefits unexpectedly rose last week, government data on Thursday showed, suggesting persistent weakness in the labor market after stumbling badly in recent months."
Just last week they told us it suggested "tepid recovery trends" to continue.
"Initial claims for state unemployment benefits increased 6,000 to a seasonally adjusted 386,000, the Labor Department said. The prior week's figure was revised up to 380,000 from the previously reported 377,000." So in reality, if you run the numbers out, the claim is up 9,000 from last week's report. For the record, this latest revision means that the weekly jobless claims number, as Jeff here said, has now been revised up 21 weeks in a row -- and 66 out of the last 67 weeks. Unexpectedly rose. Unexpectedly!
Reuters also said, and I quote, "Claims remain trapped in the tight band established since April." So the news media is even resorting to blaming "tight bands" now instead of Obama. So unemployment is up "unexpectedly," and the regime is privately admitting to themselves that there's not gonna be any miraculous economic recovery news to report between now and the election. And here's another Reuters story:
"US consumer prices fell in May by the most in over three years as households paid less for gasoline, possibly giving the US Federal Reserve more room to help an economy that is showing signs of weakening." Wait, I thought the private sector was just fine. Now we got an economy "showing signs of weakening." But now the Fed "might have more room to help an economy." "Another government report on Thursday pointed to persistent weakness in the labor market..." Another bad week for America.
Everybody says, "Ohhh, gee! What will the impact be on Obama's reelection? How will this affect Obama? No, no. How does this effect America?" And it's another bad week for people who live in this country. And it doesn't stop there. "US foreclosure starts rose year-over-year in May for the first time in more than two years as banks resumed dealing with distressed properties after a mortgage abuse settlement earlier this year..." So foreclosures are up for the first time in 27 months. (interruption)
Yeah, and they're up 29% in Illinois. Yeah, in Obama's home state, foreclosures are up 29%. The unemployment news there... The crime in Illinois, the crime in Chicago is up through the roof. (interruption) Everything's Bush's fault! The foreclosures are Bush's fault. All of this stuff, the economic news? Yes, it's Bush's fault! I'm telling you, we're gonna hear it in his speech today. I guarantee you. Because of this Gallup poll out, we're gonna hear that. He may not even mention a name. He may say "my predecessor" and "the situation that I inherited from my predecessor was much worse than any of us knew."
And he will rip into all of the policies that didn't work then that Romney wants to go back to. I know what this speech is gonna be before I read it, before I hear it. I know. I know the major points he's gonna make. I know he's been trying to fix the housing market for three-years. He's been trying to fix the job market for three years. He's been trying to help the economy for three years. But it was so bad! Bush did so many rotten, bad things -- Bush was such a disaster -- that not even the brilliance of Obama and his team with Steven Spielberg and Susie Buell Tompkins and Eric Schmidt (none of them) can fix it.
That's how bad Bush damaged it. That's how totally incompetent and worthless George W. Bush was. Now, Jeff referred to what he thinks is a conspiracy going on in the government over these job numbers. But I have here a story in my formerly nicotine-stained fingers that will intrigue him. It's from the Daily Caller. "The president’s nominee to run the highly visible Bureau of Labor Statistics is on track to win Senate approval despite her ties to decidedly left-wing political groups, her critics say.
"Erica Groshen’s left-wing ties include her 1998 co-authorship of an article urging an end to small businesses’ exemption from expensive federal regulations, and her husband’s 2011 donation to the far-left Working Families Party." Does that ring a bell? The Working Families Party is the group that protested on the lawn of the AIG lawyer's house in Connecticut, terrorizing his family.
That's a couple years ago after the controversy swirled around the bonuses that were passed out at AIG. So Obama's nominee to run the BLS is a far, fringe leftist as well as being married to one. The Daily Caller says if she gets the job, she'll be in a position to spin the unemployment numbers and the reports. Has anybody looked into who's spinning them now? (laughing) Nobody's spinning 'em now? We're only thinking about what this new nominee might do? Ha!