But earlier this week Michael Barone had a column in which he chronicled all of these instances where the media’s experts have expressed shock and surprise over the performance of the economy, as though somebody had just discovered that. We’ve been having fun with that for how many years here? But they can’t even go back to that well. “In surprisingly unexpected news, job creation was unexpectedly lower than expected.” They’ve expired, they have run through every possible credible explanation. Now AP finally says: You know, it’s really even worse than this because people have stopped looking for work — which is something else we’ve known for a long time. Yep, unemployment is only as low as it is because ofall the shirkers who aren’t even bothering to look for work.
AP tells us: If everybody who has given up looking for work were counted, the real unemployment number would be 11.5%. This is AP. These are the shock troops from Obama’s Praetorian guard, and they can’t carry the water anymore. Speaking of unemployment, there were only 422,000 new unemployment claims last week. By the way, remember Biden? He said 500,000 new jobs a months, that’s what was gonna happen here? I’ve got quotes from Biden here. He can’t believe how great the stimulus was working, never dreamed it would work this well. I’ve got it all here, folks. We’re gonna run through it. Obama: “We’ve begun remaking America,” April 29th, 2009. “President marks end of a hundred days, says he’s pleased with progress but not satisfied.”
Newsweek: “The Macho Democrat — Obama looks unbeatable now, but the GOP sees weak spots.” “The Fast Fix: Is Obama Now Unbeatable? This is CNN: “Cancel the Election! CNN Anchor Asks, ‘Obama Unbeatable in 2012?'” That’s one series of stories. Then we’ve got Biden and his promise of 500,000 jobs. The AP headline is: “More Job Seekers Give Up,” finally admitting what we’ve been pointing out for a year and a half. They say that there were “only” 422,000 new unemployment claims last week. That means that they’re down by, what, a whapping 6,000 claims — and never mind, folks, that the previous week’s number was quietly revised up by 4,000 just like it always is.
But there’s no hope (you have to keep this in mind) for any real reduction in the unemployment rate as long as that number is above 400,000, and economists are saying it will be for years to come. That 400,000, you have to get sickle below that before you even start talking about replacement level jobs. It’s a disaster. The real question is whether or not this is what Obama intends. The real question is: “Is this the objective?” I still maintain that that must be seriously examined, because nobody in their right mind– with a modicum of experience, economic intelligence, and education — would ever double down, triple down on failed policies like this, to whom this mess can be directly traceable. Something is really, drastically wrong with all of this, and it’s not the United States of America. This is not deserved, this is not called for, this is not just what happens to be up next for us.
There’s more going on here than just it is cyclical nature of economics.
RUSH: Here’s a David in Norwood, ah. David, great to have you on the program, sir.
CALLER: Hey, I wanted to know how do we fix this horrible economy?
RUSH: David, how old are you?
CALLER: I’m 43.
RUSH: You’re 43. At what age were you — no wrong answers here, don’t misunderstand, I’m trying to ascertain what might be your baseline of experience, knowledge, and paying attention to things. At what age were you when you started caring about any of this?
RUSH: Twenty-eight. Okay, so you have roughly been paying attention here for, what, 15 years?
RUSH: Okay, so those 15 years takes you back basically to the Bill Clinton administration. You know nothing prior to the Bill Clinton administration in terms of —
CALLER: No, no, I’m quite affiliate — I’m a teacher. So, yeah, I know all about all of that, but I’m scared ’cause lately —
RUSH: Well, I want to try to help you come up with this. I could tell you this in 30 seconds. I want you to come up with this yourself. At what point in your past was the economy healthy, in good shape, roaring, and very little of it concerned you, how old were you, what were you doing, and where were you?
CALLER: It was during the Reagan administration. I was fine with Reagan, and then something keyed off, something went off kilter, and I suddenly as a teacher for, you know, I’ve been teaching for —
RUSH: Let me tell you bluntly what went off kilter.
CALLER: Well, it’s a long story.
RUSH: No, it’s very simple. What went off kilter was —
CALLER: A divorce.
RUSH: No, two things, Reagan worked. Reagan’s policies posed the biggest threat to the Democrat Party they could ever imagine. The Democrat Party right now needs Reagan. Obama needs Reagan. That’s why these clowns are now all of a sudden starting to talk about growth ’cause they got reelect numbers internal. I finally heard Pat Caddell say this. I knew it was the case. Pat Caddell has said that the internal reelect polling numbers the White House are awful. They are awful, and what they need is economic growth. That’s what Reaganomics gave us. But economic growth with reduced tax rates, smaller government, less government involvement in people’s lives, argues against the need for liberals. They could not allow that. So revision history began, writing what a dunce Reagan was, how bad those policies were, killed America, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. If you want to fix the US economy, then you defeat every person with a D next to their name every November election there is.
RUSH: We were told during the campaign that Barack Obama would fundamentally change the way the United States economy works, and he has. We are finding out, getting to see exactly what he meant.
*Note: Links to content outside RushLimbaugh.com usually become inactive over time.