Obama is smooth...

[trish]

Check your facts.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-...sident-hr-1540

[trish]

Also: learn how to read a chart.

[Sabre6]

Additional job loss means additional unemployment.
Also the current unemployment figures do not take into account the number of people who are no longer seeking employment, the people who have just given up.
Were those people to be added into the figure, it would undoubtedly rise significantly.

[Sabre6]

What part of the chart am I misreading? The part that you don't like?

[Sabre6]

Any bar below the line means JOB LOSS. It doesn't matter what color the bar is. Your chart is not unemployment, it's JOB LOSS.

You need to read your own chart's TITLE.

[Sabre6]

It only shows that LESS jobs were lost. Additional jobs were still lost.

[trish]

Yes, yes. When the facts don't support your politics its time to search for those extenuating factors. We've been calculating unemployment the same way since W. Using the same definitions throughout the period of the chart, we see the Bush Crash, The Obama save (turnaround), and a continued, slow and steady recovery.

[Sabre6]

Also: learn how to read a chart.

Using your own chart, you would need to add all the red bars together, and then add all the blue bars together to get the net difference. Has the Obama economy lost fewer jobs than the economy during Bush's last year? Looks like it. BUT the net is still a loss. Even if you just use the blue bars, it's still a net loss.

[trish]

Any fool but you can look at that chart and see the upward trend. Stop thinking about partisan politics for a moment and let the cataracts fall from your eyes. There are none so blind than those who refuse to see.

[Sabre6]

Yes, yes. When the facts don't support your politics its time to search for those extenuating factors. We've been calculating unemployment the same way since W. Using the same definitions throughout the period of the chart, we see the Bush Crash, The Obama save (turnaround), and a continued, slow and steady recovery.

Ah I see. I suppose then we should ignore the growth that preceeded the crash? All the jobs that were created then?