Media Dismiss Drop In Unemployment Rate As Government "Propaganda"

[HughBeaumont]

11. So, does this mean we should say nothing at all about mid-2004?

Specifically, AFTER mid-2004 (Bewsh 43's re-election year)?

That's when, after a few years of weak monthly job numbers despite huge lottery giveaways to the wealthy in 2001, a few decent hiring months by UhMerica's suddenly-loosening-the-purse-strings corporations happened (IT'S A MIRACLE!). The timing was impeccable; it was partially helpful in getting him safely back in office and also helpful in making the voting public forget about the disastrous two wars and 9/11 (well, along with his trusty Ohio plant Ken Blackwell and a 24-7 demonizing of John Kerry by our purchased Crack Fourth Estate).

Sorry, I don't buy for one second that demand all of a sudden increased due to the 2001 tax cuts. NOT ONE SECOND.

Of course, once Bewsh got back in, the plundering and housing/financial bubbles continued until all of the wealth was at the top, Bewsh's SEC ignored the shenanigans and whistle-blowers, the economy crashed and WE got stuck with the bill.

So I shouldn't even mention THAT at all???

Put it this way . . . . if the Democrats were to cook the Unemployment rate somehow, don't you think they would have picked a better number and done it sooner?