Obama Web Ad Touts Jobs Record, Asks Supporters to ‘Spread the Word’

What a sick joke. Here’s what ABC News refuses to report…

In the past three years, according to the GOVERNMENT’S OWN NUMBERS, our civilian labor force has SHRUNK by 1.4 million people while our overall population has GROWN by over 7.3 million people. Is it any wonder we have record poverty?

Civilian Labor Force Level (Jan 2009): 142,187,000
Civilian Labor Force Level (Dec 2011): 140,790,000

Net change: -1,397,000

Estimated U.S. Population (Jan 1, 2009): 305,529,237
Estimated U.S. Population (today): 312,898,894

Net change: +7,369,657

Posted by: gobama | January 23, 2012, 4:43 pm 4:43 pm

President Obama is NOT a descendent of slaves.

Probably the first time in history an administration brags on itself about “job creation” with no mention of “job loss” and when the unemployment numbers go from 4.7% to 8.5% during it’s term.

More denial of Mr Obama’s heritage.And i suppose that his brilliance is only from his mother-despite a Harvard Ph.D. economist father

It took Bush 2 and a half years to turn job losses around into job gains after he took office. Obama accomplished this in less than a year.

Posted by: Chuck | January 23, 2012, 5:16 pm 5:16 pm

I debunked everything in your post. You can’t see it again, because of the light-weight thought you applied. And of course those numbers are in the millions! Perhaps if you read it slowly, you’ll realize you didn’t make, and don’t have an argument. If you do, post it.

Using January 2009 as a begin date to blame lost jobs on Obama is just plain stupid.

Bush handed Obama a country in free-fall economic collapse. Close to a 800,000 jobs being lost every month by the time Obama was inaugurated. You expected him to stop this on a dime? Are you that dense, or just being dishonest again? The momentum from the Bush collapse was just peaking as Obama took office and it continued for 8 more months.

By the bottom of the trough on the economic collapse, the Labor Force Level had fallen to 137,968 million. It then started to reverse as Obama’s policies began to kick in and most recently it had gone up to 140,790 million.

Gobama (5:07 PM); I personally think Obama’s success is more attributed to his maternal grandparents stepping up to the plate than anything hereditary. It’s true he was not born with a silver spoon. I will give him that. The rest of this article is more noteworthy for what it leaves out than what it tries to convey.

Posted by: Chuck | January 23, 2012, 5:23 pm 5:23 pm

Okay, let me spell it out for you – one hundred and thirty-seven million, nine hundred and sixty-eight thousand; one hundred and forty million, seven hundred and ninety thousand.

Using January 2009 as a begin date to blame lost jobs on Obama is just plain stupid.

Posted by: Philip | January 23, 2012, 5:32 pm 5:32 pm

More lies . ..

The housing bubble had reached its peak and begun it’s decline close to a year BEFORE the Democrats won the majority in Congress, same with the sub-prime crisis – sub-prime businesses had already begun to collapse in the year BEFORE the Democrats won the majority in Congress.

1) Bush homeownership plan aims at $5.5 million lift for minorities (2003)

President Bush announced an Administration effort to increase home ownership rates among African Americans and Hispanics by 5.5 million by 2010.

The plan would provide down payment assistance to 40,000 minority homebuyers each year . . .
Bush’s plan would be closely tied to some $440 million in minority loan programs offered by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. President Bush commended Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac’s efforts.

2) 2004: Under President Bush, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development announces that it will require Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, also known as the Government-Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs) “to increase their purchase of mortgages for low- and moderate-income families and underserved communities.” In order to meet these new requirements, the GSEs begin purchasing mortgage-backed securities made up of subprime loans.

All the Democrats fault according to you – even though it was a majority Republican congress and Republican presidency.

NOTE: another falsehood you post – government jobs actually decreased by well over 200,000 during the past year. You would do better to research rather than presume you know – you obviously don’t.

The economy was in free fall because of Democrats Sub-prime disaster that took out the financial markets and housing
——————————

The Republicans are still desperately trying to pass off the blame for the disastrous consequences of their deregulation of the housing and financial markets.

Where did you come up with those numbers? The entire population of the U.S. is only 313 million.

Posted by: newcountryman | January 23, 2012, 5:46 pm 5:46 pm

“one hundred and thirty-seven million, nine hundred and sixty-eight thousand; one hundred and forty million, seven hundred and ninety thousand” – directly from the Bureau of Labor Statistics web site. The internet is an excellent research tool – as long as you’re not believing everything you read on partisan blogs.

O -Blame- a is at it again. No doubt that the shills have the message and his command will be carried out.

Facts can lie. Most liars can “figure”.

“Twenty-two straight months of job growth; 3.1 million jobs added. Help us spread the word.”

As ABC News fact-checked earlier this month, the job creation claims made in the ad are true.

—–

Unfortunately, fact checkers are unable to substantiate Romney’s claims about jobs.

Posted by: david | January 23, 2012, 6:16 pm 6:16 pm

Those pesky FACTS . . . and these are the fact as to what the Bush administration handed over to Obama . . .

1) Hundreds of thousands of real people losing their jobs every month, month after month;
2) millions of people losing their homes and being kicked out of them;
3) tens of thousands of businesses going bankrupt;
4) major banks and financial institutions on the verge of default;
5) stock market in full collapse;
6) major American auto companies about to go bankrupt;
7) demands on government resources skyrocketing;
8) government revenues collapsing as millions of taxpayers were losing their jobs and no longer paying income tax;
9) the demand for unemployment insurance exploding;
10) and on and on and on . ..

These factors explain a lot about the size of the Obama deficits ($1.2 trillion in deficit for 2009, before Obama even walked through the door.

.Over $1.25 TRILLION of the current debt ‘attributed’ to Obama resulted from interest on the debt George W. Bush left. That’s just the interest on the debt Bush left, never mind the war commitments, the destroyed revenues due to the economic collapse on his watch, the unpaid for seniors drug plan,the huge deficits from his tax cuts, and on and on.

Those pesky facts just a lying away.

Here’s a question for those yammering on about the housing crisis, (Philip), is it true that while Americans were losing their houses during that crisis, Gingrich was cashing in by working with and for Freddie Mac, despite his so-called convictions? Didn’t he sell his transformed and transformative soul? After being sanctioned for ethics violations and leaving the House in disgrace, he cashed in as a DC insider of the sort the tea party claims to despise.

Posted by: Jane | January 23, 2012, 6:26 pm 6:26 pm

Speaking of pesky FACTS, you haven’t been employed Obama’s entire term yet you insist others pay more in taxes to maintain your leisure lifestyle. What an inspiring example of Obama’s America.

I’ve always said that Bush and his Administration let the Democrats like Frank, Dodd, Waters, and others mandate loose government backed lending

Posted by: newcountryman | January 23, 2012, 6:34 pm 6:34 pm

Even if that was true – and you’ve offered no proof whatsoever that it is – the Republican had the majority in the Senate, the majority in the House and the Presidency. The people gave THEM the responsibility and it’s their failure.

I’ve always said that Bush and his Administration let the Democrats like Frank, Dodd, Waters, and others mandate loose government backed lending
————————————-

But let’s not conveniently forget that the majority of the risky loans, and all the hedging against the financial products based on them, were made in the private sector.

Jane is simply parroting her side’s talking points. Heard it so many times before.

Posted by: newcountryman | January 23, 2012, 6:47 pm 6:47 pm

They’re called facts. If you have anything to counter them, please feel free to post. And please . . . the Republican right offers nothing new on here day after day, just the same collection of insults, juvenile name calling and personal smears . . .. add hypocrisy on to the list of your personal traits.

And Jane- if Bush supposedly “lost” over 8 million jobs (cite please), how come his unemployment rate never approached what barry’s is now?

Posted by: Grass Mud Horsey | January 23, 2012, 9:46 pm 9:46 pm

The housing bubble burst in the last quarter of 2005 and the first quarter of 2006. The sub-prime crisis began in 2006.

By the time Bush left office the economic was in full collapse – 4.4 million jobs had already been lost, and around 800,000 jobs were begin lost every month, month after month. By the time this collapse had finished, 8.6 million jobs had been lost.

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics

The economy needs to add roughly 250,000 jobs a month (3 million a year) to rapidly bring down the unemployment rate. We’re not even creating enough jobs to keep up with population growth.
Over 13 million are currently unemployed (including Dan/Jane).
Over 23 million are currently unemployed/underemployed.
Hundreds of thousands have given up looking for work (perversely lowering the unemployment rate).
There are over 47 million food stamp recipients, 14 million more than when Obama became President.

The economy needs to add roughly 250,000 jobs a month (3 million a year) to rapidly bring down the unemployment rate.

Posted by: Dane | January 23, 2012, 10:59 pm 10:59 pm

Over 200,000 private sector jobs were created last month.

Not good enough for you? You’d prefer to go back to the ‘good old’ Bush Republican days when we were losing 800,000 jobs a month? Month after month?

No thanks.

Posted by: Stu | January 23, 2012, 11:15 pm 11:15 pm

I prospered during the Bush years. Everyone I knew was employed and doing well. My net worth tripled. How many private sector jobs have you created during Obama’s “job recovery?” Answer: ZERO. You want everyone else to do the hard work while you benefit from it.

“Newt Gingrich claims that “more people have been put on food stamps by Barack Obama than any president in American history.” He’s wrong. More were added under Bush than under Obama, according to the most recent figures.

“We asked the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food and Nutrition service for month-by-month figures going back to January 2001. And they show that under President George W. Bush the number of recipients rose by nearly 14.7 million. ” (USA Today)

Posted by: Dane | January 23, 2012, 11:48 pm 11:48 pm

You really don’t think clearly ‘Dane’. The bul of Bush’s food stamp recipients added were added in the economic collapse on his watch – and ALL of the food stamp recipients added under Obama came out of the economic collapse on Bush’s watch.

“I prospered during the Bush years. Everyone I knew was employed and doing well. My net worth tripled”

How long are they going to continue to try and pass off that giant financial bubble as real prosperity? For most Americans it couldn’t possibly last.

“I prospered during the Bush years. Everyone I knew was employed and doing well. My net worth tripled”

How long are they going to continue to try and pass off that giant financial bubble as real prosperity? For most Americans it couldn’t possibly last.

Posted by: jumbo shrimp | January 24, 2012, 12:15 am 12:15 am

For most Americans it didn’t last.

When Clinton handed the reins to Bush, the stock market sat at over 11,000. By the time Bush was done with it, the stock market sat at below 8,000.

“I prospered during the Bush years. Everyone I knew was employed and doing well. My net worth tripled”

Your net worth tripled? You had 1000 comic books when Bush was elected, but thanks to a part time shift at Walmart, expanded your collection to 3000! After graduating from high school in 2008, you had to move out and try to make rent on a Walmart salary, and did OK for two months, on account of all those awesome credit card offers, and even bought yourself a car. Now, under Obama, the bills started rolling in and you couldn’t keep pace. When you moved back home, eek! Mom had gotten rid of your comics because they took up too much space. Now, between you lost comic book collection, the credit card debt you’ve accumulated, and the limited edition Pokemon cards that your mom gave to your nephew, your net worth is lower than it was when Bush took office! How could Obama do this to you! Started out hustlin’ ended up BAWLING.

I did OK under Bush, but I’m doing fantastic under Obama. 2011 was my best year ever. Doubled my income. I’m a personal bankruptcy attorney.

I’m doing just fine too—and if you will all join with me, together we can fight to keep my taxes below 15%. It’s for the good of the nation!

Posted by: james | January 24, 2012, 2:33 pm 2:33 pm

Clinton never had a budget surplus. It’s a myth propagated by the clueless. The national debt never went down during the Clinton years. In Clinton’s best year there was a $17.9 billion deficit. And it was only that low because fiscally concservative Republicans controlled the purse strings.

There was also no “economic collapse”. Pure hyperbole. A government-created credit bubble popped, yes, but if an economic collapse truly occurred, the entire banking system would have imploded, there would have been rioting in the streets, and martial law would have been declared. Google “Argentine economic crisis”. That was a true collapse.

Forget all the figures from Bush and Obama. Obama said he knew how bad things were, he repeated it often, this is a disaster, worst thing since the depression, on and on he went about how bad things were. He said vote for me and I will fix it… Well, he did not fix it and all we hear is, it was worst than we thought? He preached about how bad it was! He wanted the job, said he was up to the challenge and he could handle it… had big ideas to turn things around… It was all talk and his last three years and his record proves it. This same ABC story still reports a net loss of 1.7 million jobs since he took over.

To support other comments here – Obama’s ad and claims are smoke and mirrors. A recent Forbes article is quite clear about this and goes so far as to ask why the BLS is reporting such skewed numbers when the real effected jobless rate is around 11%. i.e. why does the BLS seem to support Obama over the facts?

The Obama chart in all of his ads is in “monthly change”, and never comes close to matching the number unemployed after he proclaimed the “global economic disaster of epic proportions” in 2009 (after which consumer confidence tanked and many retail and small businesses started their decline, that still continues today).

And Obama’s administration claimed/promised unemployment wouldn’t go over 8% under his leadership, and now they are celebrating it supposedly dropping below 9%. The only arena where Obama has created job growth is overseas. We have more unoccupied retail and rental space in our city than I’ve ever seen before – far more than 2008. As a small business owner, and knowing many others, we’ve seen absolutely no impact from the stimulus money, and our city is still in the red, schools charging parents for supplies, etc, and now we are seeing even more budget cuts at mid and lower levels – the effects of which won’t be felt for a year or two, but higher unemployment, more foreclosures and bankruptcies are just around the corner. The economy is getting worse, not better.