More GOP history rewriting

It really is time for a new form of media to step forth, something along the lines of fact check.org. CNN used to be my fav, but I feel they don't do their homework as well as they used to. When spin goes unchallanged, journalistic credibility suffers.

Pence has shown his lack of knowledge many times. He, often, just repeats the talking points of the tea party. Or some other right-wing rhetoric.

Meet the Press is "fluff" stuff now. Gregory has no desire to ask the tough questions. Of either party.

I feel sorry for any news media this day who does not expose lies and those who chose to lie.

One Day ? Maybe a news media will arise that will tell the truth and spread the truth.

This obvious lie is just more propaganda to push more hate buttons and keep false talking points.

It is really amazing that in the age of the Internet and access to on-line databases that the Traditional Media thinks they can get away with this. If you ever watch Jon Stewart on Comedy Central, a lot of his humour involves showing contrasting video clips to expose the hypocrisy and duplicity of... well, pretty much everyone. "I never supported X..." No? Well, here's a video of you saying just that! I think that the Media counts on a substantial portion of their target audience not doing any further research or seeking out other opinions, but just accepting one source of "infotainment" that validates their own beliefs.

The news media, the press have their own agenda. They'll lie, and twist the truth to meet their own needs. They'll go so far as giving only part of the story and not the whole story.

It's time for the American people to admit to the fact that the Republican National Committee is nothing more than a terrorist organization which seeks to terrorize and brainwash us.

He is right but employment rates lag behind the beginning and end of a recession. The real question is what caused that exploding rate. The answer, irresponsible Republican Economic Policies in 2007-8. The rates in 2009 reflect Bush policies. Obama's policies will reflect this years unemployment rate, and if the trend hold they will be lower.

Another example of Regressive Republican Disinformation (lies).

Just another way to lay the blame on any one other then BO. He is the one who said a trillion dollars and i will keep the rate at 8 or less so here we are at almost 10 with the number close to 17 or 18 percent underemployed or unemployed. When you take charge you also take the blame just like any other job. He has been in there well over a year and all we here is blame Bush the same lefty response as always. When things go well you sure dont mind giving him credit. BO takes the bad with the good. Anyone can blame someone else it takes a leader to take charge instead of crying like a baby pointing fingers. Now that some things have improved slightly I give him some credit for that and so do most Americans I believe but we have such a long ways to go.

Nice manipulation of the facts. First you put a before and after 8 year time span for Bush. The ecnomy goes in a cycle and when you hit the recession unemployement goes up. You also put in the first 3 months of Barrack Obama, normally I would say yeah first year blame Bush but Obama put through a trillion doller stimlus bill in which he promised the Unemployment rate would not go up 8% therefore he bought the blame on that.

Lets see what are the actual facts I dug up using google.

Bush's average 5.5% nothing to brag about but nothing to be happy about either.

Obama in 6 months after the stimlus was sign the unemployment rate went from. 6.7 to 9.5% and this was after spending the enormous stimlus bill. He owns the high unemployment rate just from that bill which a lot of ecnomist say did not work.

tommy (#12),

You are right that instantaneous measures are not appropriate for ongoing phenomena. Measures must be made over time.

For example, employment losses / gains.

Bush saw modest gains in late 2007... and then went into an ever-deepening free-fall for the rest of his mandate, bottoming out at the end of his administration at almost 800 000 job losses per month.

As soon as Obama took over, the situation began to improve... or rather... the Bush-era free-fall was stopped and reversed. Throughout 2009, job continued to be lost, but at an ever lessening rate. And since the beginning of 2010, jobs are being created.

A graphic presentation of this evolution is easy to understand. The reversal from the "Bush collapse" to the "Obama improvement" is limpid.

Did someone say "stimulus"??

I wonder if CNN was trying to rewrite history when it said back in March of last year that unemployment had hit a twenty five year high.

CNN Money story here.

I know it continues to be Bush's fault and President Obama stepped into one of the worst possible situations in quite a long time for a president.

But why has the unemployment not gone down from March of 2009 to March of 2010. I seem to remember President Obama promising jobs for people that desperately need them during his signing of the stimulus package back in February of last year. President Obama has promised jobs on numerous occasions so where are the jobs and are these jobs more than temporary jobs such as shovel ready projects and census workers as well.

Where is a link to the statement?

And I am surprised by those numbers, I've heard larger numbers from mainstream liberal media in the past 11-13%, or my memory sucks (I am not saying your numbers are wrong).

Problem i,if Gregory calls out his republicon guests for telling lies on his show the word goes out in Washington that you can't spin your story on meet the press. Soon MTP won't be able to get the interesting right wing people on, and ratings dwindle.

Maddow does call out republicon guests when they lie and re-write history and won't let them get away with it, to any degree.

Sadly most of her shows are a monologue. The conservative cowards won't face someone as sharp and smart as she is.

I wonder why they never discussed Ben Nelson "no"vote on financial reform, because him and his wife has so much stock in Warren Buffet company in his home state. The only democratic to say no all three times last week, he really didn't want it to succeed, he was looking out for his shares at any cost, dam the people, me first.