3 Conservative Lies About Obama's Record Debunked in One Post

[ConservaDerrps]

Ha ha ha. So the Conservative Think Tank comes in, cherry-picks their own data, gets shown their ass over and over again by clean, unbiased data, and then declare they win? Brilliant move Conservadopes.

Again, who wants to answer my question:

Did Public Sector jobs go up or down, as a whole, under Obama?

In the federal government, down. I'm in the federal government.

Your rightwing talking-points were most likely generated by the left so it's easy to debunk lies from your own side.

Hmm. So what you're saying actually debunks the other ConservaDopes charts, you realize?

 

[TakeAStepBack]

This chart shows how Obama had trended down on spending. Just look at that balance off on govt./public debt.

 

[ConservaDerrps]

How many times are you going to ask this?

They went up in the context of Obama. Federal jobs, which were omitted in your chart, went up steadily. State adn local cuts are not something Obama gets credit for anyway, but even if he could honestly claim credit, if you lump together the whole, it went up.

I'll ask as many times as it takes for you to give the factually correct, data-proven answer and one where you don't get to cherry pick the data to show the answer you WANT to be true.

Did Public Sector Jobs go up or down under Obama?

Down. 1.2 million fewer jobs.

The only reason unempoyment isn't over 10% is they only count those actively looking for work. Another factor is underemployment which they don't like to even mention.

And let's not forget about the huge drop in our spending power due to inflation. Hidden costs thrown into the price of fast-food by the FDA.

The worker participation rate is 63%......down from the Bush years.

I'll say this for you: you're the only one speaking honestly. TakeaStepOffthePier keeps misrepresenting data, and you're the one actually telling the truth.

Hey, Takeadickandsuckonitforawhile, care to address his claim?

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Sure, i'll address it./ It's wrong. We've already said state and local public employees took a hit. Federal work force has grown as shown several times.

What part are you missing, derp?

 

[The T]

Sure, i'll address it./ It's wrong. We've already said state and local public employees took a hit. Federal work force has grown as shown several times.

What part are you missing, derp?

Derp is in denial. Truth to people as him can be overwhelming.

 

[DiamondDave]

Ha ha ha. So the Conservative Think Tank comes in, cherry-picks their own data, gets shown their ass over and over again by clean, unbiased data, and then declare they win? Brilliant move Conservadopes.

Again, who wants to answer my question:

Did Public Sector jobs go up or down, as a whole, under Obama?

In the federal government, down. I'm in the federal government.

Your rightwing talking-points were most likely generated by the left so it's easy to debunk lies from your own side.

Hmm. So what you're saying actually debunks the other ConservaDopes charts, you realize?

Again

Is Obama or the fed responsible for the hiring and firings in local and/or state government??

Are their policies responsible for the hiring and firing of public jobs at the state and/or local level??

Or are you saying that Obama is responsible for all aspects, results, and details under him in all levels of government (even outside of the fed)? (I think that you better think HARD on how you answer this one)

 

[Misty]

"In 2011 and 2012, the pace of spending was slowed when a new emboldened breed of Republicans took back the House promising to end the binge. The House Budget Committee, headed by Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan, has identified about $150 billion of new spending Mr. Obama wanted in 2011 and 2012 that Republicans would not approve. As the chart shows, government spending as a share of GDP fell, and taxes were not raised. But to attribute this drop in government spending to the president or congressional Democrats would be dishonest."

There's your ******* chart.

Laffer and Moore: Obama's Real Spending Record - WSJ.com

 

[ConservaDerrps]

In the federal government, down. I'm in the federal government.

Your rightwing talking-points were most likely generated by the left so it's easy to debunk lies from your own side.

Hmm. So what you're saying actually debunks the other ConservaDopes charts, you realize?

Again

Is Obama or the fed responsible for the hiring and firings in local and/or state government??

Are their policies responsible for the hiring and firing of public jobs at the state and/or local level??

Or are you saying that Obama is responsible for all aspects, results, and details under him in all levels of government (even outside of the fed)? (I think that you better think HARD on how you answer this one)

Here's what I'm saying Jackball: I'm saying that if you folks on the right are going to hammer Obama as a guy who is rapidly increasing spending and the size of the government, and that he's doing it more than any other President, I'm going to call you liars, and point to actual data, not my spin, not my cherry-picking of the data, but actual data that shows you are either lying or misinformed.

No, of course he's not responsible for hiring and firing of every government employee both nationally and at the state and local levels. But if you're going to make THAT argument, then NO ONE on the right can rightfully criticize ANY president for the size of the government or spending.

The fact is that it's the Right Wing that wants to pretend that the President operates in a vacuum, the only one with the corporate credit card. He's not that guy, but if you stop trying to find what you want to find in the data, and just look at overall Public Sector jobs as a whole, they have gone down. This is acknowledged fact.

I'm not upset or angry that the Conservadopes in this thread have decided to call me a liar and post their own charts supposedly debunking my post. I don't care who decides to stay blind to the truth. All I'm saying is that when you can continually LIE about something as simple as "Have public sector jobs on the whole gone up or down?" instead of just admitting that you're wrong about it, there's an issue, and it's not on my end.

 

[ConservaDerrps]

"In 2011 and 2012, the pace of spending was slowed when a new emboldened breed of Republicans took back the House promising to end the binge. The House Budget Committee, headed by Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan, has identified about $150 billion of new spending Mr. Obama wanted in 2011 and 2012 that Republicans would not approve. As the chart shows, government spending as a share of GDP fell, and taxes were not raised. But to attribute this drop in government spending to the president or congressional Democrats would be dishonest."

There's your ******* chart.

Laffer and Moore: Obama's Real Spending Record - WSJ.com

Right. Because Laffer of all people is a trusted, unbiased source of analysis. Besides, you still ******* proved MY point that Obama hasn't spent us out of control. Yes, your Right Wing honk newspaper had a Right Wing honk economist declare it was all thanks to Paul Ryan's VALIANT EFFORTS, but that's spin. The FACT is that Obama hasn't outspent all the other Presidents combined.

Also, that chart's spike completely coincides with the big staffing up for the census that was done in 2010, which has already been explained earlier, so there, I just spun your shit right back on ya.

"He was going to spend another $150 billion, he was GONNA!"

 

[TakeAStepBack]

You're the one who omitted federal employees from the plot chart and then you call us liars after we had to figure out the truth? You're a ******* wingnut, son. I suggest a much simpler subject for you. Such as sitcoms, or baseball card trading (JUST STAY AWAY FROM THE STATS)

 

[TakeAStepBack]

These ******* partisan hacks are something special. Deny every last grain that stains the LOLberal party, but then go on a bender when you find a butt nugget that supports the "cause".



It's all fine adn good. But in this thread you did not find a nugget. You got exposed for trying to claim a butt nugget stuck to someone elses ass. Then you call us liars because we see you with that persons butt nugget. Why are you peddling butt nuggets anyway?

 

[ConservaDerrps]

You're the one who omitted federal employees from the plot chart and then you call us liars after we had to figure out the truth? You're a ******* wingnut, son. I suggest a much simpler subject for you. Such as sitcoms, or baseball card trading (JUST STAY AWAY FROM THE STATS)

I didn't omit ANYTHING. I gave you one chart, and then ANOTHER. Both of which completely validate my argument that public sector jobs have gone down. I even gave you direct data from the government, TWICE. Hence, why I keep asking if THE SUM TOTAL OF PUBLIC SECTOR JOBS WENT UP OR DOWN UNDER OBAMA.

And why don't you again, address what the other CONSERVATIVE in this thread has said about over a million jobs in the FEDERAL BOOKS going bye bye?

I'm so completely done with you because it's clear you suffer from the disease where you think you're right, and you claim it so hard you think I have to believe it. My shit is too legit to quit.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

No, no it does not. It clearly states TWO data plots. Local and State.

Now you;re just ******* lying. Give back that butt nugget derp. It does not belong to you.

 

[The T]

You're the one who omitted federal employees from the plot chart and then you call us liars after we had to figure out the truth? You're a ******* wingnut, son. I suggest a much simpler subject for you. Such as sitcoms, or baseball card trading (JUST STAY AWAY FROM THE STATS)

I didn't omit ANYTHING. My first chart just rolls all public sector jobs together, asshole. You are the idiots that assumed it didn't account for Federal jobs. It did, it just rolled them in with the others. Hence, why I keep asking if THE SUM TOTAL OF PUBLIC SECTOR JOBS WENT UP OR DOWN UNDER OBAMA.

And why don't you again, address what the other CONSERVATIVE in this thread has said about over a million jobs in the FEDERAL BOOKS going bye bye?

I'm so completely done with you because it's clear you suffer from the disease where you think you're right, and you claim it so hard you think I have to believe it. My shit is too legit to quit.

Sure...sure...in an attempt to Obfuscate...LIE...HIDE.

Isn't it NICE *I* came here with one that parsed it to EXPOSE your LIE?

 

[Dr.House]

I'm so completely done with you because it's clear you suffer from the disease where you think you're right, and you claim it so hard you think I have to believe it.

Ironic post is ironic....

 

[ConservaDerrps]

No, no it does not. It clearly states TWO data plots. Local and State.

Now you;re just ******* lying. Give back that butt nugget derp. It does not belong to you.

You know what? Hey, I'm an adult, and I'll cop to forgetting exactly which data points were on the first chart. So you're right that it was just state and local jobs. However, that still doesn't mean that you are correct about all public sector jobs, does it? That's my bigger point here.

Just because the first chart doesn't include Federal jobs, doesn't mean I'm wrong about the overall trend of public sector jobs.

Rob Portman says there has been a substantial increase in federal government jobs under Obama

The federal government had nearly 2.8 million employees when the stimulus passed. (The exact number, important here, is 2.795 million.) Then, according to figures from the Bureau of Labor Statistics:

The number grew to 3.4 million by May 2010. PolitiFact has examined that growth spurt several times and found it was because of temporary 2010 Census hiring, long-planned and independent of any White House action.
By October 2010, the number of federal workers had dropped to 2.86 million and by May 2012, the most recent most available, it was projected to be 2.819 million.
The number has dropped slowly every single month since March 2011.

You can assess this a couple of ways. The trend for more than a year has been downward, while the net number since the stimulus passed in early 2009 is up -- by 24,000.

Yet Portman’s point was clear: that the proper way to grow the economy is through private sector jobs, not public sector jobs. He didn’t say federal jobs have inched upward. He said they have grown "pretty substantially."

How big is substantial?

Federal employment on net has grown by less than 1 percent since the stimulus passed, BLS data and our calculator show.

 

[Si modo]

And the graphs.

There's posters breaking them down right now, the last thing I expect is Conservaderrps to come here and provide a constructive rebuttal. He's already proven in other threads he prefers the poo flinging.

You don't actually think there's a man who sat at his computer, created a screen name Conservaderrps, then started posting with the desire to have constructive dialogues about issues with people of different viewpoints did you?

I see him pushing back on a daily basis at the vast array of poo flingers on the right.

I would try to get all socratic on your ass and ask why you believe the data in the OP is representative on much of anything other than private jobs vs state and local, but I suspect you've gone blind.

Fortunately, the left still has a few annoying folks out there who actually think for themselves. But, fear not, the voting pools coming of age are even more highly concentrated in non-thinkers.

 

[DiamondDave]

Hmm. So what you're saying actually debunks the other ConservaDopes charts, you realize?

Again

Is Obama or the fed responsible for the hiring and firings in local and/or state government??

Are their policies responsible for the hiring and firing of public jobs at the state and/or local level??

Or are you saying that Obama is responsible for all aspects, results, and details under him in all levels of government (even outside of the fed)? (I think that you better think HARD on how you answer this one)

Here's what I'm saying Jackball: I'm saying that if you folks on the right are going to hammer Obama as a guy who is rapidly increasing spending and the size of the government, and that he's doing it more than any other President, I'm going to call you liars, and point to actual data, not my spin, not my cherry-picking of the data, but actual data that shows you are either lying or misinformed.

No, of course he's not responsible for hiring and firing of every government employee both nationally and at the state and local levels. But if you're going to make THAT argument, then NO ONE on the right can rightfully criticize ANY president for the size of the government or spending.

The fact is that it's the Right Wing that wants to pretend that the President operates in a vacuum, the only one with the corporate credit card. He's not that guy, but if you stop trying to find what you want to find in the data, and just look at overall Public Sector jobs as a whole, they have gone down. This is acknowledged fact.

I'm not upset or angry that the Conservadopes in this thread have decided to call me a liar and post their own charts supposedly debunking my post. I don't care who decides to stay blind to the truth. All I'm saying is that when you can continually LIE about something as simple as "Have public sector jobs on the whole gone up or down?" instead of just admitting that you're wrong about it, there's an issue, and it's not on my end.

1) It is not a lie, spending is increasing greatly
2) The prez can be criticized for FEDERAL spending, and rightfully so... not for state or local spending... just as he can be criticized with the size of the federal government, and not for the size of this state or that state or this locality or that locality
3) The president does not work in a vacuum... that is the one thing you are correct on.. and the government as a whole is to blame for the size and scope and spending levels it is at today...
4) Federal jobs have increased, and since this is a discussion on the federal government, particularly the leader of the executive, that is the part that is pertinent.. not the part of state and local government jobs decreasing

 

[ConservaDerrps]

You're the one who omitted federal employees from the plot chart and then you call us liars after we had to figure out the truth? You're a ******* wingnut, son. I suggest a much simpler subject for you. Such as sitcoms, or baseball card trading (JUST STAY AWAY FROM THE STATS)

I didn't omit ANYTHING. My first chart just rolls all public sector jobs together, asshole. You are the idiots that assumed it didn't account for Federal jobs. It did, it just rolled them in with the others. Hence, why I keep asking if THE SUM TOTAL OF PUBLIC SECTOR JOBS WENT UP OR DOWN UNDER OBAMA.

And why don't you again, address what the other CONSERVATIVE in this thread has said about over a million jobs in the FEDERAL BOOKS going bye bye?

I'm so completely done with you because it's clear you suffer from the disease where you think you're right, and you claim it so hard you think I have to believe it. My shit is too legit to quit.

Sure...sure...in an attempt to Obfuscate...LIE...HIDE.

Isn't it NICE *I* came here with one that parsed it to EXPOSE your LIE?

See my previous post. I forgot what data points were on that chart. I've seen so many that chart just public sector all together. Like I said, I'm a man and can admit when I made a mistake, but I still would like you all to address this:

PolitiFact Ohio | Rob Portman says there has been a substantial increase in federal government jobs under Obama

And this:

Obama’s press conference: The public sector isn’t fine - The Washington Post

Your math still doesn't work out, even when you account for Federal jobs.

 

[The T]

I didn't omit ANYTHING. My first chart just rolls all public sector jobs together, asshole. You are the idiots that assumed it didn't account for Federal jobs. It did, it just rolled them in with the others. Hence, why I keep asking if THE SUM TOTAL OF PUBLIC SECTOR JOBS WENT UP OR DOWN UNDER OBAMA.

And why don't you again, address what the other CONSERVATIVE in this thread has said about over a million jobs in the FEDERAL BOOKS going bye bye?

I'm so completely done with you because it's clear you suffer from the disease where you think you're right, and you claim it so hard you think I have to believe it. My shit is too legit to quit.

Sure...sure...in an attempt to Obfuscate...LIE...HIDE.

Isn't it NICE *I* came here with one that parsed it to EXPOSE your LIE?

See my previous post. I forgot what data points were on that chart. I've seen so many that chart just public sector all together. Like I said, I'm a man and can admit when I made a mistake, but I still would like you all to address this:

PolitiFact Ohio | Rob Portman says there has been a substantial increase in federal government jobs under Obama

And this:

Obama’s press conference: The public sector isn’t fine - The Washington Post

Your math still doesn't work out, even when you account for Federal jobs.

Here ya GO (again) DERP:

​

There Is ZERO recovery.​