Just Lookin' For A Little Honesty...

[Big Fitz]

9 stories out of 589? The MSM has failed big-time. But saying Obama's policies are failures is tantamount to some for being a racist. I wish I were a member of a protected class.

failed only in the context of meeting any goal reporting honestly about the Obama administration.

But has been resoundingly successful in hiding the real impact of this horrifically bad administration.

 

[NYcarbineer]

1. "As The New York Times reported on Oct. 22, 2009, "The Obama administration's forecast at the start of the year, which predicted that unemployment would not climb much above 8 percent."

A big promise to be sure and a claim that proved false as unemployment climbed higher and higher reaching 10.2 percent at its peak. Yet, ABC, CBS, and NBC referenced this promise just nine times in two years in stimulus stories mentioning unemployment.

2. Unemployment still exceeds the Obama-guaranteed 8 percent unemployment rate two years after the bill's passage. In the same time period, network news barely reported that the stimulus failed to halt the sharp rise in unemployment. ABC 'World News,' CBS 'Evening News' and NBC 'Nightly News' all paid plenty of attention to the stimulus and its accomplishments, but more than 98 percent of those evening broadcast stories skipped over the administration's failed prediction.

3. The Media Research Center's Business & Media Institute (BMI) analyzed network evening news reports that mentioned "stimulus" and "unemployment" from Obama's inauguration on Jan. 20, 2009, to Dec. 21, 2010. BMI found that the networks almost completely ignored Obama's 8 percent unemployment promise and the failure of the stimulus to prevent rising unemployment.

4. Where Were Stories about the 8 Percent Promise? Just nine stories out of 589 (less than 2 percent) referred to the unemployment prediction in two years of network news coverage.

5. Networks Instead Promoted More Stimulus: When the effects of the stimulus plan were discussed, network news shows promoted even more stimulus. ABC's Bianna Golodryga asked Warren Buffet if he thought unemployment would hit 11 percent to which he said yes. Then, instead of noting that the stimulus failed, she asked if a second stimulus was needed. To this Buffet replied it may be necessary because the first bill "was sort of like taking half a tablet of Viagra."

a. ABC "World News" only mentioned the 8 percent prediction one time in nearly two years of coverage, making it the worst of the three networks. Instead ABC credited the stimulus with lower unemployment as reporter Betsy Stark claimed Dec. 4, 2009, when unemployment dropped to 10 percent: "Economists credit the government's massive stimulus spending with getting the job market to this point."

6. Bush Forced to Defend 5 Percent Unemployment: Under the administration of President George W. Bush, negative economic stories were pushed when unemployment was below 5 percent - less than half the number reached after the stimulus passed. CBS' Dan Rather on Oct. 8, 2004, asked "Tonight, where are the jobs?" yet few stimulus stories have even mentioned Obama's unemployment prediction."
Stimulus Two Years Later, Networks Ignore Obama's Failed Job Promise

Can you quote the administration guaranteeing an 8% UE rate as a result of the stimulus?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Glad you asked.

My point is that there is clear and convincing evidence of the bias and obfuscation by the MSM...just as those of us on the right have been saying.

And the folks on the left who attack Fox News, and rail about the 'right-wing noise machicne'...I believe that is your phrase- are sorely and abysmally uninformed...or there might be some more abstruse....or even malevolent explanation??

You are well informed enough to know the difference...so one might ask why you didn't write this OP, but the danger is to those who are too busy and are otherwise engaged, to study politics the way we do, and actually get their info from the MSM.

And, as the OP is entitled, my point is that I'm lookin' for a little honesty.

Just to poke a hole in your presumption, I've known about the 8% figure being way low for about two years now, and I never watch Fox News nor listen to any of the other right wing noisemakers. (I do try to get through the National Review, however, which lately has brought me to gags sometimes, but I read it anyway just to see how much they LEAVE OUT of a story just to justify their position.)

So...I must have gotten my information about the 8% from somewhere else. Gee, I wonder where: CNN, MSNBC, Washington Post, Politico, USA Today, and others which have covered the increasing unemployment rate ad nauseam, contrary to "studies" implying that the so-called "liberal media" rarely covers it.

You're tap dancing here, Mags...

I'm sure that you understand that the point is that those with a "D" next to their name don't get the same degree of scrutiny or execration that those with an "R" get.

In fact, the OP give an example of Dan Rather blasting Bush's 5% unemployment, but it is far more difficult to find the same invective directed at this administration.

It's not a question of whether or not the info is available, but to what degree it is pounded at, how easy to find the info, and in what light it is cast.

I have no doubt that the article quoted in the OP is spot on.
How about you?

The OP is an outright lie, which, with your endorsement, makes you a liar.

There was never a guarantee of 8% unemployment. There was never a promise of 8% unemployment.

Those are the only lies here, those that were manufactured by the rightwing propaganda machine.

Maybe the negligence on the part of NBC, ABC, and CBS was their failure to adequately cover the extent to which the Right did in fact spread those lies.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Why have I heard this 'infamous' 8% number approximately a zillion times over the past couple years,

if it was hidden by the 'infamous' 'liberal' media?

 

[NYcarbineer]

[He used fear to get his trillion dollars. Now that's he's pissed away the trillion and the unemployment is up over 9% he most certainly should be called out on it. Nobody believes a damn word obie wan says nowadays. Even he doesn't believe the shit he spews.

Now listen carefully. Let's consider Willow's claim, with this question:

Who needed to be scared? Only 2 Republican votes were needed to pass the bill, and only 3 voted for it.

Is anyone here prepared to make the case that the only reason RINO's Snowe, Collins, and Specter voted for the bill was because they believed that they had been guaranteed an 8% unemployment rate after it passed?

Anyone?

...comon, let's hear it.

 

[BolshevikHunter]

Why have I heard this 'infamous' 8% number approximately a zillion times over the past couple years,

if it was hidden by the 'infamous' 'liberal' media?

Nevertheless, It's another over-bLOATED claim / prediction by your hero the madman Obama carb. Jeezus bro, as much as you and I agree on certain issues, I find it hard to believe just how much you're bouncing up and down on this fraud Obama's nutsack? You are either for the truth, or you're not bro. There is no in between. He's owned by your enemies. LMAO! ~BH

Obama said stimulus would cap unemployment at 8 percent
PolitiFact | Will: Obama said stimulus would cap unemployment at 8 percent

 

[Trajan]

9 stories out of 589? The MSM has failed big-time. But saying Obama's policies are failures is tantamount to some for being a racist. I wish I were a member of a protected class.

Of course PC's "source" is the right wing's version of Media Matters which no one takes seriously, but hey, go ahead and ^5 the source. She loves it.


About the Media Research Center

About the MRC

The mission of the Media Research Center, "America's Media Watchdog," is to bring balance to the news media. Leaders of America's conservative movement have long believed that within the national news media a strident liberal bias existed that influenced the public's understanding of critical issues. On October 1, 1987, a group of young determined conservatives set out to not only prove — through sound scientific research — that liberal bias in the media does exist and undermines traditional American values, but also to neutralize its impact on the American political scene. What they launched that fall is the now acclaimed — Media Research Center (MRC).

Although Media Matters puts out legitimate proven sources, it gets pooh-poohed by the right. This MRC outfit does their own research and it's hailed as truth. Go figure.

you are free at any time to challenge their numbers MM......are you challenging their numbers?

whats more do you have a lexus nexus account? you can get one and do the research to disprove them if you wish.


Lexis Nexis | Knight Digital Media Center

 

[Trajan]

1. "As The New York Times reported on Oct. 22, 2009, "The Obama administration's forecast at the start of the year, which predicted that unemployment would not climb much above 8 percent."

A big promise to be sure and a claim that proved false as unemployment climbed higher and higher reaching 10.2 percent at its peak. Yet, ABC, CBS, and NBC referenced this promise just nine times in two years in stimulus stories mentioning unemployment.

2. Unemployment still exceeds the Obama-guaranteed 8 percent unemployment rate two years after the bill's passage. In the same time period, network news barely reported that the stimulus failed to halt the sharp rise in unemployment. ABC 'World News,' CBS 'Evening News' and NBC 'Nightly News' all paid plenty of attention to the stimulus and its accomplishments, but more than 98 percent of those evening broadcast stories skipped over the administration's failed prediction.

3. The Media Research Center's Business & Media Institute (BMI) analyzed network evening news reports that mentioned "stimulus" and "unemployment" from Obama's inauguration on Jan. 20, 2009, to Dec. 21, 2010. BMI found that the networks almost completely ignored Obama's 8 percent unemployment promise and the failure of the stimulus to prevent rising unemployment.

4. Where Were Stories about the 8 Percent Promise? Just nine stories out of 589 (less than 2 percent) referred to the unemployment prediction in two years of network news coverage.

5. Networks Instead Promoted More Stimulus: When the effects of the stimulus plan were discussed, network news shows promoted even more stimulus. ABC's Bianna Golodryga asked Warren Buffet if he thought unemployment would hit 11 percent to which he said yes. Then, instead of noting that the stimulus failed, she asked if a second stimulus was needed. To this Buffet replied it may be necessary because the first bill "was sort of like taking half a tablet of Viagra."

a. ABC "World News" only mentioned the 8 percent prediction one time in nearly two years of coverage, making it the worst of the three networks. Instead ABC credited the stimulus with lower unemployment as reporter Betsy Stark claimed Dec. 4, 2009, when unemployment dropped to 10 percent: "Economists credit the government's massive stimulus spending with getting the job market to this point."

6. Bush Forced to Defend 5 Percent Unemployment: Under the administration of President George W. Bush, negative economic stories were pushed when unemployment was below 5 percent - less than half the number reached after the stimulus passed. CBS' Dan Rather on Oct. 8, 2004, asked "Tonight, where are the jobs?" yet few stimulus stories have even mentioned Obama's unemployment prediction."
Stimulus Two Years Later, Networks Ignore Obama's Failed Job Promise

Can you quote the administration guaranteeing an 8% UE rate as a result of the stimulus?

Oh, I see, he 'projected' or 'forecast ' it, he didn't "guarantee" it....the chart he used to sell it, IF he got the stimulus really doesn't count....my god.

 

[Trajan]

Just to poke a hole in your presumption, I've known about the 8% figure being way low for about two years now, and I never watch Fox News nor listen to any of the other right wing noisemakers. (I do try to get through the National Review, however, which lately has brought me to gags sometimes, but I read it anyway just to see how much they LEAVE OUT of a story just to justify their position.)

So...I must have gotten my information about the 8% from somewhere else. Gee, I wonder where: CNN, MSNBC, Washington Post, Politico, USA Today, and others which have covered the increasing unemployment rate ad nauseam, contrary to "studies" implying that the so-called "liberal media" rarely covers it.

You're tap dancing here, Mags...

I'm sure that you understand that the point is that those with a "D" next to their name don't get the same degree of scrutiny or execration that those with an "R" get.

In fact, the OP give an example of Dan Rather blasting Bush's 5% unemployment, but it is far more difficult to find the same invective directed at this administration.

It's not a question of whether or not the info is available, but to what degree it is pounded at, how easy to find the info, and in what light it is cast.

I have no doubt that the article quoted in the OP is spot on.
How about you?

The OP is an outright lie, which, with your endorsement, makes you a liar.

There was never a guarantee of 8% unemployment. There was never a promise of 8% unemployment.

I should have read further down before I posted above...I see, so he "forecast" it....but did not guarantee it....

Those are the only lies here, those that were manufactured by the rightwing propaganda machine.

Maybe the negligence on the part of NBC, ABC, and CBS was their failure to adequately cover the extent to which the Right did in fact spread those lies.

your last 2 sentences there are way out there considering the topic and the medias very interest in unemployment rates under presidents, apparently they did their 'homework" on Bush but failed to.....cover the extent of obamas "promise" accurately? Or fight for obama and off the rsp how wanted to hold him to his PROMISE?

 

[Trajan]

[He used fear to get his trillion dollars. Now that's he's pissed away the trillion and the unemployment is up over 9% he most certainly should be called out on it. Nobody believes a damn word obie wan says nowadays. Even he doesn't believe the shit he spews.

Now listen carefully. Let's consider Willow's claim, with this question:

Who needed to be scared? Only 2 Republican votes were needed to pass the bill, and only 3 voted for it.

Is anyone here prepared to make the case that the only reason RINO's Snowe, Collins, and Specter voted for the bill was because they believed that they had been guaranteed an 8% unemployment rate after it passed?

Anyone?

...comon, let's hear it.

I am really beginning to wonder why it is you can never stay on topic?

 

[Trajan]

The OP is an outright lie, which, with your endorsement, makes you a liar.

There was never a guarantee of 8% unemployment. There was never a promise of 8% unemployment.

she never said there was, from the OP-

The Obama administration's forecast at the start of the year, which predicted that unemployment would not climb much above 8 percent."

 

[Misty]

Obama can only create jobs in his own adminstration. If he really wants to create real jobs start a company and hire people. That's how it's done in the real world.

Let's see what company could Obama start?

 

[MaggieMae]

Glad you asked.

My point is that there is clear and convincing evidence of the bias and obfuscation by the MSM...just as those of us on the right have been saying.

And the folks on the left who attack Fox News, and rail about the 'right-wing noise machicne'...I believe that is your phrase- are sorely and abysmally uninformed...or there might be some more abstruse....or even malevolent explanation??

You are well informed enough to know the difference...so one might ask why you didn't write this OP, but the danger is to those who are too busy and are otherwise engaged, to study politics the way we do, and actually get their info from the MSM.

And, as the OP is entitled, my point is that I'm lookin' for a little honesty.

Just to poke a hole in your presumption, I've known about the 8% figure being way low for about two years now, and I never watch Fox News nor listen to any of the other right wing noisemakers. (I do try to get through the National Review, however, which lately has brought me to gags sometimes, but I read it anyway just to see how much they LEAVE OUT of a story just to justify their position.)

So...I must have gotten my information about the 8% from somewhere else. Gee, I wonder where: CNN, MSNBC, Washington Post, Politico, USA Today, and others which have covered the increasing unemployment rate ad nauseam, contrary to "studies" implying that the so-called "liberal media" rarely covers it.

You're tap dancing here, Mags...

I'm sure that you understand that the point is that those with a "D" next to their name don't get the same degree of scrutiny or execration that those with an "R" get.

In fact, the OP give an example of Dan Rather blasting Bush's 5% unemployment, but it is far more difficult to find the same invective directed at this administration.

It's not a question of whether or not the info is available, but to what degree it is pounded at, how easy to find the info, and in what light it is cast.

I have no doubt that the article quoted in the OP is spot on.
How about you?

But it IS about the news being available elsewhere, hundreds of places actually, what with the Internet. If people are stupid enough to take everything every pundit says on Fox or MSNBC at face value, then that's their problem. There will always be gullible people in this world. As for news "coverage" of a political hotcake, how much time, how many nights/weeks/months did FoxNews harp on the Acorn situation to the exclusion of other important news? The Van Jones matter? Or any other GOTCHA "news" that drew the gullibles to their network? The way I see it 50% of Americans probably watch Fox and the other 50% watch the myriad other news stations, and 100% could be further broken down in percentages of right-wing/left-wing diehards with the rest (like me) just interested in the straight story.

 

[MaggieMae]

Just Lookin' For A Little Honesty...

1. "As The New York Times reported on Oct. 22, 2009, "The Obama administration's forecast at the start of the year, which predicted that unemployment would not climb much above 8 percent."

A big promise to be sure and a claim that proved false as unemployment climbed higher and higher reaching 10.2 percent at its peak. Yet, ABC, CBS, and NBC referenced this promise just nine times in two years in stimulus stories mentioning unemployment.

2. Unemployment still exceeds the Obama-guaranteed 8 percent unemployment rate two years after the bill's passage. In the same time period, network news barely reported that the stimulus failed to halt the sharp rise in unemployment. ABC 'World News,' CBS 'Evening News' and NBC 'Nightly News' all paid plenty of attention to the stimulus and its accomplishments, but more than 98 percent of those evening broadcast stories skipped over the administration's failed prediction.

3. The Media Research Center's Business & Media Institute (BMI) analyzed network evening news reports that mentioned "stimulus" and "unemployment" from Obama's inauguration on Jan. 20, 2009, to Dec. 21, 2010. BMI found that the networks almost completely ignored Obama's 8 percent unemployment promise and the failure of the stimulus to prevent rising unemployment.

4. Where Were Stories about the 8 Percent Promise? Just nine stories out of 589 (less than 2 percent) referred to the unemployment prediction in two years of network news coverage.

5. Networks Instead Promoted More Stimulus: When the effects of the stimulus plan were discussed, network news shows promoted even more stimulus. ABC's Bianna Golodryga asked Warren Buffet if he thought unemployment would hit 11 percent to which he said yes. Then, instead of noting that the stimulus failed, she asked if a second stimulus was needed. To this Buffet replied it may be necessary because the first bill "was sort of like taking half a tablet of Viagra."

a. ABC "World News" only mentioned the 8 percent prediction one time in nearly two years of coverage, making it the worst of the three networks. Instead ABC credited the stimulus with lower unemployment as reporter Betsy Stark claimed Dec. 4, 2009, when unemployment dropped to 10 percent: "Economists credit the government's massive stimulus spending with getting the job market to this point."

6. Bush Forced to Defend 5 Percent Unemployment: Under the administration of President George W. Bush, negative economic stories were pushed when unemployment was below 5 percent - less than half the number reached after the stimulus passed. CBS' Dan Rather on Oct. 8, 2004, asked "Tonight, where are the jobs?" yet few stimulus stories have even mentioned Obama's unemployment prediction."
Stimulus Two Years Later, Networks Ignore Obama's Failed Job Promise

You want honesty?


One simple point...A projection is not a promise or a guarantee.

The claim that the Obama administration "promised" the stimulus would keep the unemployment rate below 8 percent is a popular talking point among Republican critics of the stimulus.

We've heard it from House Republican Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, Reps. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., and Lynn Westmoreland, R-Ga., as well as conservative talk show host Sean Hannity, to name a few. They all called it a "promise."

They are referring to a Jan. 9, 2009, report called "The Job Impact of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan" from Christina Romer, chairwoman of the president's Council of Economic Advisers, and Jared Bernstein, the vice president's top economic adviser.

Their report projected that the stimulus plan proposed by Obama would create between three and four million jobs by the end of 2010. The report also includes a graphic predicting unemployment rates with and without the stimulus. Without the stimulus (the baseline), unemployment was projected to hit about 8.5 percent in 2009 and then continue rising to a peak of about 9 percent in 2010. With the stimulus, they predicted the unemployment rate would peak at just under 8 percent in 2009.

But in June, the unemployment rate was 9.5 percent.

In the past week, the administration has acknowledged its projections were wrong.

Here's what Romer herself said in a July 2 interview on Fox: "None of us had a crystal ball back in December and January. I think almost every private forecaster realized that there were other things going on in the economy. It was worse than we anticipated. What the private forecasters are saying now is that they do anticipate that the economy will start growing again in the second half of the year, and that usually, then, employment and unemployment start to respond shortly after that. So I think that is a realistic expectation."

Biden also acknowledged the discrepancies in a July 5 interview with ABC's George Stephanopoulos.

PolitiFact | Cantor and other Republicans say Obama promised stimulus would keep unemployment rates below 8 percent

It's obvious to anyone with half a brain that no one can "promise" what an unemployment number will look like. But it's just one more of those mantras that caught the attention of The Gullibles who continue to repeat that idiocy.

 

[MaggieMae]

Just Lookin' For A Little Honesty...

1. "As The New York Times reported on Oct. 22, 2009, "The Obama administration's forecast at the start of the year, which predicted that unemployment would not climb much above 8 percent."

A big promise to be sure and a claim that proved false as unemployment climbed higher and higher reaching 10.2 percent at its peak. Yet, ABC, CBS, and NBC referenced this promise just nine times in two years in stimulus stories mentioning unemployment.

2. Unemployment still exceeds the Obama-guaranteed 8 percent unemployment rate two years after the bill's passage. In the same time period, network news barely reported that the stimulus failed to halt the sharp rise in unemployment. ABC 'World News,' CBS 'Evening News' and NBC 'Nightly News' all paid plenty of attention to the stimulus and its accomplishments, but more than 98 percent of those evening broadcast stories skipped over the administration's failed prediction.

3. The Media Research Center's Business & Media Institute (BMI) analyzed network evening news reports that mentioned "stimulus" and "unemployment" from Obama's inauguration on Jan. 20, 2009, to Dec. 21, 2010. BMI found that the networks almost completely ignored Obama's 8 percent unemployment promise and the failure of the stimulus to prevent rising unemployment.

4. Where Were Stories about the 8 Percent Promise? Just nine stories out of 589 (less than 2 percent) referred to the unemployment prediction in two years of network news coverage.

5. Networks Instead Promoted More Stimulus: When the effects of the stimulus plan were discussed, network news shows promoted even more stimulus. ABC's Bianna Golodryga asked Warren Buffet if he thought unemployment would hit 11 percent to which he said yes. Then, instead of noting that the stimulus failed, she asked if a second stimulus was needed. To this Buffet replied it may be necessary because the first bill "was sort of like taking half a tablet of Viagra."

a. ABC "World News" only mentioned the 8 percent prediction one time in nearly two years of coverage, making it the worst of the three networks. Instead ABC credited the stimulus with lower unemployment as reporter Betsy Stark claimed Dec. 4, 2009, when unemployment dropped to 10 percent: "Economists credit the government's massive stimulus spending with getting the job market to this point."

6. Bush Forced to Defend 5 Percent Unemployment: Under the administration of President George W. Bush, negative economic stories were pushed when unemployment was below 5 percent - less than half the number reached after the stimulus passed. CBS' Dan Rather on Oct. 8, 2004, asked "Tonight, where are the jobs?" yet few stimulus stories have even mentioned Obama's unemployment prediction."
Stimulus Two Years Later, Networks Ignore Obama's Failed Job Promise

You want honesty?


One simple point...A projection is not a promise or a guarantee.

The claim that the Obama administration "promised" the stimulus would keep the unemployment rate below 8 percent is a popular talking point among Republican critics of the stimulus.

We've heard it from House Republican Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, Reps. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., and Lynn Westmoreland, R-Ga., as well as conservative talk show host Sean Hannity, to name a few. They all called it a "promise."

They are referring to a Jan. 9, 2009, report called "The Job Impact of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan" from Christina Romer, chairwoman of the president's Council of Economic Advisers, and Jared Bernstein, the vice president's top economic adviser.

Their report projected that the stimulus plan proposed by Obama would create between three and four million jobs by the end of 2010. The report also includes a graphic predicting unemployment rates with and without the stimulus. Without the stimulus (the baseline), unemployment was projected to hit about 8.5 percent in 2009 and then continue rising to a peak of about 9 percent in 2010. With the stimulus, they predicted the unemployment rate would peak at just under 8 percent in 2009.

But in June, the unemployment rate was 9.5 percent.

In the past week, the administration has acknowledged its projections were wrong.

Here's what Romer herself said in a July 2 interview on Fox: "None of us had a crystal ball back in December and January. I think almost every private forecaster realized that there were other things going on in the economy. It was worse than we anticipated. What the private forecasters are saying now is that they do anticipate that the economy will start growing again in the second half of the year, and that usually, then, employment and unemployment start to respond shortly after that. So I think that is a realistic expectation."

Biden also acknowledged the discrepancies in a July 5 interview with ABC's George Stephanopoulos.

PolitiFact | Cantor and other Republicans say Obama promised stimulus would keep unemployment rates below 8 percent

Valerie, I have no dispute with Politfact, even though the provenance is on the left, but with the thrust of our argument....

I might have said the same if a Repub 'prediction' had been attacked.

No, the point here is that this administration is not given the same treatment that a Repub administration would have received.

That is the basis of the 'honesty' in question.

And that's just another perception on your part, since obviously you can't possibly know how a Republican administration would have been received. Ironically, it was George W. Bush who developed TARP and he was given kudos by Democrats and Republicans who recognized how necessary that was, even though no one actually liked it.

 

[MaggieMae]

1. "As The New York Times reported on Oct. 22, 2009, "The Obama administration's forecast at the start of the year, which predicted that unemployment would not climb much above 8 percent."

A big promise to be sure and a claim that proved false as unemployment climbed higher and higher reaching 10.2 percent at its peak. Yet, ABC, CBS, and NBC referenced this promise just nine times in two years in stimulus stories mentioning unemployment.

2. Unemployment still exceeds the Obama-guaranteed 8 percent unemployment rate two years after the bill's passage. In the same time period, network news barely reported that the stimulus failed to halt the sharp rise in unemployment. ABC 'World News,' CBS 'Evening News' and NBC 'Nightly News' all paid plenty of attention to the stimulus and its accomplishments, but more than 98 percent of those evening broadcast stories skipped over the administration's failed prediction.

3. The Media Research Center's Business & Media Institute (BMI) analyzed network evening news reports that mentioned "stimulus" and "unemployment" from Obama's inauguration on Jan. 20, 2009, to Dec. 21, 2010. BMI found that the networks almost completely ignored Obama's 8 percent unemployment promise and the failure of the stimulus to prevent rising unemployment.

4. Where Were Stories about the 8 Percent Promise? Just nine stories out of 589 (less than 2 percent) referred to the unemployment prediction in two years of network news coverage.

5. Networks Instead Promoted More Stimulus: When the effects of the stimulus plan were discussed, network news shows promoted even more stimulus. ABC's Bianna Golodryga asked Warren Buffet if he thought unemployment would hit 11 percent to which he said yes. Then, instead of noting that the stimulus failed, she asked if a second stimulus was needed. To this Buffet replied it may be necessary because the first bill "was sort of like taking half a tablet of Viagra."

a. ABC "World News" only mentioned the 8 percent prediction one time in nearly two years of coverage, making it the worst of the three networks. Instead ABC credited the stimulus with lower unemployment as reporter Betsy Stark claimed Dec. 4, 2009, when unemployment dropped to 10 percent: "Economists credit the government's massive stimulus spending with getting the job market to this point."

6. Bush Forced to Defend 5 Percent Unemployment: Under the administration of President George W. Bush, negative economic stories were pushed when unemployment was below 5 percent - less than half the number reached after the stimulus passed. CBS' Dan Rather on Oct. 8, 2004, asked "Tonight, where are the jobs?" yet few stimulus stories have even mentioned Obama's unemployment prediction."
Stimulus Two Years Later, Networks Ignore Obama's Failed Job Promise

in all honesty;
bush and republicans helped to make this mess
bush and republicans were not always on the mark with THEIR predictions, either
republicans have already PROVED they are no better at handling the economy than democrats
tea baggers and CONSERVATIVES keep SAYING that they are concerned about FISCAL ISSUES but keep PROVING they are MUCH MORE CONCERNED with SOCIAL ISSUES)

has, in 2 years (as opposed to the 8 that bush had), obama FIXED EVERYTHING!
no
would a repub have done any better in these 2 years?
no
is there a repub/conservative/tea party candidate who I trust to
a. stay out of social issues and
2. concentrate on fiscal issues


no

(actually....the answer is YES...but the repubs/cons I would vote for would NOT get elected...they are RINOS)

Rik-o, my friend, the contumely is directed at the media, rather than the administration...

take a look at post #15.

PC, please try to at least pay attention to your own postings. You are trying to connect media bias to the Obama Administration.

 

[MaggieMae]

He used fear to get his trillion dollars. Now that's he's pissed away the trillion and the unemployment is up over 9% he most certainly should be called out on it. Nobody believes a damn word obie wan says nowadays. Even he doesn't believe the shit he spews.

You poor dear. "Nobody"?? Maybe "nobody" in your circle of friends, but that's hardly representative of the rest of country.

Obama: Job Ratings

Economic Optimism in U.S. Ties Three-Year High

 

[MaggieMae]

9 stories out of 589? The MSM has failed big-time. But saying Obama's policies are failures is tantamount to some for being a racist. I wish I were a member of a protected class.

failed only in the context of meeting any goal reporting honestly about the Obama administration.

But has been resoundingly successful in hiding the real impact of this horrifically bad administration.

The action taken kept us from another depression. What would the Republicans have done to stop that? And please don't use the same ol' same ol' line about less regulation, lower taxes, blah blah blah, because that would have taken time and the country didn't HAVE time. Expensive as the bandaids were, it stopped the bleeding and provided breathing room to plan the surgery. There wasn't an economist alive who said recovery would happen overnight, or even be fully back to normal for at least a decade.

 

[MaggieMae]

Why have I heard this 'infamous' 8% number approximately a zillion times over the past couple years,

if it was hidden by the 'infamous' 'liberal' media?

Nevertheless, It's another over-bLOATED claim / prediction by your hero the madman Obama carb. Jeezus bro, as much as you and I agree on certain issues, I find it hard to believe just how much you're bouncing up and down on this fraud Obama's nutsack? You are either for the truth, or you're not bro. There is no in between. He's owned by your enemies. LMAO! ~BH

Obama said stimulus would cap unemployment at 8 percent
PolitiFact | Will: Obama said stimulus would cap unemployment at 8 percent

Boooosh promised the Iraq invasion would only cost $3 billion, total, and we'd be outta there by December 2003. Presidents make predictions all the time based on projections at the time.

 

[MaggieMae]

9 stories out of 589? The MSM has failed big-time. But saying Obama's policies are failures is tantamount to some for being a racist. I wish I were a member of a protected class.

Of course PC's "source" is the right wing's version of Media Matters which no one takes seriously, but hey, go ahead and ^5 the source. She loves it.


About the Media Research Center

About the MRC

The mission of the Media Research Center, "America's Media Watchdog," is to bring balance to the news media. Leaders of America's conservative movement have long believed that within the national news media a strident liberal bias existed that influenced the public's understanding of critical issues. On October 1, 1987, a group of young determined conservatives set out to not only prove — through sound scientific research — that liberal bias in the media does exist and undermines traditional American values, but also to neutralize its impact on the American political scene. What they launched that fall is the now acclaimed — Media Research Center (MRC).

Although Media Matters puts out legitimate proven sources, it gets pooh-poohed by the right. This MRC outfit does their own research and it's hailed as truth. Go figure.

you are free at any time to challenge their numbers MM......are you challenging their numbers?

whats more do you have a lexus nexus account? you can get one and do the research to disprove them if you wish.


Lexis Nexis | Knight Digital Media Center

Seems to me if their study was entirely credible, they would have published the results so that one didn't have to download an entire website to get them. Can you copy from that site? With a couple of clicks you can read every analysis Media Matters does, and they include credible sources, videos, etc., as I said.