BloggeRhythms

Much is often made regarding the liberal bias in the press. An article by  Jordan Fabian @thehill.com, however, isn’t  just supportive of the POTUS and his party, it reads like a campaign speech and outright endorsement.   

Mr. Fabian’s problem though, just like the POTUS’s, is that little stumbling blocks of reality keep contradicting his arguments. A major reason that politicians, and their flacks, despise factual evidence that conflicts with their statements. 

Fabian writes: “President Obama is using his bully pulpit to shape the 2016 presidential race, seeking to influence the vote to succeed him as the spotlight on his presidency fades.

“In a trip to Springfield, Ill. — where his own presidential campaign began — Obama called for a more civil discourse in comments that appeared to be directed at lawmakers on Capitol Hill and candidates in the presidential field.”

And then Fabian stated: “During a symbolic appearance at a Baltimore mosque the week before, he rejected anti-Muslim sentiment the White House has blamed on Republican presidential frontrunner Donald Trump and his call to ban Muslims from entering the United States.”

Yet, according to Daniel Bush @pbs.org, “Despite widespread condemnation from critics at home and abroad, Donald Trump’s poll numbers aren’t suffering. His lead has only increased since he called for a ban on Muslims entering the United States, proving that such inflammatory rhetoric resonates with many Republican primary voters and alarming party elites who now see the businessman as a serious threat to win the GOP presidential nomination.”

On another extremely important issue with voters, Fabian writes: “Obama has routinely ripped the Republican claims the economy is in poor shape. He took aim at the field’s “doom and despair” after January’s jobs report showed the unemployment rate dipping below five percent for the first time of his presidency.”

But, in reality, the shape of the economy hasn’t changed for the better at all. What’s been changed is the formula used for calculating unemployment. Omitting those out of work for more than four weeks. Add those back in, as has always been done in the past, and the number of unemployed jumps to 9.9%. Far higher than the POTUS’s predecessor's statistics. 

At the same time, the Labor Force Participation Rate was 62.7% in January. That’s the lowest since Jimmy Carter was president. 

Below is a chart from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, showing the employment trend for the past ten years. Under “W.” Bush the number of employed was consistently higher. Democrats took over Congress in 2007 and the POTUS’s Inauguration Day was Tuesday, January 20, 2009. The steady decline in employment speaks for itself, beginning in 2008.

Year	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
2006	66.0	66.1	66.2	66.1	66.1	66.2	66.1	66.2	66.1	66.2	66.3	66.4
2007	66.4	66.3	66.2	65.9	66.0	66.0	66.0	65.8	66.0	65.8	66.0	66.0
2008	66.2	66.0	66.1	65.9	66.1	66.1	66.1	66.1	66.0	66.0	65.9	65.8
2009	65.7	65.8	65.6	65.7	65.7	65.7	65.5	65.4	65.1	65.0	65.0	64.6
2010	64.8	64.9	64.9	65.2	64.9	64.6	64.6	64.7	64.6	64.4	64.6	64.3
2011	64.2	64.1	64.2	64.2	64.1	64.0	64.0	64.1	64.2	64.1	64.1	64.0
2012	63.7	63.8	63.8	63.7	63.7	63.8	63.7	63.5	63.7	63.8	63.6	63.7
2013	63.6	63.4	63.3	63.4	63.4	63.4	63.3	63.2	63.3	62.8	63.0	62.9
2014	62.9	63.0	63.2	62.8	62.8	62.8	62.9	62.9	62.8	62.9	62.9	62.7
2015	62.9	62.8	62.7	62.7	62.8	62.6	62.6	62.6	62.4	62.5	62.5	62.6
2016	62.7

Moving on, Fabian states: “The president remains very popular with Democratic voters, and both Clinton and Sanders are embracing his record as they seek votes — particularly from African-Americans. Nearly nine in ten Democrats approve of his job performance, according to Gallup.”

Nonetheless, and regardless of Fabian's positive spin: “Gallup shows Obama’s approval rating under 50 percent. It stood at 47 percent on Friday.”

Thus, regardless of how rosy those in the media try to paint the political picture for Democrats, and the POTUS in particular, hard information generally interferes. And, as often happens, two readers summed the situation up accurately and succinctly, as follows:

Dan Farrar wrote: “Obama wasn’t able to influence the midterm election much and I don’t see him doing much to influence this election much either.

Kenmar13 added: “Actually he had much influence on the mid term election. Seems to me the Democrats have lost over 900 elected seats nation wide.”

And there you have it.

On another recurring topic, Verena Dobnick @ap.org reports: “After much of the northeastern United States experienced record cold on Valentine's Day, the National Weather Service said Monday would be snowy in many areas before sleet or freezing rain started and rain finally arrived.”

Most ironically, though, is that: “Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser said she deployed the D.C. snow team Sunday ahead of the storm, which is expected to deliver a sloppy mix of snow, sleet and rain. One to 3 inches is forecast for Monday.

“Outside the nation's capital, the Virginia Department of Transportation staged nearly 2,500 trucks to treat and clear roads.”

Thus, for the second week in a row, the nation’s Capitol, where the POTUS lives, is dealing with snowstorms, causing this writer to repeat some data from a couple of months ago.

Back on February 1st of this year, Andrew Follett, Energy and Environmental Reporter @dailycaller.com headlined an article: “Obama’s Paris Global Warming Treaty Will Cost At Least $12.1 Trillion.”

The text says: “The United Nations Paris agreement to stop dangerous global warming could cost $12.1 trillion over the next 25 years, according to calculations performed by environmental activists.

“The required expenditure averages about $484 billion a year over the period,” calculated Bloomberg New Energy Finance with the assistance of the environmentalist nonprofit Ceres.

That’s almost as much money the U.S. federal government spent on defense in 2015, according to 2015 spending numbers from the bipartisan Committee For Responsible Federal Budget. The required annual spending is almost 3.7 times more than the $131.57 billion China spent on its military in 2014.

Which leads to an obvious question. If $12.1 trillion is going to be spent specifically on global-warming, does that mean another few trillion in taxes will be needed for those snow plows and shovels?  

Bringing us to today’s update on Bill Clinton’s wife.

Many esteemed pundits still believe the Sanders early primary surge is some kind of aberration or fluke, and that Bill Clinton's wife will ultimately attain the Democrat presidential nomination. Yet, some research shows Clinton vulnerability in other places around the nation.

Today, Maxwell Tani @Business Insider via yahoo. finance tells us that “whatever head start the Clinton campaign had in Nevada appears to be evaporating.”

“Despite getting off to a bumpy start in October, with a high-profile local staff resignation, Sanders has since ramped up appearances in the state, booking swings through earlier which yielded larger crowds than the campaign said it was expecting. The New York Times noted that the campaign deployed dormant Iowa staffers to beef up its 90-person-strong staff already in state, and has reportedly outspent Clinton on television ads.

“A Democratic operative unaffiliated with the presidential campaign told Business Insider in January that many volunteers from nearby Southern California were coming into the state to bolster Sanders' get-out-the-vote campaign.

“And Sanders is far from conceding the Latino vote to Clinton.

“The campaign has conducted Hispanic phone-banking in early states, and has spent heavily on Spanish-language radio ads.

"Latinos are really gravitating towards our campaign, and the numbers are changing every day, especially in states like Nevada," Sanders' Hispanic Media Director Arturo Carmona said during a call with reporters in December.”

So, perhaps, history is truly repeating itself. And just like last time where Obama came out of nowhere to steal the nomination away, Sanders may very well do the same thing.

Except, for those pesky FBI folks who may upend the whole campaigning contest, by locking one of the participants up. And since the state in question today is Nevada, you can go into a casino and safely bet big bucks that the criminal in handcuffs won’t be Bernie Sanders.

Raising the recurring question: Joe Biden, Mayor Bloomberg, Jerry Brown, and Starbuck’s chairman and CEO, Howard Schultz, are you guys reading this?     

That’s it for today folks.  

Adios