So, How Do They Know?
Supposedly, Obama's "stimulus" has "saved or created" 150,000 jobs so far and he plans to "save or create" 600,000 jobs by summertime. Since the Bureau of Labor and Statistics maintains no record - nor are they able to maintain - on jobs "saved," just what metric does Obama plan to use to demonstrate the success or failure of this plan?
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics;
June 09, 2009
The number of unemployed persons increased by 787,000 to 14.5 million in May, and the unemployment rate rose to 9.4 percent.
We are already down 14.5 million jobs. Going by Obama's 600,000 by summer goal, that means he should already have saved about 150,000. Yet, we're down 14.5 million, ten times more than what he has "saved" at this point?
Oh! I guess he can say, "Were it not for my initiative, our unemployment would be 14.65 million unemployed, rather than a mere 14.5 million."
But, how does he prove this? How does he prove that the 150,000 jobs wouldn't've been "saved" anyway?
Seems he's given himself quite the safety net. If the unemployed rate rockets by summer, he can always say that it would've been worse by 600,000.
So, why isn't the press picking up on this? Why isn't this chicanery by the Obama administration being examined by the media? We all know that the silly claims about the press being in Obama's hip pocket are false, so why aren't they calling him on this, instead of touting it as success?
If we were on a boat that was taking on 10 times more water than the captain was bailing out, would the captain be justified in claiming that his bail-out plan was successful?
Had Bush made this sort of claim, the press would have keel-hauled him, but Obama?