To be bogus, a dictionary informs us, to be not genuine; to be counterfeit or sham. It implies a deliberate misrepresentation. To demonstrate that "8.9% is bogus" one must therefore show that (i) the number is inaccurate and (ii) it was deliberately chosen.
Logically, there's not one but many opposites to "bogus." The number 8.9% may well be inaccurate. In fact, we know it be less than perfectly accurate: it is rounded to only one decimal digit, for instance. But nothing in the world is measured with perfect accuracy: measurement error is an inherent limitation.
It well may even be that on a particular month in measuring unemployment there was a human error committed --- a mistake occurred. It well may be that specific people involved into gathering data in some particular part of the country did not exercise full care in their work. If, so it is not a mistake but negligence.
An inaccuracy may thus be an error, a mistake, a result of negligence, or deliberate manipulation with the purpose to mislead. If you claim that it is the latter, that is a fraud, then you should prove that it is NOT anything else -- NOT an error, NOT negligence, NOT a mistake, etc.
In Judeo-Christian morality, Anglo-Saxon law and science the burden of proof is on the one making the claim. A person that cannot supply proof must refrain from an making accusation, which in that case constitutes a defamation. That is what the Judeo-Cristian morality and the Anglo-Saxon law --- foundations of our traditions --- demand. The scientific method demands even more: it's not whether you express an opinion --- you shouldn't even have it, you must suspend judgment.
And that is what I pointed out earlier: To begin with, your supposition do not make any sense. You believe that:
1. All presidents --- Republicans and Democrats, Regan and Clinton, Bush and Obama --- have a common interest to deceive the American public when it comes to unemployment figures. This common interest extends to all those thousands of people --- Republicans, Democrats and Independents --- that have ever served and are now serving in Congress. They may be different in all other respects but, when it comes to unemployment figures, they all join together to deceive American public.
2. Those diverse presidents and congressmen have more power than the kings ever had: not do they dictate their will to their hundreds or thousands of "subjects" at the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) --- that they must lie to the American people, --- but all those hundreds or thousands of people are intimidated into absolute secrecy.
3. Despite being very diverse, all those people at the BLS --- Republicans, Democrats and independents, working on their jobs often for decades, serving both Democrats and Republicans in the White House and Congress also have one common goal --- somehow march in step against the American people. For decades now, every single one of them is scared to death to tell a newspaper reporter even a word about this massive conspiracy.
I doubt this makes sense to anybody but you.
But more importantly, as I also tried to convey earlier, is that the burden of proof is on the one making the claim.
A. If you are a scientist, you should either (i) provide evidence that the government workers --- hundreds or even thousands of scientists, comprised of Republicans, Democrats and independents, holding the same positions often for decades, serving both Democrats and Republicans --- are all involved in a massive conspiracy; or (ii) refrain from judgment.
B. If you are a conservative guided by Judeo-Christian principles, you don't have to refrain from judgment: you can believe whatever you want about those hundreds of people. But you must refrain from "serving as false witness;" that is, making an accusation if you lack evidence to back it up.
In either case, the burden of proof is on you, not me: you've made an accusation.
I am sorry, I cannot contribute to this discussion any further.
The point is clear, 8.9% is meant to deceive the general public. Regardless one be a Democrat, Republican or Independent.
To parse the numbers into categories in which you can disqualify a sufficient number to achieve an outcome which presets your conclusion is tantamount to fraud.
Hence the presentation of unemployment at 8.9% is bogus.
The magnitude of such a loss is incalculable.