Posted on 08/05/2011 8:52:17 AM PDT by Eagle of Liberty
During a Senate floor speech on Aug. 2, 2011 -- shortly before a vote on the final debt-ceiling bill -- Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., compared the job-creation records of President Bill Clinton and President George W. Bush.
"My friend (Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.) talks about no new taxes," Reid said. "Mr. President, if their theory was right, with these huge (tax cuts) that took place during the Bush eight years, the economy should be thriving. These tax cuts have not helped the economy. The loss of eight million jobs during the Bush eight years, two wars started, unfunded, all on borrowed money, these tax cuts all on borrowed money -- if the tax cuts were so good, the economy should be thriving. If we go back to the prior eight years during President Clinton’s administration, 23 million new jobs were created."
A reader asked us whether Reid was correct that there was a "loss of eight million jobs during the Bush eight years." So we looked into it.
As always, we looked at jobs numbers compiled by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the government’s official source of employment data.
During Bush’s eight years in office -- January 2001 to January 2009 -- the nation actually gained a net 1.09 million jobs. (Because there were gains in government jobs, the private sector actually lost 653,000 jobs during that period.)
This isn’t remotely close to what Reid claimed. Reid's office didn't respond to our request for information, but we think we know what he was referring to.
From the economy’s peak to its low point, the nation lost 8.75 million jobs. Here’s the problem: The peak for jobs came in January 2008, while the low point for jobs came in February 2010. This means the starting point for Reid’s measure came seven years into Bush’s eight-year tenure, and the low point occurred about a year into Barack Obama’s tenure.
In other words, Reid had a point in saying that there was a "loss of eight million jobs" -- but it didn’t come "during the Bush eight years." The loss of eight million jobs occurred during a roughly two-year period shared more or less equally between Bush and Obama.
Reid may blame Bush’s policies for every single one of those jobs lost -- an opinion he’s entitled to, but one we are unable to fact-check. Still, his statement is incorrect as spoken.
Reid went on to say, "If we go back to the prior eight years during President Clinton’s administration, 23 million new jobs were created." We looked at the BLS numbers and found that Reid was basically correct in that claim. From January 1993 to January 2001, the nation gained 22.7 million total jobs.
This means that Reid specifically counted Clinton’s job-creation numbers from his inauguration day to the date he exited from office, but he did not do so for Bush, even though he used the Clinton figure as a direct comparison. It strikes us as a clear-cut case of cherry-picking.
So where does this leave us? Reid is correct that more than 8 million jobs were lost in the United States during the recent economic downturn, but he’s flat wrong to say that it happened "during the Bush eight years." Compounding the error, Reid makes a direct comparison between Bush and Clinton, yet he uses one method that makes Clinton’s number seem strong and Bush’s number seem weak. We rate Reid’s statement Pants on Fire.
Harry “The Undertaker” Reid sure buried this economy.
This needs to go out to the FR press list. Should be on Drudge!
What a thug. I thought this pistol whipping gangster was going to go work on his pomegranites.
The Statists of the Stupid Party will lay low, fondle lobbyists, and continue to be led by the nose of the Democrats.
Of course, Governor Sarah Palin may have a few comments.
TWB
I think that when it started appearing that Zerobama was going to be elected that businesses small and large knew what to expect and started shedding jobs. Jobs will be created when Zero loses his.
harre’s little voice is ANNOYING!
Reid continues to prove he’s an idiot. As for Clinton, he rode the “dot.com” boom and enjoyed the benefits of the Contract With America. He also signed welfare reform after vetoing it twice, before polls told him to do so. If Reid’s idol Obama is so correct the economy should be booming with all of his spending, bailouts, Obamacare threats and taxes, etc. And, Harry, thanks for raising the debt ceiling to ease the economy. Now raise the blood-alcohol content to help fight drunken driving.
But it was not due to Clinton's efforts.
Yesterday, the White House Press Secretary, Jay Carney, stated categorically, "the White House doesn't create jobs."
So, Harry Reid, are you the liar or is the White House the liar here?*
* That's actually a trick question - not only Reid but also Carney and his boss are habitual liars.
they know it’s all a lost cause so this is just another test message. The actual facts of the 4.7 vs 9.2 unemployment rates will always win out.
They lose that discussion, they will lose more and there will be more bogus stories like this one out there during the next 16 months. We just need to hold the repubs feet to the fire and keep them on message. We need to defeat these people before they can lay more waste to our country than they already have.
Reid was basically correct in that claim. From January 1993 to January 2001, the nation gained 22.7 million total jobs.Gee. Now what happened during the period of 1993 to 2001?
Ah! I remember. The EXPLOSION of the Personal Computer, Intel and AMD, Microsoft, all the spin off programs based on the Windows OS, the Internet and ISP providers, and Broadband service to almost everyone.
I recall in 1994 I had Prodigy. And access to that new thing called the World Wide Web. And at that time I was able to print out every website URL in existence then -- all 200-300 of them! And a fair portion of those websites were gubmint. 1994 was also the time when you had to type in every portion of a website URL, starting with the 'http'. What a pain that was.
So Clinton didn't create or 'gain' squat. He was just the occupier of an office when Bill Gates, Michael Dell, and others in 'Silicon Valley' were doing all the 'job creating' and 'gaining'.
But then Billy-Jeff screws the pooch and has the DOJ go after Bill Gates! Smart move asshat, YOU single handedly burst the Tech Bubble, made NASDAQ plummet, and handed off a mess to Dubya in 2001.
Dear Harry,
About 1 million of those jobs lost under Bush was Saddam Hussein’s army
Another couple hundred thousand jobs lost was the taliban govt in Afghanistan and al Qaeda employees whose jobs were eliminated by the US military and not replaced.
The lowest unemployment corresponds exactly with Dims taking over Congress in Jan ‘07. The slide accelerated wnen Obama became pres.
It DID help the economy; so well that hundreds of thousands of unqualified home buyers went for the Dodd-Fwank Fannie-Mae-Freddie Mac scam, which fueled the wall street failure.
It wasn't until it looked like Hussein had a shot at the presidency that the private sector contracted permanently.
The little old man still hasn't figured that out?
As far as they are concerned, they are doing their job... carrying Obama's water.
Really, any honest reporter would ask that question first thing.
The whole theme of the movie was "Did the holocaust really happen?" The Germans went through years of lying, lying and lying again; covering tracks covering tracks and covering tracks; accusing, accusing and accusing....
Seems like their American sympathizers are at it exactly.
Hell, the Rats still blame Reagan for everything.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.