You should believe it’s a non-recovery because I say so.

Bush vs Obama Recoveries

Everybody knows that Obama is a failure, specifically because there is no economic recovery going on. We hear this on Fox News, we hear this from Rush Limbaugh, we hear this from Sean Hannity, so obviously it must be true. Sean Hannity has also patiently explained that this specific recovery is doing much worse than ANY OTHER recovery in the known history of the universe.

So what is going on with the above graph?

This graph seems to show that if you look specifically at private sector jobs (which all good conservatives know are the only jobs that matter), the Obama recovery is larger, faster, and stronger than  the recovery after the George W. Bush recession!

These numbers contradict the fact that Obama sucks more than anyone else, and therefore must logically be incorrect.  The other possibility is that Bush was not a real conservative.

Either way, these statistics clearly must be ignored on account of their clear liberal bias!!!


Graph Found Via: The Atlantic

Investor uncertainty has a liberal bias!

Tax Uncertainty

Everybody knows that having a Democrat in the White House makes investors hoard their cash and destroy the economy. That is why it is critical that we elect a Republican into a White House as soon as possible, so that rich people can sigh a collective sigh of relief and start hiring people.

The logic is, of course, irrefutable, and it goes like this:

1) Democrats always want to raise taxes, even when they say they don’t.
2) Raising taxes makes job creators skittish, scared, and uncertain.
3) Job creators are like small, furry woodland creatures. They need to be soothed and kept safe. Raising taxes on them makes them angry.
4) Angry people don’t create jobs
5) Therefore, even the mere thought of increased taxes when a Democrat is president is enough to frighten the poor, frightened, skittish Job Creators into completely wrecking the economy.

How can anybody argue with that?

Anyway, all of this is obviously true.  So what is wrong with the above graph?

The above graph measures economic uncertainty based on the amount of money that is actually at risk due to changing tax laws, and plots it as a function of time.  On the graph, we have highlighted the economic uncertainty red during Republican presidencies and blue during Democratic presidencies.

Clearly there is something wrong with these numbers. If these numbers are to be believed, the greatest increases in economic uncertainty have happened during Republican presidencies, and economic uncertainty has generally remained flat during Democratic presidencies!


When numbers and data seem to contradict good, old conservative logic, there is obviously only one answer:  the numbers and data suffer from a liberal bias!!!!


graph data source: The Economic Policy Uncertainty Project
graph found via:

European unemployment weirdly contradicts conservative values!

Biased Unemployment Numbers

This graph compares the tax rate on the highest income earners in several European countries to the unemployment rates in those countries. We also threw in the good ol’ U.S.A  just for comparison.

As we all know, one of the most fundamental facts that is unquestionably true about conservative economics is that lowering taxes on the rich will cause unemployment to drop, because rich people will say, “Oh Noes, look at all of this extra money I have! I must hire people immediately!”

And yet somehow, the above graph does not seem to reveal this fact.  Weirdly, the graph seems to show absolutely no relationship at all between the top income tax rate that a country has and the unemployment rate that the country has!



Clearly, something is up. Since it is logically impossible for Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan to be wrong, there is only one other possibility: the European Countries’ unemployment numbers must be wrong.

Conservative Values!Luckily, we were able to remove the errors from this data, and produce the ideologically correct conservative graph to the right. (Click to enlarge.)

If Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan and all of the other great conservative thinkers are correct–and they undoubtedly are–then THIS is what the graph should look like!!  Notice the clear relationship that shows that increasing taxes on the rich increases unemployment, while decreasing taxes on the rich decreases unemployment.  That is what the graph should show!

These new unemployment numbers have been estimated using the same methods that Paul Ryan used to create his budget. These methods are known to be Ideologically Pure, and not encumbered by liberal bias.

Now, naturally, Sweden and Denmark might be shocked to discover that they actually have unemployment rates of more than 25%.  Bet they didn’t realize that. But hey, that’s the punishment you get when you tax the job creators.

In this corrected and unbiased, ideologically approved conservative graph, there is a clear relationship between top income rates and unemployment just like Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan are always talking about!  This is what a good graph should look like!!

Obviously, the first graph can be ignored. Only look at the second  “adjusted” graph.

What of the first graph?  Well… by refusing to reflect the values that we all have been told by our conservative leaders, it is clearly exhibiting a liberal bias!!!!


Graph Data Source: 2012 Eurostat Data (top graph only)
Data Found Via:

Hannity’s rubber band has a liberal bias!

Liberal Bias Rubber Band Recession.

Sean Hannity has a theory, and that theory involves rubber bands. For the last few weeks, he has been talking about the “rubber band effect“: the deeper the recession, the stronger the recovery. It is an economic fact that is always true, except when you have a foreign Kenyan socialist Muslim President who is trying to destroy America.

According to Sean Hannity, in every single past recession, the strength of the recovery was proportional to the depth of the recession.  Every recession, that is, except this one. In this recession, we had a deep recession followed by a slow weak recovery. Obviously, the fact that we had a deep recession with a weak recovery means that Obama is a communist and is trying to destroy America. We call this Sean Hannity’s Rubber
band theory.

The problem, then, is with the above graph.  According to the above graph, the deeper recessions almost always took longer to recover than the shallow ones.  The 1958 recession was deeper and took longer to recover than the 1953 recession. The 1953 recession was deeper and took longer to recover than the 1960 recession. The 1960 recession was deeper and took longer to recover than the 1969 recession.  And the 1969 recession was deeper and took longer to recover than the 1980 recession.



Clearly, if this graph is contradicting Sean Hannity’s rubber
band theory, it must be filled with liberal bias!!!


Graph Found Via:

Mark Levin proves that unemployment is really 50%

Real Unemployment

Radical left-wing media organizations all over the country reported last week that unemployment in June 2012 was 8.2%.  This is a liberal lie, designed to make people think that the entire world isn’t about to collapse under the evil dictatorship that is the Obama presidency. Well, we are here to tell you that they are wrong, and the world is about to collapse, and it is all Obama’s fault.

More specifically, on Mark Levin’s radio show this past Friday, he outlined two very strong and rational arguments that prove that the 8.2% unemployment number is a lie:

First, Mark Levin very wisely said this: You don’t need a government agency to tell you how well the economy is doing. You can just look around you. Use your own eyes. Does everything look perfect to you? Is everyone happy? Obviously not! Therefore, there is no recovery. (These were not his exact words but that was the gist of his argument, and it makes sense to me.)

Second, Mark Levin sagely pointed out that the 8.2% number is a fiction that was invented by Democrats, and that it excludes people who are under employed, or part-time employed, or who have given up looking for work because they feel discouraged.  If you include people who are employed part time but wish they were employed full time, and you include people feel so unhappy that they have given up looking for work, then the number is actually 14.5%, and that is practically 15%.


But wait! There’s more.

Not only do we  agree with this line of reasoning, we do not think Mark Levin has gone far enough.

Using exactly the same logic that Mark Levin uses, we believe it is reasonable to include yet more people who have been irrationally excluded from the unemployment statistic.

After all, if it makes sense to include people who are working part time who could be working full time, then why not also include people who are working one job but could be working two jobs?

If you include people who feel discouraged about looking for work, why not also include people who are unhappy at the jobs that they have?

If you dig deeply enough, there are all kinds of groups that we can add to the “unemployment” statistic to make it higher more realistic!

Our team of researchers at has done an in-depth analysis using the “Mark Levin line of reasoning,” and have determined that if you include ALL unemployed people, under-employed people, part-time employed people, unhappily-employed people, people who could be working 2 jobs but actually are working only 1 job, and people who are employed but spend most of their time playing golf, and so on, then the REAL unemployment rate is more like 46.8%…. and that is nearly 50%!!!

Although Mark Levin has not actually made this specific argument, he is a smart man and we are sure he would agree with this line reasoning. We know what is in his heart.

So, why aren’t other media outlets reporting this disgraceful Obama unemployment rate of 50%?

Clearly, it must be because they have liberal bias!!!!!


Graph Data Source: this graph has been created for illustrative purposes only. Liberal “actual” data was not used.

Related Story: Mark Levin proves the debt is really 1 Quadrillion Dollars!!

Manufacturing jobs have liberal bias!

Liberal Manufacturing Employment

Republican policies are pro-business and pro-jobs. Everyone knows this. As a result, any sensible statistic should show that businesses and employment boom under Republican presidents and stagnate or deteriorate under Democratic presidents.

Yet somehow, the above graph seems to show that manufacturing jobs plummeted during George Bush’s presidency. Remarkably, the steep decline, with manufacturing jobs disappearing at record rates, began almost the moment George Bush’s policies began to take effect!


I will tell you why: Manufacturing jobs are engaged in a secret liberal plot to make conservatives look bad.  By maliciously declining while George Bush is in power, manufacturing jobs create the illusion that Republicans are bad at creating jobs.

But do not be fooled! It is clear that these manufacturing jobs are completely motivated by liberal bias!!!!!

graph source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
found via:

The dark art of graph reading

Unemployment and Tax Rates

Reading and understanding the meaning behind graphs and charts is very complex, which is why it should never be left to amateurs. For example, the above graph has been circulated around the web by liberals who claim that it shows that lowering taxes on the rich does not actually reduce unemployment.

Indeed, when viewed by inexperienced and irrational people, like liberals for example, it might appear that although the tax rate on the rich has been readily decreasing (red line), the unemployment rate has gone up and down in the same basic range with no obviously apparent pattern (blue line). Thus they conclude that decreasing taxes on the rich does not lead to a decrease of unemployment.


Reading graphs is actually a very exact and mysterious science, like medicine or numerology, and should only be practiced by people with a keen eye and intellect who know what to look for and what results they want to see.

A correct interpretation of this graph is as follows:

Unemployment and Taxes - Clarification

As you can see, each time that taxes on the rich were decreased there was a corresponding decrease in unemployment.  Now, it didn’t always happen right away… sometimes things take time to have their effect.  Plus, there are other ups and downs in unemployment that obviously were also influenced by other factors: world markets, regulation laws, fear of a black president, and so on.  But the fact remains that once you remove the “noise” in the unemployment rate, and account for the time delays, there exists a decrease in unemployment for every decrease in taxes on the rich.

Those are hard, numerical facts.


graph source: U.S. Department of Labor
found via:

A 20 year trend of liberal bias!

20 years of bias

President Obama has been using his powers as president to fabricate and manipulate the unemployment rate and make it seem like things are getting better when they are not. This is a fact that has been proven by Rush Limbaugh and we have also covered that issue before.

But there is a deeper problem!

According to the above graph, since 1989 unemployment has consistently gone down under Democratic presidents and up under Republican presidents.


Therefore, this so-called “statistic” (unemployment rate) is obviously very partisan. (Like most numbers are.) Since liberals are the ones who kill jobs and destroy capitalism, the only other explanation is that the statistic itself is infected with liberal bias!!!


Unemployment graphs: bias vs truth

Unemployment: bias vs truth

Unemployment: bias vs truth

There has been a lot of confusion lately about unemployment. Many liberally biased graphs are out there, seeming to show that unemployment is “getting better” and that the economy is “improving” and so on. But these statistics are being presented in a liberally biased way.

How are these graphs liberally biased?

Because these graphs of the so-called “actual” unemployment trend are showing only what happened under a liberal president!  That shows obvious bias, because they are not considering what the graph would have looked like under the conservative alternative!

Above, you can see the correct and proper unbiased graph.  As you can see, although there is a slight decrease in unemployment under the liberal “actual” scenario, it is much worse than the unemployment under the conservative scenario.

This is what Mitt Romney and other unbiased conservatives mean when they say that the president has made the economy worse: the economy is worse than it would be if the United States were operating under true, loyal, patriotic conservative ideals.

Any graph that does not compare so-called “actual” (liberal) data with the conservative alternative is guilty of liberal bias!!!!!

source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
The Maddow Blog (only for the liberal “actual” data)

Job loss statistics show liberal bias!

Liberal Job Loss Stats

I am always hearing from reliable right-wing sources that unions and collective bargaining kill jobs. Yet somehow states that are “right to work” (no evil unions) have lost just as many jobs, if not more, than states that have free collective bargaining (evil unions).

Why would states without unions be losing so many jobs? It is clearly a conspiracy caused by liberal bias!!!

Source: Public Citizen (2011)

Unemployment claims have liberal bias!

Liberal Unemployment Claims

Rush Limbaugh, who is never wrong, has told us repeatedly that the stimulus was a failure. On Fox News, they report regularly that the stimulus was a failure.

Yet, in spite of this truth, the above graph seems to show that jobless claims were increasing before the stimulus took effect and started decreasing after it took effect.  If they seem to contradict Fox News, then it is clear that these jobless claims must have a strong liberal bias!!!!

Source: Market Watch Data
Via: The Washington Monthly

Coal mining jobs have a liberal bias!

Liberal Coal Mining Jobs

According to Republican Ohio Representative Bill Johnson, there’s a major crisis in the nation’s coalfields, with workers and their families already suffering because of actions by the Obama administration’s Environmental Protection Agency:

“Every day thousands of hardworking coal miners go to work to put food on their families’ tables and keep millions of American families supplied with reliable, low cost electricity. The Obama Administration has actively sought ways to put an end to the coal industry through onerous regulations and activist rulemaking.”

Yet, according to the data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, coal jobs have actually been increasing under President Obama! How is this possible, with Obama’s job-killing EPA regulations? These coal mining jobs are obviously an attempt to make good, honest Republican representatives like Bill Johnson look bad, and are a clear demonstration of liberal bias!!!!!

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics
Via: The Charleston Gazette

Economic growth has a liberal bias!

Liberal Economic Indicators

There is a sinister plot afoot.

Is it just a coincidence that two of the most major economic indicators, GDP and employment, were higher when Clinton raised taxes and lower when Bush cut them? Despite the fact that everybody knows that raising taxes destroys the economy and cutting taxes is the pathway to prosperity?

This graph makes it pretty clear that there is some partisan shenanigans going on!  It’s obvious that these economic indicators are colluding with liberals to create the illusion that tax increases are good for the economy. Hands-down, an obvious sign of liberal bias!!!!

Source: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
: The Long Goodbye

Oil and gas companies have liberal bias!

Liberal Oil Jobs

Congress passed Cap-And-Trade, the EPA is threatening to regulate greenhouse gases, the President is openly hostile to fossil fuels and wants to promote “green” energy and institute oppressive regulations that kill jobs. Fox News is always telling me that every second that Obama is in office is a second that the energy industry is being choked and smothered and destroyed.

So why are oil companies hiring more people than ever before under this liberal president? This undermines the obvious true conservative fact that Obama is bad for the oil industry. This can only mean one thing: the oil industry itself must have a liberal bias!!

source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics

Job creators have a liberal bias!

Liberal Job Creators

Everyone knows that the wealthy are the job creators, and that if you tax them it will kill jobs.

And yet somehow, over the last 60 years, the job creators have been creating MORE JOBS during years when they were being taxed at a higher rate!


Obviously, these job creators are involved in a sinister plot, due to their liberal bias!!!!!

source: Bureau of Labor Statistics and Tax Policy Center