The Obama economic recovery is the strongest in the world, according to liberal statistics

Thanks Obama for the strong economic recovery!

If you listen to conservative talk radio and Fox News, you know that our economy right now is TERRIBLE.  The economy originally started to tank in December of 2007, because of Barack Obama, and it has never fully recovered. On literally a daily basis, you can hear Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, and other conservative commentators referring to our current economy as “bleak”, and “stagnant”, and “horrific”, and “crashed”, and “dead”, and other words that all mean the same thing.

Naturally, whenever conservative commentators talk about how TERRIBLE the United States economy currently is, they never miss an opportunity to point out that the reason it is terrible is Barack Obama.

Yet somehow, liberally biased “statistics” tell a different story.  In fact, according to the graph above, the United States economy has recovered from the world-wide 2007-2008 recession more than any other country in the world, and the only country in the world that showed faster improvement (by marginal amounts) was Germany.

But how can this possibly be, when Obama has been the worst King of America since Satan was King of America in the year 2000 B.C.?

Obviously, these statistics must be wrong, and biased, and/or fabricated by the Illuminati.

The current U.S. economy is terrible, it is horrible, it is the worst economy ever… and if you think otherwise, you clearly just have a LIBERAL BIAS!!!!!!

How can the economy be good when some people hate their jobs, huh?

Data Source: Statistical Office of the European Communities; CEA calculations
Graph Source:

What does a -2.9% annual GDP growth rate for Q1 2014 really mean?

Fox News Explains GDP Shrinking

The above picture, from Fox News, shows the correct way to report on the recent finding that the national gross domestic product (GDP) shrank by 2.9% (annualized) during the first quarter of 2014. Specifically, this picture is the correct way to report on this finding because it does not distract or confuse people with things like history, comparisons to prior examples, or too many data points.  Plus, you have a frowning unattractive man depicted next to the gigantic negative number: so you know that things must be bad!!!!!

Indeed, the frowning unattractive man also tells you what you should believe about the explanation of this number: “This is obviously a result of an administration, five years of policies… high taxation, high regulation, high spending and high debt.”

How could he possibly be wrong?

Now, some liberals out there will present this same information in a way that is clearly liberally biased. For example, they will show you this graph:

GDP changes by quarter over several years

The problem with this graph is that includes too much information, and it might confuse people. It could even lead to uncomfortable questions, like:

“If a -2.9% growth rate is obviously the fault of President Obama’s policies, then which of President Bush’s policies are to blame for the -8.1% growth rate in 2008?”

Or worse:

“If a -2.9% growth rate is a clear sign that all of liberal philosophy is a total failure, then does that mean that Bush was also completely incompetent and all of his economic philosophies are also total failures?”

Clearly, this kind of thinking simply will not do!

Liberals have also been disseminating this second graph, which shows that although GDP was unusually low in the first quarter of 2014, other economic measures were up. For example, in the following graph we see that the total aggregate hours worked by private-sector nonsupervisory workers 1.4 percent, which is usually associated with higher growth:

Real GDP vs Private Sector Jobs

Showing this graph clearly can cause a liberal bias, because it can lead people to believe that some aspects of the economy have been improving despite that fact that Obama is OMFG KENYAN MUSLIM SOCIALIST HITLER.

If you look carefully, you will see that the above graph includes three data points where the GDP value is just as bad or worse, but the jobs value is worse than the first quarter 2014: these are the points on the same level or below the red point on the vertical axis, but to the left of the red point.

These points all occurred under George Bush as well, once again leading to the question: were those points also “obviously a result of an administration” under George W. Bush of ridiculous economic, and domestic and foreign policy failures?

No, these types of graphs clearly are not what people should be seeing.

People need to be sheltered from the burden of getting too much information, and asking questions. Therefore we applaud Fox News for not falling into that trap. That, after all, is how numbers and statistics can lead to LIBERAL BIAS!!!!


Republicans finally admit economy is improving; say racism is to blame

Over the past week, several notable Republicans have finally admitted that the economy is improving.

“We’ve been denying it for five years now, and it’s been pretty exhausting,” admitted one chief aid to a prominent orange-hued Republican on the condition of anonymity. “But between unemployment being the best it has been since Bush, the stock market reaching record highs, and the deficit being the best it’s been since Bush… it’s gotten to the point where it’s just difficult to deny.”

Of course, since the media storyline for years has been that we are in a terrible, floundering recovery, there have been a lot of facts that the media was simply unable to talk about. One low-level script writer on the Fox News journalism team even confessed, “The list of things we weren’t allowed to talk about was getting so long, it was getting to be a challenge just to fill up the prime-time slots with anything even remotely political.”


Despite admitting that every single sign shows that the economy is improving, key Republicans were able to find a way to spin it to their benefit…

…they have decided to blame racism!


“It’s basically a form of affirmative action. It has to be. How else can you explain a recovery under a black president being better than a recovery under a white president?”


Jobs are improving faster under Obama because of RACISM.

“The insight really hit me when I saw this graph from the Department of Labor,” said an anonymous Congressman who looks suspiciously like Eddie Munster. “It shows that private-sector job gains after the 2009 recession have been faster than the private sector job gains after the 2002 recession. Now I thought to myself, how could that be? In 2002 the President was George Bush, and in 2009 the President was Barack Obama. See what I mean? I think you know what I’m getting at.

Back in October 2013, Rush Limbaugh observed that people are scared to oppose Obama because Obama is black. The reasoning is simple: if you in any way try to hinder Obama’s success, then you will be called “racist”, which of course is just mean. Oh and by the way it’s also racist because calling something “racist” is inherently racist, and not wanting to do things that seem racist IS ALSO RACIST.

Looking at the above graph, some people say it’s obvious that the private sector is ONLY HIRING NEW PEOPLE out of fear of doing something to make Obama look bad, and therefore being called “racist”, which of course is also racist.

I mean, why else would the recovery under the black guy be going better than the recovery under the white guy did?

There really can’t be any other explanation, right?

Nobody cares about your stupid housing price surge!

Real Home Price Index, Unbiased Graph

Real Home Price Index, Unbiased GraphLeft-wing radicals have been promoting some kind of story about a housing price surge. Luckily, most people don’t understand it. This graph will help you to understand why.

Look at this beautiful graph. It is the perfect graph to convey what conservatives want it to convey, without a lot of worry that liberal bias will seep in.

When liberals look at this graph, they see that the teeny, tiny, itty-bitty tail end of the blue line on the right side of the graph is increasing very rapidly.  This is what lead to the headline in the liberal communist anti-American media that the recent increase “is the fastest pace of increase since April 2006.”

Liberals expected this headline to create some kind of fuss, but they were wrong.  Why?

Well, just look at the above graph!  Nobody really cares about the “rate of increase” of something!  “Rate”? Huh? What?  That sounds an awful lot like “slope” or “derivative” or other complicated words that nobody ever really understood in high school math class anyway.  That kind of stupid crap doesn’t matter.   This kind of nonsense is exactly why we conservatives are against education to begin with.

What actually matters, clearly, is just the overall value of the home prices, which are still much lower than they were back when Jesus W. Bush was President. We have highlighted this fact with a couple of additional adornments in the graph, just to make sure that you pay attention to the correct thing.

If you pay attention to anything else, like “rate of recovery” or other snobby college-sounding stuff, then well… you’re just guilty of liberal bias!!!!


(But luckily, nobody cares)


graph source data: Case Shiller, BEA
graph found via: Calafia Beach Pundit


Valentine’s Day makes full economic recovery. GOP has no explanation.

Liberal Valentine's Day

Liberal Valentine's Day

Statistics show that Valentine’s Day has made a full economic recovery from the Obama recession. Republicans have no explanation for this bizarre phenomenon.

It is well-known among conservatives that the economy is bad. There is no recovery, and the reason is that there is a communistical Kenyan liberal socialist in the White House. This is common knowledge.

Valentine’s day spending went down dramatically at the beginning of the recession. Moreover, since there is no recovery, we should expect that this spending would still be very low. Yet somehow it has risen even higher than it was in 2008.



Clearly, all of these Valentine’s Day gifts must be being purchased by blacks, Hispanics, women, and young people—you know, the people who were simply too stupid to not vote for Obama, according to Mitt Romney.

After all, good conservatives—old, white, male conservatives—clearly know better than to spend money on something as frivolous as Valentine’s day during a recession!!!


graph source data: National Retail Federation’s (NRF) 2012 Valentine’s Day Consumer Intentions and Actions Survey
graph found via:

S&P 500 stock market index has a liberal bias!

No recovery!!!

No recovery!!!

Obama is terrible for business. We have unskewed the above graph of the S&P 500 stock market index in order to make sure that you understand this fact.

The stock market has been blatantly and flagrantly contradicting our “there is no economic recovery” and “Obama is bad for businesses” message, and on behalf of conservative radio and television commentators everywhere, we here at have to say: we’re OVER IT.

It was less than a week ago, for example, that Sean Hannity had the usual pair of guests on his radio show: a timid and meek liberal and a loud and abrasive conservative (heck yeah!). The timid and meek liberal dared to talk about the fact that the Dow Jones has skyrocketed under Obama, so of course the loud and abrasive conservative interrupted and said:


(Yes, even on the radio you could tell he was speaking in all caps.)

Well, apparently this conservative radio guest was not aware that the S&P500 is also in on the conspiracy.

On the remote chance that some of Sean Hannity’s want to look up a graph of the S&P 500, we are providing the above graph as CONFIRMING EVIDENCE that there is no recovery under the Obama administration.  As you can see, in our unskewed graph, the stock market has remained completely flat during the Obama presidency.

Take that, Obama.


original graph source: Business Insider

Liberally biased recession punishes conservatives!

unemployment and education

unemployment and education

This disturbing graph shows that the recession has had a very partisan and unfair liberal bias. Specifically: the more indoctrinated you are by liberal education, the less likely you are to be unemployed.

It’s important to remember the conservative values that the Republican party has championed for the last several years. Universities are nothing more than liberal indoctrination camps. Real conservatives all home-school their children. Anyone who says that children should all have a chance to go to college is being an elitist liberal snob. These are all basic and unquestionable facts.

That is why it is so upsetting to see graphs like the one above. According to the graph above, the more education a person has—and remember that means the more they have been indoctrinated by the Liberal Machine—the less likely a person is to be unemployed!

Even worse: during recessions, layoffs are disproportionately focused on people who have rejected liberal elitist so-called “education”.

Is it possible that people without “educations” have fewer skills and therefore are less valuable in the free market workplace? NO!

That is what liberals want you to believe.

But that would imply that higher education is somehow… good. That clearly contradicts what our Republican leaders have been telling us.

There is only one explanation. The evil liberals who control our government have found a way to manipulate the free market so that they are disproportionately PUNISHING conservatives who refuse to participate in the liberal “education” scam by getting them fired.

Anyone who tells you anything else is clearly just fooled by liberal bias!!!


graph source: Calculated Risk Blog

Liberal graph claims the 2007 financial crisis is not that bad

Foreign Financial Crisis Comparison

Look at this terrible, socialist graph. According to this graph, the American financial crisis of 2007 has actually done better than 4 out of the 5 top international financial crises. But that is just crazy-talk.

According to this graph, created by noted economist, communist, and kitten-hater Josh Lehner, when you compare the current United State economic crisis, in terms of percent job losses, to the five other biggest international financial crises over the last several decades, the American financial crisis is actually not as deep (i.e. had a smaller total percent job loss at its worst point) and is recovering faster than 4 out of those 5 other crises.

He goes on to suggest, like the typical left-wing nut-job that he is, that this might have something to do with things like international economic factors over which our country has no control and the fiscal stimulus efforts introduced not only in the United States but also in foreign countries. But this is obviously a stupid suggestion since Rush Limbaugh has said repeatedly that the stimulus was a complete failure that did nothing at all.

The biggest problem with this graph, however, is that it compares the United States to other countries. We expect them to have problems that are bigger than ours, because they don’t have as much Freedom.  This is a clear fact because they do not have our constitution, which is the document that Jesus gave us to ensure that we would always have more freedom than everyone else.

We therefore must conclude that the above graph should just be ignored. The only graph that matters is the below graph, which clearly shows that the current recession is much worse than other American recessions:

Recession Comparison Without Liberal Bias

Anyone who dares to suggest that the global market, the international scope of the economic downturn, or foreign financial issues might in any way have anything to do with the “Obama Economic Collapse of 2007” is obviously just spreading liberal bias!!!!


graph created by: Josh Lehner
graph found via:

Food Stamp graphs have liberal bias!

Liberal Food Stamp Graph

Look at this tricksy liberal graph. It attempts to mislead the viewer by providing much more information than anyone could possibly need. But we know how to fix that.

The problem with this graph is that it shows changes in food stamps since January 2006. There is no need to go back that far. If you go back that far, it leaves too many openings for liberals to do their dirty work.  For example:

Un-American Liberals might point to that graph and say, “Look at how Obama has been able to decrease the rate of food stamp growth when you compare his inauguration to now!”

Crazy irrational Liberals might point to that graph and say, “Look at how food stamp growth now isn’t really that different from what it was during the Bush administration before the recession.”


Un-Skewed GraphHere we present to you the graph as it should appear. This graph correctly focuses in on the thing that matters: food stamp growth has been exploding out of control for the last several months!!!  Holy cow! Look at that trend line!!! (The red arrow that I drew, I mean!)

This graph correctly provides just enough information for you to focus on, process, and understand. It cannot be cluttered by liberal irrelevancies like “long term trends”.  Make sure that if you have a discussion about food stamps with your unsanitary liberal co-workers, you forward them this graph and then laugh as they cower in fear and wrongness.

Graph Data Source: SNAP, Zero Hedge

Graph Found Via:

Consumer sentiment has a liberal bias!

Liberal Consumer Sentiment

This graph is completely unacceptable. HOW DARE consumer sentiment increase to levels higher than any seen since July 2007. Obviously there is something sinister at work here.

Good, honest conservative voices have repeatedly stated that Obama has completely destroyed this economy, thrown growth into the gutter, set the constitution on fire, and personally killed small cute kittens with his own hands.

So why are consumers acting like things are actually getting better?


Clearly, if consumer confidence is in any way suggesting that Obama has helped the economy to improve, then consumer confidence itself must be infected with the dreaded liberal bias!!!!


Graph data source: Reuters / University of Michigan consumer sentiment index
Graph found via:

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

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:

England has a liberal bias!

US vs. UK

This graph shows the impact of the Obama Recession in 2008 and 2009 on the GDP of both the United States and the United Kingdom (England). As you can see, both were hit hard by the economic collapse, and both have had only a very slight recovery.

However, you can also see that the recovery in the United States was much better than the recovery in England.

This is very weird and suspicious. England has put into place very conservative policies. They have cut back on government spending dramatically, and cut back on government regulation. All of this has been going on while Obama has gone on a wild government spending spree and increased government regulation by three million billion percent according to some sources.

So if Obama’s stimulus and socialist policies are bad for the economy, and cutting costs is supposed to help the economy to grow, then why is England not recovering faster than the United States?


I will tell you why. Liberals, who hate America, want you to believe that Obama’s stimulus and spending are what is causing our recovery to be better than the recovery in England; but nothing could be further from the truth.

The truth is, Americans are just better than English people. According to the proven principle of American Exceptionalism, the U.S. economy should always recover faster than the U.K. economy. In fact, I’m sure that if it weren’t for Obama’s socialist stimulus and government regulation, that yellow line would have increased even more!

Anyone who thinks otherwise obviously just hates America, and is filled with liberal bias!!!!!


graph source: Thompson Reuters Datastream, April 2012
graph found via: The Rachel Maddow Show