This graph of the size of government has a LIBERAL BIAS!

Total government employees during the Reagan years and during the Obama years

Liberals love big, bloated government like bears love honey. This is axiomatic like gravity or the fact that tax cuts pay for themselves. And yet, some ridiculous libtard™ posted to the twitter the pair of graphs above. The first is the number of federal employees during the golden decade (1980-1989) when freedom-loving patriots preached and followed the golden rule: Government is the problem. The second is when Obama wrecked the economy with his tax-and-spend debt-mongering designed to accelerate our decline into crony communism, poverty and Sharia Law.

This graph is stupid and liberally biased, because it might give the impression that Reagan made the government bigger and Obama made the government smaller.

The slopes of these graphs are obviously wrong. But I have discovered how to unskew these graphs, and remove the liberal bias!

You see, the notoriously left-leaning federal reserve (what could be more cliché than a liberal millionaire bank executive?) is indiscriminately treating one government employee like any other! Let’s look closer.

During the 80s, Reagan was busy stomping his jackboot into the neck of the Soviet menace. So, at least some of that employment is Marines kicking ass in Grenada and shit. This kind of employment leads to more freedom, not less, so it should obviously be subtracted from the total employment.

Moreover, we all know that Obama has hired secret off-the-book government employees to harass Tea Party patriots. You can see the obvious evidence in things like the IRS scandal and Lois Lerner. Look it up yourself, it’s not my job to do your research for you.  Anyway, these secret undercover government employees should clearly be added to total government employment under Obama.

Once we take these two factors into account–adjusting the totals in each graph using my own totally-real and not-at-all made-up estimates of Marines kicking ass in Grenada and shit (MKAIGAS’s) and the Black Ops Patriot Harassment Brigade (BOPHB), the plots look much different.

Total government employees under Reagan and Obama, unskewed with no liberal bias

As you can see, when the numbers have been carefully massaged and corrected to take into account Conservative Ideology and Truth… the legacy of Ronald Reagan remains unsullied, and Obama really has bloated the size of government!

Another liberal fiction bites the dust. <blows smoke off revolver-finger>


The REAL Obamacare approval numbers!

Support for Obamacare

These are the actual really true approval numbers for Obamacare over the last eight months based on ABC News/Washington Post poll data. You will hear liberals in the liberally biased media saying that Obamacare’s approval is getting stronger, but obviously this is a lie.

Just look at this graph!

Florida Gun DeathsWe would like to thank the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, by the way, for giving us the inspiration for how to unskew what might otherwise be a very, very liberally biased graph. They did it with gun deaths, so we figured we could use the same strategy for Obamacare approval numbers.

It’s a good strategy. Stay tuned… we should probably use this strategy again.

Do you have any suggestions for things we could unskew using a graph like this?  You know…. to remove the liberal bias.

(Hat tip to @TeaPartyCat for bringing this story to our attention.)

Unemployment numbers before and after unskewing: a lesson in biased chart-making

Since unemployment is at its lowest point since President Obama took office, good conservatives need to turn to a different statistic in order to convince people that the entire economy is imploding and on the brink of disaster and P.S. it’s all because of Obama.

One of the most popular statistics to use is the number of people not in the work force. This is the common theme on talk radio and social media alike:  the official unemployment numbers are fake and stupid and should be ignored, because they do not consider the number of people who are not part of the workforce.

To drive this point home, the following graph has been making its way around the #TCOT Twitterverse:

Number of people not in the labor force

HOLY CRAP! Look at that HUGE NUMBER OF PEOPLE who are not part of the work force! That’s some scary shit! Obviously the economy is on the brink of collapse, and liberals are making everyone lazy and destitute, and it’s all because of Obama, and so on.

On we have a term for graphs like this: unskewed.  That is to say, any information or data or facts that might possibly give people a non-conservative opinion of the world have been delicately… removed from the graph.

As a game,this weekend we asked our Twitter followers to identify some of the liberally biased facts that have been removed from this graph. Our very intelligent followers were definitely up to the task!



That’s right! Conservatives know that when you want to make a graph look really scary, you have to emphasize the differences that you want emphasized. The above graph makes it look like the number has increased ninefold, because it only shows the increase over a very narrow range.




By showing the raw number of people who are not in the labor force, this graph leaves out all kinds of relevant (but liberally biased) data, such as the population growth rate, and the various factor that might be contributing to changes in the population that might be leading to a lack of participation that have nothing to do with how well the economy is doing, like the age composition in the population.




Finally, the graph seems to accelerate as time goes on, which conservatives just know is because Obama is destroying the universe with his evil liberal policies. However, the graph certainly was increasing even during the Bush and Reagan years.

So, just for curiosity, what would this graph look like, if all of that messy, liberal data were included?

Warning: this graph contains actual relevant facts to interpreting results, which are known to have liberal bias.
Warning: this graph contains actual relevant facts to interpreting results, which are known to have liberal bias.

Here is a graph of the percentage of the population not in the labor force, for the same time range as the original graph. The y-axis is a percentage, and gives a more “liberal” perspective on the magnitude of the changes by showing the numbers all the way down to zero.

Obviously, this graph does not convey the proper message the conservatives want to get across.  Must be all that liberal bias….