By: Wayne Allyn Root From: Personal Liberty Digest
With a U6 unemployment rate (the government's most accurate measurement of joblessness) at 14.3%. Would the media quote the lower but far less accurate, and far more favorable rate of 7.7% and declare that "things are improving?"
What if the Labor Force Participation Rate was the lowest for men since 1948 - when record-keeping first began? Would the media trumpet a "recovery?" Never in a million years.
Imagine if a Republican like Bush were President, would the media quote the 7.7 percent rate but ignore the underlying numbers of 13.8 percent unemployment among black Americans or 25.1 percent among teens?
Imagine if a white Republican President were presiding over 13.8 percent black unemployment versus 6.8 percent white unemployment, what would Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, (U.S. Senator) Barack Obama and other black leaders be screaming? Would they be leading a “million man march” on Washington, D.C.? Of course they would. Would black leaders blame this all on racism and in particular a racist white Republican President? Of course they would. Would they blame it all on conservative economic policies? Of course they would. Yet with a black President following big-tax, big-spend, big-entitlement, big-government policies, we hear not a word of anger or blame — and, of course, no mention of racism.
If a Republican were President while homelessness reached the highest levels in New York City since the 1929 Great Depression, what would Obama’s Marxist buddy Van Jones say? Would he blame it on low tax rates that favor “the rich?” Of course he would. Homelessness and poverty are now at all-time highs at a time of high tax rates and massive government spending. So why isn’t Jones blaming high taxes and big government for record-setting poverty? Because Marxists don’t blame Marxism.
If a Republican President like Bush presided over the biggest drop in disposable income for America’s workers in 54 years (since record-keeping began in 1959), what would the media say? Would they call the Republican President a dummy? An idiot? Out of touch? Would they make jokes about his incompetence and ignorance on “Saturday Night Live?” You’re right they would.
If a Republican President presided over an unimaginable 14.4 million Americans living in poverty in the suburbs, what would the media be saying? Who quoted this figure? The liberal Brookings Institute did last week. Poverty under Obama is exploding in the rich suburbs.
If a pro-business Republican President presided over record numbers of suicides at the same time we were suffering the worst economic crisis since 1929, would the media blame the suicide rate on “harsh pro-business conservative economic policies?” You could bet a million dollars on it. Yet today they say nothing because their American idol, Obama, is President.
If a pro-business, pro-oil drilling Republican presided over the doubling of gas prices, what would Democrats say? Would they say he’s in cahoots with Big Oil against the interests of the American people? They already said it with Bush as President; yet with Obama as President and oil prices doubling, there are no protests, no marches. There’s not a peep out of the left or consumer advocates.
If food and gas prices both went up dramatically under a Republican President yet he claimed there was no sign of inflation, would liberals be up in arms and call the President a liar? Would they say the middle class is under attack? You can bet on it. Yet under Obama, not a word is mentioned.
If a Republican President nominated a man for Treasury Secretary who held his money in the Cayman Islands in a building liberals called “the world’s biggest tax scam,” what would Senator Harry Reid say? We already know how Senator Reid viciously attacked Mitt Romney for the sin of having Cayman investments. Yet we hear stone silence from Reid and Democrats about Obama’s choice for Treasury Secretary, Jack Lew.
What if a Republican President sold guns to Mexican drug cartels that were then used to kill 300 Mexicans plus a U.S. border agent? Would the Democrat-controlled Senate demand a Watergate-like investigation? You can bet on it.
What if a Republican President refused higher security for a U.S. ambassador and then, upon hearing he was under attack, refused to allow a rescue attempt and then left for the night and went to sleep? Would the media have a problem with the image of a Republican President sleeping while our ambassador and three American heroes were slaughtered, while waiting for help that never came? Somehow I think Geraldo Rivera would be up in arms.
What if a Republican President named Bush was presiding over historic numbers of college graduates in default on student loans and record numbers of middle-aged Americans raiding their retirement accounts out of desperation to survive? Do you think the media would blame the President?
What if in the middle of the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, a Republican President closed down his jobs council? That’s too much to believe, right? The media would call him a rich, elitist, out-of-touch fool. He’d be lampooned in newspaper cartoons and skewered on “Saturday Night Live.” Yet Obama did just that in January, and the media was silent.
What if a Republican President in this economy with all the miserable stats that I just quoted with Americans in pain and suffering played golf with Tiger Woods at a luxury resort all weekend and refused media access while his wife hung out in Aspen, Colo., wearing designer dresses, spending billions of taxpayer dollars on non-stop vacations and all the security that goes with them, staying at Ritz Carltons and hanging out in Hawaii and Europe? What would the media say? What if the Vice President spent more than $400,000 per night of taxpayer money while in Paris and London while our soldiers die in Afghanistan? What would the media say?
Lastly, what if a Republican President like Bush promised to cut the deficit in half in his first term, but instead increased it by more than 50 percent? What if that same President promised to cut healthcare premiums by $2,500 per family in his first term, but instead the premiums increased by $3,065 per family. The media would be in a feeding frenzy. So would Democrat politicians. So would poor Americans. But with Obama in charge, there’s nothing. The silence is deafening.
The man we have occupying the White House is either a joke; the biggest incompetent, ignorant fool to ever serve as our President; or a radical Marxist purposely trying to overwhelm the system with debt, spending and entitlements in order to destroy America, kill the American dream and wreck capitalism for good.