TWIN TIMELINE: What was happening in Benghazi and Washington

From Doug Ross:

Last night I heard Newt Gingrich ask for a twin timeline to help illustrate what was happening in Benghazi and in Washington. Newt's wish is my command:

Some interesting observations:

• Hillary Clinton's aspirations for higher office are toast: despite numerous requests for additional security, the State Department adamantly refused each time -- for, what would seem, purely political reasons. Those partisan games cost four Americans their lives.

• The "Internet video" tale was an egregious lie foisted upon the American public by an administration committed to additional spiking of the Bin Laden football -- again, for purely political reasons.

• Methinks any effort to distribute the Bin Laden movie/Obama infomercial before the election will be extremely distasteful for most American.

What are your thoughts?

'Toon of the Day: A Picture Says A Thousand Words

The October Jobs Report: More Big Lie

  

First things first, in February 2009, the Civilian non-institutional population was 234.739m.  The civilian labour force was 153.716m.  There were 141.748 million Americans employed in the United States and the labour force participation rate was 65.6%.   The unemployment rate was 8.1%.

In October 2012, the Civilian non-institutional population was 243.983m.  The civilian labour force was 155,641m.  There were 143,384m Americans employed in the United States and the labour force participation rate was 58.8%.  The unemployment rate is now 7.9%.

Between February 2009 and October 2012, the civilian non-institutional population grew by 9.244 million adults; yet, 1.723 million fewer Americans were working.  In the last year alone, 1.1 million Americans left the work force.

In August, the US economy added 96,000 and the unemployment rate went from 8.3% to 8.1%.  In July, the US economy added 163,000 jobs and the unemployment rate went up to 8.3% from 8.2% in June when only 80,000 jobs were created.  Go figure.

Somehow...in a economy growing at a miserly 1.3%...873,000 people managed to find jobs.  Of course, 582,000 jobs were part-time jobs, which the Left used to say weren't "real jobs."  The addition of 873,000 jobs, which, according to CNBC, is “the highest one-month jump in 29 years.”  That would have been in November, 1983...when the GDP was 8.5%.  Once again, the annualised GDP rate for Q2 in 2012 was 1.3%.
 

If the labour force participation rate was constant, the U-3 rate would be 10.7%.  

By the way, at a rate of adding 114,000 jobs per month, we wouldn't return to full employment until 2025.   114,000 jobs per month would be great...if we were living in the late 1950s.  We need twice that many just to maintain current employment.  A robustly growing economy requires job creation in the range of 300,000+.  Take a look at the number of jobs that were being created during the Reagan Recovery when GDP was 7-8%.

In October, 369,000 Americans dropped out of the workforce altogether.

Finally, and before we turn to the report data, Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke just embarked on QE-Infinity because:

 "If the outlook for the labor market does not improve substantially, the committee will continue its purchases of agency mortgage-backed securities, undertake additional asset purchases, and employ its other policy tools as appropriate...We will be looking for the sort of broad-based growth in jobs and economic activity that GENERALLY SIGNAL SUSTAINED IMPROVEMENT IN LABOUR MARKET CONDITIONS AND DECLINING UNEMPLOYMENT.  The U.S. unemployment rate has stayed above 8 percent for 43 consecutive months - the longest such period since the Great Depression of the 1930s.  Although the unemployment rate in August fell to 8.1% from July's 8.3%, THE DROP OCCURRED FOR ALL THE WRONG REASONS -- 368,000 FEWER AMERICANS WERE LOOKING FOR WORK AND THE LABOUR PARTICIPATION RATE FELL FROM 63.7% TO 63.5% -- ITS LOWEST LEVEL SINCE SEPTEMBER 1981. If labour participation had remained at July levels, the unemployment rate actually would have risen.  The Federal Reserve is, of course, well aware that THE UNEMPLOYMENT SITUATION IS FAR, FAR WORSE THAN WHAT IS BEING CAPTURED IN THE OFFICIAL HEADLINE UNEMPLOYMENT RATE of 8.1%. THE GOVERNMENT KNOWS FULL WELL THAT THE TRUE UNEMPLOYMENT RATE, ONCE WORKFORCE PARTICIPATION RATE MANIPULATIONS ARE NETTED OUT, IS CLOSER TO 19%."

If the employment picture was truly improving, Ben Bernanke would never have embarked onto the uncharted waters of QE-Infinity.  Well, I shouldn't say the waters are uncharted as the ships of the states of Weimar Germany, Mugabe's Zimbabwe, Yugoslavia, Argentina, and others have been destroyed on the shoals of debt monetisation.

U-6, which counts part-timers, who want full-time work, and the discouraged, is 14.7% and has remained unchanged.  If the underemployed (people working a jobs below their skill-sets) are included, the U-6 hits the high teens or low twenties.  All combined, there are about 23 million Americans unemployed or underemployed.

Among the major worker groups:

Nationally, the U-3 rate for whites was 7.0% unchanged from October.  The unemployment rate for adult white men remained unchanged at 6.6%, for adult white women, it increased from 6.5% in September to 6.3% in October, and unemployment amongst white teenagers remained unchanged at 20.6%.

Nationally, the U-3 rate for blacks is 14.3%, an increase from 13.4% in October. The unemployment rate for adult black men dropped to 14.1% from 14.2% in September, unemployment rate for black women increased to 12.4% -- up from 10.9% in September, and black teenaged unemployment increased to 40.5% - up from  36.7% in September.

Nationally, the U-3 rate for Hispanics was 10% in October up from 9.9% in September  The unemployment rate for Hispanic men increased to 8.3% in October from 9.9% in September, the unemployment rate for Hispanic women decreased to 9.5% from 9.8% in Septemeber, and the Hispanic teenage unemployment rate increased to 28.9% from  27.8% in September.

 

The unemployment rate for Asians 4.9%, an increase from 4.8% in August. 

In February 2009, there were 2.647 million Americans, who had been unemployed for a period of longer than 27 weeks, and the percentage of the unemployed who were unemployed for a period of more than 27 weeks was 22.4%.

In October 2012, there were 5.002 million Americans, who had been unemployed for a period of longer than 27 weeks, and the percentage of the unemployed who were unemployed for a period of more than 27 weeks was 40.6%. 

In other words, there were 2.355 million more workers suffering long-term unemployment of 27 weeks or more in October 2012, and a 88.969% increase in the percentage of long-term unemployment than when Obama started “working to put the middle class back to work” in February, 2009.

02.09: 2.647 million

10.12: 5.002 million

That’s a 88.969% increase in the number of Americans, who have been unemployed for an average of 27 weeks or more.

BUT, the unemployment rate for government workers went down to 4.3% as a result of 934,000 new hires.

Good news, good news, good news! /s

Who will rid us of this meddlesome priest?

OK, onto the business of the day.....

I ran the numbers comparing January, 2009, Ocotober, 2012.  Also, because of the "unexpected" report this morning, I have left up August's numbers and compared them to September's data.

January 2009:

Civilian non-institution population:  234,739m

Civilian labour force:  153.716m

Employed:  142.099m

Employment-population ratio: 61.3

Unemployed:  11.616m

Not in labour force:  81.023m

Not in the labour force, but who want a job now:  5.62m

Part-time, but want full-time job:  8.038m

Participation Rate:  65.5%

Average Weeks Unemployed:  19.8

Unemployment rate:  7.6%

October 2012:

Civilian non-institutional population:  243,983 m

Civilian labour force:  155,641m

Employed:  143,384m

Employment-population ratio:   58.8

Unemployed:  12,258m

Not in labour force:  88,341m

Not in the labour force, but who want a job now: 6.427m

Part-time, but want full-time job:  18.923m

Participation rate:  63.8%

Average Weeks Unemployed:  40.6

Unemployment rate:  7.9%

Percentage Change from Jan 2009 to Oct 2012 :

Civilian non-institutional population:  +3.938% increase

Civilian labour force:  +1.252% increase

Employed:  +0.904% increase

Employment-population ratio: -4.078% decrease

Unemployed:   +5.527 % increase

Not in labour force:  +9.031% increase

Not in the labour force, but who want a job now:   +14.359% increase

Part-time, but want full-time job:   +135.419 % increase

Participation rate:  -2.595 % decrease

Average Weeks Unemployed:  +105.051% increase

Unemployment rate:  +3.947 % increase

Hey!  Did someone say "War on Women"???  I've got ya a "War on Women."   Check it out:

In January 2009, the number of women employed was:  67.007m

In October 2012, the number of women employed was:  65.316m

In January 2009, the number of unemployed women was:  4.845m

In October 2012, the number of unemployed women was: 5.523m

The percentage change in the number of women employed between January 2009 and October 2012 has been a DECREASE of 2.524%.

The percentage change in the number of women unemployed between January 2009 and September 2012 has been an INCREASE of 13.99%.

 "Our growth rate is measly [so what did you expect?]"

- Austan Goolsbee, former Obama economic adviser

Measly growth rate?  Yeah, I guess you could call it that.  **eyeroll**  But, can we at least get it to hurry up so that we can get rid of this imbecile?  Seriously.  Who in their bloody mind would hire and expand with Black Jesus (h/t David Axelrod) as CEO of the country?

'Toon of the Day: What Happens In Benghazi, Stays In Benghazi

Las Vegas Review Journal Endorses Romney and Pens One of the Most Scathing Denunciations of President Barack Obama EVER:

M2RB:  Black Hawk Down Soundtrack- Leave No Man Behind

 

Leave No One Behind...

BENGHAZI BLUNDER: OBAMA UNWORTHY COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF

By:  The Editorial Board of the Las Vegas Review Journal

U.S. Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens and three other Americans died in a well-planned military assault on their diplomatic mission in Benghazi seven weeks ago, the anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. So why are details surfacing, piecemeal, only now?

The Obama administration sat by doing nothing for seven hours that night, ignoring calls to dispatch help from our bases in Italy, less than two hours away. It has spent the past seven weeks stretching the story out, engaging in misdirection and deception involving supposed indigenous outrage over an obscure anti-Muslim video, confident that with the aid of a docile press corps this infamous climax to four years of misguided foreign policy can be swept under the rug, at least until after Tuesday’s election.

Charles Woods, father of former Navy SEAL and Henderson resident Tyrone Woods, 41, says his son died slumped over his machine gun after he and fellow ex-SEAL Glen Doherty – not the two locals who were the only bodyguards Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the Obama administration would authorize – held off the enemy for seven hours.

The Obama administration was warned. They received an embassy cable June 25 expressing concern over rising Islamic extremism in Benghazi, noting the black flag of al-Qaida “has been spotted several times flying over government buildings and training facilities.” The Obama administration removed a well-armed, 16-member security detail from Libya in August, The Wall Street Journal reported last month, replacing it with a couple of locals. Mr. Stevens sent a cable Aug. 2 requesting 11 additional body guards, noting “Host nation security support is lacking and cannot be depended on,” reports Peter Ferrara at Forbes.com. But these requests were denied, officials testified before the House Oversight Committee earlier this month.

Based on documents released by the committee, on the day of the attack the Pentagon dispatched a drone with a video camera so everyone in Washington could see what was happening in real time. The drone documented no crowds protesting any video. But around 4 p.m. Washington received an email from the Benghazi mission saying it was under a military-style attack. The White House, the Pentagon, the State Department and the CIA were able to watch the live video feed. An email sent later that day reported “Ansar al-Sharia claims responsibility for Benghazi attack.”

Not only did the White House do nothing, there are now reports that a counterterrorism team ready to launch a rescue mission was ordered to stand down.

The official explanation for the inadequate security? This administration didn’t want to “offend the sensibilities” of the new radical Islamic regime which American and British arms had so recently helped install in Libya.

The official explanation for why Obama administration officials watched the attack unfold for seven hours, refusing repeated requests to send the air support and relief forces that sat less than two hours away in Italy? Silence.

 Fortunately, the MSM's wall of silence has not worked as they had wished.  51% of Americans disapprove of how Obama has handled Benghazi.  57% of Independents.  44% of Americans believe Obama and his administration have "misled" the country.  Only 47% do not believe that Obama has "misled" the country at this point.  Those are bad numbers.  Pollsters will tell you that the word "misled" is a difficult one and only the very fringers usually believe that....like Truthers.

An open discussion of these issues, of course, would lead to difficult questions about the wisdom of underwriting and celebrating the so-called Arab Spring revolts in the first place. While the removal of tyrants can be laudable, the results show a disturbing pattern of merely installing new tyrannies – theocracies of medieval mullahs who immediately start savaging the rights of women (including the basic right to education) and who are openly hostile to American interests.

When Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney promptly criticized the security failures in Benghazi, the White House and its lapdog media jumped all over him for another “gaffe,” for speaking out too promptly and too strongly. Prompt and strong action from the White House on Sept. 11 might have saved American lives, as well as America’s reputation as a nation not to be messed with. Weakness and dithering and flying to Las Vegas the next day for celebrity fund-raising parties are somehow better?

This administration is an embarrassment on foreign policy and incompetent at best on the economy – though a more careful analysis shows what can only be a perverse and willful attempt to destroy our prosperity. Back in January 2008, Barack Obama told the editorial board of the San Francisco Chronicle that under his cap-and-trade plan, “If somebody wants to build a coal-fired power plant, they can. It’s just that it will bankrupt them.” He added, “Under my plan … electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.” It was also in 2008 that Mr. Obama’s future Energy Secretary, Steven Chu, famously said it would be necessary to “figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe” – $9 a gallon.

Yet the president now claims he’s in favor of oil development and pipelines, taking credit for increased oil production on private lands where he’s powerless to block it, after he halted the Keystone XL Pipeline and oversaw a 50 percent reduction in oil leases on public lands.

These behaviors go far beyond “spin.” They amount to a pack of lies. To return to office a narcissistic amateur who seeks to ride this nation’s economy and international esteem to oblivion, like Slim Pickens riding the nuclear bomb to its target at the end of the movie “Dr. Strangelove,” would be disastrous.

Candidate Obama said if he couldn’t fix the economy in four years, his would be a one-term presidency.

Mitt Romney is moral, capable and responsible man. Just this once, it’s time to hold Barack Obama to his word. Maybe we can all do something about that, come Tuesday.

M2RB: 

We never leave one of ours behind...

'Toons of the Day: Our Fearful Leader and His Gomer Pyles

Ernie Pyle has been replaced by sycophantic, incompetent Gomer Pyles:

CBS/New York Times/Quinnipiac Survey Narnia, Find Obama Leading

 It has been brought to global attention that President Obama sought to build a giant bulletproof tunnel on his entrance into Narnia: a place where animals talk, magic is common, and good battles evil. The objective for the problem-solving tunnel was that the tunnel's construction would ultimately create jobs for those physically building the tunnel, security personnel, and encourage economic expansion into the fictional realm of Narnia. In a place where children could become kings and queens, this
was a promising note for our children and their future. 

The tunnel was estimated to cost at $200 million dollars a day, which would be bomb-proof, have air conditioning, and a series of plasma televisions. The television screens would be able to monitor Narnia upon entry in order for the President to greet Aslon, the talking lion, and know of the White Witch's presence at all times. From now on this day shall mark a new turn in deficit spending; whenever we're in a hole, we'll build a giant tunnel and dig ourselves out into a land of make-believe.

By Keith Backer

We’re six days out from the finish line so there’s not much time left for the press to get in their final push for their preferred candidate.  Lucky for the Left, there is the wonderfully incompetent trio of CBS/New York Times/Quinnipiac to rush into the fray and magically find polls with Obama winning just close enough that, when it flips on Election Day, they can shout “Margin of Error!” and head back into their cocoon.

The economy remains the paramount issue in this election with ~50% saying it is the top priority and ~20% saying it is the #2 priority across all three states polled.  No other topic is even close.  Despite this, the lead questions in the survey were:

·  “Which candidate cares about the needs and problems of people like you?”

·  “Who cares about the middle class?”

· "Who cares and understands the needs and problems of women in the workplace?” 

I’m not making this up. These are straight out of Obama stump speeches. For the uninitiated, polling is as much art as it is science and question order greatly affects responses of those surveyed.  PPP does this in a very biased way all of the time, which is among the countless reasons I will never blog them. In the Q-poll, even after their pro-Obama wave of questions, when they get to whether candidate X is a strong leader, Obama still solidly lags Romney polling at ~56% while Romney polls ~64 across the 3 states.

After 9 straight ostensibly pro-Obama questions, they ask about the economy, which again is the TOP issue in everyone’s book and happens to be THE issue in every Romney stump speech.  With 9 questions ramping up good feelings about Obama, Romney barely leads on this issue in Florida and Virginia and trails by one in Ohio.  Well done, Quinnipiac. Now, if you’ll just survey far more Democrats than have ever shown up at the polls in these states, the Death Star may finally be fully operational and Obama can pull out an election that he is almost assuredly losing right now.  On to the states!

Florida: The Lion

• Obama leads +1 at 48 to 47 with 3% Undecided; Romney leads with Independents by 5.

• Party ID was D +7 (37/30/29). In 2008 it was D +3 (37/34/29). In 2004 it was R+4 (37/41/23). 

Good show Quinnipiac! In a state that has since 2008 elected a GOP governor, massively increased its congressional delegation in favor of the GOP, elected a popular GOP Senator, and witnessed a strong state house swing toward the GOP, you found Democrat strength equal to 2008 while Republican flight since 2004 remarkably continues unabated. You found a Democrat identification advantage in your survey that more than doubles the advantage they enjoyed in 2008 despite a nearly net 300,000 swing towards Republicans in voter registrations. Your Florida poll is unassailable…at least in Narnia.

• Obama job approval +1 at 49/48 … if Quinnipiac surveyed only Dade County and even there I’d double check the numbers.

Ohio: The Witch

• Obama leads +5, 50 – 45 with 4% Undecided; Romney leads with Independents by 6.

• The party ID was D +8 (37/29/30). This compares to D +8 in 2008 (39/31/30) and R +5 in 2004 (35/40/25). 

• There is no chance the Democrat turnout advantage will meet Obama’s 2008 best in a generation turnout which we write as D +8 based on the CNN party ID generally used.  This is even though the actual 2008 party ID was really only D +5 making this D +8 that much more implausible. How many statistics on changes in enthusiasm favoring Republicans, unrealistic Democrat demographic assumptions, and elimination of Obama’s early vote advantage do you need to see before they start polling an electorate dissimilar to 2008 when their dream candidate fulfilled their liberal inner guilt and healed a nation or whatever BS they were peddling at the time? Quinnipiac is not going to let silly facts get in the way of its mission to buck up the Lefties and turn this contest into a horse-race. One more piece to the puzzle before the Death Star is complete.

• Obama job approval +3 at 50/47 — Can you imagine what it would be if they surveyed Ohio?

Virginia: The Wardrobe

• Obama leads by 2, 49 – 47 with 3% Undecided; Romney leads with Independents by 21.

• The party ID is D +8 (35/27/35). This compares to 2008 of D +6 (39/33/27) and 2004 of R +4 (35/39/26).

• Who knew the blue wave continues so far south of the DC Beltway?  Certainly not Virginia and certainly not Governor Creigh Deeds. Just because Virginia flipped its state delegation dramatically in favor of Republicans, doesn’t mean the voters turned their backs on Democrats!  It’s just that there must have been a good TV rerun of Martin Sheen spouting nonsensical liberal tripe on The Left Wing that it distracted Democrats from voting.  Yeah, that’s it!!!  Good thing Quinnipiac found these ultra-micro-targeted hidden Democrats only Project Narwhal knows about because otherwise, without those gnomes (Step 1: Call random #s only in Fairfax County, Step 2: ???, Step 3: Obama wins!), I’m not sure we’d have a fully operational Death Star. Come November 6, we’ll see how well those gnomes delivered for this survey of a fantasy electorate.

• Obama job approval flat at 49/49 — Really?  49% with a D +8 turnout in a state closer to even D/R?  Suuuuuuuure.

Dr Michael Mann Probably Wants To Hide His Head More Than The Decline Right About Now....

Dr Michael Mann of Penn State has sued National Review, Mark Steyn and others for defamation.  In his complaint, he claimed to have won the Nobel Peace Prize.  

"To mark Michael Mann’s Nobel Prize, we bought this full-page ad that ran in today’s Penn State student newspaper."

 

—Rich Lowry is the editor of National Review.

 

 

'Toon of the Day 2: Screwed

Team Obama: Writing Off Independents?

“We may not win these voters but we may not have to win these voters.”

- David Axelrod on Independent voters, 31 October 2012

LOL! Since 1972 (when Americans began to call themselves “Independents”), only one presidential candidate has won Indies and lost the election. That was John Kerry in 2004. He won Indies by less than 2%.

Interestingly, only a few months ago, Team Obama argued that Independents would decide the election.

"A senior strategist for President Obama says the November election will be decided by 15 per cent of the electorate--swing voters who haven't firmly made up their minds whether to support Obama or Republican challenger Mitt Romney."

 - Kenneth T Walsh, US News & World Report, 25 June 2012

A candidate cannot lose the independent vote by upper-single or double-digits in swing states (or even nationally) and win an election unless the opposition party stays home in DRAMATIC numbers and has enormous crossover. I’m talking about something on the level of having a David Duke, Malik Zulu Shabazz, or Jerry Sandusky as the nominee. That isn’t the case in this election. Romney actually has a higher favourability rating than Obama and Republicans are much more enthusiastic than they were in 2008.

Only the delusional believe that Democratic turnout will be higher and Republican turnout lower than in 2008.

One predictor of turnout is midterm election turnout. Take a look at the pattern:

In the 1998 midterms, turnout was D+2.

In 2000, turnout was D+4.

In the 2002 midterms, turnout was R+1.

In 2004, turnout was R+2.4.

In the 2006 midterms, turnout was D+3.

In 2008, turnout was D+5.

In the 2010 midterms, turnout was R+3.

If this pattern holds, Republican turnout will be higher than Democrat turnout.  Even if R turnout doesn’t eclipse D turnout, the pattern still suggests that D turnout will be lower and Republican turnout higher than both were in 2008.  This prediction is also backed up by all of the polling data, which shows Republicans have a sizable enthusiasm lead over Democrats. Further, recently released data suggest that many of Obama’s core constituencies (18-34, African-Americans, and Hispanics) are not likely to vote in the numbers that they did in 2008. This is especially true for Millennials.