UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (21) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Prev | Next | Next Thread
Author: Goofyhoofy Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Top Recommended Fools Feste Award Nominee! Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: of 1947950  
Subject: Re: Oh golly, the Wall Street Journal Date: 12/3/2012 12:49 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 10
Well, if you read the WSJ rather than the left wing blog that references it, you'd see why Bush was left out of the chart.

I did read it. I see that they produced a chart topping several columns with the data they wanted to highlight, and threw away a mention of the President who shall not be named in Paragraph 49 or something of the text.

Do you not know how to manipulate a story to your own liking? (Hint: this is one of the ways.)

Well, first, that's not the point of the article and of Goofy's problem with it, which was an opinion piece and second, George Bush inherited a recession that lasted through most of his first year in office and was exasberated, obviously, by 9/11.

The recession lasted eight months, and was the mildest in the modern era, showing a -0.3% decline in GDP decline, peak to trough. It probably goes without saying that 9/11 happened in September. It was two months later that the economy emerged from recession, so it is fairly difficult to pin the recession on that, wouldn't you say?

In fact, if you fairly evaluate the economy during years 2, 3, and 4 of The President who shall not be named, you'd have to say it was, well, pretty dismal performance, in spite of massive tax cuts and economic policy prescriptions passed by a Republican House, Republican Senate, and Republican President.

And the Wall Street Journal is worried about Obama's second term, following an economic collapse which occurred during Bush's second, an economic catastrophe unmatched since the Great Depression.

OK. Apologize for them if you like. I'd prefer it if they stuck to economic analysis rather than partisan cheap shots. But then it's thoroughly Murdoch, so what else would you expect?
 
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post  
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (21) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Prev | Next | Next Thread

Announcements

Post of the Day:
Value Hounds

Medallion Financial: TAXI!
What was Your Dumbest Investment?
Share it with us -- and learn from others' stories of flubs.
When Life Gives You Lemons
We all have had hardships and made poor decisions. The important thing is how we respond and grow. Read the story of a Fool who started from nothing, and looks to gain everything.
Community Home
Speak Your Mind, Start Your Blog, Rate Your Stocks

Community Team Fools - who are those TMF's?
Contact Us
Contact Customer Service and other Fool departments here.
Work for Fools?
Winner of the Washingtonian great places to work, and "#1 Media Company to Work For" (BusinessInsider 2011)! Have access to all of TMF's online and email products for FREE, and be paid for your contributions to TMF! Click the link and start your Fool career.
Advertisement