-/

Why is it that unemployment numbers were never in question until now?

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(10-07-2014 10:16 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Why is it that unemployment numbers were never in question until now?

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

You are kidding, aren't you?

(10-07-2014 10:16 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Why is it that unemployment numbers were never in question until now?

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

Until now??? Sorry, but ...

http://nypost.com/2013/11/18/census-fake...bs-report/

(10-07-2014 11:03 PM)EagleRockCafe Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 10:16 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Why is it that unemployment numbers were never in question until now?

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

Until now??? Sorry, but ...

http://nypost.com/2013/11/18/census-fake...bs-report/

Lol. I meant until this President took office.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(10-07-2014 11:05 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 11:03 PM)EagleRockCafe Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 10:16 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Why is it that unemployment numbers were never in question until now?

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

Until now??? Sorry, but ...

http://nypost.com/2013/11/18/census-fake...bs-report/

Lol. I meant until this President took office.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

Because this President is black and everyone knows you can't trust a black man.

(10-07-2014 10:16 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Why is it that unemployment numbers were never in question until now?

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

Were you been? Those figures have been questioned probably since they starting publishing them. Same with all govt data.

(10-07-2014 10:16 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Why is it that unemployment numbers were never in question until now?

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

Fit, they'd been in question under Bush..

It wasn't until after there were conversations about how Bush had a tenure when numbers were down in the 4's and 5's under Bush, they started screaming about "What about the U6 numbers! They're still in the double digits!"

NY Post. Who owns that paper?

(10-08-2014 10:25 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  NY Post. Who owns that paper?

So what. Can you point to one story where the NY Post has fabricated a news story? If not, please abstain from baseless innuendo.

If you want to ask this same question of the NY Times, Google Jayson Blair.

(10-08-2014 10:25 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  NY Post. Who owns that paper?

Some guy that loves sensationalism and many would say yellow journalism, but can you really fault him for not showing bad things on China since he owns so much satellite feed there? Gotta make some money.

(10-08-2014 10:36 AM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  

(10-08-2014 10:25 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  NY Post. Who owns that paper?

So what. Can you point to one story where the NY Post has fabricated a news story? If not, please abstain from baseless innuendo.

It wasn't baseless. Rupert can't be trusted. See here.

And I looked for another source...sadly...the only one I saw was pajamas media. So...

Don't think they fabricate but do go off on tangents.

(10-08-2014 11:23 AM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Don't think they fabricate but do go off on tangents.

Probably not, but they don't name a source and no one else is reporting this. You at least have to wait for something a tad more corroborative before betting the farm on it.

(10-08-2014 11:31 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(10-08-2014 11:23 AM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Don't think they fabricate but do go off on tangents.

Probably not, but they don't name a source and no one else is reporting this. You at least have to wait for something a tad more corroborative before betting the farm on it.

OK, I'll wait until the HuffPost reports it.

The MSM isn't going to report this story because it doesn't fit their meme.

And no matter what problems Murdoch has had, it doesn't imply that the Post's reporting is false. Heck, Murdoch's minions hacked the Brits' phones so they could get at the truth. That apparently was OK when the DoJ did it to AP and James Rosen.

(10-08-2014 12:43 PM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  

(10-08-2014 11:31 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(10-08-2014 11:23 AM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Don't think they fabricate but do go off on tangents.

Probably not, but they don't name a source and no one else is reporting this. You at least have to wait for something a tad more corroborative before betting the farm on it.

OK, I'll wait until the HuffPost reports it.

The MSM isn't going to report this story because it doesn't fit their meme.

And no matter what problems Murdoch has had, it doesn't imply that the Post's reporting is false. Heck, Murdoch's minions hacked the Brits' phones so they could get at the truth. That apparently was OK when the DoJ did it to AP and James Rosen.

Again, you clearly don't know much about huffpo. They rarely report or break stuff. They mainly only provide links to online articles and rehash them with some of their commentary.

And what is the MSM's meme? Waiting for actual corroborated facts first?

(10-08-2014 12:52 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(10-08-2014 12:43 PM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  

(10-08-2014 11:31 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(10-08-2014 11:23 AM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Don't think they fabricate but do go off on tangents.

Probably not, but they don't name a source and no one else is reporting this. You at least have to wait for something a tad more corroborative before betting the farm on it.

OK, I'll wait until the HuffPost reports it.

The MSM isn't going to report this story because it doesn't fit their meme.

And no matter what problems Murdoch has had, it doesn't imply that the Post's reporting is false. Heck, Murdoch's minions hacked the Brits' phones so they could get at the truth. That apparently was OK when the DoJ did it to AP and James Rosen.

Again, you clearly don't know much about huffpo. They rarely report or break stuff. They mainly only provide links to online articles and rehash them with some of their commentary.

And what is the MSM's meme? Waiting for actual corroborated facts first?

Then I'll wait until HuffPost provides the link.

Corroborated facts are only applicable if they fit the proper narrative.

And for this story in particular, what corroboration will you need? Someone from the Washington headquarters of the Census Bureau saying "Yep, that's what we've been doing."

(10-08-2014 08:40 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 10:16 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Why is it that unemployment numbers were never in question until now?

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

Were you been? Those figures have been questioned probably since they starting publishing them. Same with all govt data.

Yea, don't confuse Fit with history. He doesn't know much about the subject.

(10-08-2014 01:34 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(10-08-2014 08:40 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 10:16 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Why is it that unemployment numbers were never in question until now?

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

Were you been? Those figures have been questioned probably since they starting publishing them. Same with all govt data.

Yea, don't confuse Fit with history. He doesn't know much about the subject.

Not necessary.

(10-08-2014 01:29 PM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  

(10-08-2014 12:52 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(10-08-2014 12:43 PM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  

(10-08-2014 11:31 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(10-08-2014 11:23 AM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Don't think they fabricate but do go off on tangents.

Probably not, but they don't name a source and no one else is reporting this. You at least have to wait for something a tad more corroborative before betting the farm on it.

OK, I'll wait until the HuffPost reports it.

The MSM isn't going to report this story because it doesn't fit their meme.

And no matter what problems Murdoch has had, it doesn't imply that the Post's reporting is false. Heck, Murdoch's minions hacked the Brits' phones so they could get at the truth. That apparently was OK when the DoJ did it to AP and James Rosen.

Again, you clearly don't know much about huffpo. They rarely report or break stuff. They mainly only provide links to online articles and rehash them with some of their commentary.

And what is the MSM's meme? Waiting for actual corroborated facts first?

Then I'll wait until HuffPost provides the link.

Corroborated facts are only applicable if they fit the proper narrative.

And for this story in particular, what corroboration will you need? Someone from the Washington headquarters of the Census Bureau saying "Yep, that's what we've been doing."

Something more than anonymous partisan sources. Sorry.

But hey, not even Fox News has anything on it.