RUSH: The jobs number is out, ladies and gentlemen. Where is it? Eighty thousand new jobs. Here it is. The AP’s assigned unemployment writer Christopher Rugaber on the story. “Hiring slowed in October as employers faced more uncertainty over future economic growth. The Labor Department says the economy added 80,000 jobs last month, the fewest in four months and below September’s revised total of 158,000. The unemployment rate dipped to 9%.” Now, maybe it’s just me, but I don’t see how that’s possible. We’re told here in the AP story that hiring has slowed, the economy added the fewest number of jobs in four months, and unemployment rate still went down. Meanwhile, the unemployment rate did not go down in September or August or July when more jobs were added?
Now, how is this possible? There’s only one way that I can see this is possible, and that is if the Department of Labor is playing fast and loose with some numbers, such as the total universe of jobs number. Now, we do know, thanks to James Pethokoukis that the number of jobs that were out there to be filled today is two-point-something million fewer than when Obama was immaculated, just because the government says so. The government has stated, the Labor Department has said there are that many fewer jobs to be had. That’s the only way unemployment number can go county is if there is a smaller universe against which to compare the number of people not working. I don’t care where they say it came from. It came from northerly survey which measures households.
The point here is… Let me tell you what’s happening. This is what I told you earlier in the week: They’re trying to get eight-point-anything percent. No president has been reelected with unemployment over 8%, so theory trying — and I told you this last week and the week before. What they are doing is doing everything they can to massage these numbers so that the unemployment rate is in the eights a year from now. If it’s 8.8%, you won’t hear the 0.8 reported, just the eight. If it’s 8.9%, you won’t hear the 0.9% reported, just the eight. If it’s 8.4%, you won’t hear the 0.4%, it will just be the eight. If it gets to 8.1% they’ll say, “It’s close to 7.9,” just to use the seven number. This is what is happening.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: By the way, CNBC — this is good — in this take on the jobless numbers, “We have to remind ourselves that things are so bad that 80,000 new jobs looks good.” That’s CNBC Patty Domm, D-o-m-m. “We have to remind ourselves…” Actually, this is Dan Greenhouse, global market strategerist at BTIG. It’s his quote.
“We have to remind ourselves that things are so bad that this looks good. In the context of what we’re living through, it’s not a bad report.” (laughing) Things are so bad, adding 80,000 jobs looks good. Now, it was 158,000 last month. I am stunned by what a negative tone the AP has taken to this story, but they have. They have given it a really negative flavor. Also from the AP: “Shoppers who continue to be weighed down by the weak economy slowed their spending in October. That’s a bad sign for merchants as they head into the winter holiday shopping season. Eleven retailers missed expectations for revenue at stores open at least a year. That’s an indicator of a retailer’s health. Three merchants beat estimates, according to a preliminary tally from Thomson-Reuters.
“Costco, Macy’s, Saks, and Target are among the companies that reported results that fell slightly below Wall Street analysts’ expectations.” So it was unexpected. Unexpected out there that retail sales fall short. And from also the AP, another writer, Andrew Taylor. “Senate Republicans Block $60 Billion Obama Infrastructure Plan.” It was a bipartisan vote again. But the story says, “Republicans in the Senate have killed legislation sponsored by Obama to spend $60 billion on building and repairing roads, rail lines, and other infrastructure to help kick start the economy.” This is such… What kind of fools do you people at AP think we are? We don’t forget $787 billion to “build roads and bridges and schools” back in 2009. That was $787 billion, and now they’re years later, 2-1/2 years later you come to us and whine and complain about a measly $60 billion being voted down for the same roads, bridges and schools?
What happened to the first $787 billion?
If you people in the media don’t get a handle on what’s happening, you’re gonna lose everybody. Do you honestly…? Mr. Taylor, do you not remember the $787 billion stimulus bill and allegedly what it was for? You still write a story, “Republicans killed infrastructure by voting down a $60 billion” tax increase bill? You ever think about going back to the White House and saying, “What the hell’s with this $60 billion? Why didn’t this get done with the first $787 billion?” This is a question for Obama, not Senate Republicans! Besides that, it was a bipartisan vote. It was 51-49. There were Democrats that voted against this as well. “The infrastructure measure is the third in a string of Senate defeats for Obama’s stimulus-style jobs agenda which would be financed by a tax surcharge on the very wealthy.” What a typical lie from the AP, slipped in in typical AP fashion. The Democrats proposed a 0.5% surcharge tax on millionaires. It wouldn’t even begin to pay for this half trillion-dollar boondoggle — it wouldn’t pay for anything — and yet it’s being blamed. This is why you’re not able to take out people like Herman Cain. Nobody believes your reporting anymore.
Related Links