Campaign 2004 already seems to be going down thetubes for the Donks:
The nation’s unemployment rate dropped to 6 percent in October as companies added thousands of new jobs for the third straight month, new evidence of an improving labor market.
The Labor Department reported Friday that payrolls grew by 126,000 last month, significantly more than the 50,000 new jobs that economists had predicted. That followed a revised 125,000 new jobs in September, which initially was reported at 57,000.
U.S. companies also added new jobs in August, marking three months of hiring gains following a six-month slump. October hiring occurred across a broad swath of the business landscape, including technical services, temporary employment firms, health care, social work, education and retail.
“We can finally put the nail in the coffin of the jobless recovery,” said Ken Mayland, president of ClearView Economics. “We are back on a rising job track.”
Another issue slips away.
drew
Cole-
How does this belong in the “Democratic Stupidity” section when no Democrats are mentioned?
John Cole
You know- this is the second time in two days I have been questioned and noticed I have labeled something wrong. Thius was supposed to be “Domestic Affairs,” which is right next to Democrat stupidity in the drag down box.
Yesterday the Lynch story got filed errantly under ‘Humor.’
I wonddr how many times I have done this…
Steve
John,
The 126,000 is actually for non-farm payrolls. Overall the number of newly employed went up 441,000.
mark
Actually, reading some of the dems reaction to the good economic news, you may as well file subsequent posts under “Democratic Stupidity.”
Funny how when economic times are good under a democrat, it is the genious of the president and his policies. When times are good under a GOP president, it is just a fluke in the cycle.
Kimmitt
Dr. Mayland has made this prediction every month for the past nine. He may well be right this time, but it may be more persistence than sagacity.
drew
Funny how when anything bad happens it the Clenis’ fault.
drew
Yeah!!!
Well if you weren’t a motherfucking moron you would realize this piece of information means absolutly nothing. See economists leave out farm employment when they calculate general unemployment, because farm employment varries wildly dependant on year and season. I would guess a labor intensive crop to has hit harvest.
In my last post is should have refered to the Clenis as “the Clenis™”.
Ricky
drew,
This isn’t eschaton. Try to debate like an adult.
Andrew Lazarus
In perspective, 125,000 is 75,000 LESS than the **Administration’s** most recent prediction (although indeed far above neutral economists’), and at least 25,000 less than break-even to account for growth of the labor force.
Story still developing. If the number keeps growing, good. If it drops back, not so good.
David Perron
Come to think of it, I’ve never EVER seen anyone other than an avowed liberal refer to Clinton as the Clenis. I wonder if Sigmund would have had a field day with that.
Kimmitt
The point of the Clenis phrase is to bring out into the open the conservative obsession with Clinton’s penis — to make explicit that which is implicit.
David Perron
Speaking for myself, I have absolutely no interest in Clinton’s penis. Projection, Kimmitt?
drew
I am not sure what Frued would say about the phrase “the Clenis”, but I know Freud would have a field day with the religious right.
The Clenis is the conservatives most effective talking point. Ever listen to Hannity? All he does is compare X to Clinton because he knows his listens will eat it up.
David Perron
So, the “Clenis” thing is a jab at the religious right? I think you guys are fishing in the wrong spot; hate to break it to you.
Kimmitt
The Clenis thing is a jab at the Right’s obsession with Clinton’s sex life. You don’t share it? Fine. But a lot of folks who share your opinions do.
Robin Roberts
Pathetic try, actually, Kimmitt.
Kimmitt
*shrug* It’s y’all’s $60 million obsession.
David Perron
Again, with the strawman. Pathetic.
Moe Lane
“Ever listen to Hannity?”
Actually, no.
“All he does is compare X to Clinton because he knows his listens will eat it up.”
Do tell.
Kimmitt
“Again, with the strawman. Pathetic.”
Please. The Right spent $60 million on a special prosecutor which came up with . . . an extramarital affair with an intern — but one which its $60 million absurdly turned into an act of perjury, at which point said affair was magically changed into a high crime against the state.
This is the origin of the Clenis(tm) terminology. If you don’t share either the crusading or the liberal perspective, fine. I merely sought to etymologize.
David Perron
No, you didn’t etymologize, you generalized. And everyone knows, only idiots generalize.
Kimmitt
Okay, hang on — a sitting President was impeached (not convicted) for the heinous, national-security-threatening crime of nailing an intern! There isn’t much generalization involved here.
Ricky
Kimmitt, the president was not impeached because of sex, so you guys need to get over your infatuation with Clinton’s penis and the unbelievably dishonest presentation that it was over ‘nailing an intern’. That’s patently false, dishonest and a dodge (and I’m being kind).
LYING UNDER OATH and obstruction are the reasons he was impeached and is barred from practicing law in Arkansas and the USSC. He remained in office because several senators said that they were going to vote ‘not guilty’ even though those same senators openly stated that he was guilty.
You guys are the only ones who keep harping on his penis. No one else gives a damn. And don’t EVEN make me pull up a Nina Burleigh quote…
David Perron
Well, you missed it. Actually, you missed everything, including the joke (which I’m not going to explain; evidently it’s the fabled Lefty lack of sense of humor at work again).
Look: I’m not in the least bit interested in anything at all in connection with the genitalia of any President, past or present. Furthermore, I’d bet that John is equally uninterested (can’t speak for him, though). So, assuming none of us frequent posters have the slightest care at all for the equipment of WJC, to what end do you guys keep referring to it? Unless, of course, it’s an unbecoming interest of your own.
That you maintain that pretty much anyone to the right of center has this grotesque fascination with the former presidential putz is more than a little disturbing, Kimmitt.
Andrew Lazarus
Ah, have you read the juicy parts of the Special Persecutor’s report?
Kimmitt
I’m trying to give a flying fuck about anyone lying under any circumstances about banging an intern, but my circle of caring stopped right outside “my wife.” Either he was guilty of a real crime or he wasn’t.
The only reason it was under oath was because of the Clenetic Obsession to start with — $60 million spent on Clinton’s sex life so that Ken Starr could turn lying about an affair into a Federal offense. Don’t get me wrong — the disbarring seemed like a vaguely reasonable response; once we’ve changed the Federal rules regarding testimony into nothing more than a club to force men to reveal embarassing secrets, ethical folks should probably suck it up and let themselves be slimed by anyone powerful enough to issue a subpoena. But this issue started, ended, and ran on an obsession with Clinton’s sex life.
Kimmitt
…or, at least, those are the opinions of the folks who created the term “Clenis,” so now you have your answer.
David Perron
So, in short, it’s stupid generalization on the part of those who invoke “the Clenis”. Thanks for the clarification.
Ricky
***I’m trying to give a flying fuck about anyone lying under any circumstances about banging an intern, but my circle of caring stopped right outside “my wife.”***
That sort of attitude is why NOW and the glorious “sexual harassment” theme are discredited and Clinton’s endorsements are worth less than mine.
But, I see that you’re at the point (in a corner) where you’re saying it’s so because you said it’s so. No need to waste my time, I can see kneepadding over at DU.