Big lie, or the biggest lie? (Put down your coffee before reading)

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

This is an unusually big lie...

(The whole piece is hilarious. It actually uses a prediction about 2004 from a 2003 RW publication as a source for 2004 economic data, which is pretty good. Why not footnote Nostradamus? But the highlighted line is, IMO, a lie so astonishing that, in proper "big lie" fashion, the brain seizes up upon reading it and loses a measure of critical function.)

The Facts About the Bush Tax Cuts
Posted by Erick Erickson (RedState)

...Likewise, after the 2003 tax cuts, the unemployment rate fell to the lowest level since World War II. Let me repeat that: the Bush economic program created the lowest unemployment level ever. In fact, economists liken it to full employment given the demographic composition of those who were left on the unemployment line.


http://www.redstate.com/erick/2010/07/27/the-facts-about-the-bush-tax-cuts/

That statement is not a distortion, statistical game or half-truth. It is just a lie... like saying that Nevada is the largest state, or that opossums are America's most popular house pet.


Via Yglesias and Krugman

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/07/28/tax-cut-truthiness/

http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/2010/07/bush-tax-cuts-where-was-the-growth/

[Oregone]

1. Thats dumb

Even if they were working with reality, correlation is not causation

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

3. Needless to say, the unemployment rate in the late 1990s was lower than

it ever was under Bush at any point.

It's not playing with the numbers. It's just making up a number.

And that is the difference between the crafty argument and the big lie. We assume the big lie must be based on something because it is inconceivable that somebody would just make up a number right to our face.

[HughBeaumont]

2. The Facts about the Bewsh II Job Creation Record:

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/HughBeaumont/94

Straight from Bloomberg, Straight from the BLS. 1.1 million jobs in 8 years. That's pretty much zero job growth in 10 years when you factor population expansion in the mix. Tax cuts for the rich did NOT lead to job creation. In fact, these numbers prove quite the opposite happened.

I don't know what the living hell this joker's smoking, but I'll bet the street value of it is astronomical.

[sinkingfeeling]

4. Not according to the Bureau of Labor statistics, Erik.

Funny, how it was 4.0% in 2000 and after the tax cuts of 2001 and 2003, it was 5.8% and 5.5%.

http://www.bls.gov/cps/prev_yrs.htm

Year Annual
1948 3.8
1949 5.9
1950 5.3
1951 3.3
1952 3.0
1953 2.9
1954 5.5
1955 4.4
1956 4.1
1957 4.3
1958 6.8
1959 5.5
1960 5.5
1961 6.7
1962 5.5
1963 5.7
1964 5.2
1965 4.5
1966 3.8
1967 3.8
1968 3.6
1969 3.5
1970 4.9
1971 5.9
1972 5.6
1973 4.9
1974 5.6
1975 8.5
1976 7.7
1977 7.1
1978 6.1
1979 5.8
1980 7.1
1981 7.6
1982 9.7
1983 9.6
1984 7.5
1985 7.2
1986 7.0
1987 6.2
1988 5.5
1989 5.3
1990 5.6
1991 6.8
1992 7.5
1993 6.9
1994 6.1
1995 5.6
1996 5.4
1997 4.9
1998 4.5
1999 4.2
2000 4.0
2001 4.7
2002 5.8
2003 6.0
2004 5.5
2005 5.1
2006 4.6
2007 4.6
2008 5.8
2009 9.3

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

5. .

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

7. ..

[Hydra]

6. Holy fucking shit

Pardon my french, but you said it- This is such a huge lie that your brain freezes up upon reading it.

Next they'll say torture is an acceptable and reliable form of interrogation...oh, crap