If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.
Duplicate of another approved link: 7046130


(MSNBC)   Under President Obama, 92% of the newly unemployed have been women...according to Mitt Romney. Oh, and according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics it is true...but...well...you know...it doesn't mean...well... um   (firstread.msnbc.msn.com) divider line 502
    More: Interesting, President Obama, Mitt Romney, Strategic Petroleum Reserve, Bureau of Labor Statistics, journalistic standards, PolitiFact, University of Michigan, unemployment  
•       •       •

3793 clicks; Favorite

502 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-04-13 08:40:21 AM
Man, why does private industry hate women so much?
 
2012-04-13 08:46:58 AM
Sure, as long as you're counting from JANUARY of 2009, before Obama even took office. That's some real honest and accurate reporting there, LIEmitter.
 
2012-04-13 09:12:44 AM
Yes, because Obama personally went and had those companies FIRE each and every one of those women. Keep grasping at those straws, guys.
 
2012-04-13 09:21:48 AM
Really? We're greenlighting this again? Fine...

static.politifact.com.s3.amazonaws.com

Link (new window)

talkingpointsmemo.com

Link (new window)

motherjones.com

Link (new window)

ALSO WORTH NOTING: It's important for Romney to start on January 1, even though Obama wasn't inaugurated until January 20. Why? Because if you started on February 1, you'd end up with women accounting for something like 300% of all job losses, and that's ridiculous enough that it would give the whole game away. Even the rubes wouldn't buy that.
 
2012-04-13 09:24:54 AM
 
2012-04-13 09:32:51 AM
He added, "It's like trying to pull a bunny out of a hat, but there's no bunny inside."

Have you checked the roof of the car?
 
2012-04-13 09:42:54 AM

Dusk-You-n-Me: MItt Romney, serial liar.


Serially. It's embarrassing.
 
2012-04-13 09:44:41 AM
Romney is a shameless liar who will say anything to get elected.
 
2012-04-13 09:49:34 AM
Let me summarize the article for you:

1) The numbers are correct.
2) We don't like them because they make Obama look bad.
3) It's all Bush's fault anyway.
4) Profit!
 
2012-04-13 09:52:42 AM

BillCo: Let me summarize the article for you:

1) The numbers are correct.
2) We don't like them because they make Obama look bad.
3) It's all Bush's fault anyway.
4) Profit!


Let me summarize your summary:

1) Statistics suck
 
2012-04-13 09:54:26 AM
What a bullshiat talking point...

That's gonna win the women back, Romney...

Romney wants to see Roe vs Wade repealed.

Romney wants to get rid of Planned Parenthood.

Romney thinks an employer should decide whether a woman can get contraceptives through her health insurance.

Romney needed to take some time to decide if he was in favor of equal pay for women.

But he's got a wife that "knows what it's like to struggle"... just like he "knows what it's like to worry about getting a pink slip".
 
2012-04-13 10:03:41 AM

BillCo: Let me summarize the article for you:

1) The numbers are correct.
2) We don't like them because they make Obama look bad.
3) It's all Bush's fault anyway.
4) Profit!


Even if you ignore every single argument of context, the numbers are still incorrect. The headline says "Under President Obama" while Romney is counting from January 1, 2009. In speeches, Romney is saying "during the Obama years" while 2009 was not a complete "Obama year". That's significant because the misleading stat breaks down if you remove the tiny number of days in 2009 when Obama wasn't president.

The numbers are not correct if you couch them as "Obama numbers"--it's a lie. You can't say it's "technically correct" when it's revealed as incorrect when you actually get technical.
 
2012-04-13 10:03:48 AM

BillCo: Let me summarize the article for you:

1) The numbers are correct.
2) We don't like them because they make Obama look bad.
3) It's all Bush's fault anyway.
4) Profit!


So Obama is responsible for things that happened before he was president. That's really what you're going with? Wow...
 
2012-04-13 10:04:10 AM
But I thought the government was helpless when it came to jobs. The GOP told me so just last week.
 
2012-04-13 10:05:44 AM
How much you want to bet they were all the ugly ones.
 
2012-04-13 10:09:46 AM
Yeah they all lost their jobs when it was found out they'd have to have equal pay. F*ck you lilly ledbetter.
 
2012-04-13 10:09:56 AM
wow... so romney is a liar who will say anything to get elected? get out of here!
 
2012-04-13 10:10:36 AM

Dusk-You-n-Me: MItt Romney, serial liar.


WORD
 
2012-04-13 10:11:36 AM

The Stealth Hippopotamus: How much you want to bet they were all the ugly ones.



i.imgur.com
"You weren't hired for your looks ladies."

"Well, you were."

"No, I'm not talking about you."
 
2012-04-13 10:12:23 AM

Lumpmoose: The numbers are not correct if you couch them as "Obama numbers"--it's a lie. You can't say it's "technically correct" when it's revealed as incorrect when you actually get technical.


You can when the facts are socialist.
 
2012-04-13 10:15:31 AM
I'm so confused.
 
2012-04-13 10:18:50 AM
img834.imageshack.us

Still has job
 
2012-04-13 10:19:08 AM

Wendy's Chili: ALSO WORTH NOTING: It's important for Romney to start on January 1, even though Obama wasn't inaugurated until January 20. Why? Because if you started on February 1, you'd end up with women accounting for something like 300% of all job losses, and that's ridiculous enough that it would give the whole game away. Even the rubes wouldn't buy that.


The 300% might only be something you could say if you somehow counted jobs gained for men as negative jobs lost, which I guess you can do if you're a disingenuous piece of sh*t like basically all Republicans and you start and end at whatever date makes Obama look worse.
 
2012-04-13 10:19:26 AM

make me some tea: I'm so confused.


Yes, since 1/2009 most unemployed have been women. No, Obama is not the one telling the businesses to lay off only women. No, Obama didn't systematically start this before he became president.

Yes, Obama did defend Ann Romney against stupid attacks by a campaign "strategist".

And yes, Ann Romney is the bomb. She doesn't speak like a Governor from Alaska or a stay at home mom not used to media spotlight.

And yes, we do get to choose this year between a Sekret Muslin and an Open Mormon.
 
2012-04-13 10:22:24 AM

I_C_Weener: Yes, since 1/2009 most unemployed have been women


media.npr.org

Blue is for boys, red is for girls.
 
2012-04-13 10:23:23 AM
Romney "likes firing people," I wonder what percent of those were women...
 
2012-04-13 10:28:23 AM
am i reading this wrong or did romney try to divide the absolute job loss numbers of women over the period by a net change number?
 
2012-04-13 10:31:10 AM

I_C_Weener: And yes, we do get to choose this year between a Sekret Muslin and an Open Mormon.


Well, at least Romney is open about his cult affiliations, unlike Obama.
 
2012-04-13 10:31:46 AM
Here's my question - even if true, what exactly is this supposed to mean? I don't understand the takeaway.
 
2012-04-13 10:35:34 AM

DamnYankees: Here's my question - even if true, what exactly is this supposed to mean? I don't understand the takeaway.


"Don't worry your pretty little heads about all that regressive, misogynistic bullshiat my party has been pushing for and I support, Ladies... Obama's the real misogynist!"
 
2012-04-13 10:36:22 AM
From the TFA:

That is accurate, according to BLS. But Brian Davidson, an economist at BLS, told First Read: "The math they use is correct; the terminology is completely wrong."

So if Romney spent 5 minutes talking to each of his sons last night but spent three times longer talking to his youngest son, I can conclude that:

Romney beat his youngest son for 15 minutes. The math is correct, I'm just completely wrong on the terminology.
 
2012-04-13 10:36:55 AM

DamnYankees: Here's my question - even if true, what exactly is this supposed to mean? I don't understand the takeaway.


Republicans don't actually hate vaginas because fake math.
 
2012-04-13 10:37:13 AM

DamnYankees: Here's my question - even if true, what exactly is this supposed to mean? I don't understand the takeaway.


Private industry firing a whole bunch of women is Obama's fault because he hates women so please, please, please forget that the GOP is in the middle of an effort to turn women into second class citizens through specific pieces of legislation such as mandatory ultrasounds, underpaying women, and calling them whores.
 
2012-04-13 10:37:35 AM

DamnYankees: Here's my question - even if true, what exactly is this supposed to mean? I don't understand the takeaway.


Obama wants women in burkas. Duh.
 
2012-04-13 10:37:59 AM

DamnYankees: Here's my question - even if true, what exactly is this supposed to mean? I don't understand the takeaway.


I'm gonna need more graphs and possibly a diagram or two.
 
2012-04-13 10:39:55 AM

Aarontology: DamnYankees: Here's my question - even if true, what exactly is this supposed to mean? I don't understand the takeaway.

Private industry firing a whole bunch of women is Obama's fault because he hates women so please, please, please forget that the GOP is in the middle of an effort to turn women into second class citizens through specific pieces of legislation such as mandatory ultrasounds, underpaying women, and calling them whores.


Sluts. Not whores. SEE? SEE the disinformation coming from the Democrats?
 
2012-04-13 10:42:40 AM

I_C_Weener: Sluts. Not whores. SEE? SEE the disinformation coming from the Democrats?


lulz.
 
2012-04-13 10:43:30 AM

DamnYankees: Here's my question - even if true, what exactly is this supposed to mean? I don't understand the takeaway.


Obama has been worse for women because jobs are the most/only important thing they care about.

In reality, Romney has no explanation for how his policies would have differently affected gender in job growth:

Asked by TPM on the call to explain how another president taking office in January 2009 might have affected the gender gap in job growth, Romney adviser Lanhee Chen only said that the pattern was unusual compared with other recessions and that he believed a president like Romney would have gotten different results.

"Obviously we're of the mind that the difference in policy would produce a different set of outcomes," he said.

Chen was pressed again by another reporter to explain why women were disproportionately affected and what "difference in policy" would have changed the equation.

"The president's policies in general, whether it's Obamacare or Dodd-Frank or any of the policies they have pursued have really hurt both men and women," he said. "This president has demonstrated that he's doing everything in his power to scare away job creators and that's had a disproportionate impact on women. That's just a statistical fact."

Asked a third time to explain the origins of this gender divide and how Romney would tackle the ratio of job losses specifically, Chen again said "it is a fact" that women have suffered disproportionately but offered no specific answer.

"[Romney] would undo the damage that President Obama has done," he said. "He would take the economy in a very different direction and, as a result of that, produce very substantial job gains and growth for men and women."
 
2012-04-13 10:48:07 AM

Lumpmoose: "[Romney] would undo the damage that President Obama has done," he said. "He would take the economy in a very different direction and, as a result of that, produce very substantial job gains and growth for men and women."


why did obama choose to have a recession? what terrible decision-making and leadership. no wonder he can't figure out that jesus is lord.
 
2012-04-13 10:49:23 AM

thomps: am i reading this wrong or did romney try to divide the absolute job loss numbers of women over the period by a net change number?


I was told there would be no math

/but the numbers are definitely funny
 
2012-04-13 10:49:34 AM

Lumpmoose: DamnYankees: Here's my question - even if true, what exactly is this supposed to mean? I don't understand the takeaway.

Obama has been worse for women because jobs are the most/only important thing they care about.

In reality, Romney has no explanation for how his policies would have differently affected gender in job growth:

Asked by TPM on the call to explain how another president taking office in January 2009 might have affected the gender gap in job growth, Romney adviser Lanhee Chen only said that the pattern was unusual compared with other recessions and that he believed a president like Romney would have gotten different results.

"Obviously we're of the mind that the difference in policy would produce a different set of outcomes," he said.

Chen was pressed again by another reporter to explain why women were disproportionately affected and what "difference in policy" would have changed the equation.

"The president's policies in general, whether it's Obamacare or Dodd-Frank or any of the policies they have pursued have really hurt both men and women," he said. "This president has demonstrated that he's doing everything in his power to scare away job creators and that's had a disproportionate impact on women. That's just a statistical fact."

Asked a third time to explain the origins of this gender divide and how Romney would tackle the ratio of job losses specifically, Chen again said "it is a fact" that women have suffered disproportionately but offered no specific answer.

"[Romney] would undo the damage that President Obama has done," he said. "He would take the economy in a very different direction and, as a result of that, produce very substantial job gains and growth for men and women."




Heh... Romney's going to get eaten alive during the debates.
 
2012-04-13 10:51:57 AM

keylock71: Heh... Romney's going to get eaten alive during the debates.


Have they been scheduled yet?
 
2012-04-13 10:54:15 AM

DamnYankees: Here's my question - even if true, what exactly is this supposed to mean? I don't understand the takeaway.


It means that if you elect Romney, he'll work hard to get people's jobs back, unlike Obama and everybody in Congress.

Because Mitt Romney knows about getting people's jobs back.

Well, actually, no, he doesn't. He knows how to fire Americans and give their jobs to foreigners, to maximize profit.

But it's a similar skill set.
 
2012-04-13 10:54:31 AM

Wendy's Chili: keylock71: Heh... Romney's going to get eaten alive during the debates.

Have they been scheduled yet?


Probably be after the conventions before they do that
 
2012-04-13 10:54:45 AM

Wendy's Chili: keylock71: Heh... Romney's going to get eaten alive during the debates.

Have they been scheduled yet?


Nah... Romney, technically, isn't even the Nominee yet.
 
2012-04-13 10:57:53 AM
What happened to "Mancession" ?
 
2012-04-13 11:00:31 AM

itsdan: What happened to "Mancession" ?


Obama's War on Men was Wednesday's talking point. (new window)

Keep up, will you?
 
2012-04-13 11:00:45 AM
This is a smart tactic by Romney. Whenever Obama tries one of his little distractions to try to divide Americans, Romney will steer the issue back to Obama's failure on the economy.
 
2012-04-13 11:01:46 AM

Wendy's Chili:
ALSO WORTH NOTING: It's important for Romney to start on January 1, even though Obama wasn't inaugurated until January 20. Why? Because if you started on February 1, you'd end up with women accounting for something like 300% of all job losses, and that's ridiculous enough that it would give the whole game away. Even the rubes wouldn't buy that.


i105.photobucket.com
 
2012-04-13 11:04:44 AM
Like I've been saying, the GOP pursues policies that aren't particularly wise or sound. These policies were enacted on Obama's watch. Which means that Obama is ultimately responsible.

I personally won't stand for it, and I intend to put my money where my mouth is, and vote GOP in November.
 
Displayed 50 of 502 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report