Unemployment Coverage Proves Conservative Bias of the Media
An AP story that runs in today's Anchorage Daily News says, in part:
None of the Conservatives want to acknowledge that Obama has bested their hero by over a year, despite the fact that he had to turn around the legacy of eight prior years of Republicans. Before Reagan, the Democrats only had four years to mess with the economy leaving Reagan with far less to undo. In fact Conservatives are even criticizing Obama for repeating Reagan's achievement.
Clearly, the mention of 1983 without mentioning the fact that Reagan was president at the time, shows how much influence the Conservatives have over the news. They did not want to draw attention to Obama's ability to reach double digit unemployment over a year faster than Reagan. They did not want their hero to be shown to be so soundly beaten by Obama on achieving this milestone. Strangely, it was the purportedly liberal New York Times that pointed out the 1983 level (though they didn't mention Reagan) was actually 10.8%, significantly higher than Obama's 10.2%. But OBama has time to get the unemployment higher than Reagan got it.
This is another example of shameless Conservative manipulation of the news to forward their ideological, and not objective, news standards.
[Original title was "Unemployment - Facts - Context - Ideology." I guess irony should have been in there too.]
The jobless rate rocketed to 10.2 percent in October, the highest since early 1983, dealing a psychological blow to Americans as they prepare holiday shopping lists.This story and others on this topic that I've read all point to a media conspiracy clearly orchestrated by Conservatives. None of the stories I've seen have mentioned that in 1983 Ronald Reagan was into his third year as president. None of these stories has highlighted the fact that the US reached double digit unemployment in only 10 months after Obama was sworn into office while it took Conservative hero Reagan two full years to reach that level.
None of the Conservatives want to acknowledge that Obama has bested their hero by over a year, despite the fact that he had to turn around the legacy of eight prior years of Republicans. Before Reagan, the Democrats only had four years to mess with the economy leaving Reagan with far less to undo. In fact Conservatives are even criticizing Obama for repeating Reagan's achievement.
Clearly, the mention of 1983 without mentioning the fact that Reagan was president at the time, shows how much influence the Conservatives have over the news. They did not want to draw attention to Obama's ability to reach double digit unemployment over a year faster than Reagan. They did not want their hero to be shown to be so soundly beaten by Obama on achieving this milestone. Strangely, it was the purportedly liberal New York Times that pointed out the 1983 level (though they didn't mention Reagan) was actually 10.8%, significantly higher than Obama's 10.2%. But OBama has time to get the unemployment higher than Reagan got it.
This is another example of shameless Conservative manipulation of the news to forward their ideological, and not objective, news standards.
[Original title was "Unemployment - Facts - Context - Ideology." I guess irony should have been in there too.]
