Back in December 1770, John Adams, noted in a legal brief ("Argument in Defense of the soldiers in the Massachusetts Massacre Trials") that "Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." Whenever I come across this quote, I find myself wondering were Adams, the 'Colossus of Independence' alive today, would he disavow his insightful gem? Would he turn on the TV, watch an hour of Fox News and then amend his statement to read "Facts are stupid things" -- which in fact Ronald Reagan would say more than two centuries later?
Today, more than ever, facts have become subjective; more frequently than not they are what the speaker says they are. And here, I am not referring to the interpretation of facts, but rather the deliberate avoidance and ignorance of them. Take as but one example, all those who breathlessly inform their partisans -- despite a welter of statistical evidence to the contrary -- that "Obama's stimulus hasn't created a single job." Standing in opposition to this one subjective "fact" is a set of statistical ones -- provided in a Congressional Budget Office report which concludes that the stimulus "increased employment by between 1.4 million and 3.3 million people, compared with what employment would have been otherwise."
Ah facts . . . such stupid things.
As a partial antidote to what might be called the "Foxification of Facts," I hereby present the following series of stubborn statistics. (The facts presented herein are all gleaned from the Bureau of Labor Statistics Website):
Fox Fact #1: Unemployment is always higher under Democrats:
The reality: Going back to 1953, every time America had 8 or more consecutive years of Republican administrations in the White House, unemployment starts low with them but ends up ABOVE 6% at the end of those eight years. On the other hand, going back to 1953, every time we have had 8 or more consecutive years of Democratic administrations, unemployment starts high (handed to them by the GOP) but then ends BELOW 6%.
Don't believe me? Let's check the facts:
DEMOCRAT – Harry Truman
January 1953: Democrat Harry Truman hands the White House over to Republican Dwight Eisenhower.
Unemployment Rate (January ’53) = 2.9%
REPUBICAN – Dwight Eisenhower
January 1953, Takes White House….. Unemployment Rate that month = 2.9%
January 1961, Leaves White House… Unemployment Rate that month = 6.6%
NOTE: After 8 years, a Republican hands the White House back over to a Democrat with unemployment ABOVE 6%.
DEMOCRATS – John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson
January 1961, Kennedy Takes White House…. Unemployment Rate that month = 6.6%
January 1969, Johnson Leaves White House… Unemployment Rate that month = 3.4%
NOTE: After 8 years, a Democrat hands the White House back over to a Republican with unemployment BELOW 5%.
Republicans -- Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford
January 1969, Nixon Takes White House…. Unemployment Rate that month = 3.4%
January 1977, Ford Leaves White House… Unemployment Rate that month = 7.5%
NOTE: After 8 years, a Republican (again) hands the White House back over to a Democrat with unemployment ABOVE 6%.
DEMOCRAT – Jimmy Carter
January 1977, Carter Takes White House…. Unemployment Rate that month = 7.5%
January 1981, Carter Leaves White House… Unemployment Rate that month = 7.5%
REPUBLICANS – Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush (Bush # 1)
January 1981, Reagan Takes White House…. Unemployment Rate that month = 7.5%
January 1993, Bush # 1 Leaves White House… Unemployment Rate that month = 7.3%
NOTE: After 12 years, a Republican (again) hands the White House back over to a Democrat with unemployment ABOVE 6%.
DEMOCRAT – Bill Clinton
January 1993, Clinton Takes White House…. Unemployment Rate that month = 7.3%
January 2001, Clinton Leaves White House… Unemployment Rate that month = 4.2%
NOTE: After 8 years, a Democrat (again) hands the White House back over to a Republican with unemployment BELOW 5%.
REPUBLICAN – George W. Bush (Bush # 2)
January 2001, Bush # 2 Takes White House…. Unemployment Rate that month = 4.2%
January 2009, Bush # 2 Leaves White House… Unemployment Rate that month = 7.8%
NOTE: After 8 years, a Republican (again) hands the White House back over to a Democrat with unemployment ABOVE 6%.
Fox Fact #2: "Made-in-America" job creation is always greatest under Republicans than Democrats.
The reality: Looking back 34 years, to 1977, every single Republican we’ve had in the White House has had a NET LOSS in U.S. “Made In America” manufacturing jobs, comparing the manufacturing jobs numbers from the January of the year that they took office with the January of the year that they leave office. By the same token, looking back over the same 34 years, to 1977, every single Democrat we’ve had in the White House has had a NET GAIN in U.S. “Made In America” manufacturing jobs, comparing the manufacturing jobs numbers from the January of the year that they took office with the January of the year that they leave office.
Don't believe me? Here's the actual data from the "Manufacturing Sector Employed" numbers, available at the Bureau of Labor Statistics Website:
Democrat – Jimmy Carter
January 1977, Carter Takes White House…. # of Manufacturing Jobs that month = 17,803,000
January 1981, Carter Leaves White House… # of Manufacturing Jobs that month = 18,639,000
NET GAIN in “MADE IN AMERICA” manufacturing jobs under this Democrat = +836,000
Republican – Ronald Reagan
January 1981, Reagan Takes White House…. # of Manufacturing Jobs that month = 18,639,000
January 1989, Reagan Leaves White House… # of Manufacturing Jobs that month = 18,057,000
NET LOSS in “MADE IN AMERICA” manufacturing jobs under this Republican = -582,000
Republican – George H.W. Bush (Bush # 1)
January 1989, Bush # 1 Takes White House…. # of Manufacturing Jobs that month = 18,057,000
January 1993, Bush # 1 Leaves White House… # of Manufacturing Jobs that month = 16,791,000
NET LOSS in “MADE IN AMERICA” manufacturing jobs under this Republican = -1,266,000
Democrat – Bill Clinton
January 1993, Clinton Takes White House…. # of Manufacturing Jobs that month = 16,791,000
January 2001, Clinton Leaves White House… # of Manufacturing Jobs that month = 17,114,000
NET GAIN in “MADE IN AMERICA” manufacturing jobs under this Democrat = +323,000
Republican – George W. Bush (Bush # 2)
January 2001, Bush # 2 Takes White House…. # of Manufacturing Jobs that month = 17,114,000
January 2009, Bush # 2 Leaves White House… # of Manufacturing Jobs that month = 12,559,000
NET LOSS in “MADE IN AMERICA” manufacturing jobs under this Republican = -4,555,000
Democrat -- Barack Obama
2010 — In 2010, for the first time since Bill Clinton, the nation had a NET GAIN of +153,000 “MADE IN AMERICA” manufacturing jobs.
2011 — In 2011 up to this last month’s data (November), for the SECOND TIME since Bill Clinton, the nation has had a NET GAIN in “MADE IN AMERICA” manufacturing jobs equal to +146,000 so far in 2011.
Fox Fact #3: American Trade is healthiest when Republicans control the reins of government.
The reality: Going back to 1977, every time we’ve had the Democrats controlling at least 2-out of-3 of the White House, Senate and House of Representatives, the nation’s TRADE DEFICIT shrinks (the USA imports less and exports more). By the same token, going back to 1981, every time we’ve had the Republicans controlling at least 2-out of-3 of the White House, Senate and House of Representatives, the nation’s TRADE DEFICIT grows (the USA imports more and exports less).
Don't believe me? Here’s the data, courtesy of the U.S. Census Bureau, which tracks these things:
1977 to 1980, Democrats control 3-of-3, i.e., the White House, Senate and the House of Representatives
U.S. Trade Deficit in 1977 = $27.2 billion
U.S. Trade Deficit in 1980 = $19.4 billion
U.S. Trade Deficit REDUCES by 29% when Democrats controlled 3-of-3.
1981 to 1986, Republicans control 2-of-3, i.e., the White House (Ronald Reagan) and the Senate
U.S. Trade Deficit in 1981 = $ 16.2 billion
U.S. Trade Deficit in 1986 = $138.5 billion
U.S. Trade Deficit INCREASES by 755% when Republicans control 2-of-3.
1987 to 1994, Democrats control 2-of-3, i.e., the Senate and the House of Representatives
U.S. Trade Deficit in 1987 = $151.7 billion
U.S. Trade Deficit in 1994 = $ 98.5 billion
U.S. Trade Deficit REDUCES by 35% when Democrats control 2-of-3.
1995 to 2000, Republicans control 2-of-3, i.e., the Senate and the House of Representatives
U.S. Trade Deficit in 1995 = $ 96.4 billion
U.S. Trade Deficit in 2000 = $376.7 billion
U.S. Trade Deficit INCREASES by 291% when Republicans control 2-of-3.
2001 to 2006, Republicans control 3-of-3, i.e., the White House (Bush # 2), the Senate, and the House of Representatives.
U.S. Trade Deficit in 2001 = $361.8 billion
U.S. Trade Deficit in 2006 = $753.3 billion
U.S. Trade Deficit INCREASES by 108% when Republicans control 3-of-3.
2007 to 2010, Democrats control 3-of-3…
U.S. Trade Deficit in 2007 = $696.7 billion
U.S. Trade Deficit in 2010 = $500.0 billion
U.S. Trade Deficit REDUCES by 28% when Democrats control 3-of-3.
So there you have it . . . the force of facts, not the fiction of FOX.
In an ideal world, the former would conquer the latter. But this is not an ideal world, and facts, no matter how powerful they are, suffer from a stubborn malady: they simply aren't nearly as entertaining as fiction.
More's the pity . . .
©2011 Kurt F. Stone
Oh those facts. Ever listen to 2 lawyers take different sides on the same facts? I cannot say anymore.
Posted by: Alan Weiss | December 25, 2011 at 11:20 PM
So what are you going to do about it WArren? Just wait for it all to end? I must admit that there are times when I do share Hitchens' notion of planet earth being a "penal colony." Nonetheless, I couldn't live with myself if all I did wss observe the perversity and insanity, and not try and do something about it.
Sorry for all the rational thought; it's one of many lamantable character flaws I possess.
Posted by: KFS to Warren | December 25, 2011 at 06:36 PM
All this rational thinking.
After some recent study of Republican politics, Black Holes, Alternative Universes and other amazing aspects of Astronomy, I am a firm believer in this quote from Christopher Hitchens:
"My own view is that this planet is used as a penal colony, lunatic asylum and dumping ground by a superior civilization, to get rid of the undesirable and unfit. I can't prove it, but you can't disprove it either."
Posted by: Warren Weinstein | December 25, 2011 at 04:31 PM
Where should I start? Lets see . . . . If you are talking about Hannity, or Beck, or
Your chart of facts failed to state:
1) JEC was elected in '76 with inflation at 5.8% and left in 80 with inflation at 14.5% - oops - just in increase of 150% in 4 yrs !
2) JEC was elected in '76 when unemployment was 7.6% and left in '80 with it at 11.3% - double oops - just an increase of 50% in 4 yrs !
Of course, Jimmy (as the Washington outsider) had to fight tooth & nail with Tip O'Neil who ended up manipulating most of JEC's policy proposals into giant special interest spending programs to which, for example, JEC then referred to the Democratically controlled Congressional Tax Committee as the actions of "ravenous wolves." JEC vetoed the Dem's Public Works program calling it "Inflationary" due to the gazillion ear-marks it included. Tip O'Neil & Ted Kennedy re-wrote it and then got much of it pushed thru congress.
3) RWR inherited 14.5% inflation & 11.3% unemployment and left in '88 at 4.4% and 5.4% respectively.
(Those 8 yrs included 6 of the best financial yrs of my life)
4) GHWB did hv the small matter of the 1st Persian Gulf War which definitely had a negative impact on his administration's financial ability.
(That little military sortie brought me to Kuwait in '91 and then 4 anguish filled years which also negatively impacted my financial ability to the tune of "It's Chapter 7 Bankruptcy Time!" )
And, lets not forget that the Dems controlled both houses of congress from '55 to '95. So from 2 years into DDE's administration and 2 years into WJC's administration the Dems controlled Congress. As I recall, it is Congress that passes the laws, approves the federal budget, and determines how it is spent. The President, after submitting his budget and then working directly with and negotiating with Congress, then signs or vetoes those laws, budgets, programs, etc., etc., etc.
BUT CONGRESS WRITES THE CHECKS!
In his first 2 years when President Obama swept in with total control of Congress why didn't he submit a budget proposal and then work hand in hand with his Democrat controlled Congress to get one passed ?
He did it with Health Care and the bailouts of the Auto & Banking/Insurance industry - but not the one most important legislation for the "Public Good". Its so important for you & me to know just how our government is spending the tax money it collects from us.
Hhmmmm - maybe he just doesn't want us to know how much he intends to spend.
Be well,
Don
PS: GM's 50 billion dollar bailout demanded the closing 15 GM factories (firing 21,000 union workers & 4,500 white collar workers), closing 4,000 dealerships (a loss of almost 500,000 jobs ), and untold closings of GM's vendor operations and the related loss of those jobs. And then there was Chrysler, AEG, Goldman Sachs, Lehman bros., and on, and on, and on.
So who has consistently bailed out his friends in business, refuses to work hand in hand with congress, and refuses to inform you & me how our taxes are being spent?
Now don't get me started on how Mr. "Slow & Sedate" is dealing with the "Fast & Furious" gun debacle. I'm afraid that his approach to crisis suffers from his enrollment in the Obama School of Inexperience & Lack of Leadership".
Posted by: Donald | December 25, 2011 at 02:45 PM