Obama tanking in polls, but no mention of it in media

An NBC poll released yesterday showed that Americans think very poorly of what President Obama is doing.  Despite this, Brian Williams on NBC Nightly News did not even mention his own poll.

When Obama was doing well in the polls they were on the front page of every newspaper across the country.  When George Bush was tanking in polls, this was front page news.  When Bush's numbers hit the 30s, Wolf Blizer of CNN had a cow.  But now you have Obama tanking in the polls, and you don't even get one mention of it, not even by the same network that did the poll.

Which brings us to the Rush Limbaugh Theorem as defined by Rush Limbaugh:

Limbaugh Theorem explains how it is that Obama escapes blame, how it is that Obama escapes accountability for anything happening as a result of his policies and his presidency. The way he does it is to act like he's not really governing. Somebody else is doing that. Somebody else is causing these problems. He's outside Washington!

So, instead of reporting on these poll numbers, Rush says that Obama is simply saying the polling is bad because people are tired of Washington, and tired because republicans don't want to pass any of his ideas.  It's not his fault because of republicans.

So despite tanking approval numbers in polls, the media -- of whom 80% note voting for liberal democrats -- ignores these polls even when they're their own polls.

So the polls show Obama has a 40% approval rating, and a record 76% believe their kid's lives will be better than their own.  They say that 71% believe our country is heading in the wrong direction.

But the Obama administration says these polling results are not because of anything he, because the unemployment rate dropped to 6.1% as a result of his policies, and 275,000 jobs were created last month.  He says about 200,000 jobs have been created each of the past several months, which, he says, is good.

The media barely touched on these polling results, if they touched on them at all. Yet if they did, the American people would know that Obama is no longer popular.  They would know Americans don't support Obama's policies.

Likewise, if they did, and they inspected the numbers Obama gave, they would learn that the number of people employed full-time actually declined by 523,000, and the number of part-time workers increased by 799,000 (which includes those who wanted part-time and those who wanted full-time but could only find part-time).  So the 275,000 number is misleading in itself.

What they fail to tell you is the 110,000 left the workforce, making the unemployment number artificially low. The U6 unemployment number, the one that includes these 110,000 workers, is 12.1%, twice the U3 number the media likes to report because it makes the president look better.

They don't tell you that teen unemployment rose for the third straight month, and is now at 21%.  This means that teenagers looking to get a job so they can afford a car, or cell phone service, are not finding work. Of course they'll probably try to spin this as good, considering the teenage unemployment rate was 27.3% in October of 2010.  In 2006, however, it was 14%.

They don't tell you that 700,000 immigrants are crossing the border each year, much more than the 193,000 who crossed during the Ellis Island years.  These people are taking jobs that teenagers could take.  Yet most of these people are not working because their simply enough jobs in Obama's economy to absorb this many people.  So, instead of contributing, most of these people absorb State and Federal dollars in the form of welfare, social security, and healthcare.

They don't tell you that Obama care has given businesses a dis-incentive to hire full time workers, and therefore the rise in part time workers -- 799,000 in June, 2014 --is the highest of any month since 1993.

They don't tell you that 275,000 new jobs created is not a significant number.  It's a positive good, but it's not indicative of a robust economy.  While they spin the fact that 200,000 plus jobs are being created a month under the Obama economy, this number is in no way indicative of a robust economy.

In fact, if Bush or any other republican were president, that 200,000 would be reported on accurately, and the economy would be made to look as bad as the media could make it.