I am Sick Of Media Claiming Increase In Jobless Claims Is 'Unexpected'

Jobless claims rose again and the media is flapping it's jaws and claiming to be surprised or saying the rise was "unexpected".

How many readers are surprised? How many people truly find the news unexpected?

For those living under a rock let us point out the latest unemployment rate rose to 9.1.

There has been a very public battle between Democrats and Republicans in Washington to change the course of the last two-in-a-half years where Democrats want to throw more good money after bad to "stimulate" the economy (after the first stimulus package failed so spectacularly) as well as their stock-in-trade solution of raising taxes, and Republicans trying to pass a package that would Empower Small Business Owners and Reduce Regulatory Burdens, Fix the Tax Code to Help Job Creators, Increase Competitiveness for American Manufacturers, Encourage Entrepreneurship and Growth, Maximize Domestic Energy Production to Ensure An Energy Policy for the Twenty-First Century and Pay Down America’s Unsustainable Debt Burden and Start Living Within Our Means.

Media outlets are not supposed to be living under those rocks though, they are supposed to be caught up with the latest news and events, so when you see something like bloomberg's headline screaming "Jobless Claims Unexpectedly Climb in the U.S.", or Reuters with their first paragraph stating "The number of Americans filing new claims for unemployment aid unexpectedly edged higher last week," you have to wonder why these people are still in business.

Initial claims for state jobless benefits increased 1,000 to 427,000, the Labor Department said. However, economists polled by Reuters had forecast claims dropping to 415,000 from a previously reported count of 422,000.

The rise kept first-time claims perched above the 400,000 mark for the ninth week in a row. Analysts normally associate a level below that with steady job growth.

"It's the same dismal trend continuing. It's not getting worse, but it's not getting better either," said Keith Hembre, chief economist at Nuveen Asset Management in Minneapolis.

Unexpectedly?

I am no economist, just a lowly blogger, yet I expected it.

In fact, yesterday I provided three graphs where people could see, at a glance, just how badly Obama's incompetence and policies have failed to stimulate the economy, failed brilliantly to create conditions for job growth. and has done more damage in just 2 1/2 years than any president has ever done.

Yes, that includes Jimmy Carter.

I am not the only non-economist that is not surprised and finds the recent bad news about the economy and jobless claims totally "expected".

Rasmussen shows consumer confidence is done, The Hill reports that one in three likely voters expect to be worse off when they go to the polls a year from this November, Wall Street Journal reports that the average job seeker gives up after five months, and remember the official 9.1 percent unemployment rate does not include the over two million workers that are able and want to work but didn't seek a job in the 4 weeks prior to the government unemployment survey. Last but not least 65 percent of likely voters believe the country is on the wrong track.

It was reported by CBS News recently that chronic unemployment is worse than that in the Great Depression with 45.1 percent of all unemployed workers in this country being jobless for more than six months. Then we have the news that 1.7 million graduating college students in the 2011 class are facing the greatest unemployment numbers among their demographic in U.S. history.

All of that and more and the mainstream media keeps trying to convince their readers that the bad news coming out a mile a minute is "unexpected".

No wonder Sarah Palin calls them the "lame-stream media".

They are either lying to their readers, completely clueless and biased or too busy carrying Obama's water to bother with reporting the actual news without spin and then expecting their readers to buy their crap hook, line and sinker.

Either way I am sick of seeing the word "unexpected" in headlines and stories when the majority of the country damn well does expect the bad news because they are keeping up as the polling shows.

.

Tax Deal: Two Separate Polls Show Liberals Fighting Against Majority of Americans, Even Their Own Party

Two polls released which show that an overwhelming majority of Americans, including a majority of Democrats support the tax deal that Barack Obama and Republicans negotiating. This shows that far left liberals, including House Democrats that have been fighting against the deal as a whole, are not representative of America and are not even representative of their whole party.

Earlier it was reported that the Senate is set to move forward with it's first procedural motion, cloture, to test the level of support in the upper chamber and now Pew Research and an ABC News/Washington Post poll both find a broad level of support, a majority of Americans supportive of the tax deal as a whole.

Pew finds that 60 percent of Americans back the tax deal, and that includes 63 percent of Democrats and surprise, surprise, 65 percent of liberal Democrats, showing that the far left liberal blogoshere which has spent a week throwing a complete temper tantrum, does not even represent those that consider themselves liberal Democrats!!

The agreement between President Obama and congressional Republicans to extend tax cuts and unemployment benefits is getting strong bipartisan support. Overall, 60% approve of the agreement while just 22% disapprove.

There are virtually no partisan differences in opinions about the agreement – 63% of Democrats approve of it, as do 62% of Republicans and 60% of independents. Among Democrats, liberals are as supportive of the agreement as are conservative and moderate Democrats.

The ABC News/Washington Post poll is even worse news for the far left liberal blogosphere, as well as the House Democrats that have been fighting against the deal their own party's president negotiated:

Sixty-nine percent of Americans said they support the agreement announced last week by the president that would extend all expiring tax cuts for two years, extend unemployment benefits for 13 months, allow for a one-year payroll tax holiday, and increase the level of exemption from estate taxes, an ABC News/Washington Post poll found Monday.

The graph at the top of the post is a screen shot from the ABC News/Washington Post poll PDF, and it shows that the specific part of the tax deal that receives the least support is cutting social security and payroll taxes, not the part that liberal far left progressive Democrats have been complaining about, very loudly, which has been the estate tax provisions.

The estate tax provision increasing the exemption actually enjoys a majority of support even from Democrats.

(Click image to enlarge for better reading)

Initial reactions show blogosphere far left liberals in complete denial.

[Update] New reports show that a certain segment of conservatives are slamming the deal, with estate taxes also being the chief complaint... the difference is that the conservatives do not think there should be any estate tax aka death tax.

The polls mentioned above ask about support on "increasing exemption" but they did not ask about the estate tax as a whole.

I would be interested to see those figures gauging what portion of America thinks that leveling taxes on monies or estates left to family and/or friends is supported although as I pointed out in previous days, highlighting specific portions of the bill should not assume that just because one option or another would influence support as a whole.

The bill is not being voted on separately, it is a package and when determining levels of support the whole package should always be polled on rather than cherry picking individual issues to try to dishonestly mislead readers into thinking the package in full does not enjoy bipartisan support.

.

Tax Deal: Done Deal Despite Progressives? Not So Fast, House Dems Defy Obama

Despite the caterwauling from progressive liberals in the media, the blogosphere and liberal Democratic politicians over the weekend after Barack Obama announced a deal on taxes that included the continuation of all Bush-era tax cuts, a deal on estate taxes aka death taxes, an extension of unemployment insurance, payroll-tax cuts, incentives for businesses and tax credits, it seems Democrats are being told by the Obama administration, via Joe Biden, to take the deal or risk "plunging the country into a double-dip recession if they reject his tax-cut deal with Republicans."

Obama’s White House started a full-court press on the agreement Wednesday that included a meeting between House Democrats and Vice President Biden.

House Democrats emerged from the meeting saying Biden told them the agreement essentially was final.

“It’s up or down,” Biden told them, according to Rep. Yvette Clarke (D-N.Y.)

Senior advisers to Obama told wavering Democratic lawmakers the tax package will speed the recovery and warned that failure to pass it would have disastrous consequences for the economy.

Senate Democrats led by Harry Reid are already set to schedule a vote on the package, but House Democrats are still "angry" the Washington Post describes and do not like the deal in it's current form, although VP Biden has made it clear this is the final bill.

In a forceful presentation, however, Biden made it clear that big changes are not in the cards. "The vice president said: 'This is the deal. Take it or leave it,' " an irritated Rep. Henry A. Waxman (Calif.) said, paraphrasing Biden.

I am sure that went over well... not.

Perhaps Democratic House Representatives should try a novel idea... listening to Americans, their constituents, the voters, who in two separate polls, Gallup and Rasmussen show a majority favor the tax deal the President cut with Republicans.

Gallup:

Two major elements included in the tax agreement reached Monday between President Barack Obama and Republican leaders in Congress meet with broad public support. Two-thirds of Americans (66%) favor extending the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts for all Americans for two years, and an identical number support extending unemployment benefits for the long-term unemployed.

Rasmussen:

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 56% of Likely U.S. Voters favor the agreement that extends the Bush tax cuts for all Americans for two more years, cuts the Social Security payroll tax rate for one year and renews long-term unemployment benefits for an additional 13 months. Just 29% oppose the deal, but 15% are not sure about it.

For those whining about the estate tax aka death tax, Gallup found recently (11/23/10) that the top three issues for Americans are (from first to third) "passing legislation that would keep the estate tax from increasing significantly next year", "extending some form of federal income tax cuts passed by George W. Bush that are set to expire at the end of this year," and "extending unemployment benefits for the long-term unemployed."



Those are the top three issues Americans wanted to see dealt with during the lame duck session of Congress (after elections before the newly elected politicians are seated).

This deal between Republicans and Barack Obama covers all three of the issues mentioned above.

Over the last two years liberal Democratic politicians have ignored the American people and passed their own ideological agenda time and again, in some cases in direct opposition of the majority of Americans wanted and it looks like they are about to set themselves in direct opposition yet again over this issue.

Only this time, they are not only ignoring Americans but are giving the finger to Barack Obama, the leader of their own party.

Breaking from CNN "House Democrats defy Obama on tax cut bill"

Defying President Obama, House Democrats voted Thursday not to bring up the tax package that he negotiated with Republicans in its current form.

"This message today is very simple: That in the form that it was negotiated, it is not acceptable to the House Democratic caucus. It's as simple as that," said Democratic Congressman Chris Van Hollen.

More:

"There is an important debate on Capitol Hill that will determine in part whether our economy moves backward or forward," Obama said at an Export Council meeting. "The bipartisan framework we have forged on taxes will not only protect working Americans from seeing a major tax increase on January 1, it will provide businesses with incentives to invest, grow, and hire."

"Every economist I have talked to or read over the last couple of days acknowledges that this agreement would boost economic growth in the coming years and has the potential to create millions of jobs," Obama continued. "The average American family will start 2011 knowing that there will be more money to pay the bills each month, more money to pay for tuition, more money to raise their children," he said. "But if this framework fails, the reverse is true. Americans will see it in smaller paychecks that will have the effect of fewer jobs."

My headline yesterday has been proven spot on "Liberals Want To Let Taxes Rise For Everyone And Cut Off Unemployment Benefits."

Side Note: If Democrats led by Pelosi don't allow this issue to be dealt with before Republicans take over control of the House of Representatives in January, they could deal with it and make it retroactive. The problem there is that IRS has already warned "that retroactively changing 2010 tax laws early next year "would be extremely detrimental to the entire tax filing season and to tens of millions of taxpayers."

[Update] Outgoing Democratic Representative Michael McMahon tells liberal Democrats and others who are howling at President Barack Obama for dealing with the GOP on taxes to stop acting like "petulant children".

[Update #2] White House issued a statement:

"The House and Senate are working through the normal process of bringing a bill forward and we are confident that the major components of the tax framework that we fought for will remain in the final package brought to the floor and ultimately passed by Congress."

[Update #3] Democratic House vote by Nancy Pelosi defying Obama is non-binding and may just be a way to "save face" in the eyes of progressive base, but White House has a plan B!!!

Take it away NRO:

UPDATE: Thanks to a commenter for pointing out the White House is sufficiently worried about the House Democrats that it is considering alternative legislative strategies. Speaker Pelosi has already said she won’t touch the Obama-McConnell deal until the Senate acts on it (if at all), and now CNN’s Ed Henry reports that, in light of the caucus vote, an unnamed senior White House adviser is saying that the strategy now is to use a bill already passed by House as a vehicle for the new tax deal, and send it back to the house — something the adviser called “jam[ming] the House.”

This, ironically, would amount to giving House leadership a taste of their own medicine, since they used the procedural advantages associated with the “amend a Senate bill” trick to pass their middle-class-only tax bill without giving the Republicans an opportunity to offer an alternative.

Regardless, the ball is still in Pelosi’s court. House leadership has wide prerogatives on what that body does and does not consider. Just about the only real way to force a vote without the Speaker’s approval is a discharge petition, which would require 218 signatories and 30 days. So — oh, delicious irony! — the only thing standing between President Obama and what looks like it would be the most popular initiative of his term – is Nancy Pelosi!

.

Liberals Want To Let Taxes Rise For Everyone And Cut Off Unemployment Benefits

Nothing shows the complete chaotic disarray that Congressional Democrats have come to, more than the headlines and news articles coming out over the weekend and today, with media outlets across the board and Barack Obama giving a speech and answering questions publicly, announcing to the American public that the White House and the GOP (who will control the House of Representatives in January) have come to a compromise and made a deal on taxes which include the continuation of all Bush-era tax cuts, a deal on estate taxes aka death taxes, an extension of unemployment insurance, payroll-tax cuts, incentives for businesses and tax credits.

Below are just samples of the major news outlet headlines found using Google search:

ABC News "Bipartisan deal reached to extend tax cuts."

Washington Post "Obama, GOP reach deal to extend tax breaks."

Washington Times "Deal reached on tax cuts, jobless."

The news spread wide and far and television news reported on it, polls conducted, all major newspapers reported it and over the weekend strong reactions have come like a firestorm across the blogosphere.

So, the public has been informed there is a bipartisan deal. Loudly. Clearly.

A reminder of what the deal entails from Ezra Klein which I quoted in an earlier post:

The GOP got around $95 billion in tax cuts for wealthy Americans and $30 billion in estate tax cuts. Democrats got $120 billion in payroll-tax cuts, $40 billion in refundable tax credits (Earned Income Tax Credit, Child Tax Credit and education tax credits), $56 billion in unemployment insurance, and, depending on how you count it, about $180 billion (two-year cost) or $30 billion (10-year cost) in new tax incentives for businesses to invest.

Today's headlines show that liberal Democratic politicians would rather see no deal, which would allow jobless benefits aka Unemployment Insurance to expire and allow taxes for everyone to rise rather than pass the deal Obama's White House brokered with Republicans.

The Hill reports "Liberal leader suggests GOP House should handle tax cuts, unemployment benefits."

A leader of an 80-plus member bloc of House liberals suggested Wednesday that Democrats should let the GOP-led House handle the expiring Bush-era tax cuts and unemployment benefits next year.

Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.), a co-chairman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said such a move would force Republicans into deciding whether or not they want to take two potentially unpopular stances during their first month in power.

"Let them tell the unemployed they won't get benefits. Let them tell [the middle class their taxes are going up]," he said on MSNBC.

Keep in mind, if Congress does not act, does not pass the compromise deal, then as of the end of this year, everyone's taxes rise with the expiration of the Bush-era tax cuts from a decade ago.

Grijalva's mistake here is that the Democrats still control both house's of Congress until January, so it won't be Republicans having to "explain" anything, it would be Democrats having to explain to all of America that the White House, which is Democratically controlled, and the GOP had a deal agreed upon, but liberals refused to pass it therefore letting everything expire for Americans.

NEXT headline "Liberals Try to Prevent Pelosi From Bringing Tax Bill to the Floor."

Fox has learned that Reps. Peter DeFazio (D-OR), Jim McDermott (D-WA) and Jay Inslee (D-WA) are crafting a letter to share with the House Democratic Caucus that would try to prevent the Speaker from bringing the tax bill to the floor.

They hope to get 60 signatures on their letter (which is still being drafted) and then force a vote in the caucus. DeFazio says he thinks that if a majority of House Democrats are against this compromise, they shouldn't bring it to the floor.

I repeat, if the bill does not come to the floor, it cannot pass and again, all tax cuts expire raising taxes for every American and UI benefits do not get extended.

To show even more disarray throughout the whole Democratic caucus, Nancy Pelosi calls the deal Obama and the GOP reached on estate taxes aka Death Tax, a "bridge too far."

In the meantime, there is this little tidbit:

The Obama-GOP agreement sets the inheritance tax at 35 percent for individuals bequeathing more than $5 million to their heirs. The Democratic-controlled House passed a bill in 2009 that would set the estate tax at 45 percent and start the exemption at $3.5 million. There is no estate tax in 2010.

Right now there is no estate tax, the House passed a bill but the Senate cannot get the House's bill passed, so is Pelosi prepared to nix the whole tax deal and let estate taxes rise to 55 percent which is what will happen if nothing is done? Gallup shows the American public does not want that, not increasing estate tax came up first on the lest in their polling.

Should this be passed on until next year when Republicans are in control of the House of Representatives, there is no guarantee that Republicans will keep that portion in the deal if Democrats do not honor the deal while they still have control.

Adding the final nail into the progressive liberal coffin, we now see the White House admitting that the reason it has come down to the last minute, forcing the White House and GOP to compromise and create a deal in the first place, is not the solely Republican's fault, but also the Democrat's fault because they could not unite their own party before the November election when the White House wanted this issue dealt with.

But senior administration officials said their own party is at least party to blame for the deal. White House communications director Dan Pfeiffer said President Obama wanted Congress to extend the tax cuts, but there was no consensus on how to do so in the Democratic caucus.

"He and the White House, frankly, urged the House and Senate to hold votes on this before the election," Pfeiffer said on the liberal Bill Press radio show. "But they didn't do that, in part because there's not unanimity in the Democratic Caucus on this."

Conclusion:

Americans have been informed there is a deal which will prevent their taxes from rising and preventing unemployment benefits from expiring.

The liberal Democratic politicians, especially the leadership, do not want to pass that deal, which means it is liberals that want to let all tax cuts expire and raise taxes on everyone and liberals that want to let UI benefits expire.

How does Pelosi think that is going to go over with everyone except the 20 percent of Americans that self identify as "liberal"?

Does the expression cutting off one's nose to spite their face have any meaning to these people?

(Correction has been made to this post)

.