Times Poll: Now you See It Now you Don’t. Does it really reflect the True Economy?

By: Dr. Phil Taverna

In October 2010 the Times had another slanted poll by only unemployed folks. And just recently they had their regular poll.


The liberals are back to their phony right sided brain attacks. Obama and his cronies still want to call this recession that Obama has caused that he still can’t get up from, on President Bush.


The idiot governor of Maryland is trying to get the name the Bush Recession to stick. And as usual the liberals don’t need facts. All they need is hope and change. They still don’t get it. The liberal crap works in times of prosperity but people get skeptical in bad times. And no matter how much money the liberals throw at it, Obama’s trickle down economy just ain’t trickling down to the liberal base.


When you wake up in the morning and find out that your Section 8 Housing money has been cut by more than 50% or stated another way cut in half you can’t be too happy with the liberal propaganda. You can blame the rich all you want, but none of that liberal money is trickling down to the poor people. So when the liberals used to claim Reagan trickle down economics doesn’t work, they were partially correct. Capitalism does trickle down, but liberal, socialistic and communistic policies do not trickle down to the poor in hard times.


Speaking (writing) of hard times, so the NY Times CBS poll in October of 2010 had a question.  It was very specific. It went like this who do you blame for the (Obama) high unemployment rate. They actually broke it down to 11 options. And allegedly the responses were only supplied by those who were unemployed or recently unemployed.


And the DK/NA was 15% and the “other” was 32%. So that means that 47% of those polled didn’t like the other nine options. And by October 2011 only 8% blamed unemployment on President Bush and only 5% blamed Obama. But an astounding 19% blamed politicians. So does that mean Obama is not a politician?


I wrote a piece about being amazed that the liberals finally published an honest poll. And basically President Bush was off the hot seat since his numbers dropped from 26% in 2009 to a lousy 8% in 2011. You have to figure more than 50% of those polled hated President Bush so 8% was pretty amazing.


But 2 polls show up in 2012 and the language is a whole lot different. Question 54 of the Times CBS poll changed the question a bit. There were only 7 choices. DK/NA was only 3%. Combination was 4%. And all of above was 6%. So that rules out only 13% for basically useless answers or responses. And 9% indicated someone else. So that leaves only three choices: Congress, Obama Administration and the Bush Administration.


Unfortunately they limit the question to the deficit. Now get this 43% blame it on the Bush Administration, Obama 14% and Congress 19%. 


Now let’s look at the question, who do we blame for most of the current federal deficit?  Whoops they have a subtext area that states the question really read like this: “Who do you think is mostly to blame for the Federal Budget Deficit?  I guess if they were going to be real fair, they might want to add wording like a deficit of $15 trillion dollars.


This question and the results just don’t feel right. First off why didn’t they ask the October 2011 question who do you blame for the high Obama unemployment?


Short answer is that the Times and CBS don’t want Obama to look bad. And in reality before the banks and the Democrats sabotaged the housing market in 2008, President Bush had an unemployment rating of about 5%. Today it is probably well into the 10% range if we were honest about it. That means that under President Bush assuming the numbers aren’t increasing due to people becoming of age, there were 5% more people working in the President Bush Era.    And my guess is there were a lot more illegals working in the prosperity enjoyed in the Bush years.


So if they asked the October question today, who is to blame for the unemployment, Obama would get higher numbers than President Bush. So we will never see that question again!


But this brings to light an important question. How come the people don’t know how much has been added to the deficit under Obama? Do you think just maybe that the Republican debaters should have pointed this out each and every day? We might know how many foster children Michelle B. had, but how much has Obama added to the deficit in three years? And how much is projected to be added in the next 5 years because of Obama’s failed liberal policies and executive orders?


Clinton was the sleaziest president we ever had and he raised the deficit about $1.5 trillion in 8 years. And we don’t know how much he stole in Social Security IOU’s to keep the deficit that low.  For President Bush if we credit him the return of the Bank money and the money he left for Obama to spend, he had a deficit of about $1.5 trillion in 8 years. Obama is up around $4 trillion and he has only been around 3 years. And I would assume they gave him the President Bush credit. If that is so, the Obama deficit is more like $6.5 trillion. So that means the deficit should be renamed the Obama deficit. After all Obama has added more debt to the budget then any other president in American History.  So far we have the Obama Unemployment and the Obama Deficit!


And it is totally unpredictable, but in the next few years thanks to Obamacare and other liberal Obama programs, and Obama’s unemployment, the deficit could speed past Obama’s $6 trillion in a hurry.


So after all these Republican debates, how come the people in the CBS and Times polls don’t know this?


Another fallacy that must be cleared up in a hurry is that when Clinton allegedly balanced the budget, the uniformed think that the deficit was at zero. So President Bush is responsible for all the deficit except for what Obama has added. Would someone please educate the folks! Maybe a tattoo is in order.


The deficit has been skyrocketing since Carter. The liberals have not paid the debt or the interest since Carter. You could be the dumbest person in the world, but if you don’t pay the interest, the deficit goes up each and everyday if you do nothing.


So at the end of the day, Obama thinks nothing of over-spending more than $1.5 trillion a year. So if you are stupid enough to keep Obama and liberals around for 8 years, the deficit will go up about an additional $12 trillion in 8 years. So it is conceivable that the deficit will double under Obama and the liberals. More importantly can we afford to pay it back?


Some liberal pundits think that we will never have to pay back the deficit. If that is so, then why do the liberals keep raising the taxes on the rich and everyone else?


Just a reminder Obama said he would first over spend like a crazy man then he said he would cut the budget in half just to bring down the deficit. Guess what? That did not happen. Obama is asking again to raise the debt ceiling $1.5 trillion American dollars. I guess that was what he really meant by change. Obama has a right to change his mind any time he wants. The real question is did he change his mind or is he lying to the masses in the first place?


One thing is for sure: Obama will beat Carter in an honest poll for the worse president in American History.  Obama said he did not want to be a mediocre 2 term president like Clinton and President Bush. Who knew Obama would be a one term president with the worse record in history.  Bin Laden was made useless by President Bush. It was just a matter of time that our military would take him out. Taking out Bin Laden had nothing to do with the war or the economy!


Maybe someday in the distant future the liberals will conduct a poll with honest results. The bottom line is that the recession belongs to Obama. Why not call it the Obama Recession! If Obama owns unemployment, and the deficit, Obama owns it all!

About The Author Dr. Phil Taverna:
Dr. Phil Taverna owns and operates his own website.

No Comments

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.