Originally Posted by JFrame
If you're citing that specific post, I don't see how you can infer anything more than what I said from seven words and a number.
And are you honestly arguing that the MSM didn't attack Bush at virtually every turn?
The release of a number dropping employment under 8 percent the day after Obama got his ass handed in a debate isn't remotely curious to you?
Of course the media attacked president Bush. But unemployment was reported at a very low rate during most of his term, how does that fit into the conspiracy?
The numbers didn't just randomly come out after the debate, they come out every month around the same time. If the number had gone up and not down, nobody in this thread would have questioned it. The conspiracy disappears when the information agrees with the conspiracy theorists agenda, and suddenly reappears when things don't go their way. That's how every conspiracy works. Even after pointing out all of the contradictions, they're still blind to it.
If Obama can control the reporting of the unemployment figures with a snap of his fingers, why was it over 8% for the last 3.8 years when he promised that the stimulus would keep it below 8%?
Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine