By Chrissy the Hyphenated
Click graphics to embiggen for easier reading.
I finished up all my To Do list by supper time, but Dearest had meetings all evening, so I suddenly found myself with energy and alone time. Woohoo! I got to go play with those unemployment graphs some more.
H/t to Red Pill for the idea about how who dominates 2 or 3 parts of Congress/Oval correlating with unemployment. It worked up into a very cool graphic!
Chrissy’s Site Bites: http://news.webshots.com/photo/2587344440056011884kewDVA
Chrissy’s Site Bites: http://news.webshots.com/photo/2690226670056011884uFWtVB
polination.blog 
That is one scary chart, Chrissy. I know folks who insist there isn’t a dime’s worth of difference between Democrats and Republicans, but I think this chart says otherwise.
LikeLike
Thank you so much, Chrissy! That is awesome work, and EXACTLY what I was looking for…
Everyone should keep in mind that George W. Bush “inherited” the Dot-Com bust and 9/11. Without the Bush tax cuts, our economy would have been much, much worse. With them, unemployment peaked at just a little over the historical average, and then came down continuously until… the Democrats took control of both houses of Congress.
LikeLike
Bush also had the lowest something or other relative to GDP. Oy, my brain just went on vacation. Sorry. Pill, you probly know this. If you want it graphicked, let me know. I watch the new comments in the right column, so will see you answer even if it’s a long time from now. Hope you’re having a great vacay!
LikeLike
Thanks, Chrissy!
You’re going to laugh about this, but I didn’t know the answer so I literally did a Bing search on “Bush also had the lowest something or other relative to GDP.”, and the first hit was right on the money… 🙂
George W. Bush Delivers a Basic Economics Lesson to Matt Lauer
LikeLike
ROFLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL Somebody designed a search engine for the brain dead! Yahoo!
LikeLike
No, Bing. 😉
/Smart Alec!
LikeLike
One note about the 107th Congress…
Republicans controlled the Senate only from January 20, 2001 – June 6, 2001. (Less than 5 months of the 24 months of the 107th Congress)
January 3, 2001: Senate was evenly split, 50-50, between two parties. Democrat Al Gore was still Vice President giving the Democrats a slim majority for the 17 days between the January 3 swearing-in of the new Congress and the January 20 inauguration of Republican Vice President Dick Cheney.
January 20, 2001: George W. Bush and Dick Cheney were sworn-in as President of the United States and Vice President of the United States, respectively, giving the Republicans a narrow majority in the Senate with Cheney’s tie-breaking power.
June 6, 2001: Senator Jim Jeffords, previously a Republican, declared himself an independent and announced he would join the Democratic caucus, giving Democrats control in the Senate with a one-seat advantage. Democrat Tom Daschle became Senate Majority Leader.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/107th_United_States_Congress
LikeLike
Wow. That’s complicated. THANKS for the explanation. I see your point. It’s really 51-49 for the bulk of the 2 years. I’ll try to get a minute to photoshop and replace it.
LikeLike
No hurry. Even with the Democrats controlling the Senate, the Republicans still controlled the House and Presidency, so the Republicans still had the majority of the three pieces.
The biggest impact of the Democrats controlling the senate was not felt in economic policy but in judicial nominations. Democrats in control meant that they threw up every roadblock they could to prevent Bush from getting his judicial nominations confirmed. http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=1267
LikeLike
Another sidebar note, this one about the 111th Congress…
Democrats actually had 60 Senators for two brief periods of time:
1) From the seating of Al Franken (July 7, 2009) to the death of Teddy Kennedy (August 25, 2009)
2) From the seating of Paul G. Kirk (September 24, 2009) to the seating of Scott Brown (February 4, 2010).
Again, it’s not all that relevant to the unemployment graph, but it is relevant to other things, like Obamacare, which had to have 60 Democrats in the Senate in order to vote for cloture, stop debate, and shove it down our throats.
Once Scott Brown was seated, and the Dems no longer had 60 votes to break a filibuster, it looked as though Obamacare might die because the House did not want to pass the Senate bill, and any changes to the Senate bill would have required 60 votes for cloture to end debate… the Republicans could have filibustered such changes. So what was the Democrats’ response? Bend the rules. Pass the Senate bill as-is in the House, and then put the changes in a separate bill that was inappropriately shoved down our throats by improperly using the “budget reconciliation” process in the Senate (which only requires 50 votes, not 60), something that Robert Byrd had spoken against when Clinton tried to do the same thing…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ormXLyyJtr8
LikeLike
A good reminder.
LikeLike
Yes, and I think, in retrospect, that I want to take back what I said about the 60th Dem Senator being “not all that relevant to the unemployment graph”.
Without the 60th Dem Senator, there never would have been Obamacare, and the passage of Obamacare has increased burdens on employers, and therefore has increased unemployment.
LikeLike
Excellent point. Obamacare is already screwing up our economy (or what remains of the private sector economy), and most of its provisions haven’t even gone into effect yet.
LikeLike
The Democrats also bent the rules on that one…
In 2004, when Senator John Kerry was the Democratic Party’s Presidential nominee and Mitt Romney was the Governor of MA, Teddy Kennedy pushed for the law to be changed so that if Kerry won the Presidency and vacated his Senate seat, an election (rather than a Governor’s appointment) would fill the vacancy. But then 5 years later, when Kennedy had died, the Democrats changed the rules so that a Democratic Governor could appoint a temporary replacement. Without that change, Paul Kirk would not have been seated, and Obamacare would not have passed the Senate on Christmas eve 2009.
LikeLike
Wow, I’d forgotten about that. You’re right.
LikeLike
Chrissy, I think this graphic is very powerful, too…
LikeLike
Definition of Insanity:
Senate Dems Want New Stimulus Spending in Deficit Reduction Plan
LikeLike
Hayek vs. Keynes Rap Anthem
LikeLike
Keynes vs. Hayek Round Two
LikeLike
And this video is a hoot!
(Hint: “Keynesian” does not equal “Kenyan”)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBrHkxqNT7s
LikeLike
Victims of American public education, apparently. Interviewer should’ve asked them if they could find Keynesia on a map.
LikeLike
Or if they studied Spanish so they could talk to Keynsian immigrants.
LikeLike
Pingback: Unemployment rates – Clinton v. Bush v. Obama « I Took The Red Pill (and escaped the Matrix)
Biggest Spending House Speaker in History: Tax Cuts Produce Deficits, Not Jobs
By Doug Powers • June 24, 2011 10:20 PM
FYI, at that post on Michelle Malkin’s site, I have left comments that link back to this post and your graphs, Chrissy.
LikeLike
Oh, yay! That oughta bump the traffic!
LikeLike
Well, something definitely did (bump up the traffic, that is)… because we just had three record-breaking days in a row. We had our busiest day ever on Wednesday the 22nd, and Wednesday’s record was broken on Thursday the 23rd, and Thursday’s was broken on Friday the 24th. Thanks to everyone who visited, linked, commented, and contributed!
LikeLike
Woohoo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
(My numbers at Chrissy’s Site Bites are up too!)
LikeLike
Under Nancy Pelosi’s four year watch as Speaker of the House:
LikeLike
Discouraged Workers are a tragedy for our country. The loss of optimism does a lot of damage, both to the individual psyche and to the prospects for the overall economy. I hope we can turn despondency into anger when it comes to getting people to vote in 2012.
LikeLike
“The loss of optimism does a lot of damage”
Indeed. And while the electorate was promised “HOPE”, what was delivered was the exact opposite: Despair.
Yes, I too hope and pray that we turn that around in 2012.
LikeLike
Just dropping in a little “optimism” = )
Why Obama Is Likely to Lose in 2012
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304657804576401653113017130.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop
LikeLike
People hoped they’d be left with more than pocket change. Alas…Obama’s “stash” turned out not to be all “that”, and the only part of us he was “into” was our pocketbooks.
LikeLike
LikeLike
I’m going to post this here, too, since the “action” seems to be on this thread. You cannot imagine how, after the life we’ve had for the last few years, I am annoyed by people who claim that spending more money is the way to solve your money problems!!!!!!!!! Within the last year, as the result of a cheating sub-contractor we didn’t even hire, our family has lost 3 houses, a large sum of money, and gone through a bankruptcy, My husband is retired. I am permanently disabled. This happened at a time in our lives when it is not possible to recoup such a loss.
What did we do? Let me tell you what we DIDN’T do: (1) print money, (2) borrow from the Chinese, (3) go further into debt, (4) attempt to expand our holdings, or (5) try to tell everybody that this was really progress and a sign of well-being, for which we (and they) should be grateful and proud. We downsized in every possible way, moved 1600 miles to a cheaper part of the country, and live in a house 1/3 the size, and 1/6 the value, of the house we’d lived in before–on a city lot instead of 10 acres.
Don’t TELL me that this stupid, broke government can successfully operate, during a financial crisis, on the opposite basis and pull it off. We’d be in jail if we’d tried to live like Washington, DC–not in government offices, with plush benefits, and cushy retirements. A plague on both their houses!
LikeLike
Yah. A very POXY plague!
LikeLike
Frankly, I think it of utmost importance to spell out the circumstances. It is highly unlikely that yours was an isolated situation, and people need to know to identify with some of the horrific things going on in their backyards that they might otherwise be completely oblivious to. START writing girl, oops, or boy.
LikeLike
We took him to court. I had the evidence. He had the judge. The final straw was when I was ordered to pay his court costs. I’m not sure I could tackle, under the circumstances in which I’m now living, a prolonged battle 4 states and 1600 miles away. I truly don’t think I have it in me. So I just vent my spleen on liberal idiocy instead.
LikeLike
And since I talked about my husband, I’m not trying to hide the fact that I’m a girl. Or a Border Collie…
LikeLike
Well, in fairness, only because I’m personally all to familiar with what you speak of, I know what you’re saying here, as in “he had the judge”. But if my recollection is correct, it was over some very small amount of money, that through corruption, robbed you of a huge sum of money, and I have a vested interest in your story being told, over, and over, and over again until everybody knows and understands that our courts are delivering the very opposite of justice, and OUTRAGEOUS injustice. So, I was hoping you would take it from the beginning. It started when . . .
I KNOW it is not a unique story, but for all the ones people don’t hear, it stays unique, and that must change. Have you ever done a summary of it?
LikeLike
PS, I usually explain my situation as:
I had the law, the truth, the evidence, and the skilled attorney on my side, but lost everything. Now it’s just me against them because I have nothing left, and they’re still coming after me because I dared to speak out of the corruption.
LikeLike
2D Circuit Court of Appeals Acts Like Thugs To Shield Judicial Fraud on The Court in Chrysler Dealers Case.
Why The Judicial Fraud In The Chrysler Dealers’ Case Is More Dangerous To The USA Than Obama’s Ineligibility.
LikeLike
How in the world could I have forgotten about the poor Chrysler dealers? It seems like every single day of this Administration has been one outrage after another. I wish that I had kept a journal. I guess the blogs are serving a great purpose for future historians. My sympathies to all who have been abused in our legal system. I believe it, unfortunately.
LikeLike
Sent you a reply with lots of links, not so much for you to read as to get the gist of what they’re about. It’s awaiting moderation, but here, the admins actually let posts go through so we never have to worry about being censored or banned ; ) Should be coming . . .
LikeLike
I’ll do it tomorrow. I have my invalid on the pot and a bed to make. Now is not the time to wander down Memory Lane.
LikeLike
Nice to see you Redpill. I gather from your posting the above, you know full well, what I’m talking about. Problem is, most don’t, and I personally know others, and have seen so many literally destroyed for no other reason than judges ignoring the law, defying justice, simply because they want to. In my case, they don’t just want to, they are told to. Scary stuff.
WHAT DID THE EXPERTS SAY ABOUT THE JUSTICE SYSTEM IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA?
* “…judges tried and sentenced a staggering number of people for crimes they did not commit.”
Prof David Burcham, Dean, Loyola Law School, LA (2001)
* “This is conduct associated with the most repressive dictators and police states… and judges must share responsibility when innocent people are convicted.”
Prof Erwin Chemerinsky, Dean, Irvine Law School (2001)
* “Innocent people remain in prison”
* “…the LA Superior Court and the DA office, the two other parts of the justice system that the Blue Panel Report recommends must be investigated relative to the integrity of the system, have not produced any response that we know of…”
LAPD Blue Ribbon Review Panel Report (2006)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/24902306 /
_____________________________
WHAT DID THE EXPERTS SAY ABOUT THE JUSTICE SYSTEM IN CALIFORNIA?
* “…corruption of the courts and the legal profession and discrimination by law enforcement in California.”
United Nations Human Rights Council Staff Report (2010)
_____________________________
WHAT DID THE EXPERTS SAY ABOUT THE STATE COURTS IN THE UNITED STATES?
* “On July 26, 2010, Laurence Tribe, Senior Counsel for the United States Department of Justice, Access to Justice Initiative, delivered an important speech to the Conference of Chief Justices, challenging them to halt the disintegration of our state justice systems before they become indistinguishable from courts of third world nations.”
Prof Laurence Tribe, Harvard Law School (2010), per National Defender Leadership Institute (2010)
http://www.nlada.net/library/article/national_dojspeechto%20chiefjustice07-26-2010_gideonalert
_____________________________
WHAT DID THE EXPERTS SAY ABOUT THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES?
* “More than 100 law professors have signed on to a letter released today that proposes congressional hearings and legislation aimed at fashioning “mandatory and enforceable” ethics rules for Supreme Court justices for the first time. The effort, coordinated by the liberal Alliance for Justice, was triggered by “recent media reports,” the letter said, apparently referring to stories of meetings and other potential conflicts of interest involving Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas among others.”
More than 100 law professors, as reported by the Blog of the Legal Times (February 2011)
_____________________________
WHAT DID CHIEF JUDGE OF THE US COURT OF APPEALS, 5TH CIRCUIT, SAY ABOUT THE US JUSTICE SYSTEM?
* “The American legal system has been corrupted almost beyond recognition…”
Chief Judge, US Court of Appeals, 5th Circuit, Edith Jones, speaking before the Federalist Society of Harvard Law School (February 2003)
_____________________________
WHAT DID THE CHAIR OF THE SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE SAY ABOUT THE US JUSTICE SYSTEM?
* In a speech in Georgetown University, Senator Leahy, Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee called for a “Truth and Reconciliation Commission” on the US Department of Justice.
Transcript of Senator Leahy speech (2009)
.
LikeLike
Along these lines and my wanting Susan to expose her story is this email I got from a friend re; a letter to the editor I wrote recently about a man whose 25 page suicide letter was posted in their paper. The letter was extremely lucid and described the hopelessness of getting justice in the courts as they are. He set himself on fire outside the courthouse and burned to death just so someone would listen. Let’s face it, had he not done so, no one would listen, and even still, few are = (
“Sentinel article was VERY sad to read—cannot imagine this man’s emotional pain. Unfortunately, know you can probably relate to it more than you care to—even though your situation is different, you understand the “second set of books”. Wonder what the newspaper editor that published this is thinking—not to mention everyone else who read it. Your letter to the editor was courageous and compassionate. Someone once said “knowledge is power”—politically, that would hopefully mean using knowledge to empower change(as slowly as that usually happens) . . .
LikeLike