That wasn’t a prediction

[babylonsister]

Posted with permission.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal/2011_12/that_wasnt_a_prediction034034.php

December 10, 2011 9:20 AM
That wasn’t a prediction

By Steve Benen


What the headline says:

President Obama predicts unemployment could drop to 8% by next year in ‘60 Minutes’ interview

What Obama actually said, in response to a question about whether we might see 8% unemployment by Election Day 2012.

“I think it’s possible. But I’m not in the job of prognosticating on the economy. I’m in the job of putting in place the tools that allow the economy to thrive and Americans to succeed. … I always believed that this was a long-term project. And you know, for individual Americans, who are struggling right now, they have every reason to be impatient. Reversing structural problems in our economy that have been building up for two decades, that was going to take time. It was going to take more than a year. It was going to take more than two years. It was going to take more than one term. Probably takes more than one president.

Perusing the media this morning, it’s apparently too late. Mark Halperin ignored the context of the president’s full answer, as did Business Week and a host of other major outlets.

Soon, it will simply be taken as a given: Obama “predicted” the unemployment rate would drop to 8% by Election Day, and the fact that he said he’s “not in the job of prognosticating,” and is looking at this as a long-term effort, will simply be ignored.

[Vattel]

1. Sadly, you are probably right.

The headline at least says that Obama predicted that it "could drop" to 8%, not that it "would drop" to 8%. But in the hands of the MSM, that "could" will probably soon become a "would" and the bullshit will be off and running.

[patrice]

4. Every time I hear the word "promised", I want to SCREAM, "What kind of idiot do you take me for????"

[patrice]

2. So sad. And people around here don't get why some of us don't like their piling on. Whatever

our own LEGITIMATE problems/issues are with this administration are, those issues are significantly damaged by piling on with the likes of Mark Halperin et al.

So, I say that sort of thing is motivated more by piling on (and earning certain kinds of PR creds) than it is about getting progress on whatever they SAY the issues/solutions are.

People are saying something TTE, "Stand up and fight FOR us!!" and pulling the rug out at the same time and then ridiculing him for __________________________________.

I call BULLSHIT.

[tblue]

3. It's not "All or nothing."

"You're either with us or against us."

Some folks are just honest about what they see. There is nothing wrong with that and good luck getting everybody to say only what you want them to say.

[patrice]

7. I don't want them to say only what I want them to say. I want them to be honest about what they are

saying. Anything less than thorough self-critical honest analysis is, intentionally or not, of the oppressor. People who don't know/do this may say they're about freedom and problem solving, but repeating the same old patterns only replicates the path which brought us here: power acquisition derived from pontificating absolute truths and predictions, based on exclusively their own selective and biased "knowledge".

We live in a universe of probabilities and yet people pretend that they have such a perfect grasp on ALL factors that their propositions, which BTW likely will vitally HURT more people than they might help, aren't propositions at all, but are rather absolute truths that the rest of us MUST accept or receive the consequences, people's lives be damned. If it's wrong for the Right to do that, then it's wrong for the "Left" to do it too.

All they have to do to get along with me is admit the flaws in their own "knowledge". Probabilities free people. Absolutes oppress.

[DCBob]

8. +1

I cant stand those who use misinformation and exaggeration to push their viewpoint. The GOPers do this all the time but we also see it here frequently from those who are supposed to be on our side.

[patrice]

9. What they are doing is DANGEROUS, but they refuse to own that FACT, or they dont care. nt

[tblue]

13. Dangerous to who?

Tell me.

[patrice]

16. The stakes are high so lots of money is flowing in various ambiguous environments, e.g. media/the

internet and that's only the public venues.

Powerful people are beating the drums for War on Iran and that's only the tip of the iceberg.

There's always the potential for scalable 9/11 2.0s so it's possible that disrupting social/economic/environmental efforts of any kind is turning into a profession.

[patrice]

17. self delete

[tblue]

11. Okay. Show us you do that then.

Show us how it's done. And why do you assume people are not honest? Of you disagree, then please argue your point instead of attacking people's honesty. Saying a politician is above critique is never ginna fly. That's honest tight there. Now please show us, if you care to, your examples of what the honesty you want to see looks like. I'm serious. Just trying to understand what you're saying. I mean no disrespect.

[Jackpine Radical]

5. Well, to be fair,

maybe the reporters just didn't feel up to the challenge of spelling "prognosticating."

Then again, misreporting what was actually said is an easy way for the truth-tanglers to score points in their grand game of anti-Administration propaganda.

[HowHasItComeToThis]

6. THEY NEED FLASHY QUICK STATEMENTS

THEY ARE ALL PROPAGANDISTS IN ONE WAY OR ANOTHER :argh: :argh:

[gristy]

10. So Obama never used 8% in any context? Only the questioner did?

Oh, man.

[tblue]

12. I don't listen to rightwing talk (or even corporate MSM)

so I don't know who said who said what. But this seems like it's making much out of nothing.

[babylonsister]

14. What you don't watch doesn't matter, it's the perception

those who do watch will get, and all these people are being disingenuous in the extreme. It does matter; what's wrong with the truth? Here is what Halperin wrote...

In "60 Minutes" interview set to air Sunday, Obama says "I think it's possible" unemployment could fall to 8% by November 2012.

Read more: http://thepage.time.com/2011/12/09/potus-8-in-range/#ixzz1gA1pFpJa



Business Week...

Obama: Jobless rate could fall to 8 percent

By STEVE PEOPLES

President Barack Obama says the nation's unemployment rate could drop to 8 percent by next fall's election.

more...

http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9RH9HAO2.htm

And a bunch of others...

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&gl=us&tbm=nws&btnmeta_news_search=1&q=Obama+unemployment+8+percet&oq=Obama+unemployment+8+percet&aq=f&aqi=d1d-o1&aql=&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=28704l34136l0l34335l27l26l0l20l20l0l183l884l1.5l6l0#hl=en&gl=us&tbm=nws&sa=X&ei=UGfjTuP_CYLy0gH7zMnRBQ&ved=0CCoQvwUoAQ&q=Obama+unemployment+8+percent&spell=1&fp=1&biw=1280&bih=893&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&cad=b

[tblue]

15. Oh I know that. It's just this is news to me.

I will only ever hear what they say by reading it here. I don't have the strength/stomach to face it alone. They lie. I know that much. If its not one thing it's something else. Getting the truth out to anyone out there who will listen, that is what's hard.

But I really believe the independents will stick with Obama in 2012. What Obama supposedly predicted but was off by 0.6% won't hurt him. This seems like a minor blip to me.

[Schema Thing]

18. Fuck. I get so pissed at this sort of thing. And I'd be just as pissed when they did it to Bush

Maybe even more so, since I probably would have repeated the headline uncritically.