Department of Labor Morphs into Ministry of Propaganda

In the movie, Truman, President Truman utters the line, "I'm just the man holding this office. If I dirty it, the dirt doesn't leave with me when I go, it stays here to rub off on whoever comes after me from now on."

The line may be pure "Holywood,"but that doesn't make it any less true.

If you have listened when the "mainstream media has given you the Department of Labor ("DOL") "initial unemployment claim" numbers, you are undoubtedly convinced that the economy is recovering and new unemployment claims are steadily declining. So, is our government (i. e., the DOL) telling us the truth or lying to us?

The numbers actually show that President Obama's DOL consistently lowballs each week's "initial unemployment claim" numbers to give the appearance that the economy is improving, and then revises them upwards a week later, when no one is looking.

This has gone on week after week. Because a friendly media focuses only on the initial report, and ignores the revised numbers, you are led to believe President Obama's polices are working; that the employment situation is steadily improving. But look at the numbers for the past 12 weeks.

The figures below come from the DOL's website. Every week, you will see a lead paragraph that looks like this, even though the numbers change:

"In the week ending April 28, the advance figure for seasonally adjusted initial claims was 365,000, a decrease of 27,000 from the previous week's revised figure of 392,000."

Here are the numbers for the seasonally adjusted initial claims (as initially reported) over a 12 week period.

-- Feb. 25, 351,000

-- March 3, 362,000

-- March 10, 351,000

-- March 17, 348,000

-- March 24, 359,000

-- March 31, 357,000

-- April 7, 380,000

-- April 14, 386,000

-- April 21, 388,000

-- April 28, 365,000

-- May 5, 367,000

-- May 12, 370,000

Here are the'revised initial claims numbers — after being "revised" (generally upwards) just one week later.

-- Feb. 18, 353,000

-- Feb. 25, 354,000 (up from 351,000)

-- March 3, 365,000 (up from 362,000)

-- March 10, 353,000 (up from 351,000)

-- March 17, 364,000 (up from 348,000)

-- March 24, 363,000 (up from 359,000)

-- March 31, 367,000 (up from 357,000)

-- April 7, 388,000 (up from 380,000)

-- April 14, 389,000 (up from 386,000)

-- April 21, 392,000 (up from 388,000)

-- April 28, 368,000 (up from 365,000)

u-- May 5, 370,000 (up from 367,000)

These figures clearly show that the DOL has been engaged in a shell game! If you go back to Feb. 25, it is obvious that the "seasonally adjusted initial claims" are not decreasing! Nor are the "revised" figures. Using the revised numbers, over this 12-week period, there have to be 4,426,000 new unemployment claims!

So what is going on? It's simple. The DOL has morphed into the Ministry of Propaganda.

It's an election year, so the DOL consistently understates the "seasonally adjusted initial claims" (to get them below the prior week's "revised" number); then one week later it "revises" them upwards.

Don't believe me; look at the DOL's own numbers. Here are three examples of how the DOL "statisticians" play the game:

On April 21, DOL said that there were only 388,000 initial unemployment claims; a week later they revise that number up to 392,000.

On April 14, it said there were only 386,000 initial unemployment claims; a week later it revises that number up to 389,000.

On April 7, issaid there were only 380,000 initial unemployment claims; a week later you revise that number up to 388,000.

The bottom lines is this: Ignore the lowballed "seasonally adjusted initial claims" number. To get a more accurate number, just look at the "revised" number, after it was been revised one week later.

So, since Feb. 25, are "initial claims" rising or falling? Has the number ever dropped below 353,000? Is the DOL innocently mistaken? (How many weeks in a row can you be "innocently mistaken?") Or telling little white lies to the American public to aid the president's reelection? What other explanation is there for revision after revision?

Why not just wait one week, and publish only the "revised" numbers?

If DOL is telling little white lies to help the president get reelected, why is that important? Why was Watergate important? Why did we impeach President Nixon?

Watergate was important because a burglary was used in an attempt to get the President Nixon reelected. We impeached President Nixon because he lied to cover up the what had been done.

Here's the bottom line -- something President Truman actually did say:

"The fundamental basis of this nation's laws was given to Moses on the Mount. ... If we don't have a proper fundamental moral background, we will finally end up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the State."

It is one thing for the government to mislead our enemies. It is another thing for the government to mislead the American people.

Posted Online: May 29, 2012, 2:35 pm - Quad-Cities Online

by John Donald O'Shea
Copyright 2012, John Donald O'Shea