I suppose you could support the assertion that the Nazi holocaust never happened by citing reams of "evidence" and "analysis" that just happened to all be published in the Iranian state media. I mean your theory would still be complete and utter bullshit, but at least you would have supported it with some sort of "authoritative" evidence. That would make you "intellectually honest."
In the same way that the Strib is today in its semi-weekly "ignore your own experience - the economy is shitty because we don't like who the president is and think that the top marginal tax rate should be returned to 75%" institutional (as in Bellevue) voice editorial:
On this point the evidence is clear: Despite billions of dollars in tax relief and fiscal stimulus, this is a subpar expansion. Since the recession ended in late 2001, gross domestic product has grown at an average annual rate of 3.3 percent. That's well below the postwar average of 4.5 percent. Measured against other recoveries, the current expansion also lags in job creation, wage growth and business investment, according to a new analysis by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities in Washington, D.C. (Yes, the center is known for its liberal politics. But data from the Economic Report of the President show the same pattern.) Wages for nonsupervisory workers have actually gone down, not up, during this expansion.
Whoa, there cowpoke! Did I just read what I thought I just read?
(Yes, the center is known for its liberal politics. But data from the Economic Report of the President show the same pattern.)
So faced with the choice of basing an editorial on the data from the official source or basing it on the same data that has been run through the liberal "taxes are not high enough" sausage press, the Strib goes with the sausage press.
Ever seen sausage made? It's not pretty. But then, neither is Jim Boyd.
Since this "piece" is heavy on economic data and analysis, I'll assign the full fisking of it to a guy that has more economics chops in his pinky finger than Jim Boyd has in his entire blobby self:
But first, one general observation: If you read the whole thing, notice how you can almost see the editorialist who wrote this piece jizzing on himself while extolling Clinton's handling of the economy (by, of course, raising taxes), conveniently forgetting that in mere sentences before he wrote that the "recession ended in late 2001."
When did that recession start? When were the seeds of it sewn? Did this recession suddenly pop up because of some Bush policy made in the first couple months of his term, descend to Hoover-era depths over the summer (as the Dems tried to convince us in 2004) and then suddenly and miraculously evaporate despite Bush's policies?
Anyway, I suppose we ought to applaud the Strib for backing up their insipid assertions with something.