Now that we've had about 12 hours for the article to sink in, the potential bombshell dropped at the NY Post is starting to find its naysayers.
To be clear, I do not believe in widespread govt conspiracy to phony all the numbers to make Obama look better
— James Pethokoukis (@JimPethokoukis) November 19, 2013
This is a wholly expected turn of events but all together remains disappointing.
For those of you that missed it, there is an anonymous source claiming that the drop in unemployment reported prior to the 2012 election contained falsified data intended to make President Obama look good.
Look, I have no idea if the anonymous source for the Post is legitimate or if he's just some guy with a chip on his shoulder because he thought he was the hardest working guy around and everyone should've recognized that.
But if I've learned anything from the last few years, it is this: never assume something is beyond the corruptive nature of this regime.
As you may recall, 2010 & 2011 saw similar rebukes of "conspiracy theories" from talking heads in regards to the far fetched idea that the IRS was targeting conservative groups and individuals. Going so far in some cases as to leak information about applicants.
One may also remember how utterly insane it would've been to believe that the Fast & Furious scandal could be so corrupt that the DOJ might consider using it as a way to push tougher gun control laws.
Or that Obama is trying to silence the press. Or that he knew he was flat out lying when he sold Obamacare to the American people.
Frankly, the list of now widely accepted conspiracies that were dismissed as silly musings of the unhinged is too long to adequately relay in this post.
And, to be clear, I understand the urge to dismiss these stories completely. I see headlines at times that cause my "BS detector" to go off like a fire alarm. But this administration has helped me to learn the benefit of being cautiously observant. I may tweet some jabs at the opposition, but I like to watch and see how it unfolds and I certainly don't start declaring it true or false. More often than not I'd say the safest position would be, "are you really surprised if it's true?"
To that point, is this one true? We'll see. After all, the anonymous source claims he/she's willing to appear before Congress over the matter. But I think the credibility of the claim has now moved up a notch if nothing else and I believe it is unhelpful and oblivious and, quite frankly fallacious, to pretend widespread corruption in this administration is on par with thinking 9-11 was an inside job.