You have to compare the number of full time employed compared to the number of working age people in the country. Then you have to look at spendable income to see how well America is doing. Too many people on disability, part-timers because of impending Obamacare, people not looking for work, but probably working in the underground economy not paying taxes and possibly still receiving benefits.
The Benghazi Talking Points
And how they were changed to obscure the truth
May 13, 2013, Vol. 18, No. 33 • By STEPHEN F. HAYES
Send to Kindle
Audio version Single Page Print Larger Text Smaller Text Alerts
Even as the White House strove last week to move beyond questions about the Benghazi attacks of Tuesday, September 11, 2012, fresh evidence emerged that senior Obama administration officials knowingly misled the country about what had happened in the days following the assaults. The Weekly Standard has obtained a timeline briefed by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence detailing the heavy substantive revisions made to the CIA’s talking points, just six weeks before the 2012 presidential election, and additional information about why the changes were made and by whom.
The Embassy in Benghazi burns
As intelligence officials pieced together the puzzle of events unfolding in Libya, they concluded even before the assaults had ended that al Qaeda-linked terrorists were involved. Senior administration officials, however, sought to obscure the emerging picture and downplay the significance of attacks that killed a U.S. ambassador and three other Americans. The frantic process that produced the changes to the talking points took place over a 24-hour period just one day before Susan Rice, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, made her now-famous appearances on the Sunday television talk shows. The discussions involved senior officials from the State Department, the National Security Council, the CIA, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, and the White House.