The economic contortionists (like Mark Zandi) are really going to earn their money today

from marketwatch.com

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/us-economy-creates-88000-jobs-in-march-2013-04-05?link=MW_home_latest_news

By Jeffry BartashWASHINGTON (MarketWatch) - The economy generated just 88,000 jobs in March - the smallest gain in 10 months - and more people dropped out of the labor force, adding to a fresh pile of evidence that the pace of hiring in the United States has slowed. The unemployment rate fell a tick to 7.6% from 7.7%, the lowest rate since December 2007, but the decline stemmed from fewer Americans looking for work, according to Labor Department data. The jobs report fell well short of Wall Street forecasts. Economists polled by MarketWatch expected the number of new jobs to increase by 190,000 last month and for the unemployment rate to remain unchanged at 7.7%. Employment gains for February and January, however, were both revised higher and people who do hold jobs put in more hours, Labor said Friday. The number of new jobs created in February was revised to 268,000 from 236,000, while January's figure was revised up to 148,000 from 119,000. The biggest increase in hiring in March occurred in professional services (51,000) and health care (23,000). Retailers and government trimmed employment. Average hourly wages edged up 1 cent to $23.82, reducing the 12-month increase to 1.8%. The average workweek rose 0.1 hour to 34.6, a sign that workers are putting in more overtime. The participation rate, a measure of health in the labor market, slid again to 63.3%, marking the lowest level since 1979.

"Lucy, I think you've got some 'splainin' to do."

Dang it, where's my Orwellian Doublespeak for Dummies book. I thought I didn't need it anymore.

Oh wait, here it is:

from wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublespeak

Doublespeak is language that deliberately disguises, distorts, or reverses the meaning of words. Doublespeak may take the form of euphemisms (e.g., "downsizing" for layoffs, "servicing the target" for bombing ^[1]), in which case it is primarily meant to make the truth sound more palatable. It may also refer to intentional ambiguity in language or to actual inversions of meaning (for example, naming a state of war "peace"). In such cases, doublespeak disguises the nature of the truth. Doublespeak is most closely associated with political language.^[2][3]

OK, OK good start...I need more help here.

Edward S. Herman, political economist and media analyst, has highlighted some examples of doublespeak and doublethink in modern society.^[7] Herman describes in his book, Beyond Hypocrisythe principle characteristics of doublespeak;

What is really important in the world of doublespeak is the ability to lie, whether knowingly or unconsciously, and to get away with it; and the ability to use lies and choose and shape facts selectively, blocking out those that don’t fit an agenda or program.^[8]

Yeah, yeah, yeah that's it. Doublespeak, doubletalk, yeah, yeah. Hell, even I'm confused now. 

 In his essay "Politics and the English Language", George Orwell observes that political language serves to distort and obfuscate reality. Orwell’s description of political speech is extremely similar to the contemporary definition of doublespeak;

In our time, political speech and writing are largely the defence of the indefensible… Thus political language has to consist largely of euphemism, question-begging and sheer cloudy vagueness… the great enemy of clear language is insincerity. Where there is a gap between one's real and one's declared aims, one turns as it were instinctively to long words and exhausted idioms, ...^[9]

Oh, good stuff man. Thank you George Orwell, you are a God-send man!!! Wait, wait, there's more. 

Conflict theories

Due to the inherently deceptive nature of doublespeak as well as its prominent use in politics, doublespeak has been linked to the sociological perspective known as conflict theories. Conflict theories detract from ideas of society being naturally in harmony, instead placing emphasis on political and material inequality as its structural features. Antonio Gramsci's concepts on cultural hegemony, in particular, suggest that the culture and values of the economic elite – the bourgeoisie – become indoctrinated as ‘common sense’ to the working-class, allowing for the maintenance of the status quo through misplaced belief. Being himself one of the leaders of the Communist Party of Italy, (CPI), his theories had, in turn, been strongly influenced by the German social thinkerKarl Marx, and have their ideological roots grounded in Marxist theory of false consciousness and capitalist exploitation. While Gramsci's views argue that culture (beliefs, perceptions and values) allows the ruling class to maintain domination, Marx's explanation is along more economic lines, with concepts such as commodity fetishism demonstrating how the ideology of the bourgeoisie (in this case, the existence of property as a social creation rather than an 'eternal entity') dominate over that of the working classes.^[10] In both cases, both philosophers argue that one view - that of the bourgeoisie - dominates over others, hence the term conflict theories.

OMG!!! This shit is awesome. This is going to be a piece of cake!!! Can we get the media involved? Help us make our case a bit better?

Contemporary writings

Doublespeak might also have some connections with contemporary theories as well. Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky note in their book that Orwellian Doublespeak is an important component of the manipulation of the English language in American media, through a process called ‘dichotomization’; a component of media propaganda involving ‘deeply embedded double standards in the reporting of news’. For example, the use of state funds by the poor and financially needy is commonly referred to as 'social welfare' or 'handouts', which the 'coddled' poor 'take advantage of'. These terms, however, do not apply to other beneficiaries of government spending such as tax incentives and military spending.^[12]

Is there anymore? Let's see I think I have enough. I used to just rely on "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, just baffle them with Bull Shit". But this is so much better. Much more comprehensive and effective.

I can't believe they haven't caught on by now. It's not like there isn't an Internet or Alternative media sources where they can find some actual truth. They must like us....they must really, really like us!!

Examples of the structural nature of the use of Doublespeak have been made by modern scholars. Noam Chomsky argues in Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Mediathat people in modern society consist of decision-makers and social participants who have to be made to agree.^[13] According to Chomsky, the media and public relations industry actively shape public opinion, working to present messages in line with their economic agenda for the purposes of controlling of the 'public mind'.^[13] Contrary to the popular belief that indoctrination is inconsistent with democracy, Chomsky goes so far as to argue that 'it's the essence of democracy.'^[13]

The point is that in a ... totalitarian state, it doesn't much matter what people think because ... you can control what they do. But when the state loses the bludgeon, when you can't control people by force and when the voice of the people can be heard, ... you have to control what people think. And the standard way to do this is to resort to what in more honest days used to be called propaganda. Manufacture of consent. Creation of necessary illusions.^[13]

Thanks man, I hope the people never figure this shit out, man!!! They'd go absolutely nuts over this!! Wait a minute!! Are they even people anymore? Or have we really turned them into mind-less sheeple?

You people -- or sheeple, or whatever -- HAVE A NICE DAY!!!