Friday, January 15, 2016

January, 2016, Part 2, By The Numbers: Clinton's Anemic Senate Record, Gun Control Not Working In D.C.Either and More

This is the next post this month in our continuing theme of “by the numbers.” We do this theme occasionally where we look at the reality of the numbers in the world and not the lies, deceptions, and spin of the American political class. I used to work for a boss whose favorite quote was: “There is nothing more devastating to an opinion than the correct number.” By looking at the statistics, trends, and numbers in our world we can cut through the politicians’ smoke screen to truly understand what is going on and hopefully, remedy the issues of the day.

And there will be a lot of smoke to cut through in the next few posts. Always believe the numbers before you believe our politicians, numbers do not lie but politicians do.

1) Michael Walsh, writing for the New York Post on January 2, 2015, brought some numbers and reality to the myth that cops across the country are going on a minority killing rampage. If you were to listen to the main steam media, Al Sharpton, Barack Obama, and Black Lives Matter, it is a killing field out there. But is it really, what do the numbers say?

According to Walsh’s reporting:

  • Citing a Washington Post study of police shootings in 2015, while 965 people were killed by police officers in 2015, white cops shooting unarmed black men accounted for less than 4% of fatal police shooting incidents.
  • In 75% of the shootings, police were either under attack themselves or defending innocent civilians. just doing the job they are trained and paid to do.
  • The majority of those killed were either brandishing weapons, suicidal, mentally troubled, or ran when ordered to surrender.
  • Of the 965 killed, only 90 were unarmed and the majority of those were white.
  • Walsh points out how the Post tried to twist the data to favor the “white cops killing black men” theory when they said that: “Although black men make up only 6% of the US population, they account for 40% of the unarmed men shot to death by police this year.”
  • But this twisting ignores the reality, and similar numbers and math, that historically blacks committed murders at a much higher rate than their overall share of the population.
  • This ignores the fact that black violent-crime rates are far higher than those of whites. 
Look, no one should die because a white police officer, or any racial type of police officer, exceeds his obligations or acts illegally. They should all be prosecuted to the full extent of current law. But the numbers from the Post do not support the media’s vision that white police officers are gunning down unarmed black men at unprecedented levels, the numbers tell a different story. 

Rather than beat this dead horse any more, Walsh points out some other gun violence that maybe should be the priority since the tragic numbers associated with these realities dwarf the number of white cops gunning down black men: in the worst gang-infested neighborhoods of Chicago, the murder rate (116.7 per 100,000 people) is higher than the murder rate in capitals around the world like the capital of Honduras which has a murder rate of 90.4 per 100,000

These numbers say to focus on the real problems, like everyone killing everyone regardless of race in Chicago vs. the media induced problem and myth of white police officers gunning down black men for no reason. 

2) While Chicago may have the toughest gun control laws in the country, which has likely resulted in the most violent city in the country, Washington D.C. is not far behind when it comes to gun control laws and efforts. How has that whole gun control thing worked out from a violence perspective?

According to the numbers in a recent Washington Post article, not too good:

  • By late 2015, there had been 93 murders in 2015, a 23% increase over 72 in 2014.
  • In the Petworth section of D.C, crimes with guns were up 34% in 2015 and up 9% in the Columbia Heights section.

So much for the strong gun control controlling crime arguement.

3) According to a recent Gallup opinion survey, almost half of Americans think that government regulates businesses too much while less than half of that amount, 22%, think government does not regulate businesses enough (click on the graph for a larger load):

In fact, the the number of Americans who think that government over regulates has grown significantly since Obama took office, going from 38% to 49%.

Given that the Obama administration has added untold thousands of new regulations since coming into power, this upward trend should not be a surprise. As the number of regulations has increased, economic vitality and growth has been anemic. As the numbers show, America is getting fed up with government and political meddling in the economy.

4) I am not a big fan of HIllary Clinton. I believe she is and has always been a constant liar (e.g. remember how she falsely claimed she came under sniper fire in Bosnia), was responsible for the disaster and coverup at Benghazi, and her stint as Secretary of State was an unmitigated disaster. 

But what about her Senate career, was she any kind of success while a New York Senator? The numbers are not good, regardless of what source of those numbers you look at. Let’s start with the Clinton Senate track record as compiled by the Politifact organization:

  • Number of Senate bills Clinton sponsored: 635
  • Number of Senate bills Clinton co-sponsored: 2441
  • Number of bills sponsored or co-sponsored by Clinton that became law: 54
  • Success rate: 1.8%

Thus, according to Politifact, she was successful in getting sponsored legislation passed less than 2% of the time, hardly a winning track record. 

But according to the Clinton Senate numbers reported in a Washington Examiner article by Jason Russell, that was written on December 29, 2015, her record and numbers are even worse. According to his research, in her eight years in the Senate, only three of the bills she sponsored, not co-sponsored, became law and these three were quite underwhelming:

  • One successfully sponsored bill renamed a post office in a New York town with less than 2,000 residents.
  • Another successfully sponsored bill renamed a portion of a highway outside of Buffalo, New York for the late Tim Russert.
  • The third named an existing brick house in Troy, New York as a national historic site which honored a 19th century female union leader.
Wow, underwhelming numbers. According to the Examiner’s tallies, Clinton sponsored 713 pieces of legislation (in the same ball park of 635 sponsored bills that Politifact came up with). Thus, in their analysis, Clinton’s success rate on sponsored bills was an anemic .4% and considering the content of the three bills she got passed, even more anemic.

So what did the numbers tell us today:

  • Clinton had a meager Senate legislative record.
  • Americans think that politicians regulate us too much from a business perspective.
  • Stringent gun control is not working in D.C., much like it is not working in Chicago.
  • White cops are not rampaging through the streets killing young black men.
More numbers tomorrow.

Our book, "Love My Country, Loathe My Government - Fifty First Steps To Restoring Our Freedom And Destroying The American Political Class" is now available at:

It is also available online at Amazon and Barnes and Noble. Please pass our message of freedom onward. Let your friends and family know about our websites and blogs, ask your library to carry the book, and respect freedom for both yourselves and others everyday.

Please visit the following sites for freedom:

Term Limits Now:

No comments: