CNBC: 90,000 jobs expected to be added in June. Ooops.

Ever notice how when the state-controlled media run a story on economic projections, and they turn out to be off, they're always on the optimistic side when a Dem is prez, and vice-versa when a Republican is in the White House?

For example, here's CNBC on the day before the government's June employment report was released: (title: Job growth better than thought on services gain.)

...the government's closely watched employment [sic] for June, scheduled for release on Friday [is] expected to show that nonfarm payrolls increased 90,000 last month after rising only 54,000 in May.

Wowza, look at that, Suzie! Payrolls expected to have climbed by 90,000 in June! And they rose 54,000 in May. Wow! It's Recovery Summer, just like they said!

Except that the very next day, the gummint reported just 18,000 net jobs added in June--one-fourth of the amount someone "expected."

Now, I have no doubt the CNBC reporter did find someone who "expected" the higher number. No word on whether that worthy was Axelrod, Plouffe or uber-Obamie fan Paul Krugman.

Oh, and that reported rise of 54,000 jobs in May? Later revised down to 27,000. (I know, not CNBC's fault.)

Wonder why no one in the state-controlled media ever adds, near the end of articles about jobs, that in order to absorb the number of new job-seeking entrants each month, the economy has to add somewhere between 150,000 and 200,000 jobs every month?