7 Year Rash

Today is the 7th Anniversary of this blog. For a long time this year I considered making this one my last because, quite simply, The Stupid Have Inherited the Earth. Intelligence and Common Sense (let alone <gasp> Logic) are Politically Incorrect. Hell, some Leftists have decreed that just saying “politically incorrect” is Politically Incorrect. 😦

So instead I thought I’d revisit one of my favorites from the last 7 years.

This also goes out the #NeverTrump -ers who are so mindlessly obsessed with hating Donald Trump that they are willing Hillary into the White House.

Hate never felt so Right. 🙂

And a special shout out to the Sabotage Republicans (The Establishment ones and their followers) WHO ALSO want Hillary.

The Generations (and possibly permanent) of damage you want to inflict on what’s LEFT of this country is so short-sighted you deserve her.

It will be YOUR fault.

Agree with me or else!

To the future or to the past, to a time when thought is free, when men are different from one another and do not live alone — to a time when truth exists and what is done cannot be undone: From the age of uniformity, from the age of solitude, from the age of Big Brother, from the age of doublethink — greetings! -George Orwell

So with that in mind, cast your mindless adherence to January 21, 2012  and this Blog and see yourselves currently in it also.

THE ZOMBIE HOARD

They are just a zombie hoard.

Remorseless. Merciless. Incapable of shame, morals or ethics.

They want want what they want when they want it and because they want it and will do anything to get it. Relentlessly.

And what they want is YOU. You to be either converted or cow-towed to their every whim. To do whatever they want when they want it.

Evidence John King, the CNN Liberal Moderator of the South Carolina Debate. He opens the debate with a salicious question to Gingrich about his “open marriage” and Gingrich blows him to bits for it and the crowd goes wild.

He did this to prove his “courage” to stand up to the evil “right wingers” and puff out his chest that he was “journalist” and was going to bravely confront the issue. Meanwhile, anything remotely damaging to President Obama is ignored with great speed and spin.🙂

2016: Just Like they do with Hillary. The Debate will be set up to show that Trump is grumpy, unstable and mean. The fact that Hillary is a congenital, sociopathica Liar has no bearing on the debates whatsover.

Their will be more Candy Crowley moments than ever.

And the Zombie hoard will eat it up like candy. “Brains…”

“In times of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act”.- George Orwell.

And their has never been more deceit now than ever in American History and more mindless Zombie Hoards out to make sure “What difference does it make, anyways?”

Rush Limbaugh (who I rarely get a chance to listen to because of my work schedule): Now, let me tell you one thing here, folks: You cannot shame the mainstream media. If any of you are thinking that the media learned a lesson — if any of you believe that the media finally had it handed to ’em, if you believe that the media had their eyes opened and they are fully awake now and they understand what they’re dealing with — forget it. John King is proud of what happened last night. John King is a hero in the Main Street media because he didn’t back down, because he continued to illustrate how it is that the media does really control the agenda. That was a demonstration of the power they hold over every public figure’s head, that they choose to hold like a guillotine. John King… There may even be some jealousy and envy within the journalist ranks (well, not journalists; within the Democrat Party ranks) because John King is a guy that got in Newt’s face, stared him down — and the fact that Newt told him off? It’s a badge of honor. If you are thinking that John King was embarrassed and ran away with his tail tucked between his legs and learned his lesson and it’ll never happen again? Ah, ah, ah, ah. You cannot shame the mainstream media. They are proud of this. They delight in their power to destroy candidates that they don’t like.

And they don’t like anyone who doesn’t cow-tow to them.

2016: They made THEIR Choice. Now it’s you’re Zombie duty to vote for it or else.

“At the end of the day the message to every conservative who hasn’t run for office is: “You want a piece of this? You want some of this? You want Brian Ross hounding you and your ex-wife and then you want me asking you about it on national TV the next night? Come on in. We’re ready.” That’s the message from John King and CNN last night, and do not doubt me on this.”

2016: look at the evidence, every time new “evidence” comes out about Hillary they bury it. Every time Trump even raises his voice or say one less than perfect political phrase they are on it like flies on shit and they stick to it like super glue and blow it up.

mountain

So the alternative is to cow-tow. To live in fear of the Liberal wrath.

2016: To acquiesce. Given in, the Ministry of Truth has the system rigged.

Hell, the Democrats got caught rigging the Primary, blatantly.

No one really cared.

The Zombie Hoard just went, “oh” and moved on. The Media covered it up.

Debbie Wasserman-Schultz was sacrificed.

End of Story.

#2: Hillary is caught re-handed on the Email Scandal. The FBI even says so. But since Comey has connections to Clinton and doesn’t want to have a mysterious “accident” she is not prosecuted.

Future Hillary Supreme Court Nominee Loretta Lynch, Attorney General and Clinton Cronie refuses to prosecute her.

Other people not connected to Clinton aren’t so lucky.

David_Petraeus

And the reaction from the Zombie Hoard, “Yawn”.

Hillary is still leading in the Polls!

“Brains…”

The Food Police. The TSA. The EPA. The Justice Department. Homeland Security. The FCC.

Because if they can’t make you a zombie, they can at least make you a peasant in fear of your Masters who will not challenge them or not have the power to challenge them.

“[…]you don’t have to be Sun freakin Tzu to know that real fighting isn’t about killing or even hurting the other guy, it’s about scaring him enough to call it a day.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

They’ll just turn your children into zombies instead. 12 years of Grade School and 4 years of College is a lot of Zombie Voodoo time after all. And “getting them while they are young” is entirely within the Zombie Liberal playbook. Make them a zombie before they even know what one is and then make them as immune as possible to any anti-virus and get them addicted to their own Kool-Aid. Feed it to them constantly through the Media and the Internet.

2016: They’ll DEMAND Segregation, “Safe Spaces”, “Diversity” and “Inclusion” mindlessly and will trample Free Speech because they don’t want to be “offended”.

FREEDOM IS SLAVERY

WAR (Class, Gender, Race, Religion) IS PEACE

IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

Hell, even white people getting a tan will set the little zombie off…

What it does is illustrate that they can be dealt with. But you can’t beat ’em. They’re not gonna be shamed. They’re not going to be shamed into stopping the coverage of conservatives as they do it. It’s going to continue. No matter what kind of shame you think they suffer in a contest like that — no matter how much money they lose, no matter how many of them get fired, no matter how many magazines or TV stations or newspapers get shut down — they are not gonna change. They are hard-core, leftists”

And as I have said over and over again, they are have no morals or ethics because they are governed not by logic and reason but by emotions, mostly the most basic of primitive emotions, Fear, Lust (for power), anger, jealousy, ENVY, etc. –Raw emotions.

2016: THE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS!

Which is why when you engage them they sound and act like an immature 5 year old. And as we all know from childhood development the child has to develop a sense of shame by have having boundaries and limitations and consequences. And if they don’t, they will grow up with little to no sense of shame.

disagree

2016: “Microaggressions” anyone?

They are usually called sociopaths. I can call them Liberal Zombies.

2016: And the #Never Trumpers and Establishment RINOs.

Liberals have no shame. They want what they want when they want it because they want it.

2016: And the #Never Trumpers and Establishment RINOs.

“…one of the upsides that isn’t gonna happen is the media saying, “Gosh, we’ve been so mean to these people and so unfair. You know, maybe we ought to start being fair.” That’s not going to happen.

Liberals talk about being “fair” which means you’re being unfair to them and should do what they want.

Liberals talk about “compassion” but it’s to make you feel guilty, not them, and to do what they want.

Liberals will talk about “bi-partisanship” but that just means you have to compromise your principles so they can do what they want.

“Diversity” means you’re evil and need to do what they say to repent for your sins.

2016: “Inclusion” Means you include everything THEY say and do it without hesitation.

They are a remorseless hoard. They want what they want when they want it and on their terms only.

Give them everything they want or they’ll cry, scream, bitch, moan, pout and lash out at you.

2016: “White Privilege” anyone?

That is their primitive zombie hoard mentality. And they want YOU.extremists

“Lies are neither bad nor good. Like a fire they can either keep you warm or burn you to death, depending on how they’re used.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

“Most people don’t believe something can happen until it already has. That’s not stupidity or weakness, that’s just human nature.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

“Often, a school is your best bet-perhaps not for education but certainly for protection from an undead attack.”
― Max Brooks, The Zombie Survival Guide

“Remember; no matter how desperate the situation seems, time spent
thinking clearly is never time wasted.”
― Max Brooks, The Zombie Survival Guide

“I think that most people would rather face the light of a real enemy than the darkness of their imagined fears.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

“They feel no fear, why should you?”– Max Brooks

“The zombie may be gone, but the threat lives on.”
― Max Brooks, The Zombie Survival Guide

Get rid of one zombie, and 10 more will take it’s place. So you have to be ready to do battle constantly.

Look at 2010. The Democrats suffered the worst defeat in 80 years. Does it look like they learned ANYTHING?

No.

As a matter of fact the zombie hoard is even tighter, even more determined than ever. They want it EVEN MORE.

So if we defeat then in 2012 will they go away?

HELL NO!

2016: They weren’t defeated. Even more hoards joined them. So if they are beat in 2016 will they finally be defeated and go away.

HELL NO!

They will just keep coming back like a remorseless zombie hoard until you are overwhelmed.

Which is why you will have to fight them all of your days, your kids days and their kids days until the infection is wiped out.

But like any good zombie plaque it only takes 1 to re-ignite it and spread it all over again.

And these zombies have Media and Internet outlets! (and Europe!)

“Looking back, I still can’t believe how unprofessional the news media was. So much spin, so few hard facts. All those digestible sound bites from an army of ‘experts’ all contradicting one another, all trying to seem more ‘shocking’ and ‘in-depth’ than the last one. It was all so confusing, nobody seemed to know what to do.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

“The only rule that ever made sense to me I learned from a history, not an economics, professor at Wharton. “Fear,” he used to say, “fear is the most valuable commodity in the universe.” That blew me away. “Turn on the TV,” he’d say. “What are you seeing? People selling their products? No. People selling the fear of you having to live without their products.” Fuckin’ A, was he right. Fear of aging, fear of loneliness, fear of poverty, fear of failure. Fear is the most basic emotion we have. Fear is primal. Fear sells.
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

The Democrat Party in a nutshell.

FEAR IS HOPE!

My own personal Fourth Orwellian Precept (which includes WAR IS PEACE, FREEDOM IS SLAVERY, and IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH).

“If you believe you can accomplish everything by “cramming” at the eleventh hour, by all means, don’t lift a finger now. But you may think twice about beginning to build your ark once it has already started raining”
― Max Brooks, The Zombie Survival Guide

“When I believe in my ability to do something, there is no such word as no.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

“. . . show the other side, the one that gets people out of bed the next morning, makes them scratch and scrape and fight for their lives because someone is telling them that they’re going to be okay.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

“This is the only time for high ideals because those ideals are all that we have. We aren’t just fighting for our physical survival, but for the survival of our civilization. We don’t have the luxury of old-world pillars. We don’t have a common heritage, we don’t have a millennia of history. All we have are the dreams and promises that bind us together. All we have…is what we want to be.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

“…We were a shaken, broken species, driven to the edge of extinction and grateful only for tomorrow with perhaps a little less suffering than today. Was this the legacy we would leave our children, a level of anxiety and self-doubt not seen since our simian ancestors cowered in the tallest trees? What kind of world would they rebuild? Would they rebuild at all? Could they continue to progress, knowing that they would be powerless to reclaim their future? And what if that future saw another rise of the living dead? Would our descendants rise to meet them in battle, or simply crumple in meek surrender and accept what they believe to be their inevitable extinction? For this alone, we had to reclaim our planet. We had to prove to ourselves that we could do it, and leave that proof as this war’s greatest monument. The long, hard road back to humanity, or the regressive ennui of Earth’s once-proud primates. That was the choice, and it had to be made now.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

The Future is yours. So is living through “The Walking Dead” and “1984” for real.

truth

It’s zir way or the highway

A New Years Gift brought to be the fine people of the “Tolerance”, “Diversity” and “Inclusion” crowd.

The morally superior Left. 🙂

Did you call a transsexual person “he” or “she” when they preferred to be called “zhe?” According to a newly updated anti-discrimination law in New York City, you could be fined an eye-watering $250,000.

In the latest, astonishing act of draconian political correctness, the NYC Commission on Human Rights have updated a law on “Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity or Expression” to threaten staggering financial penalties against property owners who “misgender” employees or tenants.

Incidents that are deemed “wilful and malicious” will see property owners face up to $250,000 in fines, while standard violations of the law will result in a $125,000 fine. For small business owners, these sums are crippling.

It’s not as simple as referring to transmen “he” or transwomen as “she,” either. The legislation makes it clear that if an individual desires, property owners will have to make use of “zhe,” “hir” and any other preferred pronoun. From the updated legislation:

The NYCHRL requires employers and covered entities to use an individual’s preferred name, pronoun and title (e.g., Ms./Mrs.) regardless of the individual’s sex assigned at birth, anatomy, gender, medical history, appearance, or the sex indicated on the individual’s identification. Most individuals and many transgender people use female or male pronouns and titles.

Some transgender and gender non-conforming people prefer to use pronouns other than he/him/his or she/her/hers, such as they/them/theirs or ze/hir

Other violations of the law include refusing to allow individuals to use single-sex facilities such as bathrooms that are “consistent with their gender identity,” failing to provide employee health benefits for “gender-affirming care” and “imposing different uniforms or grooming standards based on sex or gender.”

Examples of such illegal behaviour include: “requiring female bartenders to wear makeup,” “Permitting only individuals who identify as women to wear jewellery or requiring only individuals who identify as male to have short hair,” and “permitting female but not male residents at a drug treatment facility to wear wigs and high heels.”

So, Klinger on M*A*S*H could not get Col. Blake or Col. Potter fined $250,000 for objecting to him where a dress to work. (Military Protocols aside because after all, that just government sanctioned discrimination anyhow).

Not mention that Klinger being of Middle Eastern descent could also charge him with Islamophobia!

Yeah, that make perfect sense! 🙂

In other words, if a bar owner prevents male bartenders from wearing lipstick and heels, they’ll be breaking the law. They’ve now got a choice between potentially scaring off customers, and paying hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines. Regardless of the establishment’s clientèle or aesthetic, every property owner will be forced to conform to the same standard.

This is the latest in what Spiked Online editor-in-chief Brendan O’Neill calls “The Crisis of Character” in the west, in which identities become grounded in subjective interpretation rather than objective reality. The state is now forcing society to recognise the subjective identities of individuals, regardless of how absurd or surreal they may seem. In New York City, recognising someone’s identity is no longer a matter of case-by-case common sense and courtesy. It’s zir way or the highway. (Breitbart)

And in Orwellian Language Manipulation and Reality Control along with Moral Relativism (where the  only moral thing is do the Leftist Politically Correct thing or be a “bigot”, “racist” or both).

The Left: We want to do whatever the fuck we want to do, and when we want to do it, because we want to do it and you heathen mongrel Neanderthals who aren’t worth of kissing our ass will just have to shut and do as you are told or else.

We are the superior beings and we will rule over you with an iron fist of “social justice”.

We are your Superiors in every way possible, now and forever.

You do as your told when you are told, or else!

<<insert maniacal laugh here>>

Welcome to end of 2015, The Year of Orwellian Madness.

Here comes 2016, the End of The World Vote.

You will bow down peasants to your new Monarch, Queen Hillary The First.

That is the only choice you will be given to avoid punishment.

Or Else, The Scarlet “B” (BIGOT) be ‘tattooed’ on your forever!

the scarlett b
You will burn in Liberal Politically Incorrect until you are re-educated and renounce your unenlightened non-diversity, non-inclusion and intolerant heathen ways.

INFIDEL.  🙂

 

 

 

The Energy Agenda

Like your energy savings due to the crash in oil prices? Well, Obama and the Luddite Liberals have a solution for that.

Can you guess what?

More government regulations to harass and strangle.  After all, we should all have a wind farm in our backyard and solar panels like siding on the house, and driving an electric car. Anything else is just evil.:)

The Obama administration has just announced it will issue at least six new major rules directed at the oil and gas industry — an energy strategy that only the member nations of OPEC and Vladimir Putin could love.

The rules would, among other things, curtail methane emissions from natural gas and oil, place new restrictions on fracking, impose further limits on Arctic drilling and impose new safety standards on rail tanker cars.

Never mind that the oil and gas industry has to rely on rail to transport petroleum because Obama has blocked the far cleaner and more efficient alternative of moving oil and gas through pipelines.

More important, these are the kinds of mindless regulations out of this White House that could trip up the economy just as it’s showing signs of new life.

That’s why he has to kill it, and kill it now. Misery loves his Agenda. Miserable people will turn to government for “help” aka power, political power. So you can heat and cool your home with political wind power and solar from the enlightenment of total government control of your life.

Rejoice.

The oil and gas industry has carried the rest of the economy on its shoulders for the last six years. But with prices falling, drillers are struggling to keep operations running. Thanks to the boom in shale oil and gas, oil prices have dropped by nearly 50% since the summer. New drilling permits are falling and some marginal wells are already shutting down.

The decline in energy prices is a windfall benefit for the U.S. economy of an estimated $150 billion a year. But drillers must try to tough it out, and somehow earn what are now razor-thin profits.

Could there be a worse time for new EPA regulations to raise the cost of producing our domestic energy? Obviously, the answer is no, but this isn’t collateral damage; it’s the very point of the regulatory onslaught.

The Agenda is the Agenda. Damn the consequences full speed ahead!!

This is an administration that hates fossil fuels, so the endgame here is a slow death to the oil, gas and coal industries by regulatory strangulation. This will force-feed the nation to consume much more expensive “green” energy.

And feel morally and intellectually superior for it. After all, it’s for your own good. 🙂

The biggest beneficiaries from this lunacy will be many of America’s mortal enemies. By driving up the cost of domestic energy production, OPEC, the Saudi oil sheiks, the IS terrorist networks funded with petrodollars and Vladimir Putin come away big winners.

The losers will be the hundreds of thousands of Americans employed by the oil and gas industry, anyone who drives a car, U.S. manufacturers who benefit from low energy costs and families who use natural gas to heat their homes or for electricity.

Like he cares. The Agenda is The Agenda.

It seems so economically traitorous that one wonders whether Obama can pull it off. But this is a “transformational” president who has already nationalized much of our health insurance industry, run the federal budget deficit through the roof, passed mind-numbingly complicated new financial services rules and defunded America’s military.

Press reports indicate his next grandiose mission in his last two years in office is to burnish his “green” legacy by destroying fossil fuel production — as his EPA is already accomplishing when it comes to coal.

What is doubly insidious is that Obama often gives speeches on the economy boasting of the energy revolution that has happened on his watch, even while all the president’s men and women are pursuing strategies behind the scenes to flatten the industry.

These include blocking permits for drilling on energy-rich federal lands, preventing the Keystone pipeline and other infrastructure projects necessary for oil and gas to flourish and some of the toughest EPA standards to discourage fossil fuel-based power plants.

In every budget he demands higher taxes on the oil and gas industry — even as he showers the green energy industry with taxpayer subsidies.

Over the past six years, nearly all the net new jobs in the U.S. economy have come from oil and gas producers. Our reliance on foreign oil has dropped from 60% as recently as 2007 to less than half that in 2013. If the federal government simply stays out of the way, the U.S. by 2020 can be an energy-exporting nation, no longer reliant on dangerous, expensive and unstable foreign sources.

Even the radical environmental case for these regulations is flimsy. The U.S. already has reduced carbon emissions more than any other major nation. Oil, gas and coal production is cleaner than ever before. Obama’s attempt to slash energy production will only make us and the world more reliant on dirtier forms of energy produced abroad — thus increasing greenhouse gas emissions.

Republicans, who will hold majorities in both houses of Congress in January, must do everything in their power to stop these executive actions by an administration run amok.

The president will likely see a rise in his popularity rating over the next several weeks because when gasoline prices fall, Americans feel better about the economic direction of the country.

The new White House rules are yet another reminder that the benefits of the U.S. energy boom are in spite of, not because of, Obama policies. If utility bills and gas prices at the pump start to spike again in 2015 — Americans should remember who they have to thank for that.

After all, The Agenda is The Agenda!

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert


Good News, Bad News

The federal government collected a record amount of taxes in fiscal year 2014, topping $3 trillion in revenue for the first time in its history, according to Treasury Department numbers released Wednesday that show the influx helped drop the deficit to its lowest level under President Obama.

The recovering economy was the key, sending personal and corporate incomes higher — and thus sending more money to Washington. Individual taxes rose 6 percent and corporate-income taxes, which are the best indicator of a business recovery, leapt 17 percent.

Just five years ago, the Treasury took in $2.1 trillion, but fiscal year 2014, which ended Sept. 30, saw the final take at $3.020 trillion. The government spent $3.504 trillion, leaving it $483 billion in the red. That’s down from $1.4 trillion in 2010, and is the lowest figure since 2008.

The good news is, that the government has never taken in more money ever. The bad news, it come from you! You’ve never given more.

The good news is the government has never taken in more money. The bad news is that th THEY STILL SPENT MORE THAN THEY TOOK IN.

The good news, according to Democrats, they spent more than  they took in LESS than they did 5 years ago. The bad news is that they have overspent EVERY SINGLE YEAR since 2008.

But it’s less, so you should be proud of them. 🙂

So the National Debt stands at $17.864 TRILLION dollar. That’s the good news, because, as the Democrats are proud to say, they overspent less than before.

The bad news is it’s nearly $8 Trillion more debt in 5+ years of Obama. He will spend more and accumulate more debt than all Presidents in the history of the country combined.

But that’s Bush’s fault, you know! 🙂

And hey, he’s got his drug addiction down 60% from 5 years ago. Of course he did it by taking more money in taxes than ever before and snorting roughly the say, but hey who’s counting that you “hater”! 🙂

“The president’s policies and a strengthening U.S. economy have resulted in a reduction of the U.S. budget deficit of approximately two-thirds — the fastest sustained deficit reduction since World War II,” Mr. Lew said.

Deficit reduction while the debt rises faster than ever.

Orwell would be proud of your dis-assembly of the language.

Over spending and debt is good, as long as you over spend less every year!

I really should try that with my credit cards… Nah! I’m not that stupid.

Just five years ago, in 2009, the trough of the recession, revenue was only $2.1 trillion. That means it’s leapt $900 billion in just five years.

Spending, meanwhile, has remained relatively flat at about $3.5 trillion.

So he’s overspending less and that’s a good thing… 🙂

Mr. Obama fought for higher personal income-tax rates in 2012, winning a postelection deal in the so-called “fiscal cliff” debate that saw income taxes hiked for the wealthiest, and payroll tax hikes for everyone. (WT)

President Obama made  a promise to not increase taxes for families making less than $250,000 a year.

Mind you, Obamacare IS a Tax, but it’s not a Tax, it’s a Penalty that is a Tax that isn’t a Tax. but then the Supreme Court said it was a Tax!

But the government has collected more taxes, so when it spends too much they can cheer that they are overspending less and you should be happy for them.

The $$$ drug addicts have cut back. No, they just got people to give them more drugs so they can maintain their habit and it LOOKS like they cut their consumption.

It’s good news for Orwell, bad news for the Country, as a whole.

Rejoice, we Overspend Less. Lets all throw a Party!

“I don’t think the government’s going to get any more out of the American economy. The only way Europe does is because they have the VAT taxes,” Mr. Edwards said, referring the Value Added Tax system that is prominent on the Continent. He predicted VAT would be the next big tax battle in the U.S.

Of course, the addicts still need more money. They can’t survive on a flat income source. THEY WANT MORE!

They NEED MORE! FEED ME!

FEED ME!  The BEAST IS HUNGRY!

And you get a starring role on the BIGGEST LOSER! 🙂

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

 

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

 

Origins

Americans must be wondering how much more of this “recovery” they can afford. New figures from the Census Bureau’s Current Population Survey, compiled by Sentier Research , show that the typical American household’s real (inflation-adjusted) income has actually dropped 5.7 percent during the Obama “recovery.”

Yet it gets worse. Amazingly, incomes have dropped even more during the “recovery” than they did during the recession. In fact, they’ve dropped more than twice as much as they did during the recession.

Using constant 2012 dollars (to adjust for inflation), the median annual income of American households was $53,718 as of June 2009, the last month of the recession. Now, after 38 months of this “recovery,” it has fallen to $50,678 — a drop of $3,040 per household. (KFYI)

But he the guy in charge of this will give you free stuff and will make sure he sticks it to “rich” people!!! The other guy is just a gaffe-laden asshole. 🙂

And besides we all know it’s Bush’s Fault, after all… 🙂

The newest viral video is of a woman who says she will vote for Obama because she got a free cell phone from him. Now that’s the kind of intellectual voter response we need as a country! 🙂

The program is called Lifeline, established in 1984, originally created to subsidize landline phone service for low income Americans, funded by government-collected telecommunication fees, paid by consumers.

In 2008, the program was expanded to support cell phones which quickly escalated the cost of the program. In 2008 the program cost $772 million, but by 2011 it cost $1.6 billion.

A 2011 audit found that 269,000 wireless Lifeline subscribers were receiving free phones and monthly service from two or more carriers. Several websites have been created to promote “free” government cell phones, including the”The Obama Cell Phone” website at Obamaphone.net.

After all, a Cell phone must be a Human Right and if you deny it to people you must be a racist!. 🙂

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

What a mean, evil racist! 🙂

But it’s Obama re-election time, so no one in the FCC is going to do anything about it. Don’t want to upset the peasants.

2016 Update

Two weeks ago, Dinesh D’Souza’s documentary “2016: Obama’s America” passed Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth” for second place on the all-time box-office money list for political documentaries. It now has a box office gross of more than $32 million. But if you’re an independent or a liberal who’s unplugged from conservative websites and talk radio, you’d never know.
You didn’t see D’Souza on CBS or NBC (although he showed up on ABC’s “Nightline” in late night). There were no cover stories in Time or Newsweek. The film opened on just one screen in Houston when it premiered on July 13, and then spread to 10, and eventually to 1,000 theaters in August, and 2,000 theaters in September. A cultural sensation, yes — but somehow not newsworthy.
Al Gore, naturally, had every advantage of a beloved liberal almost-president. When it hit theaters in May of 2006, Time magazine wrote, “The movie got raves at the Sundance Film Festival … In Los Angeles theaters, the trailers have been getting ovations.” On NBC, Katie Couric sat down in the outdoors with Gore and told him that in the movie, “you’re funny, vulnerable, disarming, self-effacing.” On CBS, anchor Harry Smith gushed, “The box office receipts would indicate that it’s an action movie — you did better per screening than almost anything that’s come out this week.”
Even after Gore’s slideshow lecture/film eventually sputtered out at the Cineplex, several more rounds of fawning followed: an Academy Award and a Nobel Peace Prize, and in between the gushing lines came the idea that Gore might (or should) run again for president. The “Goracle” gush was so heavy that Time collected it all together. He was “Al Gore — the improbably charismatic, Academy Award-winning, Nobel Prize-nominated environmental prophet with an army of followers and huge reserves of political and cultural capital at his command.”
And yet, D’Souza’s film was the Little Engine That Could — the film that could surpass Gore at the box office. He didn’t need MSNBC to put him on, although in August, he slammed them as cowardly: “You could watch that channel and not even know we have a film out — unless you saw a commercial that we’re running for our film. You look at Lawrence O’Donnell, you look at Rachel Maddow, you look at Chris Matthews. I mean, look at those cowards! … I would love to cross swords with those guys, but I think they’re all hiding under the desk.”
Whatever media elite notice D’Souza received began trickling in once it made the top ten of the weekend box-office hits in late August … and it wasn’t positive at all.
A Washington Post critic scoffed on August 24: “It is doomed to win precious few converts. It’s a textbook example of preaching to the choir. It has the air of a ‘Nightmare on Elm Street’ sequel, pandering to the franchise’s hardcore fans, while boring everyone else.”
And “An Inconvenient Truth” was different?
On August 29, ABC’s David Wright told D’Souza his film was “disingenuous” in suggesting Obama wanted to downsize America’s power and influence, and complained “D’Souza spins out the conspiracy theory” of America in dramatic economic and geopolitical collapse by 2016. The screen read “Conspirator-in-Chief.”
NPR weekend anchor Guy Raz took a few rhetorical swings at D’Souza in a September 1 interview. “Dinesh D’Souza, if you wanted to criticize or attack President Obama, why bend the truth? Why not just offer a policy critique rather than conjecture, and in many cases in this film, conspiracy?”
But what dominated Al Gore’s documentary if not a gloomy conjecture about the destruction of the planet through global warming? Wasn’t Gore a “Conspirator-in-Chief” that some people deny the “truth” of impending planetary doom for nefarious political ends? Gore’s film ridiculously claimed a 20-foot rise in sea level that would flood Manhattan.
The media weren’t negative about that conjecture. ABC’s story on Gore’s movie was summed up with the words “The Comeback Kid? Al Gore Takes On The World.”
Reporter Claire Shipman hailed “Gore’s personal journey toward environmental evangelism.” On NPR, anchor Robert Siegel hailed the film’s success, and began with a “quibble” and moved on: “Our science correspondent had only a couple of quibbles on claims about the melting snows of Kilimanjaro or the increasing power of hurricanes.” Gore quickly shot that down as unworthy. And The Washington Post reviewer (Desson Thomson) raved: “We’re pressure-cooking the planet to death — and Al Gore has the flow charts to prove it. We know what you’re thinking, but as this surprisingly absorbing film shows, Gore’s lectures are anything but dull.”
D’Souza’s movie was comparable to an over-the-top horror movie. Al Gore has proven we’re all about to bake and/or drown, and all that can be said about that spooky spectacle is it is “surprisingly absorbing.” Their arrogance knows no bounds. (Brent Bozell)

That’s very true.

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden

Are You Better off?

All weekend, Democratic party leaders kept fumbling their answer to a simple question: Are we better off than we were four years ago? There’s a good reason for that: We’re not.

It wasn’t until Monday that the campaign was able to figure out how to answer the question, with Obama’s deputy campaign manager, Stephanie Cutter, saying, “Absolutely.”

Obama’s argument is simple: The economy was headed for a second Great Depression when he took office — hemorrhaging GDP and jobs. His stimulus, the auto bailouts and so on, prevented that, and the economy has since been slowly digging out of the massive ditch into which President Bush drove it. Thus, Obama says, he deserves an “incomplete” grade.

It’s quite a stretch that Obama stopped another depression. The recession ended just five months into his first term, before most of his policies had a chance to take effect. It’s an even bigger stretch to say that people’s lives have been improving during the 3-year-old Obama “recovery,” which started in June 2009.

By most measures the country isn’t making slow progress; it’s falling further behind. Some examples:

The number of Americans whom the U.S. Department of Labor counted as “not in the civilian labor force” in August hit a record high of 88,921,000.

The Labor Department counts a person as not in the civilian labor force if they are at least 16 years old, are not in the military or an institution such as a prison, mental hospital or nursing home, and have not actively looked for a job in the last four weeks.

The department counts a person as in “the civilian labor force” if they are at least 16, are not in the military or an institution such as a prison, mental hospital or nursing home, and either do have a job or have actively looked for one in the last four weeks. (KFYI)

The jobless rate fell from 8.3 percent as 368,000 Americans left the labor force. So nearly 4 times as many people gave up as got a job and since main unemployment figure only counts people looking it dropped.

Now that’s perverse. And a Lie I’m sure the Democrats will abuse.

The unemployment rate, derived from a separate Labor Department survey of households, has exceeded 8 percent since February 2009, the longest stretch in monthly records going back to 1948. (bloomberg)

And who had been President just then, FDR. Who is Obama’s new cypher icon- FDR. Coincidence? 🙂

• Median incomes: These have fallen 7.3% since Obama took office, which translates into an average of $4,000. Since the so-called recovery started, median incomes continued to fall, dropping $2,544, or 4.8%.

• Long-term unemployed: More than three years into Obama’s recovery, 811,000 more still fall into this category than when the recession ended.

• Poverty: The poverty rate climbed to 15.1% in 2010, up from 14.3% in 2009, and economists think it may have hit 15.7% last year, highest since the 1960s.

• Food stamps: There are 11.8 million more people on food stamps since Obama’s recovery started. 46.7 million total, a record.

• Disability: More than 1 million workers have been added to Social Security’s disability program in the last three years.

• Gas prices: A gallon of gas cost $1.89 when Obama was sworn in. By June 2009, the price was $2.70. Today, it’s $3.84.

• Misery Index: When Obama took office, the combination of unemployment and inflation stood at 7.83. Today it’s 9.71.

• Union membership: Even unions are worse off under Obama, with membership dropping half a million between 2009 and 2011.

• Debt: Everyone is far worse off if you just look at the national debt. It has climbed more than $5 trillion under Obama, crossing $16 trillion for the first time on Tuesday and driving the U.S. credit rating down. (IBD)

US manufacturing shrank at the fastest clip in more than three years, according a study released on Tuesday.

ZeroThe number of times the president mentioned the Affordable Care Act (“Obamacare”) or the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (“the stimulus”) in his primetime acceptance address on Thursday night.  These are his signature legislative accomplishments, yet he decided they didn’t merit any attention. (Guy Benson)

Ironically, the only people better off under Obama are corporate chieftains, who’ve seen corporate profits climb more than 50% under Obama’s “recovery,” and investors, who’ve benefited from a near-doubling in the Dow industrials from its March 2009 lows. (IBD)

FORWARD! 4 More Years!
Or else you will be going back to the past!
This is a future (just ignore the past, except for the one we say the Republicans are responsible for) worth crowing about? Why??
Also consider this that was going on going outside the Convention Center in Charlotte:

Consider the dozens of pink-shirted Planned Parent representatives. As the crowds stroll by, they yell out “Get your ‘Protect yourself from Romney and Ryan condom,'” as they hand out pink condom packages with a single condom appropriately dyed blue.

Abortion is also a big topic with convention goers, especially those who supported Sandra Fluke, the former college student whose congressional testimony supporting government backing of contraception was hit by conservative talker Rush Limbaugh.

Aspen, Colorado delegate Blanca O’Leary, for example, sported a “Sluts Vote,” button, a reference to the word Limbaugh used to describe Fluke.

“slut” was the evilest word in the English Language when Sandra Fluke was in front of Congress. Now they want to call themselves “sluts”. But I bet if you did, you’d get the same reaction as before. Funny how that works. 🙂
So are you better off?
Only if you’re a delusional Liberal who’s been told (and believes) how evil the past 10 years – excluding Obama completely- was OR a corporate board room type (who are supposed to be evil anyhow).
So the answer is, OF COURSE NOT!
But the Ministry of Truth and The Democrats will run on FEAR and LIES to confuse you.
PT Barnum never had it this slick.
But just know it’s not better.
But while everyone was picking apart these and other flaws in Obama’s speech, they overlooked the most frightening line of all. That was when Obama promised that he’d pursue “the kind of bold, persistent experimentation that Franklin Roosevelt pursued during the only crisis worse than this one.”

That promise might have made liberal hearts swoon. But as Amity Shlaes explained in her outstanding history of the era — “The Forgotten Man” — it was precisely FDR’s “bold, persistent experimentation” that was largely to blame for the length, depth and severity of the Great Depression.

Convinced that the government had to do something, FDR tinkered and experimented, she said, figuring that if he didn’t “get it right the first time … maybe he’d get it right the second time.” But the very arbitrariness of FDR’s actions, she found, made it impossible for businesses to make plans. And so, as FDR’s bold experiments increased, business activity decreased and markets froze.

“From the point of view of a business,” Shlaes said in a 2009 interview, “it is annihilating to hear Washington uncertain, and that itself retards recovery because you really don’t know what to expect.”

If Obama wants to conduct experiments, he should get a job as a high school science teacher, and not use the entire nation as guinea pigs, particularly when we already know how his tests will turn out.(IBD)

4 Years from now Obama will be wanting you to go for his successor who will tell you the road is still “long” and still “hard” and they just need more time.
Time to Destroy you utterly.
Now that’s “fair” 🙂

NOVEMBER IS COMING!

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

Defining a Moment

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Recovery Summer III:

David Axelrod 2010: David Axelrod, a senior adviser to the president, said: “This summer will be the most active Recovery Act season yet, with thousands of highly-visible road, bridge, water and other infrastructure projects breaking ground across the country, giving the American people a first-hand look at the RecoveryAct in their own backyards and making it crystal clear what the cost would have been of doing nothing.”

“In the face of the greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression, Republicans in Congress chose to play politics with economic recovery and declared the Recovery Act a failure before it even began. They made a cynical bet that if the President fails, they win. Democrats chose to act by tackling the crisis head-on. Just over a year later, the Recovery Act is putting millions of Americans to work and helping the economy grow again. But our work is far from over:”

David Axelrod 2012 with Chris Wallace: Wallace: Didn’t this White House badly misjudge this recovery? I remember in 2010, two summers ago, you and Vice President Biden were running around talking about ‘Recovery Summer.’ That was the summer of 2010 and the fact is the White House said if you got the stimulus, the $800 billion that unemployment would stay under 8%. In fact, with the stimulus, unemployment has stayed over 8% for the last 42 months. That’s three and a half years.

Axelrod: Chris, first of all, I wasn’t running around saying anything other than that we were going to have to be persistent. That it took years to get in this mess, it was going to take years to get out —

Wallace: You talking about ‘Recovery Summer’ in 2010, sir.

Axelrod: Well you should show me the tape of me saying that. I’ve been very consistent about the fact that we need to be very persistent in our efforts here.

See Above. 🙂

Now doesn’t that just a lot about Obama and his cronies lies, distortions and need to constant revise history to make it look like they are better and Bush was worse than is actually true?

Tell a Lie often enough and it becomes the Truth.

In other words, let’s talk about what the definition of is, is.(Katie Pavlich)

🙂

After all, Obama has been decrying Super PACs, while using them. Liberals decry the Citizens United decision, then use corporations as people donors for cash.

Want to know if a Liberal is a two-faced bold-face lying hypocrite?

Are they breathing?

Then then they are.

“It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is. If the — if he — if ‘is’ means is and never has been, that is not — that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement. … Now, if someone had asked me on that day, are you having any kind of sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky, that is, asked me a question in the present tense, I would have said no. And it would have been completely true.”–President Clinton 1998.

“If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn’t get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.”–President Obama

If you thought our president was saying that if you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that, then you heard wrong. All he was saying was that somebody else made that happen — that you, Mr. Businessman, or Ms. Businesswoman, owe your success not to your own hard work or talent, or just plain luck and God’s help, but to somebody else — the rest of us, the Great Collective, or just those roads and bridges government built. Which is what the president meant by “that.”

Oh.

But who in real life talks like that, referring to roads and bridges not as those but that? The president of the United States, apparently.

It’s enough to make us miss plain English. And not for the first time. What ever happened to the plain meaning of words, to the way people, not politicians, talk?

Remember the days when you didn’t need an interpreter to understand what a president of the United States was saying? But that was ages ago, that is, before this year’s endless presidential campaign began.

Now the country has a president who has to keep explaining, or rather not explaining, what he said about American businessmen not creating their own businesses. That’s his story and he’s sticking to it, despite the plain meaning of words.

. .

Let’s not even go into this president’s highly debatable version of who created the Internet and why, namely: Government invented it so American companies could make money off it.

Who knew?

Yes, there was a forerunner of the Internet designed largely for military purposes called ARPAnet, and it originated with the government’s Advanced Research Projects Agency, but it was developed by a private company, BBN Technologies, its hardware was designed by Honeywell, and AT&T set up the phone lines. And a number of think tanks and universities played supporting roles in that cast of thousands. If all the credits were rolled, there would be enough of them for a Hollywood blockbuster.

All in all, Mr. President, it wasn’t quite as simple as “Government research created the Internet so that all companies could make money off the Internet.”

Indeed, far from being designed for commercial purposes, ARPAnet was declared off-limits for private use. As late as 1982, a handbook on computing put out by MIT warned students:

“It is considered illegal to use the ARPAnet for anything which is not in direct support of government business. . . . Sending electronic mail over the ARPAnet for commercial profit or political purposes is both anti-social and illegal. By sending such messages, you can offend many people, and it is possible to get MIT in serious trouble with the government agencies which manage the ARPAnet.”

So much for government’s having invented the Internet to help American businesses make money off it.

Not that the private sector couldn’t be just as blind to the Internet’s potential. Xerox was so obsessed with making copiers in the 1970s, it couldn’t be bothered with developing the Internet — or inventing the personal computer, for that matter. All that would be left to Steve Jobs at Apple. Are we supposed to believe he didn’t build that company, that somebody else did? That it was built by all those roads and bridges?

Who knew?

This president needs a fact-checker, or at least a good copyeditor, hard as both are to come by.

. .

A wise president, or just a wise man, having been caught in so gross a misstatement, would simply say he was sorry, or maybe “No excuse,” as we were taught to say in the service after we’d screwed up royally. Then the air would be cleared, and the whole mess put behind us. Confession is good not just for the soul, but for peace of mind. What would it cost, a little false pride? And it would be more than compensated for by a healthy measure of self-respect.

Here’s a tip from an old editor: Run a correction and be done with it!

Instead, by trying to “explain” what he said, or didn’t say, our president has only prolonged this controversy and his own verbal ordeal. And he’s also entrenched the phrase, “You didn’t build that,” in American memories. Much like “It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is.” (Paul Greenberg)

I guess was all THAT. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Political Cartoons by Steve Breen

 Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

 

Money & Politics

Happy Cost of Government Day!

Candidate Obama 2008:

I always believed that welfare had to be changed. I was much more concerned ten years ago when President Clinton initially signed the bill that this could have disastrous results …

It worked better than I think a lot of people anticipated. And one of the things that I am absolutely convinced of is that we have to have work as a centerpiece of any social policy. Not only because, ultimately people who work are going to get more income. But the intrinsic dignity of work, uh, the sense of purpose.

… We were made for work … and the sense that you are part of a community, because you’re making a contribution.

President Obama 2012 pandering for re-election because of his lousy economy: Ah, forget it!

The Department and Health and Human Services announced the agency will issue waivers for the federal work requirement of the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program — considered a central facet of welfare reform in 1996 — Thursday.

The “Information Memorandum” states that the agency will be issuing waivers for TANF’s work participation requirements for parents and caretakers as a way to find new approaches to better employment outcomes.

Just sit on your ass. Collect your check and watch The View.
Oh, and VOTE FOR ME! because the other guy won’t be as nice. He’s the Devil incarnate , you know (a rich white guy!). 🙂
And also, F*ck you Bill! (Clinton who passed the Welfare form with Democrat support in 1996).

According to Republican Study Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, the memorandum is proof of the Obama administration’s continued disrespect for the rule of law.

“President Obama just tore up a basic foundation of the welfare contract,” Jordan said in a statement. “In exchange for taxpayer-funded TANF payments, the law calls on able-bodied adults to work, look for work, take classes, or undergo drug and alcohol counseling. It’s the tough love that gives people motivation to help themselves…Today’s action is also a blatant violation of the law. After immigration, education, marriage, and religious conscience protections, we can now add welfare reform to the list of laws President Obama refuses to follow.” (DC)

He just don’t feel like it, right now. He has only 1 priority in his life right now and this is getting in the way.
It’s good to be The King.
Speaking of Money:
The Internal Revenue Service’s total revenue went down from 2007 to 2009, while the tax rate for the top earners went up, increasing from 19.4 percent to 21 percent. Meanwhile, McBride said, the tax rates for the bottom two quintiles’ — -5.8 percent of income in 2007 and -9.3 percent in 2009 — means the  IRS actually paid them.

The top 20 percent of earners — the top quintile — bore 67.9 percent of the federal tax burden in 2009. The middle quintile paid 9.4 percent, while the lowest paid .03 percent of the federal tax burden.

So the Rich got poorer and the poor got refunds. The rich paid more taxes and the poor paid less (50% pay no income taxes at all!)
Now that’s “fair”!! 🙂

In the chart <below>, we’re measuring the strength of all the post World War II recession recoveries as measured from the very bottom of payroll jobs lost. The last time we featured it, the recovery from the 2007 recession was just barely the worst ever.

And today, it is definitively the worst recession jobs recovery ever.

Worst. Recession. Jobs. Recovery. Ever.

But that’s Bush’s Fault!  🙂

Nothing produces a greater sense of the futility of facts than seeing someone in the mass media repeating some notion that has been refuted innumerable times over the years.

On July 9, on CNN’s program The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer, commentator Gloria Borger discussed President Obama’s plan to continue the temporary extension of the tax rates established under the Bush administration — except for the top brackets, where Obama wanted the tax rates raised.

Ms. Borger said, “If you’re going to lower the tax rates, where are you going to get the money from?”

First of all, nobody is talking about lowering the tax rates. They are talking about whether or not to continue the existing tax rates, which are set to expire after a temporary extension. And Obama is talking about raising the tax rate on higher-income earners.

But when Ms. Borger asked “where are you going to get the money from” if you don’t raise tax rates, she was assuming an automatic correlation between tax rates and tax revenues, which is demonstrably false.

As far back as the 1920s, a huge cut in the highest income-tax rate — from 73 percent to 24 percent — led to a huge increase in the amount of tax revenue collected by the federal government. Why? Because investors took their money out of tax shelters, where they were earning very modest rates of return, and put it into the productive economy, where they could earn higher rates of return, now that those returns were not so heavily taxed.

This was the very reason why tax rates were cut in the first place — to get more revenue for the federal government. The same was true, decades later, during the John F. Kennedy administration. Similar reasons led to tax-rate cuts during the Ronald Reagan administration and the George W. Bush administration.

All of these presidents — Democrat and Republican alike — made the same argument for tax-rate reductions that had been made in the 1920s, and the results were similar as well. Yet the invincible lie continues to this day that those who oppose high tax rates on high incomes are doing so because they want to reduce the taxes paid by high-income earners, in hopes that their increased prosperity will “trickle down” to others.

In reality, high-income earners paid not only a larger total amount of taxes after the tax-rate cuts of the 1920s, but also a higher share of all the income taxes collected. It is a matter of record that anyone can verify by looking at with official government statistics.

This result was not peculiar to the 1920s. In 2006, the New York Times reported: “An unexpectedly steep rise in tax revenues from corporations and the wealthy is driving down the projected budget deficit this year.”

Expectations are in the eye of the beholder. Tax-cut proponents expected precisely the result from the Bush tax cuts that so surprised the New York Times. So did tax-cut proponents in the John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan administrations.

If this concept has not yet trickled down to the New York Times or CNN’s Gloria Borger, that is a commentary on the media commentators.

Ms. Borger may simply not know any better, but Barack Obama cannot use that excuse. When he was a candidate for president back in 2008, Charles Gibson of ABC News confronted him with the fact that there was no automatic correlation between the raising and lowering of tax rates and whether tax revenues moved up or down.

Obama admitted that. But he said that he was for raising tax rates on higher-income earners anyway, in the name of “fairness.” How higher tax rates that the government does not actually collect make any sense, whether from a fairness perspective or as a way of paying the government’s bills, is another question. The point here is that Obama knew then that tax rates and tax revenues do not automatically move in the same direction.

In other words, he is lying when he talks as if tax rates and tax revenues move together. Ms. Borger and others in the media may or may not know that. So they are not necessarily lying. But they are failing to inform their audiences about the facts — and that allows Obama’s lies to stand.

NOVEMBER IS COMING

The Message Rule

“There are others who are saying: ‘Well, this is just a gimmick. Just taxing millionaires and billionaires, just imposing the Buffett Rule, won’t do enough to close the deficit,’ ” Obama declared Wednesday. “Well, I agree.”

But it works for ME, what the hell, might as well…I will say anything to get re-elected so I can be “flexible”.

“The notion that it doesn’t solve the entire problem doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t do it at all,” he explained.

Who cares about the economics. It’s good politics.

So let’s cut spending, it won’t solve the whole problem but it doesn’t mean we shouldn’t do it right? 🙂

Appointing the Simpson-Bowles commission and then disregarding its findings, offering a plan for business tax reform only, and issuing a series of platitudes. The Buffett Rule, rather than overhauling the tax code, would simply add another layer.

And another layer of bureaucratic morass can’t be bad and beside it’s more “fair” and that’s much more important. 🙂

A search of the White House Web site yields 17,400 mentions of the Buffett Rule — a proposal that would bring in $47 billion over 10 years  (That’s 4.7 billion a year– The government current has a debt of over 3 billion a day!- Wow! That’s a great plan!), much of that from 22,000 wealthy households. By contrast, the alternative minimum tax gets fewer than 600 mentions on the site. The AMT, if not changed, will take about $1 trillion over a decade from millions of taxpayers, many of whom earn less than $200,000 a year.

And the DEMOCRATS passed the AMT back in 1968 as a way to stick it to 155 millionaires!

YES, I SAID 155 Millionaires!

In August 1969 as he was preparing the next year’s budget <Treasury Secretary> Barr warned that the country faced a taxpayers’ revolt. He explained, according to the Washington Post, that in 1967 there were a total of 155 individuals with incomes over $200,000 who did not pay any federal income taxes; twenty of them were millionaires. These individuals successfully used all tax loopholes available to legally evade paying taxes. The revelation attracted wide media attention and led to public shock.

Sound familiar? Gee, Liberals don’t stray very far from their “fair” tree do they. 🙂

And funny how that all worked out. You don’t think it could happen again do you? 🙂

The politics of the Buffett Rule — it has no chance of passing when the Senate takes it up next week — are so overt that Obama’s remarks Wednesday were virtually indistinguishable from a section of his campaign speech in Florida on Tuesday.

Wednesday: “If we’re going to keep giving somebody like me or some of the people in this room tax breaks that we don’t need and we can’t afford, then one of two things happens: Either you’ve got to borrow more money to pay down a deeper deficit, or . . . you’ve got to tell seniors to pay a little bit more for their Medicare. You’ve got to tell the college student, ‘We’re going to have to charge you higher interest rates on your student loan.’ . . . That’s not right.”

So does this mean he admits to being an evil “rich” Millionaire. Aren’t they untrustworthy, selfish, self-centered, egotists only looking out for #1?-themselves 🙂

Tuesday: “If somebody like me, who is doing just fine, gets tax breaks I don’t need and that the country can’t afford, then one of two things is going to happen: Either it gets added to our deficit . . . or, alternatively, you’ve got to take it away from somebody else — a student who’s trying to pay for their college, or a senior trying to get by with Social Security and Medicare. . . . That’s not right.”

Parts of Obama’s “official” speech will no doubt be repeated on the stump, including the points that “we just need some of the Republican politicians here in Washington to get on board with where the country is,” that Obama cut taxes 17 times (the bobbleheads nodded in agreement), and the contention that Republicans today would view Ronald Reagan as a “wild-eyed, socialist, tax-hiking class warrior.”

Nothing is inherently wrong with campaign-style rhetoric from the White House; George W. Bush used it repeatedly to pass his tax cuts and in his attempt at a Social Security overhaul. The pity is that Obama doesn’t use his unrivaled political skill to sell a tax plan of more consequence — and less gimmickry. (Dana Millbank)

The federal tax code with its 44000 pages, 5.5 million words, and 721 different forms so whose going to notice one more gimmick?

According to the National Taxpayers Union, we each waste about 12 hours a year, every year, filling out this crazy stuff. Schedule B. Schedule C. Above the line. Below the line. Deductions, exemptions, non-refundable credits. Medical bills over 7.5% of adjusted gross income. The instruction booklet for the 1040 now runs to 189 pages. No kidding. Seventy-five years ago, says the NTU, it was two pages.

The U.S. tax code is insane and out of control. It’s tripled in a decade. It now runs to 3.8 million words. To put that in context, William Shakespeare only needed 900,000 words to say everything he had to say. Hamlet. Othello. The history plays. The sonnets. The whole shebang.

Your tax bill this year is a lie. You’re only seeing about two-thirds of the full cost of government services. Really. Taxes are $2.3 trillion. Government spending is $3.6 trillion. The rest is being put on the national credit card.

The tax bill is a lie every year. We’ve only paid our bills in full on April 15 five times in the last fifty years. The last president to balance the books every year he was in office? Calvin Coolidge — back in the 1920s.

But ultimately he’s not selling anything but himself. It’s all about HIM. The universe does revolve around him and he just has to get you to see it too.

So it begins…

In 2008, a mostly unknown Barack Obama ran for president on an inclusive agenda of “hope and change.” That upbeat message was supposed to translate into millions of green jobs, fiscal sobriety, universal health care, a resetting of Bush foreign policy, and racial unity.

Four years later, none of those promises will be themes of his 2012 re-election campaign. Gas has more than doubled in price. Billions of dollars have been wasted in insider and subsidized wind and solar projects that have produced little green energy.

Unemployment rates above 8 percent appear the new norm, when 5 percent in the past was dubbed a “jobless recovery.”

From the Middle East to the Korean peninsula, the world seems on the brink. Modern racial relations are at a new low.

If borrowing $4 trillion in eight years was “unpatriotic,” as Obama once labeled George W. Bush, no one quite knows how to term the addition of $5 trillion in new debt in less than four years. ObamaCare is unpopular with the public. Its constitutionality now rests with the Supreme Court.

After four years, the claims of “Bush did it” and “It might have been worse” grow stale. So re-election will rest not on a new agenda, or an explanation of what happened, but on a divide-and-conquer strategy. Translated, that means Obama will find fissures in the voting public over fairness, expand them, and then cobble together various angry partisans in hopes of achieving a bare majority. Such an us/them strategy is not new in American history.

There are suddenly new enemies called the “one percent” — those who make more than $200,000 per year and who “do not pay their fair share.” Apparently in a zero-sum economy, this tiny minority has taken too much from the majority and thereby caused the four-year lethargy that followed the 2008 meltdown. Andrew Jackson, William Jennings Bryan and Franklin D. Roosevelt all ran, with varying success, against the selfish “rich.”

Congress is also now a convenient enemy of the people. Although it was Democratically controlled in Obama’s first two years, and the Senate remains so, the new theme insists that a Republican House stops the Democrats from finishing all the good things they started. When support for 16 years of the New Deal had evaporated by 1948, Harry Truman ran successfully against a “do-nothing” Republican Congress that had blocked his own big-government “Fair Deal” follow-up and thus supposedly stalled the economy.

In 2009, Obama pushed through his health care plan by a narrow partisan margin in the House, despite constitutional questions about the individual mandate. Now, as the Supreme Court seems skeptical of the legality of ObamaCare, the president seems to be running against “unelected” justices. That could work too. In 1968, Richard Nixon squeaked by Hubert Humphrey in a divisive campaign, in part by lambasting the activist Warren Court that had done everything from outlawing school prayer to supporting school busing.

Team Obama has seized on the Democrats’ allegations of a “war on women,” waged by both Republican and Catholic grandees against federal subsidies of birth control. For the first time since the campaign of John F. Kennedy a half-century ago, the role of the Catholic Church in politics is suddenly a landmark issue.

The president faults “Big Oil” and tension in the Middle East — not his own failure to develop vast new gas and oil reserves on public lands — for high gas prices. Jimmy Carter likewise blamed greedy oil companies and the Middle East in 1980, after gasoline prices spiked and lines formed at filling stations.

Suddenly, after the Trayvon Martin tragedy and what may prove to be murderous white vigilantism in Oklahoma, race again looms large. President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder have weighed in often on that issue. The former castigated police for acting “stupidly” in one incident, and more recently reminded the nation of the racial affinities between himself and Trayvon Martin. The latter blasted the nation’s reluctance to discuss race as cowardly, and alleged racial bias among his own congressional overseers. Race is always an explosive wedge issue. In 1964, Lyndon Johnson ran successfully in part on the need to expand civil rights, while in 1968 Richard Nixon found traction in the backlash against racial violence.

If Obama can cobble together disaffected young people, greens, women, minorities and the poor — who all believe a nefarious “they” have crushed their dreams — then massive debt and deficits, high unemployment, sluggish growth and spiraling gas prices won’t decide the election.

Lots of presidential candidates have run by identifying such enemies of the people, rather than debating the general state of the nation — sometimes successfully, sometimes not.

But the problem with an us/them strategy is not just winning an election, but trying to put back together what was torn asunder. (Victor David Hanson)

Assuming a Democrat would want to do that to begin with. Divide and Conquer is more satisfying when you get to the Conquer bit.

Conquering is good.

Conquering is “fair”

Conquering gives you the power to do what you want when you want because you want to. And doesn’t every “selfless” and “fair” liberal just want “fairness” and “justice” for all. :0

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

 Political Cartoons by Eric Allie
Political Cartoons by Gary McCoy

Political Cartoons by Ken Catalino

The Coming of ObamaCare Ethics

Just when you thought Obamacare and  Contraceptives were fun…

All student health care plans covering female college students in the United States must include coverage for free voluntary sterilization surgery, the Department of Health and Human Services announced late Friday afternoon.

Women of college age who do not attend school will also get free sterilization coverage whether they are insured through an employer, their parents, or some form of government-subsidized plan.

“In a study of the cost-effectiveness of specific contraceptive methods, all contraceptive methods were found to be more cost-effective than no method, and the most cost-effective methods were long-acting contraceptives that do not rely on user compliance,” said the Institute of Medicine report on its mandate recommendations.(CNS)

Say Just say “yes” to Sterilization, and No to “Just say no” abstinence!

“The reduction in the number of pregnancies compensates for the cost of contraception,” HHS Secretary Sebelius has said in the past.

The prestigious Journal of Medical Ethics has just given us a sneak-peek into what ObamaCare will surely be mandating in the not-too-distant future.

The Journal published an article this month seeking to mainstream the view that infanticide is a health-improving measure.  Calling it “after-birth abortion,” two philosophers argue that killing a newborn should be a purely elective decision of parents who believe the baby would be a burden or would negatively impact their family’s well being. (life News)

So, they way to cover cost of Obamacare is to have less people in the system!!

For the past several years, the medical profession has been undergoing a disturbing transformation. The process was begun by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) in an effort to control exploding Medicare costs, and was accelerated by the passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010. As a surgeon in practice for over 30 years, I have witnessed this transformation firsthand. I fear that my profession will soon abandon its traditional code of ethics and adopt one more suited to veterinarians.

For centuries, my predecessors and I have been inculcated with what has come to be called the “Hippocratic Ethic.” This tradition holds that I am ethically required to use the best of my knowledge to recommend to my patient what I consider to be in my patient’s best interests—without regard to the interests of the third-party payer, or the government, or anyone else.

But gradually the medical profession has been forced to give up this approach for what I like to call a “veterinary ethic,” one that places the interests of the payer (or owner) ahead of the patient. For example, when a pet owner is told by a veterinarian that the pet has a very serious medical condition requiring extremely costly surgery or other therapy, the veterinarian presents the pet’s owner with one or more options—from attempt at cure, to palliation, to euthanasia—with the associated costs, and then follows the wishes of the owner.

In a few years, almost all doctors will be employees of hospitals and will be ordered to practice medicine according to federally prescribed guidelines—guidelines that put the best interests of the state ahead of the interests of individual patients.

Several factors in combination are bringing this ethical approach to my profession.

Since the mid-1980s, Medicare has imposed price controls on health care providers. Over the years, in order to accommodate increasing Medicare utilization, physician payments have steadily dropped.

Meanwhile, the regulatory burden on physicians has increased. In the last few years, CMS required all providers to adopt electronic health records or face economic sanctions from Medicare. It is the ultimate goal that every health care provider, including pharmacies, will have electronic databases that will be accessible to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

In 2009, as part of the so-called stimulus bill, the Federal Commission for the Coordination of Comparative Effectiveness Research (FCCCER) was created. Its mission is to collect the data culled from all electronic health records and make recommendations regarding the comparative effectiveness of drugs, procedures, and therapies. In rendering advice, the FCCCER will essentially answer the following question: What is the most cost-effective way of allocating a fixed amount of resources among a population of roughly 310 million people?

With this same question in mind, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, a committee that reports to HHS, concluded in 2009 that mammogram screenings should not be recommended to women under age 50. This caused an uproar among both private health care providers and breast cancer advocacy groups, and the task force soon backed down. Similarly, in the fall of 2011, the task force recommended the abandonment of certain routine prostate cancer screenings. Once again, health care providers and cancer advocacy groups protested, and the task force rescinded its recommendation.

In 2010 the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act established an Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB). Beginning in 2014, the 15 presidential appointees on this board will determine what therapies, procedures, tests, and medications will be covered by Medicare, using advice provided by the FCCCER. Such determinations will then be used to design the coverage packages for the non-Medicare insurance offered through the government–run exchanges. The decisions of the IPAB are not subject to Congressional oversight or judicial review.

Meanwhile, in an effort to control costs now, CMS has developed practice guidelines and protocols for physicians to follow. Committees of health care academics and statisticians developed these guidelines, using data from large population samples.

These protocols govern the therapeutic decisions made by the health care practitioner—right down to the pre-operative antibiotics a surgeon may order. Despite the fact that several recent peer-reviewed studies concluded that the protocols have had no positive effect—in fact, one study showed post-op skin infections increased since the protocols were instituted—CMS imposes financial penalties on hospitals that fail to get protocol compliance from their medical staff.

Medical students and residents are now being trained to follow federally-derived protocols and guidelines as a normal part of medical practice. As a result, this new generation of doctors will be less inclined to challenge the recommendations of federal task forces and agencies. Some academics also worry that “teaching to the protocol” might discourage independent thinking and the use of intuitive knowledge, two traits essential to the practice of good medicine.

In addition, decreased reimbursements and increased regulatory demands on physicians have led many to sell their practices to hospitals. The New England Journal of Medicine* estimates that 50 percent of the nation’s doctors are now hospital employees. As private medical practice becomes more economically untenable, look for the overwhelming majority of doctors to become salaried hospital employees—many working in shifts—in the next few years. Virtually every doctor now graduating a residency program is taking a position as a salaried hospital employee.

Ten thousand people will turn 65 every day for the next 19 years, placing an even greater fiscal burden on the Medicare program.

One way CMS is trying to deal with this is by penalizing hospitals and doctors who treat patients with resistant problems. Effective this year, any patient readmitted to a hospital within 30 days of discharge for the same or a related problem will be treated by the hospital without compensation. The plan is to implement the same policy with respect to the original treating physician in the near future.

To help deal with this more definitively, an old concept with a new name is being promoted and encouraged by the Affordable Care Act: the Accountable Care Organization (ACO). The ACO harkens back to the infamous HMO capitation system of the early 1990s over which the population rebelled.

In a nutshell, hospitals, clinics, and health care providers have been given incentives to organize into teams that will get assigned groups of 5,000 or more Medicare patients. They will be expected to follow practice guidelines and protocols approved by Medicare. If they achieve certain goals established by Medicare with respect to cost, length of hospital stay, re-admissions, or other “core measures,” they will get to share a portion of Medicare’s savings. If the reverse happens, they will face economic penalties.

Private insurance companies are currently setting up the non-Medicare version of the ACO. These will be sold in the federally subsidized exchanges mandated by the Affordable Care Act. In this model, there are no fee-for-service payments to providers. Instead, an ACO is given a lump sum, or “bundled” payment for the entire care for a large group of insurance beneficiaries. The ACOs are expected to follow the same Medicare-approved practice protocols, but all of the financial risks are assumed by the ACOs. If the ACOs keep costs down, the team of providers and hospitals reap the financial reward: a surplus from the lump sum payment. If they lose money, the providers and hospitals eat the loss.

In both the Medicare and non-Medicare varieties of the ACO, cost control and compliance with centrally-planned practice guidelines are the primary goal. The hospital and provider networks will live or die by these objectives.

When almost all health care providers are salaried employees of hospitals, hospitals might then be able to get ACOs to work better than their ancestor HMOs. The hospital administrators will have more control over their medical staff. If doctors don’t follow the protocols and guidelines, and desired outcomes are not reached, hospitals can replace the “problem” doctors.

So where does all this place the medical profession with respect to its ethical credo? In a few years, almost all doctors will be employees of hospitals and will be ordered to practice medicine according to federally prescribed guidelines—guidelines that put the best interests of the state ahead of the interests of individual patients.

When the physician’s primary obligation is to satisfy the wishes of the payer—ultimately the wishes of the state—how can patients be truly confident in their doctors’ decisions?

I submit that it all boils down to a question of professional ethics.

The medical profession must decide—and soon—which ethical doctrine to follow: Are doctors to be agents of their patients or agents of the state? All of us should dread the latter choice—because we will all be patients some day.

Jeffrey Singer practices general surgery in Phoenix, Arizona, writes for Arizona Medicine, the journal of the Arizona Medical Association (Goldwater Institute)

Obama Memo on the Obamacare Case at the Supreme Court:

WHERE’S MY RECOVERY?

Today, over 4 years since the recession started, there are still almost 24 million Americans unemployed or underemployed. That includes 5.6 million who are long-term unemployed for 27 weeks, or more than 6 months, the highest since the Great Depression. The number of Americans employed part-time for economic reasons was still 8.1 million. The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) says, “These individuals were working part time because their hours had been cut back or because they were unable to find a full-time job.”

Another 2.6 million persons were marginally attached to the labor force, essentially unchanged from a year earlier. The BLS says, “These individuals were not in the labor force, wanted and were available for work, and had looked for a job sometime in the prior 12 months. They were not counted as unemployed because they had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey.”

African Americans have been suffering an outright depression under Obama, with unemployment today, 51 months after the recession started, still over 14%. Black unemployment has been over 14% for Obama’s entire term in office. Black teenage unemployment today is still nearly 35%, where it has persisted for Obama’s entire term as well.

Hispanics have also been suffering a depression under Obama, with unemployment today still in double digits at nearly 11%, where it has also persisted for Obama’s entire term. Over one fourth of Hispanic youths remain unemployed today, which also has persisted for years.

The Census Bureau reported last September that more Americans are in poverty today than at any time in the entire 51 year history of Census tracking poverty. Americans dependent on food stamps are at an all time high as well. White House spokesman Jay Carney recently tried to blame the Republicans for that, saying that it was their policies of deregulation that caused the recession. But actually it was liberal policies of overregulation forcing the looting of the banks for subprime loans under threat of discrimination suits that caused the recession. See, e.g. Paul Sperry, The Great American Bank Robbery.

Moreover, it was Obama’s responsibility to foster a timely, robust recovery restoring traditional American prosperity. Where is that? The absence of that is because Obama doesn’t believe in traditional American anything. (American Spectator)

The New Jersey Office of Homeland Security and Preparedness has released a new document entitled “Terrorism Awareness and Prevention”. The paper is aimed at raising awareness on how New Jersey residents can help combat terrorism, including tips on how to spot signs of suspicious activities and behaviors.

So what are these suspicious behaviors? “Look for signs of nervousness in the people you come in contact with.” This includes “exaggerated yawning when in a conversation,” “repetitive touching of face,” “increased breathing rate,””unusual perspiration,” “excessive fidgeting,””trembling” and “goose bumps.” Though some might say these are all completely natural body reactions, the document says otherwise.

While pacing around and being jumpy is also listed as a potential indicator of malicious intent, standing still in a rigid posture also fits the bill of terrorist intent. So what should you do to avoid getting flagged as a potential enemy of the state? Stand still, or gesture profusely? In reality, there’s probably not much you can do.

You’re just toast.

Hot dogs. Bison Wellington. Baby back ribs.

President Barack Obama is roaming all over the culinary map this week.

The president made a lunchtime detour to a barbeque and ribs joint Thursday on his way back to the White House after a speech about energy policy.

The president came away from Texas Ribs & BBQ with a takeout bag containing 2 slabs of baby back ribs and a brisket sandwich with fries.

Earlier in the week, Obama downed a hotdog at an NCAA basketball game in Ohio. And on Wednesday, he dined on bison at a fancy state dinner.

So “Let’s Move”!! 🙂

ANOTHER TSA UPDATE

Passengers at airports can now avoid TSA pat downs, long lines and can carry liquids on board by paying $100.

However, the TSA’s new fast track ‘Precheck’ screening is likely to rile the family of a wheel-chair bound toddler who was recently subjected to invasive security checks.

Unlike the background check passengers in the scheme, who will be able to skip screening, the three-year-old was stopped at O’Hare Airport in Chicago.

‘We can reduce the size of the haystack when we are looking for that one-in-a-billion terrorist,’ TSA Administrator John Pistole told the Journal.

And a Three year old in a wheelchair is definitely a candidate for that 1 in a Billion!
So you just have to bribe them a $100 bucks! Gee…
FAST & FURIOUS

Breitbart.com has uncovered video from 1995 of then-U.S. Attorney Eric Holder announcing a public campaign to “really brainwash people into thinking about guns in a vastly different way.”

Holder was addressing the Woman’s National Democratic Club. In his remarks, broadcast by CSPAN 2, he explained that he intended to use anti-smoking campaigns as his model to “change the hearts and minds of people in Washington, DC” about guns.

“What we need to do is change the way in which people think about guns, especially young people, and make it something that’s not cool, that it’s not acceptable, it’s not hip to carry a gun anymore, in the way in which we changed our attitudes about cigarettes.”

Liberal leopards don’t change their spots.
Now don’t you feel better about Obamacare, The TSA, Security and The Economy! 🙂
Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

 Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden

Moving Forwards Backwards

Meet the Roberts electric car. Built in 1896, it gets a solid 40 miles to the charge — exactly the mileage Chevrolet advertises for the Volt, the highly touted $31,645 electric car General Motors CEO Dan Akerson called “not a step forward, but a leap forward.”

As the New York Times reported September 5, “For General Motors and the Obama administration, the new Chevrolet Volt plug-in hybrid represents the automotive future, the culmination of decades of high-tech research financed partly with federal dollars.”

Way to Go Greenies. Next thing you know, we’ll get a Steam Powered Car!!

*********************

According to the British Sunday Times, sources have said President Obama asked Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to hold off on bombing Iran’s nuclear facilities until after the November 2012 election.According to the British Sunday Times, sources have said President Obama asked Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to hold off on bombing Iran’s nuclear facilities until after the November 2012 election.

Well, at least he knows what’s really important… HIM! 🙂

**************************

“You’ve got to hand it to Democratic strategists. Who would have thought six months ago that in the lead up to perhaps the most important presidential election of our time, the hottest political topic in the country would not be the weak economy, high unemployment, the huge national debt, record gas prices, or turmoil in the Middle East. Instead it’s Women’s Rights, or at least that’s what the Democratic party is calling it while miraculously managing to keep a straight face.

“A term that was once used in conjunction with women’s suffrage and the right to vote is suddenly synonymous in the modern day with free contraceptives at the expense of others. Gone are the likes of true icons like Susan B. Anthony. Now we have Sandra Fluke and her heroic crusade to mandate that her sexual lifestyle choices be subsidized. How proud the Democratic party must feel right now to have successfully revitalized the civil rights movement in the 21st century by equating it with luxury entitlement. The media must feel pretty good too. They’ve actually been able to substantiate this ridiculous narrative to the American public… or at least a targeted voting block within the American public.

“The Republicans’ War on Women – that’s the poll-tested talking point coming out of Debbie Wasserman Schultz and the DNC these days. Despite the absurdity and insulting nature of the claim, the mantra sure is getting a lot of attention. It’s also proving to be an effective weapon – one of several weapons from a year-long arsenal of distractions designed to keep the Republican party off step, off topic, and constantly on the defensive at a time when President Obama is wrapping up what is surely the most dismal presidential term of my lifetime.” (allapundit)

Mark Steyn: All of us are born with the unalienable right to life, liberty, and a lifetime supply of premium ribbed silky-smooth ultrasensitive spermicidal lubricant condoms. No taxation without rubberization, as the Minutemen said. The shot heard round the world, and all that. 🙂

******************

The U.S. economy added 227,000 jobs in February vs. expectations for 206,000, continuing a recent trend of decent hiring activity. The unemployment rate held at 8.3%.

And it has been OVER 8% since February 2009!

But America remains mired in the longest jobs recession since the Great Depression. It’s been 49 months since the U.S. hit peak employment in January 2008. And with nonfarm payrolls still 5.33 million below their old high, the jobs slump will continue for several more years.

The previous jobs recession record — 47 months — came during and after the comparatively mild 2001 recession, which saw unemployment climb to only 6.3%. The average job recovery time since 1980 is 29 months, not including the current slump.

The labor market won’t truly return to health until some 10 million positions are created to rehire all those who lost their jobs and to absorb new workers.

The longest jobs recession in decades coincides, not coincidentally, with the longest stretch of anemic economic performance on record.

U.S. gross domestic profit hasn’t risen 4% or more in any quarter since the first quarter of 2006. That’s by far the longest such stretch on record going back to 1950. The only other sizable sub-par stretch was a three-year span from late 2000 to mid-2003 during the prior recession and sluggish recovery.

The current expansion, which began in mid-2009, is particularly disappointing, given the deep recession that preceded it. The best growth was a three-quarter run of 3.8%-3.9% gains.

After the severe 1981-82 recession, the U.S. economy enjoyed a five-quarter stretch of 7% or more — following a 5.1% annualized gain.

The U.S. economy is up just 6.2% above the level at the end of the recession vs. 14.9% in the 10 quarters after the 1981-82 slump.

President Obama may take hope that the U.S. economy has picked up from near-stall speed to a modest pace in recent months. But after the mild 1990-1991 downturn, the U.S. economy rose tepidly for a few quarters before growing more than 4% in every quarter of 1992. That still wasn’t enough to keep the first President Bush from losing to Bill Clinton.

And nobody is predicting 4% growth in 2012. (IBD)

Bernard Goldberg: For years, journalists have bristled at allegations of liberal bias in the news. “If you think we have a bias,” some of them would say, “that only proves one thing: that you’re the one with the bias.”

When my book “Bias” came out at the end of 2001 — despite a surprisingly good review in the New York Times — so-called mainstream reporters generally denounced it. “Liberal bias?” they asked incredulously. “What liberal bias?”

A few even called me a “traitor” for supposedly turning on my colleagues, which is kind of funny since these are people who won’t call a real traitor … a traitor.

Well, now we have Chuck Todd, political director and chief White House correspondent at NBC News, breaking ranks (sort of) with his fellow journalists.

In an interview with Politico, Todd says, “To me, the ideological bias in the media really hasn’t been there in a long time. But what is there that people mistake for ideological bias is geographic bias. It’s seeing everything through the lens of New York and Washington.”

Not really, but it’s good that Chuck Todd at least seems to be acknowledging that there was, once upon a time, an ideological bias in the mainstream media. To say it “hasn’t been there in a long time,” acknowledges that it was there, once. This is something a lot of journalists would never admit.

To Todd, bias in the news simply stems from too many elite journalists living in too few places — Manhattan and D.C. But what he doesn’t quite seem to understand is that geography influences culture and culture influences ideology.

Inside The Bubble

People on the Upper West Side of Manhattan don’t see ObamaCare, for example, the same way people in Alabama see it. That’s not because of geography. It’s because of ideology. Or to put it another way, there are a lot more liberals on the Upper West Side than there are in Montgomery.

Todd is hard on political journalists, but only up to a point, and makes sure we understand that they’re not slanting the news in favor of liberals because they themselves are liberals. The reason, he says, has a lot more to do with zip codes than party affiliations.

“I think sometimes there are too many people who cover politics that don’t understand the grass roots of the Republican Party,” he correctly tells Politico.

And why don’t they understand? Because they cover America from a safe distance, embedded in the nation’s media capitals — Washington and New York.

“Part of what animates them (political journalists) is if (Middle Americans are) pushing it, I’m against it. But also that we don’t understand their day-to-day lives. That we don’t respect the fact that they go to church twice a week. That when we look down our noses upon Wal-Mart, they see it as the only place to shop.”

Let’s see if I have this right: The sophisticates in Manhattan and Georgetown don’t like anything that the hayseeds who live in Middle America like. If the unwashed in Flyover Country are for it, the elites in New York and D.C. are against it.

That, Chuck, is not geographical bias. It’s the same old bias conservatives have complained about for years. It’s a bias based on the reporter’s ideology, the journalist’s liberal ideology.

By blaming it all on geography, Chuck Todd, intentionally or not, tries to take the edge off the problem. If it’s only geographical, it speaks only to a blind spot. It says, “Hey, we live in a bubble, that’s why we’re biased. And it has nothing to do with our politics.”

Yes, they do live in a bubble, but make no mistake: Inside that bubble, journalists don’t simply share the same geography — they share the same ideology. They’re almost all liberals inside the bubble who share the same values and believe those values are moderate, mainstream and reasonable while conservative values are extreme and dangerous.

In Love With Obama

“Too many people mistake ideological bias for what really is a matter of geography,” is how he ends his interview with Politico.

Sorry, Chuck, but you’re the one who is making a mistake. If almost all the media elites live in Washington and New York and are liberal, is the problem that they live in Washington and New York or that they’re liberal? If there were more conservatives in the ranks of elite journalists — editors, producers, anchors — it wouldn’t matter if they all lived on the same block.

But let’s give Chuck Todd some credit for even bringing up the subject of bias in the news. Halley’s comet flashing across the sky over the USA is a more commonplace event than a mainstream reporter admitting any kind of bias.

Still, it’s too bad, since he’s in charge of political coverage at NBC News, that Todd forgot to tell Politico about how supposedly objective journalists fell madly in love with Barack Obama four years ago and decided they would not settle for being eyewitnesses to history. The election was too important.

This time, they felt, they had to they help shape history. So they put on their short skirts to go along with their pompoms and shamelessly became cheerleaders for Mr. Obama — and will probably do it again once the Republicans pick their nominee. That kind of journalistic bias has very little to do with geography and whole bunch to do with ideology.

So, one cheer for Chuck.

A Bronx one, if you please 🙂

Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden
Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Political Cartoons by Ken Catalino

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

The Ministry Has Work to Do

The Ministry Of Truth (which the Daily Kos having a website with that name by the way is amusing)

The Ministry of Truth concerned itself with Lies. Party ownership of the print media made it easy to manipulate public opinion, and the film and radio carried the process further.

The primary job of the Ministry of Truth was to supply the citizens of Oceania (read: America now) with newspapers, films, textbooks, telescreen programmes, plays, novels – with every conceivable kind of information, instruction, or entertainment, from a statue to a slogan, from a lyric poem to a biological treatise, and from a child’s spelling-book to a Newspeak dictionary.

The Ministry of Truth is involved with news media, entertainment, the fine arts and educational books. Its purpose is to rewrite history and change the facts to fit Party doctrine for propaganda effect. For example, if Big Brother (Obama) makes a prediction that turns out to be wrong, the employees of the Ministry of Truth go back and rewrite the prediction so that any prediction Big Brother previously made is accurate (or these days cover it up, modify the conditions or invent a new term for it and just continue on- i.e. “Tax Reform” now means Tax Increases on “the Rich” on the Left). This is the “how” of the Ministry of Truth’s existence. Within the novel Orwell elaborates that the deeper reason for its existence is to maintain the illusion that the Party is absolute. It cannot ever seem to change its mind  (or be wrong)(if, for instance, they perform one of their constant changes regarding enemies during war) or make a mistake (firing an official or making a grossly misjudged supply prediction)(Fast & Furious), for that would imply weakness and to maintain power the Party must seem eternally right and strong.

Example: “short-term measures for jobs growth.” — Read Stimulus spending. 😦

Has the economy improved since Barack Obama became the president of the United States? Of course not. Despite what you may be hearing in the mainstream media (The Ministry of Truth), the truth is that when you compare the U.S. economy on the day that Barack Obama was inaugurated to the U.S. economy today, there is really no comparison. The unemployment crisis is worse than it was then, home values have fallen, the cost of health insurance is up, the cost of gas is way up, the number of Americans living in poverty has soared and the size of our national debt has absolutely exploded. Anyone that believes that things are better than they were when Barack Obama was elected is simply being delusional.

The following are 18 statistics that prove that the economy has not improved since Barack Obama became the president of the United States….

#1 Today there are 88 million working age Americans that are not employed and that are not looking for employment. That is an all-time record high.

1a. The Unemployment rate has been OVER 8% for 3 Years in a row!!

#2 When Barack Obama was elected, the percentage of unemployed Americans that had been out of work for more than 52 weeks was less than 15%. Today, it is above 30% .

2a. The number of workers who have been unable to find a job in 27 months or more has shot up 83%, with their ranks now at 5.5 million

#3 There are 1.2 million fewer jobs in America today than there were when Barack Obama was inaugurated.

#4 When Barack Obama first took office, the number of “long-term unemployed workers” in the United States was approximately 2.6 million. Today, that number is sitting at 5.6 million .

#5 The average duration of unemployment in the United States is hovering close to an all-time record high .

#6 During the Obama administration, worker health insurance costs have risen by 23 percent .

#7 Since Barack Obama has been president, the average price of a gallon of gasoline in the United States has increased by 90 percent .

#8 Since Barack Obama has been president, home values in the United States have declined by another 13 percent .

#9 Under Barack Obama, new home sales in the U.S. set a brand new all-time record low in 2009, they set a brand new all-time record low again in 2010, and they set a brand new all-time record low once again during 2011.

#10 Since Barack Obama took office, the number of Americans living in poverty has risen by more than 6 million .

10a. Median annual household income is about 7% below where it was in February 2009, according to the Sentier Research Household Income Index.

#11 Since Barack Obama entered the White House, the number of Americans on food stamps has increased from 32 million to 46 million .

#12 The amount of money that the federal government gives directly to Americans has increased by 32 percent since Barack Obama entered the White House.

#13 According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the percentage of Americans living in “extreme poverty” is now sitting at an all-time high .

#14 When Barack Obama first took office, an ounce of gold was going for about $850. Today an ounce of gold costs more than $1700 an ounce.

#15 Since Barack Obama became president, the size of the U.S. national debt has increased by 44 percent .

#16 During Barack Obama’s first two years in office, the U.S. government added more to the U.S. national debt than the first 100 U.S. Congresses combined .

#17 During the Obama administration, the U.S. government has accumulated more debt than it did from the time that George Washington took office to the time that Bill Clinton took office .

#18 The U.S. national debt has been increasing by an average of more than 4 billion dollars per day since the beginning of the Obama administration.

More:

Standing too many months on the unemployment line is driving Americans crazy — literally — and it’s costing taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars.

With their unemployment-insurance checks running out, some of the country’s long-term jobless are scrambling to fill the gap by filing claims for mental illness and other disabilities with Social Security — a surge that hobbles taxpayers and making the employment rate look healthier than it should as these people drop out of the job statistics.

As of January, the federal government was mailing out disability checks to more than 10.5 million individuals, including 2 million to spouses and children of disabled workers, at a cost of record $200 billion a year, recent research from JPMorgan Chase shows.

The sputtering economy has fueled those ranks. Around 5.3 percent of the population between the ages of 25 and 64 is currently collecting federal disability payments, a jump from 4.5 percent since the economy slid into a recession.

Mental-illness claims, in particular, are surging.

During the recent economic boom, only 33 percent of applicants were claiming mental illness, but that figure has jumped to 43 percent.

Research also shows a growing number of men, particularly older, former white-collar workers, instead of the typical blue-collar ones, are applying.

Even More:

But barely a month after returning from a luxury Christmas break in Hawaii Michelle Obama is on holiday again – this time at the exclusive Colorado ski resort of Aspen. It’s her 16th holiday since her husband took office.

The Obamas are staying at the home of Jim and Paula Crown, owners of the Aspen Skiing Co, the Daily News reported.

A “middle class” non-“rich” non- Crony host I’m sure. 🙂

Let them Eat Snow!

The Icing on the Cake:

In 2011, the average gallon sold for an all-time high of over $3.50, and the average household spent $4,155 gassing up their vehicles—also a record. And if you were hoping for relief at the pump in 2012, it looks like you’re out of luck.

Gasoline prices have never been higher this time of the year.

At $3.53 a gallon, prices are already up 25 cents since Jan. 1. And experts say they could reach a record $4.25 a gallon by late April. …

The national average for gasoline began the year at $3.28 a gallon. The average price for February so far is $3.49 a gallon. That’s up from $3.17 a gallon last February, a record at the time. Back in 2007, before the recession hit, the average for February was $2.25 a gallon.

A 25-cent jump in gasoline prices, if sustained over a year, would cost the economy about $35 billion. That’s only 0.2 percent of the total U.S. economy, but economists say it’s a meaningful amount, especially at a time when growth is only so-so. The economy grew 2.8 percent in the fourth quarter, a rate considered modest following a recession.

High oil and gas prices now set the stage for even sharper increases at the pump because gas typically rises in March and April.

Sunoco, an big East Coast Refiner, has closed refineries (as as ConocoPhillips) because they were “bleeding” cash costs.

Sunoco, saying Marcus Hook was bleeding cash, shut down the plant in December, not long after the nearby ConocoPhillips in Trainer called it quits. Together, the two refineries produced about 20 percent of the gasoline used in the Northeast. Their owners are trying to sell the plants, without success.

“As soon as these two refineries shut down, prices started rising,” said Denis Stephano, president of United Steelworkers Union Local 10-234, which represents workers at the idled ConocoPhillips refinery.

“When you shut refineries down, you take refined product out of the market,” he said. (Philly.com)

And think of the Jobs… 🙂

And then there’s Iran, you know the guys Obama is largely ignoring.

Add it all up, and you can see the Ministry has a lot of work to do.

Remember this when the Ministry Lies to you 24/7/365 about how great things are becoming because of the Greatness of Barack Hussein Obama!!

Trust Me. 🙂

Blink

Jedidiah Bila: Are you feeling principled today? How about gutsy? Are the wishes of voters — the same voters that afforded you a 2010 landslide victory — at the forefront of your minds?

I certainly hope so.

As conservatives across the country await a decision as to whether or not there will be an increase in the debt ceiling, we can’t help but wonder if you will dig in your heels and stand for something.

Will you prioritize significant — and I mean significant — spending reductions?

Will you refuse to accept tax hikes and stand firm against class warfare?

Will you fight for a balanced budget amendment?

Will you call out the left’s precious “shared sacrifice” talking point for what it is, a class-warfare driven divisive tool that aims to pit one American against another and demonize our country’s job creators?

Will you articulate that in America, we don’t take from one person to give to another? We unleash a booming private sector where people have the opportunity to build their own successes.

Will you draw a clear line of demarcation between the big-government, tax-and-spend agenda of the left and what should be a limited-government, pro-growth agenda on the right?

Will you only embrace “compromise” when it’s in the best interest of the country to do so?

Americans are tired of phoniness. We’re tired of false promises. We’re tired of tax deals that inject no long-term certainty in the economy, accomplish nothing in the way of spending reductions and reflect a profound lack of gravitas on your part. We’re tired of weak cuts disguised as something greater. We’re tired of lies.

And we’re not stupid. We’re attuned to business as usual, to closed-door meetings and to what appears to be a disturbing inability on your part to stick to your guns.

So, what’s it going to be? Are you going to stand firm, to let President Obama, Harry Reid and their allies know that the buck stops here? Are you going to lead a Republican Party that stands for strict fiscal discipline, constitutional integrity and a commitment to protecting all that makes America exceptional for future generations? Are you going to be the bold contrast to the left that you should be?

The choice is yours. We’ll be watching — ready to stand by you if you do what’s right and to hold you accountable if you don’t.

There’s no time for nonsense. This country deserves real leadership. And as we head into another election season, Americans aren’t about to settle for anything less.

AMEN!

Speaker Boehner has already decide to go for a nibble rather than a bite anyhow.

Maybe the Democrats can con him into another deal like last year’s Lame Duck Goose egg. He does seem to fold under pressure.

In a statement, Boehner said: “Despite good-faith efforts to find common ground, the White House will not pursue a bigger debt reduction agreement without tax hikes.”

So I’ll cave first. So grab your wallet and what’s left in it, here come Barack The Savior! 😦

White House communications director Dan Pfeiffer said Obama intended to continue to push for as big a deficit reduction number as possible and that tax revenue be part of the mix.

“The president believes that solving our fiscal problems is an economic imperative. But in order to do that, we cannot ask the middle-class and seniors to bear all the burden of higher costs and budget cuts,” Pfeiffer said. “We need a balanced approach that asks the very wealthiest and special interests to pay their fair share as well, and we believe the American people agree.”

The middle class and senior are ALREADY burdened by your oppressiveness Mr. President, or hadn’t you noticed? 🙂

After all, as White Adviser Plouffe said last week, unemployment is not a factor.

With unemployment now at 9.2% and job growth at a standstill, is there anyone not blinded by ideology or rank partisanship who can’t see that Obama’s spend-and-regulate economic plan has been an utter failure?

On the Left or the Leftist Media: NO. There is not. Simple.

When Obama was running for office, he likened himself to Ronald Reagan. Not because he liked Reagan’s policies — he despised them — but because he saw Reagan as a transformative figure worthy of emulation.

“I think Ronald Reagan changed the trajectory of America in a way that Richard Nixon did not and in a way that Bill Clinton did not,” he said during the campaign. He’s since talked endlessly about the need to “remake” the economy, and “do big things.”

Well, Obama’s been transformative all right. While Reagan rescued a country mired in hopelessness, stagflation and fear, Obama has managed, by reversing Rea-ganomics, to bring it all back again. Consider:

• The unemployment rate has never been under 8% since Obama took office, and it has dipped below 9% in only five of Obama’s 29 months in the White House. No president since the Great Depression can match that record of failure.

• At 40 weeks, the average length of unemployment is almost twice the previous post-World War II peak.

• Inflation is once again on the rise — climbing in each of the past six months.

• And by almost every measure available, including GDP growth, the Obama recovery is the worst since the Great Depression.

Now, thanks to Obama’s grand economic failures, hopelessness is again sweeping the land. An astounding four in 10 say the economy is in a “permanent decline,” according to a New York Times/CBS poll, and an equally eye-opening 48% told CNN that another Great Depression is likely to occur in the next year, the highest level ever in the CNN survey.

More than half — 54% — say their personal finances are getting worse, according to a Rasmussen survey.

Yet, rather than admit failure, Obama’s only response is to try to shift blame and convince us to lower our expectations. “The economic challenges that we face weren’t created overnight,” he said on Friday, “and they’re not going to be solved overnight.”

Translation: How can you expect anything more, when everything was so messed up when I got into town? Poppycock.

After the long, painful and equally deep recession in the early 1980s, the economy roared back to life, powered by Reagan’s mix of tax cuts and deregulation. By this point in the Reagan recovery, growth was so fast and furious it slashed unemployment by a third.

Obama also expects us to believe that “head winds” are to blame for the economy’s lousy performance. But the only head winds holding the economy back are his own “transformative” policies — massive new government spending and debt, ObamaCare and Dodd-Frank, endless talk of tax hikes on the “rich” and corporations, and a job-killing regulatory beast unleashed against every productive corner of the economy.

Obamanomics has been weighed, measured and found wanting. Time now to get back on course.(IBD)

Stand up with a Back bone.

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Viability

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

Thomas Sowell: The media have recently been so preoccupied with a Congressman’s photograph of himself in his underwear that there has been scant attention paid to the fact that Iran continues advancing toward creating a nuclear bomb, and nobody is doing anything that is likely to stop them.

Nuclear weapons in the hands of the world’s leading sponsor of international terrorism might seem to be something that would sober up even the most giddy members of the chattering class. But that chilling prospect cannot seem to compete for attention with cheap behavior by an immature Congressman, infatuated with himself.

A society that cannot or will not focus on matters of life and death is a society whose survival as a free nation is at least questionable. Hard as it may be to conceive how the kind of world that one has been used to, and taken for granted, can come to an end, it can happen in the lifetime of today’s generation.

Those who founded the United States of America were keenly aware that they were making a radical departure in the kinds of governments under which human beings had lived over the centuries — and that its success was by no means guaranteed. Monarchies in Europe had lasted for centuries and the Chinese dynasties for thousands of years. But a democratic republic was something else.

While the convention that was writing the Constitution of the United States was still in session, a lady asked Benjamin Franklin what the delegation was creating. “A republic, madam,” he said, “if you can keep it.”

In the middle of the next century, Abraham Lincoln still posed it as a question whether “government of the people, by the people and for the people shall not perish from the earth.” Years earlier, Lincoln had warned of the dangers to a free society from its own designing power-seekers — and how only the vigilance, wisdom and dedication of the public could preserve their freedom.

But, today, few people seem to see such dangers, either internally or internationally.

A recent poll showed that nearly half the American public believes that the government should redistribute wealth. That so many people are so willing to blithely put such an enormous and dangerous arbitrary power in the hands of politicians — risking their own freedom, in hopes of getting what someone else has — is a painful sign of how far many citizens and voters fall short of what is needed to preserve a democratic republic.

The ease with which people with wealth can ship it overseas electronically, or put it in tax shelters at home, means that raising the tax rate on wealthy people is not going to bring in the kind of tax revenue that would enable wealth redistribution to provide the bonanza that some people are expecting.

In other words, people who are willing to give government more arbitrary power can give up their birthright of freedom without even getting the mess of pottage. Worse yet, they can give up their children’s and their grandchildren’s birthright of freedom.

Free and democratic societies have existed for a relatively short time, as history is measured — and their staying power has always been open to question. So much depends on the wisdom of the voters that the franchise was always limited, in one way or another, so that voting would be confined to those with a stake in the viability and progress of the country, and the knowledge to cast their vote intelligently.

In our own times, however, voting has been seen as just one of the many “rights” to which everyone is supposed to be entitled. The emphasis has been on the voter, rather than on the momentous consequences of elections for the nation today and for generations yet unborn.

To those who see voting as more or less just a matter of self-expression, almost a recreational activity, there is no need to inform themselves on both sides of the issues before voting, much less sit down and think beyond the rhetoric to the realities that the rhetoric conceals.

Careless voters may be easily swayed by charisma and rhetoric, oblivious to the monumental disasters created around the world by 20th century leaders with charisma and rhetoric, such as Hitler.

Voters like this represent a danger of terminal frivolity for freedom and democracy.

Here’s another thing to consider: The Valedictorian for Arizona State University this year is an ILLEGAL ALIEN!  Think about that for a moment…

Envy-is best described as an emotion that “occurs when a person lacks another’s (perceived) superior quality, achievement, or possessions and either desires it or wishes that the other lacked it”. It does seem that the left run on emotions more than on facts no?

Oh, and the “fair” Media:

On Sunday’s This Week, ABC’s Christiane Amanpour repeatedly hit Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell with the White House’s plea for “revenue raising” measures, often the new euphemism for tax hikes, but when she talked to Democratic Congressman Jim Clyburn, the Assistant Minority Leader in the House, she failed to press him about agreeing to GOP spending cut proposals and instead only asked him about prospects for a deal.

Amanpour began with how reasonable President Obama and Democrats, who “need revenue,” are acting: “Democrats are saying they’re not putting, for the moment, tax hikes on the table, but they need revenue, they’re talking about closing loopholes, subsidies for wealthy corporations. Is that out of the question for you, or are you willing to entertain that?”

When McConnell wouldn’t agree, with “NEW TAXES OFF THE TABLE?” as her on-screen heading, she followed up by pleading:

Are you willing, I mean this is a negotiation after all, to talk about any kind of revenue raising, for instance, ethanol subsidies, for instance, tax breaks for oil and gas corporations or corporate jets. Is there anywhere where revenue raising can happen without you saying it’s a tax hike?

She wouldn’t let it go, despairing: “Are you now basically saying, all revenue increases off the table?”

But will she ask a Democrat about spending cuts?

Of Course not!

47% of people pay no Income Taxes AT ALL.

So is American Democracy doomed?

Good Question.

Then there’s Eugenics Al (the Global Warming Loonie gone insane) Gore:

‘One of the things we could do about (global warming),” Gore said recently, “is to change the technologies, to put out less of this pollution, to stabilize the population, and one of the principle ways of doing that is to empower and educate girls and women.” That, he said, would cause population “to stabilize and societies begin to make better choices and more balanced choices.” The logic is inescapable: A smaller global carbon footprint means fewer footprints.

But governments around the world have already “empowered” women to make “more balanced choices.” These have often led to something awful: the death of tens of millions of female babies, the very ones Gore wants to “empower.”

FED HAS NO IDEA WHY…

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke says he’s puzzled by the failure of the economy to respond to our government’s many ministrations. Which explains much of why our economy is such a mess.

‘We don’t have a precise read on why this slower pace of growth is persisting,” Bernanke said recently, adding that the growth slowdown was proving to be “more persistent than we thought.”

His remarks came as the Fed dropped its 2011 gross domestic product growth forecast from the range of 3.1% to 3.3%, made just two months earlier, to a much slower 2.7% to 2.9% pace.

Not to be rude, but can the nation’s top banker really be so clueless? Anyone with half a lick of common sense looking at our economy knows what’s wrong: We’ve spent the better part of three years with government making the most extraordinary interventions in the economy in our nation’s history.

Government spending, as a share of the economy, has soared 25%. Regulations, many of them arbitrary and foolish, such as the ban on incandescent light bulbs, have never been more numerous.

Businesses say in survey after survey that, with all the government’s micromanaging of the economy, they are uncertain of what comes next, and therefore are postponing investment and hiring decisions.

But to top economic officials like Bernanke, it’s not clear by now what’s wrong. Really? How about:

• $830 billion in failed, corrupt stimulus efforts?

• A $700 billion TARP program that was promised as a way to stabilize the banks but ended up as a kind of union-crony slush fund?

• The government takeover of GM and Chrysler?

• The punitive re-regulating of Wall Street through a Dodd-Frank bill that affected even those entities that had nothing to do with the financial meltdown?

• Small-business fears about higher taxes and stringent, new green regulations that are making it harder to plan and make profits?

• Soaring oil prices that the government seems not only to tolerate, but also to actively advocate by refusing to permit our oil companies to drill for more?

• The admission by Vice President Joe Biden, put in charge of efforts on the economy, that higher taxes are “most important to us Democrats”?

• And, finally, the Bernanke Fed’s own $1.7 trillion in quantitative easing — a fancy central bankers term for “let’s print more money”? (and devalue what we already have)

Seriously, does Bernanke — and for that matter, all the other policymakers who say they’re “surprised” at the weakness in our economy — really think all this is normal?

Look at what’s transpiring in our markets. After repeated government intervention, no one today knows the real price of food, housing, energy, raw industrial goods, bonds or stocks. The amount of government money distorting these vital parts of our free economy is so great, our markets can’t really function.

Free prices set by buyers and sellers are the way free markets work. Free prices create efficiency. They send vital signals about what to produce — not to mention when and where and at what price.

Absent those price signals, which happen spontaneously between buyers and sellers, a free-market economy can’t work. That’s what’s happening today. And that’s why the USSR, with all of its grand five-year plans and thousands upon thousands of apparatchiks, couldn’t make its command economy fly.

A handful of bureaucrats can never set prices or allocate goods or decide what should be made as efficiently as millions of people acting in their own interest through a free and open market.

Our policymakers seem to have forgotten this. They make statements that indicate they don’t know the damage their policies are doing or they are willfully oblivious to them.

Either way, America needs to change course, and fast. This Keynesian superstimulus is a failed experiment — one that deserves to be cast on the ash heap of history as soon as possible. (IBD)

But don’t expect the Democrats to abandon their dreams or the Media to suddenly understand reality.

So you will have to.

And you will have make sure they do to.

They will kick and scream and yell. But if we succeed your kids will thank you for it.

Otherwise, kiss their asses goodbye.

Simple. 🙂

 

Recovery Summer

Twenty-eight months after Congress passed President Obama’s signature economic stimulus law, and nearly one year after he declared the summer of 2010 to be “Recovery Summer,” 1.9 million fewer people are employed.

In February 2009, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reported that 141.7 million people were employed. By the end of May 2011 – the last month for which data are available – that number had fallen to 139.8 million, a difference of 1.9 million.

While the number of people with jobs has increased slightly from its low point during the recession – 137.9 million in December 2009 – those 1.9 million jobs have been lost despite $800 billion in stimulus spending.

This does not mean that the economy is not creating jobs, but rather that it is not creating jobs fast enough to keep up with a combination of layoffs and people entering the job market for the first time.

In a Washington Post op-ed, former White House chief economist Larry Summers noted that the percentage of the population that has a job has not improved, even though the economy is technically in recovery.

“From the first quarter of 2006 to the first quarter of 2011, the U.S. economy’s growth rate averaged less than 1 percent a year,” Summers wrote. “The fraction of the population working remains almost exactly at its recession trough, and recent reports suggest that growth is slowing.”

The fraction of the population with a job has in fact fallen in the 28 months since Congress passed the stimulus – down from 60.3 percent in February 2009 to 58.4 percent in May 2011.

The economy cannot create jobs fast enough to keep pace with layoffs and recent high school and college graduates seeking employment. If the trend continues, as Summers notes may happen, the economy will suffer further in the future as college graduates delay entry into the labor force, reducing their lifetime productivity.

As both Summers and the BLS data make clear, the economy is not creating new jobs fast enough to make up for layoffs and new graduates, calling into question Obama’s oft-repeated claim that the economy is recovering and creating jobs.

In fact, by citing figures from the first quarter of 2006, Summers is understating the economy’s poor performance. According to BLS data, the number of people with jobs peaked at 146.6 million in November 2007, meaning that over the entire recession – which officially began in December 2007 – the number of people employed has fallen by 6.8 million. (CNS &WP)

Some of these smaller firms are responding to inflation by passing it on to their customers. A net 12% of firms reported higher prices in April. You can see from the chart that prices have been rising quickly over the past couple of months:

nfib prices 2011-04.png

This report is a discouraging sign for the recovery for two reasons. You just saw the first one: consumers are facing higher prices. As their purchase power declines, so will their ability to buy as many goods and services. This is a purely mathematical result: if your dollar doesn’t go as far, you can’t buy as much stuff. And if consumers don’t buy as much stuff, then the economy demands less stuff and hiring doesn’t need to rise. (the atlantic)

“Beyond the lack of jobs and incomes, an economy producing below its potential for a prolonged interval sacrifices its future,” argued Summers. “Huge numbers of new college graduates are moving back in with their parents this month because they have no job or means of support.” (WP)

So Inflation hurts business.

Consumers pay more and spend less.

Business don’t hire because they are making due with what they’ve got and don’t have to take the risk of hiring someone else, or the expense.

Now that’s Stimulus! Good Going Dear Leader! 😦

If you can’t have more, you learn to make due with less.

Now if only Congress learned that hard lesson instead of the people.

“Businesses are producing only 3 percent fewer goods and services than they were at the end of 2007, yet Americans are working nearly 10 percent fewer hours because of a mix of layoffs and cutbacks in the workweek.”

Which mean the 10 million people who lost their jobs are going to have a tough time getting them back, especially with an anti-business President in the White House.

But don’t worry, everything is great. The economy is getting better. And Obama is not at fault for any of it.

And they have plans to combat something that doesn’t even exist yet! (and they created by the way). Rejoice!

Oh, and the Stimulus kept it from being worse so it “worked” despite all the evidence to the contrary.

Instead of being eaten by the world devouring Galactus, we are being slowing eaten to death in the Sarlac Pit.

Gee, that makes me feel better!

Isn’t politics fun. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Robert Ariail

Political Cartoons by Dana Summers

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

 

 

Irksome

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

John Stossel: Politicians care about poor people. I know because they always say that. But then why do they make it so hard for the poor to escape poverty?

Outside my office in New York City, I see yellow taxis. It’s intuitive to think that government should license taxis to make sure they’re safe and to limit their number. It’s intuitive to believe that if anyone could just start picking up passengers, we’d have chaos. So to operate a taxi in NYC, you have to buy a license, a “medallion,” from an existing cab company (or at a once-in-a-blue-moon auction). Medallions are so scarce, they now cost hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Licensing prices poor people out of the business.

“Compare New York City, where a license to own and operate a taxi is $603,000, to Washington, D.C.,” George Mason University economist Walter Williams told me. “There are not many black-owned taxis in New York City. But in Washington, most are owned by blacks.” Why? Because in Washington, “it takes $200 to get a license to own and operate one taxi. That makes the difference.”

Regulation hurts the people the politicians claim to help.

People once just went into business. But now, in the name of “consumer protection,” bureaucrats insist on licensing rules. Today, hundreds of occupations require expensive licenses. Tough luck for a poor person getting started.

Ask Jestina Clayton. Ten years ago, she moved from Africa to Utah. She assumed she could support her children with the hair-braiding skills she learned in Sierra Leone. For four years, she braided hair in her home. She made decent money. But then the government shut her down because she doesn’t have an expensive cosmetology license that requires 2,000 hours of classroom time — 50 weeks of useless instruction. The Institute for Justice (IJ), the public-interest law firm that fights such outrages, says “not one of those 2,000 hours teaches African hair-braiding.”

IJ lawyer Paul Avelar explained that “the state passed a really broad law and left it to the cosmetology board to interpret.”

Guess who sits on the cosmetology board. Right: cosmetologists. And they don’t like competition.

One day, Jestina received an email.

“The email threatened to report me to the licensing division if I continued to braid,” she told me.

This came as a shock because she had been told that what she was doing was legal.

“When I called (the commission) in 2005 on two separate occasions, they did tell me that, but then when I called (again) … the cosmetology lady told me that the situation had changed and that I needed to go to school now and get a license.”

No customers complained, but a competitor did.

One cosmetologist claimed that if she didn’t go to school she might make someone bald.

But this is nonsense — hair-braiding is just … braiding. If the braid is too tight, you can undo it.

The cosmetology board told Jestina that if she wanted to braid hair without paying $18,000 to get permission from the board, she should lobby the legislature. Good luck with that. Jestina actually tried, but no luck. How can poor people become entrepreneurs if they must get laws changed first?! Jestina stopped working because she can’t afford the fines.

“The first offense is $1,000,” she said. “The second offense and any subsequent offense is $2,000 each day.”

“It is not unique to Utah,” Avelar added. “There are about 10 states that explicitly require people to go get this expensive, useless license to braid hair.”

Fortunately, IJ’s efforts against such laws have succeeded in seven states. Now it’s in court fighting for Jestina, which, appropriately, means “justice” in her native language.

Once upon a time, one in 20 workers needed government permission to work in their occupation. Today, it’s one in three. We lose some freedom every day.

“Occupational licensing laws fall hardest on minorities, on poor, on elderly workers who want to start a new career or change careers,” Avelar said. “(Licensing laws) just help entrenched businesses keep out competition.”

This is not what America was supposed to be.

There are a lot of things, large and small, that irk me. One of them is our tendency to evaluate a presidential candidate based on his intelligence or academic credentials. When Obama threw his hat in the ring, people thought he was articulate and smart and hailed his intellectual credentials. Just recently, when Newt Gingrich announced his candidacy, people hailed his intellectual credentials and smartness as well.

By contrast, the intellectual elite and mainstream media people see Sarah Palin as stupid, a loose cannon and not to be trusted with our nuclear arsenal. There was another presidential candidate who was also held to be stupid and not to be trusted with our nuclear arsenal who ultimately became president — Ronald Reagan. I don’t put much stock into whether a political leader is smart or not because, as George Orwell explained, “Some ideas are so stupid that only intellectuals believe them.”

All the evidence that I see is that academics and intellectuals have messed up the world. I challenge anyone to show me a major calamity that was engineered by a stupid, inarticulate person, but those caused by intelligent, articulate persons are too numerous to count, from the likes of Hitler, Stalin and Mao to Woodrow Wilson, FDR and Obama.

My vision of a good presidential candidate is a person with ordinary intelligence but great respect and love for our Constitution. Maybe Palin’s and Reagan’s respect and love for our Constitution qualified them as dumb in the eyes of the mainstream media, intellectuals and academics. (Walter E Williams)

Official motto of the White House economic team: Those who can, do. Those who can’t, fantasize in the classroom, fail in Washington and then return to the Ivy Tower to train the next generation of egghead economic saboteurs. Life is good for left-wing academics. Everyone else pays dearly.

Take Austan Goolsbee, please. President Obama’s “fresh-faced” University of Chicago econ professor arrived in Washington in December 2008 to fill two slots: chief economist/staff director of the president’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board and member of the Council of Economic Advisers. In September 2010, he replaced CEA head and fellow academic Christina Romer, who retreated to the University of California at Berkeley last August when unemployment hit 9.5 percent. (She infamously projected that the Obama stimulus would hold the jobless rate below 8 percent.)

Goolsbee’s primary task: translating all of the administration’s big-government theories for us dummies. As Goolsbee put it to his university’s student newspaper: “We’ve certainly seen in previous crises that it’s quite important to explain things to non-experts. The American people can confront any challenge if they’re comfortable with the approach.”

And what exactly was the nature of Goolsbee’s vaunted expertise? Making money as a business rescue-and-recovery expert without ever having had to meet a payroll.

Goolsbee, the 15th wealthiest member of the Obama administration, has raked in assets valued at between $1,146,000 and $2,715,000. He also pulled in a University of Chicago salary of $465,000 and additional wages and honoraria worth $93,000, according to Washingtonian magazine. As I’ve noted before, the government research fellow and Obama campaign adviser was a champion of extending credit to the un-creditworthy. In a 2007 op-ed for The New York Times, he derided those who called subprime mortgages “irresponsible.” He preferred to describe them as “innovations in the mortgage market” to expand the pool of homebuyers.

Goolsbee’s most recent “innovation”: the “White House White Board,” a weekly video lecture teaching everyone else how to hitch what remains of America’s free-market system to the wagon of the state and how much (or rather, how little) we should make doing it. He illustrated his grand interventionist strategy to pick and choose “Startup America” winners by drawing a trough of broken light bulbs (symbolizing entrepreneurial ideas) piling up in a “Valley of Death” because they lacked government support.

A comical choice of imagery given the Democrats’ enviro-nutty ban on incandescent bulbs. But I digress.

When Goolsbee joined Team Obama, the unemployment rate was at around 6 percent. When he announced his resignation on Monday, the jobless rate stood at 9.1 percent. Romer and Jared Bernstein (former chief economist to Vice President Joe Biden) had predicted unemployment would drop every single month after August 2009 due to the Obama stimulus. Bernstein bailed on the administration in April 2011 for the sanctuary of a liberal think-tank. He’ll also now ply his failed wares as a financial pundit.

These hapless command-and-control ideologues were preceded by Peter Orszag, who hung his “Mission Accomplished” banner over the White House budget office in June 2010 after fewer than two years on the job, and by former National Economic Council head and hedge fund manager Larry Summers, who was caught sleeping on the job — literally — more than once during his brief tenure. Summers packed his bags in September. He was followed by Princeton economics professor and former top Obama Treasury Department official Alan Krueger in October 2010.

White House aides have lamented that the economic team is “exhausted.” Apparently, Obama is tired of hearing from them, too. The Hill newspaper reports that he has stopped receiving daily economic briefings that were once treated with the same emergency status as national security briefings. So, the central planners continue to be paid to fail — while their boss looks the other way at the destruction, whistling into what he calls America’s temporary “head winds.”

Nice non-work if you can get it. (Michelle Malkin)

So is our Dear Leaders solution to economic headwinds?

Give money we don’t have to people who have even less– Greece! 🙂

‘Nuff Said!

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

The Ghost of Depressions Past

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Two years into a “recovery,” the unemployment rate leaps to 9.1% and just 54,000 new jobs are created. Is this just “bumps on the road to recovery,” as the White House insists, or something more dangerous?

This has been the most miserable recovery in modern history. Not only are there not enough jobs being created, but also the economy itself looks to be stalling.

Yet the Obama administration is crowing about its accomplishments as if slowing growth and rising joblessness have nothing to do with its bad policies.

“The initiatives put in place by this administration — such as the payroll tax cut and business incentives for investment — have contributed to solid employment growth overall this year, but this report is a reminder of the challenges that remain,” said Austan Goolsbee, Obama’s top economic adviser.

“Solid employment growth”? Since the end of last year, job growth has averaged 130,500 a month — about the number of people who enter the workforce each month. That’s not “solid” enough.

By the way, the unemployment rate has been below 9% for just five months since Obama took office — and three of those months were in the first 12 weeks of his presidency, before his policies took effect. (IBD)

The Democrats are focused on NOT passing a budget. They are not concerned with China dumping out debt. They are just attacking like angry bees anyone who might disagree with them.

“Throw grandma off a cliff” “End / Kill Medicare” et al.

And what are the Republicans doing about it? Not much.

But we can obsess about Wiener’s Weiner! 😦

And today is the anniversary D-Day.

But at least they spent $2 million to produce a new “food pyramid” so the stupid morons who don’t know that chips and beer is not a food group can ignore this too.

The upcoming election may become less about candidates and more about whether enough voters believe America faces a looming collapse that must be addressed now. Democrats minimize the threat of unfunded entitlements and our growing debt and promise to stay the course to “protect” those who depend on government support. Republicans, pointing to a looming crisis brought on by our unsustainable entitlement culture, the exploding deficit, and an anemic economic recovery, propose an austere budget and program changes that can easily be demagogued as severe and uncaring. One party campaigns on “caring enough to give you what you want” while the other campaigns on “caring enough to confront America’s unsustainable path.” As a result, the 2012 election may be the most important choice Americans have faced in decades.

With apologies to Charles Dickens’ beloved family classic, A Christmas Carol, what some voters need is a midnight visit by the ghosts of elections past, present and future to break through the denial that so many exhibit.

The Ghost of Elections Past might show voters how Roosevelt’s New Deal, designed to combat the Great Depression, actually suppressed economic growth and prolonged the depression and high unemployment. He’d point to President Lyndon Johnson’s “Great Society.” Designed to wage war against poverty, Johnson launched costly entitlements that expanded the reach and cost of government—expanded welfare, low-income housing, Head Start, and Medicare. Over the next thirty years, over 5 trillion dollars was spent on the “war on poverty,” but the number of Americans in poverty remained the same. Worse yet, more Americans were now dependent on expensive government programs, and responsible taxpayers were feeling the strain on their pocketbooks.

The ghost could note that when the Social Security Act of 1935 was being debated, it was estimated that Social Security payments would total $4 billion in 1980. In fact, government paid out a staggering $108 billion—off by a massive 2,600%. When Medicare was instituted in 1965, the House Ways and Means analysts predicted it would cost $12 billion in 1990; the actual cost topped $110 billion. They estimated that Medicare Part A would cost $9 billion in 1990—the actual cost $67 billion. Washington entitlements always cost more than projected!

The Ghost of Elections Present would point to the stark contrast about what was promised in President Obama’s “Hope and Change” campaign and the economic results after two years of his administration. The ghost could show the empty storefronts indicative of our anemic “recovery,” the continuing housing defaults and dropping price index, the long unemployment lines, the exploding gas prices at the pump, and end with a face-to-face encounter with the rapidly advancing U.S. Debt Clock.

But it’s the Ghost of Elections Future who could bring home the implications of the upcoming election. Four more years of President Obama means home prices continue on their downward spiral and bankruptcies grow with no relief in sight. The private sector responds to increased taxes, regulations and healthcare costs by refusing to hire more workers. Layoffs continue and real unemployment approaches 20%. The Fed continues to print dollars and buy debt, bringing creditors to the realization that they’ll never be repaid in anything other than a massively devalued dollar.

Reacting to the loss of confidence in the dollar, the IMF and WTO choose to no longer use the U.S. dollar as the standard currency of exchange. With the dollar nothing more than the obligation of a bankrupt government, a new round of double-digit inflation is unleashed. The cost of imported oil skyrockets. With over half of Americans receiving some form of direct government payments and the top 10% of wage earners unable to carry the load, state and federal governments are forced to make severe austerity cuts. With the cuts and the devalued dollar, the poor and middle class are hit with a devastating blow. Millions take to the street in protest, but the government cupboards are bare, and no one is willing to fund America’s debt.

Rather than being caught in America’s collapse, companies that can…leave. Those with wealth have long since moved to gold and strategic commodities. The ghost ends his warning pointing to a cavernous cliff a mile in the distance where young and old alike are forced off a cliff of no return for America.

Have you had enough of my ghosts? Get past the denial; we can’t borrow forever! As citizens, we must face the problems our current president refuses to address. Be prepared. Demand both parties to provide viable answers instead of campaign rhetoric. If we don’t, get ready to face three ghosts in your dreams…or, even worse, a nightmare that becomes reality! (Terry Paulson)

Ams for the poor?

Sorry, we are supposed to have Hope and Change and Win the (Socialist) Future for the Annoited One?

Ignore the Debt behind the curtain!

isn’t he just so wonderful…. 😦

Political Cartoons by Gary McCoy

May Day Call

Michelle Malkin: On May 1, left-wing vigilantes will target companies across the country that have committed a mortal sin: sending donations to GOP Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin. Rest assured, such intolerable acts of political free speech will not go unpunished by tolerant Big Labor activists. They’re calling for both a national boycott of Walker’s corporate donors and a coordinated sticker vandalism campaign on GOP-tainted products.

The Wisconsin Grocers Association is bracing for the anti-Walker witch hunt. Anonymous operatives have circulated sabotage stickers on the Internet and around Wisconsin that single out Angel Soft tissue paper (“Wiping your (expletive) on Wisconsin workers”), Johnsonville Sausage (“These Brats Bust Unions”) and Coors (“Labor Rights Flow Away Like A Mountain Stream”). Earlier this week, a “Stick It To Walker” website boasted photos of vandalized Angel Soft tissue packages at a Super Foodtown grocery store in Brooklyn, N.Y.

This destruction of private property is illegal. Not that it matters to anti-Walker protest mobsters, who trampled Wisconsin’s Capitol at an estimated $5 million in security, repair and cleaning costs to taxpayers. According to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, “The identity of the backers of the sticker effort is unknown, although many assume it is being orchestrated by public employee unions. This latest effort follows boycotts organized by members of the Wisconsin State Employees Union AFSCME 24.”

AFSCME 24 is the same union affiliate that recently disseminated intimidation letters throughout southeast Wisconsin, demanding that local businesses support unions by putting up signs in their windows. The letter threatened not just Walker supporters, but any and all businesses that have chosen to sit on the sidelines and stay out of politics altogether: “Failure to do so will leave us no choice but (to) do a public boycott of your business. And sorry, neutral means ‘no’ to those who work for the largest employer in the area and are union members.” Others on Big Labor’s hit list: Kwik Trip, Sargento Foods Inc. and M&I Bank.

Walker, of course, has been at the forefront of government pension and budget reforms. Similar measures are being advanced by Democratic governors and Democrat-run legislatures from Massachusetts to New York to California. But union bosses have yet to sic their goons on individual and corporate donors to Democratic politicians imposing long-overdue benefit and collective bargaining limits for public employee unions.

How convenient, yes? Just as they secured a big fat waiver from the federal health care mandate and tax scheme they lobbied to impose on the rest of America, Big Labor is giving Democratic legislative water-carriers who have been forced to adopt cuts and cost controls a big fat waiver from their organized wrath and vandalism.

Now, a few hundred or thousand ruined grocery store items may not seem to matter much to the average reader, but this little property destruction campaign spotlights a nasty tactic increasingly employed by the left: campaign finance disclosure as a speech-squelching weapon.

We saw it last fall when Democratic operatives targeted the U.S. Chamber of Commerce for donating to Obamacare opposition ads.

We saw it in 2008 when a top MoveOn.org alumnus launched attacks on Republican donors with the express purpose of “hoping to create a chilling effect that will dry up contributions.”

We saw it when Obama campaign committee lawyers lobbied the Justice Department to investigate and prosecute a GOP donor for funding campaign ads exposing Obama’s ties to Weather Underground terrorist Bill Ayers.

We saw it during the Proposition 8 traditional marriage battle in California, where gay rights avengers compiled black lists, harassment lists and Google target maps of citizens who contributed to the ballot measure.

We saw it when “progressive” zealots smeared Target Corporation and Chick-fil-A for daring to associate with social conservatives.

And we’re seeing it again this month as the Obama White House readies an executive order that would force federal contractors to disclose all political donations to candidates and independent groups in excess of $5,000 made not just by a corporate entity, but by all of its individual executives, directors and officers.

Former Federal Election Commission official Hans von Spakovsky obtained the sweeping draft executive order, which — surprise, surprise — exempts unions and predominantly left-wing federal grant recipients from the mandate. On Wednesday, GOP senators spelled out the bullying agenda in an open letter objecting to the Obama order: “Political activity would obviously be chilled if prospective contractors have to fear that their livelihood could be threatened if the causes they support are disfavored by the administration.” Join the club.

When disclosure’s a bludgeon, all but Obama’s cronies are nails.

As I have said many times before, the Democrats only have 3 plays in their playbook: Class Ware, fear, and Intimidation.

That’s all folks.

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

Weiss Ratings downgraded U.S. debt this week.

Yes, the superman of all debts, public and private, got it some kryptonite.    

“We believe that the AAA/Aaa assigned to U.S. sovereign debt by Standard & Poor’s, Moody’s and Fitch is unfair to investors and savers, who are undercompensated for the risks they are taking,” Weiss Ratings President Martin D. Weiss said according to the South Florida Business Journal.

Weiss rated the U.S. a “C” credit risk, behind even Mexico.

The U.S. isn’t just a banana republic under Obama, it’s close to a failed state; at least in its ability to pay the bills.

To make matters worse, Weiss made the announcement after Federal Reserve “superman” Ben Bernanke admitted in a press conference that his policy of printing money has resulted in higher inflation and no jobs.

The announcement by Weiss may not be unrelated to the Bernanke press conference.

As Forbes observed this week, the Fed under Bernanke may not have the ability to judge anything anymore.

Just last month, the web site reminded us, the Fed assured everyone that “The economic recovery is on firmer footing, and overall conditions in the labor market appear to be improving gradually.”

On Wednesday the Fed told us “The economic recovery is proceeding at a moderate pace and overall conditions in the labor market are improving gradually.”

On cue, right after the Bernanke press conference, the estimates for GDP by the Fed were then slashed to 1.8 percent after posting 3.7 percent in the first quarter. Think that Ben didn’t know about those new numbers at his all-is-well press conference?

The revised estimates confirmed what we already knew; that the Fed policy was igniting inflation that would eventually hurt economic growth by spiking prices for things like gas, food, common stocks.

1.8 percent growth is hardly enough growth to ensure that jobless claims don’t start going up again.

Then on Friday, the Fed chief told an audience that he wants more sub-prime lending.

We’re getting into the area where we just can’t make this stuff up.

Yes, Ben Bernanke is calling on lenders to give more money to people who can’t afford mortgages.

Really.

“Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke on Friday called for more lending to people and small businesses in lower-income neighborhoods,” reports the AP “saying they’ve been disproportionately hurt by the recession.”

Does Bernanke think he’s running for re-election? What’s worse is that our chief banking officer doesn’t seem to understand how the country got where we are fiscally.     

And things have just become too complicated- and political- and dangerous for Bernanke to remain the front man for U.S. economic policy.

Instead Ben should do the decent thing:

Take off that silly cape.

It looks ridlculous. (John Ransom)

But don’t worry, everything’s fine, we aren’t broke.

We just need more investments in infrastructure and higher taxes on “rich” people to solve all our woes! 😦

Political Cartoons by Ken Catalino

The New Class

The Obama Justice Department has created a secret group within the bloated civil rights division to monitor laws passed by states and local municipalities to control illegal immigration.

Because the measures are viewed as discriminatory and anti-immigrant by the administration, the Justice Department is spending valuable taxpayer dollars to track them and legally challenge them as it did in Arizona. The mission is being carried out by an undercover “National Origin Working Group” set up by Assistant Attorney General Thomas Perez, a renowned illegal immigrant advocate who once ran a taxpayer-funded day laborer center in Maryland.

This week the “National Origin Working Group” will hold a special training session at the agency’s Washington D.C. headquarters.

Laws prohibiting national origin discrimination will also be addressed at the powwow and so will discrimination against Muslims in the ever-so-hostile, post 9/11 era.

The most “transparent” administration in history doesn’t want the public to know about this special taskforce.

And if you mention this, you will have to be investigated, ruined and labelled as a RACIST! 🙂

Wanna know how that could be?

“I said over a year ago that this was going to be, this presidential race, Lawrence, was going to be the ugliest, the nastiest, the most divisive, and the most racist in the history of this Republic,” PBS host Tavis Smiley said on MSNBC.

So get ready for it. It’s going to be all out!

Many aspects of President Obama’s policies and approach give me indigestion. His reckless spending, economically destructive and unconstitutional Obamacare, deceit with respect to Paul Ryan’s “Path to Prosperity,” perpetual arrogance, and love affair with an EPA that repeatedly jeopardizes our ability to become energy independent, are just a few examples.

However, there’s one facet of the Obama ideology that turns my stomach with particular force — that of class warfare. Not only is it profoundly un-American, but it pins one citizen against another in order to promote the idea that the federal government should step in and equalize for the common good. The candidate who once advocated spreading the wealth around is determined to do just that.

President Obama has repeatedly taken jabs at those who meet his definition of wealthy. That includes hard-working individuals, families, and small and large business owners who hire employees, pay salaries, and invest in our economy. Obama ignores the fact that when you increase taxes on a business owner, you stymie the ability of that individual to help grow our economy, create jobs, and generate opportunity for others based on his/her own success and expansion. He also ignores the fact that despite what he and his liberal comrades might think, the success of individuals, families, and/or businesses is not an invitation for the federal government to seize more of their hard-earned cash.

In order to promote his class warfare-driven policies, Obama repeatedly extols a notion of “shared sacrifice.” (Translation: The “rich” aren’t funneling enough of their cash to the federal government.) As noted by The Heritage Foundation, “The top 1 percent of income earners paid 38 percent of all federal income taxes in 2008, while the bottom 50 percent paid only 3 percent. Forty-nine percent of U.S. households paid no federal income tax at all.”

In April of 2010, the AP reported, “Less noticed were tax cuts for low- and middle-income families, which were expanded when Obama signed the massive economic recovery package last year. The result is a tax system that exempts almost half the country from paying for programs that benefit everyone, including national defense, public safety, infrastructure and education. It is a system in which the top 10 percent of earners — households making an average of $366,400 in 2006 — paid about 73 percent of the income taxes collected by the federal government.”

Does that sound like a system in which the top earners haven’t been sharing the sacrifice?

2012 conservative contenders, watch closely as President Obama advocates taking from one person to give to another. Provide a stark contrast to his divisive rhetoric. Be his opposite by upholding an America in which free-market principles, limited government, and a decrease in tax rates for all would incentivize business, unleash entrepreneurial spirits, and yield greater opportunities for people of all shapes, sizes, colors, and incomes.

President Obama, keep your class warfare and the policies through which you’ve added more to our national debt than any president from Washington through Reagan combined. When it comes to 2012, getting this country back on track, and reawakening everything that makes America exceptional, conservatives have it covered. (Jedidiah Bila)

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Follow The Agenda

Remember, long ago in the very distant past of 2008 when $100+ per gallon gas was the fault of rich Oil men like President Bush and Evil CEO’s??

It was all the Republicans fault. As a commenter on a Huffington Post article about the “Bush Legacy” of  High Oil Prices put it “George Bush is from Texas, and has friends (campaign contributers) in the oil industry. Dick Cheney is from Wyoming, where he lobbied for the oil and coal business. Cheney was CEO of Halliburto­n which sells equipment to the oil business. While they’ve been in power the price of crude oil has quadrupled­. Follow the money.” which is very typical Liberal socialist diatribe.

Well, it’s BACK! And not an evil Oil President in sight. But I’m sure it’s still his fault anyhow.

Today, Reuters: “OPEC will only have an extraordinary meeting if oil prices exceed $100 and stay there. We don’t want the market to panic,” the delegate told Reuters.

So Fast forward to today in the Huffington Post reader comments:

“Of course Big Oil, energy, and the insurance industry will continue to raise prices. The plan is to make sure that middle class American’s have very little disposable income. What people don’t pay in taxes, they must pay over to corporate monopolies in the form of inflated prices. Reducing taxes kills the middle class because it destroys the ability of a “United People” to combat the tyranny of corporate fascism.”

Nothings changed.

Only, everything has, but the Liberals are still too obsessed with their Class Warfare Agenda and “green” to see it.

Political Cartoon

The prospect of oil breaking $100 a barrel, last touched in October 2008 after Lehman Brothers collapsed, has raised alarm bells about the impact of fuel costs on the economic recovery.

Obama almost secretly “allowed” some oil companies to start drilling again 6 months AFTER the Oil spill was plugged. Even though a Federal Judge said the Moratorium was illegal they went and did it again anyhow.

The Media just tried to ignore it.

After all, they have to prop up GM’s sales of the fake electric car, The Chevy Volt. I had a few choice words to say on it : https://indyfromaz.wordpress.com/2010/10/20/revolt-ting/

Especially in light of the news about the GM (Government Motors) bail out.

You know the one where the spin is that GM paid it all back and bail outs do work…

The Congressional Oversight Panel reported Thursday that by selling 45% of the stock it had in GM, Washington has “‘locked in’ a loss of billions of dollars and thus greatly reduced the likelihood that taxpayers will ever be repaid in full.”

Bailout defenders had thought that GM’s IPO would show critics that the government could make money on the bailout. But when “Treasury received a price of $33 per share,” it sold “well below the $44.59 needed to be on track to recover fully taxpayers money.”

That seems clear enough. But those justifying the bailout will ignore taxpayers’ losses and focus instead on the panel’s statement that the aided companies are “on the path to financial stability.”

Set your media on SPIN!

But then again, that’s what Liberals want.

You out of that gus-guzzling, Oil-loving, Class Warfare, infernal-combustion, global warming evil machine of death!

They want you to drive an electric car (even a fake one) or nothing.

The fact that petroleum is used in thousands of products besides gasoline, including the trucks and trains that are hauling freight all over the country is completely outside of their Agenda so it’s immaterial.

That orange had to be shipped into your grocery store from somewhere.

But The Agenda is The Agenda.

We all have to have solar panels, wind farms, electric cars and organic food.

The costs of this are immaterial. It “feels good”.

It’s 60’s hippie marijuana-toking stupidity, but  it “feels good”.

And liberals blindness is only 1/2 the problem.

The other one is China and India.

You see, one of the main reasons for the Oil Prices is them.

It’s called Demand. As in Supply and Demand.

That principle of economics Liberals only understand when it suits their Agenda and ignore otherwise.

They have a huge demand. They can pay for it (largely with our debt) so why not sell it to them instead.

With fierce global competiton and  state-run monopolies in Venezuela and China squeezing out Western energy giants, the bottom line is that cheap oil – and subsequently cheap gasoline – just doesn’t work out on the balance sheets of big oil.

At the same time, U.S. commercial oil supplies fell 1.2% to 335.3 million barrels last week. (Investor Place)

They have other customers and bigger costs. And those “western Energy Giants” at least in this country are hobbled by an Administration that is vehemently hostile to them.

So even if we produced more it would help like it did in “the old days”.

But ignoring the problem and sticking your head in the “green” sand also isn’t going to help.

“Green” tech is not economical as of yet, so relying on it, praying for it, waving 60’s peace and love over it isn’t the answer right now.

But that’s the Agenda. And The Agenda is The Agenda.

So expensive gas suits The Agenda.

And that is George W Bush and Big Oil’s Fault! 🙂

Especially as austerity is slapping us in the face.

For Jan 1, 2011 10,000 Baby Boomers EVERY DAY will be retiring for the next 20 years!!

And they want their government money and they want it NOW! (and ObamaCare).

The more we can produce for our own the better we will be for our own sake.

And being responsible for our own is important.

But The Agenda is more important!

In 2008 High Oil Prices worked for them because it was good for demonizing Bush and Big Oil, now it works for their “green” Agenda.

Either way, we all get tarred!

Political Cartoon