Posts Tagged ‘Federal Reserve’

Realize That Obama Has ‘Fundamentally Transformed’ America Into A Failed Marxist State. Just Ask Poor People And Liberals

September 9, 2013

Quick test.  Who said this:

“The economy is doing poorly. Everything is expensive. With high taxes, we’re not going to be able to pay rent.”

Wrong, Democrat.  It was NOT Karl Rove or some über right wing nutjob who only said this because he hates Obama (and that because he’s “racist”).  Nope.  It was a 34-year-old Hispanic father named Francisco Zuniga at an SEIU-sponsored protest event.  Who would have thought that out of the mouths of leftist whiners could drool wisdom???

This is the fifth year of the Age of Obama.  It is the fifth freaking year of a failed president whose only talent is blaming others for his massive failures.

Let’s break those words from Zuniga down:

“The economy is doing poorly.”

That is something that literally every single person who is not a demon-possessed liar and hypocrite without shame (i.e. a Democrat) knows as a fact.  Obama promised the world; he has delivered economic manure.

What else does Zuniga say?

“Everything is expensive.”

Well, thanks for noticing that little factoid, Francisco.  I’ve written ad nauseum about the Obama Federal Reserve policies that were necessary to “fund” Obama’s reckless and morally and fiscally insane federal spending.  We’ve had Quantitative Easing, we’ve had QE2, we’ve had Operation Twist, we’ve had QE3, and now we’re at “QE Forever.”  And these policies have basically arbitrarily added zeroes to the money supply computers.  As of March of this year, Obama’s chief Fedthug had added over $2 trillion to the money supply – a beyond insane 240 percent increase.

It’s actually probably a lot more than that “mere” 240 percent increase.  CNN Money says that rather than $2 trillion, it’s actually been at least $2.5 trillion.  And as Democrat Bernie Saunders notes, it’s actually an awful lot more than that, given the AT LEAST $16 trillion in “secret loans” that had taken place under Obama’s Federal Reserve.  I mean, holy hell, where did all this cash come from?  From Never-Never Land, that’s where.

Let me put it this way: when Obama took office from George W. Bush, the Federal Reserve balance sheet was $800 billion; it is now $3,601,523 BILLION under Barack Obama.

In an article I wrote three full years ago:

An increase in the money supply is rather like an overdose of drugs. And in this case the effect of the overdose will be hyperinflation. Basically, the moment we have any kind of genuine recovery, our staggering deficit is going to begin to create an ultimately gigantic inflation rate. Why? Because we have massively artificially increased our money supply beyond our ability to actually produce real wealth, and that means that money will ultimately be devalued. There’s simply no way it can’t be. If simply printing money solved financial problems, the government could just mail everyone several million dollars, and we could all retire. The problem is that more money chasing a limited supply of goods simply pushes up prices higher and higher without doing anything to solve the underlying economic problems. If we have a recovery, with increased economic activity, there will be increased demand on the money supply, forcing an upward climb in interest rates as a means of controlling the currency. And then we’ll begin to seriously pay for Obama’s and the Democrat Party’s sins. Paradoxically, the only thing preventing hyperinflation now is the recession, because people aren’t buying anything and therefore aren’t competing for those limited goods.

THAT is why we haven’t yet experienced truly catastrophic hyperinflation YET.  But the moment we ever actually start to get out of the economic hellhole Obama has dug us into, we will see inflation at levels that will shock and dismay you.  You mark my words.  And what we’ve now learned is that having become hooked on the hardcore narcotic known as QE crack, we can’t get off of it – because if we try the stock market will crash and people will start to panic.

Who is actually going to pay for all that money Obama invented?  I pointed out the sad reality a year ago:

Nobody’s talking about what that massive devaluation of our currency is going to ultimately cost us.  Nobody is talking about the fact that the people who are going to pay the highest tax as a result of this action – and it IS a regressive tax – will be retirees who will see the value of their savings drop even as they look at interest rates and pension funds that pay them nothing.  Retirees are not in a position to snort the crack of quantitative easing; they depend mostly on bonds.  And the Obama administration and the Federal Reserve have decided to stab the bond market  that older investors necessarily depend upon in the heart to artificially inflate the stock market.  Until they have to do it again.  And again.  And of course pretty soon again and again after that.

Commodities like oil and food – which conveniently are being ignored as proof positive that we are already seeing MASSIVE inflation – will continue to go up and up and up (see here and here and here for examples).   The fact of the matter is that prices are rising dramatically and HAVE BEEN rising dramatically, and what just happened today will sure that they CONTINUE to rise dramatically.  And everybody but Obama and the Federal Reserve know it.

And everything I predicted in that article and one I wrote back in 2011 turned out to be right.  Except I used the term “QE 4″ and Obama’s economic wizards called it “QE Forever” instead.  And all the way back in 2010 I said it would fail, as it HAS failed.  You need to understand: as I pointed out in May 2011, quantitative easing is the economic equivalent of feeding a diabetic lots of sugar.  It is incredibly unhealthy and will ultimately kill the patient, but once you start feeding that sugar you can’t stop or the patient will crash and die for sure, just as Wall Street will crash and die if Obama stops giving them free sugar candy money.

Let me add another group of people to retirees I described above, Francisco: THE POOR.  Because most of the poor are on fixed incomes every bit as much as retirees are.  And their low wages, their welfare and their food stamps just aint going to keep up with the inflation that has resulted from printing money.  When you print money out of thin air, and you’ve got trillions more dollars chasing the same amount of finite resources, the value of those dollars goes down, down, DOWN.

It turns out that “free money” isn’t really so damn free, after all.

Commodities such as food and fuel are skyrocketing - especially gas as Obama’s failed Middle East policy rears its ugly head in Syria (although, mind you, Obama’s gas prices have been shockingly high all along) - and so, yeah, Francisco, “everything is getting more expensive.”

We’re to the point where we will soon be spending more money in interest to service our psychotic debt than we will on anything else.  By the next decade – and keep in mind we’re nearly half way there NOW – we will be spending the equivalent of the 2009 $862 billion Obama stimulus EVERY SINGLE YEAR.  Only those payments will be going to China while they mockingly laugh at our stupidity that made us their debt slaves.

You aint seen nothing yet, Francisco.  Thanks to Obama, your hell is going to get a lot more hellish.

What else did Francisco tell us?  He told us that Obama’s economy was crappy and thanks to Obama’s moral and fiscal idiocy, everything was more expensive now due to inflation.  What else did he say?

“With high taxes, we’re not going to be able to pay rent.”

I don’t need to point out which party and which failed president of which damn party is behind all those taxes, of course.

Let’s try to put this in terms that Francisco will understand if he doesn’t already: who owns your house you’re paying that rent on?  And what do you think happens when liberal demagogues “tax the rich”???  Here’s what will happen: when Obama and Democrats viciously tax “the rich” who own that house you rent, what’s that high-taxed owner going to do?  He’s going to raise your damn rent, THAT’S what he’s going to do.  And if you don’t like paying more in rent, you’d better show up with a huge mob of likeminded enraged sufferers with pitchforks and torches to drive Obama out of Washington before he creates another monster and kills again.

But you won’t, will you?

I want you to consider something about Obama’s “housing recovery” within Obama’s “economic recovery.”  They’re both radically and wildly FAILED.  I want you to consider, Mr. Zuniga, the ramifications of the fact that SIXTY PERCENT OF HOMES SOLD IN 2013 WENT TO CASH BUYERS.  Before I point out what that means, let me first point out how connected it is with the radically failed Obama Fed policies that have kept the money printing presses going night and day and day and night:

USA: 60 percent of homes sold in 2013 went to all cash buyers
Posted on August 16, 2013 by Stacy Herbert

Stacy Summary: This is what interest rate apartheid looks like.

USA:  60 percent of homes sold in 2013 went to all cash buyers

There was an odd sort of myth floating around the market that the cash buyer  crowd was somehow a tiny portion of the market, like a drop of water in the vast  ocean of home buying.  This delusional dream played into the fantasy that this  housing market was naturally rising because of overall household demand when in  reality, it is being driven by investors leveraging the artificial low rates  created by the Fed.  The flood of money from Wall Street has been large.  Even  anecdotally, it was apparent that cash buyers were driving the market given that  housing is a margin driven market.  That is, at any given time only a small  portion of all homes are on the market for sale.  However, an analysis by  non-other than Goldman Sachs shows that 60 percent of all 2013 home sales are  being driven by cash buyers.  That is, the middle class is largely being pushed  out of this game and has become the minority in this real estate market.

You see, Mr. Zuniga, these rich people are taking advantage of the crony capitalism (fascism) of Obama that has helped the elite investor class at the expense of the poor.  They’re snapping up the homes that YOU’RE going to rent.  And then they’re socking you with higher and higher rents.  Meanwhile, you’ve got virtually no change to ever own a home thanks to Obama.  The American dream is dead meat.  And did I mention this is the FIFTH year of the Age of Obama???  But it’s all Bush’s fault, much the way in the Big Brother society of 1984 it was all “Emmanuel Goldstein’s” fault.

Meanwhile, Mr. Zuniga, it’s getting harder and harder for you to even GET a job in Obama’s wildly failed economy.  The jobless rate just went down to 7.4%.  Hip-hip-hooray.  Only it did so as still MORE of the decimated American working class were destroyed into hopelessness at EVER finding a job.

There is an incredibly significant labor measure called the “labor participation rate.”  It is the percentage of working-age Americans who actually have a damn JOB.

There’s an article I wrote a little over a year ago that you ought to consider.  I detailed then the catastrophic plunge in the rate of Americans who actually have a job in the miserably failed Obama economy during and throughout the Obama regime.  At that time, it was the worst it had been in thirty years.  And I noted how each year under Obama’s failed Marxist State, it had just gotten worse and worse.  As an example, I recorded that in November 2010 – and note this AFTER the so-called “recovery” – the labor participation rate was the worst it had been in 25 years.  Which is to say far, FAR worse than anything Bush had ever done, you Democrat ideologues.  The next year, by August 2011, it was the worst in 27 years.  And by May of 2012, it was the worst due to Obama in 31 years.

Here we are, a year or so later, and how have things gone?  Just as I told you they would go under this failed president’s failed leadership and failed ideology: the labor participation rate is now the worst in 35 years.

And the reliably überliberal Los Angeles Times was forced to acknowledge it in these terms:

Although the unemployment rate ticked down to 7.3% last month — the lowest level since December 2008 — it fell largely for the wrong reason. More discouraged Americans gave up looking for work as the percentage of the population in the labor force dropped for the third consecutive month to its worst point in 35 years.

The unemployment rate has been dropping – which has been as good for Obama politically as it has been catastrophic for the rest of America economically.  I predicted a year and a half ago:

At the rate we’re going in Obama’s God damn America, we will have zero percent unemployment and nobody will actually have a damn job.

And, yep, that’s the way we’re headed.

Democrats are demon-possessed bureaucrats.  That’s where they get their name from.  They claim that the labor participation rate is falling as older baby boomers retire.  But that is a LIE FROM HELL.  As an example, it is YOUNG ADULTS who are suffering the most due to Obamanomics.  People cannot find a job who need to work.

And because of ObamaCare, full-time jobs have been “fundamentally transformed” by Obama into part-time jobs with no health benefits.

And if you don’t believe me, again, just ask liberals.  A letter signed by the heads of the Teamsters, the UFCW and UNITE-HERE have this to say about Obama’s impact on workers and the hours they get to work:

When you and the President sought our support for the Affordable Care Act (ACA), you pledged that if we liked the health plans we have now, we could keep them.  Sadly, that promise is under threat. Right now, unless you and the Obama Administration enact an equitable fix, the ACA will shatter not only our hard-earned health benefits, but destroy the foundation of the 40 hour work week that is the backbone of the American middle class.

The letter from these liberal unions points out the obvious fact that Democrats refuse to acknowledge about their demonic ObamaCare takeover of healthcare:

First, the law creates an incentive for employers to keep employees’ work hours below 30 hours a week. Numerous employers have begun to cut workers’ hours to avoid this obligation, and many of them are doing so openly. The impact is two-fold: fewer hours means less pay while also losing our current health benefits.

Second, millions of Americans are covered by non-profit health insurance plans like the ones in which most of our members participate. These non-profit plans are governed jointly by unions and companies under
the Taft-Hartley Act. Our health plans have been built over decades by working men and women. Under the ACA as interpreted by the Administration, our employees will treated differently and not be eligible for subsidies afforded other citizens. As such, many employees will be relegated to second-class status and shut out of the help the law offers to for-profit insurance plans.

And finally, even though non-profit plans like ours won’t receive the same subsidies as for-profit plans, they’ll be taxed to pay for those subsidies. Taken together, these restrictions will make non-profit plans like ours
unsustainable, and will undermine the health-care market of viable alternatives to the big health insurance companies.

You want to know who is killing your dreams, Mr. Zuniga?  Democrats.

But you keep voting for them anyway, because you prefer lies and more socialism and more welfare and then more lies and still more socialism and still more welfare, to the truth that would set you free if you were willing to finally act like a man and be determined to stand up on your own two feet and demand an economic system that enables you to do that.

You’re siding with the wrong people, the wrong party, the wrong political philosophy.  You’re siding with the people who keep HURTING you.  As you’d understand if you stopped and thought about your own words.

You’re one of those people who still idiotically believes that when Obama “gives” you “free stuff,” it’s actually FREE.  Let me pop your bubble, Francisco: when ObamaCare taxes insurance companies, taxes drugs, taxes medical devices, and mandates (that means forces) the health industry to pay for all of these “free” benefits such as free birth control and 26-year-olds staying on mom and dad’s health plan, the cost of medical care rises FOR EVERYBODY.  And at the same time the quality of health care goes up for EVERYBODY.

And that has had the result that people are getting kicked off health plans rather than all the lies Obama promised.

You don’t understand that everything you and your Democrats want to do – such as force businesses to raise the minimum wage whether they can afford to do so or not, whether they will cut their work forces or not, whether they will be forced to raise prices (which will reduce demand and thus reduce jobs) on poor people who buy from them or not – undermines the economy and hurts the very poor people Democrats dishonestly claim to be trying to help.  Back in 2009, I predicted that Obamanomics with its totalitarian dictate on employers to pay higher wages would be a holocaust for minimum wage workers.  And I was right.  And I just keep being more and more right as Obama’s devastating and disastrous impact on the economy spreads like the cancer that it is.

In order for the economy to create jobs, and create enough jobs to get America out of the hellhole Obama put it in, the government needs to step off employers’ throats.  Quit forcing them to do stuff they can’t afford to do and cover stuff they can’t afford to cover.  Cut their taxes so they have an actual INCENTIVE to create jobs.  And for that matter cut the damn welfare incentive so that working-age adults who ought to be ashamed of themselves if they were capable of that virtue have an actual incentive to start working.

With QE3 Federal Reserve And Obama Administration Fully Qualify For Definition Of Insanity (Doing SAME Thing Over And Over And Expecting Different Results)

September 14, 2012

Things aren’t getting better.  Obama told you a lie.  Democrats have been telling you lies.  I (and other conservatives) have accurately and reliably told AND PREDICTED the truth from the get-go.  As I will document in this article.

First of all, the QE3 that was launched today is an open recognition of the failure of the Obama administration by the Federal Reserve.

The initial title of this article – as you can see by examining the link itself – was “GOLDMAN: Bad Jobs Report Puts Odds Of QE Next Week Above 50%.”

GOLDMAN: It Looks Like QE Is Coming Next Week
Joe Weisenthal|Sep. 7, 2012, 8:47 AM

Quick blast outta Goldman.

BOTTOM LINE: With today’s August employment report showing a nonfarm payroll gain of 96,000 and an unemployment rate of 8.1% because of a drop in the participation rate, we expect a return to unsterilized and probably open-ended asset purchases at the September 12-13 FOMC meeting.

MAIN POINTS:

1. We now anticipate that the FOMC will announce a return to unsterilized asset purchases (QE3), mainly agency mortgage-backed securities but potentially including Treasury securities, at its September 12-13 FOMC meeting. We previously forecasted QE3 in December or early 2013. We continue to expect a lengthening of the FOMC’s forward guidance for the first hike in the funds rate from “late 2014” to mid-2015 or beyond.

So this isn’t a “good thing.”  This is a bad thing.  The 200 point increase in the stock market is a temporary blip and ultimately only the institutional investors who can move money around in microseconds will be able to benefit from it.

Here’s another article I wrote back in August that cites proof that the QE3 that we just saw Friday is the result of the Obamanomics disasterThe Fed simply didn’t launch QE3 because Obama’s economic policies are working; they did it because Obamanomics has utterly failed.

Second, let’s look at the “success” of quantitative easing:

Here’s more on that from an article I wrote back in August 2011.  Notice that I predicted with complete accuracy that QE2 would fail and that we would be at precisely the point where we are now trying a THIRD round of quantitative easing.

And this isn’t really even “QE3″; it’s really “QE4.”  Because Operation Twist basically WAS QE3.  It was certainly at the very least a “primer” for QE3.  I’m hardly the only one to say that, as it’s rather easy to show.  Just how many times do we have to keep trying this???

As long as Wall Street keeps getting its massive doses of sugar (really more like crack cocaine) from the government, it keeps feeding and feeding from the massively-government-subisidized feeding trough.

Look at the chart above and answer this question: if I were a drug addict pursuing doses of crack, how would a graph of my behavior look different?  I’d have my hit (QE1) and then crash; then I’d take another hit (QE2) and then crash; so I’d need another hit (QE3).  And then another one, ad infinitum.  That is the nature of destructive addictive behavior; and the addict either changes or he dies.  We’ll see in November if we’re ready to change or if we want to keep pursuing economic crack until we collapse and die as a nation.

How many times do you keep doing the same thing?  Now that we are at “QE3,” how is this not the classic definition of insanity???

What do you think the odds are that the market is going to tank again just like it did the first two times in anticipation of a QE4????  And you need to realize that a vote for Obama IS a vote for QE4.  And QE5.  And we’ll be a banana republic before Obama’s Fed would have a chance to do a QE6.

Not counting QE3 today, the Federal Reserve has pumped (or dumped) more than $2.3 trillion in money that it invented by adding zeros to their computer under Obama.

Let me ask you a question?  Where did that $2.3 trillion go?  Are you richer???

You sure aren’t.  In fact, even if you blame the ENTIRE recession on Bush (as liberals invariably do), Obama has still been very nearly TWICE as disastrous for household incomes in his “recovery” than you can blame Bush for during “his” recession.  You’re being lied to every single day.

When George Bush left office, a senior citizen with $300,000 in bonds – basically a fairly average retirement nestegg – could collect $1,500 a month in interest.  Which was enough for them to live on and be able to have the principal for emergencies and hopefully be able to leave that principal to their children.  But Obama and Bernanke have obliterated that; now that same $300,000 is producing only $200 a month in interest.  Which is very obviously nowhere NEAR enough to live on.  And so senior citizens are eating away at that nestegg that they counted on at a very alarming rate.  Obama and his failed policies have screwed these people – and the mainstream media will NOT talk about it.

Now the Fed balance sheet is going to be over $3 trillion.  And you can add to that shocking tally another $40 billion every single month for the foreseeable future.  Before Obama took office, it was $800 billion.  Nobody’s talking about what that massive devaluation of our currency is going to ultimately cost us.  Nobody is talking about the fact that the people who are going to pay the highest tax as a result of this action – and it IS a regressive tax – will be retirees who will see the value of their savings drop even as they look at interest rates and pension funds that pay them nothing.  Retirees are not in a position to snort the crack of quantitative easing; they depend mostly on bonds.  And the Obama administration and the Federal Reserve have decided to stab the bond market  that older investors necessarily depend upon in the heart to artificially inflate the stock market.  Until they have to do it again.  And again.  And of course pretty soon again and again after that.

Commodities like oil and food – which conveniently are being ignored as proof positive that we are already seeing MASSIVE inflation – will continue to go up and up and up (see here and here and here for examples).   The fact of the matter is that prices are rising dramatically and HAVE BEEN rising dramatically, and what just happened today will sure that they CONTINUE to rise dramatically.  And everybody but Obama and the Federal Reserve know it.

I put it in biblical terms here.  And I pointed out:

The only thing propping up the economy under Obama’s morally and fiscally idiotic policies is QE2. Banks and major businesses are not being allowed to fail (it’s all too big too fail in an increasingly fascist system in which the government dominates the banking and corporate spheres). Right now, the system Obama has only made more broken is being kept afloat in cash being created out of thin air. The last time quantitative easing ended, the DOW immediately lost 16% of its value in two weeks. And QE2 is set to end in June.

This means QE3, and then of course QE4. Because “QE” means “Quack Economics” far more than it should mean anything else.

I also pointed out that this would fail way back in 2010.  And I pointed out that all the Federal Reserve is doing is monetizing Obama’s damn insane deficits.

But the real inflation monster is still yet to come.

Back in May of last year I wrote this:

QE2 is the economic equivalent of sugar in nutrition. Will it provide quick energy? Sure it will. Will that quick energy come at the expense of future health? You bet it will.

Right now, as a result of the Obama Federal Reserve’s policy of increasing the monetary supply by buying debt from itself (literally creating money out of thin air), there is more economic activity. Right now, as a result of this policy, credit rates are lower. Fewer banks and corporations are going under because of the ready access to cheap money. Investors see the stability and invest.

We should all feed our children tons of sugar, so we can enjoy the short term bonanza of frenetic activity.

Unless you worry about all the cavities, the weight gains, the diabetes, and of course that huge depressing crash with all of those catastrophic health consequences that necessarily come later.

The first time we ended QE1, the stock market lost 16% of its value in two weeks. Which is to say it didn’t work the first time for the same reason it won’t work this second time. Or a necessary third time, etcetera.

One of the more sinister effects of quantitative easing is that it essentially becomes a tax on saving. You were busy at work putting away as much as you could during a period when your money was worth more. But now, as a result of artificially increasing the money supply, all that money you accumulated in saving is worth less. Why is this? Because you can increase the money supply all you want, but you’ve still got the same finite amount of goods and services. And when you’ve got twice as many dollars in the money supply as you had before, over time those same goods and services will cost twice as much as before, and so on.

Right now, prices are going up dramatically on virtually everything that matters. And yet the only ones who refuse to admit it are the federal government and its staunchest mainstream media propagandists who think and report what the Obama regime wants them to think and report.

In another article I wrote over two full years ago:

An increase in the money supply is rather like an overdose of drugs. And in this case the effect of the overdose will be hyperinflation. Basically, the moment we have any kind of genuine recovery, our staggering deficit is going to begin to create an ultimately gigantic inflation rate. Why? Because we have massively artificially increased our money supply beyond our ability to actually produce real wealth, and that means that money will ultimately be devalued. There’s simply no way it can’t be. If simply printing money solved financial problems, the government could just mail everyone several million dollars, and we could all retire. The problem is that more money chasing a limited supply of goods simply pushes up prices higher and higher without doing anything to solve the underlying economic problems. If we have a recovery, with increased economic activity, there will be increased demand on the money supply, forcing an upward climb in interest rates as a means of controlling the currency. And then we’ll begin to seriously pay for Obama’s and the Democrat Party’s sins. Paradoxically, the only thing preventing hyperinflation now is the recession, because people aren’t buying anything and therefore aren’t competing for those limited goods.

THAT is why we haven’t yet experienced truly catastrophic inflation YET.  But the moment we ever actually start to get out of the economic hellhole Obama has dug us into, we will see inflation at levels that will shock and dismay you.  You mark my words.

Now that we are officially at QE3, I want you to watch this video to see what necessarily awaits you:

Get ready, because the American economy WILL be going on a scary ride:

Because Obama Radically Failing, Desperate Fed Will Soon Be Radically Bailing While Mainstream Media Is Wildly Flailing

August 24, 2012

The economy is going to hell under Obama far faster than anybody short of Cloward and Piven ever dared think.

If at first QEI doesn’t succeed and then QE2 doesn’t succeed to make up for the worst and most wicked president in American history, why try, try, try again.

Bernanke and the rest of the Federal Reserve Board keep trying to magically create enough money to keep up with Obama’s deranged socialist spending and no matter how determined they are to get the job done it just won’t go their way.  I have a feeling the Federal Reserve, in trying to deal with Obama, can relate to this scene of Cameron Diaz trying to deal with her bong:

They keep trying to add zeros to the Federal Reserve computers but they can’t seem to add the damn numbers fast enough to keep up with their psychotic president.  And they keep saying, “SERIOUSLY?!?!”

Federal Reserve leaning toward more stimulus
By Paul Handley | AFP – Wed, 22 Aug, 2012

Policy makers at the US Federal Reserve are leaning toward more stimulus action “fairly soon” unless economic data turns around, minutes from their meeting three weeks ago showed Wednesday.
 
The minutes revealed most members of the Federal Open Market Committee were concerned about slowing growth and the vulnerability of the economy to external threats, particularly economic instability in Europe.
 
“Many members judged that additional monetary accommodation would likely be warranted fairly soon unless incoming information pointed to a substantial and sustainable strengthening in the pace of the economic recovery,” the record of the July 31-August 1 FOMC meeting said.
 
“A number of members noted that if the recent modest rate of economic growth were to persist, the economy would be less able to weather a material adverse shock without slipping back into recession,” it added.
 
Fed members discussed the merits of different approaches to sparking more drive in the economy, from signalling that they would keep their benchmark interest rate at the current all-time low longer than currently understood, to undertaking more bond purchases aimed at pulling long-term interest rates down further.
 
Some said that a new Fed program to purchase Treasury and other bonds, pressing down their yields, “might boost business and consumer confidence”, while demonstrating that the committee remains focused on lowering unemployment while keeping inflation under control.
 
In the end, the FOMC put off any new action, but the minutes show the policy makers closer to moving on a new stimulus plan at their next meeting on September 12-13.

 Yes, it’s pretty crazy to keep trying quantitative easing over and over and over again – the definition of insanity being what it is and all – but you’ve got to see things from the Fed’s perspective: all Obama can do is fail, and fail, and then fail some more while blaming absolutely everything but his failed leadership and his failed policies for said failure.  So no matter how totally nuts QE3 is at this point, that’s pretty much all we got until we get ourselves a new president who isn’t a Marxist.

But, you know, if it makes you feel any better, Obama is spending all that money to keep losing more jobs for America:

U.S. Weekly Jobless Claims Unexpectedly Rise To 372,000
8/23/2012 8:37 AM ET

(RTTNews) – First-time claims for U.S. unemployment benefits unexpectedly showed a modest increase in the week ended August 18th, according to a report released by the Labor Department on Thursday.

The report showed that initial jobless claims edged up to 372,000 from the previous week’s revised figure of 368,000. The modest increase came as a surprise to economists, who had expected jobless claims to slip to 365,000 from the 366,000 originally reported for the previous week.

Additionally, the Labor Department said the less volatile four-week moving average crept up to 368,000 from the previous week’s revised average of 364,250.

by RTT Staff Writer

Unexpected!  Drink, ye few dying-of-cirrhosis-of-the-liver-zombies who are still left alive in this the fourth year of the mainstream media trying to cover for Obama almost as desperately as the Federal Reserve is.

One of the factoids that Obama doesn’t want you to think about is the fact that, given our population growth, ten million Americans have actually entered the work force during Obama’s presidency.  And Obama is so far behind in creating jobs for them that it is beyond unreal.  Which is why our labor participation rate is getting to the point that you just want to crawl into your own toilet and flush yourself before Obama does it for you.

Compare Obama’s abject failure and his abjectly failing “solutions” to Ronald Reagan.  And then vote like you AREN’T stupid.

Just to make sure you understand what’s going on, liberals will do whatever they’ve got to do to somehow gin up the markets before the election. Democrats will do whatever it takes to create the illusion that the country isn’t going to hell prior to election day. They’ll bankrupt the country and make our children and their children ad infinitum debt slaves to the Chinese if that’s what it takes.

For the record, I predicted that we’d be at this very point nearly a year and a half ago:

In the market itself, two things are happening: one is that banks are able to borrow money at nearly a zero percent interest rate and then reinvest it in bonds for a safe and easy profit without those risky and pesky loans to small businesses. The other thing is that there are virtually zero bankruptcies of major business and financial sector entities because they can borrow money at the aforementioned artificially low interest to keep themselves alive no matter “artificial” that life is. The moment we start to see interest rates go to their natural levels, you are going to see a giant swath of reorganizations (which is a fancy word for bankruptcies). It’s coming.

I’ve also watched as QE2 (that’s Quantitative Easing, the Obama Fed plan to manipulate interest rates by creating bogus money based on the government essentially borrowing from itself) has fed this big player stock market gluttony with artificial money creating artificially low interest rates. The last time quantitative easing ended, the market lost about 16% of its total value in about two weeks. QE2 is scheduled to end in June. You do the predictive math about what’s going to happen in June/July.

I am reminded of a rather chilling 7 minute video about a fictional scenario which is starting to look more and more like a prophecy:

The plot of the highly realistic video is that Obama’s announcment of QE4 is met with the world market finally realizing that Obama is a clueless idiot. And it proceeds to detail the unravelling of the entire financial system.

We are almost certainly going to see QE3. The only way we WON’T see QE3 is if the “experts” rename what will be virtually exactly the same thing. The liberal/progressive/socialist powers that be simply don’t have any other plan. And whether it’s QE4 or QE5, at some point the world markets will come to the same conclusion that they arrive at in the fictional video above.

Is America completely screwed in this God damn America presidency?

To answer Cameron Diaz’s thrice asked question, yes, seriously.

US Federal Reserve Handed Out More In Bailouts ($16 TRILLION!) Than The ENTIRE OFFICIAL US DEBT

December 31, 2011

If you like socialism and you don’t like socialism for the rich, YOU ARE A STUPID SOCIALIST.

Audit of the Federal Reserve Reveals $16 Trillion in Secret Bailouts
Posted by AD on July 21st, 2011

The first ever GAO(Government Accountability Office) audit of the Federal Reserve was carried out in the past few months due to the Ron Paul, Alan Grayson Amendment to the Dodd-Frank bill, which passed last year. Jim DeMint, a Republican Senator, and Bernie Sanders, an independent Senator, led the charge for a Federal Reserve audit in the Senate, but watered down the original language of the house bill(HR1207), so that a complete audit would not be carried out. Ben Bernanke(pictured to the left), Alan Greenspan, and various other bankers vehemently opposed the audit and lied to Congress about the effects an audit would have on markets. Nevertheless, the results of the first audit in the Federal Reserve’s nearly 100 year history were posted on Senator Sander’s webpage earlier this morning: http://sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/news/?id=9e2a4ea8-6e73-4be2-a753-62060dcbb3c3

What was revealed in the audit was startling: $16,000,000,000,000.00 had been secretly given out to US banks and corporations and foreign banks everywhere from France to Scotland. From the period between December 2007 and June 2010, the Federal Reserve had secretly bailed out many of the world’s banks, corporations, and governments. The Federal Reserve likes to refer to these secret bailouts as an all-inclusive loan program, but virtually none of the money has been returned and it was loaned out at 0% interest. Why the Federal Reserve had never been public about this or even informed the United States Congress about the $16 trillion dollar bailout is obvious — the American public would have been outraged to find out that the Federal Reserve bailed out foreign banks while Americans were struggling to find jobs.

To place $16 trillion into perspective, remember that GDP of the United States is only $14.12 trillion. The entire national debt of the United States government spanning its 200+ year history is “only” $14.5 trillion. The budget that is being debated so heavily in Congress and the Senate is “only” $3.5 trillion. Take all of the outrage and debate over the $1.5 trillion deficit into consideration, and swallow this Red pill: There was no debate about whether $16,000,000,000,000 would be given to failing banks and failing corporations around the world.

In late 2008, the TARP Bailout bill was passed and loans of $800 billion were given to failing banks and companies. That was a blatant lie considering the fact that Goldman Sachs alone received 814 billion dollars. As is turns out, the Federal Reserve donated $2.5 trillion to Citigroup, while Morgan Stanley received $2.04 trillion. The Royal Bank of Scotland and Deutsche Bank, a German bank, split about a trillion and numerous other banks received hefty chunks of the $16 trillion.

“This is a clear case of socialism for the rich and rugged, you’re-on-your-own individualism for everyone else.” – Bernie Sanders(I-VT)

When you have conservative Republican stalwarts like Jim DeMint(R-SC) and Ron Paul(R-TX) as well as self identified Democratic socialists like Bernie Sanders all fighting against the Federal Reserve, you know that it is no longer an issue of Right versus Left. When you have every single member of the Republican Party in Congress and progressive Congressmen like Dennis Kucinich sponsoring a bill to audit the Federal Reserve, you realize that the Federal Reserve is an entity onto itself, which has no oversight and no accountability.

Americans should be swelled with anger and outrage at the abysmal state of affairs when an unelected group of bankers can create money out of thin air and give it out to megabanks and supercorporations like Halloween candy. If the Federal Reserve and the bankers who control it believe that they can continue to devalue the savings of Americans and continue to destroy the US economy, they will have to face the realization that their trillion dollar printing presses will eventually plunder the world economy.

The list of institutions that received the most money from the Federal Reserve can be found on page 131 of the GAO Audit and are as follows..

Citigroup: $2.5 trillion ($2,500,000,000,000)
Morgan Stanley: $2.04 trillion ($2,040,000,000,000)
Merrill Lynch: $1.949 trillion ($1,949,000,000,000)
Bank of America: $1.344 trillion ($1,344,000,000,000)
Barclays PLC (United Kingdom): $868 billion ($868,000,000,000)
Bear Sterns: $853 billion ($853,000,000,000)
Goldman Sachs: $814 billion ($814,000,000,000)
Royal Bank of Scotland (UK): $541 billion ($541,000,000,000)
JP Morgan Chase: $391 billion ($391,000,000,000)
Deutsche Bank (Germany): $354 billion ($354,000,000,000)
UBS (Switzerland): $287 billion ($287,000,000,000)
Credit Suisse (Switzerland): $262 billion ($262,000,000,000)
Lehman Brothers: $183 billion ($183,000,000,000)
Bank of Scotland (United Kingdom): $181 billion ($181,000,000,000)
BNP Paribas (France): $175 billion ($175,000,000,000)
and many many more including banks in Belgium of all places

View the 266-page GAO audit of the Federal Reserve(July 21st, 2011): http://www.scribd.com/doc/60553686/GAO-Fed-Investigation

Source: http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-696
FULL PDF on GAO server: http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d11696.pdf
Senator Sander’s Article: http://sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/news/?id=9e2a4ea8-6e73-4be2-a753-62060dcbb3c3

I have to laugh at the chutzpah of openly socialist Bernie Sanders in his quote, “This is a clear case of socialism for the rich…”  I mean, I thought the guy LIKED his socialism.  The idea that only socialism for the poor is okay is as idiotic as it is false.  You can go to any socialist country at any time in history to see how false it is: Kim Jong Il of “The Peoples” Republic of North Korea made sure that he had his fill of nothing but the very finest in food and drink and blong Swedish prostitutes while the rest of his starving people were digging out their own feces to burn in order to survive the winter.

But the other little factoid being revealed here is the sheer extent of our totally-out-of-control debt.

Consider the following NPR story:

A National Debt Of $14 Trillion? Try $211 Trillion
by NPR Staff
August 6, 2011

Note that the story was written in August of 2011, you know, way, way back in history when our official debt was only $14 trillion.

Obama zoomed it to more than FIFTEEN TRILLION just three months later in November.  And now the same fool-in-chief is demanding that we hike our debt ceiling again by yet another $1.2 trillion.

While Bush was rightly criticized for exploding the national debt by $4 trillion in eight years, Barack Obama has supermassively exploded the national debt by $6 trillion in only three years.

And we’re talking about our debt being a tiny,tiny fraction of what it truly is: try more than $211 TRILLION, if we use all the debt that we’ve REALLY racked up.

We are so doomed.

Which is why the beast is coming.

Get ready to worship him and take his mark, Democrats.  Your entire lives up to this point has prepared you for that moment.

Hey Democrats, Why Is It That States With The Highest Tax Rates Have The Highest Debt???

December 21, 2011

I wrote an article entitled, “Tax Cuts Increase Revenues; They Have ALWAYS Increased Revenues” that documents the fact that, on every single occasion in which it has ever been tried, cutting income tax rates has increased federal tax revenues and resulted in a healthier economy.

Democrats stupidly won’t believe that.  Mostly because they are stupid people who are committed to stupid and depraved world views (such as Marxism).

A Newsmax article documents that what is true of the federal government and tax cutting also happens to be true of the states and tax cutting:

Abolish State Income Taxes
Tuesday, 20 Jul 2010 11:15 AM
By Richard Rahn

Did you know there are nine states that have no state income tax?

The non-income-tax states (see accompanying chart) are geographically and economically diverse, ranging from the state of Washington in the Pacific Northwest, to Texas and Florida in the South, and up to New Hampshire in the Northeast.

Why is it that some of the states with the biggest fiscal problems have the highest individual state income tax rates, such as New York and California, while some of the states with the least fiscal problems have no state income tax at all?

High-tax advocates will argue that the high-tax states provide much more and better state services, but the empirical evidence does not support the assertion.

On average, schools, health and safety, roads, etc. are no better in states with income taxes than those without income taxes. More importantly, the evidence is very strong that people are moving from high-tax states to lower-tax-rate states — the migration from California to Texas and from New York to Florida being prime examples. (Next year, the combined federal, state, and local income tax rate for a citizen of New York City will be well over 50 percent, as contrasted with approximately 38 percent for citizens of Texas and Florida.)

If the citizens of California and New York really thought they were getting their money’s worth for all of the extra state taxation, they would not be moving to low-tax states.

The obvious question then is, Where is all the extra money from these state income taxes going?

It is going primarily to service debt, and to pay for inflated salaries and employee benefits. It is interesting that the high-tax-rate states also, on average, have much higher per capita debt levels than states without income taxes. (Alaska is an outlier because it has its oil reserve to borrow against and actually gives its citizens a “dividend” each year.)

The biggest additional burden the high-tax states have is unionized government worker contracts. My Cato colleague Chris Edwards notes: “Half of all state and local spending — $1.1 trillion out of $2.2 trillion in 2008 — goes toward employee wages and benefits.”

His study showed that, on average, total hourly compensation for state and local government workers was 45 percent higher than for equivalent private-sector workers.

In addition, the government workers are rarely fired even those with poor job performance. Importantly, the differential was much greater in states where more than half of the state employees were unionized, and these were all in states with state income taxes, with the exception of Washington.

High rates of unionization of public employees and high rates of debt go hand in hand. Those states whose government workers are less than 40 percent unionized have median per capita state debt of $2,238, while those states where unionization rates are over 60 percent have a median per capita state debt of $6,380.

High rates of unionization tend to lead to excess staffing, unaffordable benefits, and pensions.

There have been a number of both empirical and theoretical studies showing the negative impacts of state income taxes and particularly those with high marginal rates on economic growth within the state.

A recent study published in the Cato Journal by professors Barry W. Poulson and Jules Gordon Kaplan, which was carefully controlled for the effects of regressivity, convergence, and regional influences in isolating the effect of taxes on economic growth in the states concluded: “Jurisdictions that imposed an income tax to generate a given level of revenue experienced lower rates of economic growth relative to jurisdictions that relied on alternative taxes to generate the same revenue.”

State Income Tax Rates and Debt (All Figures Percent)
States Income Tax State Debt as % of Income
Without Individual Income Tax
Tennessee 0 2.02
Texas 0 2.70
Nevada 0 4.07
Wyoming 0 4.90
Florida 0 5.20
Washington 0 7.93
South Dakota 0 10.95
New Hampshire 0 14.10
Alaska 0 24.01
Highest Individual Income Tax rates
Iowa 9.28 6.47
Maryland 9.23 7.26
California 10.55 7.55
Oregon 11.36 8.61
Hawaii 11.00 11.89
New Jersey 9.06 12.01
New York 10.67 12.22
Vermont 8.95 13.12
Rhode Island 9.9 20.04

The state of New York is a poster child for what not to do. At one time, it was the richest and most populous state. But at least going back to the Harriman and Rockefeller administrations decades ago, it decided it could tax and spend its way to prosperity. (Note: New York City residents face a maximum combined state and city income tax of over 12 percent, while those in many New York counties pay a little less than 9 percent, giving the state an average maximum tax rate of almost 11 percent.)

The results have been the opposite of what was promised.

New York’s relative population, economic growth, and per capita income have all declined, particularly in relation to those states without a state income tax.

In the past year, per-person taxes have increased by $419 in New York, far higher than any other state. (Note: They went up only $1 in Texas. Is New York or Texas now better off?)

Income taxes, as contrasted with consumption (i.e., sales) taxes and modest property tax rates, are far more costly to administer and do far more economic damage (by discouraging work, saving and investment) and are far more intrusive on individual liberty.

The states without state income taxes overall have had far better economic performance for most of the past several decades than have the income tax states — particularly those with high marginal taxes.

The Tea Party movement indicates that it might be the right time politically for politicians in the income tax states to call for those taxes to be phased out.

Good economics might actually be good politics this year.

Richard W. Rahn is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute and chairman of the Institute for Global Economic Growth.

That table alone is worth a million bucks.  Notice how it documents the fact that liberal/Democrat economic policy is about as abject a failure as you can get.

What is also interesting is that the United States did not have a permanent federal income tax until 1913.  That, coincidentally, was the same year that Democrats also gave us the Federal Reserve with the promise that they would now be able to fix everything.  Like all of their promises, it was a giant lie.

Many founding fathers warned against a federal reserve system that Woodrow Wilson ultimately rammed down our national throats.  Here are the words of Thomas Jefferson in particular:

“If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation then by deflation, the banks and the corporations will grow up around them, will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs.” -Thomas Jefferson, The Debate Over The Recharter Of The Bank Bill, (1809).

For the factual record, the Federal Reserve, perversely named as it is, is in fact the very kind of “private bank” that Jefferson warned us about.  It’s fascism, but Democrats love fascism.  Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are examples of other “government sponsored enterprises” devised by Democrats that give us the very, very worst of both government and private enterprise.

And this article directly relates that tax and the out of control Federal Reserve system with our present out of control debt.

Democrats have led the way in screwing up America for the last hundred years.  They were screwing it up in 1913 under Woodrow Wilson.  They were screwing it up again in the 1930s under FDR.  And now we are royally screwing it up under Obama.

And now we have no chance of lasting another hundred years because Democrats have loaded us up with debt that we can never hope to ever repay even as our debt continues to spiral even more out of control.

Things To Consider As Obama’s Propagandists Attack Rick Perry For His Remark About Bernanke

August 17, 2011

The mainstream media and the Obama administration are trying to make the most of Rick Perry’s remark:

“If this guy prints more money between now and the election, I don’t know what you all would do to him in Iowa, but we would treat him pretty ugly down in Texas,” Perry said. “Printing more money to play politics at this particular time in American history is almost … treasonous in my opinion.”

Charles Krauthammer said that it was somewhat tactless for Rick Perry to use the “t” word to describe what he and almost every other conservatives agrees is fiscally despicable behavior on the part of Obama’s Federal Reserve Chairman and the Obama Fed.  And then Krauthammer turned the shining white-hot lens back at Obama and pointed out that Obama is engaging in this very same conduct every time he demonizes Republicans as the political equivalent of terrorists, and that he is basically too cunning (I would have chosen the word ‘weaselly’) to use the “t” word when his rhetoric clearly matches it.

Recently, Obama claimed that Republicans basically wanted to turn America into a banana republic.

As one example, Obama said this:

BARACK OBAMA, (D) PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: “The only thing that is holding us back is our politics. The only thing that prevents us from passing the bills I just mentioned is the refusal of a faction in Congress to put country ahead of party. And that has to stop. I need your help sending a message to Congress that it’s time to put politics aside and get something done.”

Geez, I wonder what “faction” of which “party” that eagerly puts party ahead of country, and seeks to hurt the country for political gain.  Because, I mean, that would be practically, well, treasonous.

And then Obama said this:

Some in Congress would rather see their opponents lose than America win … we can’t have patience with that kind of behavior anymore,” Obama told a crowd.

Which prompted this dose of rational commentary on Obama’s transparent tactic:

He’s accusing his opponents of being unpatriotic, and at some point the next step is [accusing them of] being traitorous,” Michael Franc, vice president for government studies at the Heritage Foundation, told The Daily Caller Monday afternoon. “If Michele Bachmann had said ‘If you disagree with me, you’re unpatriotic,’ [Democrats] would be calling it a loyalty oath or a religious test,” Franc said.

And of course it would – and the media would be all over Obama for his vicious demoagic tactics – if they were even remotely honest.

What Michael Franc said is obviously true.  But the media simply won’t report Obama’s words.  I had a very easy time finding Perry’s rhetoric and a very difficult time finding Obama’s.  But Obama is doing the very same thing that everybody and their dog is accusing Perry of doing.

Krauthammer responds to Obama’s tactics:

KRAUTHAMMER:When the president accuses the Republicans of putting party over country and another stop he said they want America to fail so they will succeed politically, that is a sophisticated way of essentially accusing the Republicans of near treasonous behavior. He is sophisticated and practiced and articulate so he won’t use the word the way Perry did. But it’s the same idea.

BAIER: Are you suggesting that Texas Governor Perry is not articulate?

KRAUTHAMMER: I’m saying the way he articulated attack on Bernanke was a demonstration that he does not have the art and the artful way of presenting it that Obama does.

It’s an essentially an equivalent claim. These people care nothing about country, only about self-interest and politics and reelection. So “A,” it demonstrates that the president is practiced at this. Perry could use practice. But it’s essentially the same unhealthy kind of attack. It’s really something neither party ought to do.

And the president combines it with a pretense that he stands above all of this. But look at this scene. He is on a political trip, which he pretends is not. Therefore our tax money is paying for this trip under the pretense that he is explaining his policies. It’s clearly a campaign trip. It’s all a stump speech.

So he is on political trip in which he accuses his opponents of playing politics when he himself is engaged of politics at the same time and pretending only he speaks in the name of the national interest. He does it over and over again. I know it’s going to be a theme of his campaign. If you call out Perry on his use of that, I’d call out the president on that as well.

OBAMA has been putting his narrow partisan political interests ahead of the well-being of the United States and America and the American people ever since the day he came to office.  His boondoggle stimulus that cost the American people $3.27 TRILLION and pissed away our resources – and went overwhelmingly to Democrat districts.  His unconstitutional ObamaCare that he rammed down America’s throat along with its more than 160 death panels. His hostile takeover of the financial industry a.k.a. the Dodd-Frank act.  His being in the pocket of labor unions on issue after issue.  And he’s the guy who is lecturing us about putting country ahead of party and partisan interest?!?!?

Hey, Obama, how about if you pay for your damn bus tour instead of making the American people pay for it since it is obviously a campaign tour?!?!  I mean, given that you alone are above politics and all…

But, of course, the mainstream media would report on any of the above (other than the stuff that makes Rick Perrylook bad), because that would be fair and objective and honest.  And today’s media is none of those things.

I actually believe Perry’s taking on Fed policies – which are impoverishing grandmas and grandpas to enrich The State, and which have destroyed 3.5 million jobs - is a dang good idea.

Ron Paul rightly compares this policy of artificially creating money out of thin air with counterfeiting. The federal government is counterfeiting its own money, with the same exact motive that all other counterfeiters have.

The White House jumped all over this, self-righteously proclaiming, “We take the independence of the Federal Reserve quite seriously and certainly think threatening the Fed chairman is probably not a good idea.”  But other than the fact that just who in their right mind actually believes Rick Perry physically threatened Bernanke with literal violence?!?!?  I would point out that shouldn’t Obama therefore take the independence of the Supreme Court quite seriously, too?  And yet Obama has REPEATEDLY belittled their rulings.  In one speech Obama deceitfully demonized the court for exercising it’s “independence,” prompting Samuel Alito to mouth the words “That’s not true” to Obama’s demagogic attack.  And it was just today that Obama essentially said that either the Supreme Court would rule the way he wanted them to rule on ObamaCare, or they would be making up the law like some sort of kangaroo court:

“If the Supreme Court follows existing precedent, existing law, it should be upheld without a problem,” Obama said. “If the Supreme Court does not follow existing law and precedent, then, you know, we’ll have to manage that when it happens.”

But hey, refusing to honor the independence of one of the three branches of our government (the executive, the legislature and THE JUDICIARY) established by our Constitution is nothing.  Refusing to honor a Federal Reserve Entity having nothing whatsoever to do with our Constitution and in fact flying in the very face of it is quite another, indeed.

If Rick Perry used a word that cunning, weaselly political strategists say is ill-advised to describe his personal and political disgust and contempt for a disgusting and contemptible fiscal and political policy by an out-of-control Federal Reserve system, I can live with that.  In fact, I’m just glad that somebody is out there on my side who is willing to get in somebody’s face over the crap that is imploding our country.

Conservatives are beyond furious. They want a candidate who will punch Barack Obama right in the mouth and then keep punching until he is politically down on his back and able to get up. The last thing we want to see is another wimpy establishment candidate refuse to go after Obama as a guy who spent 23 years in a racist, Marxist, anti-American “God damn America!” church.

Racist, because imagine the Republican candidate having spent 23 years in a church with a WHITE values system and a commitment to the WHITE family. Because Obama’s “church” continued to spout racism while Obama was there and after he finally left it to cover his political backside. Because imagine the Republican candidate being so inspired of the equivalent of “White folk’s greed runs a world in need” – maybe “Black folk’s crime runs a world of slime” – and being so inspired he writes a book bearing the same title as that sermon.

Marxist because the “liberation theology” that Trinity United preached every single day was Marxist to its core, deriving from Marxist priests who were aiding the Marxist Sandinistas in Nicaragua. Because then Cardinal Ratziger (Now Pope Benedict) officially pronounced liberation theology as coming “from radically marxist positions”. Because the Obama Party is the Party of self-avowed communist Van Jones. Because the “reverend” who was Obama’s “spiritual mentor” is an open Marxist and socialist. Because the Communist Party USA backed Obama in the last election and is backing him in this one, too. And because just what the hell is the difference between Obama’s redistribution of wealth agenda and Karl Marx’s redistribution of wealth agenda?

Anti-American because Obama’s church and Obama’s presidency is “GOD DAMN AMERICA!” Because this is the Cloward and Piven presidency to implode America so it would be forced to embrace communism. Because it continues to the Cloward and Piven administration that is looking to achieve communism in America. Because we have continued to see that this is the Cloward and Piven ideology unfolding in hopes of imploding America.

Conservatives are looking for a guy who will tear into Barack Obama like a junkyard dog going after a thief who’s trying to rob its master. Only in this case the thief was a cynical liar who illegitimately seized the White House in 2008 with a fraudulent campaign of lies, and the “master” is the American people who need someone to fight for them.

You’ve got to be smart and polished, Governor Perry.  Because the same dishonest mainstream media that overlooks Obama’s and Democrats’ constant vile rhetoric will eagerly report every single thing you say that either crosses the line or that they can make appear to have crossed the line.

It’s up to Governor Perry to do a better job walking through the long field of land mines the media will place in his path.  And it is up to every single Republican and conservative and tea party member to keep a documented record of everything that Obama and the Democrats say so we can play the game of finger-pointing that is the quintessential tactic of liberals.

Obama Cooking Up A Nasty Batch Of Poison Stew For Democrats With Shocking Inflation

May 13, 2011

If you listen to the mainstream media, Obama is unbeatable.  Which is really quite bizarre, given the state of the “it’s the economy, stupid.”

Inflation: Poison for Obama in 2012
By Nina Easton, senior editor-at-large @CNNMoney May 9, 2011: 7:22 AM ET

FORTUNE — One of my most vivid memories from 1974 was the gas station at the foot of the hill below my Southern California high school — car lines snaking out into the street, heralding the failure of the government’s price controls and lame ideas such as odd-even rationing. That also was the year President Gerald Ford cooked up an equally goofy plan: Whip Inflation Now, or WIN.

As Ford unveiled WIN to a joint session of Congress on Oct. 8, his bulbous forehead gleaming with sweat, he truly believed he was giving voice to a momentous occasion — on a par with F.D.R.’s call to action at the depth of the Great Depression. How could he know that, four decades later, people would still ridicule his pleas to farmers to grow more food, to citizens to “drive less, heat less,” and — the worst — to supporters to wear those ridiculous WIN buttons that the smart set turned upside down to declare “Need Immediate Money”?

That government leaders would embrace such silliness — it was Nixon who instituted the Stalinesque wage and price controls that set the stage for Ford’s call to citizen action — stands as a powerful testament to how much inflation unnerves the body politic. We haven’t experienced real inflation in more than a generation, so this economic blight is mostly an uncertain stranger to pollsters and political strategists — as well as to voters under 50. But if inflation warnings are right, this stranger could become the dark horse of the 2012 election and beyond.

We know that inflation distorts economic behavior. In the 1970s a combination of high tax rates and inflation prompted investors to flee production in favor of protection. “Give me shelter,” recalls Michael Barone, principal co-author of the annual Almanac of American Politics, referring to not only tax behavior but also investments in assets like real estate to beat inflation rates. But inflation also affects voting behavior — and could exacerbate already widespread anxiety and uncertainty about a struggling economy and President Obama’s reaction to it. With rising prices on everything from big-ticket items like college tuition to food and gas, consumers “feel they don’t have any safe ground to stand on,” Barone notes.

As both President Carter and the late President Ford could attest, that’s not a good place for an incumbent to be. John Huizinga, an economist at the University of Chicago, rightly notes that while unemployment affects some people — and rattles many more — “inflation affects everyone.” Huizinga co-authored a 1982 study that opened with the conventional wisdom of that era: “It is well known … that the public regards inflation as a more serious problem than unemployment.” Looking back, that seems astonishing. While the double-digit inflation of the 1970s had inched down to 8%, unemployment at that time was still a whopping 9.7%.

By historical standards, the latest consumer price index showing a 1.2% annual rise remains super low. But consumers are being hit with hikes to two key components that aren’t included in that number — gas and food. Consumer Growth Partners recently called the rise in grocery prices (6.5% in the first quarter) “the sharpest in a generation.” And gas prices are pushing toward $4 a gallon. Including gas and food, the annual inflation rate is more than double the rise in the CPI.

Even if systemwide inflation doesn’t return in this election cycle, rising gas and food prices will be on the minds of voters. President Obama already faces an unemployment rate that has only recently slipped below 9%, worsened by long-term jobless rates unprecedented since World War II. The Congressional Budget Office now predicts an unemployment rate of 8.2% on Election Day 2012; no President since F.D.R. has been reelected with unemployment over 8%. (President Reagan, facing a similarly painful recession, was elected with a 7.2% jobless rate.)

Add inflation to that mix and it could become a poisonous stew for Democrats. And we’ll know the President is in real trouble if his staff starts handing out buttons.

There’s a video (apparently unrelated to the above article) at the site with the title, “Fed has more to worry about.”  At just before the 2:30 mark, the expert guest says (and this is not a completely accurate transcript, but it’s pretty close):

“A lot of people think that what they’re going to do is raise interest rates and it’s going to turn into a replay of the Hooverism of the 1930s in this country where they raised rates just as the economy was beginning to creep forward.  And then you just end up with another big recession.”

And, of course, in this case, “another big recession” was otherwise known as THE GREAT FREAKING DEPRESSION!!!

Thanks to Obama and his Fed’s incredibly risky and immoral policies, shockingly high interest rates are a fait accompli.  You don’t spend (“throw away” on political patronate pork is more accurate) the trillions of dollars that these fools have spent; and you don’t simply create money out of thin air the way these clowns have done with their QE1 and their QE2 and very shortly QE3 and just get away with it.

The Fed is going to be forced to raise interest rates.  That is simply a fact.  The Obama Federal Reserve is about the only entity on planet earth that refuses to recognize that inflation is becoming a huge problem.  And the moment they ARE forced to ultimately raise rates, you’re going to start to see really ugly get really really really ugly.  Because there’s almost no possible way now that we’re going to be out of our economic woes before the Fed is forced to deal with inflation.

And yes, oh yes, inflation is most definitely here.

This was the Jimmy Carter problem.  And as people like me have been pointing out all along:

It took Ronald Reagan to get America out of a death spiral last time.  Sadly, this time there may not BE another Ronald Reagan.  And this time it may well just be too late.

The beast is coming.

Adjusted U.S. Dollar Plunges To Lowest Level Since 1973

April 22, 2011

More bad news in God damn America:

Soft US dollar, tough choices
By James Mackintosh
Published: March 7 2011 22:48 | Last updated: March 7 2011 22:48

So the US Federal Reserve is not exempt from the laws of supply and demand. Theory suggests creating more dollars should make each worth less. Sure enough, the Fed’s own measure of the trade-weighted dollar in real terms – the best way to do long-term currency comparisons – is at its lowest since the dollar floated in 1973.

For those of you who need a picture to understand what is being said, I shall do my best to provide:

For those of you who simply could not see this coming, I have another useful illustration for you:

I am just so shocked.  I thought QE2 would be a smashing success after the wonders of QE1.

We need another massive stimulus.  Failure squared = success.

This chart explains something profound:

You can bet on gold because Obama can’t ruin it’s value.  You can bet on oil because Obama is making it more and more valuable with his moronic policies.

But DON’T bet on the dollar.  Don’t bet on anything that Obama can get his fumble-fingered mitts on.

Here’s a similar snapshot of reality:

It sounds like a Murphy’s law: “When a total fool occupies the White House, the value of gold increases proportionately.”

Actual U.S. Debt Exceeds GDP Of Entire Planet

April 11, 2011

Here’s one for you to put in your pipe to smoke on.  Even if the U.S. were to seize the wealth of the entire planet, and even if we taxed all the wealth of not only the rich but the miserably poor as well, we STILL couldn’t pay off the debts that Democrats demand that we keep adding to until after we’ve reached that “straw that broke the camel’s back” point:

True U.S. debt exceeds world GDP by $14 trillion
Obama 2010 budget deficit now 5 times larger than nation’s output
Posted: March 21, 2011
By Jerome R. Corsi

As the Obama administration prepares to finance a Fiscal Year 2011 budget  deficit expected to top $1.6 trillion, the American public is largely unaware that the true negative net worth of the federal government reached $76.3 trillion last year.

That figure was five times the 2010 gross domestic product of the United States and exceeded the estimated gross domestic product for the world by approximately $14.4 trillion.

According to the U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. GDP for 2010 was $14.861 trillion. World GDP in 2010, according to the International Monetary Fund, was $61.936 trillion.

“As government obligations continue to spiral out of control and the U.S. government shows no willingness to make the magnitude of spending cuts required to return to fiscal responsible, the U.S. economy is headed to a great collapse coming in the form of a hyper-inflationary great depression,” says economist John Williams, author of the website Government Shadow Statistics.

Statistics generated in Williams’ most recent newsletter demonstrate the real 2010 federal budget deficit was $5.3 trillion, not the $1.3 trillion previously reported by the Congressional Budget Office, according to the 2010 Financial Report of the United States Government as released by the U.S. Department of Treasury Feb. 26, 2010.

The difference between the $1.3 trillion “official” 2010 federal budget  deficit numbers and the $5.3 trillion budget deficit based on data reported in  the 2010 Financial Report of the United States Government is that the official  budget deficit is calculated on a cash basis, where all tax receipts, including  Social Security tax receipts, are used to pay government liabilities as they  occur.

The calculations in the 2010 Financial Report are calculated on a GAAP basis  (Generally Accepted Accounting Principles) that includes year-for-year changes  in the net present value of unfunded liabilities in social insurance programs  such as Social Security and Medicare.

Under cash accounting, the government makes no provision for future Social  Security and Medicare benefits in the year in which those benefits accrue.

“The broad GAAP-based federal deficits, including the Social Security and  Medicare unfunded liabilities, have been in the $4 trillion to $5 trillion range  in 2008 and 2009, and 2010′s deficit again likely was near $5 trillion,  remaining both uncontrollable and unsustainable,” Williams wrote.

“The federal government cannot cover such an annual shortfall by raising  taxes, as there are not enough untaxed wages and salaries or corporate profits  to do so,” he warned.

In his analysis of the 2010 Financial Report of the United States, Williams  listed both an official accounting and an alternative.

“The estimate of a broad 2010 GAAP-based deficit at $5 trillion is mine,” he  noted. “At issue with the published report, consistent year-to-year accounting  was not shown, with a large, one time reduction in reported 2010 Medicare  liabilities, based on overly optimistic assumptions of the impact from recently  enacted health care legislation.”


U.S. Government GAAP Accounting  Federal Budget Deficits U.S. Treasury, Financial Report of the United States,  2002-2010 (John Williams, Shadow Government Statistics, ShadowStats.com)

Williams argues the total U.S. obligations, including Social Security and  Medicare benefits to be paid in the future, have effectively placed the U.S.  government in bankruptcy, even before we take  into consideration any future and continuing social welfare obligations that may  be embedded within the Obama administration’s planned massive overhaul of health  care.

“The government cannot raise taxes high enough to bring the budget into  balance,” Williams said. “You could tax 100 percent of everyone’s income and 100  percent of corporate profits and the U.S. government would still be showing a  federal budget deficit on a GAAP accounting basis.”

Williams argues the U.S. government has condemned the U.S. dollar to “a  hyperinflationary grave” by taking on debt  obligations that will never be covered by raising taxes and/or by severely  slashing government spending that has become politically untouchable.

“Bankrupt sovereign states most commonly use the currency printing press as a  solution to not having enough money to cover  obligations,” he cautioned. “The U.S. government and the Federal Reserve have  committed the system to its ultimate insolvency, through the easy politics of a  bottomless pocketbook, the servicing of big-moneyed special interests, gross  mismanagement, and a deliberate and ongoing effort to debase the U.S. currency.”

He is concerned that the Federal Reserve will supplement its current policy  of Quantitative Easing 2, or QE2, under which the Fed intends to purchase by  mid-year 2010 another $600 billion of Treasury debt with “QE3.”

“These actions (QE2 and QE3) should pummel heavily the U.S. dollar’s exchange  rate against other major currencies,” he concludes. “Looming with uncertain  timing is a panicked dollar dumping and dumping of dollar-denominated paper  assets, which remains the most likely event as a proximal trigger for the onset  of hyperinflation in the near-term.”

Williams predicts that the early stages of hyperinflation will be marked by  an accelerating upturn in consumer prices, a pattern that has already begun to  unfold in response to QE2.

“For those living in the United States, long-range strategies should look to  assure safety and survival, which from a financial standpoint means preserving  wealth and assets,” he advises.

Williams suggests that physical gold in the form of sovereign coins priced  near bullion prices remains the primary hedge in terms of preserving the  purchasing power of the dollar, as well as stronger major currencies such as the  Swiss franc, the Canadian dollar and the Australian dollar.

And as totally insane as that is, it might well even be worse than that.

$61.936 trillion sounds like a lot.  And that’s the official figure for the International Monetary Fund’s estimate for U.S. indebtedness.  But the IMF is giving credibility to a figure that makes that $62 trillion seem almost manageable:

I Can Give You 200 Trillion Reasons Why We Need To Cut Government Spending NOW
By Michael Eden     March 7, 2011

Republicans are trying to get our spending under control, and Democrats are demonizing them every single step of the way.  Because Democrats are demons, and demonizing is the only thing they know how to do.

For the record, Republicans are trying to cut an amount which is basically 1/30th of Obama’s budget deficit.

News from globeandmail.com
The scary real U.S. government debt
Wednesday, October 27, 2010

NEIL REYNOLDS

Ottawa — reynolds.globe@gmail.com

Boston University economist Laurence Kotlikoff says U.S. government debt is not $13.5-trillion (U.S.), which is 60 per cent of current gross domestic product, as global investors and American taxpayers think, but rather 14-fold higher: $200-trillion – 840 per cent of current GDP. “Let’s get real,” Prof. Kotlikoff says. “The U.S. is bankrupt.”

Writing in the September issue of Finance and Development, a journal of the International Monetary Fund, Prof. Kotlikoff says the IMF itself has quietly confirmed that the U.S. is in terrible fiscal trouble – far worse than the Washington-based lender of last resort has previously acknowledged. “The U.S. fiscal gap is huge,” the IMF asserted in a June report. “Closing the fiscal gap requires a permanent annual fiscal adjustment equal to about 14 per cent of U.S. GDP.”

This sum is equal to all current U.S. federal taxes combined. The consequences of the IMF’s fiscal fix, a doubling of federal taxes in perpetuity, would be appalling – and possibly worse than appalling.

Prof. Kotlikoff says: “The IMF is saying that, to close this fiscal gap [by taxation], would require an immediate and permanent doubling of our personal income taxes, our corporate taxes and all other federal taxes.

“America’s fiscal gap is enormous – so massive that closing it appears impossible without immediate and radical reforms to its health care, tax and Social Security systems – as well as military and other discretionary spending cuts.”

He cites earlier calculations by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) that concluded that the United States would need to increase tax revenue by 12 percentage points of GDP to bring revenue into line with spending commitments. But the CBO calculations assumed that the growth of government programs (including Medicare) would be cut by one-third in the short term and by two-thirds in the long term. This assumption, Prof. Kotlikoff notes, is politically implausible – if not politically impossible.

One way or another, the fiscal gap must be closed. If not, the country’s spending will forever exceed its revenue growth, and no one’s real debt can increase faster than his real income forever.

Prof. Kotlikoff uses “fiscal gap,” not the accumulation of deficits, to define public debt. The fiscal gap is the difference between a government’s projected revenue (expressed in today’s dollar value) and its projected spending (also expressed in today’s dollar value). By this measure, the United States is in worse shape than Greece.

Prof. Kotlikoff is a noted economist. He is a research associate at the U.S. National Bureau of Economic Research. He is a former senior economist with then-president Ronald Reagan’s Council of Economic Advisers. He has served as a consultant with governments around the world. He is the author (or co-author) of 14 books: Jimmy Stewart Is Dead (2010), his most recent book, explains his recommendations for reform.

He says the U.S. cannot end its fiscal crisis by increasing taxes. He opposes further stimulus spending because it will simply increase the debt. But he does suggest reforms that would help – most of which would require a significant withering away of the state. He proposes that the government give every person an annual voucher for health care, provided that the total cost not exceed 10 per cent of GDP. (U.S. health care now consumes 16 per cent of GDP.) He suggests the replacement of all current federal taxes with a single consumption tax of 18 per cent. He calls for government-sponsored personal retirement accounts, with the government making contributions only for the poor, the unemployed and people with disabilities.

Without drastic reform, Prof. Kotlikoff says, the only alternative would be a massive printing of money by the U.S. Treasury – and hyperinflation.

As former president Bill Clinton once prematurely said, the era of big government is over. In the coming years, the U.S. will almost certainly be compelled to deconstruct its welfare state.

Prof. Kotlikoff doesn’t trust government accounting, or government regulation. The official vocabulary (deficit, debt, transfer payment, tax, borrowing), he says, is vulnerable to official manipulation and off-the-books deceit. He calls it “Enron accounting.” He also calls it a lie. Here is an economist who speaks plainly, as the legendary straight-shooting film star Jimmy Stewart did for an earlier generation.

But Prof. Kotlikoff’s economic genre isn’t the Western. It’s the horror story – “and scarier,” one reviewer of his book suggests, than Stephen King.

Enron-style accounting?  From our government?  Say it aint so!!!

It’s isn’t a matter of IF America will financially collapse; it is only a matter of WHEN.  And “WHEN” is SOON.

And it will necessarily happen because Democrats are genuinely depraved.

Recklessly spending money on fools’ projects that your grandchildren will become debt slaves just trying to pay the interest on is immoral.

I can only keep begging Republicans to turn the Democrats’ demonization game back at them.  Democrats are running around on their talking points denouncing Republicans as “extremists” who want to kill poor people.

Bullcrap.

It is DEMOCRATS (I call them “Demoncrats,” for “Demonic Bureaucrats”) who want to implode America and kill tens of millions of American people by plunging this country into a great depression that will make the last one in the 1930s seem like a fun-filled day at the beach.

It’s not going to be the richest people who starve to death and die miserably in the cold.  It’s going to be all the people liberals love to say they care about – when in reality all they do is cynically manipulate them toward their own increasingly certain doom.

Don’t you dare forget that it has been LIBERALS who have been dreaming of undermining and imploding America financially since Cloward and Piven back in the 1960s.  And now we’ve got a JUST-ex SEIU official on tape plotting to send America into a financial crisis that will dwarf anything ever seen.

If you have a true death wish, and you vote Democrat, then by all means keep doing so, because they will give you the destruction and nihilism that you seek.  That’s the real meaning of Obama’s “hope and change.”

Obama Adds Stupid And Hypocritical To Weak In His Libya No-Fly Policy

March 19, 2011

A quick refresher course for the last couple of months.

First of all there is the fact that Obama – basically in his own words – has been doing nothing more than following Bush’s pro-democracy policy in the Middle East.  He’s just been doing so in an incredibly incompetent and contradictory manner.

We actually heard the same sort of mind-boggling chutzpah from the Obama administration that led them to conclude that George Bush’s victory in Iraq – which Obama did everything possible to undermine every step of the way as both Senator and presidential candidate – was “one of the great achievements of this administration.”  Because these moral idiots in the White House actually took credit for the massive unrest in the Middle East, claiming that the yearning for freedom all somehow came from Obama’s Cairo speech.

Now, interestingly, it is actually TRUE that Obama is responsible for the massive unrest in the Middle East.  But hardly in a way that Obama would want to have attributed to him:

FEBRUARY 23, 2011
The Federal Reserve Is Causing Turmoil Abroad
Few protesters in the Middle East connect rising food prices to U.S. monetary policy. But central bankers do.
By GEORGE MELLOAN

In accounts of the political unrest sweeping through the Middle East, one factor, inflation, deserves more attention. Nothing can be more demoralizing to people at the low end of the income scale—where great masses in that region reside—than increases in the cost of basic necessities like food and fuel. It brings them out into the streets to protest government policies, especially in places where mass protests are the only means available to shake the existing power structure.

[...]

Probably few of the protesters in the streets connect their economic travail to Washington. But central bankers do. They complain, most recently at last week’s G-20 meeting in Paris, that the U.S. is exporting inflation.

China and India blame the U.S. Federal Reserve for their difficulties in maintaining stable prices. The International Monetary Fund and the United Nations, always responsive to the complaints of developing nations, are suggesting alternatives to the dollar as the pre-eminent international currency.

And, mind you, the destabilization created by Obama is hitting us right here in “God Damn America,” too.  Just as I told you so.

Obama’s reckless and immoral spending policies DID create the conditions for unrest, as hungry people whose economies have been destabilized by Obama begin to riot and protest all over the place.  Obama-appointed Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke has been doing nothing more than trying to finance Obama’s never-seen-in-the-history-of-the-human-race-spending by printing money and undermining the US dollar.  And our once mighty dollar is now like a cancer for all the countries whose currencies depend on it.

Obama’s Cairo speech was a laugher of empty liberal rhetoric.  And another little factoid to contemplate is how Obama and vile, despicable liberals blamed the hostility of the Islamic world on Bush, when the world had never SEEN the Middle East go up in flames until Weakling-in-Chief Obama had been in office for two miserable years.  And, given that Iran will have its nukes thanks very much to Democrat weakness and demagoguery, you aint seen nothing yet.  Do you remember your liberal friends assuring you that Bush had made the world violent, and that Obama would magically make the problems go away, because empty talk was what was really important, rather than the strength and courage to actually stand for something?

But let’s say just for the sake of argument that Obama’s Cairo speech awakened the desire for freedom in every breast.  Let me then cite the words of a DEMOCRAT:

“It seems to me that it is a dangerous proposition to urge people to seek democracy and revolt and then basically not to help them.”

Which is exactly – and I mean EXACTLY - what this weak, appeasing, cowardly empty-suit has done.

You want proof?  Just click here and see how the leaders of the Egyptian revolution told Obama Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to go to hell because Obama hadn’t done a damn thing to help them.

Or click here to see how that same Hillary Clinton so disgusted with Obama as “a president who can’t decide if today is Tuesday or Wednesday, who can’t make his mind up.”  And then you tell me how Obama is anything other than a pathetic, weak, appeasing little weasel.  Hillary Clinton is sick and tired of trying to explain away a failed president to foreign leaders who say things like, “Frankly we are just completely puzzled.  We are wondering if this is a priority for the United States.”  And just what the hell is the woman supposed to say to them, given that her boss is an incompetent fool on his best days?

So Obama finally decides – basically two weeks after it was probably too late – to erect a no-fly zone over Libya.  Fine.  But the fool has to show us what a fool he is by stating categorically that he will absolutely not put any American troops on the ground.  That guarantees that Gaddafi will remain in power; and worse yet, it guarantees that Gaddafi knows that Obama is too weak to do anything serious.

“As I said yesterday, we will not – I repeat – we will not deploy any US troops on the ground,” Obama said.

We bombed Iraq far more than we will ever end up bombing Libya under Obama.  But remember that in Iraq we still had to go in and dig that cockroach Saddam Hussein out of his hole in the ground with TROOPS.  Gaddafi aint going anywhere now other than his temporary rat hole, thanks to Obama’s stupid announcement.  Thanks to Obama, Gaddafi knows he can play possum and pretend to follow the rules until we’re gone, and then it’s right back to the murdering.

Obama is like an imbecile who can’t help but show everyone at the table his hand every time he plays poker.  And then can’t understand why he keeps losing.  I can understand why Obama wouldn’t want to put troops on the ground (the man is a weakling; of course he wouldn’t want to do something strong!); but I can’t understand why he had to let everybody know that all Gaddafi has to do is hunker down and he can stay in power without getting scared into making some kind of deal to save his snake skin.

Another way to put it is this: Remember when Obama was running for president by demonizing and demagoguing Bush?  Obama said:

“We’ve got to get the job done there and that requires us to have enough troops so that we’re not just air-raiding villages and killing civilians, which is causing enormous pressure over there.”

But I guess it was just Afghani civilians that Obama was queasy about air-rading and killing; he’s FINE doing nothing more than air-raiding villages and killing civilians when they’re LIBYAN.  That by his own despicable and frankly treasonous rhetoric.  If Bush was wrong not to have troops, Obama is wrong not to have troops.  Liberals are going to say, “That was totally different!” because they ALWAYS say that when they do the same damn thing that they had just got through demonizing.  It’s their nature as the quintessential hypocrites they truly are.

Bush was rightly resistant to putting too many troops into Afghanistan because he knew enough about history to understand that Afghanistan is a hell-hole.  Bush understood that while Iraq – with its flat, mostly open terrain – was perfect for American equipment and tactics, and that mountainous and cave-ridden Afghanistan was most certainly NOT well-suited for American equipment and tactics.  Bush knew that the fairly well-educated Iraqi people were capable of some semblance of democracy; and Bush knew that the ignorant, basically stone-age Afghani people were NOT capable of anything resembling self-governance.

Because Bush – however stupid the left wants to say he is – wasn’t 1/20th as massively moronic as Barack Obama is.

But I’m still not done dumping on our Moron-in-Chief.  Because we’ve got to consider something else: Obama insists that what he’s doing in Libya is right because it’s purpose is “the protection of Libyan civilians.”

Let me ask you a question: is Obama truly so personally ignorant that he didn’t know about the hundreds of thousands of civilians that Saddam Hussein murdered in Iraq while he was opposing our doing anything to help them?

From USAID:

Since the Saddam Hussein regime was overthrown in May, 270 mass graves have been reported. By mid-January, 2004, the number of confirmed sites climbed to fifty-three. Some graves hold a few dozen bodies—their arms lashed together and the bullet holes in the backs of skulls testimony to their execution. Other graves go on for hundreds of meters, densely packed with thousands of bodies.”We’ve already discovered just so far the remains of 400,000 people in mass graves,” said British Prime Minister Tony Blair on November 20 in London. The United Nations, the U.S. State Department, Amnesty International, and Human Rights Watch (HRW) all estimate that Saddam Hussein’s regime murdered hundreds of thousands of innocent people.

THAT was back in 2004.  The ugly fact of the matter is that they have continued to dig up more and more mass graves since.  We’ve got no idea how many bodies are buried in the endless sands of the Iraqi desert.

How was it right to ignore the murdered Iraqi people, but to champion a tiny fraction as many murdered Libyan people?

Then there is the hypocrisy of how Obama entered the war given the left’s incessant demonization of George Bush:

On Saturday, President Obama while visiting Brazil launched a United Nations war without obtaining Congressional approval. We all must remember how the left crucified President George W. Bush over a 9 month debate concerning war with Iraq. This debate included multiple UN Resolutions and a Multi-National Force composed of dozens of nations. Many refer to this time of debate as a “rush to war.” Yesterday however, President Obama approved the launch of Tomahawk missiles effectively engaging us in a Libyan civil war. This decision came with no debate in Congress and one UN Resolution that was only voted on 48 hours before.

Obama is quite right to care about the atrocities being committed by Muammar Gaddafi now.  But it also just goes to prove what a vile little weasel he has been his entire life prior to lying his way to the presidency.

Let us also remember that Barack Obama went to an evil, demonic church for 23 years and personally chose as his pastor and spiritual mentor wicked a man named Jeremiah Wright who sung the praises of a vile, murdering dictator named Muammar Gaddafi:

But Wright’s relationship with the controversial Farrakhan extended far beyond an award.  In 1984, Wright personally accompanied Farrakhan to Libya to meet with Muammar Gaddafi in Tripoli. In 2008, Wright even predicted his association with Farrakhan and Gaddafi may cause political headaches for Obama’s presidential aspirations: “When [Obama's] enemies find out that in 1984 I went to Tripoli to visit [Gadhafi] with Farrakhan, a lot of his Jewish support will dry up quicker than a snowball in hell,” he said.

It should have.  It should have destroyed the Obama candidacy and spared us from the most despicable president in our nation’s history.  But amazingly, and thanks primarily to the worst media propaganda campaign since Goebbels, it didn’t.

We were both foolish and wicked to vote for this evil man.  Barack Obama was a cheerful congregant in Jeremiah Wright’s wicked and racist church when Wright pronounced that the United States was “God damn America.”  And now – under Obama – it truly IS God damn America.

Barack Obama is now our Chicken-in-Chief.  And, yes, in Jeremiah Wright’s words, our chickens truly have now come home to roost.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 493 other followers