Posts Tagged ‘fiscal gap’

Liberal Democrat Policies Have Utterly Failed Working Class Americans In UberBlue States (When Will People Wake Up And Smell REALITY?)

August 11, 2014

California is – and has been for a long time – a political stranglehold for the Democrat Party.

Even when Arnold Schwarzenegger – who was largely a liberal RINO – was “governator,” that was true.  Democrats have had a stranglehold on pretty much every political body and office in the state of California going back a looong time.

Try to understand the degree of control.

Except for the period from 1995 to 1996, the Assembly has been in Democratic hands since the 1970 election (even while the governor’s office has gone back and forth between Republicans and Democrats). The Senate has been in Democratic hands continuously since 1970.

Right now Democrats in California have a supermajority.  They can do any damn thing they want.  And they’ve DONE so.

What are the rotten fruits of that poisonous tree?

Loss of mid-wage jobs hampers state’s growth
By Tiffany Hsu
August 8, 2014, 5:00 AM

On the surface, California’s job market is booming.

The state has now recovered all the jobs lost during the recession, and done so at a faster pace than all but five states.

The growth, though, belies a troubling imbalance. The fastest job creation has come in low-wage sectors, in which pay has declined. At the high end of the salary scale, a different dynamic has taken hold: rising pay and improving employment after rounds of consolidation.

Most distressing, middle-wage workers are losing out on both counts.

“People talk about it like an hourglass,” said Tracey Grose, vice president of the Bay Area Council Economic Institute. “There are fewer opportunities for people in the middle.”

Economists generally consider mid-wage jobs to pay between $15 and $30 an hour in California — encompassing a third of workers in the state. Those at the top end of that range, which amounts to about $60,000 a year, earn more than 72% of Californians.

Middle-wage stagnation can damage consumer spending, dent career mobility, stall home buying and exacerbate a poverty rate that’s already the highest in the country, economists warn. Those concerns are amplified in a state notorious for a high cost of living.

As more mid-tier jobs disappear, economists fear middle-class workers will be increasingly sucked into the ranks of the working poor. And they could crowd out those already working low-wage jobs, or drive their salaries down further.

[…]

Do you not see what these damned Democrat demoniacs have done to you and to your economy and to any chance that you or yours will ever have a meaningful chance at success?

Under Obama, the income gap – the gap between the wealthiest and poorest Americans – has increased to the largest level since the government began tracking the statistic.  It is FAR worse than at any time under Bush – which is really quite remarkable given the way Barack Obama personally demonized George Bush and demonized Republicans and then did far worse than his most demagogic accusation of what they had done.

This isn’t just about Obama, although he’s made national Democrat failure what California Democrats made state government failure.

Don’t believe the lies that dishonest propagandists tell you about Democrats caring about the poor.  Democrats don’t give one flying DAMN about the poor.

Democrats are FINE with giving giant subsidies to the rich as long as the rich are liberal rich like the liberals who dominate Hollywood.

Democrats are FINE with giving giant subsidies to the rich as long as the rich buy liberal-friendly crap such as “green” cars:

California wants 1.5 million zero-emission vehicles on the road by 2025 — more than 15 times the number now..

So the state pays buyers $2,500 per car, on top of a $7,500 federal tax credit, to help speed development and promote widespread adoption.

The effort has had mixed results. Sales of electric cars are up but remain well off the pace needed to meet state goals. And the generous subsidies are going largely to some of the state’s wealthiest residents.

Nearly four-fifths of the state rebates went to households earning $100,000 or more, according to a state survey of buyers. Nearly half of those getting rebates for Tesla’s premium electric sedan earned at least $300,000.

Now, the above article points out that there are Democrats who want to end the subsidy program for rich people, claiming that a few thousand dollars won’t affect people who earn $300,000 a year.  Let me just point out that Democrats are pathologically stupid people who keep repeating the same damn mistakes over and over and over again.

Let’s go back to something called “reality” that Democrats have thoroughly immunized themselves from and revisit this idiot mindset:

JANUARY 6, 2003
Good Riddance to the Luxury Tax

Most Americans celebrated as the ball fell in Times Square New Year’s Eve. But for auto dealers this new year is especially sweet. January 1 marked the expiration of the federal luxury tax on cars, the last vestige of the destructive luxury tax package in the infamous 1990 budget deal.

Starting in 1991, Washington levied a 10% luxury tax on cars valued above $30,000, boats above $100,000, jewelry and furs above $10,000 and private planes above $250,000. Democrats like Ted Kennedy and then-Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell crowed publicly about how the rich would finally be paying their fair share and privately about convincing President George H.W. Bush to renounce his “no new taxes” pledge.

But it wasn’t long before even these die-hard class warriors noticed they’d badly missed their mark. The taxes took in $97 million less in their first year than had been projected — for the simple reason that people were buying a lot fewer of these goods. Boat building, a key industry in Messrs. Mitchell and Kennedy’s home states of Maine and Massachusetts, was particularly hard hit. Yacht retailers reported a 77% drop in sales that year, while boat builders estimated layoffs at 25,000. With bipartisan support, all but the car tax was repealed in 1993, and in 1996 Congress voted to phase that out too. January 1 was disappearance day.

The end of any federal tax is such a rarity that it’s well worth celebrating. And the luxury tax lesson of economic damage is worth keeping in mind as politicians begin to wail that President Bush’s new tax proposals aren’t punitive enough on the rich.

Democrats GUTTED whole industries with their wicked hate-the-rich mindset and their foolish “the rich won’t notice” naiveté.  Because the rich support the economy with their purchases of the items that liberals love to drive as much as they love to hate other people being allowed to drive.  The rich stopped buying luxury items and a huge swath of our economy just withered on the vine.

The luxury tax was HORRIBLE and it HURT thousands and thousands of WORKING PEOPLE.  All because Democrats are at their core haters who constantly try to do to successful people what Hitler did to the Jews and blame them for all the woes of the world.

The Bible talks about fools’ inability to ever learn.   It talks about the Democrat platform of homosexual sodomy and says that those who advance it profess themselves to be wise but become fools.  It talks about your classic liberal elite who is “always learning but never coming to the knowledge of the truth.”  And the Democrat Party epitomizes the way of the fool.

And so Democrats – by which I mean fools – keep returning again and again and again to the same damn failed policies that failed so desperately in the past.  Like the dog that goes back to is vomit, Proverbs says.

Now, please don’t misunderstand my point with the subsidies for the “green” cars.  I’m not saying give the damn rich people their damn subsidies; I’m saying that liberal Democrats are doing nothing more than subsidizing their pet industry in a blatantly crony capitalist fascist manner.  And that Democrats are as “pro-big-business tax dodges” as ANY Republican who ever lived.  They just want to benefit THEIR people at the expense of everybody else and they want to be able to punish the OTHER people who vote Republican.  And of course I’m saying that it’s wrong to subsidize a boondoggle – which “green” energy very clearly is – and that it’s wrong to think that if you end the subsidies for the rich the rich will keep buying what they were buying BECAUSE THEY WERE GETTING DAMN SUBSIDIES.

Look, I’m not rich, God only knows.  But I actually know quite a few very wealthy people.  And I can assure you they got wealthy in the first place by counting their pennies and grabbing things when they were cheap enough to be a VALUE.  And so in this case if you take away the subsidies for these stupid cars that shouldn’t BE subsidized, any fool ought to know the rich will look for something else to buy and the program will come crashing down.

But Democrats are a special KIND of fool.  I would rather teach a cockroach geometr than try to teach a liberal ANYTHING.

Democrats demonize Republicans as only caring about the rich and giving tax breaks to filthy-rich, greedy corporations.  WHAT THEY DON’T TELL YOU IS THAT THEY DO IT DAMN MORE THAN ANYBODY THEMSELVES.

I mean, just LOOK at what Obama has done:

The Solyndra President.  Well, make that the Solyndra-EverGreenSpectraWattFirst SolarSolar TrustAbound SolarBrightSourceLSP EnergyEner1SunPowerBeacon PowerECOtalityA123Uni SolarAzure Dynamics President.  Not to mention all the other now-bankrupt green energy crony-capitalist businesses that have stolen more than $2 billion dollars of the American people’s money.

And few Americans have any idea whatsoever how transparently corrupt Barack Obama is.

Eighty percent of all green energy loans provided by the American people’s stimulus money were given to crony capitalist-fascist Obama donors.  Obama is using the American people’s money as a political slush fund to reward his friends:

A new book by Hoover Institution fellow Peter Schweizer details the startling extent of the cronyism that has pervaded President Obama’s “green jobs” push. According to Schweizer, 4 out of every 5 renewable energy companies backed by the Energy Department was “run by or primarily owned by Obama financial backers.”

Those companies’ “political largesse is probably the best investment they ever made in alternative energy,” Schweizer explains. “It brought them returns many times over.”

Such is the inevitable consequence of large government interventions in private markets. Leaving aside the losses associated with transfers of funds from self-sustaining industries to ones that rely on government support, such interventions also encourage unproductive business activities by making “subsidy suckling” far more profitable than run-of-the-mill business expansions or product improvements.

Doug Ross spotted the relevant excerpt of Schweizer’s book (h/t Ben Domenech’s Transom):

When President-elect Obama came to Washington in late 2008, he was outspoken about the need for an economic stimulus to revive a struggling economy… After he was sworn in as president, he proclaimed that taxpayer money would assuredly not be doled out to political friends…

…But an examination of grants and guaranteed loans offered by just one stimulus program run by the Department of Energy, for alternative-energy projects, is stunning. The so-called 1705 Loan Guarantee Program and the 1603 Grant Program channeled billions of dollars to all sorts of energy companies…

…In the 1705 government-backed-loan program [alone], for example, $16.4 billion of the $20.5 billion in loans granted as of Sept. 15 went to companies either run by or primarily owned by Obama financial backers—individuals who were bundlers, members of Obama’s National Finance Committee, or large donors to the Democratic Party. The grant and guaranteed-loan recipients were early backers of Obama before he ran for president, people who continued to give to his campaigns and exclusively to the Democratic Party in the years leading up to 2008. Their political largesse is probably the best investment they ever made in alternative energy. It brought them returns many times over.

…The Government Accountability Office has been highly critical of the way guaranteed loans and grants were doled out by the Department of Energy, complaining that the process appears “arbitrary” and lacks transparency. In March 2011, for example, the GAO examined the first 18 loans that were approved and found that none were properly documented. It also noted that officials “did not always record the results of analysis” of these applications. A loan program for electric cars, for example, “lacks performance measures.” No notes were kept during the review process, so it is difficult to determine how loan decisions were made. The GAO further declared that the Department of Energy “had treated applicants inconsistently in the application review process, favoring some applicants and disadvantaging others.” The Department of Energy’s inspector general, Gregory Friedman, … has testified that contracts have been steered to “friends and family.”

…These programs might be the greatest—and most expensive—example of crony capitalism in American history. Tens of billions of dollars went to firms controlled or owned by fundraisers, bundlers, and political allies, many of whom—surprise!—are now raising money for Obama again.

So it really doesn’t matter to Obama whether these crony capitalist boondoggles go bankrupt or not; what matters is that he gets a percentage of the billions of dollars of the American people’s money in the form of campaign contributions.

And that’s THE ONLY thing that matters: Obama providing all kinds of self-righteous rhetoric while he racks up more special interest campaign monies than ANY cynical and corrupt politician in the history of the entire human race.

This is a slick weasel who has now held more fundraisers THAN THE PREVIOUS FIVE PRESIDENTS COMBINED.

Notice that article dates to when he ran for re-election.  Obama was the worst crony-capitalist fascist sugar-daddy who EVER LIVED.  That’s just something called a “fact.”  And what did the hypocrite do but demonize Mitt Romney for doing a tiny fraction of what he himself had been doing???

Now, there’s a method to my madness here.  The two sections – the first on the income disparity between rich and poor and the second on the subsidies for the rich and crony capitalism – come together as we start to understand how an Obama or a liberal Democrat “create wealth” for a few at the expense of the many.

It’s easy: you demonize the rich and impose high taxes, high fees, high regulatory burdens, high bureaucracy costs and the like.  And then all you have to do is give your cronies, friends and allies special breaks.  They get rich and fund your campaigns so you can lie to the people whose jobs you destroyed about how wonderful you are and it was the Republican who had no power to do anything who destroyed your job not Obama.

What Democrats have wanted for decades now can best be described in Democrat Dingell’s description of the purpose of ObamaCare:

“it takes a long time to do the necessary administrative steps that have to be taken to put the legislation together to control the people.”

Democrats want CONTROL.  Period.  They want to make themselves indispensable to your life by controlling your life.  They want to get to decide who wins and who loses.  They want to decide who succeeds and who fails.  They want to be able to decide who regulates and who gets regulated.  They want to decide who gets redistributed to and who gets redistributed from.

Democrats want to have the power and the control to decide and dictate who gets to become rich.  Democrats don’t mind the rich; far from it.  They just want to have the power to dictate who GETS to become rich and then they want their cut of the loot.  And if that process destroys a lot of jobs and creates a lot more poor, well, that works for them too as they indoctrinate and propagandize and just flat lie to create more ignorant people to vote for more redistributionism so they can seize still more power until that vicious cycle becomes the ONLY cycle.

California has been OWNED by Democrats for all but a couple of years since 1970.  And what they have produced is an environment of stagnation and the death of the middle class and the end of the last chance of most Californians to ever escape to a higher income level and standard of living.  Unless they MOVE.

It was an interview with Joel Kotkin, a renowned demographer, and self described Truman Democrat.  He was also a guest on Jim’s show this past week.  You can read the entire article here, and I encourage you to do so as I cannot do it justice in one post.

California’s population has increased by some 3 million people according to the last census, but, that doesn’t tell the entire story.  According to Mr. Kotkin, California is rapidly becoming a state with only three classes of people…the very rich, middle class public employees and those on welfare.  Middle class private sector workers, as well as businesses, are being driven out and relocating to other states for an assortment of reasons.  Nearly 4 million more people have left the state for other states over the past 20 years than have moved into California from other states.  Here is what Mr. Kotkin found.

It’s a horrible way to do business.  Which is why so many businesses either leave or just go out of business.

In the same way, most large urban cities have been Democrat bastions for DECADES.  And what has the Democrat Party brought them?  Joblessness, decay, crime, gangs, drugs, a garbage life.  And a conditioning process that would make Pavlov jealous as poor, ignorant people were “progressively” conditioned to salivate on command whenever the word “welfare” is mentioned.  Yet the ignorant people will keep voting Democrat until the day they die – and the only poetic justice is that they will die a whole hell of a lot sooner because they voted Democrat in the first place.

Why is our stock market flourishing to the extent it is?  One reason and one reason only: our sick Federal Reserve policies that were implemented to deal with the amazingly morally idiotic Obama administration policies.  They have been pumping on average well over a trillion dollars into the stock market every single year.  And the rich people have been eating it up and widening the gap between the rich and more at the expense of poor people, elderly people, and basically anyone who tries to save rather than spend.  Meanwhile, the Democrats who created this boondoggle called the Federal Reserve and want more and more and still MORE government control over the economy demonize the free market system when it is their damn giant government that is the real cause of the massive divide between the rich and the poor.

You can’t be anti-job-creator and pro-job, which is what Democrats ARE when you examine their rhetoric.  But that’s only true to the extent that you can’t be anti-wealth gap while creating a bigger wealth gap than ANYBODY.  All you have to do to prove it is cite the Obama slogan: “Yes we can.”

When you contemplate the true extent of our debt – which is now nearing $250 trillion when you do the math – you should realize that America has screamed “yes we can!” beyond the point of lunacy to the worst economic collapse in the history of the entire human race.

And do you know whose going to suffer the most?  The very people the Democrat Party promised the most to, that’s who.

 

Advertisements

The Fiscal Generation Gap Fiasco And Everything That’s Racist And Hypocrite With Liberalism In One Smarmy Liberal Editorial

October 28, 2013

Ronald Brownstein, liberal ideologue from the überliberal National Journal wrote an editorial that also appeared in the also überliberal Los Angeles Times.  Brownstein begins:

One reason a serious budget negotiation seems unlikely this fall is that any meaningful assault on the federal deficit would require each party to confront the contradictions between its fiscal agenda and its electoral coalition.

Two long-term trends are creating this tension. One is an electoral reshuffling: Republicans increasingly depend on support from older whites, even as Democrats rely more on the youthful-tilting minority population. The second is the federal budget’s shift in focus from children (almost half of whom are now nonwhite) to seniors (about four-fifths of whom remain white). The intersection of these dynamics has left each party advancing budget blueprints that collide with the self-interest of their core supporters.

Heading into budget negotiations, the top priority for many Republicans remains limiting Medicare, Medicaid, and maybe Social Security, the Big Three senior entitlements. The contradiction they face is that the people benefiting from those programs now comprise the core of their electoral coalition.

The GOP presidential nominee has carried most white seniors in four consecutive presidential elections, and by greater margins each time. In 2012, whites over 45 supplied Mitt Romney with nearly three-fifths of his votes, even though they made up about only two-fifths of all voters. Census figures show that children constitute about the same share of the population (just under one-fourth) in House districts represented by Republicans and Democrats. Yet whites 55 and older are nearly 22 percent of the population in Republican-held districts, compared with less than 15 percent in those Democrats control. Even more strikingly, 164 House Republicans represent districts where the share of 55-plus whites exceeds the national average. That’s true for only 74 House Democrats.

These older whites deeply resist any changes in Social Security and Medicare, which most consider insurance they have paid for, not a government benefit (although studies show older Americans receive much more in lifetime benefits than they pay in taxes). In United Technologies/National Journal Congressional Connection polling this month, fully four-fifths of whites over 50 opposed any reductions in either Social Security or Medicare. These older white voters are much more passionate about cutting programs that transfer resources to the poor, such as food stamps (three-fifths of older whites would cut the program at least somewhat) and President Obama’s health care law.

The GOP’s fiscal agenda has partly reflected these priorities. The party continues scorched-earth opposition to Obamacare, and House Republicans recently voted for deep cuts in food stamps (almost half of whose benefits flow toward children). The plan from Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., to convert Medicare into a voucher, or “premium support,” system would shelter the staunchest GOP voters by exempting anyone over 55.

Three things immediately jumped out at me as I scanned over his drivel:

Fact 1) Do you know why these middle-class whites are such bad people (in liberal’s wicked minds)?  Because they believed the lying, demon-possessed bovine feces that is the promise of liberalism.

Tell me: did Democrats sell Social Security and Medicare as something that they would yank away from middle class whites?  Tell you what: you show me FDR with Social Security or LBJ with Medicare telling the American people that they were going to demand a clawback on these programs for white middle class families, and I’ll buy you a Ferrari.  You show me where Democrats said, “As soon as white middle class people have nothing else to fall back on because we seized control of retirement benefits (Social Security) and medical insurance for retired people (Medicare), we’re going to lower the boom on them and call them racist if they refuse to give back what we PROMISED them.”  You show me.

The fact of the matter stands as this: Democrats are dishonest liars.  And the only way you can be truly evil is if you believe the lies in the next fascist hijack attempt (e.g. ObamaCare) by the federal government to impose still MORE control over benefits that it will later denounce and try to claw back after Democrats made still more bullcrap promises.

That was the first thing that shot through my mind as I read the product of a truly demon-possessed brain.

Fact 2) The vicious, racist, anti-white bigotry of liberalism is once again on display.  And just as Karl Marx was a self-hating Jew who despised Jews, Brownstein is a self-hating white person – and very likely a self-hating Jew akin to Karl Marx for that matter – who KNOWS as a liberal that he is a truly terrible human being, but BEING a truly terrible human being he wrongly concludes that he’s a terrible human being because of the color of his skin rather than because his ideology is depraved and evil.  Let me demonstrate that fact this way: I’m going to replace the word “white” with “black” in Brownstein’s paragraph, and you tell me if it’s still just as true or not:

These older blacks deeply resist any changes in Social Security and Medicare, which most consider insurance they have paid for, not a government benefit (although studies show older Americans receive much more in lifetime benefits than they pay in taxes). In United Technologies/National Journal Congressional Connection polling this month, fully four-fifths of blacks over 50 opposed any reductions in either Social Security or Medicare.

For the record, the only poll I found was “generational” and did NOT cite differences in race.  I welcome Brownstein to show me that “older blacks” would be perfectly happy – in marked contrast to “older whites” – to have THEIR benefits that they were promised over their entire working lifetimes suddenly seized away by a government that wanted to take back its lie to them after their earning years are behind them so it could hoodwink an entirely new generation on a whopping lie from the same liars who lied to the (now) elderly.

So, Democrat who wants to racebait, YOU SHOW ME THE POLLS THAT DOCUMENT BLACKS BEING HAPPY TO HAVE THEIR PROMISED BENEFITS – AGAIN PROMISED TO THEM OVER THEIR ENTIRE WORKING LIFETIMES – GUTTED SO YOU CAN DEMONIZE “OLDER WHITE PEOPLE.”  YOU SHOW ME, YOU DEMON-POSSESSED LIARS.

Fact 3) Liberals are hypocrites who ONLY have the ability to see the speck in their opponent’s eye WHILE IGNORING THE GIANT MULTI-TRILLION DOLLAR LOG IN THEIR OWN.  Again, I’ll document this fact in Brownstein’s own words:

These older whites deeply resist any changes in Social Security and Medicare …  These older white voters are much more passionate about cutting programs that transfer resources to the poor.

How has EVERY Democrat tax and entitlement program been sold?  One and the same way every time: don’t you worry: we’ll raise somebody ELSE’S taxes and force SOMEBODY ELSE to pay for your new entitlement program.

When was the last time Democrats said, “This is a government takeover that will benefit the poor, so let’s force the poor to bear the burden of paying for it”???  Try “NEVER.”

But, oh holy hell, “older middle class white people” who are in fact not one tiny bit different than “older middle class BLACK people” are evil because they want to keep the entitlement that they were promised and – for the record – were promised that it wasn’t even an “entitlement” but that they had EARNED it with all those payroll tax deductions that the federal government seized from them over the course of their entire lifetimes.

I’m also trying to think of the last time the people who were collecting welfare and food stamps ever voted to have their welfare and food stamp benefits – you know, which unlike those middle class whites they DIDN’T pay for every couple of weeks for going on fifty years – yanked away from them.  Again, try “NEVER.”

Don’t you DARE act like a Democrat and expect to keep what your Democrat federal government promised you and taxed out of you your entire life to pay for.  Don’t you DARE want to hold on to YOUR program.  Because, you see, that’s fascist and it’s only “fascist” when Republicans do it.

The appalling ObamaCare fiasco ought to be all the proof that any carbon-based life form with an IQ above a stinkbug needs to know to realize that liberalism is truly evil.  But if you DON’T think so, all you have to do is understand that the very programs that Brownstein now condemns (at least for white people) were Democrat creations that were GUARANTEED to run up giant deficits just as ObamaCare is guaranteed to run up giant deficits.

Do you know what our actual fiscal gap truly is?  That’s okay.  Because thanks to liberal shenanigans and accounting dishonesty NOBODY ELSE DOES EITHER.

The debt we keep hearing about is $17 trillion.  Barack Hussein Obama – quintessential liar that he is – demonized George W. Bush as “unpatriotic” and “a failed leader” when that debt was $9 trillion.  Now, slandering hypocrite demagogue liar that he is, he sings a different tune even though by the end of his presidency, HE will have led America to higher and insanely unsustainable debt than every previous president (including George W. Bush) COMBINED.

But your share as an “American household” of that $17 trillion debt is $140,000.  And if you can’t pay your share, then America is in deep doo-doo which it keeps shoveling itself more deeply into every fraction of a second.  In point of fact, it is going up $2.28 billion per day, or $86,400 every single second.

But the International Monetary Fund published the academic article in its peer-reviewed journal by one of its members stating that it was in excess of $200 trillion back in 2011.  And our real debt is going up by about one trillion dollars every single MONTH.

Democrats and the lies they sold to impose their lies are ENTIRELY responsible for this guaranteed collapse of the United States of America.  A vote for the Democrat Party is not merely a vote for the murder of 55 million innocent babies and counting, and it’s not just a vote for bringing the wrath of God according to Romans chapter one: it is a vote for dodo-bird EXTINCTION.

We cannot even theoretically pay these debts that Democrats and NO ONE BUT DEMOCRATS saddled us with.  And who is Brownstein blaming for that?  Republican older white people because they are callously demanding that Democrats actually HONOR one of their wicked demonic lies.

And what is it that liberals want to do now?  They want to claw back on their previous lies on the basis of their self-serving racism and they want to now issue a whole NEW package of lies that will DWARF THE COST of their last load of demonic lies.  That’s what they want to do.

That leads me to:

Fact 4) Brownstein implies that Republicans who have spent their lives opposed to Social Security and Medicare are somehow hypocritical for now demanding they get their benefits.  He says “the [white Republican] people benefiting from those programs now comprise the core of their electoral coalition.”

Think about it: when the government seizes retirement insurance and retirement medicine, and forces you to pay into their Ponzi scheme year after year after year, what the hell are you supposed to do when you retire BUT take your Social Security and Medicare benefit that you were forced to buy into your entire life even though you didn’t want to???

The notion from Brownstein is that these “white” Republicans are somehow bad people for taking a benefit they were forced to purchase their entire lives so that freeloading welfare couch potatoes might have a harder time collecting the benefits they never paid so much as a damn DIME into.  Who are the bad people here?  The people who want the benefits they were promised and were forced to buy one paycheck at a time for fifty freaking years or the people who want somebody else’s money???

Medicare and Social Security are and always WERE truly evil programs.  Like I’ve said many times – and like Brownstein openly acknowledges in his attack against white middle class people that “studies show older Americans receive much more in lifetime benefits than they pay in taxes.”  Here’s my question: WHEN THE HELL WASN’T THAT THE CASE???  Is Brownstein actually trying to claim that it isn’t EQUALLY TRUE FOR BLACK MIDDLE CLASS PEOPLE???  Only WHITE people collect more than they pay into this stupid system???  Seriously???  And for the damn record, CONSERVATIVES HAVE BEEN POINTING OUT THAT FACT AND CALLING SSI AND MEDICARE THE PONZI SCHEME THAT IT IS PRECISELY BECAUSE OF THAT FACT FOR DECADES.  And here’s a liberal moral idiot now finally acknowledging it just so he can say it’s whitey’s fault???

These two Democrat programs have run America into certain bankruptcy and financial implosion and an end to the American way of life and frankly the mark of the beast and the worship of the Antichrist.  We are so many trillions of dollars in debt because of these two unfunded mandates that it is beyond insane.

I have ALWAYS been opposed to Social Security.  My parents were also opposed to a system that they were FORCED to “contribute” to over their entire working careers.  Social Security crowded out every private alternative that would have been able to pay out HIGHER returns than SSI.  My parents were also opposed to Medicare because they didn’t want to be force-fed socialized medicine.  In both cases, there could have been and should have been private sector programs, but the government forced them out of business.  The private market could have done better for less on both fronts (as was proven by Chile’s highly successful privatized social security system) – but when the government crowded everybody else out and forced itself in, those options were as aborted as an innocent little baby by Democrats.  Liberals say that if you don’t like SSI or Medicare, don’t use it.  But an analogy would be for a liberal to be opposed to having a strong military; the only way that liberal could actually ACT on his or her opposition would be to move forever away from the United States.  Because otherwise you are covered by the protection of that strong military you are opposed to whether you oppose it or not.  To demand that somebody be forced to “contribute” to a system their entire lives and then to brand that person a hypocrite because they use the benefits that they were forced to pay for is literally demon-possessed EVIL.  There is no other way to put it.

There are also no other options for this generation of retired middle class “white people” after the Democrats imposed government on what should have been private systems.  That’s the dilemma for aforementioned “white” people.

And Brownstein’s answer to the dilemma that Democrats and ONLY DEMOCRATS created is to screw white people, renege on the promise that was made to them over the course of their entire working lives, and leave them to die while Democrats now repeat the same sort of pandering politics through the even BIGGER BOONDOGGLE of ObamaCare.

If you’re going to take away or reduce Social Security and Medicare benefits, take them away from the depraved idiot fools who were stupid enough and evil enough to have bought all the lies and set America up for this fiscal gap fiasco: take them away from DEMOCRATS.

Personally, I would be willing to forego my full Social Security benefits THAT I WAS FORCED TO PAY FOR BY DEMOCRATS if and only if: if Democrats officially admitted that they had destroyed America with their idiot socialism; if the Democrat Party were criminalized, such that anybody EVER AGAIN suggesting ANY FORM of socialism immediately be hauled away to either prison or to the looney bin; and if we passed the “hunt every Democrat down with dogs and burn them alive Act.”  Until then, don’t you DARE suggest I give up one nickel of the benefits that Democrats swore up and down (the same damn dishonest lying way that Barack Obama swore that if you liked your insurance plan and your doctor you could keep them.  PERIOD. by the way).

Obama’s exact words:

“No matter how we reform health care, we will keep this promise: If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor. Period. If you like your health care plan, you will be able to keep your health care plan. Period. No one will take it away. No matter what.”

History now proves that Barack Obama to be the most documented liar in the entire history of the entire human race.  He said that over and over again to millions of people as thousands of cameras rolled.  And he told a thousand other socialist lies that were every bit as blatant.

And no one can argue that Obama didn’t know about this: THE VERY NATURE OF OBAMACARE MADE MILLIONS OF AMERICAN’S HEALTHCARE PLANS “ILLEGAL.”  The man sold his “signature legislative accomplishment” under an ocean of lies, pure and simple.  You want proof?  Here it is: the White House knew at least as early as July of 2010 that what Obama had repeatedly said and CONTINUED TO SAY AFTERWARD was a demon-possessed lie.  I quote:

In a June 2009 speech to the American Medical Association, Obama said that “no matter how we reform healthcare, we will keep  this promise to the American people: If you like your doctor, you will be able  to keep your doctor, period. If you like your healthcare plan, you’ll be able to  keep your healthcare plan, period. No one will take it away, no matter  what.”

Don Stewart, spokesman for Senate Minority Leader Mitch  McConnell’s, R-Ky., questioned whether that promise had been kept.

“Remember: The President didn’t say if you like your plan and we approve it you  can keep it,” Stewart wrote, the Post reported. “He promised that if you like  your plan, you can keep it, period— “no matter what.”

Yet the NBC report  said the government knew that wasn’t true, saying that buried in regulations  from the July 2010 law was an estimate that because of normal turnover in the  individual insurance market, “40 to 67 percent” of customers will not be able to  keep their policy.

And because many policies will have been changed  since the key date, “the percentage of individual market policies losing  grandfather status in a given year exceeds the 40 to 67 percent range.”

“This says that when they made the promise, they knew half the people  in this market outright couldn’t keep what they had and then they wrote the  rules so that others couldn’t make it either,” Robert Laszewski of Health Policy  and Strategy Associates, told NBC.

He estimated 80 percent of those in  the individual market will not be able to keep their current policies and will  have to buy insurance that meets requirements of the new law, which generally  requires a richer package of benefits than most policies today.

George  Schwab, 62, of North Carolina, told NBC he was “perfectly happy” with his plan  from Blue Cross Blue Shield, which also insured his wife for a $228 monthly  premium. But this past September, he got a letter saying his policy was no  longer available.

The “comparable” plan the insurance company offered  him carried a $1,208 monthly premium and a $5,500 deductible. And the best  option he’s found on the exchange so far offered a 415 percent jump in premium,  to $948 a month.

“The deductible is less,” he said, “But the plan  doesn’t meet my needs. It’s unaffordable.”

See also here for more on that story.  The bottom line is that the White House KNEW they were lying but continued to deceive the American people.

We’ve seen these demon-possessed lies from these same demon-possessed socialist liars before.  And we have proven that we are damn-fool and depraved enough to fall for the same lies from the same liars all over again.

As I write, the comics are absolutely SHREDDING ObamaCare.  NO ONE can access the colossally failed ObamaCare website, but millions of young people have seen Kathleen Sabelious mocked (whom everyone on earth holds responsible for this failure BUT Obama).  Trust me that ObamaCare is no longer cool and young people will NOT be enrolling in something that they don’t need but would have to pay up the whazoo to have.  ObamaCare needed to have nearly 3 million “young invincibles” sign up to avoid an “actuarial death spiral” as only the sick and uninsurable enrolled in ObamaCare which would quickly send premiums through the stratosphere.  The Obama administration touted the half that half a million had “applied” for ObamaCare; but that isn’t the same as “enrolling” and we’re learning that the numbers are a sick joke.  And what we’re finding is that across the states that are providing ObamaCare enrollment figures, those who are enrolling in “free” Medicaid (i.e., overwhelming the system with people who are NOT paying in) outnumbers those who will be paying anything at all by three- and even FOUR-to-one.  As many as over 80% of enrollees are applying for “free” Medicaid rather than paying for the system as the system requires to not plunge America off the fiscal cliff.

Again, FAR MORE people are getting termination/cancellation notices from their insurance companies – proving that Barack Obama is an abject LIAR who BETRAYED the American people – than are paying for insurance through ObamaCare.  The vast majority of the people who are “enrolling” are signing up for the taxpayer-funded Medicaid expansion that will cost the nation untold TRILLIONS.

Obama lied to you.  Democrats lied to you.  The Democrat Party is a moral disease that is killing America.

As an example, the Obama regime and the Democrat Party are saying that the ObamaCare web site crashed because nearly three million people tried to access it the first day.  Well, how the hell do they know how many people tried to access a site that CRASHED when they’re at the same time telling us that they have no idea how many people actually ENROLLED???  (and see here)???  How could you EVEN POSSIBLY know the former but not the latter???  These people are pure, distilled LIARS without shame, without integrity, without virtue and without honor.

This is a nation that is at – and probably past – a crossroad: we either need to vote conservative Republican or we need to vote Democrat so we can collapse and accept the mark of the beast and burn in hell for all eternity.  It is just as simple as that at this point.

How The United States Of America Will Catastrophically Financially Implode SOON

October 15, 2013

Let’s start with this:

China calls for dollar to be replaced as global reserve currency
Upset that the U.S. fiscal impasse threatens to trigger a default that would roil financial markets worldwide, Beijing suggests ‘building a de-Americanized world.’
By Jim Puzzanghera
October 14, 2013, 5:23 p.m.

WASHINGTON — Five years after the U.S. financial crisis helped cause a deep global recession, foreign leaders are worried that history is going to repeat itself.

The fiscal impasse that has partially shut the federal government now threatens to trigger a U.S. default that would roil financial markets worldwide, leading an agitated China to suggest replacing the dollar as the international reserve currency.

“As U.S. politicians of both political parties are still shuffling back and forth between the White House and the Capitol Hill without striking a viable deal to bring normality to the body politic they brag about, it is perhaps a good time for the befuddled world to start considering building a de-Americanized world,” China’s official state-run news agency, Xinhua, said in an English-language commentary Sunday.

There is no viable alternative to the dollar as the centerpiece of the global financial system, and there probably won’t be for the foreseeable future, experts said.

But Washington’s debt limit standoff — coming on the heels of similar brinkmanship in 2011 — could accelerate efforts to find an alternative.

“The U.S. remains the core of the global financial system at this point,” said Nicolas Veron, a senior fellow at Bruegel, a think tank in Brussels. “But the sort of thing happening in the U.S. might move people toward a system less reliant on the U.S.”

China echoed calls from world financial officials urging an end to what it called the “pernicious impasse” in the U.S. over funding the government and raising the $16.7-trillion debt limit.

The Treasury Department has said the debt limit must be raised by Thursday or it will run out of borrowing authority. That would leave it dependent on just cash on hand and incoming revenue to pay the federal government’s bills. Given the world financial system’s dependence on the dollar, a default on payments of interest or principal on U.S. Treasury bonds would be catastrophic for the global economy, analysts said.

Treasury bonds and other dollar-based investments are used as the main form of collateral worldwide, so questions about their security would cause more problems than the financial system failures in fall 2008, said Benjamin J. Cohen, an international political economy professor at UC Santa Barbara.

“It would make the Lehman Bros. episode look like a garden party by comparison,” Cohen said.

The U.S. debt limit standoff was the main topic at the recent meetings in Washington of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.

Global finance ministers are worried that the uncertainty surrounding a U.S. default “would mean massive disruption the world over, and we would be at risk of tipping yet again into a recession,” Christine Lagarde, head of the IMF, told NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

Most countries hold their foreign exchange reserves in U.S. dollars because the currency is viewed as the world’s most stable.

“The very fact that more than 60% of central banks’ reserves are in dollars gives them every reason to be concerned,” Barry Eichengreen, a professor of economics and political science at UC Berkeley and a former senior policy advisor at the IMF, said of foreign governments. “If the bank in which you held 60% of your savings was threatening to default, you’d be concerned too.”

U.S. financial markets rebounded Monday amid optimistic reports from Capitol Hill about negotiations between Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) to end the standoff.

China is the largest foreign holder of U.S. debt, with about $1.3 trillion in Treasury bonds, and probably more in other dollar-denominated investments. So the Beijing government is worried about the effect of a U.S. failure to raise the debt limit on those holdings.

The Xinhua editorial took swipes at the U.S. for claiming “the moral high ground” while “covertly doing things that are as audacious as torturing prisoners of war, slaying civilians in drone attacks, and spying on world leaders.”

Although it slammed the U.S. for the Iraq war and military activity around the world, the article focused much of its fire on the U.S. role in the global economy, saying “the world is still crawling its way out of an economic disaster thanks to the voracious Wall Street elites.”

“Most recently, the cyclical stagnation in Washington for a viable bipartisan solution over a federal budget and an approval for raising debt ceiling has again left many nations’ tremendous dollar assets in jeopardy and the international community highly agonized,” Xinhua said.

The editorial called for a “a new world order” in which “all nations, big or small, poor or rich, can have their key interests respected and protected on an equal footing.”

That new order should start with respect for the sovereignty of other nations, the editorial said. It also should include major financial reforms, such as allowing developing and emerging economies to have more say in the operations of the IMF and the World Bank.

China has been pushing since at least 2009 for the dollar to be replaced as the world’s reserve currency. The nation has not only called for a new international currency to be developed but also has been taking steps to make its currency, the yuan, more acceptable as a potential alternative.

“They never lose an opportunity to take advantage of embarrassing behavior by the United States,” Cohen said. China made similar calls in 2011, when a debt limit standoff was resolved at the last minute.

But the Chinese currency and its financial system are not ready to be the world’s reserve currency, experts said. Even the euro and Japanese yen aren’t prepared to do that because they lack the liquidity of the dollar.

Still, the latest Washington crisis could push the world to seek ways to diversify the financial system away from its dependence on the dollar, Cohen said.

“The only thing that can hurt the dollar these days is political dysfunction in Washington. We’re shooting ourselves in the foot,” he said. “The more we play these games in Washington, the less confidence people will have in the dollar and the more incentive people will have to do this diversification.”

The first thing I couldn’t help but notice is how communist China’s demagoguery sounds almost exactly like Obama’s demagoguery.  They’re both talking down America hoping that the worst will happen to this country because each (i.e, China and Obama) believes their political goals will be attained through America’s demise.  But moving on…

I don’t know whether the Los Angeles Times – which is staffed by liberal ideologue propagandists as opposed to actual “journalists” is simply being incompetent in this story or being the propagandists that they are (i.e., the backstory is that the “default” is the Republicans’ fault, and ergo sum the global meltdown over the “default” will be all the Republicans’ fault, too).  But here’s a fact that kind of pees all over some of the main assertions in this story:

From November 24, 2010 (the money quote is boldfaced at the end):

China and Russia have agreed to allow their currencies to trade against each other in spot inter-bank markets.

The motive is to promote the bilateral trade between China and Russia, facilitate the cross-border trade settlement of [the yuan], and meet the needs of economic entities to reduce the conversion cost, according to Chinese officials.

This latest move — a continuation in a series of efforts by both countries to move away from  U.S. dollar usage in international trade — further threatens the dollar’s reserve currency status.

The dollar has this status because it is currently the currency of international trade.

For example, when Malaysia and Germany exchange goods, the transaction is often denominated in dollars.  In particular, oil — something that all modern economies need — is denominated in U.S. dollars, so the currency is almost as indispensable as oil itself.

The dollar reserve currency status allows the U.S. to run up high deficits and have its debt be denominated in the U.S. dollar, which in turn enables it to print unlimited dollars and inflate its way out of debt. America, understandably, wants to protect these privileges. […]

Meanwhile, China and Russia are gradually revolting against the U.S. dollar. This latest move to shift bilateral trade away from it is significant in itself because China-Russian trade — previously denominated in dollars — is currently around $40 billion per year. For Russia, trade with China is larger than trade with the U.S.

Moreover, as this policy extends to Russian exports of oil and natural gas to China, it threatens the global petro-currency status of the U.S. dollar.

According to the International Energy Agency, China is already the largest consumer of energy,  although the U.S. is still the largest consumer of oil. However, China, now the largest automobile market in the world, is expected to rapidly increase oil consumption.

Russia is already the second biggest oil exporter and the biggest natural gas exporter in the world.

In other words, the growing importance of Russia and China in the global energy picture — and their phasing out of dollar usage for trading energy commodities — would marginalize the status of the dollar.

Russian ambitions against the dollar for energy exports go back to 2006. That year, former President Vladimir Putin made plans to set up a ruble-denominated oil and natural gas stock exchange in Russia.

So, in fact and contrary to the Los Angeles Times “reporting,” the movement away from the U.S. dollar as the reserve currency in fact PREDATES the financial crisis – and goes back to at least 2006 (I would argue it goes back even further than that, but I’ve proven my point: the financial crisis happened in late 2008).  So the LA Times is simply wrong in its thesis that the debt ceiling issue – which they over and over again hype as a “default” – is just plain bogus.

When we consider that Barack Obama demonized George Bush and ostentatiously voted against his debt ceiling (and didn’t bother to even show up and vote when the debt ceiling was raised other times during the Bush years – such that HE NEVER DID VOTE FOR A BUSH DEBT CEILING INCREASE other than when he voted for TARP – you also see the deceitful and dishonest propaganda that is going on.  It’s always “that was then” with these people; it’s always “It’s only fascist when THEY do what we did” with them.  Such as the fact that Obama did a press conference demonizing the GOP for not voting for his debt ceiling hike without ever bothering to so much as mention the fact that Obama did the exact same damn thing and how could the Republicans be anything but just as evil as the man who was now demonizing them???

Nor will that same blatantly dishonest media point out that Democrats shut down the government over the debt ceiling EIGHT TIMES during the Reagan presidency.  Because that would prove the lie to Obama’s “this has never happened before” and “no party has ever been this bent on destroying America” load of garbage.

Nor will they point out that it has largely – if not exclusively – been OBAMA who has fearmongered the debt ceiling rather than the Republicans.

The dishonesty of the mainstream media is simply breathtaking.

Having said that, let’s continue and examine this “default.”  Because it, too, is just a lie of propaganda:

Black’s law dictionary has this to say about “default”: The omission or failure to fulfill a duty, observe a promise, discharge an obligation, or perform an agreement [or observe a promise or discharge an obligation (e.g. to pay interest or principal on a debt when due ].

Come October 17 if our dysfunctional Washington hacks do not raise our debt ceiling, ominous forecasting of imminent default on our $17 trillion burden pound the airwaves. Prevarications foisted by the progressive press-corps regarding the United States becoming delinquent on its Treasury debt are as preposterous as they are disingenuous.  Whether premeditated lying or, equally likely, out of a stark darkness of matters economic the result is the usual fear mongering we have come to expect from their rumor mills.

Inconvenient as they may be, some facts are in order. The fiscal 2013 debt service for the twelve months ending September 30 will be somewhere around $420 billion. (Per the Bureau of Fiscal Service the actual figure of 11 months through August was just under $396 billion). IRS revenues for the calendar 2012 tax year will probably be around $2.3 trillion. That equates to over a five and a half times debt service coverage. So having enough money is not even close to the issue. There has been some discussion of what some are naming “prioritization of payments”.

Democrats are truly evil to fearmonger a “default” to falsely demonize and slander their opponents at the expense of the U.S. economy.  And Barack Obama is the most recklessly irresponsible president in the entirety of American history to join them in their lies.

To wit, we could easily pay our debt and NOT default.  And we could do that for not months but for years to come, if necessary.

If that isn’t enough, Republicans have already done the leg work to prevent any kind of “default”:

Sen. Pat Toomey and more than 30 Senate colleagues will introduce the “Ensuring the Full Faith and Credit of the United States and Protecting America’s Soldiers and Seniors Act.”

The bill is meant to offer a stop-gap if Congress refuses to raise the debt ceiling and the Treasury Department thus falls short of having enough cash to pay all the government’s bills in full and on time.

Toomey’s proposal would require that revenue going to Treasury first be used to pay interest on U.S. debt, Social Security benefits and active-duty military pay.

If there’s not enough revenue available to cover those payments when they’re due, the bill would also give limited authority to Treasury to raise the debt ceiling just enough to borrow the difference between revenue on hand and what’s owed on the priority payments.

I’ve pointed out the fact: if there IS a “default,” it will be because Barack Hussein refused to allow the Treasury to make the interest payment that the United States could in fact make.  He has already demonstrated that he is a genuinely evil man who is trying to make the political impasse as harsh and as painful as he possibly can in order to falsely demonize Republicans.

There is one and only one genuine fact in the Los Angeles Times piece: that of China’s demand that the United States be replaced as the reserve currency of planet earth.

That WILL happen soon.  Because Democrats WILL NEVER REIGN IN THEIR DEMONIC SPENDING.

The true debt of the United States is not the “paltry” $17 trillion that we keep hearing about; it is actually well WELL over $222 TRILLION.  Our actual debt, our “fiscal gap” between our debts and our ability to actually pay for all the crap Democrats keep imposing on America, is going up about one trillion dollars every single MONTH.  Because politicians are liars who paper over debts with more debts and then cover those debts up with still more debts.

Democrats are the worst addicts who ever existed.  Heroin, coke, crank, meth, crack addicts got NOTHIN’ on Democrats.  Because Democrats are addicted to money and the power that their money buys them – and they are addicted to it TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS AT A TIME.

The only reason Democrats can keep this insane game of insane spending going is because America is the world’s reserve currency.  The fact that all commodities such as oil are bought and sold in U.S. dollars has given us an unprecedented ability to basically just print money and keep escaping the consequences.

We have been just plain flat-out DEPRAVED in our spending.

As an example, do you know what triggered to insanely-titled-by liberals “Arab Spring” in which Arab regimes fell to be replaced again and again by terrorist-sponsored governments?  Food riots induced by Obama’s Fed as they kept printing more and more money and basically just adding more and more zeroes to the Federal Reserve computers.  As we printed more money, the Arab states that depended on the stability of the dollar saw massive inflation (because THEY can’t print more dollars their dollars became worth less = worthless).

Well, as Obama’s reverend once said, the chickens are about to come home to roost.  And they will roost on a collapsed, doomed, dead former United States of America.  And very soon.

One day, soon, the world will have had enough.  One day, soon, our stint as being the reserve currency and maximally exploiting that status with reckless and immoral spending that we can’t possibly afford will be ended FOR us.

And China will step in and take ownership.  And kick you and our family out of your home in the cold if you can’t pay their “damned American imperialist” rent surcharge.

Our time is coming.  We’ll get ours.  We’ll get what we deserve as a nation for being wicked enough to elect and then re-elect Obama: we’ll get Dodo bird extinction just like we deserve.

The United States is nowhere mentioned in Bible prophecy; that’s because America will have collapsed and simply be irrelevant as we enter these last days just before the beast of the Book of Revelation comes to impose his mark and doom the world to suffering and hell.

The Party Of Genuine Evil And The Destruction Of America: In 39 States, Democrat Welfare Pays Better Than A Secretary’s Job

September 20, 2013

If you are a Democrat, you despise religion, despise Judeo-Christianity, and despise Christian values and vote for these things to be criminalized.  If you are a Democrat, you are WORSE than a mass murderer.  Literally, you have participated in the murder of nine innocent human beings – totaling a death toll of over 55 million human lives – for every single Jew that Hitler had exterminated in the Holocaust.  If you are a Democrat, you are a celebrator of degenerate sodomy who demands the destruction of marriage and the destruction of the family.  If you are a Democrat, you oppose law enforcement and benignly smile as criminals oppress innocent – and thanks to your policies, completely helpless – citizens.

And if you are a Democrat, you have an unrelenting hostility toward the work ethic and seek the destruction of America in favor of the creation of a Marxist welfare State.  If you are a Democrat, you read the Cloward and Piven article – detailing a plot by the left to overwhelm the social support structures of the United States as a means to implode the United States so that our free “one nation, under God” could be replaced by communism or something even worse (and DON’T think that strategy isn’t alive and well today in the hearts and minds of the left).

Welfare pays.  Thanks to Obama, thanks to the Democrat Party, welfare pays well.

It’s WORK that doesn’t pay anymore.  And if you have a job and pay your taxes, you are a sucker.

One day every single Democrat will stand before a just and holy God as fire and smoke pour out of the chariot wheels of His increasing wrath and they will have to give an answer for their murderous, depraved lives and what they did with them.

Welfare now – in the age of Obama’s “fundamental transformation of America – pays more than the minimum wage in 35 states.

Amazingly, given the fact that welfare benefits average MORE THAN $15 an hour in non-taxable income, welfare pays better than a job that “pays” $21 an hour in the private sector.  And that doesn’t, by the way, include the cost of transportation to that job or the cost of purchasing clothes suitable for a job.

Which is why in 39 states, welfare “pays” better than the starting salary of a secretary:

The authors found that in 11 states, “welfare pays more than the average pretax first-year wage for a teacher [in those states]. In 39 states, it pays more than the starting wage for a secretary. And, in the three most generous states a person on welfare can take home more money than an entry-level computer programmer.” — Wall Street Journal, “Work or Welfare: What Pays More?”, August 19, 2013

It’s why in liberal Democrat New York City, welfare “pays” better than a starting teacher’s salary.

Hell, in 47 states, according to Cato, welfare “pays” better than what a janitor “earns.”  Which is why so many liberal welfare parasites sneer at the foolish unwashed janitor who is a sucker because unlike them, he is honest and actually works for his check.

This “one nation, under Obama” is doomed.  It’s too late.  We’re finished.  And we DESERVE to be finished.

Our actual debt now exceeds $200 trillion.  And what the Fed did two days ago, keeping up their “QE Forever” because Obama has so gutted the economy that we can’t ever get away from running the money printing presses day and night forever guarantee our well-deserved destruction.

Two Ways Sequestration Battle Proves That America Is A Headless Chicken Lurching Toward The Mark Of The Beast

February 26, 2013

Do you know what the absolutely most hilarious thing about the sequestration issue is? It’s that Democrats and media elites are saying, “The Republicans voted for these sequestration cuts…”  And, yes, they did vote for the bill that came from the Obama White House that had the sequestration cuts in it; as did Democrats.  But here’s the funny thing about it: if Republicans DON’T vote Obama’s way, they are “obstructionists.”  If they DO vote Obama’s way, well, they become completely to blame for the disaster that came from the mind of Obama, as far as the mainstream media and the Democrat Party are concerned.

The sequestration battle reveals two ways that the war is over, and America lost.

And it’s like that famous Pogo line: “We have met the enemy… and he is us.”

Two things going on right now blatantly show America is doomed.  There is simply no coming back from these things.

The first is the level of propaganda and lies coming from our mainstream media and from our White House.  There simply has never been a president who has ever been so in-your-face dishonest; and there simply has never been a media refusal to cover the truth like this before.

Barack Obama has now repeatedly said that sequestration – which he now says is a “meat cleaver” that would have “brutal consequences” that would destroy America – was “Congress’ idea” (with the implication that it was therefore the Republicans’ idea.  He said back on October 22:

“The sequester is not something that I’ve proposed,” Obama said. “It is something that Congress has proposed.”

But Barack Obama is a documented liar in claiming that.  Because WHO actually proposed sequestration again?

Let’s see what White House Press Secretary Jay Carney was forced to concede during an interview with Fox News anchor Brett Bair (note: I added the first remark by Jay Carney to the transcript after transcribing it from the video):

Jay Carney: Somehow, what they [Republicans] liked then, they don’t like now and they’re trying to say that it was the president’s idea.

Bret Baier: Fair to say, but it was the president’s idea… You concede that point, right?

Jay Carney: What I will concede is that we were looking and the Republicans were looking for a trigger around which to build the mechanism to get us out of default possibility and the sequester was one of the ideas yes put forward, yes, by the president’s team.

Who’s to blame for sequestration?

“At 2:30 p.m. Lew and Nabors went to the Senate to meet with Reid and his chief of staff, David Krone. ‘We have an idea for the trigger,’ Lew said. ‘What’s the idea?’ Reid asked skeptically. ‘Sequestration.’ Reid bent down and put his head between his knees, almost as if he were going to throw up or was having a heart attack. He sat back up and looked at the ceiling. ‘A couple of weeks ago,’ he said, ‘my staff said to me that there is one more possible’ enforcement mechanism: sequestration. He said he told them, ‘Get the hell out of here. That’s insane. The White House surely will come up with a plan that will save the day. And you come to me with sequestration?’ Well, it could work, Lew and Nabors explained. What would the impact be? They would design it so that half the threatened cuts would be from the Defense Department. ‘I like that,’ Reid said. ‘That’s good. It doesn’t touch Medicaid or Medicare, does it?’ It actually does touch Medicare, they replied. ‘How does it touch Medicare?’ It depends, they said. There’s versions with 2 percent cuts, and there’s versions with 4 percent cuts.” (Bob Woodward, The Price Of Politics, 2012, pp. 326)

It is a documented historical fact that it was BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA’S White House that proposed sequestration, NOT Congress and most certainly NOT Republicans.

So, yeah, it was the president’s idea.  It was Obama’s plan that Obama put forward.  If the Republicans agreed to it in order to get something done on the last debt ceiling fight.  And after all  the time you’ve spent labelling Republicans as “obstructionists” for not agreeing with you, NOW you demonize them as evil after they DO agree with you???

Barack Obama is a documented, proven liar.  Even the überliberal Washington Post acknowledges that Barack Obama is a liar.  But the rest of the media is largely disinterested, uningaged, uninvolved in this story – aside from presenting Obama’s deceitful spin on reality as “the news.”

We also have Barack Obama’s very own words to examine regarding the automatic spending cuts of the sequestration his White House proposed:

I will veto any effort to get rid of those automatic spending cuts,” said Obama from the White House’s briefing room, adding “the only way to get rid of those cuts is to get Congress to come together and work on a deal.”

We literally have him saying it on video:

Obama has said the same thing again and again:

“Already some in Congress are trying to undo these automatic spending cuts. My message to them is simple: No,” Mr. Obama said from the White House briefing room Monday evening. “I will veto any effort to get rid of those automatic spending cuts to domestic and defense spending.”

Barack Obama is a documented liar and slanderer and demagogue and fearmongering demonizer for all the world to see.

When he now says:

“Would they rather put hundreds of thousands of jobs and our entire economy at risk just to protect a few special interest tax loopholes that benefit only the wealthiest Americans and biggest corporations?” Obama asked of the GOP during a White House event.

What he is actually saying is that it was actually HIS idea to “put hundreds of thousands of jobs and our entire economy at risk just to protect a few special interest tax loopholes that benefit only the wealthiest Americans and biggest corporations.”   You DO know that GE – which paid zero taxes last year – is a liberal and pro-Obama corporation, don’t you?  You DO know that Facebook – another liberal pro-Obama corporation is not only not paying federal income taxes but is actually getting a huge tax refund of nearly half a billion dollars in tax money???

When Obama now says:

At one of his countless anti-sequester events, Obama warned that the budget cuts will “gut critical investments,” “weaken America’s economic recovery” and “weaken our military readiness.” He said tens of thousands of parents will scramble to find child care, and hundreds of thousands will “lose access to primary care and preventive care.”

Whenever you hear Obama explain how the sequestration cuts are absolutely evil and would basically kill everybody in his current slandering fearmongering, realize that Obama is the source of that evil and is responsible for all the evil things he says will happen.

And do you REALLY want to talk about the cronyism of the Obama administration????  Obama is literally SELLING access to his White House to the highest bidder.  Obama’s mindset is to be the most shameless peddler of chutzpah the world has ever known, to demonize and slander his opponents while actually doing far WORSE than the opponents whom he is routinely demonizing.   While the media dishonestly “reports” whatever the hell their Führer wants them to.  And I say “Führer” because you’ve got to go back to Joseph Goebbels’ Ministry of Propaganda to see this kind of shameless media dishonesty.

What Barack Hussein Obama is actually saying is that to whatever extent the sequestration cuts are evil, HE is evil.  To whatever extent that sequestration will hurt the economy, HE is the one who hurt the economy.  And to whatever extent sequestration cuts will hurt the American people, HE is the one who hurt the American people.  Obama is literally on the record having said that he would not allow ANYTHING to undo the spending cuts that he today dishonestly says is demonically evil.

But the world doesn’t CARE that Barack Obama is a slandering liar and a pathologically dishonest and dishonorable human being.  And that’s largely because the mainstream media are a bunch of pathologically dishonest and dishonorable human beings who now rely almost exclusively on propaganda rather than “news” or “journalism.”

It’s an inconvenient truth that the sequestration cuts that Barack Obama is now fearmongering and demonizing came from Obama.  It is an inconvenient truth that Barack Hussein Obama actually threatened to VETO ANY EFFORT TO UNDO THE SEQUESTRATION CUTS THAT HE NOW SAYS ARE SO DAMN EVIL and will be so damned harmful to the American people.  So the media doesn’t report the inconvenient truth.  And instead reports Obama’s slandering lies and fearmongering in PLACE of the truth.

When a nation is as blinded by lies and as willing to participate in lies and deceit as the American people now are, it is time for that nation and that people to go the way of the Dodo bird to extinction.  But it’s more than just extinction, because we face divine judgment: any nation that is so deluded by lies that it would vote for a liar without shame, without honor and without decency in 2008 and then vote to re-elect that shameless liar four years later deserves the Antichrist, deserves to worship him, deserves to take his mark and deserves to burn in hell for all eternity.

And that is coming because of what we have done.  That end is coming because when we needed to be confronted by the truth, the American people were the sort of people who preferred lies and slander and demagoguery and fearmongering.

The truth no longer matters in America.  And God DAMN America for that, to quote Obama’s racist reverend Jeremiah Wright.

What I point out above isn’t the only Obama lies regarding sequestration.  Like I said, this man is a liar without shame or honor or decency.  And literally everything that drools out of his mouth is a lie.  Bob Woodward also documented that Barack Obama, in demanding tax hikes (“revenue”), is not only dishonestly moving the goal post but in fact shamelessly reneging on a deal he made:

In fact, the final deal reached between Vice President Biden and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) in 2011 included an agreement that there would be no tax increases in the sequester in exchange for what the president was insisting on: an agreement that the nation’s debt ceiling would be increased for 18 months, so Obama would not have to go through another such negotiation in 2012, when he was running for reelection.

So when the president asks that a substitute for the sequester include not just spending cuts but also new revenue, he is moving the goal posts. His call for a balanced approach is reasonable, and he makes a strong case that those in the top income brackets could and should pay more. But that was not the deal he made.

Again, that is the reporting of Bob Woodward, one of the most famous journalist’ alive whose reporting brought down Nixon, stated from his access to the White House during the very time the sequestration deal was going through.

But again, the mainstream media and the wicked American people will not allow Barack Obama to be held responsible for his shameless lies or his constant deceit.  So the fact that Obama’s constant demand for “common-sense” “balanced approach,” he is in fact saying he should be rewarded for making promises, agreeing to deals, and then dishonestly reneging on those promises and deals.

Anyone who negotiates with such a dishonest man as Obama is is a fool who deserves his own destruction.  Which is why the Republican Party is in such terrible shape as they’ve tried to compromise again and again with a shameless, craven, dishonest liar.

They have gone down this path again and again and again.  Obama makes a deal only to break his own deal.  And then demonize and slander the Republicans whose sin was trying to deal with a devil:

The book, “The Price of Politics,” on sale Sept. 11, 2012, shows how close the president and the House speaker were to defying Washington odds and establishing a spending framework that included both new revenues and major changes to long-sacred entitlement programs.

But at a critical juncture, with an agreement tantalizingly close, Obama pressed Boehner for additional taxes as part of a final deal — a miscalculation, in retrospect, given how far the House speaker felt he’d already gone.

Who killed that infamous Grand Bargain deal in which Boehner had agreed to concede higher taxes in exhange for spending cuts?  Obama killed it by having a deal and then demanding even more concessions after he had already agreed on a deal.  And dishonest Democrats, which pretty much is all of them, have perverted the truth ever since by falsely claiming Boehner walked away from a deal.  All Boehner walked away from was the destroyed engine of a deal after Obama dishonestly threw a monkey wrench into it after they’d already agreed to a deal.

When Barack Hussein Obama pissed on the deal and killed it, he and his vast army of lying cockroaches were ready to point the finger at the victim of Obama’s dishonest dealing.

Democrats are every bit as happy to go off the fiscal cliff of sequestration as the most right wing Republican.  And Obama has been doing a whole lot of moving the goalposts while he dishonestly goes back on agreements he made.  But the dishonest media refuses to report the truth.  Because the truth is the first thing to go before God truly begins to judge a nation for its wickedness.

That’s one.  The dishonesty of the American people in their leader, in their dishonest, false messiah are alone enough to constitute God Damn America until this nation fades away from its status as a world power in humiliation and shame.

But the sequestration debate reveals a far more dangerous cancer at the dishonest, wicked heart of Barack Hussein Obama and the American people he leads to their damnation.

The other fact is the fact that there will NEVER be anything remotely CLOSE to true spending cuts as long as there is one Democrat who has not been hunted down with dogs and burned alive.

Do you know what the sequestration fight is really over?  Of course you don’t, if you get your “news” from the mainstream media!  It is over a 2.4% reduction in the rate of projected spending:

How much is to be “cut”? $85 billion on a budget of $3.6 trillion. That’s 2.4%. As of August household income was down 8.2% under Obama and the country had to make do. Now Obama tries to tell us that government can’t do with 2.4% less? Seriously?

He has been lying about the sequester since the debates.

And:

Federal spending will explode from $3.6 trillion to $6 trillion over the next 10 years, but the much-maligned sequester will cut only 2.4 percent of this spending.

Sequestration represents a relatively small cut in projected spending. So why are so many in Washington wringing their hands over a two-and-a-half percent reduction?

Do you know that the coming budget will spend more than last years budget EVEN WITH the sequestration “cuts”???  Because the fact of the matter is that we will actually be spending $110 billion MORE in this budget even when the sequestration “cuts” are factored in.

I want you to understand: Democrats are literally becoming hysterical and rabid over the fear of not a 2% cut that ANY bureaucracy ought to be able to easily make – but a 2.4% cut in the rate of growth of that spending.  This is another way of simply pointing out the fact that we can’t make ANY cuts of ANY kind at all.

The sequestration “cuts” are mindless, stupid and evil – which is exactly what I for one would expect from anything coming out of Obama’s White House as these sequestration cuts did – but Republicans are beginning to express a willingness to “go off the cliff” with sequestration simply because it is now glaringly obvious to anyone possessing a faculty for comprehending reality that Barack Obama will NEVER allow any other spending cuts of any kind during the next four years.  And if Republicans want ANY cuts to the budget, the deficit, or the debt at ALL, this is their only chance to get them.

That’s the fact.

And the fact is that Democrats – in spite of their frequent lip service to reducing spending, reducing the deficit, reducing the debt – are shameless liars who say one thing and keep doing another.  They will NEVER allow ANY spending cuts.  Period.

Obama slandered George Bush for his $4 trillion debt over eight years.  He has now presided over $6 trillion more in debt in only four years.  Which is to say that the nation’s crushing, bankrupting, extinction debt is tripling under Obama beyond what Obama demonized Bush over.

Again, Barack Hussein Obama is a pathologically dishonest man.  And this hellbound world longing for the Antichrist loves him for it.

What Obama did was load up the 2008 federal deficit with TRILLIONS of dollars in his own spending, then slanderously and dishonestly hold Bush responsible for Obama’s own wicked spending.  As if it was Bush who imposed the Obama stimulus, and Bush who imposed the Obama Omnibus bill, etc.  The deficit that Bush handed Obama for 2008 was $400 billion.  And what Obama did was deceitfully assert that HE ended the war in Iraq – which Bush actually ended and signed the final status of forces agreement for – and that somehow without Obama the Iraq War would have gone on forever and so Obama should somehow be credited with eternal savings for ending a war that Bush actually won and ended.

And that is why this nation is utterly doomed.  Either money is nothing – in which case nobody needs any more of it and Democrats are idiots for trying to redistribute the wealth like the Marxists they truly are – or money matters and our $228 trillion fiscal gap will bury us and smother this nation to death.  It’s one or the other.

Our true fiscal gap was documented by the International Monetary Fund at $222 trillion as of August of last year.  It is growing by nearly a trillion dollars every month.  Which means it is now well over $228 trillion in unfunded liabilities that will bankrupt this nation.

And Obama is literally coming unglued at saving $84 billion in cuts not in our spending but only in our rate of growth – which is a drop of piss in a giant ocean of bloody-red debt???

Democrats won’t allow America to cut its spending in any way, shape or form.  And America is going to die because of that.

The Democrat Party stands for the extinction of America.  It is crushing America with lies and crushing America with debt.  And America cannot survive with either scourge, let alone both.

So it should be no surprise that the same Obama administration that has gone so completely deranged predicting national disaster and even holocaust if the sequestration that Obama proposed, that Obama signed into law and that Obama threatened to use his veto to protect was put into effect is also the administration that is about to intentionally try to make those cuts as painful to as many Americans as they possibly can.

Want an example?  Obama cabinent appointees are already releasing a wave of CRIMINAL illegal immigrants as a way to inflict harm with the sequestration cuts in order to say the Republicans did what in fact OBAMA did.  I say “criminal” not just because it is a damn CRIME to enter the United States without going through the legal immigration process, but because the “immigrants” being released are “immigrants” who have already been convicted of crimes in Los Estados Unidos.

So basically, what Obama is saying is that you either agree with my new deal after I broke my word with you on our last deal, or else I’ll threaten you with huge numbers of criminal illegal immigrants.  And according to Obama, that’s a “balanced compromise” rather than terrorist extortionism.

Republican Majority Leader Eric Cantor put it this way:

“President Obama has said that unless he gets a second tax hike in eight  weeks, he will be forced to let criminals loose on the streets, the meat at your  grocery store won’t be inspected and emergency responders will be unable to do  their jobs,” Cantor said in his statement.

“These are false choices. We are faced with the negative effects of the  sequester because Democrats have not been able to take even the smallest step  towards controlling spending.”

False choices have been all we’ve had for Obama’s entire presidency.

Could Obama lay off his scheduling secretary so he’d have a harder time going on a golfing vacation with Tiger Woods just before coming back to say that what clearly wasn’t a big deal before he went on vacation is suddenly about to kill America if he doesn’t get his way?  Yes, but it’s so much more fun for Obama to fire firefighters and police officers instead.  Because that’s just the kind of wicked man he is.

When the beast comes, there is not a doubt in my mind that he will honor Barack Hussein Obama as the man who made his arrival possible.

And the American people will burn in hell for all eternity as a result of both of these wicked men.

Why I’m Not A Doomsday Prepper Even Though I Believe We’re Close To Doomsday

February 7, 2013

There’s a fascinating show on National Geographic called “Doomsday Preppers.”  It is basically a documentary series detailing various people and groups of people who are variously earnestly preparing for any of a number of “doomsday scenarios.”  And while it is undoubtedly produced by Hollywood liberals who think the people they are focusing their cameras on are pretty much all nuts, it is likely that they find everything about the doomsday preppers nuts, such that they don’t feel they need to tip the scales in their favor with the kind of propaganda that they devote to so many other subjects.

A parallel would be the “ghost hunters” crap that started to dominate the Sci-Fi channel.  As an example, I believe that these people are so off that the more accurately you frame them, the crazier they will look.  And I think that’s how the “Doomsday Preppers” series is being filmed and produced.

I came across Doomsday Preppers because it was the channel up from the Military History Channel that I like to watch.  And I’ve watched two or three episodes.

You should understand that if you are a liberal who believes Obama is lowering the level of the oceans and healing the planet, these doomsday preppers are as mentally and emotionally warped as I think the ghost hunters are.

Anyway, I’m a guy who takes his Bible seriously (another subject liberals find crazy).  I believe the Bible is literally true, I believe the Book of Revelation describes our very close future and I therefore very much believe in “doomsday” stuff.

Maybe you don’t.  There are two kinds of people who don’t, though: 1) those who don’t think the human race will end in tragic mushroom clouds, but rather that the human race will create a Utopia and they will climb on board the Enterprise and seek new civilizations with Captain Kirk.  I’m not trying to mock anybody by putting it that way; there’s just two very different views of the future.  And man either solves his own problems and lives happily ever after or he doesn’t and things get really bad really quickly before they get even worse.  People of any intelligence believe in one or the other.  The second group 2) are those who are frankly as much too stupid to consider their world ending as a cow lying in a field chewing its cud could consider its world ending.  They’re just oblivious to anything beyond themselves.

Anyway, I’m in the group of thinking people who believe things are going to get really ugly as the human race systematically destroys itself.

So why am I not a “doomsday prepper,” then?  I mean, if I think things are going to go to hell on earth, shouldn’t I be trying to maybe do something to either escape the chaos or be able to fight it?

On my view of the world, no, I don’t need to do that.  God is in control.  And as our world gets more and more crazy all around us, it is actually proving that the God who predicted it would become crazy knew what He was talking about.

As it became obvious that Obama was going to target the 2nd Amendment and specifically target so-called “assault weapons,” I seriously considered getting myself an AR-15 or an M4.  Why?  Well, because Obama wants to take away my right to have one and be able to defend myself with one if needed.  But in my case, that wasn’t enough justification.

As a Christian, I do not have to go through life carrying a spirit of fear.

Again, if you’re going to even consider buying a weapon like an AR-15, you’d better think about it some first.  That by no means indicates the answer will be, “you shouldn’t buy one.”  But you ought to consider issues from “just where am I going to store this?” to “why am I buying this thing again?”

This is what gets to the essence of doomsday preppers versus Christians like myself.

Since I read my Bible and take my understanding of the world from that, I know that most of the scenarios that the “doomsday preppers” are fearing happen well into the Tribulation – after the Rapture – and I and my Christian brethren will be long-gone when the truly psycho stuff starts raining down upon a godless world ruled by the Antichrist.

Here’s the question: if a bunch of Obama’s jackbooted FBI killers came smashing through your door, would you want to be able to shoot them with your assault weapon?  Well, the doomsday prepper is going to say, “Hell yeah I would.  If it’s them or me and my family, I want to make it them.  No brainer.”

But, you see, my answer to that question is no, I wouldn’t.

I think we should all realize that localized scenarios when a hurricane, tornado or earthquake hits and you are completely on your own are more likely than ever.  People in high risk locations ought to consider buying an assault weapon to either discourage or deal with looters.

But I personally don’t spend my nights worrying about that.

The scenario I see developing is leftist fascists using the full weight of the power of government to “legally” drag me out of my home for my exercising of what had previously been my 1st Amendment right of free speech.  I see that happening as America and the world unfolds according to what the prophets said would happen in the Bible.

Would I want that assault rifle in that scenario?  No.  Let them drag me away and put me in prison and then kill me.  Frankly I’ll be glad if they take me in the very first wave.  That way I won’t have to keep being brave after I see what happens to the other people who were dragged away for exercising what had previously been their 1st Amendment right of free speech.

We find that after they take your guns away, you’ve got to be braver and braver and braver in the face of a government that knows it has all the guns and all the power and the people have nothing but interrogation cells waiting for them if they complain about it.

So why would I shoot armed vandals trying to break into my home but not shoot at government fascists trying to break into my home?  The answer is found in Revelation 13:10:

Anyone who is destined for prison will be taken to prison. Anyone destined to die by the sword will die by the sword. This means that God’s holy people must endure persecution patiently and remain faithful.

That passage tells me that in these last days, when the beast comes for you, God says to let him come and haul you away.  There is a time and a place for everything under heaven, Ecclesiastes chapter 3 famously tells us.  There WAS a time to fight – such as before the most wicked president in our nation’s history was getting elected through slander, fearmongering and demagoguery – but when the beast comes God calls us to stop fighting with our own strength and completely depend on Him.

I truly believe that we are heading for that day.  I truly believe that we have arrived at the point in history when God’s people will have to endure rather than fight back.  And I’m going to live that out in the here and now.

And when that day comes to my door, I won’t fight back.  Because the Word of God tells me to endure patiently by trusting in Him and to remain faithful to His Gospel.

P.S. For the record, while we talk about our “national debt” of $16.5 trillion, our real issue is the unfunded liabilities and the fiscal gap that the US government owes its own people due to Democrats imposing Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid on this nation.  Our unfunded liabilities are now well over $225 trillion and they are increasing at a rate of nearly one trillion dollars every single month.  And that isn’t counting the hundreds of billions of dollars in union pension debt that many of our states have accumulated – with California ALONE facing a $500 unfunded pension liability.  And with Illinois facing at least another hundred billion – which is increasing at the rate of $17 million every single DAY.  I say that our unfunded liabilities are our real issue because who do you think Democrats will renege on: China or millions of voters who have a benefit check coming at the end of the month and who will vote them out of office if they don’t keep pumping out those checks whether America can pay the bill or not???  The answer is obvious.  Our politicians will welch on our foreign creditors long before they welch on their voters.  And if we’re talking about having a hard time finding $16.5 trillion, how the hell are we ever going to come up with the hundreds of trillions of dollars that nobody will talk about???

The only thing keeping America financially afloat is the fact that we are the world’s reserve currency, such that most commodities such as oil are traded exclusively in U.S. dollars.  Because we are the world’s reserve currency, we can literally print money in a way that no other nation has ever been allowed to print money without immediate and painful consequences.  China and Russia are already demanding that status be changed.  And Obama and many Democrats are declaring that the United States is NOT the bastion of “exceptionalism” that resulted in America having that world reserve currency status in the first place.  In so doing, our own rulers are actually helping the nations that want to chop us down to size.  Because when we lose the world reserve currency status – that we only deserve if we are the unique, exceptional benevolent superpower that liberals deny we are – it will fiscally implode in very short order as we collapse under the sheer weight of our massive and unsustainable debt.

And then will come our doomsday.

But as a Christian who clings to Christ rather than to Obama or to the America he is “fundamentally transforming,” I need not fear.

That’s why I’m not a doomsday prepper even though I believe we are danger-close to doomsday.

Obama Has Just Taken God Damn America To $16 Trillion In Debt (Mind You, Our Actual Debt Is $222 Trillion And SKYROCKETING)

September 5, 2012

Barack Obama fortuitously provides my setup for me as I point the angry finger of blame he once pointed right back in his fool face:

“The problem is, is that the way Bush has done it over the last eight years is to take out a credit card from the Bank of China in the name of our children, driving up our national debt from $5 trillion for the first 42 presidents – #43 added $4 trillion by his lonesome, so that we now have over $9 trillion of debt that we are going to have to pay back — $30,000 for every man, woman and child. That’s irresponsible. It’s unpatriotic.” — Barack Obama, 3 July 2008

Obama gives us the relevant numbers himself: Bush gave us $4 trillion in debt over eight years and that was so irresponsible and such a failure in leadership that it’s “unpatriotic.”  Those are Obama’s own words that he was elected under.  And Obama started out with a national debt of $10 trillion and promised the American people he would cut the deficit in half during his first term.

That deficit that Obama promised to cut in half was $455 billion.  That is a fact as can be seen below.  Not only did Obama NOT keep his self-righteous, lying, hypocrite promise to cut the deficit in half in his first term, he has more than doubled that deficit each year of his presidency and one year MORE THAN TRIPLED it.  And not only has Obama given us trillion-PLUS dollar deficits every single year of his presidency, but in fact he has created the disastrous future of trillion dollar deficits as far as the eye can see until America collapses.

Obama demonized Bush for a debt that was so enormous that it would cost every man, woman and child in America $30,000 to pay.  And what did he do?  He gave us a debt that will now cost every man, woman and child in America more than $50,000 to pay!

It’s not just that Obama is a liar; he is a truly demonic liar. And Obama has been “governing” or “leading” by counting on his ability to lie faster than the other side can correct his lies.

Here are the official budget deficit numbers:

  • 2011 – $1.5 trillion budget deficit (projected)
  • 2010 – $1.3 trillion budget deficit
  • 2009 – $1.4 trillion budget
  • 2008 – $455 billion budget deficit
  • 2007 – $162 billion budget deficit
  • 2006 – $248.2 billion budget deficit
  • 2005 – $319 billion budget deficit
  • 2004 – $412.7 billion budget deficit
  • 2003 – $377.6 billion budget deficit
  • 2002 – $157.8 billion budget deficit
  • 2001 – $128.2 billion budget surplus

It has become very difficult to estimate Obama’s and the Democrat Party’s deficits.  Because they have wickedly refused to even BOTHER to pass a budget as required by law for 1,224 days.  Republicans in the House have done their job every year they have governed, both during the time that they controlled both branches of the Congress in 2006 (when the final Republican congressional budget under Bush was just $162 billion) and since they retook the House in 2010.  But Democrats who control the Senate have refused to do their duty and pass ANY budget at ALL.

It’s official: We are now $16 trillion in debt
posted at 6:58 pm on September 4, 2012 by Erika Johnsen

That. Just. Happened. There’s been a bit of waffling on when exactly it occurred between last Friday and Tuesday, but regardless, that ship has sailed.

Total U.S. government debt eclipsed $16 trillion for the first time Friday, new government data show, as total federal borrowing continues marching toward the $16.394 trillion borrowing limit.

The Treasury Department said total government debt hit $16,015,769,788,215.80 on Friday, up $25 billion from the day before. The amount of federal debt subject to the borrowing limit is actually slightly less, as it doesn’t include several types of borrowing, and it stood at $15.977 trillion on Friday.

Ah yes, remember when Obama promised he’s cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term in office? Heh, that ol’ chestnut. In actuality, President Obama has added over $5.4 trillion to the debt during less than four years in office, more than any other president and approximately a trillion more than President Bush during his full two terms in office. So, there’s that.

Parting thought: How much is a trillion?

If Obama is a one-term president, which he himself by his own rhetoric said he ought to be, he will have added more than $6 trillion to the debt in his four years by the time he leaves office.  The same man who viciously demonized his predecessor for adding less than $5 trillion over EIGHT years.  The national debt is over $16 trillion now, and it’s going to keep piling on and piling on until January 2013.  With at least $500 billion in interest to pay on top of that.

But don’t forget the REAL debt is actually $222 trillion:

The U.S. fiscal gap, calculated (by us) using theCongressional Budget Office’s realistic long-term budget forecast — the Alternative Fiscal Scenario — is now $222 trillion. Last year, it was $211 trillion. The $11 trillion difference — this year’s true federal deficit — is 10 times larger than the official deficit and roughly as large as the entire stock of official debt in public hands.

Now, the fact of the matter is that 99.9 percent of that supermassive debt have been loaded on the back of America’s children – because Democrats love “free stuff” that SOMEBODY ELSE gets forced to pay for – was created by Democrat entitlement programs that should have never been passed in the first place.  Both Social Security and Medicare would have been FAR more stable and pay out FAR better benefits if they had been privatized from the very start as Republicans wanted.  But Democrats imposed their socialism by force and it is only a matter of time before their government fascist takeover implodes America.  Unless YOU’VE got $222 trillion in your pocket.

Democrats have murdered America.

What they’ve done to the country they’ve done to the liberal states and the liberal cities.   Go to Illinois, the king of the deadbeat states. You watch a 60 Minute Story and you will be PISSED at what slimebag Democrat cockroaches have done. Go to California, where Democrats have created a $500 BILLION unfunded pension black hole of doom. Look at America under Obama and take note that America just passed the $16 trillion mark that was $10 trillion when Bush left office. Barack Obama DEMONIZED George Bush for increasing the debt by $4 trillion over eight years – look what that Marxist weasel has done in HALF the time by piling on $6 trillion in debt in only FOUR years!!!

This election isn’t a “do-over.”  The odds are that Obama has already fatally wounded America with his insane spending and his bizarre “logic” and his constant fracturing of America on the basis of race and gender and income.  But if you vote for Obama now, you are literally voting for the suicide of America.

Harvard Professor Provides Systematic And Scathing Take Down Of Obama’s Entire Presidency: Obama’s Gotta Go

August 21, 2012

The following isn’t a takedown of Obama for merely failing to turn the economy around; it is a scathing indictment of Obama’s entire premise for his 2008 entire campaign and failed presidency:

Niall Ferguson: Obama’s Gotta Go
Aug 19, 2012 1:00 AM EDT
Why does Paul Ryan scare the president so much? Because Obama has broken his promises, and it’s clear that the GOP ticket’s path to prosperity is our only hope.

I was a good loser four years ago. “In the grand scheme of history,” I wrote the day after Barack Obama’s election as president, “four decades is not an especially long time. Yet in that brief period America has gone from the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. to the apotheosis of Barack Obama. You would not be human if you failed to acknowledge this as a cause for great rejoicing.”

Newsweek
 

Despite having been—full disclosure—an adviser to John McCain, I acknowledged his opponent’s remarkable qualities: his soaring oratory, his cool, hard-to-ruffle temperament, and his near faultless campaign organization.

Yet the question confronting the country nearly four years later is not who was the better candidate four years ago. It is whether the winner has delivered on his promises. And the sad truth is that he has not.

In his inaugural address, Obama promised “not only to create new jobs, but to lay a new foundation for growth.” He promised to “build the roads and bridges, the electric grids, and digital lines that feed our commerce and bind us together.” He promised to “restore science to its rightful place and wield technology’s wonders to raise health care’s quality and lower its cost.” And he promised to “transform our schools and colleges and universities to meet the demands of a new age.” Unfortunately the president’s scorecard on every single one of those bold pledges is pitiful.

COVER STORY: Obama has broken his promises, and it’s clear that the GOP ticket’s path to prosperity is our only hope bit.ly/QQLouG

In an unguarded moment earlier this year, the president commented that the private sector of the economy was “doing fine.” Certainly, the stock market is well up (by 74 percent) relative to the close on Inauguration Day 2009. But the total number of private-sector jobs is still 4.3 million below the January 2008 peak. Meanwhile, since 2008, a staggering 3.6 million Americans have been added to Social Security’s disability insurance program. This is one of many ways unemployment is being concealed.

In his fiscal year 2010 budget—the first he presented—the president envisaged growth of 3.2 percent in 2010, 4.0 percent in 2011, 4.6 percent in 2012. The actual numbers were 2.4 percent in 2010 and 1.8 percent in 2011; few forecasters now expect it to be much above 2.3 percent this year.

Unemployment was supposed to be 6 percent by now. It has averaged 8.2 percent this year so far. Meanwhile real median annual household income has dropped more than 5 percent since June 2009. Nearly 110 million individuals received a welfare benefit in 2011, mostly Medicaid or food stamps.

Welcome to Obama’s America: nearly half the population is not represented on a taxable return—almost exactly the same proportion that lives in a household where at least one member receives some type of government benefit. We are becoming the 50–50 nation—half of us paying the taxes, the other half receiving the benefits.

Niall Ferguson discusses Obama’s broken promises on ‘Face the Nation.’  [See site for video]

And all this despite a far bigger hike in the federal debt than we were promised. According to the 2010 budget, the debt in public hands was supposed to fall in relation to GDP from 67 percent in 2010 to less than 66 percent this year. If only. By the end of this year, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), it will reach 70 percent of GDP. These figures significantly understate the debt problem, however. The ratio that matters is debt to revenue. That number has leapt upward from 165 percent in 2008 to 262 percent this year, according to figures from the International Monetary Fund. Among developed economies, only Ireland and Spain have seen a bigger deterioration.

Not only did the initial fiscal stimulus fade after the sugar rush of 2009, but the president has done absolutely nothing to close the long-term gap between spending and revenue.

His much-vaunted health-care reform will not prevent spending on health programs growing from more than 5 percent of GDP today to almost 10 percent in 2037. Add the projected increase in the costs of Social Security and you are looking at a total bill of 16 percent of GDP 25 years from now. That is only slightly less than the average cost of all federal programs and activities, apart from net interest payments, over the past 40 years. Under this president’s policies, the debt is on course to approach 200 percent of GDP in 2037—a mountain of debt that is bound to reduce growth even further.

Newsweek’s executive editor, Justine Rosenthal, tells the story behind Ferguson’s cover story.  [See site for video]

And even that figure understates the real debt burden. The most recent estimate for the difference between the net present value of federal government liabilities and the net present value of future federal revenues—what economist Larry Kotlikoff calls the true “fiscal gap”—is $222 trillion.

The president’s supporters will, of course, say that the poor performance of the economy can’t be blamed on him. They would rather finger his predecessor, or the economists he picked to advise him, or Wall Street, or Europe—anyone but the man in the White House.

There’s some truth in this. It was pretty hard to foresee what was going to happen to the economy in the years after 2008. Yet surely we can legitimately blame the president for the political mistakes of the past four years. After all, it’s the president’s job to run the executive branch effectively—to lead the nation. And here is where his failure has been greatest.

Jobs Graphic
 

On paper it looked like an economics dream team: Larry Summers, Christina Romer, and Austan Goolsbee, not to mention Peter Orszag, Tim Geithner, and Paul Volcker. The inside story, however, is that the president was wholly unable to manage the mighty brains—and egos—he had assembled to advise him.

According to Ron Suskind’s book Confidence Men, Summers told Orszag over dinner in May 2009: “You know, Peter, we’re really home alone … I mean it. We’re home alone. There’s no adult in charge. Clinton would never have made these mistakes [of indecisiveness on key economic issues].” On issue after issue, according to Suskind, Summers overruled the president. “You can’t just march in and make that argument and then have him make a decision,” Summers told Orszag, “because he doesn’t know what he’s deciding.” (I have heard similar things said off the record by key participants in the president’s interminable “seminar” on Afghanistan policy.)

This problem extended beyond the White House. After the imperial presidency of the Bush era, there was something more like parliamentary government in the first two years of Obama’s administration. The president proposed; Congress disposed. It was Nancy Pelosi and her cohorts who wrote the stimulus bill and made sure it was stuffed full of political pork. And it was the Democrats in Congress—led by Christopher Dodd and Barney Frank—who devised the 2,319-page Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank, for short), a near-perfect example of excessive complexity in regulation. The act requires that regulators create 243 rules, conduct 67 studies, and issue 22 periodic reports. It eliminates one regulator and creates two new ones.

It is five years since the financial crisis began, but the central problems—excessive financial concentration and excessive financial leverage—have not been addressed.

Today a mere 10 too-big-to-fail financial institutions are responsible for three quarters of total financial assets under management in the United States. Yet the country’s largest banks are at least $50 billion short of meeting new capital requirements under the new “Basel III” accords governing bank capital adequacy.

obama-has-to-go-FE01-main
Charles Ommanney for Newsweek

And then there was health care. No one seriously doubts that the U.S. system needed to be reformed. But the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) of 2010 did nothing to address the core defects of the system: the long-run explosion of Medicare costs as the baby boomers retire, the “fee for service” model that drives health-care inflation, the link from employment to insurance that explains why so many Americans lack coverage, and the excessive costs of the liability insurance that our doctors need to protect them from our lawyers.

Ironically, the core Obamacare concept of the “individual mandate” (requiring all Americans to buy insurance or face a fine) was something the president himself had opposed when vying with Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination. A much more accurate term would be “Pelosicare,” since it was she who really forced the bill through Congress.

Pelosicare was not only a political disaster. Polls consistently showed that only a minority of the public liked the ACA, and it was the main reason why Republicans regained control of the House in 2010. It was also another fiscal snafu. The president pledged that health-care reform would not add a cent to the deficit. But the CBO and the Joint Committee on Taxation now estimate that the insurance-coverage provisions of the ACA will have a net cost of close to $1.2 trillion over the 2012–22 period.

The president just kept ducking the fiscal issue. Having set up a bipartisan National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, headed by retired Wyoming Republican senator Alan Simpson and former Clinton chief of staff Erskine Bowles, Obama effectively sidelined its recommendations of approximately $3 trillion in cuts and $1 trillion in added revenues over the coming decade. As a result there was no “grand bargain” with the House Republicans—which means that, barring some miracle, the country will hit a fiscal cliff on Jan. 1 as the Bush tax cuts expire and the first of $1.2 trillion of automatic, across-the-board spending cuts are imposed. The CBO estimates the net effect could be a 4 percent reduction in output.

The failures of leadership on economic and fiscal policy over the past four years have had geopolitical consequences. The World Bank expects the U.S. to grow by just 2 percent in 2012. China will grow four times faster than that; India three times faster. By 2017, the International Monetary Fund predicts, the GDP of China will overtake that of the United States.

GDP Graphic
 

Meanwhile, the fiscal train wreck has already initiated a process of steep cuts in the defense budget, at a time when it is very far from clear that the world has become a safer place—least of all in the Middle East.

For me the president’s greatest failure has been not to think through the implications of these challenges to American power. Far from developing a coherent strategy, he believed—perhaps encouraged by the premature award of the Nobel Peace Prize—that all he needed to do was to make touchy-feely speeches around the world explaining to foreigners that he was not George W. Bush.

In Tokyo in November 2009, the president gave his boilerplate hug-a-foreigner speech: “In an interconnected world, power does not need to be a zero-sum game, and nations need not fear the success of another … The United States does not seek to contain China … On the contrary, the rise of a strong, prosperous China can be a source of strength for the community of nations.” Yet by fall 2011, this approach had been jettisoned in favor of a “pivot” back to the Pacific, including risible deployments of troops to Australia and Singapore. From the vantage point of Beijing, neither approach had credibility.

His Cairo speech of June 4, 2009, was an especially clumsy bid to ingratiate himself on what proved to be the eve of a regional revolution. “I’m also proud to carry with me,” he told Egyptians, “a greeting of peace from Muslim communities in my country: Assalamu alaikum … I’ve come here … to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world, one based … upon the truth that America and Islam are not exclusive and need not be in competition.”

Obama
Charles Ommanney for Newsweek

Believing it was his role to repudiate neoconservatism, Obama completely missed the revolutionary wave of Middle Eastern democracy—precisely the wave the neocons had hoped to trigger with the overthrow of Saddam Hussein in Iraq. When revolution broke out—first in Iran, then in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, and Syria—the president faced stark alternatives. He could try to catch the wave by lending his support to the youthful revolutionaries and trying to ride it in a direction advantageous to American interests. Or he could do nothing and let the forces of reaction prevail.

In the case of Iran he did nothing, and the thugs of the Islamic Republic ruthlessly crushed the demonstrations. Ditto Syria. In Libya he was cajoled into intervening. In Egypt he tried to have it both ways, exhorting Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak to leave, then drawing back and recommending an “orderly transition.” The result was a foreign-policy debacle. Not only were Egypt’s elites appalled by what seemed to them a betrayal, but the victors—the Muslim Brotherhood—had nothing to be grateful for. America’s closest Middle Eastern allies—Israel and the Saudis—looked on in amazement.

“This is what happens when you get caught by surprise,” an anonymous American official told The New York Times in February 2011. “We’ve had endless strategy sessions for the past two years on Mideast peace, on containing Iran. And how many of them factored in the possibility that Egypt moves from stability to turmoil? None.”

Remarkably the president polls relatively strongly on national security. Yet the public mistakes his administration’s astonishingly uninhibited use of political assassination for a coherent strategy. According to the Bureau of Investigative Journalism in London, the civilian proportion of drone casualties was 16 percent last year. Ask yourself how the liberal media would have behaved if George W. Bush had used drones this way. Yet somehow it is only ever Republican secretaries of state who are accused of committing “war crimes.”

The real crime is that the assassination program destroys potentially crucial intelligence (as well as antagonizing locals) every time a drone strikes. It symbolizes the administration’s decision to abandon counterinsurgency in favor of a narrow counterterrorism. What that means in practice is the abandonment not only of Iraq but soon of Afghanistan too. Understandably, the men and women who have served there wonder what exactly their sacrifice was for, if any notion that we are nation building has been quietly dumped. Only when both countries sink back into civil war will we realize the real price of Obama’s foreign policy.

America under this president is a superpower in retreat, if not retirement. Small wonder 46 percent of Americans—and 63 percent of Chinese—believe that China already has replaced the U.S. as the world’s leading superpower or eventually will.

It is a sign of just how completely Barack Obama has “lost his narrative” since getting elected that the best case he has yet made for reelection is that Mitt Romney should not be president. In his notorious “you didn’t build that” speech, Obama listed what he considers the greatest achievements of big government: the Internet, the GI Bill, the Golden Gate Bridge, the Hoover Dam, the Apollo moon landing, and even (bizarrely) the creation of the middle class. Sadly, he couldn’t mention anything comparable that his administration has achieved.

Now Obama is going head-to-head with his nemesis: a politician who believes more in content than in form, more in reform than in rhetoric. In the past days much has been written about Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan, Mitt Romney’s choice of running mate. I know, like, and admire Paul Ryan. For me, the point about him is simple. He is one of only a handful of politicians in Washington who is truly sincere about addressing this country’s fiscal crisis.

Deficit Graphic
 

Over the past few years Ryan’s “Path to Prosperity” has evolved, but the essential points are clear: replace Medicare with a voucher program for those now under 55 (not current or imminent recipients), turn Medicaid and food stamps into block grants for the states, and—crucially—simplify the tax code and lower tax rates to try to inject some supply-side life back into the U.S. private sector. Ryan is not preaching austerity. He is preaching growth. And though Reagan-era veterans like David Stockman may have their doubts, they underestimate Ryan’s mastery of this subject. There is literally no one in Washington who understands the challenges of fiscal reform better.

Just as importantly, Ryan has learned that politics is the art of the possible. There are parts of his plan that he is understandably soft-pedaling right now—notably the new source of federal revenue referred to in his 2010 “Roadmap for America’s Future” as a “business consumption tax.” Stockman needs to remind himself that the real “fairy-tale budget plans” have been the ones produced by the White House since 2009.

I first met Paul Ryan in April 2010. I had been invited to a dinner in Washington where the U.S. fiscal crisis was going to be the topic of discussion. So crucial did this subject seem to me that I expected the dinner to happen in one of the city’s biggest hotel ballrooms. It was actually held in the host’s home. Three congressmen showed up—a sign of how successful the president’s fiscal version of “don’t ask, don’t tell” (about the debt) had been. Ryan blew me away. I have wanted to see him in the White House ever since.

It remains to be seen if the American public is ready to embrace the radical overhaul of the nation’s finances that Ryan proposes. The public mood is deeply ambivalent. The president’s approval rating is down to 49 percent. The Gallup Economic Confidence Index is at minus 28 (down from minus 13 in May). But Obama is still narrowly ahead of Romney in the polls as far as the popular vote is concerned (50.8 to 48.2) and comfortably ahead in the Electoral College. The pollsters say that Paul Ryan’s nomination is not a game changer; indeed, he is a high-risk choice for Romney because so many people feel nervous about the reforms Ryan proposes.

Want to discuss this week’s cover story? Use the hashtag –just as it appears on the cover.

But one thing is clear. Ryan psychs Obama out. This has been apparent ever since the White House went on the offensive against Ryan in the spring of last year. And the reason he psychs him out is that, unlike Obama, Ryan has a plan—as opposed to a narrative—for this country.

Mitt Romney is not the best candidate for the presidency I can imagine. But he was clearly the best of the Republican contenders for the nomination. He brings to the presidency precisely the kind of experience—both in the business world and in executive office—that Barack Obama manifestly lacked four years ago. (If only Obama had worked at Bain Capital for a few years, instead of as a community organizer in Chicago, he might understand exactly why the private sector is not “doing fine” right now.) And by picking Ryan as his running mate, Romney has given the first real sign that—unlike Obama—he is a courageous leader who will not duck the challenges America faces.

The voters now face a stark choice. They can let Barack Obama’s rambling, solipsistic narrative continue until they find themselves living in some American version of Europe, with low growth, high unemployment, even higher debt—and real geopolitical decline.

Or they can opt for real change: the kind of change that will end four years of economic underperformance, stop the terrifying accumulation of debt, and reestablish a secure fiscal foundation for American national security.

I’ve said it before: it’s a choice between les États Unis and the Republic of the Battle Hymn.

I was a good loser four years ago. But this year, fired up by the rise of Ryan, I want badly to win.

Like The Daily Beast on Facebook and follow us on Twitter for updates all day long.

Niall Ferguson is a professor of history at Harvard University. He is also a senior research fellow at Jesus College, Oxford University, and a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University. His Latest book, Civilization: The West and the Rest, has just been published by Penguin Press.

This article is a complete ass-kicking of Obama.  Which is why the doctrinaire ideologue left immediately came so completely unglued by it.