Posts Tagged ‘spending’

Coming To America (Thanks, Obama!): Spain On Verge Of Collapse While Liberals Turn Violent In Streets

June 23, 2012

The OWS (“Occupy”) Movement pretty much proves it: this is liberalism on failure:

Spain’s economy on the edge of collapse as protests turn violent
By Hugo Duncan
PUBLISHED: 19:38 EST, 19 June 2012 | UPDATED: 01:49 EST, 20 June 2012

Europe plunged deeper into crisis last night as Spain lurched closer to needing a full-blown bailout to save it from collapse.

The government in Madrid was forced to pay prohibitively high interest rates to borrow money on another bruising day for the single currency bloc.

It raised fears that Spain is on the verge of becoming the biggest victim of the euro crisis so far – following the bailouts of Greece, Ireland and Portugal.

 

A coal miner sets fire to a barricade made of tires during a protest against government cuts in Villafranca del Bierzo, Leon, North-eastern SpainA coal miner sets fire to a barricade made of tires during a protest against government cuts in Villafranca del Bierzo, Leon, North-eastern Spain

The country – the fourth biggest economy in the eurozone – is back in recession and unemployment is at 25 per cent with half of young workers unable to find a job.

And the problems on the stock markets were matched on the streets.

Striking Spanish coal miners armed with homemade rockets, slingshots and rocks clashed with police firing rubber bullets yesterday.

They drove officers out of the town of Cirena in northern Spain in protest at government mining subsidy cuts that could devastate their industry.

Analysts warned that the situation was ‘critical’ for both Madrid and the eurozone despite the £80 billion lifeline thrown to the Spanish banking system last week.

Nicolas Spiro, a government debt expert at Spiro Sovereign Strategy, said: ‘We are in a critical situation now. This is the Rubicon that should have never been crossed.

‘It should have never come to this. We are dealing with a broken government bond market in Spain and quite possibly in Italy. This is exactly where you did not want the cancer to spread.’

 

Striking Spanish miners fire homemade rockets towards Spanish Civil Guards in Cinera, near Oviedo, northern Spain, during a mass strike against subsidy cuts that they claim threaten tens of thousands of jobsStriking Spanish miners fire homemade rockets towards Spanish Civil Guards in Cinera, near Oviedo, northern Spain, during a mass strike against subsidy cuts that they claim threaten tens of thousands of jobs

Spain had to pay an interest rate of 5.07 per cent to sell 12-month debt yesterday – up from 2.99 per cent a month ago and the highest level since the euro was launched in 1999.

The crucial 10-year bond yield was also above 7 per cent – a psychologically important level which proved to be the point of no return for Greece, Ireland and Portugal.

Marc Otswald, an analyst at City firm Monument Securities, said Spanish borrowing costs could lead to a full-blown bailout worth around £250 billion.

‘It is becoming very difficult to see how it can manage without that beyond the end of September unless yields fall dramatically,’ he said.

Ishaq Siddiqi, a market strategist at trading firm ETX Capital, said: ‘The sustained high yields on Spanish bonds remain a considerable concern for markets.

If the Spanish government fails to address the country’s economic crisis, like Greece, sky high borrowing rates could eventually force Spain into a full sovereign bailout.

A Spanish bailout would mark a disastrous escalation of the euro crisis, threatening Italy and core eurozone nations such as France and even powerhouse Germany.’

Obama is trying to make America more and more like Spain even as Spain is beyond obviously going to collapse into ruins.

Kind of makes you wonder what kind of demon-possessed people voted for this turd.

The same people – LEFTISTS (AKA “liberals”) – who are rioting in Europe are rioting in America as the Occupy fascists show us that violence invariably comes from the left.

Obama and the Democrat Party want for America EXACTLY what liberals in Spain created there.

Advertisements

‘The Other Side Will Tell You’ (The Truth): The Worst President EVER Tries To Inoculate His Followers Against Reality

June 15, 2012

As carried by Yahoo News:

In an Ohio campaign event, President Barack Obama described the kind of ads he foresees the GOP running against him during the election cycle.

“From now until then, both sides will spend tons of money on TV commercials. The other side will spend over a billion dollars on ads that tell you the economy is bad, that it’s all my fault; that I can’t fix it because I think government is always the answer, or because I didn’t make a lot of money in the private sector and don’t understand it, or because I’m in over my head, or because I think everything and everybody is doing just fine,” Obama said at Cuyahoga Community College Metropolitan Campus in Ohio on Thursday.

Notably, Obama did not refute the hypothetical accusations.

“That’s what the scary voice in the ads will say; that’s what Mr. Romney will say; that’s what the Republicans in Congress will say. Well, you know, that may be their plan to win the election. But it’s not a plan to create jobs. It’s not a plan to grow the economy. It’s not a plan to pay down the debt. And it’s sure not a plan to revive the middle class and secure our future.”

It’s interesting.  Obama first says, “The other side will spend over a billion dollars…”  Do you know which side first brought up the real possibility that it would be able to raise over a billion dollars?

Obama’s side.

Let’s consider a few facts.  Barack Obama became the first politician – as young and as inexperienced as he is – to raise over a billion dollars in the entire history of the human race.  Obama’s favorite source of money was the very Wall Street financiers he demonized as greedy and cynical fat catsObama is the slick pathological political weasel who has now held more fundraisers than the last five presidents COMBINED. As of March 27, Obama had attended 191 fundraisers – FAR EXCEEDING ANY PRESIDENT EVER RECORDED IN HISTORY.  In 2008, Obama outspent John McCain by at least 3-1 and by as much as 5-1 after breaking his promise to accept the public campaign matching funds that every previous party nominee had accepted until Obama.

Now this pathological weasel is following the liberal script to whine about the huge sums of money that HE HIMSELF OPENED THE DOORS TO HELL IN RAISING.  There never would have BEEN a Citizens United case that the left so demonizes had Obama accepted the same matching funds that every major party candidate for president had accepted before him.  Obama is the pathological weasel who started a war over campaign money and used that war chest to annihilate the other side and then actually complained that the other side was actually fighting back.

Obama says they’re going to tell you “that tell you the economy is bad, that it’s all my fault.”  Well, that’s a shocker.  We thought Obama knew that he’d been the president for the last four years and that the president was responsible for his economy.  That’s been true in the past, but not in this case, because Obama is a pathological weasel and a malignant narcissist to boot.  So Obama has never once accepted so much as a scintilla of blame for ANY of his four years of failure.  Rather, he’s literally still blaming Bush – and if you want four more years of failure along with four more years of excuses and four more years of blaming Bush, you know who to vote for.  Rather, he’s blaming the Republican Party for “obstructionism” – as if the two years of utter Democrat obstructionism in which Democrats controlled both the House AND the Senate during the period between 2006 and 2008 when the economy went to crap, during which a Senator named Barack Obama and a Senator named Joe Biden participated in obstructing absolutely everything George Bush tried to do while personally demonizing him on a constant basis, and the first two years of the Obama administration when he had total control of the White House, the House and the Senate but got NOTHING done to help the economy, mattered.

I ask you:

Further, Obama and the Democrats – in trying to demonize Republicans for their “obstructionism” – are demanding that Republicans vote for what is essentially the son of the son of Obama’s first massive and massively failed stimulus. Remember that first massive stimulus that was officially $862 billion but which the CBO said would actually cost $3.27 TRILLION when it was all said and done? Remember that second stimulus program for $447 billion that will likewise cost far more than that? How many more stimulus programs should Obama get? How many trillions of dollars in government spending is enough?

But that’s exactly what Obama is doing: demanding more of what he has already done and which has already failed.  Obama demands that America bash its head against a reinforced brick wall until it is a brainless collectivist socialist state like Europe.  Nothing will stop him from turning America into a failed state except an election.

So yeah, Barry Hussein, we DO blame you for your four years of mess.  Consider this summary of Obama’s record:

Few things are more difficult in politics than confronting failure and learning from it. It is especially difficult when a leader you have championed, and in whom you have placed your highest hopes, turns out to be less than he seemed.

Such is the dilemma facing liberals in the age of Obama. Barack Obama entered the presidency with his sights and standards very high, and many liberals believed he could be the transformative figure they had been awaiting for generations. But by now it is clear that, by any reasonable measure (including those set out by Obama himself at the beginning of his term), his presidency has been a failure.

Consider the economy. President Obama has overseen the weakest recovery on record. He is on track to have the worst jobs record of any president in the modern era. The standard of living for Americans has fallen more dramatically during his presidency than during any since the government began recording it five decades ago. As of this writing, unemployment has been above 8 percent for 38 consecutive months, the longest such stretch since the Great Depression. Home values are nearly 35 percent lower than they were five years ago. A record 46 million Americans are now living in poverty.

The economist Michael Boskin has listed some of the post–World War II records set during the Obama years: among them, federal spending as a percentage of GDP at 25 percent, the federal debt as a percentage of GDP at 67 percent, and the budget deficit as a percentage of GDP at 10 percent. The United States has amassed more than $5 trillion in debt since January 2009, with the president having submitted four budgets with trillion-dollar-plus deficits. (Prior to Obama, no president had submitted even a single budget with deficits in excess of a trillion dollars.) In addition, government dependency, defined as the percentage of persons receiving one or more federal benefit payments, is the highest in American history.

Add to this the fact that the president’s signature domestic achievement, the Affordable Care Act, is among the most unpopular major domestic policies passed in the last century; and that the $787 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, widely known as Obama’s stimulus package, is so unpopular that his aides have virtually expelled the word stimulus from their lexicon.

And yeah, add to that the fact that Obama keeps trying to same trick under different names – it’s no longer a “stimulus,” it’s an investment  The “S” word is a dirty word, so Obama has to use another dirty word to sucker the American people into doing the same fool thing all over again.  It’s no longer “shovel-ready jobs,” it’s “construction workers ready to get dirty”.  And, you see, the fact that Obama is not talking about construction workers ready to get dirty “right now” means we can’t consider his infamous confession that “Shovel-ready was not as … uh .. shovel-ready as we expected.”

Obama most certainly cannot run claiming that the American people are better off under his presidency than they were.  We just found out that the average American household lost a whopping forty percent of their wealth.  Liberals want to blame some of that loss on Bush, but guess what: the median household income is down more after Obama’s first three years of failure (down $4,300 since assuming office)  than it was under the entire Bush presidency (down $2,000 over eight years):

Barack Obama campaigned four years ago assailing President George W. Bush for wage losses suffered by the middle class. More than three years into Obama’s own presidency, those declines have only deepened.

The rebound from the worst recession since the 1930s has generated relatively few of the moderately skilled jobs that once supported the middle class, tightening the financial squeeze on many Americans, even those who are employed.

[…]

As a candidate in 2008, Obama blamed the reversals largely on the policies of Bush and other Republicans. He cited census figures showing that median income for working-age households — those headed by someone younger than 65 — had dropped more than $2,000 after inflation during the first seven years of Bush’s time in office.

Yet real median household income in March was down $4,300 since Obama took office in January 2009 and down $2,900 since the June 2009 start of the economic recovery, according to an analysis of census data by Sentier Research, an economic- consulting firm in Annapolis, Maryland.

One of the interesting things that comes from these facts is that Americans have actually lost more in household income SINCE “the recession officially ended” ($2,900) than they had during the recession ($4,300 – $2,900 = $1,400).  Obama’s “recovery” is a “wreckovery” – which is the term conservatives like Michelle Malkin coined in predicting that Obamanomics would be a colossal and wildly expensive failure.  It is literally true to state that Obama’s “recovery” has been harder on American families economically than the recession that he keeps claiming he inherited was for those families.

There are more Americans living in poverty under Obama than any time during the 52 years the government has been publishing figures for that statistic.  There are more grown-ups living with their parents than any time during the last sixty years.

Pardon us for telling the world about what a profound failure you are, Barry Hussein.  Sorry it bothers you.  Truly sorry you are a pathetic and inadequate man in a job that is clearly way over your abilities to perform.

Obama says the Republicans are going to say “that it’s all my fault; that I can’t fix it.”

Obama himself once talked about “If I can’t fix the economy”:

Obama in 2009: If I can’t fix the economy in three years, you can call me former President Obama
by editor on June 16, 2011

Don’t you hate it when your own words come back to bite you in the butt? Back in February 2009 President Obama told Today Show host Matt Lauer that he’d be a one-term president if he didn’t fix the economy in three years.

“I will be held accountable,” Obama said. “I’ve got four years and … A year form now, I think people are going to see that we’re starting to make some progress, but there’s still going to be some pain out there … If I don’t have this done in three years, then there’s going to be a one-term proposition.”

Obama at the time he made that remark clearly believed that his Obamanomics held the answer, and that he could turn the economy around with his Obamanomics.  His was the administration that predicted that if his stimulus was passed – by which I mean the first $862 billion one, not the second $447 billion dollar one that he demanded follow it – unemployment would not go above 8% and that in fact unemployment would be less than 6% by now.  And he was saying if I’m wrong I’ve got no business holding this job and I should be voted out of office.

Question: DID OBAMA FIX THE ECONOMY? Please consider the above section on the economy before you provide an asinine answer, liberal.

Obama predicts we’ll going to say that “the economy is bad, that it’s all my fault; that I can’t fix it because I think government is always the answer.”

As Dinesh D’Souza points out:

Barack Obama is the most antibusiness president in a generation, perhaps in American history. Thanks to him the era of big government is back. Obama runs up taxpayer debt not in the billions but in the trillions. He has expanded the federal government’s control over home mortgages, investment banking, health care, autos and energy. The Weekly Standard summarizes Obama’s approach as omnipotence at home, impotence abroad.

Not only has Obama enacted spending that DWARFS anything ever before seen in the entire history of the human race, and not only is Obama literally spending $2.52 in bucks seized from taxpayers or borrowed from the Chinese for every $1 he gets in bang, not only are Obama’s budgets so insane than not even one single DEMOCRAT would vote for them for the last two years in a row, but the actual Obama spending is even worse than the official numbers:

Real federal deficit dwarfs official tally
By Dennis Cauchon, USA TODAY

The typical American household would have paid nearly all of its income in taxes last year to balance the budget if the government used standard accounting rules to compute the deficit, a USA TODAY analysis finds.

Under those accounting practices, the government ran red ink last year equal to $42,054 per household — nearly four times the official number reported under unique rules set by Congress.

A U.S. household’s median income is $49,445, the Census reports.

The big difference between the official deficit and standard accounting: Congress exempts itself from including the cost of promised retirement benefits. Yet companies, states and local governments must include retirement commitments in financial statements, as required by federal law and private boards that set accounting rules.

The deficit was $5 trillion last year under those rules. The official number was $1.3 trillion. Liabilities for Social Security, Medicare and other retirement programs rose by $3.7 trillion in 2011, according to government actuaries, but the amount was not registered on the government’s books.

America’s real debt is not the on-its-face massive $16 trillion; it is well over $211 trillion.  And virtually every penny of that debt is due to Democrat policies.  And what we are looking at now is a coming $600 trillion collapse.  Again, mostly created by liberals and liberal policies.

Yeah, Barry Hussein, you believe that government is God, and you are as determined as any true believer to force all Americans to bow down before you as the god of your Government and render you sacrifices and offerings otherwise known as “taxes.”  You DO believe “government is always the answer.”

And as was pointed out, in your demagogic attack that masqueraded as a “major policy speech” and yet offered nothing, NOTHING, you “did not refute the hypothetical accusations” that you literally levied against yourself. 

Rather, you state them as a rhetorical device to suggest that they now somehow can’t be used against you – no matter how true they are and no matter what a failure you are.  And when we do in fact say the facts that you predicted we’d say – and why wouldn’t we? – you want your worshipers to disconnect the logical side of their brains and instead say, “Obama was right!  Scary voice man said exactly what Obama predicted!”

Obama says that the GOP will go after him “because I didn’t make a lot of money in the private sector.”  That isn’t true, and if you claim it is, find me a major conservative source that argues that Obama didn’t make enough money to be deemed a fit candidate for president.  It’s a straw man demagogic argument like most all of his other arguments that doesn’t have a scintilla of truth to it.

Our argument isn’t that Obama isn’t “rich” and so he shouldn’t be president (Obama IS rich, by the way: his books made him so); our argument is that Obama has basically NEVER had a real job in the private sector and has absolutely no idea whatsoever how the private sector works.  In fact, when Obama came the closest he ever would in his career to having such a job, he was so radical and so anti-business that he wrote, “I felt like a spy behind enemy lines.”  Obama’s real love was for socialist community agitating and undermining the private sector.  Our argument is also the fact that Obama has an administration that is almost as clueless in actual world business experience as he is:

The Obama administration is truly one of the blind leading the blind.

Obama predicts his opponents will say he should not be president “because I think everything and everybody is doing just fine.”  Again, Obama demagogues his opponents by offering a straw man.  Unlike Obama, we don’t have to invent false statements to demonize our opponentWE CAN RELY ON OBAMA’S VERY OWN WORDS:

“The private sector is doing fine. Where we’re seeing weaknesses in our economy have to do with state and local government,” President Obama claimed on Friday. His solution to fix the public sector was more government spending.

Nobody is arguing that Obama says “everybody and everything is doing just fine.”  That is simply typical lying demagoguery from a lying demagogue weasel.  Obama wants to slander and demonize the truth so that when his followers hear it, they will be inoculated against it and turn their brains off.  The fact is that Obama said that the private sector is doing just fine, and that ought to be quite a surprise to the vast majority of Americans.  According to US News and World Report, about 22 million people work in the American public sector.  The OTHER 291 million Americans are in the private sector.  And let me assure you that things aren’t nearly so rosy for those 291 million Americans as Barack Obama claims they are.

I document that the labor participation rate clearly proves that Barack Obama has destroyed jobs at a terrifying rate.  For men, the labor participation rate is now 70% – the lowest it has EVER been since records started being kept in 1948.  The American work force has massively evaporated during the Obama years, with millions of jobs simply vanishing, and if the U.S. unemployment rate were calculated using the labor participation rate that Barack Obama inherited from George W. Bush, the official unemployment rate would be on the order of 11.6%.  I also document that a whopping 88 million working age Americans are completely out of the labor force under Obama’s regime.

“The private sector’s doing fine” is a lie from a genuinely evil man.

Many people have admired Obama’s speaking ability.  Allow me to point something out: the gift of great public speaking can be a blessing or a curse.  In the case of Winston Churchill, it was a blessing, as his courage and clarity of speech rallied the free world to fight and to keep fighting.  In the case of Adolf Hitler, it was a curse as an demon-possessed man used the power of lies to ignite the unholy passions of a nation that had succumbed to a spirit of deception.  I’m not trying to claim that Barack Obama is Adolf Hitler; I’m merely pointing out the fact that the gift of speech can be used not to illuminate the truth, but to deceive, not to reveal reality, but to distort it, not to untangle the truth, but to tangle it up into knots.  Barack Obama does the latter on a constant basis.

When the revelations came out about Rev. Jeremiah Wright – Obama’s self-acknowledged spiritual leader and mentor for over 20 years – I realized that this man was an order of magnitude more evil than any president who had ever sat in the Oval Office, and that America would suffer terribly under him.  History documents that I have not been wrong.

So when Obama says, “They’re going to say this about me,” what he’s really saying is, “They’re going to tell you the truth about me.  Don’t believe it.  Believe my lies instead.”

Obama Blaming His Pathetic Economy On ‘European Debt Crisis,’ Which Is Funny: Because He’s Trying To Saddle U.S. With An ‘American Debt Crisis’

June 5, 2012

Obama spent the last four years blaming Bush.  While he will NEVER cap that well – because Obama is a weasel who pathologically refuses to take so much as a scintilla of responsibility for HIS economy – Obama is now turning to OTHER SOURCES OF BLAME as excuses for the fact that his entire presidency has been one long failure.  Obama is now saying he can’t be blamed for America’s slump because of the “debt crisis” in Europe

But let me just provide on headline for you to point out what a laugher that is:

Lying Obama Claims He Didn’t Increase Spending As USA Today Points Out Real Obama Deficits Actually $5.6 Trillion A Year

Obama Promised To Cut Deficit In HALF By Now; Instead He’s Given Us The Three Highest Budget Deficits IN HISTORY OF ENTIRE HUMAN RACE

Obama, After His 2012 Budget Was Voted Down 97-0 and His 2013 Budget Was Voted Down 414-0 BY EVERY DEMOCRAT, Has Chutzpah To Demonize GOP Budget As ‘Radical’

U.S. Now Has Highest Corporate Tax Rate IN THE WORLD (But Emperor Obama Says Business Must Render More Unto Him Instead Of Creating Jobs)

Another Little ObamaCare Surprise: How About A SEVENTEEN TRILLION DOLLAR Funding Gap?

‘Recovery’ My Democrat Donkey A$$: 2012 Government Spending Is Higher And Tax Revenues Are Lower Than Last Year

Obama’s And Democrats’ February Budget Deficit Of $229 Billion Is Almost FIFTY PERCENT MORE Than Last GOP Congress’ ENTIRE YEAR’S Deficit Under Bush

Who Spent More? Average Bush Vs. Average Obama Spending Per Day Proves Obama Most Reckless And Irresponsible EVER

Obama Demands $1.2 Trillion Debt Ceiling Extension – Making Him Responsible For $6.2 Trillion In Just Three Years

Obama Says Bush Increasing Debt $4 Trillion In 8 Years Was Irresponsible And Unpatriotic. So Obama Increasing Debt By $6 Trillion In 3 Years Is WHAT?

Barack Obama is the hell of socialist European debt and failure come to America.

Stop and think about Obama’s argument: “You can’t hold me responsible for the U.S. economy because it’s really the Euro debt crisis that’s responsible.”  And you’re supposed to overlook the fact THAT OBAMA HAS BEEN DOING EVERYTHING IN HIS POWER TO BRING THE VERY EUROPEAN DEBT CRISIS TO AMERICA THAT HE’S NOW BLAMING FOR AMERICA’S PROBLEMS.

It’s analogous to a cheating husband telling his wife, “You can’t blame me for my infidelity, honey.  It’s really the live-in-maid’s fault.”  And if the wife has an iota of sense she’s going to reply, “Hey, A$$HOLE, aside from the fact that you’re responsible for your own actions, YOU WERE THE ONE WHO BROUGHT THAT LITTLE HUSSY INTO OUR HOUSE TO BEGIN WITH.  AND I KEPT TELLING YOU THAT THE SLUT DOESN’T EVEN BOTHER TO CLEAN!”

This abject hypocrisy of Obama blaming the very sort of condition that he is trying to create for what is going wrong is part of the reason that we can mock liberalism as a completely vacuous pseudo-intellectual bowel movement.

An Associated Press story gives us still another laugher: “World stocks fall on dismal US hiring report.”  You see, Obama is blaming the failure of EUROPE for America’s problems while the rest of the world is more rightly blaming the failure of AMERICA under Obama for the world’s problems.  You see the irony?  If you want to see the world under Obama’s leadership, it pretty much boils down to a bunch of pointing fingers.  And more and more fingers are pointing at Obama now.  Including life-long liberal Maureen Dowd.

What Obama is doing is no different than what Greece is doing: they’re both failures led by clueless idiot Marxist demagogues, after all.

I asked the question, “US Is in Even Worse Shape Financially Than Greece. And Why Is That In The Age Of Obama???”  What I was pointing out (and see also here) was the fact that if more government spending was the answer, both the US and Greece ought to be THRIVING, right???  The fact of the matter is that Europe has been in a perennial state of economic doldrums for forty years BECAUSE of it’s out-of-control socialist spending.  And it’s just at the point that Europe is truly on the verge of collapse BECAUSE OF THAT SPENDING that Obama and the Democrat Party says, “We should be more like Europe.”

We really shouldn’t.  Which is why Obama is “the first downgraded president.”

And it’s why I say, “Move Over Greece. Obama Taking America To Bankruptcy: U.S. Debt-To-GDP Now Exceeds 100 Percent While Obama Spends $2.52 To Get Us A Lousy Dollar.”

Obama’s essential bet has been that he could declare open war with business and that if he demonized and attacked business enough that he could force businesses to grow and hire while repudiating capitalist profits.  And surprise, surprise, he’s as wrong as you can get.

We keep hearing about Greece, which has basically been in a perennial state of meltdown for the last two years while European socialist liberals keep trying to put one band aid after another over arterial spray bleeding.

But Greece is only the tip of the iceberg, and like REAL icebergs (sorry to pop your collectivist bubbles, global warming demagogues) the debt iceberg is getting bigger and bigger.

Let’s go to Spain:

Spain is in ‘total emergency’, the EU in total denial
After a Spanish exit from the euro, there would be nothing left to exit from.
By Janet Daley
9:00PM BST 02 Jun 2012

I’ve never actually heard the term “total emergency” before, at least not in the context of global economics. It sounds like the title of a disaster movie. When it is uttered in sober tones by the elder statesman of an advanced democracy to describe his country’s financial condition, the effect is rather startling.
 
The man who delivered this apocalyptic judgment, former Spanish prime minister Felipe González, being a socialist, might be expected to detest austerity programmes that require cuts to government spending. But there seemed to be few disinterested observers of Spain’s economy prepared to quibble with his assessment.
 
Forget Grexit. Greece’s teeny, tiny economy is a footnote now. As is Ireland’s decision – which seemed more like a sigh of resignation than a plebiscite – to engage in however much self-flagellation the EU gods insist on, for however long it takes. What might have seemed dramatic a week or so ago has now shrivelled in importance by comparison to the realistic possibility of a spectacular crash in the fourth largest economy in the EU. Spexit (and Spanic) are lodged in the lexicon, and have become part of the psychological reality that moves markets. The equivalent of more than £55 billion was withdrawn and transported out of Spain last month – and that was before the country’s largest bank was nationalised. No one seems to be kidding himself that the collapse of the Spanish economy could be somehow weathered and overcome, as the default of Greece might be.
 
There is no talk of firewalls, or of simply letting Spain go, or of the European banking system being re-capitalised to compensate for the losses that it would suffer. Nope. This is it. The cancer has now spread to the vital organs of the EU. Spain is not a peripheral Mediterranean country. It is not an insignificant player in the political project. It is not a marginal going-along-for-the-ride-and-the-free-money passenger on the euro train. Not only is its economy so large as to be indispensable, but its ties with Italy mean that the Italian economy (which is the third largest in the EU) would be fatally compromised by its fall. “Itexit” is almost unpronounceable, so perhaps it’s fortunate that it will never be required: after Spexit, there would be nothing left to exit from.
 
With Spain’s “total emergency”, the point at which denial and bluster become absurd has been well and truly reached, but this being the EU, the gamesmanship goes on. Still the pointless demands for “decisive action” continue, even though the only action that would possibly constitute a remedy is politically untenable if member states are to maintain any pretence of democratic accountability.

To repeat (sorry, but it does seem necessary) what I have said before on these pages: however much she is beaten about the head by blowhards in Brussels, Rome, London and Washington, Angela Merkel cannot let the ECB (in effect, the Bundesbank) print money to soak up the debts of Spain, Greece or Italy. To do that would not simply be to fly in the face of her own electorate’s wishes. (What the hell, you might say – every European political leader is doing that.) It would be to contravene the constitution which was enforced upon Germany by the post-war settlement. In other words, it would be both undemocratic and illegal within the terms of the German nation state which, for all the hokum about European political union, still exists. And there it is.
 
This is the heart of the irreconcilable contradiction on which the euro is being broken. As everyone has been saying, in order to be viable in the face of market pressures, a genuine currency (as opposed to a pretend one) must have a “lender of last resort” – a true central bank like the US Federal Reserve System. But this is impossible within the EU because the constitutions of member states are not compatible with each other or with the principle of underwriting debt across national boundaries (as the states of the US are under their genuinely federal system). So, either the existing democratic institutions and historical principles of all EU countries must be forcibly reconciled in a Year Zero political reconstruction, or there can never be a monetary union (let alone fiscal union) that will be sustainable. This is where we are.
 
What would such a reconstructed political entity look like (assuming that someone in the delusional European political class should think of trying it)? Presumably it would involve wealth redistribution on an epic scale – since the most urgent problem to be remedied is the disparity between the poor, indebted states and the rich, thrifty ones. Fiscal transfers (meaning Germany pays for everybody) would be an accepted, perhaps automatic, mechanism, thus creating more or less permanent dependency of the less productive on the more productive. We have grown accustomed in Britain to this form of cross-subsidy, in which wealth produced in the South East is channelled to the North. Even within one country with a shared identity and linguistic culture, it breeds some resentment and resistance.
 
Applied across the boundaries of nations whose peoples have profoundly different historical experiences and social attitudes – and whose democratic institutions have been shaped by their collective memories – it would be incendiary. And it is worth saying that there is nothing invidious in this. For Germans to refuse to bend in the face of shrill demands to (as they see it) debauch the currency is a sign of conscience: an unwillingness to forget the shame and criminality into which such a process led them in the last century. It is ironic that Germany itself was one of the great drivers of economic union, and specifically of the democratic socialist model in which “the rich nations help the poor ones” as José Manuel Barroso (who seems less and less capable of remaining in touch with reality) likes to put it.
 
Now the “socialist” and the “democratic” sides of this utopian vision are heading for a collision: the EU can embrace wealth-redistribution wholeheartedly – with the full works of a central bank, fiscal uniformity and no nonsense about the will of the people – or it can accept the separate, and morally defensible, differences between its member states which will mean thinking seriously about other options than browbeating Germany. Generally, when given a choice, Europe ditches the democracy and keeps the socialism – so I wouldn’t get your hopes up.

Aside from the fact that Spain DWARFS Greece and pretty much guarantees that the “European debt crisis” is a monster that WILL get out of control and create an economic calamity, there’s another interesting fact about Spain: and that is that Spain was basically Obama’s model for “green jobs.”

Spain, you see, was the country that dived deep into the well of “green jobs” that Obama hailed as the answer to the U.S. economy.  The problem is that theory was and continues to be a giant load of crap.  In reality, the “green jobs” that Obama has been touting actually destroyed 2.2 actual jobs for every job they created.  And the jobs that were destroyed tended to be better paying jobs, at that.

The reality of Obama’s campaign to create jobs is that “Rapidly Worsening Labor Participation Rate Now Lowest In More Than THIRTY YEARS Under Obama’s Failed Regime. PLEASE LOOK AT HISTORY!!!

Now, I suppose that if you are a green energy enthusiast, you could still argue that green jobs haven’t been given a real chance in America because Barack Obama is so pathologically dishonest and corrupt in giving hundreds of billions of taxpayer money to his crony capitalist campaign contributors that he frankly belongs in a prison cell.

But other than that excuse, Obama’s and Spain’s “economic recovery plan” are a spectacular failure.

There are a couple of other things that need to be pointed out about the “European debt crisis.”  At the top of the list is the fact that liberals are constantly saying, “Spending cuts can’t possibly work!  They tried them in Europe and look what happened!”

Two things need to be pointed out: the first is the little fact that the troubled European countries NEVER actually “tried” austerity; what they did was first agree to austerity as a condition of receiving bailout loans, and then renege on any actual austerity in the wake of a constantly striking and rioting left.   France, for example, just elected a SOCIALIST to do the very opposite of what the IMF said they needed to do.  And isn’t it interesting that this open SOCIALIST’S major policies and Obama’s are virtually identical?

One place that DID try “austerity” is Belgium.  Here’s how that worked out:

Belgium economy: Austerity measures to save €11.3bn in 2012

The Belgian government’s austerity measures, which include public spending cuts and tax increases, aim to save €11.3bn in 2012. The budget also includes an increase in the early-retirement age to 60 years from 58 years (applicable from January 1st 2012 for new contracts and from 2015 for old ones).
 
The budget is based on the goals agreed with the European Commission in the 2010-13 Stability and Growth Programme: a reduction of the budget deficit from 4.2% of GDP in 2010 to 3.6% in 2011 and 2.8% in 2012. In January the government’s 2012 budget was criticised by the Commission for relying on an over-optimistic economic growth estimate of 0.8% for 2012. As this target is now unrealistic with the Belgian economy already in recession, the government announced in January that additional measures would be needed in light of a lower growth forecast for 2012 (0-0.5%).

When Belgium faced more problems, rather than riot, they cut more:

Coene Urges Additional Spending Cuts as Belgium Faces Economic Contraction
By John Martens – Feb 14, 2012 9:00 PM PT

Belgium needs additional budget cuts of at least 1 billion euros ($1.3 billion) to meet its 2012 deficit target as the central bank forecast the euro region’s sixth-largest economy will contract this year.

Belgium’s budget deficit will reach 3.1 percent of gross domestic product this year following a 2011 shortfall of 3.8 percent that was narrower than previously estimated, theNational Bank of Belgium said today. The Belgian economy will contract 0.1 percent in 2012, the bank forecast, cutting a Dec. 14 prediction for growth of slightly less than 0.5 percent.

Central bank Governor Luc Coene urged Prime Minister Elio Di Rupo’s six-party coalition to maintain its deficit target of 2.8 percent of GDP this year and said an additional 1.3 billion euros of cuts are needed if the government wants to unblock planned expenditure that was frozen last month to win a reprieve from European Union sanctions.

“The growth rate in government expenditure remains a fundamental problem that needs to be solved and it is closely linked to an increase in public-sector employment,” Coene told reporters in Brussels on Feb. 14. His comments were embargoed until today. “One should do more to stimulate economic growthand make the budgetary correction a bit easier.”

And what happened?  Well, it sure surprised the hell out of the “experts”:

Belgium surprises with first-quarter return to growth
By Philip Blenkinsop
BRUSSELS | Wed May 2, 2012 4:31pm BST

BRUSSELS (Reuters) – Belgium’s economy returned to growth in the first quarter and was not in recession in the second half of 2011 as initially thought, data showed on Wednesday, in an encouraging sign for the broader euro zone.

Gross domestic product grew 0.3 percent in the first quarter from the last three months of 2011 and by 0.5 percent compared with same period last year, Belgium’s central bank said.

The rise in output followed a quarterly contraction of 0.1 percent in October to December.

The positive news from a country closer to Europe’s core contrasts with data in the last week showing both the Spanish and British economies sinking back into recession.

First quarter figures for the euro zone, which shrank by 0.3 percent in the fourth quarter, will be published on May 15. Germany, France, Italy and the Netherlands are also due to release their GDP estimates on that day.

Economists were surprised by the positive Belgian growth figures, having expected austerity measures announced at the end of 2011 to undermine consumer sentiment and domestic demand.

Well, what the hell.  Let’s consider the mindset of these leftist “experts”:

Which is why no matter how many times they are refuted, the leftist “experts” keep insisting we go deeper into “solutions” that produce still more debt and more failure.

That’s one thing to consider.  The second thing is the fact that American conservatives are not talking about “austerity” the way the socialists in Europe are: because whereas the European socialists see the crisis in Europe as being solvable only with higher taxes (think about that: the same government that spent too much now says it needs to tax more), American conservatives keep pointing out that cutting tax rates and incentivizing growth and investment not only grows the economy but ACTUALLY INCREASES TAX REVENUES.

The other fly in the ointment for the European model of “austerity” based on hiking taxes is the fact that our CBO has studied this issue and concluded that if we don’t extend the Bush tax cuts we are going to fall off a “fiscal cliff.”  Which again serves to demonstrate that the entire model the Europeans – and the Democrats in America – are following is completely wrongheaded.

Lying Obama Claims He Didn’t Increase Spending As USA Today Points Out Real Obama Deficits Actually $5.6 Trillion A Year

May 25, 2012

Every time I’ve mentioned the massive Obama stimulus on this blog – and just use my search engine to look up “stimulus” for the proof that I’ve said it over and over and over again – I have pointed out that the cost WASN’T “$800 billion”; the actual cost of Obama’s stimulus was – according to the CBO – actually $3.27 TRILLION:

All of the major news outlets are reporting that the stimulus bill voted out of conference committee last night has a meager $789 billion price tag. This number is pure fantasy. No one believes that the increased funding for programs the left loves like Head Start, Medicaid, COBRA, and the Earned Income Tax Credit is in any way temporary. No Congress under control of the left will ever cut funding for these programs. So what is the true cost of the stimulus if these spending increases are made permanent?

Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) asked the Congressional Budget Office to estimate the impact of permanently extending the 20 most popular provisions of the stimulus bill. What did the CBO find? As you can see from the table below [visit link], the true 10 year cost of the stimulus bill $2.527 trillion in in spending with another $744 billion cost in debt servicing. Total bill for the Generational Theft Act: $3.27 trillion.

The actual cost of the Obama stimulus was simply completely unreported by the mainstream media which is now merely the propaganda wing of the Democrat Party.  The numbers reported were pure lies.

So, as I’ve said over and over and over again, the “real” cost of the Obama stimulus was actually 308.75% higher than it was deceitfully sold to the American people as costing.

And now we see that that was a common theme of the Obama deception: because we find that the real Obama deficit wasn’t $1.3 trillion; no, it was actually $5.6 trillion.  Which is, for the record, 330.77% higher than what we were told.

A picture is worth a thousand words, so here’s a picture of the the contrast between Obama’s bullcrap and actual reality:

From USA Today:

Real federal deficit dwarfs official tally
By Dennis Cauchon, USA TODAY

The typical American household would have paid nearly all of its income in taxes last year to balance the budget if the government used standard accounting rules to compute the deficit, a USA TODAY analysis finds.

Under those accounting practices, the government ran red ink last year equal to $42,054 per household — nearly four times the official number reported under unique rules set by Congress.

A U.S. household’s median income is $49,445, the Census reports.

The big difference between the official deficit and standard accounting: Congress exempts itself from including the cost of promised retirement benefits. Yet companies, states and local governments must include retirement commitments in financial statements, as required by federal law and private boards that set accounting rules.

The deficit was $5 trillion last year under those rules. The official number was $1.3 trillion. Liabilities for Social Security, Medicare and other retirement programs rose by $3.7 trillion in 2011, according to government actuaries, but the amount was not registered on the government’s books.

Deficits are a major issue in this year’s presidential campaign, but USA TODAY has calculated federal finances under accounting rules since 2004 and found no correlation between fluctuations in the deficit and which party ran Congress or the White House.

Key findings:

•Social Security had the biggest financial slide. The government would need $22.2 trillion today, set aside and earning interest, to cover benefits promised to current workers and retirees beyond what taxes will cover. That’s $9.5 trillion more than was needed in 2004.

•Deficits from 2004 to 2011 would be six times the official total of $5.6 trillion reported.

•Federal debt and retiree commitments equal $561,254 per household. By contrast, an average household owes a combined $116,057 for mortgages, car loans and other debts.

“By law, the federal government can’t tell the truth,” says accountant Sheila Weinberg of the Chicago-based Institute for Truth in Accounting.

Jim Horney, a former Senate budget staff expert now at the liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, says retirement programs should not count as part of the deficit because, unlike a business, Congress can change what it owes by cutting benefits or lifting taxes.

“It’s not easy, but it can be done. Retirement programs are not legal obligations,” he says.

In California, Democrat Governor Jerry Brown is talking about the “crisis” of the official state deficit of billion.  That’s not even CLOSE to the truth; the actual deficit of just the Democrat-passed unfunded pension liabilities for their union allies is $500 billion ALL BY ITSELF.

From the Los Angeles Times:

California’s $500-billion pension time bomb
April 06, 2010|By David Crane

The state of California’s real unfunded pension debt clocks in at more than $500 billion, nearly eight times greater than officially reported.

That’s the finding from a study released Monday by Stanford University’s public policy program, confirming a recent report with similar, stunning findings from Northwestern University and the University of Chicago.

It’s great if you’re in a government employee union and give all your campaign contributions to Democrats to keep the pork coming.  It sucks if you’re the vast majority of Californians.  Meanwhile, these same California voters keep falling for the same trick, namely, Democrats keep promising that they’ll redistribute the wealth of others and give it to people who vote Democrat.

Until California collapses under the weight of Democrat lies and burns in hell.

There’s only one term to describe this sheer lunatic deception: demon possessed.  The Democrat Party today is the party of hell.  One day soon Democrats will worship the Antichrist who will promise the big government Utopia of their dreams and take his mark and ultimately end up in the eternal fire that they truly deserve.

As bad as California looks, the actual debt picture of the United States as a country makes that $500 billion in uncounted unfunded liabilities to pro-Democrat labor unions look like nothin’.

Understand, this article was written in August 2011 when the national debt was “only” $14 trillion.  It’s going to be $16 trillion by the end of the year.

Look at the actual debt faced by the United States.  You’re on the hook for this:

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

When Standard & Poor’s reduced the nation’s credit rating from AAA to AA-plus, the United States suffered the first downgrade to its credit rating ever. S&P took this action despite the plan Congress passed this past week to raise the debt limit.

The downgrade, S&P said, “reflects our opinion that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the administration recently agreed to falls short of what, in our view, would be necessary to stabilize the government’s medium-term debt dynamics.”

It’s those medium- and long-term debt problems that also worry economics professor Laurence J. Kotlikoff, who served as a senior economist on President Reagan’s Council of Economic Advisers. He says the national debt, which the U.S. Treasury has accounted at about $14 trillion, is just the tip of the iceberg.

“We have all these unofficial debts that are massive compared to the official debt,” Kotlikoff tells David Greene, guest host of weekends on All Things Considered. “We’re focused just on the official debt, so we’re trying to balance the wrong books.”

Kotlikoff explains that America’s “unofficial” payment obligations — like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid benefits — jack up the debt figure substantially.

“If you add up all the promises that have been made for spending obligations, including defense expenditures, and you subtract all the taxes that we expect to collect, the difference is $211 trillion. That’s the fiscal gap,” he says. “That’s our true indebtedness.” […]

There is no possible way in hell we can pay these debts.  And all we’re doing now is having the Federal Reserve add zeros to the money supply which is now a fantasy that only exists in computers.  That’s what “quantitative easing” is: we’ve done it twice now under Obama, and we’re going to be doing it again soon.

Quantitative easing is a hidden tax; the government inflates the currency which deflates the value of the existing dollars.  The dollars systematically become worth less and we get inflation – which is actually running out of control (see here, here, here, here and – for the antidote – here).

For the record, Obama’s massive regulations which have largely been passed by executive decree, are another massive form of hidden taxation.  To the tune of $1.75 trillion taken out of the private economy in forced compliance costs every single year.

Democrats love to blame Republicans for our debt.  They are, as I have said before, demon-possessed liars.  The programs that the Democrat Party rammed down our forcibly collectivist throats such as Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid are responsible for 99-plus percent of our massive unsustainable unpayable debt that will necessarily implode America.

I wrote about this earlier this year: it didn’t have to be this way: there were superior alternatives to both Social Security AND Medicare that were ignored and falsely demonized.

If you want to put it in honest terms, the agreement the Democrats – the party of baby genocide – was this: “You vote for us, and we’ll give you benefits that we’ll sell the next generation into slavery to pay for.”  And Democrats said, “Good!  That’s what we want!”

Republicans can’t end Social Security or Medicare now; millions of Americans (including my own parents) count on these programs – even as bad as they are –  for survival.  Democrats made sure that there were no rivals and no possible alternatives.  But we were right all along that it was a terrible program for America and we were right all along pointing out that there were FAR better alternatives.

If that isn’t bad enough, Democrats as we speak are trying to ensure that these programs – beginning with Medicare – go bankrupt.  Because the Republicans who said these programs were a mistake to begin with are doing their best to try to sustain them, while Democrats are refusing to allow ANY of the fixes that will prevent them from GOING BANKRUPT NO LATER THAN 2017.  Democrats are demanding that we keep these programs exactly as they are: and “exactly as they are” equals CATASTROPHIC BANKRUPTCY and collapse.

And just to help shove Medicare into the grave, Democrats stole $500 billion from Medicare funding and then double-counted it.  As if you can create two dollars by tearing a dollar bill in half.

And fot further go on with the sheer deceit of the Democrat Party, we now know that ObamaCare was sold on such a whopping load of lies it is beyond unreal – such as a SEVENTEEN TRILLION DOLLAR FUNDING GAP between the ocean of lies and the actual reality.

As sick and as frankly terrifying the implications of all the above are, can I end on a hilarious note?

Barack Obama, the man who demonized George Bush for raising the debt by four trillion dollars over eight years only to himself increase the debt by SIX TRILLION IN ONLY FOUR YEARS, is now demonically claiming that his spending spree never really happened:

“And by the way, we’re going to pay down our debt in a way that is balanced and responsible.  I inherited a trillion dollar deficit; I signed $2 trillion in spending cuts.  My opponents won’t admit it because it runs contrary to, I guess, the only argument they have — but since I’ve been President, federal spending has actually risen at the lowest pace in nearly 60 years.  (Applause.)  It usually takes a Democrat to fix these problems after they have run up the tab.”  (Applause.) — Barack Obama, May 24, 2012

In order to justify this demonic lie, Obama assumes a baseline that simply blames George Bush for all 2009 debt – INCLUDING OBAMA’S MASSIVE $3.27 TRILLION STIMULUS THAT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH GEORGE BUSH AND WHICH NOT ONE SINGLE REPUBLICAN VOTED FOR.  Obama’s “baseline” further assumed that emergency programs such as the TARP – which Obama himself approved of and voted for – was now something that America had to repeat every single year in perpetuity as opposed to being what it was (a one-time emergency event).  And so the following year when Obama didn’t spend another $700 billion in TARP, he was actually SAVING money.  Oh, and to complete the point about how ridiculous this is, OBAMA ASKED FOR AND RECEIVED HALF THE $700 billion TARP funds.  So Obama voted for it, Obama asked for it, and Obama spent it.  But it’s Bush’s fault and so blame Bush.

Oh, and Obama actually supermassively expanded his $350 billion in TARP funds to at least $16 TRILLION.  And put $23.7 trillion in taxpayer money at risk according to the TARP inspector general.  Obama does it.  Blames Bush for it.

Obama is artificially and demonically jacking up the “baseline” and then pointing to a lie to say “I’m only increasing spending by a little tiny bit.”  He uses a bogus contrived statistic to claim he’s the lowest-spending president in sixty years when the actual reality is that he’s the highest-spending president in the history of the entire human race.

Here’s the reality of Obama’s spending:

The only way you can explain Obama telling these “big lies” or Democrats actually believing them comes down to one thing: demon possession.

Openly Socialist Hollande And Obama Share SAME Major Policies – So Obama Isn’t A Socialist WHY, Exactly???

May 8, 2012

From each according to his ability, to each according to his need” – Karl Marx

I have frequently on this very blog demanded liberals to explain in detail just how exactly Barack Obama isn’t for the same thing (i.e., the major economic element of communism).  But let’s start with the French and get to Obama later.

Planet France is a place where fools have pretty much run things ever since 1789.  Two words that define France today are “socialism” and “surrender.”

Who did Planet France just elect?  And just what is this particular cheese-eating socialist surrender-monkey saying he’s going to do?

Hollande defeats Sarkozy in French presidency vote
Updated 04:05 p.m., Sunday, May 6, 2012

PARIS (AP) — Socialist Francois Hollande defeated conservative incumbent Nicolas Sarkozy on Sunday to become France’s next president, heralding a change in how Europe tackles its debt crisis and how France flexes its military and diplomatic muscle around the world.

Exuberant, diverse crowds filled the Place de la Bastille, the iconic plaza of the French Revolution, to fete Hollande’s victory, waving French, European and labor union flags and climbing the column that rises at its center. Leftists are overjoyed to have one of their own in power for the first time since Socialist Francois Mitterrand was president from 1981 to 1995.

“Austerity can no longer be inevitable!” Hollande declared in his victory speech Sunday night after a surprising campaign that saw him transform from an unremarkable, mild figure to an increasingly statesmanlike one.

Sarkozy is the latest victim of a wave of voter anger at government spending cuts around Europe that have tossed out governments and leaders over the past couple of years.

In Greece, a parliamentary vote Sunday is seen as critical to the country’s prospects for pulling out of a deep financial crisis felt in world markets. A state election in Germany and local elections in Italy were seen as tests of support for the national government’s policies.

Hollande promised help for France’s downtrodden after years under the Sarkozy, a man many voters saw as too friendly with the rich and blamed for economic troubles.

Hollande said European partners should be relieved and not frightened by his presidency.

“I am proud to have been capable of giving people hope again,” Hollande told huge crowds of supporters in his electoral fiefdom of Tulle in central France. “We will succeed!”

Hollande inherits an economy that’s a driver of the European Union but is deep in debt. He wants more government stimulus, and more government spending in general, despite concerns in the markets that France needs to urgently trim its huge debt.

Sarkozy conceded defeat minutes after the polls closed, saying he had called Hollande to wish him “good luck” as the country’s new leader.

Sarkozy, widely disliked for budget cuts and his handling of the economy during recent crises, said he did his best to win a second term, despite widespread anger at his handling of the economy.

“I bear responsibility … for the defeat,” he said. “I committed myself totally, fully, but I didn’t succeed in convincing a majority of French. … I didn’t succeed in making the values we share win.”

With 75 percent of the vote counted, official results showed Hollande with 51.1 percent of the vote compared with Sarkozy’s 48.9 percent, the Interior Ministry said. The CSA, TNS-Sofres and Ipsos polling agencies all predicted a Hollande win as well.

Hollande has virtually no foreign policy experience but he will face his first tests right after his inauguration, which must happen no later than May 16.

Among his first trips will be to the United States later this month for summits of NATO — where he will announce he is pulling French troops out of Afghanistan by the end of the year — and the Group of Eight leading world economies.

Hollande’s first challenge will be dealing with Germany: He wants to re-negotiate a hard-won European treaty on budget cuts that Germany’s Angela Merkel and Sarkozy had championed. He promises to make his first foreign trip to Berlin to work on a relationship that has been at the heart of Europe’s postwar unity.

Germany’s foreign minister, Guido Westerwelle, congratulated Hollande on Sunday night and said both countries will keep on cooperating closely in driving the European Union’s policies and be “a stabilizing factor and a motor for the European Union.”

At home, Hollande intends to modify one of Sarkozy’s key reforms, over the retirement age, to allow some people to retire at 60 instead of 62. He also plans to increase spending in a range of sectors and wants to ease France off its dependence on nuclear energy. He favors legalizing euthanasia and gay marriage.

Sarkozy supporters call those proposals misguided.

“We’re going to call France the new Greece,” said Laetitia Barone, 19. “Hollande is now very dangerous.”

Sarkozy had said he would quit politics if he lost, but was vague about his plans Sunday night.

“You can count on me to defend these ideas, convictions,” he said, “but my place cannot be the same.”

His political allies turned their attention to parliamentary elections next month.

People of all ages and different ethnicities celebrated Hollande’s victory at the Bastille. Ghylaine Lambrecht, 60, who celebrated the 1981 victory of Mitterrand at the Bastille, was among them.

“I’m so happy. We had to put up with Sarko for 10 years,” she said referring to Sarkozy’s time as interior and finance minister and five years as president. “In the last few years the rich have been getting richer. Now long live France, an open democratic France.”

“It’s magic!” said Violaine Chenais, 19. “I think Francois Hollande is not perfect, but it’s clear France thinks its time to give the left a chance. This means real hope for France. We’re going to celebrate with drink and hopefully some dancing.”

Planet France is a place where liberalism lives forever.  Planet France is a place where foolishness is wisdom, where night is day and where evil is good.

The markets already plunged on the fear that Hollande could win; now he’s won.  And the finance markets aren’t happy with “we will spend other people’s money until there is no more of other people’s money left to spend” policies:

Euro falls to three and a half year low amid market jitters at French and Greek elections
The Euro hit a three and a half year low against the pound as financial markets reacted to the election of Francois Hollande as France’s first Socialist president for 17 years and the new threat to a eurozone break-up posed by the post-election turmoil in Greece.
By Roland Gribben, Henry Samuel and Bruno Waterfield
11:24AM BST 07 May 2012

The Paris stock exchange CAC 40 index dropped 1.52pc in early trading with investors nervous about the growing pressure for a eurozone economic policy switch from austerity to growth, reflected in the French and Greek election results and President Hollande’s priorities.
 
The euro fell heavily across the board on Monday. Traders said the euro’s losses, which saw it hit a three-month low against the dollar, its lowest in 3 and a half years against the British pound and a 2 and half month trough versus the yen, were likely to be extended in coming days.
 
Stocks in Italy fell 2.2pc, the main Madrid index slipped 1.76pc while a 2.02pc drop in the DAX index of leading German shares was blamed on a local election setback for Chancellor Angela Merkel.
 
Political stalemate in Greece after the failure of any party to gain a majority saw shares on the Athens market slump 7.6pc.
 
The strength of the opposition to the Greek bail-out programme has raised fresh questions about continued eurozone membership.

Alexis Tsipras leader of the Syriza party, a coalition of the radical left which emerged as the second biggest after winning 16pc of the Greek vote, immediately drew the battle lines declaring: “The people of Europe can no longer be reconciled with the bailouts of barbarism.”
 
The euro fell its lowest level for almost four months to $1.2954 before showing signs of a rally to $1.301 while the interest rate on France’s benchmark ten year bonds rose.
 
Traders said there was no panic but the rising yield is increasing concerns about a run on French debt and a threat to the French deficit reduction programme. A widening in the spread between French and German bonds was seen as a ‘flight to safety.’
 
Germany’s 10-year yield fell to as low as 1.552pc, the second record in consecutive trading days.
 
Ratings agency Standard and Poor’s said President Hollande’s victory would have no immediate effect on its French rating.
 
The agency infuriated former President Sarkozy when it stripped France of its top triple-A rating in January.
 
A number of analysts felt markets had already taken account of a Hollande victory while others argued that a combination of the French and Greek results would increase pressure on eurozone debt.
 
World stock markets hit as France votes for first Socialist president in 20 years and Greece chooses a parliament with a majority of MPs from anti-bailout parties.

Some say that the market has already taken a Hollande win – i.e. a win for socialism, a win for liberalism, into account.  These are pretty much saying that Hollande will govern far more pragmatically than his liberal rhetoric suggests.  They’re saying that the world financial markets will prevent true socialism from emerging in France, and that Hollande will have to face reality given that he’s simply boxed-in by simple reality.   But even those people are saying, “We are quite pessimistic about the euro area in the short-term. We think that the GDP contraction will amplify in the second quarter. So, things will get worse in the coming weeks.”

I think that’s hogwash.  I think that Hollande will now believe he’s got a mandate to export his brand of socialist-liberal belief in unicorns and fairy dust to Germany and to the world financial markets.  His win was by about the same margin that Obama won by, interestingly, and both Obama and Democrats sure as hell thought THEY had a mandate which they foolishly exploited until the voters gave them a historic ass-kicking in 2010.  I also think that Hollande’s “Our way out of our massive debt is for our government to pretend we’re not in debt and quadruple down on our reckless, insane spending” mantra is the way to ruin.  And that ruin will surely ensue.  And, lastly, I think that the Eurozone’s complete and utter collapse is all but guaranteed now.

I said “quadruple down on our reckless, insane spending” in honor of our own socialist fool: Barack Hussein Obama.  Because Obama has spent FOUR TIMES AS MUCH AS BUSH DID:

“Austerity can no longer be inevitable!”

Our socialist fools in the Democrat Party in America are as determined to ignore reality as the sociliast fools on Planet France.

Compare and contrast openly socialist Hollande’s major policies to Obama’s: both want huge government stimulus programs; both oppose any constraints on government spending; both demand that we tax the rich; and both want a special tax on banks.  That’s because Barack Obama is a damn SOCIALIST!!!

The French election previews the U.S. November election contest between incumbent Barack Obama and challenger Mitt Romney in the following four ways:

1). Both Obama and Hollande offer almost identical leftist platforms (details on this below).

2) The bland challengers (Hollande and Romney) ignite electoral passions less than their more colorful opponents (playboy Sarkozy with his celebrity wife and Obama, the first black president).

3) The sorry state of the economy gives both challengers a hefty leg-up.

4) The French and American elections are foreshadowed by electoral disasters for the incumbent party in off-year races in 2010 and 2011. In both, the incumbent party lost long-held majorities in one house of Congress or parliament.

Read more…

And it’s no surprise that America under Obama is looking more and more like Europe and having the same long-term problems that Europe has had:

EDITORIAL: Obama’s euro-style unemployment
Welfare-state mentality fosters permanent joblessness
By THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Tuesday, June 14, 2011

It’s no secret that President Obama wants America to look more like Europe. He desires expanded powers for labor unions, higher gas prices for commuters and a diminished role on the world stage. So far, he’s been effective in fostering the conditions for European-style unemployment on these shores. […]

As we speak the unemployment rate just went down.  Why?  Because 115,000 jobs were created – nowhere near enough to even keep pace with population growth, mind you – and 342,000 gave up trying to find a job in complete despair.  We live in our own version of planet France when nobody could have a job and our president could boast of a 0% unemployment rate.

George Will pointed out a couple of facts as to just how terrible Obama is managing our economy this week on ABC’s “This Week”:

JAKE TAPPER: George, the president kicked off his campaign yesterday. Thoughts?

WILL: He kicked it off a day after we saw the emblematic achievement of the Obama administration, which is to make a decline in the unemployment rate bad news. It ticked down from 8.2 percent to 8.1 percent because 342,000 of Americans succumbed to discouragement with the Obama economy and left the economy.
 
Male participation rate in the economy today is lower than it has been at any time since we began keeping this statistic in 1948. Indeed, if the workforce participation rate were the same today as it was when Mr. Obama was inaugurated, the real unemployment rate would be measured at about 11 percent. That’s no record to run on.

Barry Hussein has been a jobs holocaust.

Bay Buchannon later made a statement about the planet France-like FOOLS who were instrumental to Obama’s 2008 victory: college students.

People who are graduating from college, 53 percent, do not get jobs when they graduate. We are going to lose that whole generation because, you know, when the jobs do come back, they’re going to hire college graduates just coming out.

Those idiot socialist fools deserve to suffer; it’s too dang bad the rest of the nation has to suffer along with them because of their vote for Obama four years ago.

I point out how simply godawful Obama has been for America.  Two years ago, due to Obama’s wildly failed policies, the labor participation rate measuring how many working-age Americans are actually WORKING was at a 25-year low.  Last year that participation rate had decreased to a 27-year low.  This year it decreased to a 31-year low.  Millions and millions of jobs have simply been vaporized under Obama and there is no sign that they will be coming back.

If you vote for Obama’s version of planet France, I can guarantee you that that rate measuring how many working-age Americans have any chance whatsoever of getting a job will continue to plunge.

P.S. The funniest damn thing of all is what I read after I got through writing this article but before I published it: that Obama is advising Hollande NOT to raise taxes and increase spending for the sake of the European economyWHILE OBAMA HIMSELF IS CAMPAIGNING ON DOING THE VERY THINGS HE’S TELLING HIS FELLOW SOCIALIST NOT TO DO.

Obama’s GSA Chief Resigns After Beyond-Insane Spending Found Out

April 3, 2012

Notice how quickly Obama’s stooges raced out and said, “Blame Bush!  Blame Republicans!  Anybody but our Messiah!”

GSA Chief Resigns Over Outlandish Spending
By Daniel Foster
April 2, 2012 4:15 P.M.

General Services Administration head Martha Johnson has resigned along with two of her deputies, reportedly over an impending inspector general’s report detailing lavish spending on a Vegas conference for a handful of government employees.

Organizers spent $835,000 on the event, which was attended by 300 employees. The expenses included $147,000 in airfare and lodging at the hotel for six planning trips by a team of organizers. Among the other expenses were $3,200 for a mind reader; $6,300 on commemorative coin set displayed in velvet boxes and $75,000 on a training exercise to build a bicycle.

“When the White House was informed of the Inspector General’s findings we acted quickly to determine who was responsible for such a gross misuse of taxpayer dollars,” White House Chief of State Jack Lew said in a statement to The Washington Post. President Obama “was outraged by the excessive spending, questionable dealings with contractors, and disregard for taxpayer dollars,” Lew said, “and called for all those responsible to be held fully accountable.”

The GSA is basically the federal government’s office managers, providing things like office space, desks, and cars to other agencies. One of its charges is to develop cost-saving administrative strategies. . . .

Obama demonized Las Vegas trips.  But of course that was just deceitful demagogic rhetoric for public consumption.

On the “we-told-you-so” side of this story, Republicans tried to block Martha Johnson’s appointment:

On February 3, 2010, Obama, in an unusual move for a sitting president, sharply criticized Bond and Republican senators for blocking Johnson’s nomination, and complained that Republicans were blocking nominees for reasons that have nothing to do with their qualifications for their prospective jobs. While at a retreat for Democratic senators, Obama made the comments in response to a question from Sen. Patrick Leahy about his judicial nominations. Obama expanded his answer to include not just blocked judicial nominations but also executive nominations as well:

Nobody can tell me that there’s anything particularly wrong with her. They’re blocking her because of some unrelated matter. Don’t hold this — this woman hostage. If you have an objection about my health-care policies, then let’s debate the health-care policies. But don’t suddenly end up having a GSA administrator who is stuck in limbo somewhere because you don’t like something else that we’re doing.

This was almost as crazy as the fact that the federal limousine  fleet had grown by 73% under Obama from when Bush was president in only two years.

Kind of explains why Obama’s budget deficits are averaging well over a trillion dollars a year, doesn’t it???

Another Little ObamaCare Surprise: How About A SEVENTEEN TRILLION DOLLAR Funding Gap?

March 31, 2012

The craziest thing of all is that this seventeen trillion-dollar unfunded spending is actually itself just a small fraction of the money that the most irresponsible political party in the history of the entire human race has spent without being able to even begin to pay for it:

Another $17 trillion surprise found in Obamacare
Published: 9:21 AM 03/30/2012
By Neil Munro – The Daily Caller

Senate Republican staffers continue to look though the 2010 health care reform law to see what’s in it, and their latest discovery is a massive $17 trillion funding gap.

“The more we learn about the bill, the more we learn it is even more unaffordable than was suspected,” said Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions, the Republican’s budget chief in the Senate.

“The bill has to be removed from the books because we don’t have the money,” he said.

The hidden shortfall between new spending and new taxes was revealed just after Supreme Court justices grilled the law’s supporters about its compliance with the Constitution’s limits on government activity. If the court doesn’t strike down the law, it will force taxpayers find another $17 trillion to pay for the increased spending.

The $17 trillion in extra promises was revealed by an analysis of the law’s long-term requirements. The additional obligations, when combined with existing Medicare and Medicaid funding shortfalls, leaves taxpayers on the hook for an extra $82 trillion in health care obligations over the next 75 years.

The federal government has an additional $17 trillion unfunded gap in other obligations, including Social Security, bringing the total shortfall to $99 trillion.

The shortfall is different from existing debt. The federal government already owes $15 trillion in debt, including $5 trillion in funds borrowed during Obama’s term.

That $99 trillion in unfunded future expenses is more than five years of wealth generated by the United States, which now produces just over $15 trillion of value per year.

The $99 trillion funding gap is equal to almost 30 years of the current federal budget, which was $3.36 trillion for 2011.

The new $17 trillion funding gap is five times the current federal budget.

Currently, the Social Security system is $7 trillion in debt over the next 75 years, according to the Government Accountability Office.

Also, Medicare will eat up $38 trillion in future taxes, and Medicaid will consume another $2o trillion of the taxpayer’s wealth, according to estimates prepared by the actuarial office at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.

The short-term cost of the Obamacare law is $2.6 trillion, almost triple the $900 billion cost promised by Obama and his Democratic allies, said Sessions.

The extra $17 trillion gap was discovered by applying standard federal estimates and models to the law’s spending obligations, Sessions said.

For example, Session’s examination of the health care law’s “premium support” program shows a funding gap $12 billion wider than predicted.

The same review also showed the law added another $5 trillion in unfunded obligations for the Medicaid program.

“President Obama told the American people that his health law would cost $900 billion over ten years and that it would not add ‘one dime’ to the debt… this health law adds an entirely new obligation—one we cannot pay for—and puts the entire financing of the United States government in jeopardy,” Sessions said in a floor speech.

“We don’t have the money… We have to reduce the [obligations] that we have.”

ObamaCare was based entirely on lies from the very outset.  This bill seriously needs to burn in hell.

That $2.6 trillion ObamaCare figure – again, making it THREE TIMES what Obama promised the American people it would cost – is not some “right-wing talking point”; it comes right out of the CBO:

A Congressional Budget Office report shows that the cost of implementing President Obama’s health care overhaul will reach $2.6 trillion over a ten-year period, a dramatic increase from the White House’s original estimate.

In 2009, Obama stated that the legislation would cost “around $900 billion over ten years.” The CBO’s original ten-year numbers weren’t that far off, but critics of the health care bill noted then that the cost would be much greater once projections accounted for its full implementation.

Democrats pushed the back-loaded bill into law in 2010, although it isn’t scheduled to be fully implemented until 2014.

“The fact that the outlook for the law continues to worsen so rapidly, even before it is implemented, is ominous,” Alabama Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions said in a statement.

“And despite massive tax hikes and new penalties to pay for the bill, which CBO estimates have risen by another $99 billion compared to their estimates last March … the president’s health spending law will add at least $700 billion to the deficit over its first 10 years. Sadly, it may prove much worse than that.”

The CBO arrived at its $2.6 trillion figure after measuring the effects of expanding coverage over its first ten years in effect. At its full scope the health care law will result in “4 million fewer Americans [having] employer-based coverage,” the CBO noted.

As insane as that $99 trillion figure is, it is the lowball estimate of the sheer extent of the fatal debt cycle that the Democrat Party is entirely responsible for.  A peer-reviewed IMF publication cited the actual unfunded liabilities of the United States at over $200 trillion:

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

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

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

I’ve written about how simply terrible and frankly wicked the Social Security boondoggle was from the very outset.  And what we could have had were the Democrat Party not the party of genuine evil in America

I’ve also written about the coming $600 trillion collapse that will implode America thanks to Barack Obama and his demonic crony capitalist friends.

Medicare will go bankrupt no later than 2017; and Democrats are demonizing every attempt by Republicans to save this failed system by making modifications that are critically needed to avert complete disaster.

The Democrat Party – the most reckless and irresponsible political body in the history of the world – has refused to produce a budget in 1,064 days.  And the ONLY budget Republicans can consider from the Democrat Party – Barack Obama’s budget – was so blatantly EVIL that it just went down in the House of Representatives on a vote of 414 to ZERO.

The Democrat Party ought to be called the “Demoncrat Party” – as in “the party of Demonic Bureaucrats.”

The United States of America is guaranteed to die if Democrats – and particuarly if Barack Obama – is allowed to have anything to do with its governance.

‘Recovery’ My Democrat Donkey A$$: 2012 Government Spending Is Higher And Tax Revenues Are Lower Than Last Year

March 13, 2012

“The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money” – Margaret Thatcher

The Obama crazy train doesn’t make any stops on its trip off the cliff:

US Rakes Largest Monthly Deficit In History, 2012 Tax Revenues Net Of Refunds Trail 2011
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 03/12/2012 15:00 -0400

A few days  ago we noted that based on preliminary data, the February budget deficit would hit $229 billion (yes, nearly one quarter of a trillion in one month, about where real Greek GDP is these days) – the largest single monthly deficit in history. Unfortunately, this number was low: the final February deficit was just released and the actual print is $231.7 billion. It also means that in the first 5 months of the fiscal year, the US has raked up $580 billion in deficits, oddly matched by $727 billion in new debt issuance, 25% more new debt issued than needed to fund deficits… And that in itself would not be horrible – February is traditionally the worst month for deficits as the Treasury sees a surge in tax refund issuance – if it wasn’t for something even more troubling. As the second chart below shows, through last Friday, and net of tax refunds, total US tax revenues were actually lower in the fiscal 2012 year to date period than compared to 2011, by just under $2 billion, at $625.5 billion. Which is the weakest link for any argument that the US is actually growing: what is growing is America’s debt (now almost exponentially), while its revenues are at best unchanged. And the scariest: annualizing net tax revenues brings the number to $1.5 trillion. Which is just 50% more where total US debt interest will be in 2014 when debt is $20 trillion, assuming interest rates are somehow allowed to go back up… to the astronomical level of 5%.

Monthly deficits:

and net US tax revenues:

I wrote about Obama’s supermassive February deficit here.  In that article, I pointed out that the last Republican Congress during Bush’s presidency passed a budget (FY-2007) that had a budget deficit of $162 billion.  Which is to say that Democrats and Obama are giving us monthly deficits that are literally forty-one-plus percent higher than the deficit for the enitre damn year under Republicans.

And the Democrat Party of today is every bit as pathologically dishonest as its liar-in-chief president, who said:

That’s why today, I’m pledging to cut the deficit we inherited by half by the end of my first term in office.”

And for more information on how THAT whopping lie worked out, click here.

We live in a nation of lies which is being led to its grave by lying leaders.  Which is another way of saying we live in God damn America.

Obama Government Spending $1 Out Of Every $4 In ENTIRE U.S. Economy – And He Borrows $1 Out Of Every $3 He Spends To Do It

January 25, 2012

Mitch Daniels absolutely hammered Obama’s State of the Union speech in about 1/2oth of the time it took Obama to wax blowhard:

Transcript: Daniels gives GOP response to State of the Union
updated 11:15 PM EST, Tue January 24, 2012

(CNN) — Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels is to give the Republican Party response to the State of the Union speech on Tuesday night. Below is a transcript of the speech.

Daniels: Greetings from the home of Super Bowl XLVI.

The status of loyal opposition imposes on those out of power some serious responsibilities: to show respect for the presidency and its occupant, to express agreement where it exists.

Republicans tonight salute our president, for instance, for his aggressive pursuit of the murderers of 9/11 and for bravely backing long overdue changes in public education. I personally would add to that list admiration for the strong family commitment that he and the first lady have displayed to a nation sorely needing such examples.

On these evenings, presidents naturally seek to find the sunny side of our national condition. But when President Obama claims that the state of our union is anything but grave, he must know in his heart that this is not true.

The president did not cause the economic and fiscal crises that continue in America tonight, but he was elected on a promise to fix them, and he cannot claim that the last three years have made things anything but worse. The percentage of Americans with a job is at the lowest in decades. One in five men of prime working age and nearly half of all persons under 30 did not go to work today.

In three short years, an unprecedented explosion of spending, with borrowed money, has added trillions to an already unaffordable national debt. And yet the president has put us on a course to make it radically worse in the years ahead.

The federal government now spends one of every four dollars in the entire economy. It borrows one of every three dollars it spends. No nation, no entity, large or small, public or private, can thrive, or survive intact, with debts as huge as ours.

The president’s grand experiment in trickle-down government has held back rather than sped economic recovery. He seems to sincerely believe we can build a middle class out of government jobs paid for with borrowed dollars. In fact, it works the other way: A government as big and bossy as this one is maintained on the backs of the middle class and those who hope to join it.

Those punished most by the wrong turns of the last three years are those unemployed or underemployed tonight and those so discouraged they’ve abandoned the search for work altogether. And no one’s been more tragically harmed than the young people of this country, the first generation in memory to face a future less promising than their parents did.

As Republicans, our first concern is for those waiting tonight to begin or resume the climb up life’s ladder. We do not accept that ours will ever be a nation of haves and have-nots. We must always be a nation of haves and soon-to-haves.

In our economic stagnation and indebtedness, we’re only a short distance behind Greece, Spain, and other European countries now facing economic catastrophe. But ours is a fortunate land. Because the world uses our dollar for trade, we have a short grace period to deal with our dangers. But time is running out if we’re to avoid the fate of Europe and those once-great nations of history that fell from the position of world leadership.

So 2012 is a year of true opportunity, maybe our last, to restore an America of hope and upward mobility and greater equality. The challenges aren’t matters of ideology or party preference. The problems are simply mathematical, and the answers are purely practical.

An opposition that would earn its way back to leadership must offer not just criticism of failures that anyone can see, but a positive and credible plan to make life better, particularly for those aspiring to make a better life for themselves. Republicans accept this duty gratefully.

The routes back to an America of promise and to a solvent America that can pay its bills and protect its vulnerable start in the same place. The only way up for those suffering tonight, and the only way out of the dead end of debt into which we’ve driven, is a private economy that begins to grow and create jobs, real jobs, at a much faster rate than today. Contrary to the president’s constant disparagement of people in business, it’s one of the noblest of human pursuits. The late Steve Jobs — what a fitting name he had — created more of them than all those stimulus dollars the president borrowed and blew.

Out here in Indiana, when a businessperson asks me what he can do for our state, I say, “First, make money. Be successful. If you make a profit, you’ll have something left to hire someone else, and some to donate to the good causes we love.”

The extremism that stifles the development of homegrown energy, or cancels a perfectly safe pipeline that would employ tens of thousands, or jacks up consumer utility bills for no improvement in either human health or world temperature, is a pro-poverty policy. It must be replaced by a passionate pro-growth approach that breaks all ties and calls all close ones in favor of private-sector jobs that restore opportunity for all and generate the public revenues to pay our bills.

That means a dramatically simpler tax system of fewer loopholes and lower rates, a pause in the mindless piling on of expensive new regulations that devour dollars that otherwise could be used to hire somebody. It means maximizing on the new domestic energy technologies that are the best break our economy has gotten in years.

There’s a second item on our national must-do list: We must unite to save the safety net. Medicare and Social Security have served us well, and that must continue. But after half and three- quarters of a century, respectively, it’s not surprising they need some repairs. We can preserve them unchanged and untouched for those now in or near retirement, but we must fashion a new, affordable safety net so future Americans are protected, too.

Decades ago, for instance, we could afford to send millionaires pension checks and pay medical bills for even the wealthiest among us. Now, we can’t, so the dollars we have should be devoted to those who need them most.

The mortal enemies of Social Security and Medicare are those who, in contempt of the plain arithmetic, continue to mislead Americans that we should change nothing. Listening to them much longer will mean that these proud programs implode, and take the American economy with them. It’ll mean that coming generations are denied the jobs they need in their youth and the protection they deserve in their later years.

It’s absolutely so that everyone should contribute to our national recovery, including of course the most affluent among us. There are smart ways and dumb ways to do this: The dumb way is to raise rates in a broken, grossly complex tax system, choking off growth without bringing in the revenues we need to meet our debts. The better course is to stop sending the wealthy benefits they do not need, and stop providing them so many tax preferences that distort our economy and do little or nothing to foster growth.

It’s not fair and it’s not true for the president to attack Republicans in Congress as obstacles on these questions. They and they alone have passed bills to reduce borrowing, reform entitlements, and encourage new job creation, only to be shot down time and time again by the president and his Democratic Senate allies.

This year, it falls to Republicans to level with our fellow citizens about this reality: If we fail to act to grow the private sector and save the safety net, nothing else will matter much. But to make such action happen, we also must work, in ways we Republicans have not always practiced, to bring Americans together.

No feature of the Obama presidency has been sadder than its constant efforts to divide us, to curry favor with some Americans by castigating others.

As in previous moments of national danger, we Americans are all in the same boat. If we drift, quarreling and paralyzed, over a Niagara of debt, we will all suffer, regardless of income, race, gender, or other category. If we fail to shift to a pro-jobs, pro- growth economic policy, there’ll never be enough public revenue to pay for our safety net, national security, or whatever size government we decide to have.

As a loyal opposition, who put patriotism and national success ahead of party or ideology or any self-interest, we say that anyone who will join us in the cause of growth and solvency is our ally, and our friend. We will speak the language of unity. Let us rebuild our finances, and the safety net, and reopen the door to the stairway upward; any other disagreements we may have can wait.

You know, the most troubling contention in our national life these days isn’t about economics, or policy at all. It’s about us, as a free people. In two alarming ways, that contention is that we Americans just can’t cut it anymore.

In word and deed, the president and his allies tell us that we just cannot handle ourselves in this complex, perilous world without their benevolent protection. Left to ourselves, we might pick the wrong health insurance, the wrong mortgage, the wrong school for our kids; why, unless they stop us, we might pick the wrong light bulb.

A second view, which I’ll admit some Republicans also seem to hold, is that we Americans are no longer up to the job of self- government. We can’t do the simple math that proves the unaffordability of today’s safety net programs, or all the government we now have. We will fall for the con job that says we can just plow ahead and someone else will pick up the tab. We will allow ourselves to be pitted one against the other, blaming our neighbor for troubles worldwide trends or our own government has caused.

2012 must be the year we prove the doubters wrong. The year we strike out boldly not merely to avert national bankruptcy, but to say to a new generation that America is still the world’s premier land of opportunity. Republicans will speak for those who believe in the dignity and capacity of the individual citizen; who believe that government is meant to serve the people rather than supervise them; who trust Americans enough to tell them the plain truth about the fix we are in, and to lay before them a specific, credible program of change big enough to meet the emergency we are facing.

We will advance our positive suggestions with confidence, because we know that Americans are still a people born to liberty. There is nothing wrong with the state of our union that the American people, addressed as free-born, mature citizens, cannot set right. Republicans in 2012 welcome all our countrymen to a program of renewal that rebuilds the dream for all, and makes our “city on a hill” shine once again.

We either have to get rid of Obama or fly – well, fly very poorly and then fall – the way of the Dodo bird.

America cannot survive another Obama term.

DEMOCRATS Set Up America For 2008 Collapse, And Barack Obama Became Their KING

August 15, 2011

Let me begin with the immediate Obama present, compare that dismal reality to what Republican states/governors are doing right now, and then work my way backward to document that it was DEMOCRATS who set this country up for failure, even as they are the ones leading this nation deeper and deeper into failure right now.

Good old Barry Hussein and his basically Marxist polices.  He sure has helped people with all his Keynesian-communist commissar crappola.

Or not.

August 10, 2011, 1:28 PM ET
Vital Signs: 4.5 Unemployed for Each Job Opening
By Justin Lahart

Work is hard to find. For each U.S. job opening at the end of June, there were 4.5 people looking for work, according to Labor Department figures. That was down from a year earlier, when there were 5.4 job seekers for every opening. But in 2007, there were about two job openings for every three unemployed workers.

In 2007 there were two job openings for every three unemployed persons.  Doing the math to get the relevant ratio, that’s 3 unemployed persons divided by 2 jobs, or 1.5 jobs for every unemployed person.  Versus Obama’s 4.5 figure now.

I’m trying to think but I can’t remember; who was president when REAL UNEMPLOYMENT WAS ONE-THIRD WHAT IT IS NOW?

Barack Obama has TRIPLED real unemployment.  And that is a FACT.

At some point the people are either going to realize that the mainstream media, the Democrat Party and Barack Obama have told so many giant lies to sell their leftwing narrative it is positively unreal.  Or they will go the way of the Dodo bird.  It’s that simple.

Obama is a demon-filled demoniac who keeps demonizing conservative policies for driving America into a ditch.  BUT LOOK AT WHAT IS HAPPENING RIGHT NOW:

Wisconsin Republicans just survived a recall election funded by tens of millions of dollars in out-of-state big union money.  Good thing, because their policies that sent liberals into evil and vile fury WORKED and Wisconsin is CREATING JOBS:

Here’s the thing that every American ought to know: the Republican initiatives WORKED:

According to new jobs figures, Wisconsin created 12,900 new private-sector jobs in June, almost as many as the 18,000 new jobs created nationwide last month. This represents the largest one-month gain of private-sector jobs in Wisconsin since 2003, according to the state Department of Workforce Development.

Because of Governor Scott Walker and the Republican Party initiatives that made the left go absolutely batpoop, Wisconsin is a JOB ENGINE.

Is OBAMA created jobs?  No.  He has destroyed jobs by the MILLIONS while offering a continuous stream of incredibly deceitful statistics and excuses.

Governor Rick Perry of Texas is about to announce his campaign to take Obama’s job away from him (and I am about to put my efforts behind his campaign when he does).  How about Rick Perry’s job creation in Republican Texas?

From a liberal writing in the Los Angeles Times:

For the last few weeks, I’ve been unable to get a startling statistic out of my head: Since the recession officially ended, Texas has created more than 4 of every 10 new jobs in America.

That’s right, Texas: the reddest of red states, home to gun lovers and school textbooks that openly question whether the Founding Fathers intended for the separation of church and state. I am no ideologue. Still, whenever I get political, I tend to tilt reflexively to the left, making the jobs figure a bit disconcerting at first.

But there’s no escaping it. The number is real. Which means that if you care about putting people back to work at a time when nearly 14 million in this country are unemployed, maybe Texas has something to teach us.

[…]

According to the Dallas Fed, Texas generated 43% of the net new jobs in the U.S. from June 2009 through May 2011 — an enormous share when you consider that the Lone Star State accounts for about 8% of the nation’s economy.

We just discovered that the United States of America has crossed the ridiculous tipping point of having our borrowing/debt EXCEED 100% of our GDP.  And how are conservative policies working out RIGHT NOW while Obama and his liberal policies are ruining America job by job by job?

Nebraska, a state governed by Republican conservative Dave Heineman.

First there’s the unemployment rate of 4.1%. Second lowest in the entire nation (behind fellow Republican state North Dakota, for what that’s worth):

LINCOLN, Neb. (AP) — Authorities say Nebraska’s unemployment rate dropped to 4.1 percent in May, a drop of a tenth of a point from April’s 4.2 percent.

Then there’s the fact that this Republican state has a balanced budget. And how did it balance the budget and get low unemployment?

[M]aybe there is something Washington can learn from Nebraska. How did Nebraska, with an estimated budget shortfall of almost $1 billion November 2010, get to a unanimous decision May 2011 and approve a balanced biennial budget of $6.9 billion? A balanced budget that does not raise taxes and leaves nearly $300 million in the state’s cash reserves.

Some might presume that life is difficult for Nebraskans, what with their state government required to balance the budget and not allowed to borrow. Actually Nebraska is ranked #10 by Lifestyle Statistics, it was 3rd in top jobs behind North Dakota and Texas, and to top it off, the unemployment rate for Nebraska is 4.1%.

How did it happen? Strong leadership. A state constitution that requires a balanced budget and doesn’t allow for borrowing. Tough decisions made during tough times, not delayed. Priorities identified. Discussions. Debates. Negotiations…and the use of a red line.

An interesting quote from Gov. Dave Heineman occurs midway through this snippet from an article entitled, “Caterpillar Threatens To Leave Illinois Over Taxes“:

“If Illinois doesn’t want your business, Texas does,” wrote Rick Perry, the governor of that state.

The governor of Nebraska, Dave Heineman, wrote: “In Nebraska, we balance our budget by controlling spending, not by raising taxes.”

An official in the South Dakota governor’s office chimed in: “In South Dakota, you make a profit, and you keep your profit.”

The Illinois tax increase will cost Caterpillar’s 23,000 employees in the state about $40 million this year, said Jim Dugan, the company’s chief spokesman. Higher taxes make it harder for Caterpillar to attract and retain engineers, accountants and other employees, Dugan said. He added that Caterpillar’s corporate taxes in the state also will increase but provided no estimate on the added cost.

“The state unfortunately continues to put off the tough decisions” about potential reductions in government spending and pension costs, Dugan said. He said Caterpillar was offering to advise the governor on cost-cutting based on the company’s own experience chopping pay and laying off workers during the 2008-09 recession

First, liberal Democrat Illinois is a hellhole. And that’s because Democrats own that state. Some interesting figures: 4 out of the last 7 governors of Illinois are convicted felons. It’s government union pension program is the biggest disaster in the nation. It’s major city Chicago is so filled with gang violence that even Democrats have been pleading for the National Guard to come in. And, if that isn’t bad enough, Democrats are so dishonest that they just altered their congressional map to undo the clear will of the people. That’s what Democrats bring.

All over the nation we’ve got cities that have voted Democrat for a hundred years. And they are all hell holes. While a jackass is in many ways an accurate symbol of what it means to be a Democrat, it would really be far more fitting if the symbol of the Democrat Party was a black hole surrounded by the white-hot fires of hell. Because “Democrat” is really a portmanteau for “Demonic Bureaucrat.” And hell is what demonic bureaucrats invariably bring. Along with socialism and totalitarian control.

In 2008, Barack Obama, the Democrat Party and the mainstream media sold you a blatantly false narrative.  The same people who assured you that George Bush was completely to blame because he was president in 2008 refuse to assign Barack Obama ANY responsibility WHATSOEVER even when he has been president for THREE YEARS of UNMITIGATED DISASTER.  The same Democrats and the same media that now blame Republicans because they took control of the House early this year REFUSED to blame Democrats who took control of BOTH THE HOUSE AND THE SENATE in November 2006.  When Nancy Pelosi took control of the House of Representatives and when Harry Reid took control of the Senate from Republicans, the unemployment rate was 4.4 PERCENT.

And what horror they then wrought.  But the same media propaganda machine that now blames Republicans for controlling only HALF of Congress refused to assign Democrats any blame even though they controlled THE WHOLE THING.

And let’s look at spending when we can compare the “failed” policies of Republicans to the “oh so successful” policies of Democrats:

Consider the last three plus years’ worth of reckless spending. The Bush administration has been blamed for much of this reckless spending, but it was actually a Democrat Congress that swept into power in 2006 (largely due to what we can now readily see was hypocritical demagoguery over the Iraq War and Hurricane Katrina rather than any economic issue) which proceeded to spend America into the stratosphere:

For the record, the last budget from a Republican President AND a Republican Congress – FY-2007 (passed in 2006) – resulted in a$161 billion deficit at a time when unemployment was 4.6%. That’s what happened the last time the GOP was in control.

What happened when the Democrats took control in January 2007? Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi passed a FY-2008 budget that had a $459 billion deficit – nearly three times the deficit in the immediately previous Republican-passed budget. Three times. And this before the financial crisis that somehow “necessitated” all this massive spending.

Now, that’s a pretty crazy increase under Democrat control. But you aint seen nothin’ yet.

The Democrats passed a FY-2009 budget with a staggering, mind-boggling, totally reckless $1.42 TRILLION deficit.

The FY-2010 budget approved by Reid and Pelosi and signed by Obama had an estimated $1.6 TRILLION deficit.

The deficit has increased from $161 billion in the last budget before Democrats took control of the Congress (FY 2007) to $1.42 trillion in the most recent fiscal year (FY 2009)—an increase of $1.26 trillion or 782%.

With three months remaining in the fiscal 2009 budget, the federal deficit just officially passed the $1 trillion mark. Worse yet, Obama borrowed more than forty cents for every single dollar he spent.

We also suffered a budget shortfall of $94 billion in the month of June, which marks the first June in more than ten years (read, “encompassing the entire Bush presidency”). Bush’s success in raising revenues is bookended by two Democrat presidents who failed.

And now the Democrats aren’t even bothering to pass a budget for the next fiscal year, so they can simply spend without any accountability whatsoever.

The old annual deficits under Republicans have now become the monthly deficits under Democrats:

In the 12 years that Republicans controlled the House, the average deficit was $104 billion (average of final deficit/surplus FY1996-FY2007 data taken from Table F-1 below). In just 3 years under Democrats, the average deficit is now almost $1.1 trillion (average of final deficit/surplus FY2008 and 2009 data taken from Table F-1; FY2010 data taken from Table 1-3). Source: CBO January 2010 Budget and Economic Outlook

Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Minority Whip) rightly pointed out on ABC’s “This Week”:

“If you look at the kind of deficit that we’ve incurred over the last three years that the Democrats have been in control of Congress, 60% of the overall deficit from the last ten years has occurred in that period. And frankly with the incurrence of the debt, we’ve seen very little result. That’s why we think we ought to choose another way.”

And yet the media falsely blame BUSH and Republicans for that spending, rather than Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and the Democrat-controlled House and Senate, even though factually speaking the Democrats were ENTIRELY to blame for every single penny that was spent from January 2007 on. Because our Constitution forbids a president from spending; it is CONGRESS that spends.

I also point out in that article (and many others such as this one) that Democrats were primarily responsible for the disastrous policies that led to the 2008 collapse. They were basically completely responsible for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and their reckless policies, and then utterly refused to allow any reforms that would have averted the ensuing disaster.

For the record, as I write this on Wednesday, August 10, it has now been 834 days since the Democrat Party bothered to pass ANY BUDGET AT ALL.  But again, the only people who are “responsible” for the total fiscal disaster we are now in are Republicans.  And that is because the mainstream media has degenerated into a propaganda tool that one has to go back to Joseph Goebbels and his Ministry of Propaganda to surpass in its sheer determination to report lies as truth.

Obama is spending $5 billion a day, versus George Bush’s $1.6 billion a day. But it was all George Bush and his “reckless spending” that “got us into this ditch we’re in.”

Obama promised us if his $862 (actually $3.27 TRILLION, according to the CBO analysis) stimulus unemployment would be 6.5% by now.  In reality it is over 9 percent.  And the ONLY reason it dropped from 9.2 to 9.1% is because MORE PEOPLE just plain gave up bothering to even TRY to look for work than actually got any jobs.  100,000 jobs were added, versus 200,000 people who gave up looking for work.

This has been a regular trend, as my February article “Unemployment Rate: At ‘Rate’ We’re Going, We’ll Have 0% Unemployment But No One Will Have An Actual Job” ought to prove.

The economy is in the worst shape since the LAST time a socialist and his Democrat Party got complete control of our economy.  And the housing market (which collapse created the disaster in 2008) is actually now WORSE than it was during the Great Depression.

Democrats live in a realm of absolute lies.  They are poisonous serpents who trick gullible and ignorant people into making terrible choices – just like the serpent and Eve in the Garden.

They have poisoned this economy.  And the ONLY thing they have done well is demonize Republicans for DEMOCRAT mismanagement.

By the way, here are some articles on why it was DEMOCRATS who created the conditions that caused our 2008 economic collapse:

More Proof Democrats Destroyed The Economy In 2008: The Ongoing Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac Disaster

Why Did Our Economy Melt Down In 2008? (Email This To Your Friends)

US Is in Even Worse Shape Financially Than Greece. And Why Is That In The Age Of Obama???

How Should Democrats Eat The Half-Trillion $ Monsters Fannie And Freddie? One Bite At A Time

It Was DEMOCRATS Who Blew Up Our Economy In 2008

And that last article above contains the links and titles to six more articles on the subject of why an intelligent and informed people would have blamed DEMOCRATS for the 2008 collapse.

But in short, just take a look at the following timeline of our 2008 collapse and see which (Democrat) entity led the nation into implosion:

Now allow me to quote the New York Times from September 30, 1999:

“Fannie Mae, the nation’s biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits.”

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac collapsed first.  And when these mammoth entities that controlled more than half of America’s mortgages proved rotten, all of the Wall Street firms that had purchased tainted GSE mortgage backed securities immediately began to topple.  George Bush and Republicans in Congress had tried SEVENTEEN TIMES to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  But Democrats used every procedural gimmick in the book to block them at every turn.

When Bush first tried to reform these massive “government sponsored enterprises” that had dived into subprime loans to provide “the right to own homes” to favored Democrat voting bases –

WASHINGTON, Sept. 10— The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago. (New York Times, September 11, 2003)

– powerful Democrat Rep. Barney Frank said:

These two entities — Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — are not facing any kind of financial crisis,” said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ”The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.”

If you read this article you will see that economists predicted as early as 1999 that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would implode and take our economy with it.  But here’s enough proof.  Again from the New York Times, September 30, 1999:

In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980′s.

From the perspective of many people, including me, this is another thrift industry growing up around us,” said Peter Wallison a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. ”If they fail, the government will have to step up and bail them out the way it stepped up and bailed out the thrift industry.”

And yet JUST before Fannie and Freddie collapsed and brought down the entire housing mortgage industry with it creating the economic meltdown, Barney Frank – continuing to stop any regulation of Fannie and Freddie – said this:

REP. BARNEY FRANK, D-MASS.: I think this is a case where Fannie and Freddie are fundamentally sound, that they are not in danger of going under. They’re not the best investments these days from the long-term standpoint going back. I think they are in good shape going forward.

And then Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac – protected entirely by Democrats – collapsed.  And took our entire economy to hell with it like two gigantic boulders that crushed everything on their way down.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac went completely bankrupt, and had to be bailed out by the government in THE LARGEST BAILOUT OF THE ENTIRE CRISISFrom the Associated Press, August 9, 2011:

The government rescued McLean, Va.-based Freddie Mac and sibling company Fannie Mae in September 2008 after massive losses on risky mortgages threatened to topple them. Since then, a government regulator has controlled their financial decisions.

Fannie and Freddie own or guarantee about half of all U.S. mortgages and nearly all new mortgage loans. The mortgage giants buy home loans from banks and other lenders, package them into bonds with a guarantee against default, and then sell them to investors around the world.

Taxpayers have spent roughly $150 billion to rescue Fannie and Freddie, the most expensive bailout of the 2008 financial crisis. The government estimates the final cost for rescuing the firms could go as high as $259 billion.

It had been Fannie and Freddie which had the sole authority to buy mortgages, bundle them into the mortgage-backed securities which ultimately exploded, and then sell those gigantic bundled securities to private companies that believed that these securities were backed by the federal government. Just as it was Fannie and Freddie which had been the seller of subprime loans.

Now let me point out that Barack Obama took more campaign money in less time from corrupt Fannie and Freddie and from dirty crony capitalist Wall Street players like Lehman Brothers THAN ANYBODY.  Which is to say you literally voted for the devil in 2008, America.

And what is true about reckless spending is just as true about reckless voting: when you realize that you are digging yourself into a hole, PLEASE STOP DIGGING.

Vote for conservative Republicans to save America.  Or vote for America’s extinction.  It’s your choice, America.