NC unemployment rate 9.6 percent, October 19, 2012, 4.5 percent when Bush took office, 4.7 percent when Democrats took both houses in January 2007
“Guilford (Large NC County) appears on it’s way to a third consecutive year with annual jobless rates in double digits. Economists say that likely hasn’t happened since the Great Depression.”…Greensboro News Record December 2, 2011
“The weak job growth recorded during 2011 did little to replace the jobs lost earlier in the business cycle. Since the onset of the “Great Recession,” North Carolina has lost, on net, 295,300 positions, or 7.1 percent of its payroll employment base.”
“Absent significant changes in economic conditions and public policies, weak job growth, high levels of joblessness, and pervasive economic hardships appear to be in store for North Carolina, with 2012 apt to mark the fifth consecutive year of negative or minimal job growth.”…South by North Strategies, LTD February 10, 2012
“People leaving the labor force were a big reason that North Carolina’s unemployment rate dropped to 9.4 percent in April, a month when only 1,400 more people got jobs.”…WRAL May 18, 2012
The NC Department of Commerce announced the unemployment rate for September. 9.6 percent. To put this in perspective it was 4.5 percent when Bush took office in January 2001 and 4.7 percent when the Democrats took control of both houses of congress in January 2007.
In my humble opinion, the report leaves much to be desired and appears to be attempting to put a positive spin on the numbers. Here are a couple of statements that I found interesting.
“Among the major industries in North Carolina, Government had the largest over-the-month increase in employment at 30,600 (4.6%), followed by Education & Health Services (2,700; 0.5%), Professional & Business Services (2,300; 0.4%), Construction (1,700; 1.0%), and Manufacturing (200; <0.1%).”
“The Goods Producing sector decreased by 4,500 (0.7%) jobs over the year. Construction declined by 6,700 (3.7%), followed by Mining & Logging (200; 3.5%), while Manufacturing grew by 2,400 (0.5%).”
Obama Romney debate Gallup selects town hall audience, Recent Gallup change helped Obama, Hofstra CNN Crowley Gallup bias?, October 16, 2012 debate
“I hope I shall possess firmness and virtue enough to maintain what I consider the most enviable of all titles, the character of an honest man.”…George Washington
“If I had my choice I would kill every reporter in the world but I am sure we would be getting reports from hell before breakfast.”… William Tecumseh Sherman
“The function of the press is very high. It is almost Holy.
It ought to serve as a forum for the people, through which
the people may know freely what is going on. To misstate or
suppress the news is a breach of trust.”…. Louis D. Brandeis
Anyone paying attention for years should be aware of the bias from CNN and Candy Crowley. Yesterday at Citizen Wells, the bias in favor of the LGBT community at Hofstra University was revealed.
“A cursory examination of the Hofstra University website reveals what can only be described as an inordinate emphasis on gay issues.
For example. On the first page of the scholarship opportunities we find:
“LGBT Activism Scholarship
In 2002, Hofstra University established an unprecedented scholarship program for students engaged in service to the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) community. The program is designed to demonstrate Hofstra’s commitment to equality and support for LGBT individuals. The program also includes the Hofstra Law School Fellowships for Advocacy for the Equality of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender People, as well as the Mildred Elizabeth McGinnis Endowed scholarship for students in the humanities.”
“School of Law Scholarships”
“LGBT Rights Fellowship – The Law School supports a Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Rights Fellowship for students interested in pursuing advocacy work on behalf of these communities.”
LGBT Studies.
“LGBT Studies focus on lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people, their history and culture, considering sexualities and genders as identities, social statuses, categories of knowledge, and as lenses that help us to frame how we understand our world. A central core of courses is complemented by interdisciplinary courses taught across campus or by specialized syllabi for students taking a course that could lend itself to LGBT studies. Currently, a minor in LGBT Studies is available as part of the Hofstra College of Liberal Arts and Sciences.”
Queer Rhetoric
The 6th Annual LGBT Studies Conference
Friday and Saturday, March 16-17, 2012
Queer Rhetoric is a relatively new field situated at the intersection of LGBT Studies, Queer Theory, Rhetoric and Cultural Studies. In short, Queer Rhetoric seeks to uncover the symbolic and performative strategies whereby queer identities have been and continue to be constructed in different times and places. Scholars working in this field locate the heteronormative occlusion of queer voices within a given cultural and social context and describe how queer voices develop a battery of technologies that offer a means of resistant expression. This conference will be the first ever devoted entirely to the subject of Queer Rhetoric. For more information click here.
Keynote Addresses will be given by:
Erik Gunderson
University of Toronto, Canada
Joseph G. Astman Distinguished Symposium Scholar
The Reluctant Queerness of Ancient Rhetoric
and
Chuck E. Morris III
Boston College
Joseph G. Astman Distinguished Conference Scholar
My Old Kentucky Homo: Abraham LIncoln is Here,
Queer, and Wants to Recruit You”
Gallup is selecting the town hall meeting audience from undecided voters. Most of you are aware of the controversies surrounding polling methodologies and in many cases the skewing of results with an unrealistic representation of Democrats in the numbers. Recently Gallup changed it’s methodology midstream in the election cycle to the benefit of Obama.
From The Hill October 11, 2012.
“Obama approval rating gets a boost after Gallup tweaks its polling methodology”
“President Obama’s job approval rating spiked this month, according to Gallup’s daily tracking survey, but the jump may be the result of a shift in the polling outlet’s survey methodology.
Since late 2011, President Obama has held steady at just under 50 percent saying they approved of the job he was doing and just under 50 percent saying they disapproved.
Earlier this month, the trend line moved in favor of the president, and on Thursday it sat at 53 percent positive and 42 negative — a greater job approval rating than Obama enjoyed after the assassination of Osama bin Laden.
However, this movement may have been provoked by a change in the pollster’s methodology, without which the president may have seen no change in job approval.
“As we began this election tracking program on Oct.1, our methodologists also recommended modifying and updating several procedures,” Gallup CEO Frank Newport wrote on Wednesday.
Gallup increased the proportion of cellphones in its tracking survey from 40 percent, and now splits its calls to cellphones and land lines evenly. Newport defended the switch, saying it was an attempt to “stay consistent with changes in the communication behavior and habits of those we are interviewing.”
“Gallup switched primarily to telephone interviewing a few decades ago based on the increased penetration of phones in American households and the increased costs of going into Americans’ homes for in-person interviewing,” Newport wrote. “Now we know, based on government statistics (and what we observe around us), that Americans are shifting rapidly from reliance on landline phones to mobile devices.”
Still, the timing of the change — one month out from the presidential election — has some on the right exasperated.
“What I can say is that it’s problematic to alter one’s methodological approach to polling elections just five weeks before the biggest election in a generation,”writes Jay Cost, polling analyst for the conservative Weekly Standard. “In fact, I think this is a highly inopportune time to make such a change; do it in the summer of 2012 or the winter of 2013, but for goodness sake not the fall of 2012!”
The controversy will likely be fuel for those conservatives who claimed polls from earlier in the cycle were skewed in favor of Democrats.
The Romney campaign and other Republicans said polls showing Obama with a significant lead over their candidate were inaccurate.”
It appears to me on the surface that using a higher percentage of cell phones could include more young people.
From Gallup.
“How does Gallup polling work?
Gallup polls aim to represent the opinions of a sample of people representing the same opinions that would be obtained if it were possible to interview everyone in a given country.
The majority of Gallup surveys in the U.S. are based on interviews conducted by landline and cellular telephones. Generally, Gallup refers to the target audience as “national adults,” representing all adults, aged 18 and older, living in United States.
The findings from Gallup’s U.S. surveys are based on the organization’s standard national telephone samples, consisting of directory-assisted random-digit-dial (RDD) telephone samples using a proportionate, stratified sampling design. A computer randomly generates the phone numbers Gallup calls from all working phone exchanges (the first three numbers of your local phone number) and not-listed phone numbers; thus, Gallup is as likely to call unlisted phone numbers as listed phone numbers.
Within each contacted household reached via landline, an interview is sought with an adult 18 years of age or older living in the household who has had the most recent birthday. (This is a method pollsters commonly use to make a random selection within households without having to ask the respondent to provide a complete roster of adults living in the household.) Gallup does not use the same respondent selection procedure when making calls to cell phones because they are typically associated with one individual rather than shared among several members of a household.
When respondents to be interviewed are selected at random, every adult has an equal probability of falling into the sample. The typical sample size for a Gallup poll, either a traditional stand-alone poll or one night’s interviewing from Gallup’s Daily tracking, is 1,000 national adults with a margin of error of ±4 percentage points. Gallup’s Daily tracking process now allows Gallup analysts to aggregate larger groups of interviews for more detailed subgroup analysis. But the accuracy of the estimates derived only marginally improves with larger sample sizes.
After Gallup collects and processes survey data, each respondent is assigned a weight so that the demographic characteristics of the total weighted sample of respondents match the latest estimates of the demographic characteristics of the adult population available from the U.S. Census Bureau. Gallup weights data to census estimates for gender, race, age, educational attainment, and region.”
Obama deficit lies, Obama blames Bush tax cuts, AP repeats Obama lie, Washington Post reveals Obama lie, 4th Straight $1 Trillion Plus deficit spending
“With a 63.7% labor force participation, “conditions in the labor market are considerably worse than indicated” in July’s report”…economist Joshua Shapiro, WSJ August 3, 2012
“Since the Democrats took control of both houses of congress in January 2007, the number of people who could only find part time work has gone up 215 percent”…Citizen Wells
“Student health care costs have doubled, tripled and in some cases increased over 1000% in 2012. Premiums for employer provided family coverage rose $2,370 since 2009, Obamacare penalties to hospitals will average $125,000 per facility in 2013 and gasoline has risen over $2 per gallon since Obama took office.”…Citizen Wells
“And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed
–if all records told the same tale–then the lie passed into
history and became truth. “Who controls the past,” ran the
Party slogan, “controls the future: who controls the present
controls the past.”…George Orwell, “1984″
Obama has been blaming Bush for the deficit and bad economy since he began running for the presidency. He continues to blame the Bush Tax cuts for the deficit even though it is a lie. The Washington Post recently exposed this lie.
From Citizen Wells October 8, 2012.
“From the Washington Post October 1, 2012.
“Obama’s claim that the Bush tax cuts led to the economic crisis”
“Now Governor Romney believes that with even bigger tax cuts for the wealthy, and fewer regulations on Wall Street, all of us will prosper. In other words, he’d double down on the same trickle-down policies that led to the crisis in the first place.”
— President Obama, in a new two-minute television ad released Sept. 27, 2012
“This election to me is about which candidate is more likely to return us to full employment. This is a clear choice. The Republican plan is to cut more taxes on upper income people and go back to deregulation. That is what got us into trouble in the first place.”
— Former president Bill Clinton, in an Obama campaign ad running since August
When two different people give virtually the same message in two different ads, it’s a good bet that the language has been carefully poll-tested. Both President Obama and former president Bill Clinton assert that Mitt Romney wants to cut taxes for the wealthy and cut financial regulations — which they suggest is a recipe for another economic crisis.
The name “George W. Bush” is never mentioned but is certainly implied. This leads to the question: Did the Bush tax cuts cause the economic crisis?
We’ve been interested in the Clinton comments for some time and never quite got a satisfactory response from the Obama campaign. But Clinton used the vague word “trouble,” which could be broadly defined as also meaning higher deficits. (Clinton’s staff did not respond to queries about what he meant.) Certainly the Bush tax cuts did play some role in higher deficits, though, as we have noted, increased spending played a bigger role.
But Obama is not vague at all. He highlights the tax cuts and then says the “same trickle-down policies” — Democratic code for tax cuts for the wealthy — led to the “crisis.” The campaign’s back-up material labels that as “economic crisis,” thus leaving no ambiguity about his reference.”
“The Pinocchio Test
It is time for the Obama campaign to retire this talking point, no matter how much it seems to resonate with voters. The financial crisis of 2008 stemmed from a variety of complex factors, in particular the bubble in housing prices and the rise of exotic financial instruments. Deregulation was certainly an important factor, but as the government commission concluded, the blame for that lies across administrations, not just in the last Republican one.
In any case, the Bush tax cuts belong at the bottom of the list — if at all. Moreover, it is rather strange for the campaign to cite as its source an article that, according to the author, does not support this assertion.”
Despite the fact that Obama knew it was a lie, Obama continued to blame the Bush Tax cuts in his debate with Mitt Romney.
“When I walked into the Oval Office, I had more than a trillion-dollar deficit greeting me. And we know where it came from: two wars that were paid for on a credit card; two tax cuts that were not paid for”
From NPR and the AP October 12, 2012.
“US Runs A 4th Straight $1 Trillion-Plus Budget Gap”
“The United States has now spent $1 trillion more
than it’s taken in for four straight years.
The Treasury Department confirmed Friday what was widely expected: The
deficit for the just-ended 2012 budget year — the gap between the
government’s tax revenue and its spending — totaled $1.1 trillion. Put
simply, that’s how much the government had to borrow.
It wasn’t quite as ugly as last year.
Tax revenue rose 6.4 percent from 2011 to $2.45 trillion. And spending
fell 1.7 percent to $3.5 trillion. As a result, the deficit shrank 16
percent, or $207 billion.
A stronger economy meant more people had jobs and income that
generated tax revenue. Corporations also contributed more to federal
revenue than in 2011.
The government spent less on Medicaid and on defense as U.S. military
involvement in Iraq was winding down.
Barack Obama’s presidency has coincided with four straight $1
trillion-plus annual budget deficits — the first in history and an
issue in an election campaign that ends in 3½ weeks.
When Obama took office in January 2009, the Congressional Budget
Office forecast that the deficit that year would total $1.2 trillion.
It ended up at a record $1.41 trillion.
The increase was due in large part to the worst recession since the
Great Depression. Tax revenue plummeted, and the government spent more
on stimulus programs.
Tax cuts enacted under President George W. Bush and military spending
in Iraq and Afghanistan contributed to the deficits.”
Biden lie revealed by Catholic Bishops, October 12, 2012 US Conference of Catholic Bishops USCCB statement, HHS mandate, Infringements on religious freedom
“If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan.”…Barack Obama
“It’d be like Hitler playing golf with (Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin) Netanyahu.”
“They’re the enemy,” “by “they” he meant Obama and Vice President Joe Biden.”…Hank Williams Jr.
“First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out – because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the communists and I did not speak out – because I was not a communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out – because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me –
and by then there was no one left to speak out for me.”…Pastor Martin Niemoller
From the US Conference of Catholic Bishops October 12, 2012.
“USCCB Responds To Inaccurate Statement Of Fact On HHS Mandate Made During Vice Presidential Debate”
“The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) issued the following statement, October 12. Full text follows:
Last night, the following statement was made during the Vice Presidential debate regarding the decision of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to force virtually all employers to include sterilization and contraception, including drugs that may cause abortion, in the health insurance coverage they provide their employees:
“With regard to the assault on the Catholic Church, let me make it absolutely clear. No religious institution—Catholic or otherwise, including Catholic social services, Georgetown hospital, Mercy hospital, any hospital—none has to either refer contraception, none has to pay for contraception, none has to be a vehicle to get contraception in any insurance policy they provide. That is a fact. That is a fact.”
This is not a fact. The HHS mandate contains a narrow, four-part exemption for certain “religious employers.” That exemption was made final in February and does not extend to “Catholic social services, Georgetown hospital, Mercy hospital, any hospital,” or any other religious charity that offers its services to all, regardless of the faith of those served.
HHS has proposed an additional “accommodation” for religious organizations like these, which HHS itself describes as “non-exempt.” That proposal does not even potentially relieve these organizations from the obligation “to pay for contraception” and “to be a vehicle to get contraception.” They will have to serve as a vehicle, because they will still be forced to provide their employees with health coverage, and that coverage will still have to include sterilization, contraception, and abortifacients. They will have to pay for these things, because the premiums that the organizations (and their employees) are required to pay will still be applied, along with other funds, to cover the cost of these drugs and surgeries.
USCCB continues to urge HHS, in the strongest possible terms, actually to eliminate the various infringements on religious freedom imposed by the mandate.
Small Business hiring plans plunge, September another month of low expectations and pessimism, Rising health care and energy costs, Federal taxes
“With a 63.7% labor force participation, “conditions in the labor market are considerably worse than indicated” in July’s report”…economist Joshua Shapiro, WSJ August 3, 2012
“Since the Democrats took control of both houses of congress in January 2007, the number of people who could only find part time work has gone up 215 percent”…Citizen Wells
“Student health care costs have doubled, tripled and in some cases increased over 1000% in 2012. Premiums for employer provided family coverage rose $2,370 since 2009, Obamacare penalties to hospitals will average $125,000 per facility in 2013 and gasoline has risen over $2 per gallon since Obama took office.”…Citizen Wells
From the National Federation of Independent Business October Survey.
“Hiring Plans Plunge: Small Business Optimism Drops 0.1
Expectations for the Future Remain Low
September was another month of low expectations and pessimism for the small-business community, with the NFIB Small Business Optimism Index losing 0.1 points and falling to 92.8. The recession-level reading was pulled down by a deterioration in labor market indicators, with job creation plans plunging 6 points, job openings falling one point and more firms reporting decreases in employment than those reporting increases in employment. Since the commencement of NFIB’s monthly surveys in 1986, the Index has been below 93.0 a total of 56 times; 32 of which have occurred since the recovery began in June 2009.”
Capital Expenditures: Small-business owners are still in “maintenance mode,” with the frequency of reported capital outlays over the past six months falling 4 points to 51 percent. Of those making expenditures, 34 percent reported spending on new equipment (down 7 points from the previous month), 16 percent acquired vehicles (down 5 points), and 14 percent improved or expanded facilities (unchanged). Four (4) percent of owners acquired new buildings or land for expansion (down 2 points) and 12 percent spent money for new fixtures and furniture (unchanged). Overall, there was a substantial reduction in capital spending activity. The percent of owners planning capital outlays in the next three to six months fell 3 points to 21 percent. While the number of owners who characterized the current period as a good time to expand facilities went up 3 points (seasonally adjusted) to seven percent, this is only half of the 14 percent of owners who said the same in September 2007. The net percent of owners expecting better business conditions in six months rose 4 points to two percent after posting a 6 point improvement last month, albeit still registering a pessimistic collective view. Not seasonally adjusted, 15 percent expect an improvement in business conditions (up 1 point), and 20 percent expect deterioration (down 4 points). A net one percent of all owners expect improved real sales volumes.
Sales: Weak sales continue to be an albatross for the small-business community. The net percent of all owners (seasonally adjusted) reporting higher nominal sales over the past three months was unchanged at a negative 13 percent, cementing the 17 point decline since April and affirming weak GDP growth for the second quarter. Twenty-one (21) percent still cite weak sales as their top business problem—historically high, but down from the record 34 percent reached in March 2010. Seasonally unadjusted, 23 percent of all owners reported higher sales (last three months compared to prior three months, down 1 point) and 30 percent reported lower sales (up 1 point). Consumer spending remains weak and high energy costs continue to “tax” consumer disposable income. The net percent of owners expecting higher real sales was unchanged at one percent of all owners (seasonally adjusted), down 11 points from the year high of net 12 percent in February. The weak reading is unlikely to trigger orders for new inventory or business expansion. Not seasonally adjusted, 24 percent expect improvement over the next three months (down 4 points) and 31 percent expect declines (up 3 points).
Job Creation: Job creation plans showed that small-business owners created fewer jobs in September than in the two previous months. Not seasonally adjusted, 10 percent plan to increase employment at their firm (down 3 points), and 11 percent plan reductions (up 2 points). Seasonally adjusted, the net percent of owners planning to create new jobs fell 6 points to four percent, a historically weak reading, especially in a recovery. Essentially, hiring is keeping up with population growth, but not exceeding it. Seasonally adjusted, 10 percent of the owners reported adding an average of 2.2 workers per firm over the past few months, and 13 percent reduced employment an average of 3 workers. The remaining 77 percent of owners made no net change in employment. Fifty-one (51) percent of the owners hired or tried to hire in the last three months and 41 percent (80 percent of those trying to hire or hiring) reported few or no qualified applicants for open positions. The percent of owners reporting hard to fill job openings fell 1 point to 17 percent of all owners. The only region of the country that saw any positive job growth was the West North Central states, largely because of energy production. “
“Consumer spending has barely advanced this year, and consequently so has job creation. Employment is still 4 million lower than it was in the first quarter of 2008 (first quarter). The population grows about 1% annually. A few more jobs are needed to take care of that, and that seems to be about all we are getting. The percent of owners reporting hard to fill job openings fell 1 point to 17% of all owners, no help for a lower unemployment rate. Seasonally adjusted, the net percent of owners planning to create new jobs fell 6 points to 4%, a historically weak reading, especially in a recovery. Owners remained pessimistic about the future in September and consequently hiring plans remain weak. Reported job creation for the past few months was negative. More workers let go than hired, signaling a weak BLS jobs report for September, around 100,000 new jobs overall.”
“Uncertainty has cast a cloud over the future for small business owners, making it difficult to make commitments to new spending and hiring. In a recently released NFIB Problems and Priorities survey, owners rated the severity of 75 business issues. Uncertainty about the economy ranked second while uncertainty about government policy ranked fourth. For perspective, securing long term funding was 56th and finding qualified workers 32nd. With a 50/50 election, according to the polls, and very different sets of policies that might be put in place, owners are unwilling to put their own capital on the line until the future path of the economy and economic policy becomes clearer.
MOST IMPORTANT PROBLEM: 2012
1. Rising Cost of Health Care Insurance
2. Uncertainty over Economic Conditions
3. Energy Costs
4. Uncertainty over Government Actions
5. Unreasonable Government Regulations
6. Federal Taxes on Business Income
7. Tax Complexity
8. Frequent Changes in Federal Tax Laws and Rules
9. Property Taxes
10. State Taxes on Business Income”
Princeton professor Harvey Rosen Obama misrepresents study of Romney tax plan, Romney plan can be revenue neutral, More Obama lies exposed
“It is time for the Obama campaign to retire this talking point, no matter how much it seems to resonate with voters. The financial crisis of 2008 stemmed from a variety of complex factors, in particular the bubble in housing prices and the rise of exotic financial instruments. Deregulation was certainly an important factor, but as the government commission concluded, the blame for that lies across administrations, not just in the last Republican one.
In any case, the Bush tax cuts belong at the bottom of the list — if at all. Moreover, it is rather strange for the campaign to cite as its source an article that, according to the author, does not support this assertion.”…Washington Post October 1, 2012
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it”…Joseph Goebbels
“Propaganda must not serve the truth, especially not insofar
as it might bring out something favorable for the opponent.”
… Adolf Hitler
From the Weekly Standard October 8, 2012.
“Princeton Economist: Obama Campaign Is Misrepresenting My Study on Romney’s Tax Plan”
“Last night, the Obama campaign blasted out another email claiming that Mitt Romney’s tax plan would either require raising taxes on the middle class or blowing a hole in the deficit. “Even the studies that Romney has cited to claim his plan adds up still show he would need to raise middle-class taxes,” said the Obama campaign press release. “In fact, Harvard economist Martin Feldstein and Princeton economist Harvey Rosen both concede that paying for Romney’s tax cuts would require large tax increases on families making between $100,000 and $200,000.”
But that’s not true. Princeton professor Harvey Rosen tells THE WEEKLY STANDARD in an email that the Obama campaign is misrepresenting his paper on Romney’s tax plan:
I can’t tell exactly how the Obama campaign reached that characterization of my work. It might be that they assume that Governor Romney wants to keep the taxes from the Affordable Care Act in place, despite the fact that the Governor has called for its complete repeal. The main conclusion of my study is that under plausible assumptions, a proposal along the lines suggested by Governor Romney can both be revenue neutral and keep the net tax burden on taxpayers with incomes above $200,000 about the same. That is, an increase in the tax burden on lower and middle income individuals is not required in order to make the overall plan revenue neutral.
You can check the math that shows Romney’s plan is mathematically possible here.”
Washington Post and Labor Dept. facts expose Obama lies, Bush Tax cuts, Employment data, Democrats controlled both houses of Congress, Playbook of Goebbels Orwell
“With a 63.7% labor force participation, “conditions in the labor market are considerably worse than indicated” in July’s report”…economist Joshua Shapiro, WSJ August 3, 2012
“Obama energy policy: Pander to the left, lie to the poor and working class and enrich his friends.”…Citizen Wells
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it”…Joseph Goebbels
In a recent campaign ad video, Barack Obama makes the usual litany of false claims about the Bush tax cuts, the employment situation that he inherited and what he will do to stimulate the economy.
“When I took office we were losing nearly 800,000 jobs a month and were mired in Iraq. Today I believe that as a nation we are moving forward again. But we have much more to do to get folks back to work and make the middle class secure again.
Now, Governor Romney believes that with that even bigger tax cuts for the wealthy and fewer regulations on Wall Street all of us will prosper. In other words he’d double down on the same trickle down policies that led to the crisis in the first place. So what’s my plan?
First, we create a million new manufacturing jobs and help businesses double their exports. Give tax breaks to companies that invest in America, not that ship jobs overseas.
Second, we cut our oil imports in half and produce more American-made energy, oil, clean-coal, natural gas, and new resources like wind, solar and bio-fuels—all while doubling the fuel efficiencies of cars and trucks.
Third, we insure that we maintain the best workforce in the world by preparing 100,000 additional math and science teachers. Training 2 million Americans with the job skills they need at our community colleges. Cutting the growth of tuition in half and expanding student aid so more Americans can afford it.
Fourth, a balanced plan to reduce our deficit by four trillion dollars over the next decade on top of the trillion in spending we’ve already cut, I’d ask the wealthy to pay a little more. And as we end the war in Afghanistan let’s apply half the savings to pay down our debt and use the rest for some nation building right here at home.”
Obama has consistently blamed George Bush for our economic woes, but the truth is that the Democrats controlled both houses of congress the last 2 years of the Bush Administration and they, combined with Obama, have caused the most harm.
From the Washington Post October 1, 2012.
“Obama’s claim that the Bush tax cuts led to the economic crisis”
“Now Governor Romney believes that with even bigger tax cuts for the wealthy, and fewer regulations on Wall Street, all of us will prosper. In other words, he’d double down on the same trickle-down policies that led to the crisis in the first place.”
— President Obama, in a new two-minute television ad released Sept. 27, 2012
“This election to me is about which candidate is more likely to return us to full employment. This is a clear choice. The Republican plan is to cut more taxes on upper income people and go back to deregulation. That is what got us into trouble in the first place.”
— Former president Bill Clinton, in an Obama campaign ad running since August
When two different people give virtually the same message in two different ads, it’s a good bet that the language has been carefully poll-tested. Both President Obama and former president Bill Clinton assert that Mitt Romney wants to cut taxes for the wealthy and cut financial regulations — which they suggest is a recipe for another economic crisis.
The name “George W. Bush” is never mentioned but is certainly implied. This leads to the question: Did the Bush tax cuts cause the economic crisis?
We’ve been interested in the Clinton comments for some time and never quite got a satisfactory response from the Obama campaign. But Clinton used the vague word “trouble,” which could be broadly defined as also meaning higher deficits. (Clinton’s staff did not respond to queries about what he meant.) Certainly the Bush tax cuts did play some role in higher deficits, though, as we have noted, increased spending played a bigger role.
But Obama is not vague at all. He highlights the tax cuts and then says the “same trickle-down policies” — Democratic code for tax cuts for the wealthy — led to the “crisis.” The campaign’s back-up material labels that as “economic crisis,” thus leaving no ambiguity about his reference.”
“The Pinocchio Test
It is time for the Obama campaign to retire this talking point, no matter how much it seems to resonate with voters. The financial crisis of 2008 stemmed from a variety of complex factors, in particular the bubble in housing prices and the rise of exotic financial instruments. Deregulation was certainly an important factor, but as the government commission concluded, the blame for that lies across administrations, not just in the last Republican one.
In any case, the Bush tax cuts belong at the bottom of the list — if at all. Moreover, it is rather strange for the campaign to cite as its source an article that, according to the author, does not support this assertion.
We nearly made this Four Pinocchios but ultimately decided that citing deregulation in conjunction with tax cuts kept this line out of the “whopper” category. Still, in his effort to portray Romney as an echo of Bush, the president really stretches the limits here.”
Thanks to the Washington Post for clearing up the big lie.
I will address the rest of the false claims.
Probably the biggest of the many lies that Obama has told about the economy has to do with job creation and what he inherited. Without fail, all of the historical data from the Labor Dept. reveal that the job losses and economic calamity began when the Democrats controlled Congress and in many cases worsened with Obama in office.
Recently I explained how the jobs situation worsened even though the “unemployment rate” dropped. The Labor Dept. counts part time workers the same as full time for employment numbers. In September the number of people who could only get part time employment skyrocketed. So, the unemployment rate dropped but the jobs situation worsened.
“When I took office we were losing nearly 800,000 jobs a month”
The job losses were high and the Democrats controlled both houses. Approximately 4 million fewer people were employed from the time that the Democrats took control of both houses until Obama took office.
The employment population ratio was 63.3 percent in January 2007, 60.6 in January 2009 and 58.7 in September 2012. A significant drop during Obama’s tenure.
The Labor Force Participation Rate was 66.4 percent in January 2007, 65.7 in January 2009 and 63.6 in September 2012. Another significant drop during Obama’s tenure.
Obama stated:
“First, we create a million new manufacturing jobs”
Obviously, Obama’s record on creating jobs as indicated by labor Dept. data dispels that lie. Without Obama in office the statement works.
Obama stated:
“Second, we cut our oil imports in half and produce more American-made energy, oil, clean-coal”
Oh really?
“if they want to build [coal plants], they can, but it will bankrupt them”…Barack Obama
And Obama stated:
“Fourth, a balanced plan to reduce our deficit by four trillion dollars over the next decade on top of the trillion in spending we’ve already cut”
Obama raises $ 181 million in September 2012, Suspicions raised again, Obama for America 2008 audit and fine, Robert Bauer, 98% of contributions under reporting threshold
“Why did Obama employ Robert Bauer of Perkins Coie, to request an advisory opinion on FEC matching funds that he was not eligible for?”…Citizen Wells
“Why was Democrat Ellen L. Weintraub, a former Perkins Coie employee, allowed to remain at the FEC , long after her scheduled tenure, by Barack Obama?”…Citizen Wells
“In February 2007, I proposed a novel way to preserve the strength of the public financing system in the 2008 election. My plan requires both major party
candidates to agree on a fundraising truce, return excess money from donors, and stay within the public financing system for the general election.”…Barack Obama
From Breitbart News October 6, 2012.
“WINDFALL: OBAMA RAISES $181 MILLION, ONLY AROUND 2% OF DONATIONS REPORTABLE”
“The Obama campaign dropped a bombshell this morning. It announced that, combined with the DNC, the campaign raised a staggering $181 million in September. The windfall is a huge increase over July and August, when the campaign raised around $100 million, although it is slightly down from the $193 million it raised in September 2008. The news should raise eyebrows.
The campaign said that just over 1.8 million people made donations to the campaign last month. According to the campaign, over 500k of these were brand-new donors, having neither given in 2008 nor 2012. 98% of contributions were under the reporting threshold of $250. Of these, the average contribution was $53.
Its really a tale of two worlds. 35k people gave an average of $2,600, while just over 1.7 million people gave an average of $53. Half the campaign’s haul came from people giving around the maximum amount and half from people who don’t have to be disclosed. Seems a bit odd.
The average of $53 from small donors is particularly noteworthy. Contributions under $200 don’t have to be disclosed, but the campaign still has to keep track of the donor’s name, in case subsequent donations push their contribution over the reporting threshold.
For contributions under $50, however, the campaign doesn’t even have to keep track of the donor’s name. It is effectively considered a “petty cash” donation. A person could theoretically make 10 $49 donations and never be reported, even though their total contributions are above the FEC’s reporting threshold.
With an average donation of $53 from small donors, Obama has A LOT of donors who will never be disclosed and whose names aren’t even known to the campaign. Tens of millions of dollars worth.
Today’s report certainly adds a great deal of interest to this news story from last week.”
“Final Audit Report on Obama for America. On April 19, the Commission made public the Final Audit Report of the Commission on Obama for America (OFA) covering campaign finance activity between January 16, 2007 and December 31, 2008. The Commission approved a finding that OFA failed to file required 48-hour notices totaling $1,972,266 received in 2008.”
“Final Audit Report of the
Commission on
Obama for America
(January 16, 2007 – December 31, 2008)”
“Part I
Background
Authority for Audit
This report is based on an audit of Obama for America (OFA), undertaken by the Audit Division ofthe Federal Election Commission (the Commission) in accordance with the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended (the Act). The Audit Division conducted the audit pursuant to 2 U.S.C. §438(b), which permits the Commission to conduct audits and field investigations of any political committee that is required to file a report imder 2 U.S.C. §434. Prior to conducting any audit under this subsection, the Commission must perform an intemal review of reports filed by selected committees to determine if the reports filed by a particular committee meet the threshold requirements
for substantial compliance with the Act. 2 U.S.C. §438(b).
Scope of Audit
Following Commission-approved procedures, the Audit staff evaluated various risk factors and as a result, this audit examined:
1. the receipt of excessive contributions;
2. the receipt of contributions from prohibited sources;
3. the disclosure of contributions received;
4. the disclosure of individual contributors’ occupation and name of employer;
5. the consistency between reported figures and bank records;
6. the completeness of records; and
7. other committee operations necessary to the review.
Audit Hearing
Obama for America declined the opportunity for an audit hearing before the Commission on the matter presented in this report.”
“• Treasurer During Period Covered by Audit Robert R. Bauer January 16,2007 – May 9,2007, Martin H. Nesbit May 10,2007 – Present”
“Part III
Summary
Commission Finding
Failure to File 48-Hour Notices
Based on audit fieldwork, OFA did not file required 48-hour notices for 1,312
contributions, totaling $1,972,266, that were received prior to the general election. OFA provided no further information regarding this matter in response to the Interim Audit.
Report recommendation.
The Commission approved a finding that OFA failed to file required 48-hour notices in 2008. (For more detail, see page 4)”
“Facts and Analysis
A. Facts
During fieldwork. Audit staff compared OFA’s 48-hour notices with contributions of $1,000 or more that had been reported as received during the 48-hour notice filing period.’ This review identified 1,312 contributions, totaling $1,972,266, for which OFA failed to file the required notices. A majority of the missing 48-hour notices arose from a transfer reported on October 24,2008 from the Obama Victory Fund (OVF), a joint fundraising committee composed of OFA and the Democratic National Committee (DNC). In order to verify whether the contributions in question had been received between October 16 and October 23, Audit staff traced contributions attributed to the October 24 transfer to the disclosure reports filed by OVF.”
“Commission Conclusion
On March 8,2012, the Commission considered the Audit Division Recommendation Memorandum, in which the Audit Division recommended that the Commission adopt a finding that OFA failed to file required 48-hour notices in 2008.
The Commission approved the Audit staffs recommendation.”
RESPONDENTS: Biden for President, Inc.; and Melvyn Monzack, in his official capacity as treasurer
COMPLAINANT: FEC-Initiated
SUBJECT: In the normal course of carrying out its supervisory responsibilities, the Commission found that Biden for President, Inc. (the Committee) and Monzack, in his official capacity as treasurer, did not retain adequate records to document the notification of contributors of the Committee’s presumptive redesignation of $1,092,899 in excessive contributions. Biden was a 2008 primary candidate for president.
DISPOSITION: The Commission entered into a conciliation agreement whereby Biden for President, Inc. and Monzack, in his official capacity as treasurer, agreed to pay a civil penalty of $50,000.”
“Robert Bauer, of Perkins Coie, on February 1, 2007 requested an advisory opinion to keep Obama’s option for matching funds open. Bauer knew full well that Obama, not being a natural born citizen, was not eligible for matching funds. The FEC advisory opinion from March 1, 2007 responded in the affirmative.Ellen L. Weintraub, former staff member at Perkins Coie, was a Democrat appointee of the FEC at that time. She remained well beyond her scheduled tenure with the help of Barack Obama.
Obama, Robert Bauer, Democrats interaction with FEC timeline.”
7.8 percent unemployment rate truth Obama won’t admit, Citizen Wells analysis of facts, Part time workers counted as employed, Obama and Democrats worsen job opportunities
“With a 63.7% labor force participation, “conditions in the labor market are considerably worse than indicated” in July’s report”…economist Joshua Shapiro, WSJ August 3, 2012
“Since the Democrats took control of both houses of congress in January 2007, the number of people who could only find part time work has gone up 215 percent”…Citizen Wells
“And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed
–if all records told the same tale–then the lie passed into
history and became truth. “Who controls the past,” ran the
Party slogan, “controls the future: who controls the present
controls the past.”…George Orwell, “1984″
I began life as a math major, spent over 30 years in Information Technology, taught college level Computer Science, was an officer in a company and had my own small consulting company for years. I know numbers and business. I have been watching and reporting on the employment data. Others such as Jack Welch smelled the stench as well.
Earlier today at Citizen Wells you were informed that an increase in part time workers was a big reason for the .3 percent drop in he unemployment rate.
“Total employment rose by 873,000 in September, following 3 months of little
change. The employment-population ratio increased by 0.4 percentage point to
58.7 percent, after edging down in the prior 2 months. The overall trend in
the employment-population ratio for this year has been flat. The civilian labor
force rose by 418,000 to 155.1 million in September, while the labor force
participation rate was little changed at 63.6 percent. (See table A-1.)
The number of persons employed part time for economic reasons (sometimes
referred to as involuntary part-time workers) rose from 8.0 million in August
to 8.6 million in September. These individuals were working part time because
their hours had been cut back or because they were unable to find a full-time
job.”
Part time workers included in employed category.
“Household survey. The sample is selected to reflect the entire
civilian noninstitutional population. Based on responses to a series
of questions on work and job search activities, each person 16 years
and over in a sample household is classified as employed, unemployed,
or not in the labor force.
People are classified as employed if they did any work at all as paid
employees during the reference week; worked in their own business,
profession, or on their own farm; or worked without pay at least 15
hours in a family business or farm. People are also counted as employed
if they were temporarily absent from their jobs because of illness, bad
weather, vacation, labor-management disputes, or personal reasons.”
“Establishment survey. The sample establishments are drawn from private
nonfarm businesses such as factories, offices, and stores, as well as
from federal, state, and local government entities. Employees on nonfarm
payrolls are those who received pay for any part of the reference pay
period, including persons on paid leave.”
White House cleaning, Congress flushing, Remove Obama and congressmen ignoring US Constitution, Obama eligibility and Justice Department oversight, Senator Coburn
“Why has Obama, since taking the White House, used Justice Department Attorneys, including Tony West, at taxpayer expense, to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells
“Now, I don’t get upset when foreign and national journalists fail to mention Tony Rezko, or the Daley boys, or how the Chicago machine plans to staff the Department of Justice, and the new Department of Homeland Casinos.”…John Kass, Chicago Tribune July 30, 2008
“We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.”…Abraham Lincoln
I have a younger friend who is a PHD candidate in history, In a recent conversation she brought up the disturbing fact that we have lost our checks and balances. Of course I readily agreed.
Recently at Citizen Wells you were informed that Obama nominated Tony West for a permanent position as the number three person in the US Justice Department. West is a friend of Obama, finance co chair of Obama’s California campaign in 2008, but wait, it get’s better. Tony West was at the top of the list of Justice Dept. attorneys in a response to a lawsuit filed by retired Naval Commander Charles Kerchner on January 21, 2009, challenging Obama’s eligibility.
Then, on June 24, 2010, Tony West represented the Justice Department and ultimately Obama, in a question and answer session before the House Judiciary committee. For example:
“The Civil Division is vigorously defending the Affordable Care Act health care reform statute against multiple lawsuits brought on constitutional and other grounds.””The President has pledged to make this Administration the most open and transparent in history, and the department is doing its part to make that pledge a reality.”
Where in the hell is the House Judiciary Committee? What is Congressman Howard Coble of NC doing about this?
Here is another, in a long string of congressmen, failing to do their constitutional duty, providing lip service to their constituents, and maintaining status quo.
From WND October 4, 2012.
“SEN. COBURN DUCKS ON BIRTH CERTIFICATE PROMISE
Arpaio investigator says lawmaker didn’t want to see evidence”
“Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., appears to dodging a campaign promise he made to look into evidence President Obama’s birth certificate is a forgery.
In a letter to a constituent dated Oct. 2, Coburn said his staff had reached out to the office of Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio in Phoenix after making a promise to tea-party activist Miki Booth at an Aug. 7 town hall appearance in Claremore, Okla. At the campaign event, Booth was seen on video confronting the senator about a letter she had written to him.
“My staff has reached out to Sheriff Arpaio’s office,” Coburn wrote in the constituent letter. “However, I have yet to be presented any credible evidence to demonstrate President Obama was not born in Hawaii.”
From there, Coburn cited Obama being placed on state ballots for president as proof Obama’s birth certificate is genuine.
“Furthermore, all 50 states saw fit to put Mr. Obama on their ballots in 2008 and again in 2012,” Coburn wrote. “This includes Arizona, which was recently provided verification of President Obama’s birth by Hawaii. I remain open to hearing and reviewing any supporting evidence.”
However, Mike Zullo, lead investigator for Sheriff Arpaio’s law enforcement investigation into Obama’s eligibility, insists Coburn has yet to see the evidence his team has uncovered indicating the document the White House posted as Obama’s birth certificate is a forgery.
“I was initially contacted by Ken Ashton, an aide to Sen. Coburn in Sen. Coburn’s Washington office, on Sept. 4,” Zullo explained to WND. “I provided Ashton at his request, an overview of the sheriff’s investigation, focusing on the document fraud.”
Coburn’s office has not replied to WND’s request for comment.
Zullo told WND he emphasized to Ashton the sheriff was not investigating the president but the long-form birth certificate released by the White House April 27, 2011, to determine if that document was legitimate.
“I told Ashton that it would be appropriate for Sen. Coburn to contact Sheriff Arpaio directly to fulfill the commitment Coburn had made to his constituents,” Zullo said. “I explained Sheriff Arpaio was prepared and looking forward to answering any questions Coburn might have.”
Zullo documented his discussion with Ashton in an internal memo sent to Arpaio’s office Sept. 4. Zullo told Arpaio that he expected Coburn would contact the sheriff to request access to the evidence after Ashton and Coburn had an opportunity to study the overview.
Two weeks later, Zullo received a second phone call from Ashton in which Ashton seemed intent to emphasize the fact that he had called Arpaio’s office Sept. 4 in his capacity as an investigative aide to Coburn.
“I told Ashton that Coburn should speak directly to Sheriff Arpaio, because the sheriff had to make the decision to release evidence from the investigation,” Zullo recalled.
“I specifically pointed out to Ashton he would not be able to use his phone call to me as a substitute for Sen. Coburn talking directly to Sheriff Arpaio.”
Zullo told WND he felt Ashton’s second phone call was disingenuous, almost as if Ashton wanted Zullo to agree to a cover story.
“At the conclusion of the phone call, I felt Coburn’s office was attempting to use Ashton’s phone call as evidence that Coburn contacted the sheriff’s office,” Zullo said, “when the truth is Coburn never contacted Sheriff Arpaio, and Coburn never requested any evidence be provided to him for his inspection.”
Zullo said the episode was typical of the repeated frustrations the sheriff has experienced trying to get Congress to look at the birth certificate evidence.
“Ashton was trying to create the illusion that somehow the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office had not provided Sen. Coburn with any credible evidentiary information, even though Ashton never requested to see the evidence,” Zullo said.
“Even if Ashton had requested to see the evidence, the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office would not blindly send out the evidence without first requiring Sen. Coburn to talk with the sheriff so the sheriff could make a determination whether or not it was appropriate to release the evidence to the senator’s office.”
Zullo’s final conclusion was that Coburn’s office was just engaging in politicking, and Ashton only wanted to create “the illusion the evidence had been examined.”
“The truth appears to be that Sen. Coburn has no serious interest in conducting an honest evaluation of whether or not Obama’s birth certificate is genuine, or the computer-generated forgery we have concluded the document is,” Zullo said.”
Mr. Coburn, I have seen no credible evidence that Obama was born in Hawaii. In fact, the bulk of circumstantial evidence prior to 2008 strongly indicates that Obama was not born there. If you wish to compare credentials, I am available.
“Mr. Smith goes to Washington” airs on Turner Classic Movies tonight. I will watch it again. Perhaps all of those in office should as well.
Citizen WElls 