¿Cómo calificarías la gestión de Barack Obama en el últi

[siboneyes]

Vanity: Planned Parenthood's Margaret Sanger on Charity, Disease and Sterilization

The Pivot of Civilization (Margaret Sanger) ^ | 1922 | WPtG

WhistlingPastTheGraveyard

Organized charity itself is the symptom of a malignant social disease. Those vast, complex, interrelated organizations aiming to control and to diminish the spread of misery and destitution and all the menacing evils that spring out of this sinisterly fertile soil, are the surest sign that our civilization has bred, is breeding and perpetuating constantly increasing numbers of defectives, delinquents and dependents. "The Pivot of Civilization", Page 108It [charity] encourages the healthier and more normal sections of the world to shoulder the burden of unthinking and indiscriminate fecundity of others; which brings with it, as I think the reader must agree, a dead weight of human waste. Instead of decreasing and aiming to eliminate the stocks that are most detrimental to the future of the race and the world, it tends to render them to a menacing degree dominant. "The Pivot of Civilization", Pages 116-117The most serious charge that can be brought against modern “benevolence” is that it encourages the perpetuation of defectives, delinquents and dependents. These are the most dangerous elements in the world community, the most devastating curse on human progress and expression. "The Pivot of Civilization", Page 123It now remains for the U.S. government to set a sensible example to the world by offering a bonus or yearly pension to all obviously unfit parents who allow themselves to be sterilized by harmless and scientific means. In this way the moron and the diseased would have no posterity to inherit their unhappy condition. The number of the feeble-minded would decrease and a heavy burden would be lifted from the shoulders of the fit. “The Function of Sterilization,” The Birth Control Review, October 1926

[siboneyes]

As Obama Crows, The Real Story Is 10.5 Million Jobs Deficit

IBD ^ | 02/04/2012

Of course it's good news that 243,000 new jobs were created in January, shaving the unemployment rate to 8.3%. But thanks to massive policy errors by the White House, we're still way below where we should be.

President Obama, speaking in Arlington, Va., immediately took credit for the bullish report, crowing that "altogether, we've added 3.7 million new jobs over the last 23 months."

According to data from the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, the economy is just 0.7% above its previous high. Usually at this point in an expansion, it's 13.5% above the last peak. In other words, thanks to Obama's policies, we're missing about $1.8 trillion in GDP — or roughly $5,760 for every man, woman and child.

Far worse for most Americans is the jobs depression that has accompanied Obamanomics. As the chart shows, we've suffered a jobs implosion greater than any since World War II.

The president went on to say: "We can't go back to the policies that led to the recession. And we can't let Washington stand in the way of our recovery."

"Our" recovery? And "We can't go back to the policies that led to the recession"? The cause of the recession was, in fact, housing policies put in place by President Clinton and aggressively supported by Democrats in Congress, including former Sen. Barack Obama.

How soon we forget. These were the policies that led to the housing meltdown, the financial crisis and, ultimately, the deep recession we're still climbing out of.

Yet Obama's "blame Bush" theme will be the Democrats' strategy for the 2012 campaign. So get used to it.

Truth is, by now we should have created millions more jobs than we have.

[siboneyes]

New BS BLS Report Shows Obama Costs US $20 Trillion

 By John Ransom 2/4/2012

Hey folks, good news!

Another 1.2 million people dropped out the workforce, which means that Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) economists can say that unemployment has moved down to 8.3 percent without that messy job-creation thing getting in the way.

That’s been such a bummer for Obama. But now he doesn’t have to worry about his programs actually doing anything, since the invention of the new government BLS math BS to replace the old government BLS math BS makes job creation obsolete. That's just perfect for the Democrats. 

Last month when I wrote about the BS the BLS now uses to make unemployment go down, I did the math myself. This time around, I’m letting the folks from ZeroHedge and our contributor Mike Shedlock, do the math for me.

ZeroHedge says that if you add back in the 5 million people who have permanently dropped out the labor force, as reflected in the historical average workforce participations rates, the “implied” unemployment rate is 11.5 percent and rising, not falling.

Workforce participation rates - see chart to right- imply an 11.5 percent unemployment rate, while the "official" BLS rate says unemployment is going down. Typical liberal math.      

“It also means that the spread between the reported and implied unemployment rate just soared to a fresh 30 year high of 3.2%,” ZH say. “And that is how with a calculator and just one minute of math, one strips away countless hours of BLS propaganda.”

Last month ZeroHedge reported that the spread between the reported and implied unemployment rate was at 2.9 percent, then “the widest divergence to reported data since the early 1980s. And because we know this will be the next question, extending this lunacy, America will officially have no unemployed, when the Labor Force Participation rate hits 58.5%, which should be just before the presidential election.”

[siboneyes]

PART 2

Indeed, that’s how the story gets worse from here.

ZeroHedge used the historical workforce participation rates to estimate the workforce, but as our own Mike Shedlock points out, participation rates have declined again “taking out a 1984 low.”

Instead of the historic rate of 65.8 percent participation in the workforce, we are now at 63.7 percent. That means that we are literally years away from replacing jobs that we’ve lost since Obama became president. So many have lost heart looking for work that it’s going to be some time before they become candidates for employment again.

One of the few Wall Street economists who sees this is Lindsey Piegza, of FTN Financial in New York.

“It was a better-than-expected report, the strongest report that we've seen in quite some time,” Piegza told Reuters. “The big question is -- here's the thing: the reason we're seeing the unemployment rate drop is because more and more people are dropping out of the labor force. I know the market wants to rally on this number but remember we need a minimum of 250,000 just to cover demographic change. So we're almost at the place where we need to be to reabsorb the nine million people who lost their jobs during the Great Recession. This pushes the bar even higher for payrolls for the rest of this year. Given that the bar is so low we have to take this in the context that it's still not good enough."

As Piegza and others have pointed out, the 243,000 jobs that were reported aren’t enough to keep up with the number of people joining the labor force, yet alone, those who have lost their jobs.

“People should take it with a grain of salt,” Scott Brown, an economist with Raymond James and Associates of Saint Petersburg, FL, also told Reuters “since they are January figures and subject to revisions. We also had some unusually mild weather.”

In the end what it means is that wages in the US have been permanently reduced by $208 billion per year and counting so far. That’s about 1.5 percent of GDP just in wages, not counting anything that is actually produced by those workers. When you figure in total output subtracted from GDP from missing workers, the number is closer to 2.1 percent of GDP that’s permanently missing from our economy. That’s about $320 billion.

Even the most optimistic projections for Obama’s millionaires’ tax doesn’t come close to raising that amount.  

Over the long-term those little variations of 2 percent more or less in GDP growth make a huge difference in our economy.  Over a ten-year period an economy that grows by 2 percent versus an economy that grows by 4 percent is the difference between having a GDP of $18.5 trillion versus a GDP of $22.5 trillion by year ten.

In total over ten years, it means that the economy will miss about $20 trillion worth of GDP in those ten years, and between $3.4-$4 trillion in tax revenues unless we start to follow pro-growth policies that lead to job creation for someone other than major Obama donors.

See? And here I ended up doing some math anyway.

That’s just another reason to deny Obama four more years.

Now I have 20 trillion reasons plus one. And so do you.

[siboneyes]

Catholic Church Rejects Surrender Terms from Obama
http://www.aim.org ^| January 30, 2012 | Cliff Kincaid

"My Catholic priest, Father Larry Swink, delivered a homily on Sunday that I told him would make headlines. In the toughest sermon I have ever heard from a pulpit, he attacked the Obama Administration as evil, even demonic, and warned of religious persecution ahead. What was also newsworthy about the sermon was that he cited The Washington Post in agreement—not on the subject of the Obama Administration being evil, but on the matter of its abridgment of the constitutional right to freedom of religion.

What is happening is extraordinary and unprecedented. The Catholic Church is in open revolt against the Obama Administration, with Fr. Swink noting from the pulpit that priests across the archdiocese were joining the call on Sunday to rally Catholics to resistance against the U.S. Government. He said we are entering a time of religious persecution and that Catholics and others will have to make a final decision about which side they are on.

The issue is what the Catholic Bishops have called [1] a “literally unconscionable” edict by the Obama Administration demanding that sterilization, abortifacients and contraception be included in virtually all health plans.

At a time when the media are full of reports about who is ahead and behind in the polls, and who will win the next Republican presidential primary, this incredible uprising in the Catholic Church is something that could not only overshadow the political campaign season, but also may have a major impact on the ultimate outcome—if Republicans know how to handle it.

This matter goes beyond partisan politics to the growing perception of an unconstitutional Obama Administration assault on religious freedom. To hear the Catholic Bishops and Priests describe it, our constitutional republic and our freedoms hang in the balance".

[msvagabond]

iablo:

---

ufteam ha escrito:
Obama rindió tercer informe sobre el Estado de la Unión

src="http://s0.uvnimg.com/noticias/estados-unidos/fotos/photo/2012-01-24/barack-obama-discurso-congreso_3..." border="0" width="323" height="216" />

El presidente Barack Obama prometió el martes reconstruir la economía estadounidense sobre reglas equitativas para todos, en un discurso Sobre el Estado de la Uniónde tono populista ante el Congreso, discurso que además de cumplir con un mandato constitucional marcó el inicio de su batalla por la reelección en noviembre.

El discurso en inglés

"Podemos conformarnos con un país donde a un decreciente número de personas les va bien, mientras un creciente número de personas se las arreglan con las justas", dijo Obama en su discurso transmitido por las principales canales de televisión de Estados Unidos, entre ellos Galavisión y Telefutura de la Cadena Univision.

Más detalles aquí

¿Cómo calificarías la gestión de Barack Obama en el último año?

---

[msvagabond]

:burlon:

---

ufteam ha escrito:
Obama rindió tercer informe sobre el Estado de la Unión

src="http://s0.uvnimg.com/noticias/estados-unidos/fotos/photo/2012-01-24/barack-obama-discurso-congreso_3..." border="0" width="323" height="216" />

El presidente Barack Obama prometió el martes reconstruir la economía estadounidense sobre reglas equitativas para todos, en un discurso Sobre el Estado de la Uniónde tono populista ante el Congreso, discurso que además de cumplir con un mandato constitucional marcó el inicio de su batalla por la reelección en noviembre.

El discurso en inglés

"Podemos conformarnos con un país donde a un decreciente número de personas les va bien, mientras un creciente número de personas se las arreglan con las justas", dijo Obama en su discurso transmitido por las principales canales de televisión de Estados Unidos, entre ellos Galavisión y Telefutura de la Cadena Univision.

Más detalles aquí

¿Cómo calificarías la gestión de Barack Obama en el último año?

---

[msvagabond]

iablo:

[msvagabond]

iablo:

[msvagabond]