Responder
¡Bienvenido! Para que puedas participar, intercambiar mensajes privados, subir fotos, dar kudos y ser parte de las conversaciones necesitas estar ingresado en los Foros. | Ingresa | Regístrate Gratis
Diamante
siboneyes
Mensajes: 90,641
Registrado: ‎06-03-2009

EL NUEVO GRITO DE GUERRA DE OBAMA ES EL SOBADO MARXISTA

New Obama slogan has long ties to  Marxism, socialism

By Victor Morton

April 30, 2012



The Obama campaign apparently didn’t look backwards into  history when selecting its new campaign slogan, “Forward” — a word with a long  and rich association with European Marxism.

Many Communist and radical publications and entities  throughout the 19th and 20th centuries had the name “Forward!” or its foreign  cognates. Wikipedia has an entire section called “Forward (generic name of  socialist publications).”

“The name Forward carries a special meaning in socialist  political terminology. It has been frequently used as a name for socialist,  communist and other left-wing newspapers and publications,” the online  encyclopedia explains.

The slogan “Forward!” reflected the conviction of European  Marxists and radicals that their movements reflected the march of history, which  would move forward past capitalism and into socialism and communism.

The Obama campaign released its new campaign slogan Monday in  a 7-minute video. The title card has simply the word “Forward” with the “O” having the familiar Obama logo from 2008. It will be played at rallies this  weekend that mark the Obama re-election campaign’s official  beginning.

There have been at least two radical-left publications named “Vorwaerts” (the German word for “Forward”). One was the daily newspaper of the  Social Democratic Party of Germany whose writers included Friedrich Engels and  Leon Trotsky. It still publishes as the organ of Germany’s SDP, though that  party has changed considerably since World War II. Another was the 1844 biweekly  reader of the Communist League. Karl Marx, Engels and Mikhail Bakunin are among  the names associated with that publication.

East Germany named its Army soccer club ASK Vorwaerts Berlin  (later FC Vorwaerts Frankfort).

Vladimir Lenin founded the publication “Vpered” (the Russian  word for “forward”) in 1905. Soviet propaganda film-maker Dziga Vertov made a  documentary whose title is sometimes translated as “Forward, Soviet” (though  also and more literally as “Stride, Soviet”).

Conservative critics of the Obama administration have noted  numerous ties to radicalism and socialists throughout Mr. Obama’s history, from  his first political campaign being launched from the living room of two former  Weather Underground members, to appointing as green jobs czar Van Jones, a  self-described communist.

 
 
OBAMA'S SLOGAN: "Forward Forward" A Hitler Youth  Anthem
 

A few people have commented on the fact that Obama's 2012  campaign slogan 'Forward' has a long history in socialist and communist  ideology. The most chilling and in your face example I've seen so far is from  the National Socialist Hitler Youth Anthem "Forward,Forward." The themes of  youth have always been a big part of Obama's campaigns, but seeing his campaign  slogan being sung by actual Hitler Youth Members really brings it all together  and creeps me out. As I said on Twitter, those who fail to learn from history  are doomed to release it as campaign material. Forward Forward.

 

 

FORWARD, FORWARD... ADELANTE,  ADELANTE!!!



No nos sorprende a los  cubanos Obama arme su campaña para reelección con el grito de  lucha escogido por los marxistas y fascistas desde Hitler hasta  Castro, ya que es parte del himno del 26 de Julio que enpieza: "Adelante cubanos que Cuba premiará  tu heroismo..."

Diamante
siboneyes
Mensajes: 90,641
Registrado: ‎06-03-2009

Re: MI RESPUESTA A LO QUE USTED, SIR JOHN, ME DEJO ESCRITO;

The Osama Hit — It Wasn’t a Gutsy  Call

By Ben Shapiro On May 2, 2012 @ 12:54 am In Daily  Mailer,FrontPage



Any reasonably astute observer of politics knew within hours  of Osama Bin Laden’s killing that President Obama would take as much credit for  the hit as humanly possible. What we didn’t know is that he’d turn it into a  full-blown campaign issue – and that in the process, we’d find that he fulfilled  all our worst fears about his weakness in the first place.

This week, President Obama’s campaign put out an ad suggesting  that had Mitt Romney been President of the United States, he wouldn’t have  authorized the mission to “get Bin Laden.” That ad featured Bill Clinton – yes,  the same Bill Clinton who routinely missed opportunities to get Bin Laden – stating that Obama took “the harder and the more honorable path.” Then these  words appear on the screen: “Which path would Mitt Romney have  taken?”

The answer: the same path as every President of the United  States in the history of the country. Even Jimmy Carter (as Romney said)   would have had no problem making this call. The fact that we were all surprised – and face it, we were – when President Obama ordered the hit is evidence that  we didn’t expect him to do the right thing.

In fact, as the evidence shows, Obama did the right  thing  only after safely ensuring that should anything go awry, he’d have  someone to blame. Here’s the memo that then-CIA head Leon Panetta wrote about  the Obama order:

Received phone call from Tom Donilon who stated that the  President made a decision with regard to AC1 [Abbottabad Compound 1]. The  decision is to proceed with the assault.

The timing, operational decision making and control are in  Admiral McRaven’s hands. The approval is provided on the risk profile presented  to the President. Any additional risks are to be brought back to the President  for his consideration. The direction is to go in and get bin Laden and if he is  not there, to get out. Those instructions were conveyed to Admiral McRaven at  approximately 10:45 am.

Notice anything odd here? There are a few elements  that are strange. First, Obama places all operational authority under Admiral  McRaven (who, by the way, received exactly zero credit in  any of this). To ensure that Obama would be able to  throw McRaven under the bus should things go south, he spelled out that the  approval was based only on the “risk profile  presented to the President.” Any additional risks were to be “brought back to the President for his consideration.”

This is strange language. Typically, it is understood that a  president is giving orders based on the risk profile presented – what else would  he give approval for an operation based upon? The extra sentence here spelling  out how Obama might stop the mission if the risk profile changed  is  extraneous. More than that, it’s troubling – military situations are always  fluid, and the risk profile constantly changes. Were the military to update  President Obama with every change in risk profile, the operation would never  take place.

But Obama did want the operation  to take place. He just wanted to be able to cover himself if things went wrong.  He could always say that the risk profile had changed and that he wasn’t  informed. He could blame Panetta or McRaven.

That, of course, has been President Obama’s M.O. throughout  his presidency on foreign policy. When he gave the military fewer  troops  than requested in Afghanistan, he blamed it on his generals. When things go  poorly in Afghanistan, it’s Bush’s fault. Everything is always someone else’s  fault. But when things go right, he takes all the credit. In Obama’s new  opinion, he’s the only man who would have made the call to get Bin  Laden. As he said this week, “I said that I’d go after bin Laden if we had a  clear shot at him, and I did. If there are others who have said one thing and  now suggest they’d do something else, then I’d go ahead and let them explain  it.”

Even Ariana Huffington finds Obama’s  grandstanding on this issue despicable.  And so, apparently, do a number  of  Navy SEALs, who usually remain anonymous and silent for the most part,  but have spoken out on this occasion.

As Toby Harnden of the UK Daily Mail reported, “Ryan Zinke, a former Commander n the US Navy who  spent 23 years as a SEAL and led a SEAL Team 6 assault unit, said: ‘The decision  was a no brainer. I applaud him for making it but I would not overly pat myself  on the back for making the right call. I think every  president would have done the same.’” Zinke wasn’t the only SEAL speaking  out. Harnden reports the words of Chris Kyle, a former SEAL sniper “with 160  confirmed and another 95 unconfirmed kills to his credit,” said“In years to come there is going to be information that will come out that Obama  was not the man who made the call. He can say he did and the people who  really know what happened are inside the Pentagon, are in the military and the  military isn’t allowed to speak out against the commander- in-chief so his  secret is safe.”

Not safe enough.  The way President Obama has  turned the hit on bin Laden into a political issue has drained away the credit  he deserved for ordering the mission in the first  place.

Diamante
siboneyes
Mensajes: 90,641
Registrado: ‎06-03-2009

Re: MI RESPUESTA A LO QUE USTED, SIR JOHN, ME DEJO ESCRITO;

Michelle O wears $2700 sweater

BY: Washington Free Beacon Staff -May 2, 2012

The first closet has increasingly become a subject of interest since Michelle Obama swept fashionably into the White House in her Jason Wu ball gown.

Yesterday, Ann Romney’s clothes stole the spotlight as she wore a fashionable top on Tuesday for an appearance with her husband on CBS “This Morning.” Politico reported that the Reed Krakoff shirt would “cost you a pretty penny,” at $990.

But Mrs. Romney will need to step up her fashion game if she wants to fill the shoes of Mrs. Obama.

In March, the first lady visited her British counterpart Samantha Cameron wearing a L’Wren Scott sweater in a trendy bright yellow hue. The embellished cardigan costs $2,720.

Obama, widely regarded as a fashion icon, likes the brand so much that she wore a peach cardigan from the same line last week during the Take Your Child to Work Day festivities.

The next day, she wore another sweater from L’Wren Scott, this one white with red trim from the Spring 2011 ready to wear collection, for a visit to Fort Stewart with the president.

She has been a fan of the brand’s cardigans since at least 2010, when she wore this black and white number to a childhood obesity event.

The first lady’s favorite embellished cardigans from L’Wren Scott range from $2,095 to $3,320. Plain cashmere-blend cardigans from the brand start at $910.

Diamante
siboneyes
Mensajes: 90,641
Registrado: ‎06-03-2009

Re: MI RESPUESTA A LO QUE USTED, SIR JOHN, ME DEJO ESCRITO;

Obama's Chicago politics: Thuggery not civility

 

It has been reported that the Obama campaign this year, as in 2008, has disabled or chosen not to use AVS in screening contributions made by credit card.

That doesn't sound very important. But it's evidence of a modus operandi that strikes me as thuggish.

AVS stands for Address Verification System. It's the software that checks whether the name of the cardholder matches his or her address.

If a campaign doesn't use AVS, it can wind up accepting contributions from phony names or accepting contributions from foreigners, both of which are illegal.

The 2008 Obama campaign pocketed money from "John Galt, 1957 Ayn Rand Lane, Galts Gulch CO 99999" and $174,000 from a woman in Missouri who told reporters she had given nothing and had never been billed. Presumably she would have noticed an extra charge of $174,000.

Obama has been to at least two fundraisers just in my apartment building. I often see police and Secret Service blocking traffic for a block around Washington's posh Jefferson Hotel at 16th and M Streets.

Obama talks a good game on transparency and openness, but he's ready to flout the law by avoiding AVS and to break his high-minded campaign promises.

In the 2008 campaign cycle, he promised to take public financing for the general election. He broke that promise when it became apparent that he could raise far more money on his own.

During much of this cycle, he's been criticizing Republican super PACs as a perversion of the political process. But when he saw that Republicans might be able to raise as much money as Democrats, he broke that promise too and authorized Cabinet members to appear at fundraisers for the super PAC headed by his former deputy press secretary.

 

The Obama campaign is evidently happy to pocket the money. After all, this is the president who, according to political scientist Brendan Doherty, has appeared at more fundraisers in three and a half years than his six predecessors did in 35 years.

Democrats outraised Republicans in 2004 and 2008. Evidently, Obama considers it grossly unfair that they might not do so this year. That's not how things work in Chicago.

The "campaigner in chief," as The Washington Post's Dana Milbank dubbed him yesterday, also has a nasty habit of denouncing Republican and conservative contributors by name. He's followed lefty bloggers in trying to demonize the Koch brothers.

This coupled with a propensity to make jokes about siccing the Internal Revenue Service on people looks like an attempt to chill opposition political speech. Especially when there are reports that tea party organizations are getting hassled by the IRS.

Obama also indulges often in reckless political rhetoric. He likes to say that Republicans want no regulations at all on financial institutions and businesses.

It would be more politically astute, I think, and would certainly look less thuggish to draw intellectually defensible distinctions between his own regulatory policies and those of the opposition. Attacks like this sound like debates late at night in the dorm.

"If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun," Obama said during the 2008 cycle. That sounds like something you might hear from a community organizer. Or a Chicago pol.

Chicago, Obama's chosen political venue, helps to explain this behavior. The mayor of Chicago -- the job he once aspired to before greater opportunity beckoned -- is an utterly dominant figure.

Chicago pols assume they can endlessly plunder the local private sector without penalty. And business leaders quickly catch on that it's a good thing to be known as a personal friend of the mayor. Campaign money flows accordingly.

The local rule is "don't back no losers." Those who do are well advised to do business somewhere else. You never know when the assessor is going to raise your assessment. And don't appeal in court unless you hire the lawyer with the right connections.

The mayor is also the one who gets all the credit for all good things that happen on his watch, as Obama is attempting to do on the killing of Osama bin Laden. Even though he opposed the interrogation methods that produced the information that led our special forces to Abbottabad.

Other campaigns have not disabled their AVS systems. But then their candidates are not from Chicago. Obama likes to talk about the need for civility. He just doesn't like to practice it.

 

 

Banned
sirjohn
Mensajes: 137,146
Registrado: ‎12-15-2005

Re: MI RESPUESTA A LO QUE USTED, SIR JOHN, ME DEJO ESCRITO;

ABC news .. Diane Sawyer...."Bring America Back?"

 

SHOCKING ABC   News on Obama/USA Infrastructure

 

Diane Sawyer reporting on U.S. Bridge projects going to the

Chinese.... NOT Americans.

 

The bridges are right here in the U.S. And yet Chinese contractors are coming in to do the work.

What about jobs for Americans???

 

 

This one should be tough for Obama supporters   to swallow....

AND it comes from ABC NEWS...no Snopes or Wikileaks on this one!!

 

 

U.S.A.  Bridges and Roads Being Built by Chinese Firms

Shocking to say the least!

 

This video is a jaw-dropper that will make you sick.

 

(It   was also shocking that ABC was actually reporting this story....

Maybe reality is finally hitting the Main Stream Media ???)

 

Our tax dollars are at work - for CHINA !!!

 

 

CLICK here: U.S. Bridges, Roads Being Built by   Chinese Firms | Video - ABC News

 

 

PLEASE   PASS ON TO EVERYONE !!!

 

 

Pass on to Democrats and Republicans

 

Diamante
siboneyes
Mensajes: 90,641
Registrado: ‎06-03-2009

VER EN CALMA UN CRIMEN ES COMTERLO-JOSE MARTI

Christian Slaughter in Nigeria

By Faith J. H. McDonnell On May 4, 2012  In Daily Mailer,FrontPage

 

"Ver en calma un crimen es cometerlo" dijo José Martí.  Obama ha mantenido un silencio cómplice mientras que los fanáticos de su religión de paz cometen día tras día horrendas masacres de cristianos de un extremo a otro de África.



Are they terrorists yet? Boko Haram, an Islamist sect seeking to impose Sharia throughout Nigeria, attacked three church services on Sunday, April 29, 2012. The latest slaughters added twenty-seven more dead to 900+ victims of the past two years’ efforts by Boko Haram to kill all the Christians in northern Nigeria. In recent months, the sect has also been marking the houses of Christians in the north, targeting them for killing, forcing thousands to flee from their homes.

On the morning of April 29, Boko Haram struck Catholic and Protestant worship services simultaneously at Bayero University in Kano. Twenty-two so farhave been confirmed dead, and twenty-three wounded. In the evening they attacked a church service in Jere, near Maiduguri, Borno State, killing another five people.

U.S. Congressmen Peter King (R-NY), Chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, and Patrick Meehan (R-PA) recently wrote to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, urging that she designate the group as a terrorist organization. Meehan’s Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence released an extensive, bi-partisan report on Boko Haram as an “emerging threat to the U.S. Homeland.” But the State Department continues to downplay Boko Haram’s Islamist nature, preferring to see the terrorist murderers – of whom even the Nigerian police are afraid – as victims of poverty and marginalization.

One survivor of the April 29 attack on the Catholic Mass was a geography professor, Emmanuel Olofin. Olofin reported that Mass had just gotten underway in the university indoor sports complex at 8:10 AM when the worshippers heard the sound of “gunshots and pellets falling on the roof of the building.” According to reports, the attackers arrived in a car and two motorcycles. They threw explosives into the building and sent people into a panic. They fled from the building, straight into the attackers’ line of fire.

Professor Olofin, age 71, leaped over an eight-foot fence instead of using the actual exit in the gate. “I believe that most of the people that died were those who took the pedestrian exit because it seemed as if the attackers used the pedestrian gate to gain entrance,” said Olofin, who found refuge under a tree. Among the dead were two of Olofin’s university colleagues, Professors Jerome Ayodele, Department of Chemistry, and Andrew Leo Ogbonyomi, Library Science.

At the same time the attack on the Catholics was taking place, other members of the sect attacked the Chapel of Victory Protestant church service, meeting outdoors near the Faculty of Medicine. Professor Julius Falola, who was preaching when the Islamists arrived, recounted a horrific scene similar to that described by Professor Olofin. Explosions and gunshots were followed by fleeing church members who provided easy targets for Boko Haram killers.Falola said that some of the Christians “jumped over the fence while others ran deeper into the campus.” Falola hid in the university clinic. Falola and Olofin, as well as other witnesses, said that the police did not arrive until 10 AM. “The shooting went on for 45 minutes,” said Falola.

Boko Haram topped off their killing spree later that night, by opening fire on the Church of Christ in Nigeria parish in Jere. Because of a state of emergency in the town, worshippers had foregone meeting in the morning in favor of what they assumed would be an unnoticed and therefore less dangerous evening worship. Halfway through the service, witnesses reported that the Islamists came “in their trademark car, Volkswagen Golf, dressed in flowing gowns.” After “their routine shout of ‘Allah akbar,’ they . . . headed straight for the altar” where they shot and killed the pastor, Reverend Albert Naga. Four others died from the attack, as well.

In response to Sunday’s targeted killing of Christians by Boko Haram, Secretary Clinton put out a paragraph on May 1, saying that the United States “strongly condemns the recent attacks on innocent civilians in Nigeria, including yesterday’s disgraceful assault during church services at Bayero University in Kano.” Clinton said that they are “concerned about attacks on churches, news media, and government installations that increasingly target innocent civilians across Northern Nigeria.” She condemned “attempts by those in Nigeria who seek to inflame Christian-Muslim tensions, and support those who recognize Nigeria’s ethnic and religious diversity as one of the country’s greatest strengths.” She concluded by saying that “Our thoughts and prayers are with the families and loved ones of those who were killed and injured.”  (Obama silent, undisturbed about the killing of Christian as far if it is by Muslims)

While the statement does specifically mention churches, her condemnation of “those in Nigeria who seek to inflame Christian-Muslim tensions,” is vague enough to cause concern. First of all, it is obvious to almost everyone but the State Department why the “tension” is there to begin with: Islamic supremacism such as that of Boko Haram and other radical Muslims who want a pure Islamic state. In that case, any action, statement, or mere existence of non-Muslims can inflame the tension – a lunar eclipse, a Miss World pageant, the election of a Christian president, a speech by the Pope… and usually it is the Nigerian Christians (or the Christians anywhere in the Islamic world) who are blamed for “inflaming” things.

Other popular targets of Boko Haram have been newspaper offices and television viewing centers. On April 25, Boko Haram was responsible for bombing a television viewing center in Jos, Plateau State, where hundreds of Christians were watching a soccer match. One person was killed and four were injured when the radicals drove by the site and threw an explosive device at the viewers. On December 10, 2011, Boko Haram bombed three television viewing centers in Jos. At one site, 31 year-old Joshua Dabo was killed in the explosion. Ten people were injured, with four in critical condition and two in left in a coma, at the two other viewing centers. Apparently, watching soccer also inflames Christian-Muslim tensions.

The government of President Goodluck Jonathan has been asking the United States for help in dealing with Boko Haram and other terrorists, but so far the U.S. State Department has talked of providing financial aid to impoverished and marginalized youth, like Boko Haram.

In his Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, Assistant Secretary of State for Africa Johnnie Carson said, “The Nigerian government must effectively engage communities vulnerable to extremist violence by addressing the underlying political and socio-economic problems in the North.” In what is **noallow** dismissal of the life-and-death struggles that Nigerian authorities have had with Boko Haram, he added, “The government must also promote respect for human rights by its security forces, whose heavy-handed tactics and extrajudicial killings reinforce the belief that Abuja is insensitive to the concerns of the North.”

Then he added helpfully, “The appointment of credible northerners to lead the government response to northern grievances would be an important and tangible step toward reversing that perception.” Well, since the State Department appears to see Boko Haram as “credible northerners,” perhaps it will suggest their appointment. That would follow the pattern the Obama Administration has helped to set through Arab “Spring.”

On May 1, 2012, a Reuters news report indicated that the Nigerian government has not decided to follow the State Department’s advice. Forces raided the hideout of Boko Haram in Kano (the location the State Department is considering for a second U.S. Embassy), and after a gunfight that lasted several hours, killed “the mastermind” of the attack on the Christian worshippers the weekend before. According to Police Commissioner for Kano State Ibrahim Idris, AK-47 assault rifles, 467 munitions and 45 cans full of explosives were seized in the raid. And Kano army commander Brigadier General Ilyasu Abba, part of the Joint Task Force that conducted the raid, explained that although the terrorists of Boko Haram can identify the Nigerian security forces, the security forces cannot identify them. He said that two of the suspects had “escaped through the back door.”

While the Obama Administration continues to deny that Boko Haram are terrorists, more evidence has surfaced to prove their affiliation as such. An April 30, 2012 report from Nigerian newspaper, This Day Live, reveals that documents linking Boko Haram directly to Osama bin Laden were found in the dead terrorist’s house in Pakistan. The documents confirm what a top Boko Haram figure had declared openly to The Guardian in January. “A Boko Haram spokesman had boasted after the attacks on Police Headquarters in Abuja last year that the group had just trained a generation of suicide bombers in Somalia in what was seen then as a direct link to al-Shaabab, a Somali terrorist group aligned to al-Qaeda,” according to the report. They added that “Boko Haram is also believed to be working with Al-Qaeda in Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), based in Algeria.”

All the evidence coming out about Boko Haram only confirms and clarifies what the terrorist group has said about itself. It is “fighting to reinstate a 19th century Islamic caliphate.” As such, it wants to remove the Christian presence from the north of Nigeria and ultimately, from the entire country. U.S. Representatives Peter King and Patrick Meehan have warned that Boko Haram is a tremendous threat not only to the Christians and other good citizens of Nigeria, but “its tactics, targeting, and fundraising operations appear to be increasingly international in scope, including within the U.S. Homeland.” This threat should be taken seriously.

Diamante
siboneyes
Mensajes: 90,641
Registrado: ‎06-03-2009

25 Statistics About The U.S. Economy

25 Statistics About The U.S. Economy Barack Obama Does Not Want You To Know

April 30, 2012 9:49 Author: The American Dream

 

The human capacity for self-delusion truly is remarkable. Most people out there end up believing exactly what they want to believe even when the truth is staring them right in the face. Take the U.S. economy for example. Barack Obama wants to believe that his policies have worked and that the U.S. economy is improving. So that is what he is telling the American people. The mainstream media wants to believe that Barack Obama is a good president and that his policies make sense and so they are reporting that we are experiencing an economic recovery. A very large segment of the U.S. population still fully supports Barack Obama and they want to believe that the economy is getting better so they are buying the propaganda that the mainstream media is feeding them. But is the U.S. economy really improving? The truth is that it is not. The rate of employment among working age Americans is exactly where it was two years ago and household incomes have actually gone down while Obama has been president. Home ownership levels and home prices continue to decline. Meanwhile, food and gasoline continue to become even more expensive. The percentage of Americans that are dependent on the government is at an all-time record high and the U.S. national debt has risen by more than 5 trillion dollars under Obama. We simply have not seen the type of economic recovery that we have seen after every other economic recession since World War II.

The horrible statistics about the U.S. economy that you are about to read are not talked about much by the mainstream media. They would rather be “positive” and “upbeat” about the direction that things are headed.

But lying to the American people is not going to help them. If you are speeding in a car toward a 500 foot cliff, you don’t need someone to cheer you on. Instead, you need someone to slam on the brakes.

The cold, hard reality of the matter is that the U.S. economy is in far worse shape than it was four or five years ago.

We have never come close to recovering from the last recession and another one will be here soon.

The following are 25 horrible statistics about the U.S. economy that Barack Obama does not want you to know….

#1 The percentage of Americans that own homes is dropping rapidly. According to Gallup, the current level of homeownership in the United States is the lowest that Gallup has ever measured.

#2 Home prices in the U.S. continue to fall like a rock as well. They have declined for six months in a row and are now down a total of 35 percent from the peak of the housing bubble. The last time that home prices in the United States were this low was back in 2002.

#3 Last year, an astounding 53 percent of all U.S. college graduates under the age of 25 were either unemployed or underemployed.

#4 Back in 2007, about 10 percent of all unemployed Americans had been out of work for 52 weeks or longer. Today, that number is above 30 percent.

#5 When Barack Obama first became president, the number of “long-term unemployed workers” in the United States was 2.6 million. Today, it is 5.3 million.

#6 The average duration of unemployment in the United States is about three times as long as it was back in the year 2000.

#7 Despite what the mainstream media would have us to believe, the truth is that the percentage of working age Americans that are employed is not increasing. Back in March 2010, 58.5 percent of all working age Americans were employed. In March 2011, 58.5 percent of all working age Americans were employed. In March 2012, 58.5 percent of all working age Americans were employed. So how can Barack Obama and the mainstream media claim that the employment situation in the United States is getting better? The employment rate is still essentially exactly where it was when the last recession supposedly ended.

#8 Back in 1950, more than 80 percent of all men in the United States had jobs. Today, less than 65 percent of all men in the United States have jobs.

#9 In 1962, 28 percent of all jobs in America were manufacturing jobs. In 2011, only 9 percent of all jobs in America were manufacturing jobs.

#10 In some areas of Detroit, Michigan you can buy a three bedroom home for just $500.

#11 According to one recent survey, approximately one-third of all Americans are not paying their bills on time at this point.

#12 Since Barack Obama entered the White House, the price of gasoline has risen by more than 100 percent.

#13 The student loan debt bubble continues to expand at a very frightening pace. Recently it was announced that total student loan debt in the United States has passed the one trillion dollar mark.

#14 Incredibly, one out of every four jobs in the United States pays $10 an hour or less at this point.

#15 Household incomes all over the United States continue to fall. After adjusting for inflation, median household income in America has declined by 7.8 percent since December 2007.

#16 Over the past several decades, government dependence has risen to unprecedented heights in the United States. The following is how I described the explosive growth of social welfare benefits in one recent article….

Back in 1960, social welfare benefits made up approximately 10 percent of all salaries and wages. In the year 2000, social welfare benefits made up approximately 21 percent of all salaries and wages. Today, social welfare benefits make up approximately 35 percent of all salaries and wages.

#17 In November 2008, 30.8 million Americans were on food stamps. Today, more than 46 millionAmericans are on food stamps.

#18 Right now, more than 25 percent of all American children are on food stamps.

#19 According to the U.S. Census Bureau, today 49 percent of all Americans live in a home that receives some form of benefits from the federal government.

#20 Over the next 75 years, Medicare is facing unfunded liabilities of more than 38 trillion dollars. That comes to $328,404 for each and every household in the United States.

#21 During the first quarter of 2012, U.S. public debt rose by 359.1 billion dollars. U.S. GDP only rose by 142.4 billion dollars.

#22 At this point, the U.S. national debt is rising by more than 2 million dollars every single minute.

#23 The U.S. national debt has risen by more than 5 trillion dollars since the day that Barack Obama first took office. In a little more than 3 years Obama has added more to the national debt than the first 41 presidents combined.

#24 The Federal Reserve bought up approximately 61 percent of all government debt issued by the U.S. Treasury Department during 2011.

#25 The Federal Reserve continues to systematically destroy the value of the U.S. dollar. Since 1970, the U.S. dollar has lost more than 83 percent of its value.

But the horrible economic statistics only tell part of the story.

In communities all over America there is a feeling that something fundamental has changed. Businesses that have been around for generations are shutting their doors and there is a lot of fear in the air. The following is a brief excerpt from a recent interview with Richard Yamarone, the senior economist at Bloomberg Brief….

You have to listen to what the small businesses are telling you and right now they are telling you, ‘Hey, I’m the head of a 3rd or 4th generation, 75 or 100 year old business, and I’ve got to shut the doors’ or ‘I’ve got to let people go. And if I’m hiring anybody back, it’s only on a temporary basis.’

Sometimes they do this through a hiring firm so that they can sidestep paying unemployment benefit insurance. So that’s what’s really going on at the grassroots level of the economy. Very, very, grossly different from what you’re seeing in some of these numbers coming out in earnings releases.”

All over the country, millions of hard working Americans are desperately looking for work. They have been told that “the recession is over”, but they are still finding it incredibly difficult to find anyone that will hire them. The following example is from a recent CNN article….

Joann Cotton, a 54-year-old Columbus, Mississippi, resident, was one of those faces of poverty we met on the tour. Unemployed for three years, Joann has gone from making “$60,000 a year to less than $15,000 overnight.” Her husband is disabled and dependent on medicines the couple can no longer afford. They rely on food stamps, which, Joann says, “is depressing as hell.”

Receiving government aid, however, has not been as depressing as her job search. Joann says she has applied for at least 300 jobs. Even though she can barely afford gas, she drives to the interviews only to learn that the employers want to hire younger candidates at low wages.

The experiences have taken a toll: “I’ve aged 10 years in the three years that I’ve been looking for a job,” Joann told us. “I want to get a job so I can just relax and exhale … but I can’t. After a while you just give up.”

Meanwhile, Barack Obama and his family continue to live the high life at the expense of the U.S. taxpayer.

Even many Democrats are starting to get very upset about this. The following is from a recent article by Paul Bedard….

Blue collar Democratic voters, stuck taking depressing “staycations” because they can’t afford gas and hotels, are resentful of the first family’s 17 lavish vacations around the world and don’t want their tax dollars paying for the Obamas’ holidays, according to a new analysis of swing voters.

It simply is not appropriate for the Obamas to be spending millions upon millions upon millions of U.S. taxpayer dollars on luxury vacations when so many Americans are deeply suffering.

But Barack Obama does not want you to know about any of this stuff.

He just wants you to buy his empty propaganda one more time so that he can continue to occupy the White House for another four years.

Junior
labellesurmer
Mensajes: 213
Registrado: ‎04-26-2013

Re: MI RESPUESTA A LO QUE USTED, SIR JOHN, ME DEJO ESCRITO;