Ron Paul Marginalized Before and After Win, Big Surprise...

Ron Paul wants to end the Federal Reserve and end wars. The last president to try that dropped the top in Dallas. His policies are consistent. His values show through his voting record. His minimalist view of the scope and authority is a step in the right direction, while Obamney are seeking increased socialist efforts from the Right and Left. A pig by any other name...

Those points should be enough to champion him, but the game is rigged and the lamestream state media is in bed with the regime (look up the media coverage of the sinking of the Lusitania, and the willful sacrifice of those passengers by the US as an excuse to join the war). We are down to about six corporations that control most news, so even a win is severely marginalized and written off, if it is covered at all. 

What? Our only options worth voting for are Obamney? Even moderate voters are looking to Ron Paul for lack of differentiation between those poor excuses for political candidates. How many reports of back room deals or special interest influence has Paul been involved in? None I can find. Obama, Romney, Bush, Clinton, etc.; all enriched and pandering to lobbyists and special interests. 

His consistent voting record for over thirty years (almost as long as I've been alive!) should be the other leg on which voters find support. Paul is a true statesman while the others are simply career politicians with no respect for those they claim to represent, while selling us and our descendants down the river through inflation (theft) of the currency. 

http://m.reason.com/26821/show/a648fbedf65f2fec662d69b2cf292243/?

Left and Right are both Wrong. 

Ron Paul 2012

Obama wants your wedding presents

Liberals are trying to pound home the idea that Mitt Romney is out of touch with regular Americans. At least he's not trying to take away their wedding presents.

None of these career politicians are connected to real people by any measure, and it shows. 

This week MSNBC played a selectively edited videotape of Mr. Romney seemingly showing his fascination with the process of ordering food at a Wawa restaurant in Pennsylvania. Reporter Andrea Mitchell compared the visit to George H. W. Bush's alleged amazement with a grocery store scanner in 1992. MSNBC was called on the doctored tape, but the news organization failed to apologize. This follows closely after three journalists were fired from an NBC affiliate in Miami for editing the audio tape of George Zimmerman's 911 call the night he shot Trayvon Martin to make it more inflammatory.

Other media outlets are behaving more responsibly. Late Thursday, Politico suspended White House correspondent Joseph Williams for saying that Mr. Romney is only relaxed among white people. Appearing on MSNBC, Mr. Williams had said that Mr. Romney is "stiff and awkward in town hall settings" because he "can't relate to people" who aren't like him, but he can relax on "Fox and Friends" because "they're white folks who are very much relaxed in their own company." Politico said these comments "fell short of our standards for fairness and judgment in an especially unfortunate way."

The Pew Research Center for the People and the Press released a survey last week finding most respondents believed Mr. Obama "connects well with ordinary Americans" much more so than Mr. Romney. Even so, Mr. Obama is hardly a man of the people. Never known for his warmth and affability, Mr. Obama was often compared during the 2008 campaign to the unemotional Mr. Spock from Star Trek.

I love that more media outlets recognize the failures of political figures from both sides of the institution, rather than focusing on one and ignoring the other. 

This contrasts with his Democratic predecessor, Bill Clinton, who was much more skilled as a politician. Mr. Clinton felt our pain; Mr. Obama thinks record unemployment rates are a sign the private sector is doing "just fine." Mr. Clinton smiled with his eyes; Mr. Obama does so with a hint of a sneer. Mr. Clinton was a classic populist politician; Mr. Obama comes across more as a marketing concept. His record numbers of golf outings and fundraisers with Hollywood celebrities will not enhance his image as someone who fundamentally connects with America.

The latest Obama campaign fundraising vehicle will not help, either. The "Obama Event Registry" asks people planning weddings to have guests send a donation to the campaign in place of a gift to the newlyweds. "Let your friends know how important this election is to you," the site exhorts. "It's a great way to support the president on your big day" and "goes a lot further than a gravy bowl."

This may very well go down as the tackiest political appeal in history, at least until the campaign suggests that people organizing funerals have donations sent to Mr. Obama in lieu of flowers.

Obama might do well to request flowers sent to the funeral of the US economy, although it has yet to be taken off life support. His fiscal policies have done as much damage as his predecessors. 

More: http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jun/22/obama-wants-your-wedding-presents/

Obama’s immigration amnesty: is it motivated by humanity, economics or crude politics?

The Obama administration has announced that it's granting what effectively amounts to amnesty to 800,000 children of illegal immigrants.

Good. Let them come, freely and without state support or opposition. Immigration was natural and unencumbered when the US grew into the power it once was, because of the people not the government. 

Secretary of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano, says this is about reducing expenditure on "low priority" cases so as to beef up enforcement elsewhere. You have to hand it to Obama: this is bold, radical, liberal stuff. [...]

I would take this a step further and remove immigration law completely, returning the uninhibited right to travel, work, and freely live anywhere one chooses. 

If too many immigrants more to an area where work can be found, unemployment will rise. With fewer jobs, more labored will migrate elsewhere where jobs are available. 

As interventionist governments try to guide markets to promote growth and surplus jobs? Those efforts have the opposite effect. They create inefficiencies, reduce available jobs, and discourage employers from hiring due to higher taxes for business that increase in size, and creating complex regulations requiring more capital diverted to navigate those regulations. 

The state is in fact a barrier to job growth despite claims by statists that those inefficient and despotic methods are even slightly productive. 

---

Original Page: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/timstanley/100165703/obamas-immigration-amnesty-is-it-motivated-by-humanity-economics-or-crude-politics/

Wisconsin Union Changes Saving Schools Millions

Just days before recall elections, Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker sent out a news release saying the union reforms he pushed are already saving school districts millions.

I actually have to hand it to Walker, he is making progress in cutting wasteful spending and relieving potential tax burden the private sector labor force.

From Madison to Hudson, angry protesters promised dire consequences if Wisconsin lawmakers voted to strip government union members of some of their collective bargaining rights. The reforms did pass and a Madison think tank says they're already having an impact.

Public unions should rightly have little bargaining power, as their market is driven by private sector successes. We were warned against allowing public unions decades ago, but socialism sees no limit to it's malignant potential in a free society.

"With collective bargaining not an option for teachers outside of salary concerns, we're seeing a lot more freedom for these school boards to find new and creative ways to save money," said Christian D'Andrea of the MacIver Institute. His organization says many school districts are shopping around for health insurance for the first time. In the past, they had to buy it from the Wisconsin Education Assocation, the teachers union.

Imagine that. Shifting to private sector markets for services and goods saves significant resources over public alternatives, where accountability is no more than a word and politicians come and go through the revolving door, replaced by another who serves special interest groups rather than the true social good. They were forced to purchase marked-up, low-value insurance and not given choices. This lack of choice is a big problem with unions. Rock out with voluntarism.

"The problem there is that, once you become static... and this is true with any company, I'm not just picking on WEA. But once you become static within one company, you tend to settle for higher rates," said D'Andrea.

"It means that we can save teacher jobs and really provide a better value for the taxpayers of the state," said Senator Sheila Harsdorf of River Falls. Harsdorf faces a recall election Tuesday because of her support for union reforms and Governor Walker's budget.

In Harsdorf's Senate district, MacIver found savings at Ellsworth, Prescott, Menomonie, Somerset and Hudson school districts. The Hudson Superintendent tells 5 EYEWITNESS NEWS her district stands to save more than $800,000.

"They would have seen that same savings if they'd done it in cooperation with the teachers," said Shelly Moore, a teacher in Ellsworth who is running against Harsdorf in the recall election.

This might be one of the few instances of politicians using the power of the state to promote social good and reduce forced coercion (mandatory union dues) on a captive audience (teachers). Usually the state is doing the opposite, reducing individual liberties and choices, while increasing burden.

Local teachers union President Kris Ohman (OH-mun) said before the union reforms, teachers were already agreeing to cheaper insurance options. Under state law, a district could limit an increase in teacher pay and benefits combined could be limited to 3.8%. If health insurance was more expensive, teachers would have to take less pay to offset it.

The last thing the public sector needs to be able to do is limit things which the private sector can not. If service costs go up in the private, they must be allowed to do so in the public, for it not the costs through taxation will increase disproportionately affecting private sector workers.

"So it had always been in our best interest to keep those costs down so that our pay could be comparable and competitive with districts around us," said Ohman.

The MacIver Institute says if all districts in Wisconsin reconfigured teacher benefits packages, the state could save $451 million.

Report: Wisconsin Union Changes Saving Schools Millions | KSTP TV - Minneapolis and St. Paul

Political Liars - Economic Edition - Tax Subsidies

I've been on an economics kick for the last couple of years, learning all I can. One issue that gets under my skin is is subsidies to industries through theft (taxation, since I is not voluntary). Some politicians believe that subsidizing markets, services, or products will help the economy, but this is a falsehood. Here is why we should end subsidies and involuntary taxation.

By subsidizing those costs to consumers, the public believes that those costs are lower. This is false, since costs are actually higher, but only the direct costs are experienced in transactions. Indirect costs round out the overall transaction, with producers receiving the balance of their revenue from the state, which extorts through taxes that revenue which drives costs and production higher.

This theft from consumers through forced coercion (taxation is theft) affects all taxpayers, even those who do not directly consume those goods or services. By ending subsidies, producers will lower costs to equilibrium and consumers will pay directly or indirectly pay for those goods and services they choose to. In turn, taxation can decrease, since need for taxes is negated by the market.

Beyond that problem, subsidization leads directly to increase costs to consumers, since producers see it as an increased demand (which we know not to be the case). By artificially driving up demand, producers see that demand can go higher, so in turn increase costs to consumers. Subsidies actually increase the total cost, rather than decreasing them.

Obama’s Unwelcome Jubilee Present to Britain

Barack Obama was all smiles in his carefully scripted message of congratulation to Queen Elizabeth II on her Diamond Jubilee. But at the same time as he recorded his message, his administration was actively undermining Great Britain at the annual meeting of the Organisation of American States (OAS), held in Bolivia.

Well that's a fine how do you do. The US despotic regime honors the Queen by engaging in talks regarding the Malvinas. What if China were to approach Puerto Rico and support their cessation from American rule, while also celebrating the US? It's basically the same concept. Rather conniving, no?

The OAS General Assembly, which includes the United States, has just re-adopted the 2010 "Declaration on the Question of the Malvinas Islands," which backed Argentina's call for negotiations between London and Buenos Aires over the Falkland Islands.

http://patriotupdate.com/24237/barack-obamas-unwelcome-jubilee-present-to-britain

Not that I even slightly support a monarchy which removes the natural right to self defense from its citizens (read: subjects). 

GOP rejects Obama's "fine" assessment of private sector

Speaker John Boehner and Republicans leaders responded to President Obama's statement and press conference on the economy on Friday, rejecting his statement that the private sector is "doing fine."

With increasing regulation and taxation on the private sector, while production is anything but increasing, it's no wonder that those actually producing believe Obama's statement to be false. As government spending increases supported by both Left and Right, any opinion that increasing debt while decreasing production is sustainable is laughable, but also an insight that fiat government is well removed from reality. Maybe the state should e removed entirely?

---

Original Page: http://feeds.cbsnews.com/~r/cbsnews/feed/~3/zyBwzJEHadM/

New bumper stickers for President Obama

Here are just a few suggestions for Obama Campaign slogans to help everyone understand who he is and why we must reelect him. Providing them is the least I can do and he needs all the help we can give. Suggest more, please. Give until it hurts.

Vegans for Obama. There's no Meat There!

Unemployment Pays. Vote Obama!

Michelle Vacations for Us so We don't have to.

Original Page: http://maddmedic.wordpress.com/2012/06/05/20888/

Obama vs Romney; What's the Difference?

President Obama leads Republican Mitt Romney by 4 points overall in a new poll of Florida from Democratic-leaning firm Public Policy Polling (PPP). Romney still struggles on favorability with Florida voters, largely unchanged in PPP's polling since the depths of the Republican primary fight earlier in the year.

When potential votes are this close, it reminds me why many people can't tell the difference between Romney and Obama. The population can't tell policy differences because there are none of significance. We're arguing over which flavor of statism we want!

"Obama's strength is based on what's become a pretty predictable set of groups. He's up 57-39 with women, 61-36 with Hispanics, 93-7 with African Americans, and 65-27 with voters under 30," PPP pollsters wrote. "Romney's up 52-46 with seniors and 55-41 with whites but he'd need larger advantages with those demographics to be ahead overall."

Polls like these ate meant to drive voters toward predestined outcomes rather than present likely conclusions. 

Romney's personal rating is at 39 percent favorable, while 51 percent say they have an unfavorable view of the former Massachusetts governor. Obama's approval rating is at 49 percent in the poll, while 46 percent disapprove of his performance.

[...] 

---

Original Page: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/tpm-news/~3/WRHDSTF-1Ic/poll-obama-leads-romney-by-4-in-florida.php

Allen West on the American Gene Pool

Sounds just about right to me, but I get the same feeling from Romney stickers as well. It's enough to consider bringing eugenics back. 

---

Original Page: http://saberpoint.blogspot.com/2012/06/allen-west-on-american-gene-pool.html

So Much for the Facts

In "Obama Says Economy Will 'Come Back Stronger,'" ...

Makes me think of Obama as Vader, with Guinness' immortal line, "if you strike me down I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine."

...the Associated Press reports that our President remains optimistic despite today's "unexpected" bad news:

President Barack Obama says the May jobs report shows that the economy is not creating jobs "as fast as we want" but vows that the economy will improve.

Firing up the printing presses an creating more dollars doesn't create growth, it stifles it. More so, it devalues the currency further, while inflation is running at about 4% annually. 

Obama says, "we will come back stronger. We do have better days ahead."

Not sure what he's basing that on, since the people who probably know best -- those who operate on the economy's front lines -- are not seeing any evidence of it, as Reuters reports in "Economic worry tightens U.S. CEOs' grip on spending":

CEOs will hold their wallets a little bit tighter heading into the summer after the long-awaited recovery in U.S. employment stumbled in May.

Anyone putting in purchase requests or submitting expense reports is quite aware of the new reality of business spending. 

The United States had been a relative bright spot this year in a troubled world economy coping with Europe's debt crisis and a cooling Chinese economy. But a weaker-than-expected May jobs report on Friday gave corporate America fresh worries.

AT&T Inc was one company that was not surprised by the disappointing jobs numbers as it has seen a lack of hiring at both big and small corporate clients. Fewer employees at these companies means fewer phone lines, which hurts AT&T's growth prospects.

"We are not seeing any hiring in the upper end of business in the U.S.," said Randall Stephenson, chief executive of the biggest U.S. phone company by revenue, told an investor conference in New York on Friday. "People aren't hiring a lot in the U.S," he said.

At smaller companies, Stephenson said, the situation was worse. "As you go down-market, it's getting tighter and tighter, and you're seeing the wallet for investment being less open."

Then again, facts don't really matter when you're running for office, right?

Neither Obama nor Romney can take credit for economic growth, but it seems anything politician do these days sure has visible negative results. What more motivation do we have for a true free market system than the failed attempts by the state to control capitalism?

---

Original Page: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/financialarmageddon/~3/6XWS82PtKos/so-much-for-the-facts.html

Threats, deals got drug companies on board with Obama

Top administration officials cut backroom deals with the nation's top drug companies to win support for President Obama's health care overhaul, threatening them with steeper taxes if they resisted and promising a better financial deal for the industry if they acquiesced, according to internal documents released Thursday by House Republicans.

Imagine that...

In some of the key deals, Mr. Obama agreed to drop his long-standing support for letting Americans buy cheaper foreign prescription drugs — something the pharmaceutical industry vehemently opposed — and the drugmakers promised to mount a public campaign to sell the public on the health care legislation.

Time to get off the drugs, America. 

The drug industry financed the famous "Harry and Louise" commercials in the early 1990s that many credit with helping to turn public opinion against President Clinton's massive health care bill. In 2009, the industry revived the fictional married couple — this time with words of praise for Mr. Obama's bill.

The material released by House GOP members provides a rare insider look at the wheeling and dealing on Capitol Hill as Mr. Obama tried to shepherd his bill through Congress, in the face of near-unanimous GOP opposition.

[...]

http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/may/31/threats-deals-got-drug-companies-on-board-with-oba/

Warren: The legend of Fauxcahontas' little big lie

It started when Democratic Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren was said to have used tenuous claims of Native American heritage to further her career. The defense for listing herself as a minority in a directory of law professors for almost a decade rested on the roots of Warren's great-great-great-grandmother. If true, that would make Warren 1/32 Cherokee. It was not. Now, Warren relies on tales of "high cheekbones" and media outlets like the Boston Globe, which buried the news that she was 0.00 percent Cherokee. It's hard to see how Harvard's first blond-haired, blue-eyed "woman of color" will get her campaign back on track.

What, just this one insignificant lie from Warren that we are taking issue with? I think that we can refer to a wealth of malignant in her voting record for better reasons to end her political career.

Warren: The legend of Fauxcahontas' little big lie | Times 247

Obama awards Medal of Freedom to avowed socialist

President Obama awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom on Tuesday to Dolores Huerta, an 82-year-old labor activist and co-founder of the United Farm Workers union.

Huerta is also an honorary chair of the Democratic Socialists of America.

DSA describes itself as “the largest socialist organization in the United States, and the principal U.S. affiliate of the Socialist International.”

Huerta has claimed, “Republicans hate Latinos,” and has spoken fondly of Hugo Chavez’s despotic regime in Venezuela.

Read more: http://times247.com/articles/obama-awards-medal-of-freedom-to-democratic-socialists-of-america-chair#ixzz1wSnZAK1s

Obama's big deficit lie

President Obama claims federal budget deficits have not soared out of control during his administration. He has officially jumped the shark.

Maybe that's not quite the best expression, as claims of budgetary stability are simply misinformation at best, most likely just state propaganda. 

On Wednesday at a Denver fundraiser, Mr. Obama said he was "running to pay down our debt in a way that's balanced and responsible." He claimed that "after inheriting a $1 trillion deficit, I signed $2 trillion of spending cuts into law" and that since he has been president, "federal spending has risen at the lowest pace in nearly 60 years. Think about that." It doesn't take much thought to see that this is the most absurd claim in political memory.

Mr. Obama is basing his boast on an already discredited study by journalist Rex Nutting that purported to show that "Obama has been the most fiscally moderate president we've had in 60 years." Among other fatal problems with the study is that it omits all spending that took place during the first nine months of the Obama administration, which were the last nine months of fiscal 2009. Thus, all of the initial spending programs to which the White House points with pride - particularly the failed nearly trillion-dollar economic stimulus program - are George W. Bush's responsibility so far as Mr. Nutting is concerned.

The "savings" Mr. Obama signed into law were all based on rosy economic projections, none of which has come true. The fiscal 2010 budget, fancifully titled "A New Era of Responsibility," projected a $1.2 trillion cut in the deficit to $533 billion by 2013. The fiscal 2012 budget, which had no hopeful title, raised this number to $768 billion. Mr. Obama's September 2011 deficit-reduction proposal further raised the projected 2013 deficit to $912 billion. The fiscal 2010 budget also hopefully projected 6.26 percent economic growth for 2012 rather than the anemic 1 percent to 2 percent growth the country is suffering. Naturally, Mr. Obama would much rather make reference to the imagined future his economists projected than to the grim reality he actually created.

Other simple metrics show the disastrous impact of Mr. Obama on the deficit. The 2009 budget deficit was three times that of 2008. The deficit as a percentage of gross domestic product went from 3.1 percent in 2008 to 9.9 percent in 2009. The deficit for the first month of fiscal 2010 was $176 billion, which was greater than the $161 billion deficit for all of 2007. In his first 986 days in office, up to Oct. 3, 2011, Mr. Obama oversaw a $4.2 trillion increase in the national debt, which was more than the debt accrued by all presidents from George Washington to George H.W. Bush combined.

It's no wonder why Mr. Obama wants to portray himself as a deficit hawk. The federal budget deficit is the second-most-important issue in the election after jobs, on which Mr. Obama's record is equally dismal. The White House has never submitted a proposal that has come close to balancing the federal budget, even with 10-year projections to work with. The flawed economic assumptions used to sell Mr. Obama's programs were a bait-and-switch that left America mired in unsustainable levels of debt. It's incredible that Mr. Obama believes he can get away with such a big lie. He seems simply to have lost his grip on reality.

http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/may/24/obamas-big-deficit-lie/

LAMBRO: Bad news for Obama in the mountains - Washington Times

President Obama isn't doing so well in some of his party primaries where a surprisingly large number of Democrats are giving him the thumbs down.

Big surprise; even moderate liberals think Obama is extreme. Hello Mr. Obvious. 

The national news media are paying little attention to the Democrats' presidential primaries because Mr. Obama is assured of his nomination. But the large size of the anti-Obama vote - exposing deep unrest in his party's political base - has shaken his campaign's high command.

The latest explosions erupted Tuesday in the Kentucky and Arkansas primaries, which, of course, Mr. Obama won easily. But a stunning 42 percent of Kentucky Democrats voted for "uncommitted" on their ballots.

In yellow dog Democrat Arkansas, 42 percent voted for a little-known Tennessee lawyer, John Wolfe, over the president of the United States.

Two weeks ago in the West Virginia primary, Keith Judd, a convicted felon and now Texas prison inmate, got 41 percent of the vote.

Some smarty-pants political pundits who think they know everything say some of this is about race and that these states are firmly in the GOP column anyway.

"You will forgive me, I hope, a lack of excitement about the 'story' of the president's weakness in these two states [i.e. Arkansas and Kentucky] and in other border states with large fossil-fuel energy industries and relatively few African-Americans, since I've been reading about it since the 2008 primaries," Democratic strategist Ed Kilgore says in Wednesday's Washington Monthly Political Animal blog.

But others think the Democrats' sizable anti-Obama vote in the party primaries has much deeper implications for the election.

Such strong antipathy toward Mr. Obama at this end point in his trouble-plagued presidency is "an indicator of not-insignificant pockets of unrest within his party," The Washington Post's campaign trackers Chris Cillizza and Aaron Blake write.

Racial factors "may be less of a problem for Obama than the broader cultural disconnect that many of these voters feel with the Democratic Party." They also quote Democrats who point to growing grievances that many in their party have over the political direction Mr. Obama is taking the country.

"The most significant factor is the perception/reality the Obama administration has leaned toward the ultra-left," says former Rep. Charles Stenholm, Texas Democrat.

That's certainly true in the coal-rich Appalachian states where Mr. Obama's zeal for eliminating coal as one of the fuels that run our country has triggered a political backlash against him and the Environmental Protection Agency, which is carrying out his anti-coal agenda.

These are states with large populations of low-income, blue-collar, "working class" Americans who have been hit hardest by Mr. Obama's economic policies, and they do not like the national Democratic Party's sharp lurch to the left on economic and cultural policies.

[...]

http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/may/24/bad-news-for-obama-in-the-mountains/

Obama's big deficit lie

President Obama claims federal budget deficits have not soared out of control during his administration. He has officially jumped the shark.

Deficit spending only works when economic growth is in high gear, and even then it only works temporarily. Paired with rampant 4% inflation every year, growth is guaranteed to stagnate and decline. You can't make wealth from debt. 

On Wednesday at a Denver fundraiser, Mr. Obama said he was "running to pay down our debt in a way that's balanced and responsible." He claimed that "after inheriting a $1 trillion deficit, I signed $2 trillion of spending cuts into law" and that since he has been president, "federal spending has risen at the lowest pace in nearly 60 years. Think about that." It doesn't take much thought to see that this is the most absurd claim in political memory.

Mr. Obama is basing his boast on an already discredited study by journalist Rex Nutting that purported to show that "Obama has been the most fiscally moderate president we've had in 60 years." Among other fatal problems with the study is that it omits all spending that took place during the first nine months of the Obama administration, which were the last nine months of fiscal 2009. Thus, all of the initial spending programs to which the White House points with pride - particularly the failed nearly trillion-dollar economic stimulus program - are George W. Bush's responsibility so far as Mr. Nutting is concerned.

The "savings" Mr. Obama signed into law were all based on rosy economic projections, none of which has come true. The fiscal 2010 budget, fancifully titled "A New Era of Responsibility," projected a $1.2 trillion cut in the deficit to $533 billion by 2013. The fiscal 2012 budget, which had no hopeful title, raised this number to $768 billion. Mr. Obama's September 2011 deficit-reduction proposal further raised the projected 2013 deficit to $912 billion. The fiscal 2010 budget also hopefully projected 6.26 percent economic growth for 2012 rather than the anemic 1 percent to 2 percent growth the country is suffering. Naturally, Mr. Obama would much rather make reference to the imagined future his economists projected than to the grim reality he actually created.

Other simple metrics show the disastrous impact of Mr. Obama on the deficit. The 2009 budget deficit was three times that of 2008. The deficit as a percentage of gross domestic product went from 3.1 percent in 2008 to 9.9 percent in 2009. The deficit for the first month of fiscal 2010 was $176 billion, which was greater than the $161 billion deficit for all of 2007. In his first 986 days in office, up to Oct. 3, 2011, Mr. Obama oversaw a $4.2 trillion increase in the national debt, which was more than the debt accrued by all presidents from George Washington to George H.W. Bush combined.

[...]

http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/may/24/obamas-big-deficit-lie/

Bad news for Obama in the mountains

President Obama isn't doing so well in some of his party primaries where a surprisingly large number of Democrats are giving him the thumbs down.

The sad part about this is that when many find Obama dissatisfying, they actually look to his statist counterparts on the far opposite side instead of truly moderate and responsible candidates such as Ron Paul or Gary Johnson. Choosing between Obama and Romney is simply picking your flavor of statism. 

The national news media are paying little attention to the Democrats' presidential primaries because Mr. Obama is assured of his nomination. But the large size of the anti-Obama vote - exposing deep unrest in his party's political base - has shaken his campaign's high command.

The latest explosions erupted Tuesday in the Kentucky and Arkansas primaries, which, of course, Mr. Obama won easily. But a stunning 42 percent of Kentucky Democrats voted for "uncommitted" on their ballots.

In yellow dog Democrat Arkansas, 42 percent voted for a little-known Tennessee lawyer, John Wolfe, over the president of the United States.

Two weeks ago in the West Virginia primary, Keith Judd, a convicted felon and now Texas prison inmate, got 41 percent of the vote.

Some smarty-pants political pundits who think they know everything say some of this is about race and that these states are firmly in the GOP column anyway.

"You will forgive me, I hope, a lack of excitement about the 'story' of the president's weakness in these two states [i.e. Arkansas and Kentucky] and in other border states with large fossil-fuel energy industries and relatively few African-Americans, since I've been reading about it since the 2008 primaries," Democratic strategist Ed Kilgore says in Wednesday's Washington Monthly Political Animal blog.

But others think the Democrats' sizable anti-Obama vote in the party primaries has much deeper implications for the election.

Such strong antipathy toward Mr. Obama at this end point in his trouble-plagued presidency is "an indicator of not-insignificant pockets of unrest within his party," The Washington Post's campaign trackers Chris Cillizza and Aaron Blake write.

[...]

http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/may/24/bad-news-for-obama-in-the-mountains/

Julia...

http://media.patriotpost.us/humor/2012/05-22.html

Obama’s Allegiances

NATO to Plan More War in Chicago

This week's NATO summit meeting, in Chicago, "will be full of aggressive activities: plans for energy wars around the world, new decisions about how the U.S will maintain hegemony in the oil-rich Middle East and Afghanistan," said Chris Gavreau, spokesperson for UNAC, the United National Anti-War Coalition. Thousands of demonstrators are expected to converge on the city.

The Chicago school continues to remind us that the current regime is no better than its predecessors. 

Boycott the Two Major Parties

"We know him as a war president, we know him as an anti-civil liberties president, we know him as an austerity president – that's the record," said Dr. Tony Monteiro, professor of African American Studies at Temple University, in Philadelphia, speaking of Barack Obama. "The same goes for Mitt Romney." Progressives and the Black Left should "boycott the two major parties" this election cycle.

How about voting for an alternative to the status quo like Gary Johnson or Ron Paul. Left and right are both wrong. 

Obama the Militarist

The president proclaims his militarism "proudly, with repeated references to 'taking out' al Qaida operatives through the most illegal methods imaginable," said political analyst Paul Street, author of The Empire's New Clothes: Barack Obama and the Real World of Power. Street noted that Obama called his own health care program "centrist," while admitting that it is modeled on a plan developed by the rightwing Heritage Foundation in the Nineties.

Derivatives Wreak Havoc at Banks

JP Morgan Chase, the nation's largest bank, gambled away billions because neither party made any real "effort to crack down on derivatives in general," said Doug Henwood, editor of Left Business Observer. "It's remarkable how little has changed since the financial crisis" of 2008, said Henwood. "This is precisely the sort of thing that was supposed to be stopped."

Obama's Allegiances

President Obama's "policies are similar to the Bush administration but, in my opinion, are far worse, because he presented himself in 2008 as a change agent," said Abayomi Azikewe, editor of the Pan African Newswire. Today, people see Obama as he really is, "a representative of the banks, the transnational corporations and the Pentagon – pure and simple." Azikewe spoke with host Solomon Commissiong on Your World News, broadcast on WPWC Radio, in Washington, DC.

---

Original Page: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/PRNfm/~3/By9MIBo_O9I/