Newsweek has been known for its absurd cover stories of late: from using the only unflattering photo of Michele Bachmann available, to calling Obama the “first gay president,” the bias has unmistakeably trended leftward. But this week’s edition features a head story of a very different breed: Niall Ferguson, former advisor to John McCain during his run for the White House, writes that Obama’s policies have failed, and it’s time to replace him.
The Daily Beast has the article live now, including this particularly damning passage:
In his fiscal year 2010 budget—the first he presented—the president envisaged growth of 3.2 percent in 2010, 4.0 percent in 2011, 4.6 percent in 2012. The actual numbers were 2.4 percent in 2010 and 1.8 percent in 2011; few forecasters now expect it to be much above 2.3 percent this year.
Unemployment was supposed to be 6 percent by now. It has averaged 8.2 percent this year so far. Meanwhile real median annual household income has dropped more than 5 percent since June 2009. Nearly 110 million individuals received a welfare benefit in 2011, mostly Medicaid or food stamps.
Welcome to Obama’s America: nearly half the population is not represented on a taxable return—almost exactly the same proportion that lives in a household where at least one member receives some type of government benefit. We are becoming the 50–50 nation—half of us paying the taxes, the other half receiving the benefits.
And all this despite a far bigger hike in the federal debt than we were promised. According to the 2010 budget, the debt in public hands was supposed to fall in relation to GDP from 67 percent in 2010 to less than 66 percent this year. If only. By the end of this year, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), it will reach 70 percent of GDP. These figures significantly understate the debt problem, however. The ratio that matters is debt to revenue. That number has leapt upward from 165 percent in 2008 to 262 percent this year, according to figures from the International Monetary Fund. Among developed economies, only Ireland and Spain have seen a bigger deterioration.
Those four paragraphs are utterly jawdropping. This president ran on the promise of alleviating our economic crisis, and all he’s done is exacerbate it and hid the numbers with the government entitlement programs as a bandaid.
The whole article is worth reading, and here’s something to consider: when you’re a Democrat and Newsweek is running a cover story against you, you’re probably in trouble.
Delusional obama surrogate for sure!
The liberal war on free speech marches on:
The Chick-fil-A same-sex marriage debate doesn’t seem to be going away anytime soon. Ever since President Dan Cathy stated his stance on gay marriage last month, the fast-food chain has been under scrutiny.
Now, some University of Maryland students and staff are working to get the restaurant off their campus.
They’re using online petitioning via change.org to persuade Adele H. Stamp Student Union officials to remove the restaurant, reports campus newspaper The Diamondback.
As of Friday afternoon, the petition has more than 560 supporters. The organizers have set 1,000 signatures as a goal.
However, the school has a contract with Chick-fil-A that runs through the academic year, according to student union director Marsha Guenzler-Stevens.
Guenzler-Stevens said it’s hard to say whether the Chick-fil-A business on campus has been affected. But in a survey conducted last spring about popularity of food court options, Chick-fil-A was No. 1.
Again the liberals can not talk about obama without bringing race into the speech!
On this weekend’s Up with Chris Hayes on MSNBC, the eponymous host and guest Heather McGhee suggested that white seniors have an inability to trust President Barack Obama because of race and familiarity.
McGhee noted that Republican VP candidate Paul Ryan is now defending Medicare despite his budget plan calling for cuts to the program. She then went on to explain why she believes this contradiction manages to elude people because: “Frankly, the American people right now are so distrustful of politicians in general, and they are very confused, rightly, by the 75 time horizons that we’re throwing around on these big fiscal policy debates.”
“There is an inability for white seniors to trust Barack Obama on Medicare,” she continued, “and it doesn’t have anything to do with the policies that he’s put out. It has to do with the demographics –”
“I like the way you’re using the word ‘demographics,’” Hayes interrupted. “You mean race.”
“Well, yes, I’m sorry. By no means am I afraid to use the word ‘race,’” she responded. “It has to do with race, and it has to do with familiarity and has to do with the fact that, in 2010, the Republican Tea Party ran on cuts to Medicare that were in the ACA.”
Who Does The Government Intend To Shoot?
By Major General Jerry Curry, USA (Ret.)
The Social Security Administration (SSA) confirms that it is purchasing 174 thousand rounds of hollow point bullets to be delivered to 41 locations in major cities across the U.S. No one has yet said what the purpose of these purchases is, though we are led to believe that they will be used only in an emergency to counteract and control civil unrest. Those against whom the hollow point bullets are to be used — those causing the civil unrest — must be American citizens; since the SSA has never been used overseas to help foreign countries maintain control of their citizens.
What would be the target of these 174, 000 rounds of hollow point bullets? It can’t simply be to control demonstrators or rioters. Hollow point bullets are so lethal that the Geneva Convention does not allow their use on the battle field in time of war. Hollow point bullets don’t just stop or hurt people, they penetrate the body, spread out, fragment and cause maximum damage to the body’s organs. Death often follows.
Potentially each hollow nose bullet represents a dead American. If so, why would the U.S. government want the SSA to kill 174,000 of our citizens, even during a time of civil unrest? Or is the purpose to kill 174,000 of the nation’s military and replace them with Department of Homeland Security (DHS) special security forces, forces loyal to the Administration, not to the Constitution?
All my life I’ve handled firearms. When a young boy growing up on my father’s farm in Pennsylvania Dad’s first rule of firearms training was, “Never point a gun at someone, in fun or otherwise, unless you intend to shoot them. If you shoot someone, shoot to kill.” I’ve never forgotten his admonition. It stayed with me through my Boy Scout training, when I enlisted in the army as a Private to fight in the Korea
War, during my days as a Ranger and Paratrooper and throughout my thirty-four year military career.
If this were only a one time order of ammunition, it could easily be dismissed. But there is a pattern here. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has ordered 46,000 rounds of hollow point ammunition. Notice that all of these purchases are for the lethal hollow nose bullets. These bullets are not being purchased and stored for squirrel or coyote hunting. This is serious ammunition manufactured to be used for serious purposes.
In the war in Iraq, our military forces expended approximately 70 million rounds per year. In March DHS ordered 750 million rounds of hollow point ammunition. It then turned around and ordered an additional 750 million rounds of miscellaneous bullets including some that are capable of penetrating walls. This is enough ammunition to empty five rounds into the body of every living American citizen. Is this something we and the Congress should be concerned about? What’s the plan that requires so many dead Americans, even during times of civil unrest? Has Congress and the Administration vetted the plan in public.
I fear that Congress won’t take these ammunition purchases seriously until they are all led from Capitol Hill in handcuffs. Why buy all this ammunition unless you plan to use it. Unknown to Congress, Does DHS plan to declare war on some country? Shouldn’t Congress hold hearings on why the Administration is stockpiling this ammunition all across the nation? How will it be used; what are the Administration’s plans?
Obama is a deadly serious, persistent man. Once he focuses on an object, he pursues it to the end. What is his focus here? All of these rounds of ammunition can only be used to kill American citizens, though there is enough ammunition being ordered to kill, in addition to every American citizen, also every Iranian, Syrian or Mexican. There is simply too much of it. And this much ammunition can’t be just for training, there aren’t that many weapons and “shooters” in the U.S. to fire it. Perhaps it is to be used to arm illegal immigrants?
We have enough military forces to maintain law and order in the U.S. even during times of civil unrest.
We have local police, backed up by each state’s National Guard, backed up by the Department of Defense. So in addition to all these forces why does DHS need its own private army? Why do the SSA, NOAA and other government agencies need to create their own civilian security forces armed with hollow nose bullets?
Were I the JCS, and if I wasn’t already fully briefed on this matter, I’d stop the purchase of hollow point bullets, ask the secretary of Defense why all this ammunition is being purchased and spread around the country? If I got answers like the ones Congress got during the investigation of Operation Fast and Furious – I’d start tracking all ammunition deliveries nationwide to find out what organizations and units are using them, for what purpose and, if it is not constitutional, prepare to counteract whatever it is that they are doing.
This is a deadly serious business. I hope I’m wrong, but something smells rotten. And If the Congress isn’t going to do its duty and investigate this matter fully, the military will have to protect the Constitution, the nation, and our citizens.
Jerry Curry is a decorated combat veteran, Army Aviator, Paratrooper, and Ranger, who for nearly forty years has served his country both in the military and as a Presidential political appointee.
The leftist critique of capitalism and all the improvements in the quality of life that it has brought remains what it has always been: the desire of intellectuals to dictate to the rest of humanity how they may live. Or even more to the point, how many of them may live at all. Thus, the latest New York Times feature about the evils of air conditioning and how the increasing demand for it in the Third World is unsustainable tells us a lot more about the left and its mindset than it does about the future of society.
The piece in the Sunday Review by Elisabeth Rosenthal at least is honest about why more air conditioning is needed. It is a major factor in productivity around the world. The economic boom in places like Singapore and other warm-weather cities was made possible in no small measure by air conditioning. As population growth and economic activity rises in other Third World cities, more AC will be needed. But for the Times, this spells environmental doom since they tell us the energy used to run the units and the emissions from the coolants will create more global warming. The answer from the left to this conundrum is typical of the sort of eco-Luddite argument we’ve been hearing for decades. People will have to learn to live without air conditioning in the same way they are told to live without the freedom that automobiles give them. Sweat more and shut up about it seems to be the mantra. But the problem with this sort of thinking is not just the arrogance of western liberals telling people to do without modern conveniences; it is that it reflects a lack of understanding of human potential.
WASHINGTON — The feds have asked a judge to strike from the public record the most “scandalous” details of a bombshell sexual-discrimination lawsuit against Janet Napolitano and the Department of Homeland Security that refer to oral sex and an odd bathroom prank.
The lewd details are included in senior law-enforcement official James Hayes’ suit claiming retaliation anti-guy bias.
The filing claims top immigration aide Suzanne Barr “humiliated” a male employee by calling him in his hotel room and screaming that she wanted his “c–k in the back of [her] throat.”