Friday, September 9, 2011

JOBS? ONLY MORE OBAMA CON JOBS!

AMERICANS CAN SEEM TO CATCH ON THAT OBAMA DOES HAVE A JOBS PLAN; IT’S THE SAME ON HE’S FROM FIRST DAY IN OFFICE! AMNESTY!

OBAMA KNEW HE WOULDN’T BE ABLE TO CON US WITH HIS PERFORMANCES OF “CHANGE” TOO LONG. WE’D HAVE TO CATCH ON THAT HE WAS NO MORE THAN A THIRD BUSH TERM. IT WASN’T BY ACCIDENT THAT ALSO FROM HIS FIRST DAY IN OFFICE OBAMA FILLED HIS ADMINISTRATION WITH BUSH’S BANKSTER PEOPLE, LIKE BUSH ARCHITECT FOR BANK WELFARE, TIM GEITHNER. BEYOND CORRUPT WALL STREETERS, OBAMA HAS INFESTED HIS ADMINISTRATION WITH LA RAZA SUPREMACIST. HIS SEC OF LABOR IS ONE SUCH LA RAZA SUPREMACIST WORKING MORE FOR ILLEGALS THAN ANYONE! WHAT IS THE MESSAGE THERE? LAWS AGAINST HIRING ILLEGALS WILL NEVER BE ENFORCED BY THIS PRESIDENT.

CURRENTLY, OBAMA HAS JUST GRANTED DE FACTO AMNESTY TO 300,000 ILLEGALS THAT SHOULD BE DEPORTED. HE TELLS THEM TO HANG AROUND, STEAL JOBS AND LOOT THIS COUNTRY LIKE THE MEXICANS ARE SO PRONE TO DOING!

WHEN OBAMA BROUGHT IN BILL DALEY AS CHIEF-OF-STAFF IT WAS FOR ONE REASON, DALEY WAS CONNECTED TO ALL THE CRIMINAL BANKSTERS THAT HAVE BEEN SO GENEROUS TO OBAMA, AND IS LIKE OBAMA AN ADVOCATE FOR OPEN BORDERS.
*
CHECK OUT OBAMA’S LA RAZA INFESTED ADMINISTRATION:

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/06/obama-operates-la-raza-supremacy-out-of.html
*
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/06/obama-mexican-supremacist-party-of-la.html
*
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/04/history-of-mexican-fascist-party-of-la.html

*
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/05/wikileaks-exposed-obamas-la-raza-open.html
*
“What's needed to discourage illegal immigration into the United States has been known for years: Enforce existing law.” ….. CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR

*
While hailed by his Democratic supporters as the return of a new combative Obama, his phony populist demagogy about the need for immediate action and commitment to ensuring that every American received a “fair shake” stood in stark contrast to the actual content of the policies advanced in the speech.


Obama outlines right-wing program in “jobs” speech
By Bill Van Auken
9 September 2011
The speech delivered by President Barack Obama to a joint session of Congress Thursday night was billed as the presentation of a new government initiative to confront the worst unemployment crisis since the Great Depression of the 1930s. Instead, it underscored yet again the unwillingness and inability of the US financial elite and its two major parties to implement a single meaningful measure to aid the 25 million Americans who are unable to find full time work.
The “American Jobs Act” trumpeted by Obama from the podium of the House of Representatives represents a laundry list of right-wing proposals, all of which he justified as having been supported by Republicans, sections of big business or the US Chamber of Commerce.
While hailed by his Democratic supporters as the return of a new combative Obama, his phony populist demagogy about the need for immediate action and commitment to ensuring that every American received a “fair shake” stood in stark contrast to the actual content of the policies advanced in the speech. All the proposals, moreover, will be paid for by even deeper attacks on core social programs such as Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.
The speech came on the same day that the US Department of Labor released weekly unemployment figures showing that the number of people filing new unemployment claims had risen by 2,000 again to a seasonally adjusted 414,000. Even more telling was the most recent four-week average of new filings for unemployment benefits, which rose by 3,750 to 414,750.
This follows the report that in August, zero net jobs were added to the economy. It is estimated that 11.2 million jobs would have to be created to reach the employment levels that existed before the meltdown of the capitalist financial system three years ago.
Current conditions are catastrophic for the unemployed, with nearly five jobless workers chasing every new job opening. Meanwhile, the wave of budget cutting carried out by Democratic and Republican administrations alike on the federal, state and local levels are adding tens of thousands of workers to the jobless rolls every month.
In its scale, estimated at $300 billion, the “American Jobs Act” represents little more in dollar terms than half of the stimulus package proposed by Obama and enacted by Congress two years ago. That package itself was dwarfed by the scale of the crisis and had only a marginal and temporary impact in terms of limiting the growth in unemployment, while doing little to reduce the overall jobless rate or the number of long-term unemployed, which now stands higher than at any time since the 1930s.
While Obama presented no breakdown of the overall cost of the proposed act, the plan reportedly calls for just $100 billion for infrastructure projects, such as repairing highways and bridges. This is 50 percent less than what Congress appropriated to fund the ongoing US wars in Iraq and Afghanistan for fiscal 2011. Such are the real priorities of American capitalism.
Even it were approved, the infrastructure proposal, which has been supported by Republican Congressional leaders, would amount to little more than a boondoggle to corporate interests, geared to funneling money to private companies. The measure has also been backed by the US Chamber of Commerce, the main business lobbying group.
Among the Republican policies promoted by Obama was a program known as “Georgia Work$,” which sends unemployed workers to private sector employers to work as unpaid trainees for six weeks, with the state paying the usual benefits plus only a small stipend to cover transportation costs. Georgia officials said they were surprised that the program, which is virtually bankrupt and has enlisted less than 100 people since February, would be touted as a model. Its apparent attraction is that it holds out the prospect of doing away with traditional jobless benefits and forcing the unemployed to work without pay.
The bulk of the “American Job Act’s” funding would go to pay for tax breaks and another extension of unemployment benefits, neither of which will produce any appreciable reduction in the number of unemployed.
At the center of the proposal is the conception that only the private sector can create jobs, and that the government can prod it along with the offer of tax incentives. The reality, however, is that corporate America is sitting on a cash hoard amounting to trillions of dollars, fed by record profits and government bailouts, and has shown no inclination to utilize these vast resources to provide jobs for the unemployed. A reduction in payroll taxes or tax incentives for hiring veterans or the long-term unemployed will not change this class policy.
Moreover, by cutting these taxes, the Obama administration is starving core social programs—Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid—for funds, helping to create a justification for inflicting even more savage budget cuts.
In his speech, Obama pledged money spent on the “American Jobs Act” will be offset by increased cuts in government spending.
“The agreement we passed in July will cut government spending by about $1 trillion over the next ten years,” Obama said. “It also charges this Congress to come up with an additional $1.5 trillion in savings by Christmas. Tonight, I’m asking you to increase that amount so that it covers the full cost of the American Jobs Act.”
He specified that this would be done by making “additional spending cuts” including to Medicare and Medicaid, winning a standing ovation from many congressional Republicans.
He added that he would propose changes in the tax code affecting “tax breaks and loopholes” for the rich and corporations. The reality, however, is that the super-rich have benefited not merely from a few loopholes, but rather the cutting of the top tax rate in half over the past 15 years. As for the corporations, Obama promised that elimination of loopholes would be accompanied by a lowering of the corporate tax rate, driving profits even higher.
Along similar lines, Obama pledged to eliminate “rules and regulations that place an unnecessary burden on businesses,” a policy that he pursued last week with the rejection of a proposal from the Environmental Protection Agency to tighten standards for smog. While the EPA found that the regulation would prevent thousands of premature deaths, the Obama White House overruled it on the basis that it would unduly cut into corporate profits.
Three quarters of a century ago, the administration of Franklin D. Roosevelt found the resources to put millions of Americans to work through programs like the Works Progress Administration, that were responsible for nationwide construction and repair of basic infrastructure, from highways to airports to national parks.
Driven by tumultuous struggles of the American working class and the fears that example of the 1917 workers’ revolution Russia could be repeated, Roosevelt set about to save capitalism from itself.
Today, Obama cannot even hint at creating such a program. The protracted crisis of American capitalism has left the United States a declining power and the most heavily indebted country in the world. Moreover, the American ruling elite is increasingly dominated by a financial oligarchy that has amassed obscene fortunes not through production, but rather Wall Street speculation that crosses over into criminality.
This ruling class is prosecuting a savage assault on living standards and basic social rights of the working class, in which mass unemployment is viewed as an indispensable weapon in driving down wages and ripping up fundamental social programs.
In this counterrevolutionary offensive, it enjoys the full backing of the existing trade unions, whose privileged and well-paid bureaucracy is collaborating in slashing wages and benefits of the workers it purports to represent. Significantly, within hours of the speech, AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka, an invited guest of the president, hailed Obama for having “showed working people that he is willing to go to the mat to create new jobs on a substantial scale.”
Obama’s speech and the reactionary content of the “American Jobs Act” demonstrate once again that the beginning of any genuine struggle for jobs is the independent political mobilization of the working class against a social and political system that subordinates economic life to the profits of the dominant banks and corporations and the accumulation of wealth by the top 1 percent.
Working people must start from the standpoint that decent employment is an elementary social right, without which no other rights have any real content. To secure this right requires recovering the vast wealth monopolized by the financial and corporate elite and using it to create a massive public works program, ensuring decent jobs for all. To halt mass layoffs and further social cutbacks, the major banks and corporations must be turned into publicly owned enterprises under the democratic control of the working class.
*
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/07/why-rich-and-illegals-vow-to-reelect.html
*

For years, statistics have depicted growing income disparity in the United States, and it has reached levels not seen since the Great Depression. In 2008, the last year for which data are available, for example, the top 0.1 percent of earners took in more than 10 percent of the personal income in the United States, including capital gains, and the top 1 percent took in more than 20 percent. But economists had little idea who these people were. How many were Wall street financiers? Sports stars? Entrepreneurs? Economists could only speculate, and debates over what is fair stalled.
Now a mounting body of economic research indicates that the rise in pay for company executives is a critical feature in the widening income gap.
*
Yet Obama plods along, raising gobs of cash for his reelection bid — he was scheduled to speak at two DNC fundraisers Monday night — and varying little the words he reads from the teleprompter. He seemed detached even from those words Monday as he pivoted his head from side to side, proclaiming that “our problems is not confidence in our credit” and turning his bipartisan fiscal commission into a “biparticle.”
*
OBAMA, THE BIGGEST CON JOB IN AMERICAN HISTORY?
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/08/obama-why-his-rich-donors-and-criminal.html
*
Those of us who were bewitched by his eloquence on the campaign trail chose to ignore some disquieting aspects of his biography: that he had accomplished very little before he ran for president, having never run a business or a state; that he had a singularly unremarkable career as a law professor, publishing nothing in 12 years at the University of Chicago other than an autobiography; and that, before joining the United States Senate, he had voted "present" (instead of "yea" or "nay") 130 times, sometimes dodging difficult issues.

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/08/barack-obama-one-of-greatest-tragedies.html
*
THE RICH LOVE HIM! ILLEGALS ADORE HIM! HE’S MEXICO’S ANSWER TO WELFARE. “FREE” GRINGO-PAID HEALTHCARE AND ANCHOR BABY BREEDING… EVEN THE MEXICAN DRUG CARTELS APPRECIATE THE WAY OBAMA HAS NEUTERED BORDER SECURITY AND HELPED THEM EASE DRUG CARTELS INTO OUR NATION.
OBAMA! THE BIGGEST PUNKSTER IN AMERICAN HISTORY!

HE WALKS ABOUT LIKE A SOVEREIGN PRETENDING TO BE ABOVE IT ALL AS HE SERVICES HIS CRIMINAL BANKSTER DONORS AND TURNS THE WHITE HOUSE INTO HEADQUARTERS FOR THE LA RAZA SUPREMACIST PARTY.
REALITY OF AMERICAN UNDER OBAMA’S ASSAULT ON THE AMERICAN WORKER:
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/05/joe-american-legal-vs-la-raza-jose.html

*

Proving that President Obama is the first choice of Wall Street and the American super-rich, his reelection campaign announced Wednesday that it had broken all previous records for fundraising, raking in $86 million during the second quarter of this year.



Obama campaign raises record sums from the wealthy
By Patrick Martin
15 July 2011
Proving that President Obama is the first choice of Wall Street and the American super-rich, his reelection campaign announced Wednesday that it had broken all previous records for fundraising, raking in $86 million during the second quarter of this year.
The $86 million total dwarfed the previous record for presidential reelection fundraising, the $50 million raised by George W. Bush in the third quarter of 2003. It was far above the $60 million target set by Obama’s campaign manager, Jim Messina.
Obama for America, the official name of the reelection effort, raised $47 million, while the Democratic National Committee collected $38 million, largely from fundraising events featuring the president, where big donors are allowed to give up to $30,800 apiece. Individual donations to Obama for America are limited under federal election laws to a maximum of $5,000.
By comparison, the leading Republican fundraiser, former Massachusetts governor and investment banker Mitt Romney, raised $18.25 million in the April-June quarter. The total raised by all the Republican presidential hopefuls who have filed reports with the Federal Election Commission came to only $36 million, less than half Obama’s haul.
The Obama reelection campaign will be the most lavishly funded in American history. It is expected to dwarf the $745 million Obama raised in 2008, and could top the $1 billion mark. Only two decades ago, $20 million was sufficient to finance a full-scale presidential campaign.
According to press accounts, the Obama campaign has already opened 60 offices in various states around the country, nearly a year and a half before Election Day, and hired hundreds of full-time operatives.
The vast fund-raising comes in two relatively distinct components: over half a million small donors, reflecting lingering illusions in Obama in sections of the population; and large donors, from the wealthy and the most affluent sections of the upper-middle class.
A total of 552,462 individuals gave money during the second quarter, including 260,000 who made no donations during the 2008 campaign. Of these, 98 percent were of $250 or less, with an average contribution of $69. Based on that average, the small donations accounted for less than half the total raised, about $37 million.
The remainder, about $49 million, came in large-dollar contributions, including thousands who gave the maximum of $35,800—$30,800 to the DNC and $5,000 to Obama for America.
The Washington Post noted, “Much of the tens of millions Obama raised through the Democratic National Committee came from big fundraising events that the president attended throughout the spring. Donors to the DNC can give up to $30,800, and many of those who made the maximum contribution got to attend intimate, invitation-only dinners at which the president took their questions behind closed doors.”
Moreover, the total number of small donors was deliberately inflated by a promotion run by the campaign in which anyone who gave as little as $5 was entered into a lottery for a dinner with Obama and Vice President Biden.
The Obama campaign, clearly concerned about releasing information that would demonstrate corporate America’s enthusiasm for the president’s reelection, declined to say how much Obama for America raised from large donors. These numbers will be buried in the 15,000-page report the campaign files Friday with the FEC.
The report to the FEC will also detail the amount raised by “bundlers,” those who solicit donations from a group of individuals and reach a total set by the campaign, of $350,000 or more, as well as a group called Gen44, consisting of individuals younger than 40 who raise $100,000 or more.
While the 2008 Obama campaign was regularly described as fueled by small donors, the actual figures demonstrate the opposite: Obama did indeed raise $180 million from that source, but that came to less than one-quarter of his overall fundraising. Nearly half of his total—and the bulk of the early money, critical to sustaining his campaign against the initial frontrunner, Hillary Clinton—came from big donors.
Some details of the wooing of big-ticket donors were reported in the Washington press. The Post reported June 29, “Campaign officials are working to broaden Obama’s network of ‘bundlers,’ the well-connected rainmakers tasked with soliciting big checks from wealthy donors, while seeking to preserve the aura of a grass-roots movement by luring back the kind of small Internet donations that helped shatter fundraising records four years ago. Obama has attended 28 fundraisers from coast to coast—a pace that could continue, or even accelerate, over the next several months.”
The Post noted that White House Chief of Staff William Daley, former vice chairman of JP Morgan Chase “has huddled in recent weeks over breakfasts and dinners with business leaders and Wall Street financiers in Chicago, New York and Washington,” while campaign manager Messina “made his pitch during at least two meetings in Manhattan with Wall Street executives.”
Politico described one Wall Street fundraising dinner held at Daniel, a top-drawer restaurant on Manhattan’s Upper East Side: “The tables were filled with moneymen like Marc Lasry, the billionaire founder of the hedge fund Avenue Capital; Robert Wolf, the chief executive of UBS Group Americas; and Mark T. Gallogly, a co-founder of Centerbridge Partners.”
While noting the absence of Jamie Dimon of JP Morgan Chase and Lloyd Blankfein of Goldman Sachs, this was said to be by mutual agreement—an effort to avoid photographs of the president shaking hands with the CEOs of the largest recipients of federal bailouts.
“While Wall Street executives still complain about the president’s name-calling and pressure for a regulatory overhaul,” Politico observed cynically, “many say privately that his bark has been worse than his bite.”
The event raised $2.3 million in a single evening, far more than the projected $1.5 million. Politico concluded that “Obama’s campaign set a goal of getting 400 individuals to each help raise $350,000 by year’s end. That may sound like a tall order—especially with much of Wall Street on the sidelines—but early indications suggest the effort is on track, according to people involved in the campaign.”
*


Mr. Cool turns cold
By Richard Cohen, Published: August 8
In her autobiography, Helen Gahagan Douglas recalled telling President Franklin D. Roosevelt about her visits to the camps of migrant workers. She was especially poignant about the children and their lack of Christmas toys when the president tried to stop her. “Don’t tell me any more, Helen,” FDR told the woman who is probably best known for losing a dirty Senate race to Richard Nixon. She was stunned. Roosevelt was crying. Can anyone imagine Barack Obama doing anything similar?
The answer — at least my answer — is no. And this is quite amazing when you think about it. FDR was a Hudson River squire — down to his cigarette holder and cape. Nonetheless, he could connect to the less fortunate. Obama, in contrast, was raised in the great American muddle, not rich and not poor. Yet when the stock market fell more than 500 points last week and the image that night was of the president whooping it up at his birthday party, the juxtaposition — just bad timing, of course — seemed appropriate. He does not seem to care.
This quality of Obama’s, this inability to communicate what many of us think he must be feeling, has lately cost many trees their dear lives — reams of essays and op-ed pieces. One of the more interesting ones, by Drew Westen, a psychology professor at Emory University, ran in Sunday’s New York Times. It cited Obama’s frequent inability or unwillingness to explain himself or to appear empathetic. All this is true. But Westen’s most salient point was contained in the title: “What Happened to Obama?” The answer: Nothing.
Obama has always been the man he is today. He is the very personification of cognitive dissonance — the gap between what we (especially liberals) expected of the first serious African American presidential candidate and the man he in fact is. He has next to none of the rhetorical qualities of the old-time black politicians. He would eschew the cliche, but he feels little of their pain. In this sense, he has been patronized by liberals who looked at a man and saw black and has been reviled by those who looked at a black man and saw “other.”
Westen faults Obama for his lack of storytelling abilities. But this is because Obama is himself the story. Consider for a moment that Obama’s account of how he had to fight to get medical coverage for his dying mother is not exactly true. The White House’s response to this revelation was grudging silence. It did not dispute the story and it soon died. This was because the Obama story is not what he says but who he is. That remains unchanged, and so the very people who would pummel a Republican for such a mischaracterization were silent about Obama’s. Obama did not deign to reply. He does not have to.
Obama’s communications handicap, his loathing for the pornography of politics, could cost him a second term. In the current New York Review of Books, Andrew Hacker cites the findings of the University of Virginia’s Larry Sabato to point out that “an usually high proportion” of Obama’s 2008 majority came from new voters, “notably students and minorities.” If a large number of these Obama voters are no longer elated by the historic novelty of the candidate and/or are disappointed by his performance, turnout will be depressed and Obama will be in peril. The passion of his haters is fearsome; his admirers cannot be tepid.
Only the GOP can save Obama. His political shortcomings cannot be fixed because he is who he is. He can rely on running against a party that has the soul of an actuarial table and will cut programs that the poor and the middle class adore. Whoever that Republican candidate may be, he or she will be stuck in the amber of the early primaries and caucuses where extremism runs rampant and moderates go to die. Neither Jon Huntsman nor Mitt Romney has so far shown the political dexterity to squiggle out of the box that is the Iowa or South Carolina contests.
Obama is the very soul of common sense. As he talks, I nod my head in agreement. Mostly, I think, he has done the right thing. But I doubt anyone will ever recount how he cried in the Oval Office any more than I can recall a soaring passage from a speech. This president got elected because he was cool. He could be defeated because he is cold.
*
WASHINGTON — This is one anniversary few feel like celebrating.
Two years after economists say the Great Recession ended, the recovery has been the weakest and most lopsided of any since the 1930s.
After previous recessions, people in all income groups tended to benefit. This time, ordinary Americans are struggling with job insecurity, too much debt and pay raises that haven't kept up with prices at the grocery store and gas station. The economy's meager gains are going mostly to the wealthiest.
*

No comments: