FROM HIS FIRST DAYS IN
OFFICE, HE’S RUN FOR REELECTION. HE TURNED HIS ADMINSTRATION INTO A LA RAZA “THE
RACE” MACHINE TO EXPAND HIS PARTY BASE of ILLEGALS.
HE SERVICES HIS CRIMINAL
BANKSTER DONORS AND VOWED TO NEVER PUNISHED THEM FOR THEIR CRIMES. WHILE HIS
CORRUPT DEPT of JUSTICE AS FAILED TO BRING TO JUSTICE ANY OF OBAMA’S CRIMINAL
BANKSTER DONORS, IT HAS SUED FOUR AMERICAN STATES ON BEHALF OF OBAMA’S LA RAZA
SUPREMACY, ATTEMPTED TO NEUTER VOTING LAWS TO HELP GET ILLEGALS INTO THE VOTING
BOOTHS, FOUGHT AGAINST E-VERIFY TO EASE MORE ILLEGALS INTO OUR JOBS, AND FACED
A LA RAZA AUDIENCE TALKING ABOUT LEGALS AS “OUR ENEMIES”.
NO ADMIN IN HISTORY IS AS
INFESTED WITH LA RAZA AS OBAMA’S!
ULTIMATELY OBAMA PUNKED US
WORSE THAN ANY PRESIDENT IN HISTORY AND SIMPLY BECAME BUSH’S THIRD TERM ON
STEROIDS!
*
It was, by any measure, a breathtaking display of
grandiosity by a man whose entire political curriculum vitae consisted of seven
undistinguished years in the Illinois senate and two mostly absent years in the
United States Senate. That evening Mr. Obama revealed the
characteristics—arrogance, conceit, egotism, vanity, hubris and, above all,
rank amateurism—that would mark his presidency and doom it to frustration and
failure.
What
do historians really think of Obama?
By Edward Klein, Edward Klein
Published June 08, 2012
advertisement
On the evening of Tuesday,
June 30, 2009—just five months into his administration—Barack Obama invited a
small group of presidential historians to dine with him in the Family Quarters
of the White House. His chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, personally delivered the
invitations with a word of caution: the meeting was to remain private and off
the record. As a result, the media missed the chance to report on an important
event, for the evening with the historians provided a remarkable sneak preview
of why the Obama presidency would shortly go off the rails.
Today, with Mr. Obama in
full campaign mode, that event—as well as two more unreported White House
dinners with the historians—is worth examining. Together, they shed light on
the reason this president is likely to find it much harder than he expects to
connect with the public and win reelection to the White House.
At the time of the first
dinner, the new president was still enjoying a honeymoon period with the
American people; according to Gallup, 63 percent of Americans approved of the
job he was doing. Brimming with self-confidence, Mr. Obama had earlier confided
to David Axelrod, his chief political strategist: “The weird thing is, I know I
can do this job. I like dealing with complicated issues. I’m happy to make
decisions.…I think it’s going to be an easier adjustment for me than the
campaign. Much easier.”
That the adjustment from
campaigner to chief executive would prove harder—much harder—than
anticipated had still not dawned on Mr. Obama when he sat down to dine with the
historians. He was in an expansive mood as he tucked into his lamb chops and
went around the table addressing each historian by name—Doris Kearns Goodwin,
Michael Beschloss, Robert Caro, Robert Dallek, Douglas Brinkley, H. W. “Billam”
Brands, David Kennedy, Kenneth Mack, and Garry Wills.
During the presidential
campaign, most of the evening’s dinner guests, like their liberal counterparts
in the media, had dropped any pretense at objectivity. For instance, Michael
Beschloss ('Presidential Courage: Brave Leaders and How They Changed America,
1789-1989') described Obama as “probably the smartest guy ever to become
president,” which appeared to put Thomas Jefferson in his place.
Judging from Mr. Obama’s
questions, one subject was uppermost in his mind: how could he become a
“transformational” president and bend the historic trajectory of America’s
domestic and foreign policy?
When one of the historians
brought up the difficulties that Lyndon Johnson, another wartime president,
faced trying to wage a foreign military venture while implementing an ambitious
domestic agenda, Mr. Obama grew testy. He implied that he was different,
because he could prevail by the force of his personality. He could solve the
worst financial crisis since the Great Depression, put millions of people back
to work, redistribute wealth, withdraw from Iraq, and reconcile the United
States to a less dominant role in the world.
It was, by any measure, a breathtaking display of
grandiosity by a man whose entire political curriculum vitae consisted of seven
undistinguished years in the Illinois senate and two mostly absent years in the
United States Senate. That evening Mr. Obama revealed the
characteristics—arrogance, conceit, egotism, vanity, hubris and, above all,
rank amateurism—that would mark his presidency and doom it to frustration and
failure.
These characteristics had
already set the pattern of his administration. Mr. Obama personally conducted
his own foreign policy more than any president since Richard Nixon. He made all
the decisions, because he believed that only he truly understood the issues. He
spent his evenings writing decision papers on foreign affairs when, instead, he
should have delegated that chore to experts and devoted his time to schmoozing
members of Congress and convincing them to support his programs. He still loved
making speeches to large, adoring crowds, but he complained to foreign leaders
on the QT that he had to waste precious hours talking with “Congressmen from
Palookaville.”
[pullquote]
The senior people in his
administration proved to be just as inexperienced and inept as Mr. Obama when
it came to the business of running the government. Members of his inner
circle—David Axelrod, campaign manager David Plouffe, press secretary Robert
Gibbs, and éminence grise Valerie Jarrett—had proven their mettle in the dark
arts of political campaigning, but they had no serious experience in dealing
with public-policy issues. If they could be said to have any policy exposure at
all it was their ideological enthusiasms for the left.
Over the two-hour dinner,
Mr. Obama and the historians discussed several past presidents. It wasn’t clear
from Mr. Obama’s responses which of those presidents he identified with. At one
point, he seemed to channel the charismatic John F. Kennedy. At another moment,
he extolled the virtues of the “transformative” Ronald Reagan. Then again, it
was the saintly Lincoln…or the New Deal’s “Happy Warrior,” Franklin Roosevelt….
Mr. Obama told the
historians that he had come up with a slogan for his administration. “I’m
thinking of calling it ‘A New Foundation,’ ” he said.
Doris Kearns Goodwin
suggested that “A New Foundation” might not be the wisest choice for a motto.
“Why not?” the president
asked.
“It sounds,” said Goodwin,
“like a woman’s girdle.”
In the wake of the
shellacking the Democrats took in the midterm elections in 2010, Mr. Obama held
a second dinner with the historians, which was devoted to the question of how
he could “reconnect with the public.”
A third dinner took place
in July 2011, shortly after Mr. Obama and his team botched the budget-deficit
negotiations with Congress, and the United States government lost its Triple-A
credit rating for the first time in history. It revolved around the theme “the
challenge of reelection.”
That fall, I spoke to one
of the historians who attended all three of the dinners. We met in a restaurant
where we were unlikely to be seen, and our conversation, which lasted for
nearly two hours, was conducted under the condition of anonymity.
I wanted to know how this
liberal historian, who had once drunk the Obama Kool-Aid, matched the
president’s promise with his performance. By this time, most of Mr. Obama’s
supporters were puzzled by the sense of disconnect between the sharply focused
presidential candidate of 2008 and the dazed and confused president of the past
three years. The satirical TV show "The Onion News Network" had
broadcast a faux story that the real Barack Obama had been kidnapped just hours
after the election and replaced by an imposter.
“There’s no doubt that
Obama has turned out to be a major enigma and disappointment,” the historian
told me. “He waged such a brilliant campaign, first against Hillary Clinton in
the primaries, and then against John McCain in the general election. For a long
time, I found it hard to understand why he couldn’t translate his political
savvy into effective governance.
“But I think I know the
answer now,” he continued. “Since the beginning of his administration, Obama
hasn't been able to capture the public's imagination and inspire people to
follow him. Vision isn't enough in a president. Great presidents not only have
to enunciate their vision; they must lead by example and inspiration. Franklin
Roosevelt spoke to the individual. He and Ronald Reagan had the ability to make
each American feel that the president cared deeply and personally about them.
“That quality has been
lacking in Obama. People don’t feel that he’s on their side. Obama doesn't
connect. He doesn't have the answers. The irony is that he was supposed to be
such a brilliant orator. But, in fact, he’s turned out to be a failure as a
communicator."
If the verdict of this
historian is correct, and Barack Obama’s fundamental failure as president is
his inability to connect with people, he is in far more serious trouble than
most people realize as he seeks a mandate for a second term in office. Or, as
this historian put it: “I wouldn’t bet the ranch on his getting reelected.”
"More than that, Obama
might not have the place in history he so eagerly covets. Instead of ranking
with FDR and Reagan and other giants, it seems more likely that he will be a
case-study in presidential failure like Jimmy Carter."
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/06/08/what-do-historians-really-think-obama/print#ixzz1xUwMlDFX
THANKFULLY,
NO ADMINISTRATION IN HISTORY HAS BEEN INFESTED WITH A FOREIGN POLITICAL PARTY
AS OBAMA’S HAS WITH THE MEXICAN FASCIST PARTY of LA RAZA!
HIS
ADMIN IS INFESTED WITH LA RAZA SUPREMACIST!
DO
A SEARCH AT THE BLOG FOR HILDA SOLIS, OBAMA’S SEC. of (illegal) LABOR, OR HIS
AMBASSADOR TO MEX FASCIST, CECELIA MUNOZ, WHO IS FINANCED BY OBAMA WITH OUR TAX
DOLLARS!
Newsmax
Obama's 'Hispanicazation' of America
Monday, January 10, 2011 08:28 AM
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/08/obamas-hispanicazation-of-america-most.html
Obama's 'Hispanicazation' of America
Monday, January 10, 2011 08:28 AM
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/08/obamas-hispanicazation-of-america-most.html
*
FIFTEEN
THINGS YOU SHOULD KNOW ABOUT LA RAZA “THE RACE”
by Michelle Malkin
(get Malkin’s book on
OBAMA NOTED below!)
Only in America could critics of a group called "The
Race" be labeled racists. Such is the triumph of left-wing identity
chauvinists, whose aggressive activists and supine abettors have succeeded in
redefining all opposition as "hate."
Both Barack Obama and John McCain will speak this week in
San Diego at the annual conference of the National Council of La Raza, the
Latino organization whose name is Spanish for, yes, "The Race." Can
you imagine Obama and McCain paying homage to a group of white people who
called themselves that? No matter. The presidential candidates and the media
have legitimized "The Race" as a mainstream ethnic lobbying group and
marginalized its critics as intolerant bigots. The unvarnished truth is that
the group is a radical ethnic nationalist outfit that abuses your tax dollars
and milks PC politics to undermine our sovereignty.
*
Here are 15 things you should know about "The
Race":
*
15. "The Race" supports driver's licenses for
illegal aliens.
*
14."The Race" demands in-state tuition discounts
for illegal alien students that are not available to law-abiding U.S. citizens
and law-abiding legal immigrants.
*
13. "The Race" vehemently opposes cooperative
immigration enforcement efforts between local, state and federal authorities.
*
12. "The Race" opposes a secure fence on the
southern border.
*
11. "The Race" joined the American-Arab
Anti-Discrimination Committee in a failed lawsuit attempt to prevent the feds
from entering immigration information into a key national crime database -- and
to prevent local police officers from accessing the data.
*
10. "The Race" opposed the state of Oklahoma's
tough immigration-enforcement-first laws, which cut off welfare to illegal
aliens, put teeth in employer sanctions and strengthened local-federal
cooperation and information sharing.
*
9. "The Race" joined other open-borders,
anti-assimilationists and sued to prevent Proposition 227, California's
bilingual education reform ballot initiative, from becoming law.
*
8. "The Race" bitterly protested common-sense
voter ID provisions as an "absolute disgrace."
*
7. "The Race" has consistently opposed post-9/11
national security measures at every turn.
*
6. Former "Race" president Raul Yzaguirre, Hillary
Clinton's Hispanic outreach adviser, said this: "U.S. English is to
Hispanics as the Ku Klux Klan is to blacks." He was referring to U.S.
English, the nation's oldest, largest citizens' action group dedicated to
preserving the unifying role of the English language in the United States.
"The Race" also pioneered Orwellian open-borders Newspeak and advised
the Mexican government on how to lobby for illegal alien amnesty while avoiding
the terms "illegal" and "amnesty."
*
5. "The Race" gives mainstream cover to a
poisonous subset of ideological satellites, led by Movimiento Estudiantil
Chicano de Aztlan, or Chicano Student Movement of Aztlan (MEChA). The late GOP
Rep. Charlie Norwood rightly characterized the organization as "a radical
racist group … one of the most anti-American groups in the country, which has
permeated U.S. campuses since the 1960s, and continues its push to carve a
racist nation out of the American West."
*
4. "The Race" is currently leading a smear
campaign against staunch immigration enforcement leaders and has called for TV
and cable news networks to keep immigration enforcement proponents off the
airwaves -- in addition to pushing for Fairness Doctrine policies to shut up
their foes. The New York Times reported that current "Race" president
Janet Murguia believes "hate speech" should "not be tolerated,
even if such censorship were a violation of First Amendment rights."
*
3. "The Race" sponsors militant ethnic nationalist
charter schools subsidized by your public tax dollars (at least $8 million in
federal education grants). The schools include Aztlan Academy in Tucson, Ariz.,
the Mexicayotl Academy in Nogales, Ariz., Academia Cesar Chavez Charter School
in St. Paul, Minn., and La Academia Semillas del Pueblo in Los Angeles, whose
principal inveighed: "We don't want to drink from a White water fountain,
we have our own wells and our natural reservoirs and our way of collecting rain
in our aqueducts. We don't need a White water fountain … ultimately the White
way, the American way, the neo liberal, capitalist way of life will eventually
lead to our own destruction."
*
2. "The Race" has perfected the art of the PC
shakedown at taxpayer expense, pushing relentlessly to lower home loan
standards for Hispanic borrowers, reaping millions in federal "mortgage
counseling" grants, seeking special multimillion-dollar earmarks and
partnering with banks that do business with illegal aliens.
*
1. "The Race" thrives on ethnic supremacy -- and
the elite sheeple's unwillingness to call it what it is. As historian Victor
Davis Hanson observes: "[The] organization's very nomenclature 'The National Council of La Raza' is hate speech
to the core. Despite all the contortions of the group, Raza (as its Latin
cognate suggests) reflects the meaning of 'race' in Spanish, not 'the people'
-- and that's precisely why we don't hear of something like 'The National Council
of the People,' which would not confer the buzz notion of ethnic, racial and
tribal chauvinism."
*
The fringe is the center. The center is the fringe. Viva La
Raza.
Obama Quietly Erasing Borders
*
8 Out of 10 Illegals Apprehended in 2010 Never Prosecuted
*
HAS OBAMA PUNKED US?
“ The larger fear is that Obama
might be just another corporatist, punking voters much as the Republicans do
when they claim to be all for the common guy.” NEW YORK TIMES
Well, the banksters he works for don’t think
so! They caused a global depression, the life savings of millions of Americans,
and Obama and his harem of LA RAZA DEMS have handed them half the economy as
thanks. Now they’re staging a new show to convince they’re protecting our
borders from the Mexican drug cartel, even while they’re working up an
underhanded way of handing “free” healthcare for illegals so that even more hop
our borders and keep wages depressed for the LA RAZA DEMS’ paymasters.
The drugsters got hardons watching Obama
perform for criminal bankers, and they want theirs too, and OBAMA has promised
it!
Obama’s LA RAZA dems have been promised that
while Obama continues to lie about the people, he’s come up with some
interesting new angles to put 38 million Mexican flag waving illegals into our
jobs to depress wages even more.
Yes, we’re punked! Obama is nothing but a
calculated red-carpet addicted actor bent on extending the golden age of
CORPORATE RAPE AND PILLAGE under BUSH, HILLARY, BILLARY, BUSH.
Unemployment? Foreclosures? Mexican crime
waves? Hey, don’t talk like a socialist commie! There’s good money in socialism
for corporate criminals, war and war profiteer, like DIANNE FEINSTEIN, and they
know OBAMA will protect and put out good bonuses. ARE WE PUNKED BY THE GREATEST
CON JOB EVER?
August
9, 2009
Op-Ed
Columnist
Is Obama Punking Us?
“AUGUST is a challenging time to be president,” said Andrew Card,
the former Bush White House chief of staff, as he offered unsolicited advice to his successors in a
television interview last week. “I think you have to expect the unexpected.”
He should know. Thursday was the
eighth anniversary of “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.,” the President’s
Daily Brief that his boss ignored while on vacation in Crawford. Aug. 29 marks
the fourth anniversary of Hurricane Katrina’s strike on the Louisiana coast,
which his boss also ignored while on vacation in Crawford.
So do have a blast in Martha’s
Vineyard, President Obama.
Even as we wait for some unexpected
disaster to strike, Beltway omens for the current White House are grim. Obama’s
poll numbers are approaching free fall, we are
told. If he fails on health care, he’s toast. Indeed, many of the bloviators
who spot a fatal swoon in the Obama presidency are the same doomsayers who in
August 2008 were predicting his Election Day defeat because he couldn’t “close
the deal” and clear the 50 percent mark in matchups with John McCain.
Here are two not very daring
predictions: Obama will get some kind of health care reform done come fall. His
poll numbers will not crater any time soon.
Yet there is real reason for
longer-term worry in the form of a persistent, anecdotal drift toward
disillusionment among some of the president’s supporters. And not merely those
on the left. This concern was perhaps best articulated by an Obama voter, a
real estate agent in Virginia, featured on the front page of The
Washington Post last week. “Nothing’s changed for the common guy,” she said.
“I feel like I’ve been punked.” She cited in particular the billions of dollars
in bailouts given to banks that still “act like they’re broke.”
But this mood isn’t just about the
banks, Public Enemy No. 1. What the Great Recession has crystallized is a
larger syndrome that Obama tapped into during the campaign. It’s the sinking
sensation that the American game is rigged — that, as the president typically
put it a month after his inauguration, the system is in hock to “the
interests of powerful lobbyists or the wealthiest few” who have “run Washington
far too long.” He promised to smite them.
No president can do that alone, let
alone in six months. To make Obama’s goal more quixotic, the ailment that he
diagnosed is far bigger than Washington and often beyond politics’ domain. What
disturbs Americans of all ideological persuasions is the fear that almost
everything, not just government, is fixed or manipulated by some powerful
hidden hand, from commercial transactions as trivial as the sales of prime
concert tickets to cultural forces as pervasive as the news media.
As Democrats have pointed out, the
angry hecklers disrupting town-hall meetings convened by members of Congress
are not always ordinary citizens engaging in spontaneous grass-roots protests
or even G.O.P. operatives, but proxies for corporate
lobbyists. One group facilitating the
screamers is FreedomWorks, which is run by the former Congressman Dick
Armey, now
a lobbyist at the DLA Piper law firm. Medicines Company, a global
pharmaceutical business, has paid DLA Piper more than $6 million in
lobbying fees in the five years Armey has worked there.
But the Democratic members of
Congress those hecklers assailed can hardly claim the moral high ground. Their
ties to health care interests are merely more discreet and insidious. As
Congressional Quarterly reported last week, industry
groups contributed almost $1.8 million in the first six months of 2009 alone to
the 18 House members of both parties supervising health care reform, Nancy
Pelosi and Steny Hoyer among them.
Then there are the 52 conservative
Blue Dog Democrats, who have balked at the public option for health insurance.
Their cash intake from insurers and drug companies outpaces their Democratic
peers by an average of 25 percent, according to The Post. And let’s
not forget the Democratic Senate Campaign Committee, which has raked in nearly $500,000
from a single doctor-owned hospital in McAllen, Tex. — the very one
that Obama has cited as a symbol of runaway medical costs ever since it was profiled
in The New Yorker this spring.
In this maze of powerful moneyed
interests, it’s not clear who any American in either party should or could root
for. The bipartisan nature of the beast can be encapsulated by the remarkable
progress of Billy Tauzin, the former Louisiana congressman. Tauzin was a founding member of the Blue
Dog Democrats in 1994. A year later, he bolted to the Republicans. Now he is
chief of PhRMA, the biggest pharmaceutical trade group. In the 2008 campaign,
Obama ran a television ad pillorying Tauzin for his role in preventing Medicare
from negotiating for lower drug prices. Last week The Los Angeles Times reported — and The New York Times confirmed — that
Tauzin, an active player in White House health care negotiations, had secured a
behind-closed-doors flip-flop, enlisting the administration to push for
continued protection of drug prices. Now we know why the president has ducked
his campaign pledge to broadcast such negotiations on C-Span.
The making of legislative sausage is
never pretty. The White House has to give to get. But the cynicism being
whipped up among voters is justified. Unlike Hillary Clinton, whose chief
presidential campaign strategist unapologetically did double duty as a
high-powered corporate flack, Obama promised change we could actually believe
in.
His first questionable post-victory
step was to assemble an old boys’ club of Robert Rubin protégés and
Goldman-Citi alumni as the White House economic team, including a Treasury
secretary, Timothy Geithner, who failed in his watchdog role at the New York
Fed as Wall Street’s latest bubble first inflated and then burst. The questions about
Geithner’s role in adjudicating the subsequent bailouts aren’t going away, and
neither is the angry public sense that the fix is still in. We just learned
that nine of those bailed-out banks — which in total received $175 billion of
taxpayers’ money, but as yet have repaid only $50 billion — are awarding a total of
$32.6 billion in bonuses for 2009.
It’s in this context that Obama
can’t afford a defeat on health care. A bill will pass in a Democrat-controlled
Congress. What matters is what’s in it. The final result will be a CAT scan of
those powerful Washington interests he campaigned against, revealing which have
been removed from the body politic (or at least reduced) and which continue to
metastasize. The Wall Street regulatory reform package Obama pushes through, or
doesn’t, may render even more of a verdict on his success in changing the
system he sought the White House to reform.
The best political news for the
president remains the Republicans. It’s a measure of how out of touch G.O.P.
leaders like Mitch McConnell and John Boehner are that they keep trying to
scare voters by calling Obama a socialist. They have it backward. The larger fear is that Obama might be
just another corporatist, punking voters much as the Republicans do when they
claim to be all for the common guy. If anything, the most unexpected — and
challenging — event that could rock the White House this August would be if the
opposition actually woke up.
*
The Mexican occupation of 38 million
illegals depress wages $200 - $300 billion per year for Americans. These same
Americans are forced to pay the staggering welfare costs of the occupation as
well. Welfare paid to illegals in Mexican occupied Los Angeles, is nearly $40
MILLION PER MONTH. In Los Angeles, 47% of those employed are ILLEGALS.
US corporations squeezing more
output from workers and paying lower wages
By Patrick O’Connor
12 August 2009
12 August 2009
US
Labor Department data released yesterday showed productivity up 6.4 percent in
the second quarter, the largest gain since 2003 and higher than economists’
forecasts of 5.5 percent. Over the same period, workers’ compensation fell
sharply.
The
Bureau of Labor Statistics explained that productivity—which measures hourly
output per employee—increased “due to hours worked declining faster than
output.”
In
other words, big business is using the rise in unemployment to extract greater
output from employed workers through speedup and other forms of intensified
exploitation.
Nonfarm
productivity rose 6.4 percent as a result of output declining by 1.7 percent
and total hours worked plummeting 7.6 percent.
Data
also showed that real hourly employee compensation fell by 1.1 percent in the
second quarter, or by 2.2 percent on an annualized basis. The combined impact
of declining wages and rising productivity brought unit labor costs down by a
huge 5.8 percent in the three months from April to June.
In
manufacturing, quarterly productivity rose 5.3 percent, a result of output
falling by 9.9 percent and hours by 14.4 percent. In the durable manufacturing
sub-category, the output and hours decline was even greater—16.5 percent and
19.6 percent respectively.
The
recent productivity boost, unlike that seen in previous periods, has involved
no developments in productive technique. Mark Vitner of Wells Fargo Bank told
Dow Jones Newswire that the second quarter gain “is almost entirely the result
of cost-cutting, not improved ways of producing goods and providing services.”
Several
commentators frankly admitted that the productivity boost was the product of
intensified pressure on the working class. In a comment for Dow Jones’ MarketWatch,
Tom Bernis wrote: “Anybody lucky enough to hang onto his or her job in this
recession is working flat out to keep it. That’s one take on the latest US
productivity numbers...
“The
severity of the recession has pushed the hours worked to levels not seen since
the mid-1990s, even as units of output have risen nearly 40 percent. So, with
the economy essentially in ‘idle,’ it takes far fewer workers to keep things
moving than nearly a decade-and-a-half ago. That’s good news for profits, but
not so good for the unemployed.”
Ian
Shepherdson, chief domestic economist for High Frequency Economics, added:
“These are spectacular numbers and help explain why so many recently reporting
companies have beaten earnings estimates.”
Bloomberg News highlighted
DuPont, the third-biggest US chemical company, which last month announced a
better-than-anticipated $417 million second quarter profit. This was achieved
after outlining a strategy to cut fixed costs by $1 billion, partly by laying
off 2,500 permanent workers and 10,000 contractors. “Our aggressive actions to
improve productivity and reduce costs across the company are paying off,” Chief
Executive Officer Ellen Kullman declared.
According
to Time magazine’s Justin Fox, a recent report by the Goldman Sachs
portfolio strategy team compared current corporate profits with previous
periods. In an extraordinary finding, the researchers concluded that if
financial companies, auto producers and utilities are excluded, corporations in
the S&P 500 index had higher profit margins during the worst of the current
crisis than they did during any point of the mid-1980s economic boom.
This
conclusion points to the class character of the Obama administration and the
social interests being served by its policies.
The
economic policies advanced by successive Democratic and Republican
administrations over the last three decades produced significant productivity
increases at the same time that average real wages stagnated or declined. This
led to an unprecedented shift in national income distribution, away from wages
towards corporate profits, massively increasing social inequality.
These
tendencies are accelerating, with the Obama administration, on behalf of the
major corporations and banks, advancing a sweeping economic restructuring
agenda aimed at permanently driving down workers’ wages and conditions. Every
aspect of the administration’s agenda—from the bailout of the banks, to mass
layoffs and wage and benefit concessions in the auto industry, to sweeping cuts
in health care for workers and retirees—is directed towards protecting the
ruling elite’s wealth at the expense of the majority of the population.
Obama
sent a clear signal to big business with the restructuring of the auto
industry. The federally supervised bankruptcy of General Motors and Chrysler
involved the destruction of large sections of each company’s productive
capacity, the elimination of tens of thousands of jobs, and the imposition of
wages and conditions equivalent to those last experienced in the industry in
the 1930s. This set the stage for an economy-wide corporate offensive against
jobs, wages, and conditions, the initial results of which are reflected in the
latest productivity and labor cost data.
*
ARE AMAZED AT HOW UTTERLY BRAZEN THESE CORPORATE OWNED
POLITICIANS ARE?
GET THIS BOOK!
Culture of Corruption: Obama and His Team of Tax Cheats,
Crooks, and Cronies
by Michelle Malkin
Editorial Reviews
In her shocking new book, Malkin digs deep into the records
of President Obama's staff, revealing corrupt dealings, questionable pasts, and
abuses of power throughout his administration.
From the Inside Flap
The era of hope and change is dead....and it only took six
months in office to kill it.
Never has an administration taken office with more inflated
expectations of turning Washington around. Never have a media-anointed American
Idol and his entourage fallen so fast and hard. In her latest investigative
tour de force, New York Times bestselling author Michelle Malkin delivers a
powerful, damning, and comprehensive indictment of the culture of corruption
that surrounds Team Obama's brazen tax evaders, Wall Street cronies, petty
crooks, slum lords, and business-as-usual influence peddlers. In Culture of
Corruption, Malkin reveals:
* Why nepotism beneficiaries First Lady Michelle Obama and
Vice President Joe Biden are Team Obama's biggest liberal hypocrites--bashing
the corporate world and influence-peddling industries from which they and their
relatives have benefited mightily
* What secrets the ethics-deficient members of Obama's
cabinet--including Hillary Clinton--are trying to hide
* Why the Obama White House has more power-hungry,
unaccountable "czars" than any other administration
* How Team Obama's first one hundred days of appointments
became a litany of embarrassments as would-be appointee after would-be
appointee was exposed as a tax cheat or had to withdraw for other reasons
* How Obama's old ACORN and union cronies have squandered
millions of taxpayer dollars and dues money to enrich themselves and expand
their power
* How Obama's Wall Street money men and corporate lobbyists
are ruining the economy and helping their friends In Culture of Corruption,
Michelle Malkin lays bare the Obama administration's seamy underside that the
liberal media would rather keep hidden.
Product Details
• Hardcover:
376 pages
• Publisher:
Regnery Publishing (July 27, 2009)
• Language:
English
• ISBN-10:
1596981091
• ISBN-13:
978-1596981096
No comments:
Post a Comment