Sunday, March 24, 2019

OBAMA'S PLOTTING FOR A THIRD AND FOURTH TERM FOR LIFE - WILL HIS MUSLIM CRONIES HELP HIM CREATE A MUSLIM-STYLE DICTATORSHIP?



Has President Obama finally been caught in the act? Was he in on the FBI's FISA abuse all along?
Townhall editor Katie Pavlich has dug up something pretty interesting from the trove of newly released emails from the ultra-chatty FBI officials Lisa Page and Andrew McCabe, noted earlier here. She writes:
Next, while Page and McCabe are refusing to clarify, it appears the Obama White House may have been directly briefed on the matter.
She cites this news report from Fox News as the indicator:
On Oct. 14, 2016, Page again wrote to McCabe, this time concerning a meeting with the White House.

“Just called," Page said to McCabe. "Apparently the DAG [Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates] now wants to be there, and WH wants DOJ to host.  So we are setting that up now.  ... We will very much need to get Cohen’s view before we meet with her.  Better, have him weigh in with her before the meeting. We need to speak with one voice, if that is in fact the case.” ("Cohen" is likely then-Deputy CIA Director David Cohen.)

McCabe responded within the hour: "Thanks. I will reach out to David." On Oct. 19, Page wrote to McCabe that the "meeting with WH counsel is finally set up."

Neither Lisa Page nor McCabe responded to Fox News' inquiries as to whether the meeting was designed to brief the White House on the FISA application or some other matter.
Seems like the Fox News question was pro forma. Could such a meeting, a month before the election, back when Hillary Clinton was projected to win, have been about anything else? Would these deep-staters, lining up with their plot to frame Donald Trump, really have lined up as a group to tell the White House Counsel all about their FISA abuse during those electric times and then asked the man to keep the information away from the president? Would the White House counsel have taken in such a meeting and then kept the news to himself, despite his job description? Would Obama have been incurious about such an unprecented meeting?
Color me skeptical.
It very much looks like Obama was in on the plot all along, getting his briefings about it and smiling to himself. And as GatewayPundit has speculated, it certainly would have made sense from Obama's point of view:
What was Obama’s motive? Simple, he knew if he did that for Hillary, he’d own the next President of the United States, and could blackmail her with the truth till the end of time. It literally would have given him a 3rd and 4th term.
Which is pretty creepy, but also perfectly believable.
Obama, as it happens, has a certain style of governance that is above all characterized by meddling and interference. Here are a few examples from Obama's post-presidency that I wrote about a few days ago - Obama's little minions trying to interfere in the Jussie Smollett case, interfering for sure in the Roseanne Barr firing, and maybe having some involvement in the elitist college admissions scandal. They interfere like crazy because they are accustomed to interfering, sticking their fingers in every pie if it benefits them politically. Would Obama have benefited politically from some FISA abuse to spy on Trump and his advisors? Darn tootin' he would. 
Which way down on the horizon raises some questions about whether there should be legal consequences for the illegal activity. If we don't want to see more of it from Democratic leaders, maybe there has to be.



Is Michelle Obama Plotting to Take the White House in 2020?

https://townhall.com/columnists/cliffnichols/2019/01/09/is-michelle-obama-plotting-to-retake-the-white-house-in-2020-n2538776


 



Recently, the mainstream media gleefully reported something that many at first dismissed, quickly passing it off as nothing more than a transient morsel of cultural trivia, if not fake news.

Allegedly, a recent Gallup Poll not only bestowed upon Michelle Obama the honor of being The Most Admired Woman in 2018,but also thereby declared her to be more popular than Hillary and Oprah!
I would suggest this news might represent an ominous bellwether of measurable import to all of us who are hoping to see President Trump elected to a second term.
In politics, 2020 is but a blink away, and who will be anointed by the Democrats to challenge President Trump is being decided right now. And I promise you, they are considering Michelle Obama a possibility.

Back in May 2016, I published an op-ed entitled: Overlooking the Obvious, if Hillary is Indicted? In that editorial, I attempted to alert people in the late spring of that election year to the possibility that —in the event Hillary Clinton was indicted for the felonies she committed in connection with her infamous private email server— Michelle Obama stood an excellent chance of becoming the candidate who would be chosen by the DNC to replace Hillary at their National Convention in July.
In pertinent part, I argued:

“From a progressive point of view, Michelle is a popular, educated, black, liberal female. Translation? She is most probably more appealing to almost all significantly relevant demographic groups than either Biden or Kerry could ever hope to be. Demographics that could foreseeably unite Hillary’s supporters with Bernie’s and, perhaps even lure some “crossovers” back from Trump. As such, would she not provide a clearer path by which her presently fractured party could effectively unite and ultimately defeat Trump? Probably.

“Additionally, Michelle’s anointing would also present significant personal benefits to the Obamas. At minimum, Michelle would present the best of all options for the President [Obama] to protect, if not guarantee, the continuation of his legacy. Surely, if elected, would she not foreseeably continue unabated the advancement of much, if not most, of his present Administration’s liberal Supreme Court, immigration, LGBT, pro-choice and anti-Israel agendas? Almost certainly.”

Of course, none of this transpired in 2016, and for that, I was as glad as I was made later by Hillary’s defeat.

That does not mean that Michelle’s candidacy for the presidency should be dismissed as impossible today, however.

The reality is that those same reasons given in 2016 as to why the Democrats might find her nomination ideal remain as valid today as they were back then, if not more so.
And all that is before one considers the considerable support her candidacy could receive today from:

1.The many people in this country who so single-mindedly desire to see a female elected president in their lifetime regardless of her aptitude or qualifications;

2.The mainstream media that is already wholeheartedly committed to endorsing and promoting anyone who could possibly defeat the current president they so passionately hate; and, needless to say,

3. All those from the first Obama presidency who may have a vested interest in finding some way to forestall the unsealing of rumored indictments for little things like treason and other related felonies.

The indisputability of these facts should, at at the very least, give the president and his supporters cause to keep a close watch on Michelle’s present public activities.
Only last summer the former FLOTUS was busy enlisting some of her anti-Trump, celebrity friends — including “Hamilton” creator Lin-Manuel Miranda, singers Janelle Monáe and Faith Hill, and actor Tom Hanks  — to help her launch a supposedly “nonpartisan” voter-registration campaign called When We All Vote.
Then, only a few months later, just last November, she published her new book, Becoming, in coordination with a nation-wide “promotion” campaign that, from all appearances, is exceeding in terms of scope and ambition even that of Hillary’s 2016 presidential campaign.

Managed by the same company that promotes Beyoncé’s concert tours, the ten stops of the first leg of her national tour in November and December of 2018 were at arenas with seating capacities hovering around 20,000, not only in Washington, D.C., but also in states like New York, Massachusetts, Colorado, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Tennessee, Illinois, California, and Georgia.

And then, to begin this New Year, a few days ago she announced that 14 additional speaking engagements have now been scheduled — so far — to allow even more sell-out crowds to attend her “A Conversation with Michelle Obama” tour in similarly huge venues located this time around in Oregon, Washington, Arizona, Texas, Minnesota, Wisconsin,Ohio, and Florida.

If they haven’t done so already, both the president and the RNC might want to compare these “whistle stops” now being made by Michelle to “promote” her book to the following list of the top 10 “key” electoral vote states in 2020: California (45); Texas (38); New York (29); Florida (29); Illinois (20); Pennsylvania (20); Ohio (18); Michigan (16); Georgia (16); North Carolina (15).

Mere coincidence? Perhaps. But, then again, maybe not.

Either way, what can’t be denied is the fact that these events promoting Michelle — or should I say, her “book” — bear an uncanny resemblance in size and geographic scope to the “MAGA Rallies” of 2016 that helped get President Trump elected.

And the single most important fact that might distinguish their rallies is one that may not bode well for the president.

To attend Michelle’s “book signing” events, she is finding herself able to charge those who want to attend as much as $597.00 to $1,435 per ticket!

Unless her new book is really that good — which is doubtful — the question this fact should put before the president is this: If he were to charge his supporters such ticket prices, would he be able to fill stadiums next year, like he did in 2016?
If not, he really should be taking a long hard look at Michelle Obama… starting right now.
Disregard the fact that Michelle has said on numerous occasions that she doesn’t like politics, and has no intention of running for president. In politics, a more accurate reading of a person’s intentions is better often obtained by looking at what they are doing, rather than what they may be saying while they are doing it.
And from that perspective, Michelle’s presently scheduled activities strongly suggest the behavior of a person plotting to place herself in the position of becoming the left’s “reluctant hero” in 2020. The only demographically-qualified Democrat who — if they absolutely beg her to do it — is able to rise to the occasion, respond to the pleas of her Party, and save them all from having to endure another four years of President Trump.
But whether she is reluctant or not, make no mistake about it. Her potential candidacy, when viewed through the prism of her present, successful endeavors, has all the earmarks of one that could propel her toward having an impact upon Trump’s presidency in 2020 with a force similar to that of a locomotive charging at full throttle that is followed close behind by a tsunami of support.
And to stop it, President Trump may very well need … a WALL!
Clifford C. Nichols is an attorney licensed to practice in California and New Mexico. He is also a political commentator and the author of a recent satire — My Unspeakable Kindergarten Experience with Kavanaugh — that lampoons the Left’s mistreatment of Justice Kavanaugh. Any comments or questions regarding this editorial may be directed to him at cliff@cnicholslaw.com or www.cnicholslaw.com.


OBAMA AND HIS SAUDIS PAYMASTERS… Did he serve them well?
Malia, Michelle, Barack and the College Admissions Scandal https://globalistbarackobama.blogspot.com/2019/03/malia-michelle-barack-and-college.html
*
Michelle was the next to attend Harvard, in her case Harvard Law School. “Told by counselors that her SAT scores and her grades weren’t good enough for an Ivy League school,” writes Christopher Andersen in Barack and Michelle, “Michelle applied to Princeton and Harvard anyway.”
*
Barack Obama’s back door, however, was unique to him. Before prosecutors send some of the dimmer Hollywood stars to the slammer for their dimness, they might want to ask just how much influence a Saudi billionaire peddled to get Obama into Harvard.

MICHELLE OBAMA ANNOUNCES SHE WILL RUN FOR THE WHITE HOUSE AND BE BARACK’S THIRD TERM FOR LIFE.
MEXICO WILL ELECT HER!
https://globalistbarackobama.blogspot.com/2019/01/michelle-obama-ill-be-baracks-third.html
The main objective of “political animals” like Obama and the Clintons is to get elected; it’s not to fix a broken America, nor to protect her. There are people who govern and there are people who campaign; Obama and the Clintons are the latter. Just look at the huge Republican electoral gains under Obama and the Clintons. It’s amazing that Democrats who still care about their party still support the very people who have brought it down.

“Of course, one of the main reasons the nation is now “divided, resentful and angry” is because race-baiting, Islamist, class warrior Barack Hussein Obama was president for eight long years.   MATTHEW VADUM
 Editorial Reviews: Obama Is Making You Poorer—But Who’s Getting Rich?

Goldman Sachs, GE, Pfizer, the United Auto Workers—the same “special interests” Barack Obama was supposed to chase from the temple—are profiting handsomely from Obama’s Big Government policies that crush taxpayers, small businesses, and consumers. In Obamanomics, investigative reporter Timothy P. Carney digs up the dirt the mainstream media ignores and the White House wishes you wouldn’t see. Rather than Hope and Change, Obama is delivering corporate socialism to America, all while claiming he’s battling corporate America. It’s corporate welfare and regulatory robbery—it’s Obamanomics. TIMOTHY P CARNEY
*
GET THIS BOOK!

Obamanomics: How Barack Obama Is Bankrupting You and Enriching His Wall Street Friends, Corporate Lobbyists, and Union Bosses

BY TIMOTHY P CARNEY

 Editorial Reviews

Obama Is Making You Poorer—But Who’s Getting Rich?

Goldman Sachs, GE, Pfizer, the United Auto Workers—the same “special interests” Barack Obama was supposed to chase from the temple—are profiting handsomely from Obama’s Big Government policies that crush taxpayers, small businesses, and consumers. In Obamanomics, investigative reporter Timothy P. Carney digs up the dirt the mainstream media ignores and the White House wishes you wouldn’t see. Rather than Hope and Change, Obama is delivering corporate socialism to America, all while claiming he’s battling corporate America. It’s corporate welfare and regulatory robbery—it’s OBAMANOMICS TO SERVE THE RICH AND GLOBALIST BILLIONAIRES.

 


ISLAMIST BARACK OBAMA

*
“Of course, one of the main reasons the nation is now “divided, resentful and angry” is because race-baiting, Islamist, class warrior Barack Hussein Obama was president for eight long years." MATTHEW VADUM
*
"But the Obamas are the center of the most delusional cult of personality that the media has yet spawned. And so we get bizarre pieces like these." MONICA SHOWALTER
*
"Along with Obama, Pelosi and Schumer are responsible for incalculable damage done to this country over the eight years of that administration." PATRICIA McCARTHY

THE (REALITY) OF THE DEMOCRAT PARTY:
Anti-Semitic, open borders for cheaper labor and funded by criminal banksters… and these pols are making vast fortunes sucking the blood of America!

We must not let them cheat their way to power over the rest of us.  Their ongoing vote fraud must be stopped and the Democrats need to take a look at themselves and at what they have become. It's not a pretty picture.  What they have become threatens to destroy the greatest nation on the planet and they are doing it on purpose.  They have nothing but contempt for the US as founded and for those of us who love this country. PATRICIA McCARTHY – AMERICAN THINKER

“Then we suffered the rattling election of Barack Obama, whose active membership in a white-, Jewish-, and America-hating church was well known to the electorate.  His close personal relationship with the likes of his adored Rev. Jeremiah Wright and Louis Farrakhan was no secret.  Obama was open about his goals.  He told us he was out to "fundamentally transform America" and the world.”  ALAN BERGSTEIN
“There is a deep racist and anti-Semitic disease in the leadership of the Democrats. As Senator Cory Booker brings his hatred for the Jewish State to the Senate, he should be asked whether he agrees with his hero, “The only good Zionist is a dead Zionist we must take a lesson from Hitler”. DANIEL GREENFIELD

 

 

Obamanomics: How Barack Obama Is Bankrupting You and Enriching His Wall Street Friends, Corporate Lobbyists, and Union Bosses


BY TIMOTHY P CARNEY


Goldman Sachs, GE, Pfizer, the United Auto Workers—the same “special interests” Barack Obama was supposed to chase from the temple—are profiting handsomely from Obama’s Big Government policies that crush taxpayers, small businesses, and consumers. In Obamanomics, investigative reporter Timothy P. Carney digs up the dirt the mainstream media ignores and the White House wishes you wouldn’t see. Rather than Hope and Change, Obama is delivering corporate socialism to America, all while claiming he’s battling corporate America. It’s corporate welfare and regulatory robbery—it’s Obamanomics. TIMOTHY P CARNEY

*

OBOMB for BRIBES:
BARACK OBAMA AGAIN TALKS THIRD TERM.


President Barack Obama: During his presidential campaign, President Obama promised to run an ethical and transparent administration. However, in his first year in office, the President has delivered corruption and secrecy, bringing Chicago-style political corruption to the White House. JUDICIAL WATCH

“They knew Obama was an unqualified crook; yet they promoted him. They knew Obama was a train wreck waiting to happen; yet they made him president, to the great injury of America and the world. They understood he was only a figurehead, an egomaniac, and a liar; yet they made him king, doing great harm to our republic (perhaps irreparable.)” ALLAN ERICKSON


"We know that Obama and his inner circle have set up a war room in his D.C. home to plan and execute resistance to the Trump administration and his legislative agenda.  None of these people care about the American people, or the fact that Trump won the election because millions of people voted for him."  Patricia McCarthy / AMERICAN THINKER.com

Obamanomics: How Barack Obama Is Bankrupting You and Enriching His Wall Street Friends, Corporate Lobbyists, and Union Bosses

BY TIMOTHY P CARNEY

 Editorial Reviews

Obama Is Making You Poorer—But Who’s Getting Rich?

Goldman Sachs, GE, Pfizer, the United Auto Workers—the same “special interests” Barack Obama was supposed to chase from the temple—are profiting handsomely from Obama’s Big Government policies that crush taxpayers, small businesses, and consumers. In Obamanomics, investigative reporter Timothy P. Carney digs up the dirt the mainstream media ignores and the White House wishes you wouldn’t see. Rather than Hope and Change, Obama is delivering corporate socialism to America, all while claiming he’s battling corporate America. It’s corporate welfare and regulatory robbery—it’s Obamanomics.


 

DREAMS FROM HIS WIFE

Michelle Obama's "Becoming" explains it all for you.



November 27, 2018

The United States is smothered in a “veil of impossibility,” and “only one person will snatch that veil of impossibility off their heads.” That was a fired-up Michelle Obama back in 2008, but in her new book Becoming, the former First Lady shows it was possible to advance long before her husband came on the scene.
Her father Fraser Robinson worked for the city of Chicago in a water filtration plant. He provided the family with a middle-class lifestyle and drove a Buick Electra 225, a luxury car known as a “deuce and a quarter.” Michelle attended Whitney Young high school where “it was safe to be smart,” and “you never hid your intelligence for fear of someone saying you talked like a white girl.” Indeed, the author’s racial consciousness is on full display here.
Families moved to the suburbs in search of “whiteness.” Washington was “just a faraway city filled with a lot of white buildings and white men.” The capitol “confused me with its decorous traditions and sober self-regard, its whiteness and maleness.” And “people of color” jostle on every hand.
Becoming will be of interest to the “presidential historians” who hold forth on PBS. General readers get a sense of the First Family and their experience with in vitro fertilization. The photo section features one picture of Michelle in a swimsuit and her book is like a bikini. What it reveals is interesting but what it conceals is crucial.
In 2008, Michelle recalls, Christopher Hitchens said of her senior college thesis, that “to describe it as hard to read would be a mistake; the thesis cannot be ‘read’ at all, in the strict sense of the verb. This is because it wasn’t written in any known language.” Michelle was fond of black radicals like Stokely Carmichael but she wasn’t much of a writer.
On page 224 of Becoming readers meet David Axelrod, who would “lead the messaging and media for Barack.” Michelle fails to recall that the New York Times dubbed Axelrod “Obama’s narrator” and his fingerprints are all over this account. Axelrod’s 2015 Believer betrays the same elephantine style, and a lot more.
Axelrod left journalism because he liked to tell stories and he describes Obama, who had no record of publication, as a fantastic writer with the skill of an historical novelist. As Becoming explains, the future president “sold his idea for a nonfiction book about race and identity.” No word that in the 2017 Rising Star: The Making of Barack Obama, official biographer David Garrow proclaimed Dreams from My Father to be “historical fiction”and the author a “composite character.”
Michelle writes that “he’d spent the first 20 years of his life going by the nickname Barry,” but  “somewhere along the way, though, he’d stepped into the fullness of his birth name – Barack Hussein Obama.”  Michelle does not note that, in all his writings from 1958 to 1964, the Kenyan Barack Obama mentions nothing about an American wife and Hawaiian-born son.
Dreams from My Father devoted more than 2,000 words to the beloved “Frank,” whom the author identified as Frank Marshall Davis. Becoming does not mention Frank, so Michelle missed an opportunity to explain the devotion of a black American to all-white Communist dictatorships.
Becoming portrays the future president as an “exceptional” and “gifted” student who “worshipped books.” At Columbia he “consumed volumes of political philosophy as if it were beach reading” and “spent all his spare change on books.” Michelle managed to marry an “out-of-the-box thinker” who “steered himself with a certainty I found astounding.”  
On page 148 readers meet Valerie Jarrett, deputy chief of staff to Chicago mayor Harold Washington. Valerie spent her childhood in her Iran, “where her father had been a doctor at a hospital.” Michelle does not divulge that Valerie’s father, James Bowman, and her father-in-law Vernon Jarrett were both Communists and associates of Frank Marshall Davis.
“Valerie was the right person to address any concerns,” Michelle writes. “Valerie was like a fast-moving comet and clearly going places.” Jarrett went on to great power in the White House, a de-facto First Lady on policy issues. Michelle styles herself a “first mom” but she does pronounce on her husband’s record and controversies.
The Rev. Jeremiah Wright “was known as a sensational preacher with a passion for social justice.” In his fiery sermons, Wright showed “callous and inappropriate fits of rage and resentment of white America.” No word about Wright’s pal Louis Farrakhan or the photo of her husband with the Nation of Islam boss. And the dutiful Michelle never links Islam with terrorism. As she explains, Nigerian girls were “kidnapped by the extremist group Boko Haram.”
Michelle’s husband was “the right person for this moment in history.” Republicans fought “every effort to stanch the economic crisis, refusing to support measures that would cut taxes and save or create millions of jobs.” Hillary Clinton was the designated successor and Michelle “will always wonder about what led so many women, in particular, to reject an exceptionally qualified female candidate and instead choose a misogynist as their president.”
Readers might wonder what Michelle is “becoming” now. The author claims, “I have no intention of running for office, ever,” but even if she likes that plan she might not keep it.
At this moment in history, Michelle may tear away that veil of impossibility and enter the race for 2020.

THE (REALITY) OF THE DEMOCRAT PARTY:
Anti-Semitic, open borders for cheaper labor and funded by criminal banksters… and these pols are making vast fortunes sucking the blood of America!

We must not let them cheat their way to power over the rest of us.  Their ongoing vote fraud must be stopped and the Democrats need to take a look at themselves and at what they have become. It's not a pretty picture.  What they have become threatens to destroy the greatest nation on the planet and they are doing it on purpose.  They have nothing but contempt for the US as founded and for those of us who love this country. PATRICIA McCARTHY – AMERICAN THINKER

“Then we suffered the rattling election of Barack Obama, whose active membership in a white-, Jewish-, and America-hating church was well known to the electorate.  His close personal relationship with the likes of his adored Rev. Jeremiah Wright and Louis Farrakhan was no secret.  Obama was open about his goals.  He told us he was out to "fundamentally transform America" and the world.”  ALAN BERGSTEIN
“There is a deep racist and anti-Semitic disease in the leadership of the Democrats. As Senator Cory Booker brings his hatred for the Jewish State to the Senate, he should be asked whether he agrees with his hero, “The only good Zionist is a dead Zionist we must take a lesson from Hitler”. DANIEL GREENFIELD



Clinton, a serial rapist, is welcomed to McCain's funeral, as is his wife, who as a "manifest felon" is the epitome of every unscrupulous behavior and trickery she can get away with by committing fraud, harming American lives, and lying to the American public. By Eileen F. Toplansky

Obama ‘Very Confident’ He Would’ve Won Third Term

 21 Nov 20181,491
1:34

Former President Barack Obama said on Tuesday that he was “very confident” he would have won a third term had the Constitution and his wife allowed him to run again.

Speaking to his former top adviser David Axelrod at a live recording of the “The Axe Files” podcast at the University of Chicago, Obama said he believes voters felt that he had “taken the job seriously, worked hard, been true to my oath, observed and hopefully strengthened the norms and the rules and the values of our democracy.”
“I feel very confident that I was in a position—had it not been for both the Constitution and Michelle—to continue in office,” Obama said.
Axelrod had earlier said that some people would like Obama to serve in perpetuity and joked about some of Obama’s supporters even wanting him to run for vice president.
The former president, though, added that he is “not sure it is a healthy thing” to serve more than two terms, pointing out that in countries without term limits, “even very good people… lose their edge and get stale and comfortable in the position.”
Obama said it is “useful to have a democracy have to continually evolve.”
Had Obama been allowed to run for a third term, he would have faced off against Donald Trump in 2016. But when Axelrod asked whether Obama believed he could defeat President Trump in 2020 in a hypothetical one-on-one matchup, Obama did not take the bait.
“I will not answer that direct question for obvious reasons,” Obama said.
More 'legacy lies' from outgoing Obama on economy

Here is what President Obama said on the Ellen show on Abe Lincoln's birthday:

Since I came into office, we reduced the deficit by two-thirds, but if you ask the average person, they're sure that spending has shot up. And the reason is because there are a bunch of folks who say that we're wildly overspending, even though we aren't.
Here are some actual numbers: in FY 2007, the last year President Bush and Republicans had 100% control of Congress, federal spending including both wars was $2.7 trillion.  The budget President Obama just submitted is $4.1 trillion.  That is up over 50% despite record-low interest rates and his continually bragging that he has ended the wars.  Median family income around the country is actually down or flat, so I do not understand how the president could pretend that they aren't overspending and taxing.

The deficit was down to $161 billion in FY 2007, including the spending on the wars and because of President Bush's across-the-board tax cuts in the summer of 2003.  In FY 2003, federal income tax receipts had decreased to around $900 billion prior to the tax cuts, due to a recession and a collapsed stock market.  By FY 2007, due to the stimulus of the tax cuts, the economy rebounded, economic growth was substantial, unemployment was way down (not because of a lower labor participation rate), and income tax receipts had climbed to over $1.5 trillion.  The tax rate cuts did not cause receipts to go down, as Democrats and CBO had projected; they actually skyrocketed by over 60%.  The tax cuts obviously did not cause the deficit.

The projected deficit for FY 2016 is projected to be over $500 billion.  Think how high it would be if the Federal Reserve weren't keeping the interest rates artificially low.

Despite the record-low interest rates and massive increases in federal spending, economic growth has been some of the slowest on record after a recession.  Keynesian economics is obviously not that stimulating.

The president also continually says that his policies brought us out of the great recession.  The recession actually ended by June 2009, four months and ten days after he took office.  This is obviously before any of his policies could have had any effect.

On February 10, in Springfield, Illinois, he gave a speech where he said his opponents are not entitled to their own facts.  It would be nice if he paid attention to that lecture, and it would be great if the media would call him out on his many false statements.

Read more: 
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/02/more_legacy_lies_from_outgoing_obama_on_economy.html#ixzz404dvRyAl


AMERICA AT THE POINT OF NO RETURN
THE LEGACY OF CORRUPTION OF BARACK OBAMA AND HILLARY CLINTON
 more: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/02/the_united_states_at_the_point_of_no_return.html#ixzz40Mw7Fxf8
Follow us: 
@AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook


An old joke I heard during my brief time in the opera business went something like this: There are four types of tenors: leggiero, lyric, spinto, and heldentenor. The leggiero tenor has no balls. The lyric tenor has one ball. The spinto tenor has two...

The main objective of “political animals” like Obama and the Clintons is to get elected; it’s not to fix a broken America, nor to protect her. There are people who govern and there are people who campaign; Obama and the Clintons are the latter. Just look at the huge Republican electoral gains under Obama and the Clintons. It’s amazing that Democrats who still care about their party still support the very people who have brought it down.


Inequality, class and life expectancy in America

Inequality, class and life expectancy in America

15 February 2016
A study by Brookings Institution economists released Friday documents a sharp increase in life span divergences between the rich and the poor in America. The report, based on an analysis of Census Bureau and Social Security Administration data, concludes that for men born in 1950, the gap in life expectancy between the top 10 percent of wage earners and the bottom 10 percent is more than double the gap for their counterparts born in 1920.

For those born in 1920, there was a six-year differential between rich and poor. For those born in 1950, that difference had reached 14 years. For women, the gap grew from 4.7 years to 13 years, almost tripling.

Overall, life expectancy for the bottom 10 percent improved by just 3 percent for men born in 1950 over those born in 1920. For the top 10 percent, it soared by about 28 percent.

Life expectancy for the bottom 10 percent of male wage earners born in 1950 rose by less than one year compared to that for male workers born 40 years earlier—to 73.6 from 72.9. But for the top 10 percent, life expectancy leapt to 87.2 from 79.1.

The United States ranks among the worst so-called rich countries when it comes to life expectancy. But its low ranking is entirely due to the poor health and high mortality of low-income Americans. According to the Social Security Administration, life expectancy for the wealthiest US men at age 60 was just below the rates for Iceland and Japan, two countries with the highest levels. Americans in the bottom quarter of the wage scale, on the other hand, ranked just above Poland and the Czech Republic.

Life-expectancy is the most basic indicator of social well-being. The minimal increase for low-income workers and the widening disparity between the poor and the rich is a stark commentary on the immense growth of social inequality and class polarization in the United States. It underscores the fact that socioeconomic class is the fundamental category of social life under capitalism—one that conditions every aspect of life, including its length.

The Brookings Institution findings shed further light on the catastrophic decline in the social position of the American working class. They follow recent reports showing a sharp rise in death rates for both young and middle-aged white workers, primarily due to drug abuse, alcoholism and suicide. Other recent reports have shown a dramatic decline in life expectancy for poorer middle-aged Americans and a reversal of decades of declining infant mortality.

It is no mystery what is behind this vast social retrogression. It is the product of the decay of American capitalism and a four-decade-long offensive by the ruling elite against the working class. From Reagan to the Obama administration, Democrats and Republicans alike have overseen a corporate-government assault on the jobs, wages, pensions and health benefits of working people.
The ruling elite has dismantled the bulk of the country’s industrial infrastructure, destroying decent-paying jobs by the millions, and turned to the most parasitic and criminal forms of financial speculation as the main source of its profit and private wealth. Untold trillions have been squandered to finance perpetual war and the maniacal self-enrichment of the top 1 percent and 0.1 percent.
The basic infrastructure of the country has been starved of funds and left to rot, to the point where uncounted millions of people are being poisoned with lead and other toxins from corroded water systems. Flint, Michigan is just the tip of the iceberg.

Under Obama, this social counterrevolution has been intensified. The financial meltdown of 2008 has been utilized by the same forces that precipitated the crash to carry through a reordering of social relations aimed at reversing every social gain won by the working class in the course of a century of struggle. A central target of the attack is health care for working people.

Obamacare is the spearhead of a worked-out strategy to reduce the quantity and quality of health care available to workers and reorganize the health care system directly on a class basis. Corporate and government costs are to be slashed by gutting employer-paid health care, forcing workers individually to buy expensive, bare-bones plans from the insurance monopolies, and rationing drugs, tests and medical procedures to make them inaccessible to workers.

The rise in mortality for workers and the widening of the life span gap between rich and poor are not simply the outcome of impersonal economic forces. In corporate boardrooms, think tanks and state agencies, the ruling class is working to lower working class life expectancy. In late 2013, the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington think tank with the closest ties to the Pentagon and the CIA, published two 
policy papers decrying the “waste” of money on health care for the elderly. The clear message was that ordinary people were living much too long and diverting resources needed by the military to wage war around the world.

The social and economic chasm in America finds a political expression in the vast disconnect between the entire political establishment and the masses of working people. Neither party nor any of their presidential candidates, the self-described “socialist” Bernie Sanders included, can seriously address the real state of social conditions or offer a serious program to address the crisis.

In his final State of the Union Address last month, Obama presented an absurd picture of a resurgent economy. “The United States of America, right now,” he declared, “has the strongest, most durable economy in the world… Anyone claiming that America’s economy is in decline is peddling fiction.”
In the race for the Democratic presidential nomination, Hillary Clinton and Sanders are seeking to outdo one another in seizing the mantle of the Obama administration and praising its supposed social and economic achievements.

They cannot address the real conditions facing the masses of working people because they defend the capitalist system, which is the source of the social disaster. The remedy must be based on an understanding of the disease. It is the building of an independent socialist and revolutionary movement uniting the entire working class, in the US and around the world.

Barry Grey



February 13, 2016 

More 'legacy lies' from outgoing Obama on economy

Here is what President Obama said on the Ellen show on Abe Lincoln's birthday:
Since I came into office, we reduced the deficit by two-thirds, but if you ask the average person, they're sure that spending has shot up. And the reason is because there are a bunch of folks who say that we're wildly overspending, even though we aren't.
Here are some actual numbers: in FY 2007, the last year President Bush and Republicans had 100% control of Congress, federal spending including both wars was $2.7 trillion.  The budget President Obama just submitted is $4.1 trillion.  That is up over 50% despite record-low interest rates and his continually bragging that he has ended the wars.  Median family income around the country is actually down or flat, so I do not understand how the president could pretend that they aren't overspending and taxing.

The deficit was down to $161 billion in FY 2007, including the spending on the wars and because of President Bush's across-the-board tax cuts in the summer of 2003.  In FY 2003, federal income tax receipts had decreased to around $900 billion prior to the tax cuts, due to a recession and a collapsed stock market.  By FY 2007, due to the stimulus of the tax cuts, the economy rebounded, economic growth was substantial, unemployment was way down (not because of a lower labor participation rate), and income tax receipts had climbed to over $1.5 trillion.  The tax rate cuts did not cause receipts to go down, as Democrats and CBO had projected; they actually skyrocketed by over 60%.  The tax cuts obviously did not cause the deficit.

The projected deficit for FY 2016 is projected to be over $500 billion.  Think how high it would be if the Federal Reserve weren't keeping the interest rates artificially low.

Despite the record-low interest rates and massive increases in federal spending, economic growth has been some of the slowest on record after a recession.  Keynesian economics is obviously not that stimulating.

The president also continually says that his policies brought us out of the great recession.  The recession actually ended by June 2009, four months and ten days after he took office.  This is obviously before any of his policies could have had any effect.

On February 10, in Springfield, Illinois, he gave a speech where he said his opponents are not entitled to their own facts.  It would be nice if he paid attention to that lecture, and it would be great if the media would call him out on his many false statements.

No comments: