Super Citizen Harvard Professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. Arrested???

Source: http://blatheringsblog.com/

Date: July 23, 2009

Being a Friend of Pres Obama's Not Worth Much in Cambridge?

Even after 7 months of his carefully staged ‘hopechangery’, it’s the unscripted, off the cuff moments when america sees who the real barack obama is. and frankly, it’s just not pretty. there were just sooo many moments in last night’s ‘lying‘ press conference, but this one seems to be resonating with the public and guess what? it didn’t have a thing to do with healthcare.

do you think The iOne knows he lost control of the message? i mean no one is mentioning or debating critically important healthcare issues very much today at all. we’re all salivating over barack obama v the cambridge, massachusettes police department - specifically sgt. james crowley and his arrest of the belligerent friend of obama, harvard prof henry louis gates jr. the story continues to evolve with everyone, from the police union to bill cosby, weighing in on the ’stupidity’ of The iOne’s comment:

“Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof he was in own home.” And then going on (and on) tying it to racism.

“What I think we know separate and apart from this incident is that there’s a long history in this country of African-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately. That’s just a fact.”

no doubt there has been racism shown in law enforcement actions across this country however there is absolutely none shown in this one.

here’s the police report.

and The iOne? he’s backpeddling because of the stupidity of his racist remarks on a non-racial issue. he didn’t have all the facts — he said so. he should have said something like “because I don’t have all of the facts in the case, no comment.” he should have displayed to the world that post-racial candidate that he claimed he was in the campaign.

but no. instead, the president of the united states pulled a jesse jackson.

update: well it seems The iOne is walking his ’stupidly’ comment backwards. after police unions blasted obama for sticking his nose into a law enforcement issue before he had all the facts, which include 911 and police tapes of the incident, obama said this:

“Because this has been ratcheting up and I helped contribute to ratcheting it up, I want to make clear that in my choice of words I unfortunately gave an impression that I was maligning the Cambridge Police Department or Sgt. Crowley specifically and I could have calibrated those words differently.

“My sense is you’ve got two good people in a circumstance in which neither of them were able to resolve it the way the wanted to resolve it,” President Obama said.

but wait! the ‘it’s not about me’ president also said this:

“I continue to believe based on what I’ve heard that there was an overreaction in pulling Professor Gates out of his home.”

his attempts at defusing the situation, including invited sgt. crowley over to the wh for a beer with prof. gates, only resulted in ’stupidly’ mucking it up again.

Follow up Sgt. Crowley's Attorney Considering Legal Action Against Prof. Gates

Source: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=8163051&page=1

Date: July 24, 2009

Alan McDonald, who represents Crowley, the veteran cop who teaches a racial profiling class for rookie police officers told ABC News earlier that the sergeant had not ruled out filing a defamation of character or libel lawsuit against Gates.

"He is exploring all of his options,'' McDonald told ABC News.

Though charges were dropped, Gates has loudly asserted his arrest was a result of racial profiling.

The arrest and subsequent storm of racially charged comments has enveloped the White House after Obama said on Wednesday the Cambridge police acted "stupidly" in arresting the prominent black scholar.

In a press conference held by the Cambridge police unions and Massachusetts Municipal Police Officers Association to support Crowley, members said they hope Obama and Massachusetts Gov. Patrick Deval will apologize for their remarks. Crowley stood with them but remained silent.

McDonald argued that race "played no role in the decision making in this case," adding that it was "inappropriate" of Obama to use this case to talk about racial profiling.

Get Stoked Google docs: we need to recall a time when we still had a sense of humor. As this news is unfolding it reminded me of the great 1993 MGM comedy written and directed by : E. Max Frye Amos & Andrew with Samuel L. Jackson and Nicolas Cage. Check out the IMDB listing at http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0106266/

Truth Justice & the American Way? Does it Still Exist

http://docs.google.com/fileview?id=F.ba0ce396-ca6b-484f-875e-0e93b7e56602&hl=en

Fall of Capitalism Rise of Islam

http://docs.google.com/fileview?id=F.ed370757-b2ac-4657-8bee-f70e84259ec4

Decepticon’s War Room

http://docs.google.com/fileview?id=0B0jE9taMWseFMDJiYzAzOTUtM2FiMS00M2Q4LWJlM2QtMGYxY2Q0NDNiY2Zk&hl=en\

Best Conservative Movies

http://docs.google.com/fileview?id=F.841abd49-06dc-48b6-bf3a-54f9fb9a944f&hl=en

Obama's Czar Over New Jobs in Business Communist Background

Source: http://www.rightpundits.com/ http://www.rightpundits.com/?p=4324#more-4324

Date: July 17, 2009

By Shannon Bell

Van Jones Green Jobs Czar

Is Van Jones, Obama’s Green Jobs Czar a Communist? If you take him at his word he is. His official title is Special Advisor on Green Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation for the White House Council on Environmental Equality. That’s a fancy way of saying Green Jobs Czar that only answers to President Obama.

Let’s take a look at Van Jones for a moment shall we? A young African-American, Yale Law School Graduate, advocate for the downtrodden and all around white knight for the misfortunate; sounds like a top notch guy to have as an advisor if you’re the President.

There was a little incident though back in 1992 that some of you may remember. The Rodney King beating and subsequent riot that took place after the police officers were acquitted. Van Jones happened to be one of those who was arrested during that awful period. From a 2005 interview with East Bay Express:

Jones had planned to move to Washington, DC, and had already landed a job and an apartment there. But in jail, he said, “I met all these young radical people of color — I mean really radical, communists and anarchists. And it was, like, ‘This is what I need to be a part of.’” Although he already had a plane ticket, he decided to stay in San Francisco. “I spent the next ten years of my life working with a lot of those people I met in jail, trying to be a revolutionary.” In the months that followed, he let go of any lingering thoughts that he might fit in with the status quo. “I was a rowdy nationalist on April 28th, and then the verdicts came down on April 29th,” he said. “By August, I was a communist.”

It gets better, Van Jones Green Jobs Czar Communist (self-proclaimed), founded an organization called Storm. From the same interview:

In 1994, the young activists formed a socialist collective, Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement, or STORM, which held study groups on the theories of Marx and Lenin and dreamed of a multiracial socialist utopia.

One of Storms projects was the “Bay Area Police Watch”, basically a bunch of thugs keeping tabs on the police and reporting “abuses” by law enforcement.

I guess for Van Jones, the best thing about being Green Jobs Czar is that he didn’t have to sit in front of Congress and be confirmed. Nobody can ask him questions about his past and his proclivity for trouble. Of course given the make-up of Congress right now, it may not really matter.

Obama sure can pick em’, tax dodgers, communists, anarchists, liars and thieves. But I’m sure Obama has no idea about Van Jones checkered past. So the question remains; is Van Jones Green Jobs Czar a Communist? I suppose you’d have to ask him, problem is nobody will.

STATE PRESS 101: Minority Broadcasters Seek Federal Aid

Source: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124752187967935029.html

Date: JULY 13, 2009, 5:59 P.M. ET

THE WALL STREE JOURNAL

By FAWN JOHNSON

WASHINGTON --A group of minority broadcasters asked Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner Monday for financial assistance akin to the aid that has been extended to the financial and auto industries.

"Minority-owned broadcasters are close to becoming an extinct species," the letter said. "Even in better economic times, minority broadcasters have historically had difficulties accessing the capital markets."

The broadcasters told Mr. Geithner they can bounce back if they are given some temporary assistance while the credit markets are slow. "Unlike the auto business, broadcasting has been healthy for many years," their letter said.

The broadcasters appeal follows a proposal sent in May to Mr. Geithner by a group of influential House members asking for a minority broadcaster support program, bridge funding, or government-backed loans.

The House letter was signed by House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D., S.C.) and a group of key committee chairmen, including Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D., Mass.) Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel (D., N.Y.) and Oversight Committee Chairman Edolphus Towns, (D., N.Y.).

At a hearing last week, National Association of Black Owned Broadcasters President James Winston told lawmakers that advertisers have severely cut investments in minority audiences at the same time minority broadcasters are having difficulty negotiating loan terms with banks.

Research from the Internet advocacy group Free Press says minorities own just 7.7% of full power commercial radio stations and 3.2% of full power commercial TV stations.

Minority broadcast ownership also is an issue important to Federal Communications Commission Commissioner Michael Copps, who was acting chairman of the agency earlier this year.

Companies and groups that signed on to the Geithner letter included the National Association of Black Owned Broadcasters, the Inner City Broadcasting Coalition, the Spanish Broadcasting System, Taxi Productions Inc., and Carter Broadcast Group, Inc.

Write to Fawn Johnson at fawn.johnson@dowjones.com

Get Stoked google docs

Bill of Rights not a Suicide Pact

http://docs.google.com/fileview?id=F.2a6348af-1434-42f0-bbc0-af8ae726c390&hl=en

Truth Justice & the American Way? Does it Still Exist?

http://docs.google.com/fileview?id=F.ba0ce396-ca6b-484f-875e-0e93b7e56602&hl=en

Are We Holding Our Current Leaders Accountable to Their Oath?

http://docs.google.com/fileview?id=F.944bf9ab-c480-4fb5-a02a-8e4b980b80a9&hl=en

Rebellion to Tyrants is Obedience to God

http://docs.google.com/fileview?id=F.7505039f-1bb8-410b-b928-a798e4aa4ecb&hl=en

Are We Sliding From Liberty to Serfdom?

http://docs.google.com/fileview?id=F.f098d02d-0fd8-4b28-a157-b51c97e1e8a9&hl=en

Argentine glacier advances despite global warming

Source: http://news.lp.findlaw.com/ap/other/1501/06-15-2009/20090615012006_15.html

Date: June 15, 2009

By JEANNETTE NEUMANN Associated Press Writer

BUENOS AIRES, Argentina (AP) - Argentina's Perito Moreno glacier is one of only a few ice fields worldwide that have withstood rising global temperatures.

Nourished by Andean snowmelt, the glacier constantly grows even as it spawns icebergs the size of apartment buildings into a frigid lake, maintaining a nearly perfect equilibrium since measurements began more than a century ago.

"We're not sure why this happens," said Andres Rivera, a glacialist with the Center for Scientific Studies in Valdivia, Chile. "But not all glaciers respond equally to climate change."

"The glacier has a lot of life," said Luli Gavina, who leads mini-treks across the glacier's snow fields.

2009-06-15 07:54:08 GMT

Legal Threat Based on this Reality?

http://supreme.lp.findlaw.com/supreme_court/briefs/05-1120/05-1120.mer.ami.crc.pdf

... need to reduce global warming pollutants now. Over the ... to prevent grave injury from global

http://supreme.lp.findlaw.com/supreme_court/briefs/05-1120/05-1120.mer.ami.crc.pdf

Global warming is not merely a future threat, but a present deadly reality, claiming the lives of up to 150,000 people each year due to malnutrition, malaria, and other

maladies.

Ref: http://supreme.lp.findlaw.com/supreme_court/briefs/05-1120/05-1120.mer.ami.crc.pdf

Stoked Notes on Real Weath Death Stats: if we study that chart we should be surprised to see a lessoning of extreme weather deaths from 1900 to 2004. The worst year is the decade between 1920 and 1929 where you see 485 deaths in thousands and 242 per million. The most current extreme weather deaths between 2000 and 2006 are only 22 death in thousands and 3 per million. This chart can be found at: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/07/05/going-down-death-rates-due-to-extreme-weather-events/

Is this the reason more than 31,000 scientists initiated a law suit against Al Gore's data calling it a fraud. The names of these 31,000 scientists can be revealed at the following we site: :

http://www.oism.org/pproject/

31,000 Scientists Suing Al Gore for Gloval Warming Faud!!

Source: http://patriotsforamerica.ning.com/video/video/show?id=2734278:Video:100997&xgs=1
Date: June 13, 2009

Author Twana Blevins on June 13, 2009 at 9:13pm

Al Gore is the High Priest behind global warming Dangerous claims

1. loyal agenda driven disciples as they predict a calamitous outcome from anthropogenic global warming.

2. According to Mr. Gore the polar ice caps will collapse and melt

3. sea levels will rise 20 feet inundating the coastal cities making 100 million of us refugees.

4. numerous Pacific islands will be totally submerged and uninhabitable.

5. dramatically changing climates will throw the world food supply into chaos.

6. global warming will turn hurricanes into super storms, produce droughts.

7. heat waves will kill tens of thousands.

8. we must change our lives and eliminate fossil fuels or face the dire consequences.

9. With a preacher’s zeal, Mr. Gore sets out to strike terror into us and our children and make us feel we are all complicit in the potential demise of the planet.


Names of over 31,000 Scientists Rejecting Global Warming Hypothesis

Source: http://endofmen.wordpress.com/2008/05/17/names-of-over-30000-scientists-rejecting-global-warming-hypothesis/

The Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (OISM) will announce that more than 31,000 scientists have signed a petition rejecting claims of human-caused global warming. The purpose of OISM’s Petition Project is to demonstrate that the claim of “settled science” and an overwhelming “consensus” in favor of the hypothesis of human-caused global warming and consequent climate damage is wrong. No such consensus or settled science exists. As indicated by the petition text and signatory list, a very large number of American scientists reject this hypothesis.

It is evident that 31,072 Americans with university degrees in science – including 9,021 PhDs, are not “a few.” Moreover, from the clear and strong petition statement that they have signed, it is evident that these 31,072 American scientists are not “skeptics.”

NOAA reports that April 2008 was a full degree (F) below normal making it the 29th coldest April out of 115 years for the United States, the coldest in 11 years. Much of the western 2/3rds of the lower 48 were colder than normal. In Washington State, it was the second coldest April on record. In contrast in the east, in New York State it was the 3rd warmest.

All of these names can be found alphabetically at this web site:
http://www.oism.org/pproject/

Tyrany: New Congress Not Reading Bills or Writing Them!!

Q: Can we impeach congress for failure to do their job?
A: The Patriot Act, for example, weighed in at 340 pages.
A: the Global Warming bill is 1200 pages.
A: the Waxman-Markey Cap-and-Trade Bill about 1,200 pages long.
A: “No LEGISLATION without representation,” they state on their campaign website. “We hold this truth to be self-evident, that those in Congress who vote on legislation they have not read, have not represented their constituents. They have misrepresented them.”
Source: http://www.examiner.com/x-1051-Independent-Examiner~y2008m11d18-We-can-make-Congress-read-the-bills-they-pass
A: At the start of each new Congress, the entire House of Representatives and one-third of the Senate are sworn into office. This oath-taking dates to 1789, the first Congress; however, the current oath was fashioned in the 1860s, by Civil War-era members of Congress.
A: Congressional oath they swore to follow after election day requires they represent us in the legislative process by protecting each bill as preserving our constitution. In Congress, all members take the same oath of office when they begin a new term. The Vice President usually administers the oath to senators, and the Speaker of the House administers the oath to representatives: http://www.answers.com/topic/oath-of-office 7/10/2009 11:17 AM

I, [member's name], do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.

Get Stoked Freedom docs:
Evil Junta Attacking the Bush Admin
http://docs.google.com/fileview?id=F.e1580b3e-4e22-4b42-a281-0b65f7e4dc6e&hl=en

Congress Not Reading Bills Tyranny
http://docs.google.com/fileview?id=F.ce119723-4350-4d9a-9878-6ac173b85363

GI’s shocking homeless rate is it safe to forget them?
http://docs.google.com/fileview?id=F.67cec174-bc04-4500-852d-2692403edf87&hl=en

Rebellion to Tyrants is Obedience to God
http://docs.google.com/fileview?id=F.7505039f-1bb8-410b-b928-a798e4aa4ecb&hl=en

Bill of Rights not a Suicide Pact
http://docs.google.com/fileview?id=F.2a6348af-1434-42f0-bbc0-af8ae726c390&hl=en

Billions in aid go to areas that backed Obama in '08

Souce: http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-07-08-redblue_N.htm

Date: July 8, 2009

USA TODAY

By Brad Heath,

WASHINGTON — Billions of dollars in federal aid delivered directly to the local level to help revive the economy have gone overwhelmingly to places that supported President Obama in last year's presidential election.

That aid — about $17 billion — is the first piece of the administration's massive stimulus package that can be tracked locally. Much of it has followed a well-worn path to places that regularly collect a bigger share of federal grants and contracts, guided by formulas that have been in place for decades and leave little room for manipulation.

REPORT: Cities missing out on much needed road funds

STIMULUS FUNDS: States aren't using money as intended

"There's no politics at work when it comes to spending for the recovery," White House spokesman Robert Gibbs says. Counties that supported Obama last year have reaped twice as much money per person from the administration's $787 billion economic stimulus package as those that voted for his Republican rival, Sen. John McCain, a USA TODAY analysis of government disclosure and accounting records shows.

That money includes aid to repair military bases, improve public housing and help students pay for college. The reports show the 872 counties that supported Obama received about $69 per person, on average. The 2,234 that supported McCain received about $34.

Investigators who track the stimulus are skeptical that political considerations could be at work. The imbalance is so pronounced — and the aid so far from complete — that it would be almost inconceivable for it to be the result of political tinkering, says Adam Hughes, the director of federal fiscal policy for the non-profit OMB Watch. "Even if they wanted to, I don't think the administration has enough people in place yet to actually do that," he says.

"Most of what they're doing at this point is just stamping the checks and sending them out," Hughes says. The stimulus package Obama signed in February includes about $499 billion in new spending, and to date, the Obama administration has allocated about $158 billion to specific projects and programs.

Most of that money has gone directly to state governments, which then disperse the money to prevent school layoffs, repair roads and fund social services. That contrasts with the $17 billion that Washington distributes directly to local communities.

Including the larger chunk of money given to state governments, the aid favors states that voted for Obama, which have received about 20% more per person Not all of the money favors places that supported Obama. About a third of the $17 billion, or $5.5 billion, in contracts that the federal government has signed for projects ranging from repaving runways to cleaning up nuclear waste has gone overwhelmingly to counties that supported McCain.

Jake Wiens, an investigator with the non-profit Project on Government Oversight, says it's too soon to draw meaningful conclusions about whether the type of aid in the stimulus favors Obama's constituents. But, he says, "it will be important to pay close attention as the data come in to ensure that political favoritism plays no role."

The imbalance didn't start with the stimulus. From 2005 through 2007, the counties that later voted for Obama collected about 50% more government aid than those that supported McCain, according to spending reports from the U.S. Census Bureau. USA TODAY's review did not include Alaska, which does not report its election results by county.

Get Stoked Notes:

Are We Sliding From Liberty to Serfdom?

http://docs.google.com/fileview?id=F.f098d02d-0fd8-4b28-a157-b51c97e1e8a9&hl=en

"Queen Michele" Obama's Amazing Cost

Source: http://blatheringsblog.com/

Date: July 7, 2009

Released yesterday was the annual disclosure to congress of the west wing payroll and on it was an unprecedented 22 paid lackeys staffers from the office of the first lady.

check this out:

1. $172,2000 – Sher, Susan (CHIEF OF STAFF)

2. $140,000 – Frye, Jocelyn C. (DEPUTY ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT AND DIRECTOR OF POLICY AND PROJECTS FOR

THE FIRST LADY)

3. $113,000 – Rogers, Desiree G. (SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT AND WHITE HOUSE SOCIAL SECRETARY)

4. $102,000 – Johnston, Camille Y. (SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT AND DIRECTOR OF COMMUNICATIONS FOR

THE FIRST LADY)

5. Winter, Melissa E. (SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT AND DEPUTY

CHIEF OF STAFF TO THE FIRST LADY)

6. $90,000 – Medina, David S. (DEPUTY

CHIEF OF STAFF TO THE FIRST LADY)

7. $84,000 – Lelyveld, Catherine M. (DIRECTOR AND PRESS SECRETARY TO THE FIRST LADY)

8. $75,000 – Starkey, Frances M. (DIRECTOR OF SCHEDULING AND ADVANCE FOR THE FIRST LADY)

9. $70,000 – Sanders, Trooper (DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF POLICY AND PROJECTS FOR THE FIRST LADY)

10. $65,000 – Burnough, Erinn J. (DEPUTY DIRECTOR AND DEPUTY SOCIAL SECRETARY)

11. Reinstein, Joseph B. (DEPUTY DIRECTOR AND DEPUTY SOCIAL SECRETARY) $62,000 – Goodman, Jennifer R. (DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF SCHEDULING AND EVENTS COORDINATOR FOR THE FIRST LADY)

12. $60,000 – Fitts, Alan O. (DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF ADVANCE AND TRIP DIRECTOR FOR THE FIRST LADY)

13. Lewis, Dana M. (SPECIAL ASSISTANT AND PERSONAL AIDE TO

THE FIRST LADY)

14. $52,500 – Mustaphi, Semonti M. (ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR AND DEPUTY PRESS SECRETARY TO THE FIRST LADY)

15. $50,000 – Jarvis, Kristen E. (SPECIAL ASSISTANT FOR SCHEDULING AND TRAVELING AIDE TO THE FIRST LADY)

16. $45,000 – Lechtenberg, Tyler A. (ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR OF CORRESPONDENCE FOR THE FIRST LADY)

17. Tubman, Samantha (DEPUTY ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR,SOCIAL OFFICE)

18. $40,000 – Boswell, Joseph J. (EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT TO THE

CHIEF OF STAFF TO THE FIRST LADY)

19. $36,000 – Armbruster, Sally M. (STAFF ASSISTANT TO THE SOCIAL SECRETARY)

Bookey, Natalie (STAFF ASSISTANT)

Jackson, Deilia A. (DEPUTY ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR OF CORRESPONDENCE FOR THE FIRST LADY)

Reality Check: mary lincoln was taken to task for purchasing china for the wh during the civil war. mamie eisenhower had to shell out the salary for her personal secretary. and nancy reagan’s china for the wh? well even though it was paid for through private foundation money, was excoriated in the press.

Stoked Notes:

Let Them Eat Cake: Eating Obama’s Cake Socialism Unmasked

http://docs.google.com/fileview?id=F.0ce2a212-3a3b-4a62-b297-99fa04725564&hl=en

Reality Check: state media still having very high views of their white house even though some people are starting to doubt their worth. "Apart from Fox News and the Wall Street Journal, both owned by News Corp., the media "remains very supportiveMurdoch said he was "shocked" at the sour mood media executives are in regarding their own businesses and the economy in general. Some, he said, are predicting "five years at least" before seeing real economic growth return. of him, perhaps not of all of his policies," Murdoch told Stuart Varney of Fox Business Network. " According to the Rasmussen daily tracking poll, as of Thursday, 30% of Americans "strongly approve" of the way Obama is performing as president while 38% "strongly disapprove."

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/news/e3i3c6dccc0e0549069a2c7f244259ae82a

Latest Obama Approval Rating At 52%: Obama Approval Rating Dropping

Source: http://www.rightpundits.com/

Date: July 7, 2009

By Ignatius Reilly

A couple of stunning new polls from Rasmussen Reports and Gallup show that approval for President Barack Obama is weakening dramatically.

Both polling services had Obama’s approval rating well over 60% in January when Obama first took over as President.

Now:

Rasmussen Reports: 52% (13% drop since January)

Gallup: 58% (11% drop since January)

The Gallup poll results are available here. The Rasmussen Reports results can be viewed here.

Sources: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/obama_approval_index_history

http://www.gallup.com/poll/113980/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Job-Approval.aspx

Global Warming Alert: Tax the Wealthy for Carbon Footprint

Source: http://www.rightpundits.com/

Date: July 6, 2009

By Bryan McAffee

If you want to read an article that will surely make your eyes bleed, be sure to check out Reuter’s latest “alert”, New climate strategy: track the world’s wealthiest. This piece of tripe, written by so-called “environment correspondent” Deborah Zabarenko, is one of the most egregious examples of MSM propaganda that I’ve come across in a long time. The gist of the article is that we should tax the “wealthy” and by extension the country they belong to, more for carbon emissions. From the article:

As it stands now, under the carbon-capping Kyoto Protocol, rich countries shoulder most of the burden for cutting the emissions that spur global warming, while developing countries — including fast-growing economies China and India — are not required to curb greenhouse pollution.

Rich countries, notably the United States, have said this gives developing countries an unfair economic advantage; China, India and other developing countries argue that developed countries have historically spewed more climate-warming gases, and developing countries need time to catch up.

The study suggests setting a uniform international cap on how much carbon dioxide each person could emit in order to limit global emissions; since rich people emit more, they are the ones likely to reach or exceed this cap, whether they live in a rich country or a poor one.

One wonders why they don’t look at the carbon footprint of Algore? He must easily have one of the largest carbon footprints of anyone alive as he runs around the world in his private jet and leaves the lights on in his large 14 bedroom mansion, which only he and his wife now live in (servants too I guess). Ms. Zabarenko also points out that the average carbon footprint is about 5 tons, but for Americans the average carbon footprint is 20 tons. Obviously the gist here is we have to make the evil Americans pay, after all they are responsible for all this gorebull warming.

I’m guessing that the Obama administration will be down with this proposal, I wonder if its too late to add it to the current Cap and Trade legislation. Get ready to pay up.

PALIN: 'Obama is growing government outrageously and it's immoral'...

Source: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1908983,00.html

Date: July 7, 2009

President Obama is growing government outrageously, and it's immoral and it's uneconomic, his plan that he tries to sell America. His plan to "put America on the right track" economically, incurring the debt that our nation is incurring, trillions of dollars that we're passing on to our kids, expecting them to pay off for us, is immoral and doesn't even make economic sense. So, his growth of government agenda needs to be ratcheted back, and it's going to take good people who have the guts to stand up to him, stand up to him and debate policy, not personalities, not partisan politics, but policy to effect the change that we need there. And allow free enterprise and the industrious Americans who run our small businesses and want to raise a family, allowing our families to grow and prosper and thrive, Americans who still believe in those ideals to get in there and effect change. I want to work for people who believe in that.

Two of his big platform issues right now are universal health care and your favorite issue, energy, his global warming plan. What do you think of his positions on both?

His cap and trade agenda is a cap and tax agenda, and it's going to drive the cost of consumer goods and the cost of energy so extremely high that our nation is going to start exporting even more jobs to China and to other countries that do not have the corporate tax or the equivalent of the corporate tax that the cap and trade — I call it cap and tax — agenda is going to usher in. What he needs to be understanding is we have the domestic supplies of energy in America. It's conventional sources — oil, gas, coal, it's nuclear — and we have the renewable sources here in America. But if we're not allowed to drill and develop those conventional sources in this transition period between now and when we can rely more on alternative sources, we're going to become more and more reliant on foreign sources of energy and importing more and more goods because they're going to be cheaper over there to produce, and our country is going to be in a world of hurt. And that, of course, has so much to do with his economic policy in thinking that it's okay to borrow money from other countries to fund this government largess that he's believing in. It doesn't make any sense. We need to develop responsibly our natural resources of energy here. This will provide the jobs here, the true economic stimulus is developing our domestic, safe supplies of energy here, and Alaska is the place to look to contribute.

Get Stoked Notes:

Are We Sliding From Liberty to Serfdom?

http://docs.google.com/fileview?id=F.f098d02d-0fd8-4b28-a157-b51c97e1e8a9&hl=en

http://docs.google.com/fileview?id=F.6881eb64-1c11-43a0-b773-e85073a75d4c&hl=en

Putin praises Bush hospitality during Obama visit

Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/reutersComService_2_MOLT/idUSTRE5661Q520090707

Date: Tue Jul 7, 2009 4:22am EDT

MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russia's Prime Minister Vladimir Putin praised the hospitality and openness of U.S. former President George W. Bush in a telegramme sent hours before meeting his successor Barack Obama.

"During the last years we have been working on strengthening Russia-U.S. cooperation. Although there were differences between our countries, I always valued your openness and sincerity," Putin said, congratulating Bush on his 63rd birthday on July 6.

"With special warmth I recall your hospitality in the Crawford ranch and your family estate in Kennebunkport," Putin wrote, referring to their 2007 meeting at the Bush family vacation home when the two leaders went fishing and ate lobster.

Bush had said he "was able to get a sense of his soul" when he first met Putin and since then their warm rapport has helped limit the damage from a series of rows that returned ties between their administrations to chilly Cold War lows.

On Tuesday, Putin, who stepped down as president last year but remains the most influential Russian politician, invited Obama for a "Russian-style" breakfast during their first meeting at Putin's forest residence outside Moscow.

Russian agencies, quoting the government's press service, said Putin treated Obama to black caviar with sour cream, smoked beluga with pancakes and tea made in the traditional Russian samovar, a big coal-fired kettle.

(Writing by Gleb Bryanski)

Obama Lauds Putin’s ‘Extraordinary Work’ in Visit to Mend Ties

Source: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=washingtonstory&sid=al7IO7sebEWA

Date: July , 2009

By Hans Nichols and Roger Runningen

July 7 (Bloomberg) -- U.S. President Barack Obama lauded Prime Minister Vladimir Putin for his service to Russia, continuing a three-day push to overcome the animosities of the George W. Bush era.

“I am aware of not only the extraordinary work you have done on behalf of the Russian people in your previous role as prime minister -- as president -- but in your current role as prime minister,” Obama told Putin after more than an hour of talks at the premier’s residence near Moscow.

Obama and Putin’s protégé and successor Dmitry Medvedev reached agreements yesterday on nuclear arms and Afghanistan, which Obama said marked a “new start” in relations between the two nuclear superpowers. The two leaders called for a reduction of atomic warheads by as much as a third, while Russia also agreed to allow the transit of U.S. arms shipments to troops fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Relations had reached a post-Cold War low under the last U.S. administration because of disagreements over the eastward expansion of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, a proposed U.S. missile shield in Europe and Russia’s war with Georgia.

While Obama, 47, and Medvedev, 43, “had a symbolically successful day” yesterday, the U.S. president’s meeting with Putin, 56, was “key” to the relationship because Putin is still the dominant political figure in Russia, said Andrew Kuchins, a scholar at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.

‘Ability to Charm’

Most Russians believe Medvedev is controlled by Putin, a poll showed last month. Sixty-eight percent of respondents in a Levada Center poll said Putin controls Medvedev, while 19 percent said the president acts independently.

“Obama’s ability to charm is his greatest strength and Putin is not a guy that can be charmed,” Kuchins said late yesterday.

After four hours of meetings in the Kremlin yesterday Obama told reporters that he and Medvedev, a fellow lawyer by training, had succeeded in their goal to “reset relations” between the U.S. and Russia. “After less than six months of collaboration, we have done exactly that,” Obama said.

That represented a 180-degree turn from Bush’s first meeting with Putin, then Russia’s president, at a summit in Slovenia in 2001. Bush told reporters then that he had “looked the man in the eye” and found Putin trustworthy, adding: “I was able to get a sense of his soul.”

Cash Stockpile

In his eight years in the Kremlin, Putin consolidated political power, tamed the country’s new billionaires and led Russia’s resurgence in international affairs. Russia’s economy, contracting now for the first time in more than a decade, grew an average of 7 percent a year under Putin, as the price of oil, the country’s main export earner, climbed from $20 a barrel in 2000 to more than $100 when he stepped down in May 2008.

Russia amassed the world’s third-largest cash stockpile, increasing 30-fold to almost $600 billion before the war with Georgia a year ago. Putin also turned OAO Gazprom, the world’s biggest gas producer, into a geopolitical weapon as the state- run company’s market value surged from less than $5 billion to more than $330 billion.

Today, Putin, a KGB colonel during the Cold War, returned Obama’s compliment.

“With you we link all our hopes for the furtherance of relations between our two countries,” Putin said. “We are very glad to see you here and welcome you here in Russia.”

To contact the reporters on this story: Hans Nichols in Moscow at hnichols2@bloomberg.net ; Roger Runningen in Moscow at rrunningen@bloomberg.net

Last Updated: July 7, 2009 02:51 EDT

Get Stoked Notes: before Obama began this diatribe of praise it is interesting to note for those watching FOX news how witnesses say Puting spent the first more than an hour lecturing to Obama. Is Putin less progressive than Obama?

Is Jesus a Marxist as Many Claim?

http://docs.google.com/fileview?id=F.39678dd5-c11e-4abf-b952-099950b50f1b&hl=en

Let Them Eat Cake: Eating Obama’s Cake Socialism Unmasked

http://docs.google.com/fileview?id=F.0ce2a212-3a3b-4a62-b297-99fa04725564&hl=en

Al Gore likens fight against climate change to battle with Nazis

Source: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6658672.ece

Date: July 7, 2009

Al Gore today compared the battle against climate change with the struggle against the Nazis.

The former US Vice President said the world lacked the political will to act and invoked the spirit of Winston Churchill by encouraging leaders to unite their nations to fight climate change.

He also accused politicians around the world of exploiting ignorance about the dangers of global warming to avoid difficult decisions.

Speaking in Oxford at the Smith School World Forum on Enterprise and the Environment, sponsored by The Times, Mr Gore said: “Winston Churchill aroused this nation in heroic fashion to save civilisation in World War II.”

He added: “We have everything we need except political will but political will is a renewable resource.”

Mr Gore admitted that it was difficult to persuade the public that the threat from climate change was as urgent as the threat from Nazi Germany.

“The level of awareness and concern among populations has not crossed the threshold where political leaders feel that they must change.

“The only way politicians will act is if awareness raises to a level to make them feel that it’s a necessity.”

Mr Gore, who brought the issues around climate change to a mass audience with the 2006 documentary An Inconvenient Truth, said the great hope for the future lay in a high level of environmental awareness among young people.

He said sceptics who refused to believe dramatic cuts in carbon emissions could be delivered should consider the example of the young scientists in the NASA team which put a man on the moon on 1969.

“The average age of scientists in the space centre control room was 26, which means they were 18 when they heard President Kennedy say he wanted to put a man on the moon in 10 years. Neil Armstrong did it eight years and two months later.”

He said future generations would put one of two questions to today’s adults.

“It will either be ’what were you thinking, didn’t you see the North Pole melting before your eyes, didn’t you hear what the scientists were saying?’ Or they will ask ’how is it you were able to find the moral courage to solve the crisis which so many said couldn’t be solved?’.”

Sir David King, the Government’s former chief scientist and now director of the Smith School, also berated politicians for failing to follow up their statements on climate change with a clear programme of action.

“I do think it’s relatively easy for a prime minister to make a speech on climate change which sounds committed and very much more difficult for that prime minister to persuade the Treasury to put the finance behind that commitment to make it a reality.

“There is a long distance in government between saying what you think needs to be said and then doing in terms of making budgets available.”

Sir David expressed disappointment that no senior British politician had taken up his invitation to address a conference attended by the world’s top climate scientists, senior business leaders and the presidents of the Maldives and Rwanda.

“I tried to pull in a lot of IOUs. But where was Lord Mandelson (the Business Secretary), where was Ed Miliband (the Energy and Climate Change Secretary)? Where was David Cameron? Where was William Hague?”

GetStoked Notes: sadly too many people are reading Al Gore with some dangerous kool-aid. The moment the 110th congress talked Bush 2 into signing a budget reflecting that reality we began loosing Automakers.

Is Our Crisis Manufactured by the 110^th Congress?

http://docs.google.com/fileview?id=F.8d6a766c-4515-4687-bb0b-a726ff248f71&hl=en

Law of Unintended Circumstances

http://docs.google.com/fileview?id=F.4e1e6bac-2f8f-4195-b95a-665df4725fb3&hl=en

Colin Powell airs doubts on Obama agenda

Source: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jul/03/powell-airs-doubts-on-obama-agenda/

Date: July 3, 2009

Washington Times

by Jon Ward

Originally published 11:44 a.m., July 3, 2009, updated 03:16 p.m., July 3, 2009

Right Pundits

Source: http://www.rightpundits.com/?p=4223

Beth Shaw

Former Secretary of State Colin Powell is a prominent Republican who threw support behind Barack Obama’s presidential candidacy. During an interview on CNN’s ‘State of the Union with John King’, that will air on Sunday, July 5, 2009m, Colin Powell expressed doubts about Obama’s agenda. Among other things, Powell said that Obama is creating a tax burden and bureaucracy that is too big. Read about it below.

In an interview on Friday, Colin Powell expressed doubts regarding Barack Obama’s agenda. He was being interviewed for a segment on CNN’s ‘State of the Union with John King’ that will air on Sunday, July 5th. In the interview, he discussed the massive amount of legislation that the Obama Administration is attempting to get passed in record speed and the burden it is putting on the American people.

“I’m concerned at the number of programs that are being presented, the bills associated with these programs and the additional government that will be needed to execute them,” Mr. Powell said in an excerpt of an interview with CNN’s John King, released by the network Friday morning.

Mr. Powell, a retired U.S. army general who rose to political prominence after a long and accomplished military career, said that health care reform and many of Mr. Obama’s other initiatives are “important” to Americans.

But, he said, “one of the cautions that has to be given to the president — and I’ve talked to some of his people about this — is that you can’t have so many things on the table that you can’t absorb it all.”

“And we can’t pay for it all.”

‘And we can’t pay for it all.’ That, of course, is what is sending many fiscal conservatives reeling these days. Powell is one of a series of recent high profile Obama supporters who have expressed these kinds of concerns. People who are aware that the pie in the sky ideals of the privileged, sheltered, idealistic Effete EliteTM are not realistic in the workings of the real world.

He didn’t say he was ‘worried’, but he did say he was ‘concerned’.

“I’m concerned at the number of programs that are being presented, the bills associated with these programs and the additional government that will be needed to execute them,” he said.

Former Secretary of State Colin Powell has strong conservative credentials. The United States Army General served as national security adviser to President Ronald Reagan. He was Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under President George H. W. Bush and served as Secretary of State under President George W. Bush. His name was often discussed as a possible presidential contender.

He had been a supporter of John McCain during the presidential primaries. Then, just before the election he announced he was endorsing Obama over McCain. Many people felt that Powell had put identity politics over political ideology, policy, beliefs and the character of the candidate. It is of some relief that, even at this late date, his concern over the policies and beliefs of the man in office are once again rising to the surface.

As a former commander of Men at Arms, he is after all, a man of honor himself and an American patriot.

Powell has suffered the slings and arrows of vicious racist attacks from the left himself. Something the left does so often and so well while accusing the right of the very thing they are guilty of doing. You might recall when prominent democrats called him and Dr. Condoleezza Rice “house n****rs” simply because they are Republicans. If either of them had been democrats, they’d have been the toast of the democratic party because of their remarkable personal accomplishments, class and successful careers. But they are dismissed out of hand for not towing the party line. Even though the nations Black population is as diverse as the White population in terms of Conservative and Liberal values, it is necessary for Blacks to be card-toting members of the democratic party to be acceptable to the Leftists of our country.

So now, a few months after the election, Colin Powell doubts the Obama agenda and is concerned that Obama’s ever increasing tax burden and government bureaucracy are too big and burdensome to the American people.

And here I thought Obama was going to give us all free health care and new cars!! He never said anything about us having to pay for it all. But then, he did say he’d get us all jobs, so I guess we’ll be able to afford it.

New Congress's Holiday Travel Tab Swells

Source: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124650399438184235.html
Date: JULY 3, 2009

Spending on Taxpayer-Funded Trips Rises Tenfold; From Italy to the Galápagos

By BRODY MULLINS and T.W. FARNAM

WASHINGTON -- Spending by lawmakers on taxpayer-financed trips abroad has risen sharply in recent years, a Wall Street Journal analysis of travel records shows, involving everything from war-zone visits to trips to exotic spots such as the Galápagos Islands.

The spending on overseas travel is up almost tenfold since 1995, and has nearly tripled since 2001, according to the Journal analysis of 60,000 travel records. Hundreds of lawmakers traveled overseas in 2008 at a cost of about $13 million. That's a 50% jump since Democrats took control of Congress two years ago.

The cost of so-called congressional delegations, known among lawmakers as "codels," has risen nearly 70% since 2005, when an influence-peddling scandal led to a ban on travel funded by lobbyists, according to the data.

Lawmakers say that the trips are a good use of government funds because they allow members of Congress and their staff members to learn more about the world, inspect U.S. assets abroad and forge better working relationships with each other. The travel, for example, includes official visits to American troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The Journal analysis, based on information published in the Congressional Record, also shows that taxpayer-funded travel is a big and growing perk for lawmakers and their families. Some members of Congress have complained in recent months about chief executives of bailed-out banks, insurance companies and car makers who sponsored corporate trips to resorts or used corporate jets for their own travel.

Although complete travel records aren't yet available for 2009, it appears that such costs continue to rise. The Journal analysis shows that the government has picked up the tab for travel to destinations such as Jamaica, the Virgin Islands and Australia's Great Barrier Reef.

Lawmakers frequently bring along spouses on congressional trips. If they take commercial flights, they have to buy tickets for spouses. If they fly on government planes -- as they usually do -- their spouses can fly free.
Paris Air Show

In mid-June, Sen. Daniel Inouye (D., Hawaii) led a group of a half-dozen senators and their spouses on a four-day trip to France for the biennial Paris Air Show. An itinerary for the event shows that lawmakers flew on the Air Force's version of the Boeing 737, which costs $5,700 an hour to operate. They stayed at the Intercontinental Paris Le Grand Hotel, which advertises rooms from $460 a night.

The lawmakers were invited to a dinner party at the U.S. Embassy and had cocktails at a private party at the Eiffel Tower. Mr. Inouye attended a dinner sponsored by the Aerospace Industries Association, a U.S. trade group. Another senator on the trip, Alabama Republican Sen. Richard Shelby, took a cruise on the River Seine with defense-industry executives and elected officials from Alabama, Mississippi and Florida.
Mr. Inouye and Mr. Shelby declined to comment.
Often, lawmakers combine trips to war zones with visits to more tranquil spots. In February, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi led a delegation of Democratic lawmakers to visit U.S. troops in Afghanistan for a day. Before landing in Kabul, the eight lawmakers and their entourage of spouses and aides spent eight days in Italy, spending $57,697 on hotels and meals.

A spokesman for Ms. Pelosi says that she was working in Italy, meeting with U.S. troops at Aviano Air Base, laying a wreath at the Florence American Cemetery, giving a speech to Italian lawmakers and visiting the Pope, among other things.

Homeland Security

Rep. Bennie Thompson (D., Miss.), the chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, led a group to Brazil, Argentina, Peru and Panama. "This trip further solidified the message that homeland security does not begin or end at our borders," says Mr. Thompson's spokeswoman.
any congressional trips have been to Iraq or Afghanistan. In 2008, lawmakers and aides took 113 trips to Iraq, according to the Journal analysis, down slightly from the prior year. Not much money is spent in the war zones. Lawmakers are not allowed to stay overnight in Iraq and receive only minimal spending allowances for their one-day visits.

In mid-February, for example, six House lawmakers traveled to Kuwait, Iraq, Bahrain and Afghanistan. Each lawmaker reported spending $1,500 on hotels and meals in Kuwait, $400 in Bahrain, and $25 in Afghanistan. They reported no expenses in Iraq.

Scores of lawmakers are spending this week abroad on taxpayer-funded trips. Congressional offices say they won't release details of the trips for security reasons. Disclosure rules require lawmakers to print some information about their taxpayer-funded travel in the Congressional Record within 30 days of returning home.
Congressional Fleet

The congressional trips are possible thanks in part to an unlimited fund created by a three-decade old law. Nearly two dozen government officials work full-time organizing the trips. Much of the costs are not made public, including the cost of flying on government jets. The Air Force maintains a fleet of 16 passenger planes for use by lawmakers.

Documents obtained by the Journal show that the cost of flying a small group of lawmakers to the Middle East is about $150,000. Larger trips on the Air Force's version of the Boeing 757 cost about $12,000 an hour. Two federal agencies pay for most of the travel -- the Defense Department and the State Department.

Exotic Locales

In October, Rep. Bud Cramer (R., Ala.) spent two weeks in Europe on government business. Reports show that Mr. Cramer spent $5,700 on hotels, meals and incidentals. Mr. Cramer wasn't running for re-election and left office just two months later.

"Knowing that I was leaving with my 18 years of seniority, I wanted to conclude some issues that I was working on," Mr. Cramer said. He now works for a lobbying firm in Washington.

Some of the most expensive travel is to exotic locales.

Last summer, Rep. Brian Baird (D., Wash.) took a four-day trip to the Galápagos Islands with his wife, four other lawmakers and their family members. The lawmakers spent $22,000 on meals and hotels, records show. Mr. Baird, a member of the House Science Committee, said the trip was to learn about global warming.

On the first day, lawmakers toured a breeding center for giant tortoise and land iguanas before dining with scientists, according to an itinerary for the trip. The next morning, lawmakers headed to the Galápagos National Park while their family members had the option of hiking, swimming or shopping. That afternoon, the group boarded a boat to visit a sea-lion colony and search for white-tip sharks.

Mr. Baird didn't respond to a request for comment.

Write to Brody Mullins at brody.mullins@wsj.com and T.W. Farnam at timothy.farnam@wsj.com

'We're in the Middle of a Crash'

Source: http://www.cnbc.com/id/31706523
Date: July, 2, 2009

By: CNBC.com | 02 Jul 2009 | 08:55 AM ET

The financial system is crashing and action must be taken by the US government to convert debt into equity to produce a more stable environment, Nassim Taleb, author of "The Black Swan," told CNBC Thursday.

"You may have green shoots, whatever you want to call them, you may have temporary relief, but you are still in a world that's breaking," Taleb said on "Squawk Box."




Anything that's fragile like the financial system will eventually crash, he said.

"We're in the middle of a crash," Taleb said. "So if I'm going to forecast something, it is that it's going to get worse, not better."

The government needs to deleverage debt and not try stimulus packages that will inflate assets, he said.

"What makes me very pessimistic in not seeing any leadership or awareness on parts of government on what has to be done, which is deleverage $40-to-$70 trillion," Taleb said.

RELATED LINKS
Print More Money: Hendry
Rogers Not Shorting — or Buying — Anything
Market Tips: The Pullback Is Coming

"The monkey on our back is debt," he added.

As an example, Taleb said banks should not be sending demands for larger and larger sums from homeowner in arrears on their mortgage. Instead the bank should offer to lower the monthly payments in return for part-ownership of the property.

"People would be able to start from scratch on a healthy basis. You don't want to wait for foreclosure," he said.

467K jobs cut in June; jobless rate at 9.5 percent

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_economy
Date: July 2, 2009

By JEANNINE AVERSA, AP Economics Writer – 32 mins ago

WASHINGTON – Employers cut a larger-than-expected 467,000 jobs in June and the unemployment rate climbed to a 26-year high of 9.5 percent. Workers also saw weekly wages fall, suggesting Americans will have little appetite to spend and the economy's road to recovery will be bumpy.

The Labor Department report, released Thursday, showed that even as the recession flashes signs of easing, companies likely will want to keep a lid on costs and be wary of hiring until they feel certain the economy is on solid ground.

June's payroll reductions were deeper than the 363,000 that economists expected and average weekly earnings dropped to the lowest level in nearly a year.

However, the rise in the unemployment rate from 9.4 percent in May wasn't as sharp as the expected 9.6 percent. Still, many economists predict the jobless rate will hit 10 percent this year, and keep rising into next year, before falling back.

All told, 14.7 million people were unemployed in June.

If laid-off workers who have given up looking for new jobs or have settled for part-time work are included, the unemployment rate would have been 16.5 percent in June, the highest on records dating to 1994.

"We were on the road of things getting less bad in the jobs market, and that has been temporarily waylaid," said economist Ken Mayland, president of ClearView Economics. "But this doesn't change my view that the recession will end later this year. We're probably two months away."

On Wall Street, the employment news pulled stocks lower. The Dow Jones industrials lost about 165 points in midday trading, and broader indices also fell. Overseas markets dropped after a report showed unemployment in Europe rose to a 10-year high in May.

The average work week in June fell to 33 hours, the lowest on records dating to 1964.

"We are in some very hard and severe economic times," Labor Secretary Hilda Solis said in an interview. "The president and I are both not happy."

Still, Solis thought it was too early to consider a second government stimulus, saying more time is needed for the current one to take hold. "I do think the public needs to be patient," she said. "We know they are hurting."

Layoffs in May turned out to smaller, 322,000, versus the 345,000 first reported. But job cuts in April were a bit deeper — 519,000 versus 504,000, according to government data.

Even with higher pace of job cuts in June, the report indicates that the worst of the layoffs have passed. The deepest job cuts of the recession came in January, when 741,000 jobs vanished, the most in any month since 1949.

For the second quarter, job losses averaged 436,000 a month. That was down from a monthly average of 691,000 in the first quarter. Economists predict the economy will continue to lose jobs through the rest of this year, although they hope at a slower pace.

And there was some other encouraging job news Thursday.

In a separate report, the department said the number of newly laid-off workers filing applications for unemployment benefits fell last week to 614,000, in line with economists' predictions. The number of people continuing to draw benefits unexpectedly dropped to 6.7 million.

Meanwhile, the Commerce Department said orders placed with U.S. factories rose 1.2 percent in May, the most in 11 months. The increase also was better than economists expected.

Still, job losses last month were widespread.

Professional and business services slashed 118,000 jobs, more than double the 48,000 cut in May. Manufacturers cut 136,000, down from 156,000. Construction companies got rid of 79,000 jobs, up from 48,000 the previous month. Retailers eliminated 21,000, up from 17,600. Financial activities cut 27,000, following 30,000 in May. The government cut 52,000 jobs, up from 10,000 the previous month. Leisure and hospitality cut 18,000 jobs, erasing a gain of the same size in May.

One of the few industries adding jobs: education and health services, which added 34,000 positions last month and 47,000 in May.

Mayland and other economists said a good chunk of June's job losses likely were affected by shutdowns at General Motors Corp. and fallout from the troubled auto industry, which should let up later this summer. The government said employment at factories making autos and parts fell by 27,000 last month.

Payroll losses and the unemployment rate are derived from two separate statistical surveys. The jobless rate probably would have moved higher if not for people dropping out of the labor force.

With the weakness in the job market, workers saw wages drop in June.

Average weekly earnings fell from $613.34 in May, to $611.49 in June, the lowest level in nearly a year and the first drop since March. That raises fresh questions about consumers' willingness to spend in the months ahead.

The worst crises in the housing, credit and financial markets since the 1930s have plunged the country into the longest recession since World War II.

Many think the jobless rate could rise as high as 10.7 percent by the second quarter of next year before it starts to make a slow descent. Some think the rate will top out at 11 percent. The post-World War II high was 10.8 percent at the end of 1982, when the country had suffered through a severe recession.

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke predicts the recession will end this year, with many economists forecasting that the economy will start to grow again as soon as the current July-September quarter.

But recoveries after financial crises tend to be slow, which is why economists predict it will take years for the job market to return to normal. Some predict the nation's unemployment rate won't drop to 5 percent until 2013.

An elevated unemployment rate could become a political liability for President Barack Obama when congressional elections are held next year. The last time the unemployment rate topped 10 percent, the party of the president — then Ronald Reagan's GOP — lost 26 House seats in midterm elections in 1982.

So far, many people are saving — rather than spending — the extra money in their paychecks from Obama's tax cut, blunting its help in bracing the economy. Much of the economic benefit of Obama's increased government spending on big public works projects won't kick in until 2010, analysts say.

The White House last week said federal money was being shoveled out of Washington quickly, but states aren't steering the cash to counties that need jobs the most.

Large job cuts have continued this week. Newspaper publisher Gannett Co. said it plans to cut 1,400 jobs in the next few weeks, about 3 percent of the work force, as it faces a prolonged slump in advertising revenue. Farm machinery company Deere & Co. said 800 salaried employees, or 3 percent of its salaried work force, took a voluntary buyout offer.



Since the recession began in December 2007, the economy has lost a net total of 6.5 million jobs.

As the downturn bites into sales and profits, companies have turned to layoffs and other cost-cutting measures to survive. Those include holding down workers' hours and freezing or cutting pay.

The Press Revolts Against Obama

Source: http://blog.heritage.org/2009/07/02/the-press-revolts-against-obama/
Date: Posted July 2nd, 2009 at 11.03am in Ongoing Priorities.

During yesterday’s White House press briefing, reporters grilled spokesman Robert Gibbs on the growing trend of staged theatrics used by President Obama. Last week when a Huffington Post columnist was hand-selected by the White House to ask a specific question to the President at a press briefing, the media was understandably upset. But when the White House unveiled its new Reality TV Show “Health Care Town Halls” with Senior Advisor Valerie Jarrett acting as the host, the press had enough. Staged questions, hand-picked audiences, and still no answers. It appears the honeymoon between Obama and the fourth estate appears to be over.

Conservative Blogs
http://www.heritage.org/
http://blog.heritage.org/
http://blatherings.blog.com/
http://www.thefoxnation.com/
http://hannity.blogs.foxnews.com/
http://www.rightpundits.com/?p=2284
http://www.marklevinshow.com/
http://site.the912coalition.org/the-912-project.html
http://www.campus-watch.org/
http://www.wabcradio.com/article.asp?id=531472
http://glennbeckblog.blogspot.com/
http://www.rove.com/