If February's spending holds true, Obama's annual debt will be 2.64 trillion, not 1.5 trillion as he has projected. He is spending at 8 times Bush's.

We are being told that Obama's debt accumulates at the rate of 1.5 trillion annually, or 127 billion a month (4.1 billion dollars x 31 days). Where did we get this number? From Obama, himself. The 1.5 trillion in annual deficits is his number. But . . . . .

Here is our (Midknight Review's) problem: the February debt, alone, was 220 billion. Obama is telling the nation that his annual debt this year will be 1.5 trillion BUT, if the 220 billion per month holds for the next 12 months, his annual deficit will actually be 2.64 trillion. . . . . that's 2.64 trillion in one year. It took Bush 8 years to spend that same total.

In other words, Obama is spending at 8 times the record pace under G. W. !!! Rather than adding as "little" as 10 trillion in the coming 10 year period, Obama is on tract to add 26.4 trillion to the national debt in that same period of time. By 2020, our debt will be 90% of our GDP, an sustainable total.

If you do not fully understand our situation, as a nation, what with all the talk of GDP and 26.4 trillion, we give you this example.

Think of your total income per month - that amount is your "GDP." Now, spend 90% of that income on monthly payments for the house, the car(s), auto insurance, property taxes and transportation costs (gas, oil, auto maintenance, tires -- etc) and nothing else.

That would give you 10% of your income to spend on "secondary issues" such as food, clothing, debt reduction (credit card payments), recreation, charities, transportation costs other than travel to and from your job, Christmas, graduation costs and special event funding (marriage and divorce for you and/or your children), doctor expenses, health care insurance, prescription costs, special health care demands ( if any), emergency repairs.

Anyone see the problem? On our illustration, above, if your monthly income was $2,000 a month, you would have just $200 to spending on "secondary issues." Impossible.

Just as surely as a 90% debt against income (as described above) is an impossible task, so to is a 90% debt against our Gross Domestic Product ( all that we do as a nation to create income). Socialized Security is not counted in national debt totals. Neither are war expenses, national disaster costs, Medicare overages and interest on the national debt.

We cannot survive as a nation with a debt-to-GDP ratio of 90%. Since Obama has no clue on how to govern without spending money, he will have no choice but to increase taxes by 60% over the coming 10 year period.

Can anyone think of a better reason to fire this idiot, call the '08 election a bad dream, and move on? --- jds.

Nothing is as it appears when it comes to anything "Obama" and that includes his announcement to allow off-shore drilling.

Minority Leader, Representative John Boehner, made this statement as we seek to qualify Obama's announcement to allow for off shore drilling. Understand, that this man (Obama) is an "environmental freak" and, as such, does not believe in any kind of future for the oil and gas industry, especially when it comes to the nation's transportation needs.

The statement speaks for itself:

“The Obama Administration continues to defy the will of the American people who strongly supported the bipartisan decision of Congress in 2008 to lift the moratorium on offshore drilling not just off the East Coast and in the Gulf of Mexico, but off the Pacific Coast and Alaskan shores as well. Opening up areas off the Virginia coast to offshore production is a positive step, but keeping the Pacific Coast and Alaska, as well as the most promising resources off the Gulf of Mexico, under lock and key makes no sense at a time when gasoline prices are rising and Americans are asking ‘Where are the jobs?’

“It’s long past time for this Administration to stop delaying American energy production off all our shores and start listening to the American people who want an “all of the above” strategy to produce more American energy and create more jobs. Republicans are listening to the American people and have proposed a better solution – the American Energy Act – which will lower gas prices, increase American energy production, promote new clean and renewable sources of energy, and encourage greater efficiency and conservation.

“At the same time the White House makes today’s announcement, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is plotting a new massive job-killer that the American people can’t afford: a cascade of new EPA regulations that will punish every American who dares to flip on a light switch, drive a car, or buy an American product. Americans simply don’t want this backdoor national energy tax that will drive up energy and manufacturing costs and destroy jobs in our states and local communities.”

Editor's notes: you must understand that we are in the campaign season. While Obama will not "move to the middle" as Bill Clinton did, he will appear to have moved to the middle -- in fact, he will claim that he never left the "middle." His tough anti-terrorist talk and, now this announcement about drilling off shore, are calculations designed to mitigate the pending mid-term disaster for his party.

How can you tell the difference between a real and inspired "move to the middle?" Deeds measured over and against words, that's how. Words are never the means by which one evaluates the enemy unless, of course, there is nothing but words to analyzes.

For example: Obama is beginning to push back on the notion that he is a "socialist." He made this push back clear over the weekend with his interview on the Today Show host, Matt Whats-his-name. So, is he a socialist or not?

Why we believe Obama is a "Socialist"

You can either listen to the words or look to the (his) deeds. We remind you of his deeds. They give us the true Barack Husein Obama.

He obliterated accepted Wall Street rules and violated fiduciary agreements with "primary stockholders" in his take-over of GM and Chrysler.

His minions avoided Senate debate and secretly pushed through a complete take-over of the student loan industry costing thousands of jobs and adding to the Secular Government's thought control over schools who accept students receiving grants and loans for higher education pursuits. Expect to see applications for these grants and loans refused for students attending private or religious schools.

There is his confiscation of the funding giants, Fannie and Freddie, on Christmas eve, giving him access to their funds without the need for congressional approval, a story that was both under-reported and socialist to its core. News to you? We carried the story. In fact, this is the very story that got our original Midknight Review taken down on Dec. 26 !! Check out this link.

Look at Obama's use of federal regulation to begin his environmental policies -- i.e. the regulations governing the output of carbon dioxide (needed by trees to live !!). Understand that we know that regulations are what they are. But you must know that Obama is using "regulations" to begin an environmental policy that may not survive the congressional legislative process. That is what a socialist would do - not what a politician would do who respects the legislative process or respects public opinion.

There was his decision to refuse voucher support previously given to private schools. This was well documented last March ('09) as he continued his support of state run schools and teacher unions. You must know that Obama is no friend of private education.
.
.

A WSJ headline reads: White House Seeks to Rally Supporters With Aggressive Tone Against Opponents - So, what's new ?? Seriously.

Editor's prefatorial: understand that beginning with BHO's congressional speech to both houses of congress September 9, 2009, Hussein Obama manifested his "I am calling you out" strategy, never before used by a President of the United States. All previous Presidents have believed they needed votes from the middle and and conservative side of the aisle to win an election. Obama is the first to conclude that he can win elections while ignoring more than half the nation's voting population.

The word is out that Congress will continue to infuriate the general population with work on immigration, Cap and Trade, the silencing of the secret union ballot and attacks on conservative talk radio. Obama intends to take a majority opinion (the fact we are a "center right" nation) and turn those people into second class citizens --- permanently. With the passage of his remaining agenda, before the mid-terms, Obama hopes to be successful in putting America in the Marxist/Socialist column and boxing in the free movement of traditionalist opposition in this Nation. We will expand on this theme in the very near future with linked references and expanded commentary.

It is with great amazement that we read of Obama's "momentum" (in the WSJ article below). All non-partisan polls such as Rasmussen and Gallup have Obama's approval numbers under 50% (Gallup at 46% and Rasmussen at 47% -- both polls taken yesterday). He ultimately gained nothing in polling results because of the passage of the long overdue health care bill and now, after the fact, it turns out that the bill is so poorly written that it might collapse under its own financial burden. The business and corporate communities are silently positioning themselves to fight the Socialist Democrat Party with all the finances they can engender. 77% of Wall Street businessmen believe Obama is anti-business. He has lost 20 points in the moderate community and 9% in the Black community (a truly significant number). He has proven to be an utter disaster for small business and the "anti-Christ" with regard to the Christian faith - lets never forget that he ordered the symbols for "Jesus Christ" covered before giving a speech at the University of Georgtown, last year. Midknight Review regards that as politically unforgivable.

The first "volley" in all this was September the 9th. The facts of this WSJ article give us the final revelation of his strategy. Read the following with the context of our commentary above:

President Barack Obama . . . . . . is taking a more aggressive tack with his Republican adversaries, hoping to energize Democratic voters and possibly muscle in some Republican support in Congress.

On Thursday, the president challenged Republicans who planned to campaign on repealing his health-care bill with, "Go for it." Two days later, he made 15 senior appointments without Senate consent, including a union lawyer whose nomination had been blocked by a filibuster. President Obama is taking a more aggressive tack with his Republican adversaries, hoping to energize Democratic voters and possibly muscle in some Republican support in Congress, Jonathan Weisman reports. At a bill-signing event Tuesday, he is set to laud passage of higher-education legislation that was approved despite Republican objections through a parliamentary maneuver that neutralized the party's filibuster threat.

On Thursday, Mr. Obama will be in Maine, home state of two moderate Republican senators who opposed his health-care plan, to promote the health law. Even his surprise trip to Afghanistan on Sunday mobilized the perks of the presidency to marshal public opinion, as pictures were beamed home of Mr. Obama mobbed by U.S. troops.

A senior Democratic official said the push was a textbook case of taking advantage of political momentum as the campaign season begins. Republicans are "on the defensive," the official said, "and as long as they're not cooperating, we ought to keep them there."

Republicans say Mr. Obama's overtures to them have been for show, whether it was his January meeting with House Republicans in Baltimore or last month's televised, bipartisan health-care summit.

“Instead of trying to work together after the bruising health-care battle, we are going to double down. It only seems to indicate the post-partisanship speak was just that, speak.” —Octavio Lima

The partisanship "may be more visible, and he may be more resolute about it, but as far as most of us are concerned, this is business as usual," said Tennessee Sen. Lamar Alexander, a member of the Republican leadership. But Mr. Alexander said the recent moves are broader, more public swipes that will hurt the president in the end. He conceded that Republican leaders have tried to maintain unity in opposition. "When you have 40 Republicans, with your back against the wall and the gallows are right in your face, you're going to do your best to be unified," Mr. Alexander said.

The onus, however, is on the president to build relationships with minority leaders, Mr. Alexander said.

"If you're the president or a governor and you don't have a good relationship with the other party, that's your problem to solve," he said.

Mr. Obama campaigned on calling for an end to partisan bickering in Washington, but once in office he launched an ambitious agenda that pursued several long-held Democratic goals.

Meanwhile, Republicans decided at an early stage to aggressively oppose most of Mr. Obama's agenda. Partisan tensions have run high for most of his term.

Recently, Mr. Obama has been swinging particularly hard. He followed up his "go for it" taunt Thursday with the recess appointment of union lawyer Craig Becker to the National Labor Relations Board, adopting a tactic that presidents of both parties have used in recent decades to skirt the normal confirmation process. Mr. Becker's confirmation had been blocked in the Senate by a filibuster in February.

On Tuesday, Mr. Obama will sign what has been billed as a package of fixes to the health-care bill, approved under rules that required only a simple majority vote to pass in the Senate. That nullified Republicans' power to block it through a filibuster. Democrats attached to the bill a major overhaul of student-lending laws, which eliminated a federal subsidy for private tuition lenders, federalized most student loans and plowed the savings into expanded federal higher education aid. Republicans say the bill will destroy the private student-lending market. Mr. Alexander, the Tennessee Republican, called the student-loan move "really brazen" and "the most underreported, biggest Washington takeover in history."

In classic game theory, confrontation is sometimes necessary when cooperation breaks down to present a credible potential threat and get the two sides to re-engage, said Robert Axelrod, a University of Michigan political scientist and author of the game-theory book, "The Evolution of Cooperation." He isn't related to White House senior adviser David Axelrod.

The Senate doesn't work the way game theorists think, said Antonia Ferrier, an aide to Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah. A body built on personal relationships is likely to spiral into endless tit-for-tat retaliations in the face of Mr. Obama's new turn, she said. . . . .

—Jean Spencer contributed to this article.

Write to Jonathan Weisman at jonathan.weisman@wsj.com

Health Care is not two weeks old and already over budget. Anyone surprised ???

Here is a news brief found at the Wall Street Journal. It concerns itself with the revelation that children with pre-existing conditions were not included in the ForcedObamaCare law as Obama stated over and over and over.

First, read the brief:

BY AVERY JOHNSON

Insurers said they would comply with regulations the government issues requiring them to cover children with pre-existing conditions, after a dispute with lawmakers over interpretation of the new health-care legislation.

The Obama administration has made near-immediate coverage for sick children a priority in its health-care overhaul. But shortly after the bill's passage last week, insurers contended that the law didn't require them to accept sick children until 2014.

The insurance industry's lobby, America's Health Insurance Plans, said the law meant only that they needed to cover treatments for sick children who already were customers.

Continuing notes: two things come to mind. How many times has the very combative Hussein Obama stated something as fact only to find out later that he didn't have a clue. In fact, this scenario is such a frequent circumstance that Midknight Review believes it to be much more than "pattern activity," rising to the level of intentional activity. In virtually every case, Obama spews moments of misinformation when in the midst of a "debate" -- the Obama claim trumping all objections. On September 9, 2009, the famous "you lie" was uttered immediately after Obama claimed that illegals would not receive benefit from the current health care proposal. Turns out Obama was wrong. Illegals will benefit from health care via Medicaid - a program in which administrators are expressly forbidden to ask for or, in any way, verify citizenship.

The claim for pre-existing conditions with children was made over and over again - by the Slickmeister. The news brief above tells us that the provision was not in the bill, that it is being added in after the fact and insurance companies have 'agreed" to the inclusion (as if they had a choice !!).

Understand that this particular omission allowed the pundits of ForcedObamaCare (FOC) to claims the law would actually save money -- a pathetic 137 billion over the course of ten years. Do not be surprised to find out that this provision, not priced into the new reform law, will cost 400 billion dollars over the course of the first ten years. So, before the reform law is two weeks old, we already know it is over budget.

One final point is this - we go deeper into debt to the tune of $220 billion a month. You should write that down and use it as a benchmark when politicians start talking about costs or savings. For example, when Pelosi looked into the cameras three weeks ago, raised her eyebrows in fake "surprise," and said, "This bill will save $137 billion dollars over the course of ten years," using our "benchmark," we know that this "savings" is equal to the debt we incur over a period of two weeks - hence our characterization of "pathetic."

.

Obama to his Democrat Stooges: Keep up the controversial legislation and I will win the election for you.

Think about it: the rumor is that between now and the November mid-term elections, Obama will drive his Democrat congress to pass an immigration reform bill, a value added tax proposition, an anti-secret ballot voting process for the unions, regulations limiting free speech on talk radio and Cap and Trade.

They have six months to get all this done.

We say, have at it. In doing so, his party will miss the needed time for campaigning to save their Congressional seats and get very little of the above fully accomplished in the process.

Instead of backing off, now that the controversial ObamaCare has been forced through Congress, Obama plans to continue the pursuit of controversial legislation right up to November 2nd. Apparently, he believes that he, alone, is all that is needed to win the various campaigns necessary to keep large majorities in both houses of Congress.

Themes that will be carried in Midknight Review are these:

1. An unabridged documentation of his failings as measured against his stated goals.

2. The radical composition of those gathered into his Administration.

3. His Black Liberation ties and the nature, history and definition of Black Liberation Theology.

4. A thorough listing of all the promises he as made and broken.

5. Michelle's senior paper and its implications for the Obama "presidency."

6. A documentation specifics of Obama's rejection of our Founding Principles.

7. Obama's decision to continue racial divisions in this country for the accomplishment of his purposes.

8. Seven fundamental political positions that permeate all of his agenda.

No doubt there will be others, but these categories will become themes of this blog, intertwined but identifiable as specific issues. Understand that nothing could be further from the truth than Obama's claim that he is not an ideologue. While this fact does not tell give us the full picture of who he is as an ideologue, it does give us the ability to predict much of his intended course -- jds.
.

.

.
Did you know that before it is all said and done, the Obama Government will spend nearly 20 billion dollars on the Census -- $5 million in training a group of people who will work no more than 24 hours.

.
.

Crosshairs on a gun's sight or a surveyor's sight symbol ?

16,683 shares  (I believe this
number is due to the article
being used as a gateway onto
Midknight Review).

So, here is Palins "hit" map
"targeting" 20 vulnerable
Democrat

One lone critic has decided to be as insulting as he can be with regard to my depiction of gun site. He , of course, has no clue nor does he have reason for his extremely insulting tone. We will not return the insult. Our response is at the bottom of the article.


Representatives
with seats in districts voting
for John McCain.
Not the "sights" giving the
ignorant Left a chance to argue
that Palin was making a call for
violent activity.
So - are these gun sights or
surveyor sights ?
You make the call.
On the right is looking through a
scope on a rifle. The symbols on Palin's
map are different. Why? Because they are

NOT gun sights; those images are
survey markers.

But it is all so silly. Palin a terrorist ??

Update (1/9/11): Go to "comments " below to read the editor's overwhelming defense of the
more important point. Giffords was one of only two Democrats to
survive Palin's hit list for the midterms. No one including Giffords thought
Palin wanted her dead. Lefties have actually killed
more individuals because of their policies than all the wars of modern
times. You all must be proud. Again, see my "comments" for
further discussion. - JDS

Update 1/9/11): From Ben Smith, we have this:

" We have nothing whatsoever to do with this," Palin aide. Rebecca Mansour told the talk radio host Tammy Bruce in an interview. "We never ever, ever intended it to be gun sights. It was simply cross-hairs like you'd see on maps," she said, suggesting that it is a "surveyor's symbol."
Although Ben Smith doesn't buy this account, he admits the symbol is closer to a
surveyor sight than a gun sight. cf this Link

1/15/2011 update:

Guess who was the first to put a real target on Giffords.

Anyone know what this is? An article from the very liberal Daily Kos, back in 2008, putting an actual bullseye on Gabrielle Giffords.

This is what a gun target looks like.

Click on image to enlarge

Midknight Review was the first to make the case for Palin's symbols being survey targets, back on March 29 of 2010. See the story here, Crosshairs on a gun's sight or a surveyor's sight ...

We have gotten over 1570 hits on this story -- mostly from liberals going insane over our premise; all of whom ignore their own complicity in the "target" scandal they created out of the events in Arizona -- Daily Kos included.

And today on the House floor, the airhead we know as Nancy Pelosi actually spoke of the Arizona shootings as " a tragic accident [that] took lives, wounded people in the expression of ideas.” The implication being that the expression of ideas lead to this 'tragic accident.'

For the lone doubter of the pictorial representation of a gun site at top of page, we give a second and similar version. Both pictures were taken out off gun/rifle wedsites.

The self proclaimed critic apparently spoke before thinking.

Tiger Woods and the Final Four

There was a time when the "accomplishes" of Woods included 14 different women. Turns out, these are the faces of the Final and only Four.

Talk about objectifying women - Midknight Review will not add names to these sluts nor - in any way - add to the sordid tale.

We do not care about these babes or their futures. They will try to cash in on the moment -- but then, a year from now, no one will have the slightest idea as to who they are.

When society decided to diminish the social stigma of such activity, Tiger Woods selfishness and lust became common place and, worse, acceptable.

We could not care less about the women or Tiger's "road back to health." This is the last you will see or hear of Mr. Woods on Midknight Review. Understand that he is no less the slut than the women -- jds.
.

Remember those shovel ready jobs ?? Turns out not to be a practical idea.

By Garance Burke

updated 10:32 a.m. PT, Sun., March. 28, 2010

FRESNO, Calif. - After a year of crippling delays, President Barack Obama's $5 billion program to install weather-tight windows and doors has retrofitted a fraction of homes and created far fewer construction jobs than expected.

In Indiana, state-trained workers flubbed insulation jobs. In Alaska, Wyoming and the District of Columbia, the program has yet to produce a single job or retrofit one home. And in California, a state with nearly 37 million residents, the program at last count had created 84 jobs.

The program was a hallmark of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, a way to shore up the economy while encouraging people to conserve energy at home. But government rules about how to run what was deemed to be a "shovel-ready" project, including how much to pay contractors and how to protect historic homes during renovations, have thwarted chances at early success, according to an Associated Press review of the program.

Editor's notes: so there you have it. The Liberals with their regressive environmental concerns and lust for over regulation are being defeated by their own policies !! That is the story, here.

Our question is this: how long will it take to see completion of the thousands of "solar farms" Obama talks about and the hundred of thousands of related jobs? We're thinking "never." In California, two solar farms are being proposed for the central/coastal state. We are looking at a 6 to 10 permit process if, in fact, the environmentalists are defeated in their opposition to such farms -- jds.

.

The Associated Press fails, again, to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

Here is an AP story we found that falls short of giving us the truth on the health care issues upon which it is reporting.

CHICAGO (AP) - Health insurance premiums for young adults are expected to rise about 17 percent once they're required to buy insurance four years from now. That estimate is from an analysis by Rand Health.

Young people will need to carry more of the burden of health care under the new health overhaul law. The new law limits an industry practice of charging older customers more.

Even so, the pluses could outweigh the minuses. Some 2 million people under age 26 should qualify for coverage under their parents' health plans. And Medicaid expansion will insure 9 million more young adults.

The part we object to is this: " . . . . the pluses could outweigh the minuses. . . . "

Really? Did you know that the 26 year olds (and under) covered by family paid insurance policies are those who are currently attending college? No college, no parent paid insurance. And . . . . . did the AP author [always anonymous] just list as a plus the notion of Medicaid coverage ? You have to hunt and peck to find a doctor who accepts Medicaid and that will only get worse over the course of the coming year. That explains why the Government plan is billed as cheaper than private insurance --- less coverage usually equals cheaper prices. There are more medical requests turned down under Medicaid and Medicare than under private insurance coverage. Finally, the news brief, above, fails to mention that because of the reduced premiums required of seniors, adult youth will see their premiums rise by approximately 17%.

It is just a shame that the popular media is not giving us the whole picture -- jds.

.

We keep telling you that Democrats believe in the principle of "the ends justify the means." You have only to look at Harry Reid for proof.

Until a couple of months, no one had ever heard of Scott Ashjian. Harry Reid will be running against one of three GOP candidates in the coming mid-term - currently, each of the three poll [much] better than Mr. Reid. Suddenly, out of nowhere, there is a new "conservative" in town -- and he is facing 14 years in prison on a bad check case, at least according to the Clark County Attorney Generals office. Understand that it is believed that Reid and the Democrats have "planted" Ashjian in the hopes of diverting some the conservative vote needed to defeat Reid in November. Maybe "they" are more worried about this race than they are letting on? You think ??!! Until that happens, here is what 15 other conservative groups are doing about this Democrat plant:



Can you believe this bunch of Democrats? Corrupt to the core. It turns out that Ashjian is an asphalt contractor in Nevada who has written a $5,000 bad for which he will be prosecuted. Read the whole story here --- jds.
.
.

Some insight into RomneyCare and why Midknight Review is not excited about his candidacy

Here is a story we found in the Nashua Telegraph that tells the truth about RomneyCare. It is universally agreed that RomneyCare is about to bankrupt Massachusetts State. Midknight Review will support a Romney candidacy but will not back his Primary efforts at gaining the GOP nomination. This story factors into our reasons for this decision. On the other hand, we would support Tim Pawlenty, or Eric Cantor or Paul Ryan -- to name a few. Sarah Palin is near the top of our list as well, but for very different reasons. We believe that Palin "will serve if asked," but is not actively seeking the Presidency. She is Miss Middle America, and is willing to spend her capital as a celebrity conservative and past politician to advance the grassroots conservative movement and help to keep it on track.

Here is the news brief:

Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, a potential Republican presidential contender in 2012, said universal health care in Massachusetts is no model the nation should follow.

“The plan is dramatically propped up by federal money,” he said. “Take that away and there would be dire economic consequences.

“Looking at the Massachusetts experience, it would not be one I would want for the country to follow any further.’’

Now that Congress passed the health care reform law, the Massachusetts health experience could become even more a critical bellwether for Mitt Romney’s second run for president, in 2012.

During an interview with The Sunday Telegraph, Pawlenty didn’t mention Romney by name, but he relayed how Massachusetts state Treasurer Tim Cahill warned that a national version of the Massachusets law could bankrupt the country in four years -- read the full story here. Please note our recommendation: it is a rather long news story but worth the read -- jds.

.

Midknight Review expects a favorable jobs report next week but not because of Obama. Here's why.

You can expect a favorable jobs report this coming week. Last week's "first time applicants" for Unemployment benefits was 442,000. that representative the third week in a row in which that total declined over and against the week before. What does not get reported, except here at Midknight Review, of course, is the context for such a report.

We have been witness to well over a year's worth of reporting on only one aspect of the jobs situation. No one reports the numbers of jobs created and people newly employed. While people are signing up for first time unemployment benefits, there are those who are leaving those benefits behind because they are newly employed. That has been a continuing but under-reported reality all along.

From what we at Midknight Review can observe, the critical number of "first time unemployment applicants" is somewhere around 420,000. It is at this statistical marker that we can expect to see a positive jobs report. And, after nearly a year and a half, we are about to see some positive movement as relates to "jobs." While the "first time applicants" will remain at 400,000 per week or higher, if that number does not approach totals significantly higher than 420,000, new hires will "balance out" the first time applicant numbers. In other words (as an example), the first time benefit report can be 408,000 for the week with the newly employed numbers at 425,000 and -- suddenly - we have a positive jobs report.

The Case For Obama's Smoke and Mirrors Campaign

Obama and his company of Flunkies has been hoping the economy would repair itself. The intention has been, all along, to take credit for this "repair" while continuing to work against private and non-government jobs providers. Most remember Obama's promise related to the February '09 &787 Stimulus (now worth $861 billion) and the infamous 8% benchmark . . . . . "Pass this Stimulus and unemployment will not rise above 8%." Remember that promise? Well, if truth be known, the fact is that Obama was expressing his belief and untold confidence in the free market capitalist system. He thought the "system" would repair itself while he spent money like a drunken Democrat. The strategy was to call this expenditure a "jobs bill," give the bulk of the money to unrelated entities and take credit for whatever jobs improvement occurring after February 17, 2009 (the beginning of the Stimulus). At the time, the unemployment benefit rate was 7.4%. Keep in mind that less than $111 billion was allocated for "infrastructure" (jobs) or less than 15% of the Stimulus package. Here is the official chart of projected Stimulus outlays. The pertinent category, here, is "infrastructure and science." Understand that "science" is attached to "infrastructure" in order to mask the actual and pathetic allocation Obama set aside for jobs creation.

$787 Stimulus Bill - Feb '09

Picture left is the original intent of the Feb '09 $787 Stimulus Bill.

"tax relief" is a one time check written to all citizens whether they paid taxes or not. This is not the $250 check we all received from the appropriations bill.

As of June 30, '09 on $27 billion has been sent out with the states receiving $19 billion, according to FoxNews ("fiscal relief").

Midknight Review believes that 50% of each total is lost to waste, theft and administration costs. On average, then, each state will have $1 billion to spend for "infrastructure and Science"

Conclusions: As a jobs bill, this bill is a misnomer.

Note: no one seems to know what "Protecting the Vulnerable" means. It certainly does not include the hard working middle class tax payer.

The total outlay for all of the above is $787 billion. You should know (from our reporting) that long term "jobs creation" was not a part of the Stimulus Bill -- and, short term "jobs creation" received very little attention in this bill, no more that 15% of total outlays and as little as 8% of the total Stimulus allocation.

The case for a Conservative Reality Campaign

The point of this post? The Stimulus was not about either "stimulus" or "jobs creation." This is not a theoretical claim, by the way. We have a 13 month record proving the point. It is already too late for Obama to lay claim to any jobs improvement. He was right about one thing -- free market capitalism works.

We [conservatives] must not allow Obama to co-opt the successes of the free market system. After a full 13 months of bad news, the notion that the Stimulus is now working is preposterous on its face. Reports such as this editorial present the proper context for America's economic recovery. The stock market, hated by Obama and Company, continues to repair itself - a glowing testimonial to free market enterprise. The continuing economic recovery is a testimony to the same principle. The scope of the current recovery can be influenced by Obama and his Socialist Democrat policies but it can never be the result of those same policies. Governments do not create jobs --- jds
.

Here is the kind of reporting Conservatives are up against.

Bob Cusack, Managing Editor for The Hill, writes a lead-in (and full article) with a picture of Congressionman Jim Wilson shouting "you lie" during Obama's September 9 Congressional speech in which he called out his opposition for the first time on national television and made a claim that health care will not be offered to illegal aliens.

Villains, liars and conspiracy theories marked the 2009-10 healthcare debate

Bob Cusack - 03/28/10 03:33 PM ET

The healthcare debate of 2009-2010 had everything a movie producer craves: conflict, twists and turns and of course, a climactic ending.…

If you "google" the issue, you will find article after article confirming that, "indeed," illegals will not be given access to the health care provided under the law. What no one seems to want to report is the fact that last summer, the Democrats rejected the Heller Amendment which would order verification of citizenship before participation in health care could be administered.

If Obama was telling the truth, why would his minions vote this amendment down? The fact of the matter is this: verification demands of citizenship are disallowed. In many states, driver's licenses are issued to illegals. More than that, while the Health Care law excludes illegals from health care proper, Medicaid administrators are not allowed to ask for citizenship verification. In this , we now understand why Obama and Comrades intend to place 17 million ( or so) indigent folk onto the Medicaid/Medicare rolls. Wilson was right - Obama lied.

But the point of this post is not the Wilson story and the lies Obama has been telling the public with regard to Illegal inclusion. It is the fact that men such as Bob Cusack, again, the Managing Editor of a paper as influential as The Hill, are given the power of the bully pulpit when they are no more qualified to participate in the political debate than the "next guy." Cusack has a B.A. degree in journalism (similar to a "sand box" degree) and is further "qualified" because he is a member of the Actor's Guild, does commercials, featured films and television show !!! Good grief !! Little wonder why he did not get his review of the past health care debate accurate. And, this is what conservatives have to deal with . . . . men and women with no more qualification for reporting the news than those who make the news.

While Cusack is palpable, idiots like Keith Olbermann are not. True to our M.O. for media personalities, Olbermann has a B.S. (how fitting) degree in communications and a failed attempt at managing the news department at MSNBC two years ago. He was promoted to that position after the death of Tim Russert's untimely death and forced to step down within a year of the promotion. His show on MSNBC runs across from Bill O'Reilly (who owns a B.A., a M.A, and a M.P.A. from Harvard) garners about 25% of O'Reilly's numbers. In the world of news journalism he is a failure BUT, there he is, every evening on MSNBC, the news channel that runs paid commercials each weekend.

NBC uses him as a "color" commentator on Sunday Night Football. He is a foul mouth slut for the Left and has nothing of importance to talk about. His claim to fame is his assault against FoxNews in general and O'Reilly in particular. Olbermann proves that hate and stupidity do not sell. --- jds.
.

Has Obama tipped his hand with regard to his Supreme Court strategy ? Midknight Review thinks so.

Is he as liberal as some on the Right fear? We do not know, as of yet. BUT he is an Obama favorite AND he is just 39. So, the man starts off with two strikes.

Out of the NY Times, we have this: The first major appeals-court nomination fight of the Obama presidency may be shaping up over Goodwin Liu, a highly qualified teacher and legal scholar. Mr. Liu, nominated to the San Francisco-based United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, is raising hackles on the right because of some of his legal views, and because he is seen as a strong candidate for the Supreme Court in the near future. The White House and Senate Democrats should fight hard for the confirmation.

Editor's notes: here's the problem -- and it is a big deal. The man, as liberal a fellow as a there is, is only 39 years of age. If appointed to the 9th District, will he become Obama's nominee to the High Court should Ginsburg retire (she will do that during Obama's first term, you know). No one is saying that Liu is more liberal than Ginsburg. But he is 39. If appointed to the High Court, the Marxists would secure that seat on the Court for, perhaps, the next 40 years.
.

Every day, in every way, Obama and his thugs go further to the left - soon they will be left out.

Here are the opening words of a Washington Examiner story dettailing the Democrat reaction to Corporate America's reporting this past week, specificaly John Deere's reporting of 150 million in lost revenues, Caterpillar's 100 million loss and AT&T estimated losses of $1 billion -- all this year -- due to the recent health care law.

Here is the story. Let's not forget the Chicago tactics and tyranny of this administration -- something that goes well beyond Democrat/Republican. We are experiencing nothing short of an assault on the freedoms of America. Take the time to read all of what we have cut from the original article -- hopefully all of us, Dems and conservatives, will see the danger implicit in this story.

Rep. Henry Waxman, chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, has summoned some of the nation's top executives to Capitol Hill to defend their assessment that the new national health care reform law will cost their companies hundreds of millions of dollars in health insurance expenses. Waxman is also demanding that the executives give lawmakers internal company documents related to health care finances -- a move one committee Republicans describes as "an attempt to intimidate and silence opponents of the Democrats' flawed health care reform legislation."

On Thursday and Friday, the companies -- so far, they include AT&T, Verizon, Caterpillar, Deere, Valero Energy, AK Steel and 3M -- said a tax provision in the new health care law will make it far more expensive to provide prescription drug coverage to their retired employees. Now, both retirees and current employees of those companies are wondering whether the new law could mean reduced or canceled benefits for them in the future.

The news is an embarrassment for Democrats. As President Obama and congressional leaders tout the purported benefits of the new health care law, some of the nation's biggest companies are saying it will mean higher costs and fewer benefits -- not exactly what Democrats want to hear in the days after their historic victory.

So Waxman has ordered the executives to explain themselves at an April 21 hearing before the Energy and Commerce Committee's investigative subcommittee. That subcommittee just happens to be chaired by Rep. Bart Stupak, the Michigan Democrat who held out his vote on health care reform until a few hours before final passage on March 21, giving the bill's opponents the unfounded hope that he might vote against it.

Waxman's demands came Friday in letters to several executives. "After the president signed the health care reform bill into law, your company announced that provisions in the law could adversely affect your ability to provide health insurance," Waxman wrote to Randall Stephenson, chairman and CEO of AT&T. A few hours before Waxman sent his letter, AT&T announced it will take a $1 billion charge against earnings because of the tax provision in the new health bill. AT&T also said it will be "evaluating prospective changes" to its health care benefits for all workers.

Waxman's letter suggests he does not accept the company's decision. "The new law is designed to expand coverage and bring down costs, so your assertions are a matter of concern," Waxman wrote to Stephenson, in addition to letters to Verizon CEO Ivan Seidenberg, Caterpillar CEO James Owens, and Deere & Company CEO Samuel Allen. The companies' decisions, Waxman wrote, "appear to conflict with independent analyses."

Waxman's demands for documents are far-reaching. "To assist the Committee with its preparation for the hearing," he wrote to Stephenson, "we request that you provide the following documents from January 1, 2009, through the present:

(1) any analyses related to the projected impact of health care reform on AT&T; and (2) any documents, including e-mail messages, sent to or prepared or reviewed by senior company officials related to the projected impact of health care reform on AT&T. We also request an explanation of the accounting methods used by AT&T since 2003 to estimate the financial impact on your company of the 28 percent subsidy for retiree drug coverage and its deductibility or nondeductibility, including the accounting methods used in preparing the cost impact statement released by AT&T this week.

Waxman's request could prove particularly troubling for the companies. The executives will undoubtedly view such documents as confidential, but if they fail to give Waxman everything he wants, they run the risk of subpoenas and threats from the chairman. And all as punishment for making a business decision in light of a new tax situation. read the full story at the hyperlink above.

.

CNN reports "dozens" at the first stop on the Tea Party Express. One wonders why CNN even bothers to keep its doors open.

Well, this story requires more space for the pictures of Searchlight than it does for words or a "rebuttal." As per usual, the Marxist Media (CNN specifically) reported the first stop for the Tea Party Express, beginning in Searchlight, Nevada, Harry Reid's hometown, as a gathering of "dozens" of conservatives.

If you remember the April 15 Tea Party gathering in D.C. last year, you will recall a Marxist Media estimate of 30,000 when the actual number was between 1.5 and 2 million -- Midknight Review ran two pictures of the event showing a wall-to-wall crowd running from the Washington Monument down to our White House, around to the right side of the Capitol building, and nearly 3/4 of a mile "up" whatever side street is to that side of the Capitol.

We give you the same "rebuttal" as we did last year. The Marxist Media will be consistent in denying the grassroots movement of Conservative America. Midknight Review believes that we could have 73 million folks vote a conservative ticket this coming mid-term. That would be a pronominal total. The Liberals had 69 million voting for Obama in contrast to 60 million conservatives.

Setting CNN reporting aside, FoxNews reported more than 10,000 at the Searchlight event with several thousand sitting along side the highway, unable to get into the event. The Tea Party conservative grassroots movement is huge and growing.

Take a look at the crowds and decide for yourselves: a few dozen or maybe, just maybe, 10 to 12 thousand.

Make note of the cars: the line runs the full length of the picture -- from the bottom, up and around that little hill and as far as you can see. The event is near the top and to the left of the hill. It is the right lane at picture bottom traveling to the event. You can see the entrance into the event about a half inch below the line of trees.

The crowd at the event was so large the folks in the helicopter above could not get the entire gathering in its view.

Story by jds.
. .

News Flash !!! The existential Left is using "child abuse issues" to defeat the Christian Faith at all levels

Singer Sinead O'Conner as she ridicules the Catholic Church specifically and Christianity in general.

Make no mistake, the current angst mounted the Pope is not about child abuse but about the Leftist disdain for the Christian faith. Joining in the battle against the Christian religion is Christopher Hitchens, a confused and despondent atheist, often touted as some kind of authority on God by the likes of MSNBC and CNN, and the equally confused singer, Sinead O'Conner. Read this LA Times news brief.

Sinead O'Connor: 'There should be a full criminal investigation of the pope'

Years after her controversial 'Saturday Night Live' appearance, the Irish singer is still at odds with the Catholic Church, saying it must come clean about sexual-abuse allegations.

March 24, 2010|By Henry Chu

Reporting from Bray, Ireland — She shot to fame 20 years ago with her shaved head, chiseled cheeks and haunting rendition of the song "Nothing Compares 2 U." Then she gained notoriety when she tore up a photo of Pope John Paul II on American TV, calling him "the enemy" and urging people to fight child abuse.

Sinead O'Connor is still singing. And she's still speaking out against abuse -- only now her 1992 stunt on "Saturday Night Live" almost seems prescient as the Roman Catholic Church faces a growing catalog of complaints about child sexual and physical assault by priests in her Irish homeland and across Europe. end of script.

Editor's comments: Note the reference to the torn picture of the Pope, years ago. Again, this is not about child abuse. Rather, it is about ridding the world of the Christian religion, period. Never forget that what is said against the Catholic Church is said against all none Catholic Christian entities.

Understand that Midknight Review is not defending the Catholic Church in the current circumstance. But this review is not about the religious American scene. It is only and primarily about politics. While the child abuse issues need immediate and prayerful attention, we must not lose sight of the fact that the Marxist Left hates Christianity and will use and and all criticism directed at the Church (Catholic, Protestant High Church, Holiness, Pentecostal, or whatever) to divide public opinion and conquer that philosophical push back to evil that is the Christian Faith in its many forms and expression.

Another reason why Midknight Review thinks Obama is a classless jerk -- he excludes parochial students and private school children from White House

Obama continues his assault against private enterprise, private employment, private faith based charities and now, private and parochial schools:

(CNSNews.com) – The Obama administration announced on Tuesday it has reserved 3,000 free tickets to the annual White House Easter Egg Roll for students in D.C.-area public and charter schools, but not for children who attend private or parochial schools.

Why exclude children in private and parochial schools, asked the father of a parochial school student at Tuesday’s press conference where U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan and District of Columbia Mayor Adrian Fenty announced the ticket giveaway. read the full story linked above.

What we have in this classless "leader" is a man so convinced of his own rhetorical abilities and the rightness of his own version of socialism ( socialism: government ownership of private concerns) that he cares for no other opinions and pitts himself against all who disagree. We saw this in the health care "debate" but the first view of Obama's immaturity and classlessness was in February of '09. One of the first announcement of this dictator-like administration was the unreasoned assault against private schooling - private Black schooling - in Washington, D.C.

Again, that was in the early days of his ascending the thrown. Think people have forgotten? Think again, W'aldo. Here is a video of a protest on September 8, 2009, by concerned and ignored Black parents effected by Comrade Obama. Allow a few seconds of script and audio. The Black spokesman is informed and passionate. If we conservatives cannot figure out how to partner with these folks, we are more the losers. Note this - this protest was ignored by all of the major media -- jds



.

They want people to note the "crosshairs" instead of the 20 Congressional individuals that need to be gone after the 2010 elections.

Here is a map -- THE map -- that has been used by the most violent segment of our society, the hard left, to try to garner points as "they" continue to politicize just about everything that moves.

The very cute Ann Curry, on NBC's Today Show, tried [she's just doing what she is told] to put Senator McCain on the defense regarding this map, a creation of Sarah Palin. Apparently Curry thought the map was a bit over the top what with the gun-sights and all.

Did we say "and all?" Oooops ! "And all " ???!!! There is no "and all." But to hear the Radical Left and their parrot media hosts, there is so much more to this map besides the notion that certain Representatives need to be targeted for defeat in the upcoming mid-term election.

And who said they were "gun sights?"

We studied the entire image -- nothing about violence even hinted at. Nothing.

Curry asked "These are very dangerous times. Is this the language we should be hearing today?" Perhaps Miss Curry should take the challenge and look up the word "target." Here is an Internet definition found at the very liberal "Word Web" : "Intend (something) to move towards a certain goal." Anything in that definition that reminds you of violence or gun sights?

You say, "Target, what target? Its the gun sights that are offensive." We would argue that these "sights" are those found in a scope, whether hand held or mounted on a gun or part of a survey tripod. There is nothing found on this Palin map that suggests an intention to cite violence against the individual's named or to imply that these are "gun sights."

What we have in the very lame objection is an effort at distraction. The Dems are fully aware of the anger caused by their own arrogant cramdown of the healthcare bill -- make no mistake, they know this. They are hoping to mute the message embedded in this map and the message made front and center is this: there are 20 Congress people who reside in McCain districts that need to be voted out of office this coming November. THAT is the message of the map. So we really should simply ignore the childish efforts at changing the focus of the conservative counter attack and make certain these people do not come back to Congress after January of 2011.

As an important side bar to the above, we have these words from the Senate Sargeant-At-Arms, Terrance Gainer: " there has been an increase in telephone calls and emails that are probably more harassing than threatening and the number of House Members being threatened has increased this week." So there you have it - "more harassing than threatening." There is an uptick in threats but the bulk of the protests have nothing to do with violent intent. Look, the most violent political side of aisle, in this country, is the hard left. Billions of dollars in damages have been the result of environmental terrorism. While the Oklahoma bombing was the result of a Right Wing nutcase, the Unibomber killed and terrorized hundreds of individuals over a period of decades -- and was cheered by many on the Left. There are plenty of nuts to go around but only the Left actually give them employment at places like MSNBC.

Having said all this -- let's work hard to rid Congress of those on Palin's list and not get lost in a silly defense engineered by those clearly on the run --- jds.

.

There is no better example of gross incompetence than the Obama Administration 's treatment of one of our best allies, Israel. Get this bum gone!

Editor's notes: You must understand that Black Marxist leaders in this country hate the Jew. [read this supporting story ] There simply is no other explanation for Obama's disgraceful, childish and immature actions taken against Israel's Prime Minister. People like Obama blame [especially] the Jewish bankers of this country for the plight of the looters and loafers of their community. Many Blacks, responsible and hard working, disagree with this Black bias - but it remains the only and best explanation for Obama's disgust with the Jewish national community and their leaders. Understand that in the latest internal national polls, only 9% of Israeli's believe Hussein Obama is NOT anti-Isreal. We seldom reprint whole stories from other blogs but in this case, we must. From Gateway Pundit, we give you this story:

Obama Refuses to Dine With Jewish Leader

Friday, March 26, 2010, 4:45 AM

Jim Hoft

Do you remember when Jesse Jackson said that under Obama Jews would lose all of their clout?
He was right.

(Top left clockwise) Barack and Michelle Obama and radical Leftist anti-Israel Professor Edward Said at a May 1998 Arab community event in Chicago at which Edward Said gave the keynote speech. (Bill Baar’s West Side), Former PLO operative and close friend of the Obama’s Rashid Khalidi, Barack Obama and his racist minister Jeremiah Wright, and close terrorist friend William Ayers.

In an unprecedented move, Barack Obama refused to dine with the Jewish leader on Wednesday.
Nile Gardiner said it best:

Barack Obama’s humiliation of Israel is a disgrace

I wrote recently about Barack Obama’s sneering contempt for both Israel and Great Britain. Further confirmation of this was provided today with new details emerging regarding the President’s appalling reception for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House earlier this week. As Adrian Blomfield reports for The Telegraph:

Benjamin Netanyahu was left to stew in a White House meeting room for over an hour after President Barack Obama abruptly walked out of tense talks to have supper with his family, it emerged on Thursday. The snub marked a fresh low in US-Israeli relations and appeared designed to show Mr Netanyahu how low his stock had fallen in Washington after he refused to back down in a row over Jewish construction in east Jerusalem.

… (Mr. Obama) immediately presented Mr Netanyahu with a list of 13 demands designed both to the end the feud with his administration and to build Palestinian confidence ahead of the resumption of peace talks. Key among those demands was a previously-made call to halt all new settlement construction in east Jerusalem.

When the Israeli prime minister stalled, Mr Obama rose from his seat declaring: “I’m going to the residential wing to have dinner with Michelle and the girls.” As he left, Mr Netanyahu was told to consider the error of his ways. “I’m still around,” Mr Obama is quoted by Israel’s Yediot Ahronot newspaper as having said. “Let me know if there is anything new.”

This is no way to treat America’s closest ally in the Middle East, and a true friend of the United States. I very much doubt that even third world tyrants would be received in such a rude fashion by the president. In fact, they would probably be warmly welcomed by the Obama White House as part of its “engagement” strategy, while the leaders of Britain and Israel are frequently met with arrogant disdain.

The ritual humiliation of the Israelis is an absolute disgrace, and yet another example of how the Obama administration views its allies with indifference, contempt, and at times outright hostility. It is extraordinary how far the Obama team has gone out of its way to grovel to state sponsors of terrorism, such as Mahmoud Ahmadinejad or Muammar Gaddafi, while kicking America’s friends in the teeth.

Read the whole thing.

Reader Michael G. added:

It is funny how all the things conservatives worried about pre-election, which were poopoo-ed by the media, seem to be coming to fruit in the Obama administration.

Actually, it’s much worse than we thought.

.

Someone told Winston the dog about Obama care and the debt his owner's now share - he went nuts !! See the video.

We think this is a riot !! Talk about angry conservatives !! Nothing holds a candle to Winston, the dog. He tore through 2 fences and attacked 4 cars - the last one was this cop car. Geeez !!



.

Some facts about Social Security but first the fairy tale of socialized security:

Read this article found on the opinion pages of New York Times. As you do, understand that nearly all of what this seemingly qualified pundit has to say about Socialized Security is as false as is the notion that Jeremiah Wright is a Christian minister.

Paying More for Benefits

Munnell">

Alicia H. Munnell, a former member of the Council of Economic Advisers, is the Peter F. Drucker professor of management sciences at Boston College’s Carroll School of Management and director of the college’s Center for Retirement Research.

Despite the financial crisis, Social Security continues to send out monthly benefits to 35 million retirees, 9 million disabled workers and their families, and 6 million families in which the bread winner has died.

Even under current law, Social Security benefits will replace a smaller fraction of pre-retirement earnings than in the past.

Yes, in the short run, a higher-than-predicted unemployment rate means that fewer people are working and contributing to the system than originally projected. But the system has a contingency reserve to buffer just such a downturn, and today’s trust fund is more than adequate to insure the payment of full benefits for decades.

How about Social Security’s long-run outlook? A worse than expected short-term economy will have only a small impact on Social Security’s 75-year outlook, which is driven mainly by the aging of the population.

Editor's notes: you will have to search long and hard to find anyone who agrees with this woman's rosy picture of Socialized Security. First, there is no "contingency reserve" laying around to feed the needs of SS -- if there was, there would be no truth to the forecast of unexpected deficits beginning THIS year instead of the year 2016 as originally predicted. What Munnell has to say is so far from reality as to be simply "silly" ----- no truth to what she says at all.

Secondly, the Federal Government has been stealing Social Security payroll tax collections for years and years. There never has been a special fund set aside and dedicated to the future needs of Social Security. That WAS the plan, you know. That was the lie told us by Progressives in pre-legislation rhetoric. That is why the program now owes 38 trillion dollars in unfunded liabilities and no longer collects enough payroll tax to fulfill current demand let alone fund a "reserve." The Baby Boom generation is about to crash the bank with its 78 million applicants over the course of the next 15 years.

Three things are about to happen: first, retirement age is about to be increased from 62 and 65 years to somewhere in the 70's bracket. Secondly, new benefit pay-outs will be cut. Third, taxes on retirement payouts will be increased. The effect of all the above is this: those under 50 will not have the same degree of "security" some of us old timers have . . . . best make other arrangements.

But there is more to this story. What you see in Socialized Security is exactly what will be the case for ForceObamaCare. Progressives laughed at conservatives and arrogantly argued that SS would always be self sustaining. Within ten years of the programs beginnings, it was obvious that the Nation had been lied to in this regard. Look at Medicare -- set up in 1965 -- we were told that the projected Medicare debt for the year 2000 would be under 10 billion dollars. Instead, it was somewhere in the neighborhood of 370 billion dollars.

When Obama took office, each family in this country owed %56,000. Because of Obama, by we now owe $71,000 per family and $170,000 per family by 2020 !!! That's 90% of our Gross National Product. Under Bush? Our debt was a manageable 40% of GDP.

Need we say more? Forget about elections based on our "pocket book" and start thinking "national debt reduction" --------- jds

.

Forget "nuclear peace" and think "real peace." Emmylou to you with thanks to Hack Wilson.

Emmylou Harris is listed as one of my favorite all-time performers. She is in her 60's and without a wrinkle . . . . and, as I say in my blog profile, she could sing a Wheaties commercial and I would be crying my eyes out (yes, real me cry when they hear Emmylou sing).

It has nothing to do with politics, but that just might be a good thing -- grab a cup of mud or a red beer and give yourself four minutes of peace -- jds.



.
.

Nuclear Arms Reduction Treaty - Obama and his new found Russian friend (it ain't Putin) sign treaty that adds nothing to our safety.

Obama, King of Smoke and Mirror diplomacy, announces a thoroughly meaningless nuclear reductions treaty.

From the NY Times:
At 8:00 am pst, Obama announced the "most significant nuclear treaty in two decades. The numbers are seeing give us a reduction of nuclear warheads by 25% and delivery systems by by half, bringing the nuclear US arsenal down to 1500 warhead and related delivery systems to a lesser but unstated number.

Obama alluded to the smoke and mirrors fact that the world is safer because of this "land mark" treaty. read the full story at the above link.

Editor's notes: Really? Look, of we (both the US and Communist Russia) could kill off the population of the world 9 times over, and now, after the treaty, over 6 times over . . . . . . . . . . . . well, pardon me for not feeling safer.

Our question is this: beside the above point, how many of these warheads have aged beyond their time and are a part of this nuclear reduction? In other words, how many of these warheads needed to be retired and now, with the treaty, what was going to happen anyway is credit to a "peace treaty?"

In the end, this treaty has nothing to do with increasing the "safety" factor for the world's population. If you kill me with 9 missiles and now, only 6 missiles, I am no less dead -- jds.
.
.

Obama's approval numbers, election percentage and the Marxist Media's push to keep him "at the top" of the National Popularity Contest.

From Rasmussen we see that the day before ForcedObamaCare was voted into law, Obama's approval rating was at the lowest of his last term in office -- 43%. Since that time, his numbers have improved by 6% to 49% (today's number) but remain 16 points below his early time "presidential" number of 65%. Understand that "voter approval numbers" often have little to do with an actual vote projection. As a specific example, take the 65% approval number set at the first day of Obama's administration and compare that to the FACT of the winning percentage for Obama of 6.5%. "65%" versus "6.5%. One could argue that the 65% polling number equalled a winning margin of just 6.5 points. If that is a true comparative ratio, what does it mean when Obama's approval numbers are now 16% lower than when he won election?

Date	Presidential Approval Index		Strongly Approve	Strongly Disapprove	Total Approve	Total Disapprove
3/26/2010	-10		31%	41%	49%	51%
3/25/2010	-10		32%	42%	48%	51%
3/24/2010	-11		31%	42%	48%	52%
3/23/2010	-10		31%	41%	48%	52%
3/22/2010	-12		29%	41%	47%	53%
3/21/2010	-16		26%	42%	45%	54%
3/20/2010	-21		23%	44%	43%	56%

What we have in the above charted polling results is not the whole story. What the people think is one thing, but what the Marxist Media thinks is something quite different. If we are to count the number of stories written about Obama (for and against) and convert those numbers to percentages, we have this revelation: over the past 7 days, there have been 7830 positive articles written or aired by the national media over and against 4234. That converts to an "approval" media rating of 64.9% versus a negative percent of 35.1%. Understand that if the Marxist Media reflected popular concerns, Obama's approval numbers would be well under 40% ---- jds.

Update: is the "bump" over? One day's reporting is not the measure but today's polling is not good for Obama:

Date	Presidential Approval Index		Strongly Approve	Strongly Disapprove	Total Approve	Total Disapprove
3/27/2010	-13		30%	43%	47%	53%

H
His numbers dropped two full points in a single day - between yesterday and this morning. Understand our claim: if the passing of ForcedObamaCare does not get him in positive numbers, he and his Socialist Democrat Party is headed for hard times -- jds.