Obama Voter Says Vote for Obama because he gives a free Phone

Show the Movie 2016 Obama's America

Show the Movie "2016: Obama's America" and Save the Country Petition | GoPetition

The Truth behind the 4.5 million jobs

If I see one more post on FB or tweet on Twitter about how this adminstrtation has created 4.5 million jobs, I am going to scream! This number does not tell the whole story. From the Daily Herald:

While that figure has become a White House talking point, it’s only part of the story. It’s a cherry-picked number that refers just to private sector jobs created in the last 29 months, from the trough of the recession through July. Governments — especially state and local ones — have continued shedding jobs.

The economy lost 8.8 million jobs from the time employment peaked in January 2008 until it hit bottom in February 2010. Between then and this July — the most recent month for which there are figures — just 4 million jobs have been recovered. Never since World War II has the economy been so slow to recover all the jobs lost in a downturn.

So as you can see the Obama administration is not telling the whole truth. Now I realize that is not a surprise to many of you, but the next time you hear a lib scream how this administration has created 4.5 million jobs you can take them to task. You may also want to point out to them that the jobs that are being created are low wage jobs. From the NY Times: (emphasis mine)

“The overarching message here is we don’t just have a jobs deficit; we have a ‘good jobs’ deficit,” said Annette Bernhardt, the report’s author and a policy co-director at the National Employment Law Project, a liberal research and advocacy group.

Higher-wage occupations — those with a median wage of $21.14 to $54.55 — represented 19 percent of job losses when employment was falling, and 20 percent of job gains when employment began growing again. Lower-wage occupations, with median hourly wages of $7.69 to $13.83, accounted for 21 percent of job losses during the retraction. Since employment started expanding, they have accounted for 58 percent of all job growth.
The occupations with the fastest growth were retail sales (at a median wage of $10.97 an hour) and food preparation workers ($9.04 an hour). Each category has grown by more than 300,000 workers since June 2009.

So this administration likes to talk about jobs being created and in reality they are just entry level retail jobs.

Finally the labor force participation rate has been shrinking since Obama took office.  Neal Lipschutz of the Wall Street Journal does a great job of explaining this:

First a definition: The labor force participation rate is that percentage of the adult population that is employed or actively seeking employment.
In August, this group was 63.5% of the population. That was the lowest figure since September 1981, when it also stood at 63.5%, according to the Labor Department‘s Bureau of Labor Statistics.
For men, the August participation rate figure was 69.8%. That’s the lowest on record. The records of the Labor Department began in 1948.

So to recap the 4.5 million number is cherry picked, the jobs created are low wage jobs, and the labor participation rate has been shrinking. Now that you are armed with the truth you can point out facts to all of your liberal friends!

RR

A Different Look at the Chick-fil-A Controversy

Unless you have been under a rock for the past two weeks, you are well aware of the Chick-fil-A controversy.

First a little background. After the mayor of Chicago Rahm Emanuel stated that Chick-fil-A did not share Chicago values, I nearly became unglued! (Note: My Alderman in Chicago and the Boston mayor made comments about Chick-fil-A as well. You can find them here and here.) What are Chicago values? Was he talking about all of the shootings that occur in Chicago? Was he talking about all of the crime in black communities? Was he talking about the high taxes Chicago imposes on its citizens? What about the high unemployment rate in the black community? Well no, he of course was saying that Chicago has no problem with the gay and lesbian community. I agree with that and for the record, I am opposed to gay marriage based on my understanding of God's Word the Holy Bible. I make no bones about it and I am willing to stand up for what I believe in. With that being said, I have plenty of gay friends and I believe as the Bible teaches we are to love everyone as God has loved us. What I do disagree with him on is the fact that Chicago has plenty of issues, why even wade into the waters on this one? Well Peter Bella of the Washington Times does a pretty good job of explaining that when he wrote the following:

There are defintely two Chicagos: working and wealthy Chicago, and poor Chicago. Politicians, especially black politicians, rarely visit poor Chicago except during election time. They stay just long enough to beg for votes. They more often frequent wealthy and White Chicago, where the campaign money is.
Blacks were promised that if black politicians were elected to represent them, their lives would change for the better. Chicago’s black elected officials on every level - city, state, and federal - have done next to nothing for the communities they allegedly serve and supposedly represent. They willfully and cheerfully ignore the very people they promised to help.

Wow. There are two points to be made here. One, he mentions politicians and votes. He states black politicians, but as anyone who follows politics knows a politician is a politician no matter race creed or color. It is safe to say Rahm was trolling for votes like all politicians. He has stated that he is in favor of gay marriage and I take him at his word. The second point, speaks to black America especially those who continue to vote for Democrats blindly. They have been burned by them time and time again, yet they go back for more. Also, when politicians decide to support one group over another, (in this case the LGBT over everyone else) they end up hurting other groups in this case blacks and Hispanics. With the black unemployment rate over 14%, I think they would welcome any business willing to hire them. If you would like to read the full article it can be found here.

RR

John Sununu Nails It

With all of the talk going on about presumptive nominee Mitt Romney's time at Bain Capital, John Sununu (former NH governor) makes great points about Obama.



RR

Really Barry?

This man knows no bounds. We don't know who his friends were in college, we have not seen his grades, and he has the nerve to say you have to be an open book? We have to get this man out of office pronto.
RR

We Can't Afford NOT to Repeal Obamacare

In his new blog post: Obamacare, the CBO, and the downward spiral of statist economics, Glenn Gogoleski makes a few points about Obamacare that we all should keep in mind:

 •$1 trillion cost projection is an underestimate that includes only six rather than 10 years of subsidies; $2.4 trillion is a more accurate cost projection for the first decade.

 •The Community Living Assistance Services and Supports Act (CLASS)that was built into Obamacare will not generate the $70 billion expected. That idea was scrapped from the original plan. That means more than $70 billion of the supposed 10-year deficit reduction of $123 billion from the original cost estimate is already gone. 

•Spending cuts to Medicare in Obamacare are not real and based upon a flawed premise that Medicare payments to doctors can fall below payments from Medicaid.

 •Double-counting – a heavy reliance on cuts to the Medicare program to pay for the massive entitlement expansions in the legislation. But a large part of the Medicare cuts (and payroll tax increases) is also supposed to pay for future benefits out of the Medicare Hospital Insurance trust fund. In other words, the savings from the cuts and taxes is spent twice—once on Obamacare’s entitlements and then again to fill a hole in the trust fund so that future Medicare claims can be met. The end result is not deficit reduction, as Obamacare’s apologists claim, but a massive increase in deficit spending over the long term.

 •The CBO assumes that in 2019 only 19 million Americans will receive insurance through the health care exchanges, when in fact most workers will be better off foregoing employer health care coverage, taking cash instead of the benefits, and using Obamacare’s entitlement package for their health care. 

•There’s the $300 billion in physician fees. The Administration scooped up every Medicare cut it could find to pay for Obamacare and then said it wanted to add new physician fee spending to the deficit without any offsets. But just because they tried to keep two sets of books doesn’t mean the deficit won’t go up. It will, as the combined effect of the “doc fix” and Obamacare is unquestionably an increase in the deficit. •Finally, there are the omitted costs. CBO admits that a lot of the costs for administering Obamacare aren’t counted in the original cost estimate. There’s at least $5 billion to $10 billion in Health and Human Services (HHS) spending, and another $5 billion to $10 billion for the IRS. Just this year, HHS asked for an additional $850 million to pay for setting up a federal backup exchange in 2013.

None of these costs are counted in the original cost estimate. As we await the Supreme Court ruling on Obamacare, it is nice to be reminded of what we were told, compared to the truth which was concealed. RR