Obamanomics vs. Reaganomics: Destroying the lies about trickle …

dancingczars.wordpress.com2/7/12

This entry was posted in Obamanomics vs. Reaganomics: Destroying the lies about trickle down economics and tagged conservative blog netowrk, Progressives are economic morons, Socialism doesn't, Trickle down works.

Another Record for Obamanomics | Wizbang

wizbangblog.com2/3/12

Another Record for Obamanomics. February 3, 2012 | Filed under Economics,Employment | Posted by Rodney Graves. And like all such records, it's not one that's doing the nation a damn bit of good.

President Obama has frequently justified his policies and judged their outcomes in terms of equity, justice and fairness.

All of which begs an obvious question,

How does our existing system and his own policy record stack up according to those criteria?

1) Is it fair that the richest 1% of Americans pay nearly 40% of all federal income taxes, and the richest 10% pay two-thirds of the tax?

2) Is it fair that the richest 10% of Americans shoulder a higher share of their country’s income tax burden than do the richest 10% in every other industrialized nation, including socialist Sweden?

3) Is it fair that American corporations pay the highest statutory corporate tax rate of all other industrialized nations but Japan, which cuts its rate on April 1?

4) Is it fair that President Obama sends his two daughters to elite private schools that are safer, better-run, and produce higher test scores than public schools in Washington, D.C. while millions of other families across America are denied that free choice and are forced to send their kids to second-rate schools?

5) Is it fair that Americans who build a family business, hire workers, reinvest and save their money—paying a lifetime of federal, state and local taxes often climbing into the millions of dollars must then pay an additional estate tax of 35% (and up to 55% when the law changes next year) when they die, rather than passing that money onto their loved ones?

6) Is it fair that Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, former Democratic Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, former Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel and other leading Democrats who preach tax fairness underpaid their own taxes?

7) Is it fair that after the first three years of Obamanomics that the poor are poorer, that the poverty rate is rising, that the middle class is losing income, and some 5.5 million fewer Americans have jobs today than in 2007?

8) Is it fair that roughly 88% of political contributions from supposedly impartial network television reporters, producers and other employees in 2008 went to Democrats?

9) Is it fair that the three counties with America’s highest median family income just happen to be located in the Washington, D.C., metro area?

10) Is it fair that wind, solar and ethanol producers get billions of dollars of subsidies each year and pay virtually no taxes, while the oil and gas industry which provides at least 10 times as much energy pays tens of billions of dollars of taxes while the president complains that it is "subsidized"?

11) Is it fair that those who work full-time jobs, and sometimes more than one in order to make ends meet have to pay taxes to support up to 99 weeks of unemployment benefits for those who don’t work?

12 Is it fair that those who took out responsible mortgages and pay them each month have to see their tax dollars used to subsidize those who acted recklessly, greedily and sometimes deceitfully in taking out mortgages they now can’t afford to repay?

13) Is it fair that thousands of workers won’t have jobs because the president sided with environmentalists and blocked the shovel-ready Keystone XL oil pipeline?

14) Is it fair that some of Mr. Obama’s largest campaign contributors received federal loan guarantees on their investments in renewable energy projects that went bust?

15) Is it fair that federal employees receive benefits that are nearly 50% higher than those of private-sector workers whose taxes pay their salaries, according to the Congressional Budget Office?

16) Is it fair that soon almost half the federal budget will take income from young working people and redistribute it to old non-working people, even though those over age 65 are already among the wealthiest Americans?

17) Is it fair that in 27 states workers can be compelled to join a union in order to keep their jobs?

18) Is it fair that nearly four out of 10 American households now pay no federal income tax at all, and is a number that has risen every year under Mr. Obama?

19) Is it fair that Boeing, which is a private company, was threatened by a federal agency when it sought to add jobs in a right-to-work state rather than in a forced-union state?

20) Is it fair that our kids and grandstands and great-grand-kids who never voted for Mr. Obama will have to pay off the $5 trillion of debt accumulated over the past four years, without any benefits to them?

What do you think? Was it fair?

Related posts:

1. Obama Owns The Economy Now
2. What’s The Tax Debate All About?
3. Would Cain’s 999 Have Beeen A Good Thing?

In Search of Angels « CFE Korea

cfekorea.com2/6/12

… timeless problem of obtaining the financing necessary to get their product or service off the ground and out the door, a challenge made all the more tricky given the dearth of venture capital funds floating around the country.

Critical Components for Receiving Venture Capital | eVirtual Sales …

virtualblackswanmarketing.mobi2/6/12

Sometimes nothing is more powerful as opposed to passion along with vision of your entrepreneur. Nevertheless sometimes interest and vision are just inadequate. It helps to understand the criteria in which venture capital companies use to make a decision which firms to fund. A number of venture capital firms and corporate and business investors possess very thin criteria-specific technologies in specific procedures in specific areas of the country. Other individuals …

Israel attracts more venture capital investment per person ($170) than any other in the world, including the U.S. !

From the Internet to alternative energy and communications technology, Israel innovates at a pace that few places other than Silicon Valley can come close to rivaling.

Why is that? And How Can That Be?

Because Israel is a nation where thousands of start-ups are encouraged and nurtured, and there’s great ingenuity too.

Huge Investment Is A Problem Though

Israel can fairly easily attract a small seed investment in the hundreds of thousands of dollars, but getting a $2 million investment to turn a start-up into a mature corporation is much more difficult.

And that’s why in spite of its technical genius, Israel still hasn’t yet created a tech giant on the scale of Intel or Google.

Not yet a tech giant, but check out the things that Israel has already contributed to the world’s technology.

The Acquisition Of Israeli Start-Ups

While there are exceptions, most Israeli start-ups end up getting acquired during their growth stages rather than sticking it out to achieve IPOs (International Public Offerings).

And part of the problem is that with so many start-ups, the country’s small population talent pool is stretched thin, which is a problem the U.S. is starting to have too.

Sell Early

So it makes sense for Israeli entrepreneurs to sell early and become employees of bigger American firms that set up shop in their own country which only has seven million inhabitants.

Right now Intel employs 7,500 people in Israel and Apple is reportedly opening up a new research center too.

Related posts:

1. Will The Fed Use Stress Tests To Determine If A Bank Needs Capital?
2. Black Monday – More Job Cuts Around The Country!
3. Obama Still Determined To Make America Just Another Country

Economic Terrorism: Was the 2008 Collapse Intentional …

conservativebyte.com1/20/12

Economic jihad perhaps. Reply. Big Ugly, Wyoming says: January 20, 2012 at 10:32 am. There is no doubt in my mind that the “Crash of 2008″ was intentional …. orchestrated by Obama's handlers ….. headed by George …

Ireland may be the first EU state to sell Islamic bonds – Jihad Watch

www.jihadwatch.org1/20/12

McCormick Foundation: Shariah, Law and 'Financial Jihad' and How Should America Respond? 1. Recommendation: Enforce and prosecute violations of current laws on disclosure, racketeering, anti-trust, material support for …

Glen Beck talks to Kevin Freeman, the author of the book "Secret Weapon", about economic terror.

I edited the interview because the sound was so low as to be almost inaudible, and the clip was very long.

It seems like economic terror is now an official part of Jihad and its intent is to cause a collapse of the US economy!

Frightening stuff!

If you can’t destroy the US militarily then destroy it economy!

Both the Arabs and George Soros (seems like he’s involved too) have lots of money at their disposal, and their motivation to destroy the US economy is sky-high.

The bottom line is that the dollar and America’s credit rating are under attack, and the attack is very very serious!

So what can be done?

Please post your thoughts and suggestions.

Related posts:

1. The U.S. And The E.U. Are On An Economic Collision Course.
2. The Economic News Is Both Good And Bad
3. Do Socialist Countries Fare Better In An Economic Crisis?

Herman Cain's 999 Plan Draws Praise, Skepticism – Finance – CBN …

Cain's 999 plan is part of what's propelled him to the front of the GOP field. Although the plan is resonating with voters, it's drawing criticism from economists.

Publish Date: 10/15/2011 2:00

http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/finance/2011/October/Herman-Cains-999-Plan-Draws-Praise-Skepticism/

Why I Support Herman Cain For President – Forbes

Neon Tommy

Why I Support Herman Cain For President Forbes The author is a Forbes contributor. The opinions expressed are those of the writer. I have decided to support Herman Cain for president of the United States, and have joined his team of economic advisors. Central to my support are Cain's pro-growth … Cain's 999 Plan A Payoff For Koch SupportLez Get Real Interview with Presidential Candidate Herman CainRealClearPolitics Cain's 9-9-9 Plan: A Step In The Right DirectionNeon Tommy Patch.com -Daily Beast -OpEdNews all 5,377 news articles »

Herman Cain Wants To Kill Our Tax Code!

Herman Caine is the only GOP presidential candidate that wants to do it, and he’s rising super fast in the opinion polls!

The 999 Plan Isn’t Perfect

But like they say,

"Good should never be the enemy of the perfect" – Voltaire

and Rep. Paul Ryan just gave the plan a thumbs-up!

Art Laffer agrees and says,

"It would be far, far better than the current system".

*Arthur Betz Laffer is an American economist who first gained prominence during the Reagan administration as a member of Reagan’s Economic Policy Advisory Board (1981–1989).

And Chris Chocola, the president of the free-market Club for Growth, calls it,

"A truly revolutionary tax reform that would amount to a massive job-creating tax cut on investments, savings and income".

What Is Caine’s 999 Plan?

A 9% income-tax rate.

A 9% value-added net sales tax rate on business.

And a 9% national sales tax overall.

The sales tax part has come under attack from both sides of the political spectrum with many conservatives worrying that it will start at 9% and gradually get raised, whilst a good number of Liberals oppose it because they say its regressivity will hurt middle- and low-income people.

* A regressive tax imposes a greater burden, relative to resources, on the poor than on the rich because there is an inverse relationship between the tax rate and the taxpayer’s ability to pay as measured by assets, consumption, or income.

Cain’s Rebuttal Of Sales Tax Criticism

Everybody below the poverty line will be exempt from the sales-tax and the sales of existing goods will be exempt.

The sales tax will pick up revenue and help to lower the rate for everybody, especially the middle class.

And Caine’s economic adviser, Rich Lowrie says that.

"The sales tax is a replacement tax, not an add-on tax like you’d find at the state level. This is a key point. All we are doing is pulling out taxes that are invisible. We’re cutting the rates. We’re putting them back in at lower rates".

Lowrie is referring to the payroll tax, which in the Cain plan will go from 15% to 9% which constitutes a net tax cut and a good deal more transparency regarding costs and prices that are embedded in the current code.

"The 9-9-9 plan will add $2 trillion to U.S. gross domestic product, create 6 million jobs, increase business investment by a third and lift wages by 10%. And if you fold all that growth together, federal revenues go up by 15%", said Lowrie,

Would It Work?

Such a gigantic drop in marginal tax rates for individuals, 35 to 9%, or to 18% including the sales tax, and for businesses also from 35 to 9% would supply an incredibly strong economy-wide growth incentive, and if you’re looking for proof, then you need go no further than the Harding-Coolidge-Mellon tax cuts of the 1920s, the John F. Kennedy tax cuts of the 1960s and the Ronald Reagan tax cuts of the 1980s.

Remember, too, that the Cain tax plan would eliminate the double-tax on saving and investment by removing capital gains, estates and dividends from the tax code.

Given the current economic malaise, which in large part can be traced to the weakened balance sheets and net worths of families suffering from the multi-year slump in stock prices and home values, increasing returns to saving and investment through a much lower marginal tax rate should boost asset values, and might be just what the doctor ordered.

As for businesses, not only would they get a globally super-competitive 9% tax rate, but they’d receive 100% expenses for new purchases of capital equipment.

Gary and Aldona Robbins who once worked at the treasury priced out the Cain plan on a static basis and discovered it to be revenue neutral.

And the models suggests a $26 trillion tax base yielding $2.3 trillion in revenue for a 9.1% overall rate.

No Federal Or State Tax But Just A Sales Tax

I’ve personally yet to have anybody to explain to me why simply having a sales tax instead of ALL the other taxes wouldn’t be fairer.

The rich would spend more than the poor and therefore pay more tax, and what could be simpler than that?!

Tax preparers understandably hate the idea of course because simply having just a sales tax would put around 100,000 out of work.

Related posts:

1. Obama Owns The Economy Now
2. Twenty Questions Obama Needs To Answer
3. Will Youths Blacks And Hispanics Desert Obama?

Moody's Review China's Credit Rating, Overseas Investment …

www.proactiveinvestors.co.uk11/8/11

HIGHLIGHTS FROM CHINA About ARC China ARC China is a Shanghai-based investment manager focused on investments in consumption-driven, entrepreneur-owned small and medium sized enterprises in China's Tier II and Tier III …

China cuts bank reserve ratio by 50 bps | Bramesh's Technical …

www.brameshtechanalysis.com11/30/11

In a major rating action review of as many as 37 banks globally, S&P has incidentally upgraded two Chinese banks – Bank of China and China Construction Bank. A credit rating is generally considered as a tool to measure an …

A PDF of The Ratings Of Various Countries By The Credit Agencies Is Available For Download

Government officials in China are berating the U.S. because of the Standard & Poor’s downgrade to AA+ and Guan Jianzhong, chairman of Dagong Global Credit Rating, says the U.S. dollar is,

"Gradually being discarded by the world", adding that the “process will be irreversible".

China’s Credit Rating

Fitch gives China an A+ which is their fourth highest rating.

Moody’s gives China an Aa3 which is there third highest ranking.

S&P lists China’s debt rating as AA-, which is the fourth highest level, due to its “sizable” contingent liabilities in its banking system.

Debt to GDP

China’s debt-to-GDP ratio is not only worse than the United State’s ratio, it’s probably worse than Portugal’s, and Portugal is close to bankruptcy.

Despite Moody’s Investors Service saying last month that China’s local debt was understated by hundreds of billions of dollars, the People’s Daily said S&P’s downgrade of the U.S.’s credit rating,

"Sounded the alarm bell for the dollar-denominated global monetary system".

Some Points To Ponder

China has come to own an estimated $1.16 trillion in U.S. debt, by printing excessive Yuans which holds down the currency’s value, making its exports dirt cheap, and it then it uses that extra printed currency to buy U.S. debt.

China likes to say its debt-to-GDP ratio is 17% but the respected Beijing-based research firm Dragonomics says it’s in fact 89% of GDP, which if true would make it worse than Portugal’s which is 83% of GDP.

Stephen Green, who is China economist at Standard Chartered Bank, reckons China’s total debt, including contingent liabilities, is 77% of GDP.

Moody’s said last month that China’s local government debt is understated and might be 3.5 trillion yuan ($540 billion), bigger than its state auditor has estimated,

China’s central bank alone holds an estimated $1.16 trillion in debt, and the government has already increased credit in the system to a reported 200% of GDP.

The eurozone’s problems have kept the euro on a very questionable footing, with the European Central Bank keeping it strong by raising interest rates.

Japan’s massive debts, which are the largest in the world, have kept the yen on an unsound footing.

Strong U.S. defense of Japan, South Korea, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates make it in their interests to protect the dollar.

Related posts:

1. S&P Downgraded US Credit Rating Because Of Huge Deficits
2. Will Moody’s & Fitch Downgrade America’s Credit Rating?
3. Paying Off Debts Will Improve Your Credit Rating

Is it Time to Foreclose on Your Bank?

www.triplepundit.com12/5/11

A look back at the role of corporate banks during the financial crisis of 2008 and a look at other options such as Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFIs).

Daily Kos: Bank foreclosing on businesses that have paid their …

www.dailykos.com12/24/11

First off, how in the hell can it be legal for a bank to foreclose on a loan if the payments have been made on time? Second, less operating income and falling property values “Compelled the bank to act.” Seriously? We are in …

It certainly is a changing globe!

Five months ago Bank of America filed foreclosure papers on a Florida couple who didn’t owe anything on their home.

The homeowner’s, the Nyergers, were later forced to take the case to court because Bank of America refused to accept their proof that they’d paid cash for their home.

A Collier County judge immediately accepted the family’s evidence, confirmed the Nyergers’ claims, and told Bank of America to pay all legal fees.

The bank refused, and the family’s attorney did exactly what the bank had tried to do to his clients, he seized the bank’s assets.

A truck and sheriffs arrived at the bank with orders to remove assets from the bank and within an hour of being locked out of his bank, the branch manager handed over a check for the legal fees.

Related posts:

1. The ‘Loan Modification Program’ Finally Gets Underway.
2. As Stocks Advanced The Number Of Defaulting Homebuyers Rose By 50%
3. Two New Plans Announced To Help Homebuyers

Community Organizer Obama on Republican Economic Theory: “It …

www.thegatewaypundit.com12/7/11

President Obama, in one of his most expansive speeches to date, declared on Tuesday that supply-side economics is a failure and called “gaping inequality” across the country a moral shortcoming that is distorting American …

Obama says economic 'inequality' hurts everyone – CNN Political …

politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com12/6/11

(CNN) — President Barack Obama said Tuesday that economic inequality in America is at "a level we haven't seen since the Great Depression" and "hurts us all.

Here are four recent headlines.

“U.S. Manufacturing Growth Slows Substantially!”.

“Housing Imperils Recovery!”.

“Private Sector Added Few Jobs in May!”.

“Moody’s!”.

And they are all very bad news for Obama’s reelection chances in 2012 !

Obama Now Owns The Economy

Jimmy Carter owned the 1980 election-year economy and George H.W. Bush owned the 1992 election-year economy and both were one-term presidents.

Barack Obama however, has seemingly taken ownership of the 2011 economy, a full year and half before he has to face the voters which is great news for the GOP!

Obama’s self-confidence is famously limitless, but is almost certainly founded on vanity and not on facts.

During his hyper-partisan deficit speech at George Washington University in April, Obama raised major expectations of economic seriousness and then somewhat unexpectedly, dropped them over a cliff.

The day before that speech, most of Washington expected Obama to make a major policy statement about the big deficit-reduction debate that was then unfolding, but the president sadly contributed nothing.

Instead he ridiculed and derided the Republican leadership seated before him and with that speech, Mr. Obama effectively kicked off his 2012 presidential campaign, and in so doing politicized the economy.

Whether you agree or disagree with it, Paul Ryan’s budget which was released just one week earlier, was all about policy, and the Republicans were actually offering to take part-ownership of the economy by spending the year in dense discussions about the deficit and spending.

Bad Timing For Obama

Obama’s timing was not good to say the least because Americans are starting to panic about the economy, the persistently high unemployment and persistently weak growth.

Private forecasters have reduced their estimates for economic growth the rest of the year well below the 3%-plus the Federal Reserve predicted in April and the Fed’s 2012 growth forecast runs as high as 4.2% meaning that they must be using high-powered binoculars or telescopes.

The Failed Stimulus Package

The policy most explicitly intended to reboot the economy was 2009′s $814 billion stimulus, plus successive budgets that raised federal spending to 25% of a $14 trillion economy.

But in this year’s first quarter, the economy grew at only1.8% !

And What’s Worse

The housing sector, which is a monumental and intractable mess is choking the economy; and how did the White House respond?

The president allowed (or told) his “adviser” Elizabeth Warren of the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to involve banks and mortgage servicers in negotiations over a complex regulatory scheme whose goal is literally, “to fix their business model”.

And Worse

The White House now says the free trade agreements with Colombia, Panama and South Korea will be delayed absent payouts of more money for “trade adjustment assistance”, which means that unless the Republicans can force a change, that the last two years of uncertainty for trade commitments, will be extended

Is It Fair To Blame Obama?

Yes it is!

Because the US president made conscious policy choices during a deep recession to vastly reorder vast swaths of American industry and economic growth, like a long gray day, sits still below 3% !!!

Related posts:

1. Will Youths Blacks And Hispanics Desert Obama?
2. Would Cain’s 999 Have Beeen A Good Thing?
3. Twenty Questions Obama Needs To Answer

The EU, US and UK Are Going Bankrupt, Not China | Culture of Life …

emsnews.wordpress.com11/17/11

But it didn't shift in the US favor, it shifted in favor of Asia! Now, Europe is seeing individual countries going bankrupt, one after another, in rapid succession. Greece already is bankrupt when they announced a 50% haircut on …

The Dollar Today Is Dead, The U.S. Bankrupt | Laitman.com

www.laitman.com10/30/11

Opinion: (Giulietto Chiesa, former Italian Politician and Member of the European Parliament): “We are at the beginning of the transition period, which has no.

You Don’t Believe The US Is Headed For Bankruptcy?

So Let’s put the debt into perspective!

And now take a look at President Barack Obama’s 2010 budget!

It shows a massive fiscal gap over the next seventy five years, the closure of which requires immediate tax increases, spending cuts, or some combination of both totaling 8% of gross domestic product, and to put 8% of America’s GDP in perspective, this year’s employee and employer payroll taxes for Social Security and Medicare will amount to just 5% of GDP.

And why are we only projecting seventy five years ahead? Probably because over the full long-term, we’ll need an extra 12%, not 8%, of GDP annually.

Seventy-five years might seem like a long enough time to plan ahead but it’s not, and if the Greenspan Commission, which “fixed” Social Security back in 1983, had focused on the true long term we wouldn’t be sitting here now with Social Security 26% under funded.

The Social Security trustees, at least learned a lesson and the 26% figure is now based on their infinite horizon fiscal-gap calculation.

And another reason we shouldn’t look just seventy five years ahead, is that the government’s cash flows, which are the difference between its annual taxes and non-interest spending, over any period of time, including the next seventy five years, aren’t well defined.

If you use different words to describe the receipts taken in and paid out each year by the government, you produce entirely different cash flows and an entirely different fiscal gap measured over any finite horizon.

Take this year’s payroll tax contributions.

Let’s call these transfers from workers to Uncle Sam “borrowing” by the government, rather than “payroll taxes”, since the money will be paid back as future benefits.

If the future payback isn’t in full however, meaning equal to principal plus interest, then we can call the difference a “retirement tax”.

And abracadabra!

With this change of words, our 2011 deficit of about 10% of GDP is boosted another five points to 15%.

The bottom line then, is that we need to look at the infinite-horizon fiscal gap not just for Social Security, but for the entire federal government and that analysis, based on the CBO’s (Congressional Budget Office’s) long-term alternative fiscal scenario, shows a mind numbing fiscal gap of $202 trillion!

And covering this gap requires coming up with the aforementioned 12% of GDP, forever.

But the Obama administration budget has seemingly fixed the problem!

The president’s 2012 budget, shows that most of our long- term fiscal problem has miraculously disappeared and the fiscal gap isn’t 12% of annual GDP or even 8%, it’s 1.8%.

How does it work?

In 2014 an Independent Payment Advisory Board will be established and will be charged with recommending cuts to Medicare and Medicaid providers when their costs grow too fast.

Hardly anyone expects the cuts to actually happen of course, because until now they’ve always been repealed, and Richard Foster, who is Medicare’s chief actuary certainly doesn’t believe they’ll happen.

Foster added this statement to the end of the report:

“The financial projections shown in this report for Medicare do not represent a reasonable expectation in either the short range, or the long range”.

I’m not sure whether censoring the fiscal gap is more dishonorable than fudging it, but what is sure, is that if nobody starts getting honest about it real soon, then it will be cheaper to light cigars with dollar bills than with matches.

Related posts:

1. Can America Survive This Administration?
2. Will China Cause America’s Next Financial Crisis?
3. The U.S. And The E.U. Are On An Economic Collision Course.

Right Wing Fringe: How Can Obama Win ?

rightwingfringe.blogspot.com12/17/11

A new AP-GfK Poll says that 52 % of American believe that Obama does not deserve to be re elected. With support for Obama waning in all quarters, its difficult to see how he can win. He has lost independents, rumor has it he …

Can Obama win? – Cannonfire

cannonfire.blogspot.com12/16/11

For the first time, the poll found that a majority of adults, 52 percent, said Obama should be voted out of office while 43 percent said he deserves another term. The numbers mark a reversal since last May, …

The Revisionist Hype

Firat of all, let’s ignore the revisionist hype in so many sections of the liberal media about President Obama staging some kind of mythical political comeback!

This is a presidency with an approval rating of around 50% (according to the RealClear Politics poll of polls), that presides over a nation where just 27% of voters think the country is moving in the right direction, and just 29% of Americans think he will be returned to power in 2012.

The White House may be claiming a couple of political wins in the dying embers of the lame duck Congress after expending a great deal of political capital in the Senate over the reckless ratification of the Moscow-friendly START Treaty and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, but these are issues barely on the radar screens of most American voters in the lead-up to 2012, an election which will be dominated by the economy and health care reform, and the political landscape still looks strikingly bleak for the “transformational president” as he goes into 2011 and 2010 was an incredibly bad year for Barack Obama, no matter how much, The New York Times or The Washington Post might try to sugar coat it.

Here are four reasons why it was a year Obama will want to forget:

1. The midterm elections were a defeat of epic proportions for the Obama Presidency, and were the worst since 1948!

When Barack Obama spoke of a “shellacking” at the midterms, it was a huge understatement.

The Republicans scored a significantly bigger win than they did in 1994, with their biggest gain in the House of Representatives in sixty two years.

And fortunately for the Democrats only thirty seven Senate seats were up for election, which most likely prevented what would have been an almost certain handover of power in the upper house too.

Republicans also made huge gains at the gubernatorial level, with the GOP now holding twenty nine governorships to the Democrats’ twenty. Republicans also picked up 680 seats in state legislatures, which is the highest figure in the modern era.

2. Conservatism grew increasingly dominant in America!

The midterms were certainly no flash in the pan, but were definitely part of the much broader conservative revolution which swept America in 2010.

As a recent Gallup survey showed, 48% of Americans now describe themselves as “conservative”, compared to 32% who call themselves “moderate”, and just 20% who call themselves “liberal”.

Conservatives now outnumber liberals by nearly 2.5 to 1, a ratio that is likely to increase in 2011.

The percentage of Americans who now call themselves conservative has risen six points since 2006 and eight points since 1994.

Barack Obama, who is the most liberal US president of the modern era, only has a natural liberal constituency comprised of just one in five Americans, which certainly does not bode well for 2012.

3. The Left lost a huge amount of ground and also engaged in a brutal civil war

2010 was a monumentally bad year for the liberal establishment in the United States, not only in electoral terms but also in terms of increasing divisions within its ranks, as well as the continuing decline of the “mainstream” liberal media.

The conservative media, from Fox News to The Wall Street Journal, had a tremendous year with increasing market share, while establishment giants from CNN to network news outlets continued to decline.

The White House very unwisely (and werhaps stupidly) took on Fox in a major offensive, and spectacularly lost.

And Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, and a constellation of conservative talk show hosts had a bumper 2010 too.

In the meantime, America’s disillusioned liberal elites are increasingly aiming their fire at each other, in scenes that are reminiscent of the bloodthirsty finale of Reservoir Dogs.

The New York Times columnist Paul Krugman perfectly captured the brutal post-midterm atmosphere on the Left in a fiery broadside against the president: “Whatever is going on inside the White House, from the outside it looks like moral collapse and a complete failure of purpose and loss of direction".

4. The Tea Party became more powerful than the president at the ballot box

The Tea Party was the big victor of 2010 because it spectacularly humiliated the White House by running rings around it.

A small grassroots movement with barely any resources evolved into the most successful US political movement of this generation, sparking a national protest against the big government policies of the Obama administration, and a powerful call for a return to America’s founding principles.

The Tea Party, which was initially mocked and jeered by its political opponents, including the president, later came to be feared by the Left as it flexed tremendous political muscle.

A September, a CNN poll showed that “while just 37% of Americans are more likely to vote for a candidate if backed by Barack Obama, a far larger 50% will vote for a Tea-Party endorsed candidate".

The Tea Party continues to gain momentum following the midterms, where it scored significant successes, and a late November USA Today/Gallup poll showed the Tea Party virtually neck and neck with President Obama in terms of voter opinion on who should influence government policy.

Related posts:

1. Will Youths Blacks And Hispanics Desert Obama?
2. New Poll Says Obama’s Base Is Crumbling
3. Do Liberals Finally Understand Obama Was A Huge Mistake?

AMA’s support of ‘Obamacare’ driving away doctors – Catholic Online

AMA's support of 'Obamacare' driving away doctors Catholic Online High on this list are physicians' dissatisfaction with "Obamacare," which they say drives down the quality of care available to patients. Many doctors have been actively dissociating themselves from the AMA. Forty-seven percent cited the organization's … Doctors Distancing Themselves From Health Care LawThe Epoch Times all 4 news articles »

ObamaCare Reaches the Supreme Court – Human Events

Washington Times

ObamaCare Reaches the Supreme Court Human Events On Wednesday, the National Federation of Independent Business petitioned the Supreme Court to review a decision from the 11 th Circuit Court of Appeals regarding ObamaCare. This is the main event, the title card fight between Obama's … HOAGLAND: No economic recovery with ObamacareWashington Times Obamacare endgame: DOJ appeals mandate to SCOTUSAmerican Thinker (blog) Supreme Court Might Kill ObamaCare Before Election — If Obama's LuckyTown Hall Lez Get Real -Daily Caller -National Review Online (blog) all 1,816 news articles »

Obama Participates In A Q&A with ABC.

Better late than never as they say; whoever "they" is.

ABC is certainly way left of the political spectrum and it did its best to give Obama an easy ride both before and after his election, so it was somewhat surprising and heartening to observe News White House Correspondent Jake Tapper finally asking some tough questions and not backing down.

Well done Jake Tapper!

Tapper asked President Obama how he reconciled his claim before ObamaCare was passed that reform would lower health care costs with the fact that a new government report says health care costs are rising.

The president replied, "I said at the time, it wasn’t going to happen tomorrow, it wasn’t going to happen next year".

But Tapper Didn’t Give Up

"No, Mr. President, that’s not what you said.

You claimed repeatedly that "by the end of your first term a family health insurance policy would cost $2,500 less".

Obama responded, "As a consequence of us getting thirty million additional people health care, at the margins that’s going to increase our costs, we knew that".

Tapper responded,
"But what you said last March was, ‘My proposal would bring down the cost of health care for millions of families, businesses, and the federal government’".

The President Somewhat Unsurprisingly Moved On – Next Question?

In spite of the new transparency, Tapper didn’t get to follow up and demand that the president answer the question truthfully.

Is The Health Insurance Mandate A Tax Or Not?

In another lively exchange, ABC’s George Stephanopoulos asked President Obama if the mandate to have health insurance was a tax.

"For us to say that you’ve got to take a responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase", the president replied.

And the legislation concurs; it never refers to the mandate as a tax.

Catch 22

Except that the Obama Justice Department now says it, "Absolutely is a tax".

At least it’s making that claim before judges considering the constitutionality of the mandate.

The reason Justice is calling the mandate a tax is that Congress has the constitutional authority to levy taxes but it does not have any constitutional authority to tell people they have to buy health insurance.
So if the administration can convince the judges, and eventually the Supreme Court that the mandate is a tax, then the mandate may have a better chance of being ruled constitutional.

Will People Be Able To Keep Their Current Policy?

The president repeatedly asserted they would, but report after report shows that within the next few years that many if not most people will lose their current coverage, because of ObamaCare.

Wellpoint, Cigna and CoventryOne have already decided to stop offering child-only policies because of new rules that are going into effect this week that would force them to accept any and every child applicant.

And there are growing concerns that many if not most employers will take the easy and less-expensive way out.
They’ll stop offering coverage and let their employees go into the health insurance exchanges, scheduled to start in 2014.

And Prescription Coverage?

Then there’s a new study on Medicare’s Part D prescription drug coverage from Avalere Health, which predicts that up to 3.7 million seniors could be forced to switch their prescription drug coverage.

And Medicare?

Doctors are increasingly refusing to take new seniors because Medicare pays only about 78% of what private insurance pays and there will be potential reimbursement cuts of about 30% by the end of the year if nothing gets done.

"Preserving and strengthening Medicare", is therefore a meaningless mantra if a senior can’t find a doctor who’s willing to take new Medicare patients.

Related posts:

1. Certain Parts Of The Intended Health Plan Are Unconstitutional
2. The ‘Loan Modification Program’ Finally Gets Underway.
3. Obama’s Reelection Problems