There is a never ending "updating" of economic data issued by Washington with the said "updating" often lowering the previously released good news embraced by the Obama White House. Unfortunately, this "updating" has happened again with the target this time being the growth of the American economy during this past third quarter.
Originally the Obama Administration proclaimed that the national economic growth in the 3rd quarter of 2009 was at the rate of 3.5% which it later lowered to 2.8% and which it has now very quietly reduced even lower to the figure of 2.2%. If the last figure is accepted, then some acknowledgement must be given that either the Obama actions of this past year have allowed only a marginal recovery or that the economy runs on its own efforts with those efforts now showing some success or these figures are nice but meaningless when compared to other economic indicators.
There is no question that America still faces a very high unemployment rate which Washington states to be at 10% while almost all other economists see at a 17% figure. There also have been many "busted" banks in America this year, with more expected, and the average American consumer remains over leveraged.
Most of the economic good news, and that particularly includes the "rocketing" of the sale of previously owned homes, is not the result of natural growth but rather by programs "fueled by federal aid". This "fueling" is merely the spending of money borrowed from Communist China or the spending of money created by the Obama Congress. In either event, these funds will have to be repaid and will curtail real growth in the future.
No real American wishes for or encourages these now years of economic disaster. However, the Obama power brokers have realized the opportunities now presenting themselves to expand the powers of a federal government and to push all of us closer to a socialist government/economy.
The importance of the 2010 elections grows every day
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
OBAMA DOES NOT EQUAL TRUTH
No matter how much President Obama smiles and publicly pronounces that the American economy has seen its worse days, the truth always seems to surface and to refute the statements of our President. It happened again today.
The Labor Department has just released data concerning matters pertaining to last month's economy and the news ran counter to Obama's recent optimistic representations. It has been disclosed that during this past November wholesale prices increased 1.8%. This inflationary figure is more than two (2) times greater than what the Department had previously prognosticated. Key items contributing to this unexpected rise in costs included the wholesale expense of energy which rose by 6.9% and the wholesale expense of food items which were up by 2.4%.
Not helping in any way to bolster the mood of Americans, in a most recent speech Ben Bernanke expressed that our nation was confronted with "formidable headwinds" as it seeks economic recovery. In that same presentation he confirmed his belief that the recent drop in American unemployment to 10.0% would be short lived. His full expectation was that this not-working number would increase in size as the months of 2010 proceed. Not helping to defuse this bad news was the data release on foreclosures. In 2009 some 3,900,000 mortgage foreclosure notices were sent to US property owners. This is an increase of 22% over the 2008 total for the same type of legal document. Leading the way in the number of recently filed foreclosures were Nevada [1 in every 119 housing units is being foreclosed] and Florida [1 in every 165 housing units is being foreclosed].
The year 2010 will soon be upon us and the change in the number of the year number will, unfortunately, not bring about a change in the White House or in the Senate or in the House of Representatives. However, as November of the year 2010 approaches, those goals of significant governmental change become every day closer and more realistic.
The Labor Department has just released data concerning matters pertaining to last month's economy and the news ran counter to Obama's recent optimistic representations. It has been disclosed that during this past November wholesale prices increased 1.8%. This inflationary figure is more than two (2) times greater than what the Department had previously prognosticated. Key items contributing to this unexpected rise in costs included the wholesale expense of energy which rose by 6.9% and the wholesale expense of food items which were up by 2.4%.
Not helping in any way to bolster the mood of Americans, in a most recent speech Ben Bernanke expressed that our nation was confronted with "formidable headwinds" as it seeks economic recovery. In that same presentation he confirmed his belief that the recent drop in American unemployment to 10.0% would be short lived. His full expectation was that this not-working number would increase in size as the months of 2010 proceed. Not helping to defuse this bad news was the data release on foreclosures. In 2009 some 3,900,000 mortgage foreclosure notices were sent to US property owners. This is an increase of 22% over the 2008 total for the same type of legal document. Leading the way in the number of recently filed foreclosures were Nevada [1 in every 119 housing units is being foreclosed] and Florida [1 in every 165 housing units is being foreclosed].
The year 2010 will soon be upon us and the change in the number of the year number will, unfortunately, not bring about a change in the White House or in the Senate or in the House of Representatives. However, as November of the year 2010 approaches, those goals of significant governmental change become every day closer and more realistic.
Thursday, December 10, 2009
MULTIPLE THOUGHTS
What has to be taken as a positive political sign for anti-Obama conservatives, a third incumbent Democrat Congressman has announced that he will not stand for re-election in November of 2010. These three "retiring" folks are Baird of Washington, Moore of Kansas and Tanner of Tennessee. The Republican Party has clearly embraced these openings with full intent to have the seats become occupied by a member of its Party. As we enter into 2010, fully expect that more Democrats will humbly announce, that for their personal best interests and the best interests of their home district, no reelection campaign will be made.
With the 2010 elections less than a year away, Democrats want to implement a financial debt act now so that it will be forgotten or at least minimized by time voters enter the polls this coming November. This legislation is the raising of the ceiling on the national debt. The current allowed total US debt is $12.1 Trillion and that figure has already been reached. To "balance the books", the Democrats will in next few days raise the national debt by another $1.8 Trillion. In real figures that will be a total short, money owed by all us Americans to others like Communist China and OPEC, in the total amount of $13,900,000,000,000.00.
Considering this huge Federal debt as well as other negative aspects of the American economy, Ken Rogoff, who is a noted Harvard economist and an IMF Department Director, has said that he does not easily see "the kind of robust recovery" in the immediate future of America that will "generate 10-11 million jobs". His thoughts have been that in matters concerning unemployment and housing, "it is going to get worst" particularly as Federal support programs "in time will have to fade".
Finally, a most recent article by Monica Crowley placed before her readers a very somber view of Obama's most recent Afghanistan decree. The article is titled Unserious Afghan Approach and in just those few words perfectly describes Obama's efforts in this war effort. Her emphasis was on how weak Obama had appeared. Key points included that Obama is "just not into it" referring to the military efforts in that region of the world. An apt comparison was also made to Jimmy Carter, another weak Democratic President, when Obama was assigned Carter's "hapless and halfhearted politics". In a obvious reference to the coming elections of 2010 and 2012, Ms Crowley stated that "weak Presidents are neither respected nor electorally rewarded".
November of this year will, with any luck, certainly confirm these feelings of Monica Crowley.
With the 2010 elections less than a year away, Democrats want to implement a financial debt act now so that it will be forgotten or at least minimized by time voters enter the polls this coming November. This legislation is the raising of the ceiling on the national debt. The current allowed total US debt is $12.1 Trillion and that figure has already been reached. To "balance the books", the Democrats will in next few days raise the national debt by another $1.8 Trillion. In real figures that will be a total short, money owed by all us Americans to others like Communist China and OPEC, in the total amount of $13,900,000,000,000.00.
Considering this huge Federal debt as well as other negative aspects of the American economy, Ken Rogoff, who is a noted Harvard economist and an IMF Department Director, has said that he does not easily see "the kind of robust recovery" in the immediate future of America that will "generate 10-11 million jobs". His thoughts have been that in matters concerning unemployment and housing, "it is going to get worst" particularly as Federal support programs "in time will have to fade".
Finally, a most recent article by Monica Crowley placed before her readers a very somber view of Obama's most recent Afghanistan decree. The article is titled Unserious Afghan Approach and in just those few words perfectly describes Obama's efforts in this war effort. Her emphasis was on how weak Obama had appeared. Key points included that Obama is "just not into it" referring to the military efforts in that region of the world. An apt comparison was also made to Jimmy Carter, another weak Democratic President, when Obama was assigned Carter's "hapless and halfhearted politics". In a obvious reference to the coming elections of 2010 and 2012, Ms Crowley stated that "weak Presidents are neither respected nor electorally rewarded".
November of this year will, with any luck, certainly confirm these feelings of Monica Crowley.
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
OBAMA DO NOTHING AWARDS
There are so many issues that the majority of American voters have with the Obama led national government that the liberal/socialist political realists in Washington are starting programs to lessen the harm they expect in November of 2010. Some of these efforts are obvious such as this week's pending trip by our President to receive his Noble Prize. Others efforts are thinly veiled political acts set as routine functions by a concerned Federal government. The most recent announcement by Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner falls into this second category.
Declaring that "the recovery of our financial system remains incomplete", Geithner has directed that the Troubled Asset Relief Program [TARP] passed in October of 2008 is extended until October 3, 2010. He has that authority and has exercised it. The real question is, why.
According to Geithner he has three new goals. Number One is to "step up efforts to curb home foreclosures" but this "step up" is not defined. Further, the commercial mortgage industry, unaddressed, remains in bad shape and in the early months of 2010 is expected to get worse with a sizeable increase in declared defaults, foreclosures and repossessions. Number Two is to "provide capital to small banks for job creation". This must mean Federal loans to our "small banks" with the banks to then reloan the funds to a federal-defined class of business for expansion. The only thing at real risk in this situation is the Independence of the "small banks" for when these loans default, Washington will move in to secure its advances by taking control of these banks. Number Three is to "boost its commitment to a program aimed at sparking lending to consumers and small businesses". There is only one response to this Geithner statement and that is, "What in the world do you mean?"
In reality, the Obama Administration is doing nothing economically of any significance. Trying through Geithner to lessen what has been determined to be a probable anti-Obama Administration vote in November of 2010, a great degree of self-proclaimed success will be published by the White House as election day approaches with declarations of how well Geithner's three goals have been achieved. It will be urged that more of the same can be guaranteed if the Democrats are reelected.
All-in-all, it seems appropriate that President Obama is receiving a Noble Medal for doing nothing and at the same time his close advisor, Geithner, is proposing to redirecting TARP money for a new do-nothing Federal economic program.
Declaring that "the recovery of our financial system remains incomplete", Geithner has directed that the Troubled Asset Relief Program [TARP] passed in October of 2008 is extended until October 3, 2010. He has that authority and has exercised it. The real question is, why.
According to Geithner he has three new goals. Number One is to "step up efforts to curb home foreclosures" but this "step up" is not defined. Further, the commercial mortgage industry, unaddressed, remains in bad shape and in the early months of 2010 is expected to get worse with a sizeable increase in declared defaults, foreclosures and repossessions. Number Two is to "provide capital to small banks for job creation". This must mean Federal loans to our "small banks" with the banks to then reloan the funds to a federal-defined class of business for expansion. The only thing at real risk in this situation is the Independence of the "small banks" for when these loans default, Washington will move in to secure its advances by taking control of these banks. Number Three is to "boost its commitment to a program aimed at sparking lending to consumers and small businesses". There is only one response to this Geithner statement and that is, "What in the world do you mean?"
In reality, the Obama Administration is doing nothing economically of any significance. Trying through Geithner to lessen what has been determined to be a probable anti-Obama Administration vote in November of 2010, a great degree of self-proclaimed success will be published by the White House as election day approaches with declarations of how well Geithner's three goals have been achieved. It will be urged that more of the same can be guaranteed if the Democrats are reelected.
All-in-all, it seems appropriate that President Obama is receiving a Noble Medal for doing nothing and at the same time his close advisor, Geithner, is proposing to redirecting TARP money for a new do-nothing Federal economic program.
Monday, December 7, 2009
A LOOK INTO THE FUTURE
This past week, Washington was most pleased to announce that the unemployment rate in America had for the month of November dropped from 10.2% to 10%. Even those economists who believe that Obama under reports the true national level of our citizens who are out of work expressed that their calculation of the unemployed, based on State and national data, had dropped from 17.5% to just over 17%. Either way, it has to be good news, or is it.
Almost every month the Federal staffers who are charged with collecting, analysing and publishing the nation's unemployment data issue a now almost expected statement that last month or several months ago there was an error in their data or in their calculations and the real unemployment rate for that applicable period of time was something different. Some times the newly updated rate is better news for Obama, but usually it is not. The bottom line is, like much of what we hear from the current Administration, every American has to be careful when considering Washington issued information.
On the issue of unemployment, many political commentators have expressed that Obama, as well as other Democrats, will find the goal of reelection, be it in 2010 or 2012, to be an unreachable target if the percentage of Americans who are unemployed on election day remains high. The recent results of the Statewide balloting in New Jersey and Virginia confirm this prognostication.
Most recently Dr. Charles Krauthammer expressed that the American unemployment level, as it stands in November of 2010 and in November of 2012, will be a tremendous influence on the outcome of all elections. Krauthammer's position is that a voter accepted national unemployment figure of 10% or higher will insure that Republicans will replace Democrats in most contested races. If that same unemployment figure is below 8%, then the Democrats will maintain their political control, including the White House. What is most interesting was his opinion that these same races will be open, harsh and heavily contested if unemployment is between 8 and 10 percent.
What a choice conservatives have. They can hope that unemployment remains high [over 10%]and thus insure that Obama and his followers are retired from public life or wish well for their fellow citizens seeking work [unemployment falling to under 8%] and risk a second Obama term.
Reality raises its ugly head on this issue and the suffering of our nation at the hands of Obama will, unfortunately, continue with the result being victories at the polls in 2010 and 2012 by those openly and aggressively against Obama and his governmental allies.
Almost every month the Federal staffers who are charged with collecting, analysing and publishing the nation's unemployment data issue a now almost expected statement that last month or several months ago there was an error in their data or in their calculations and the real unemployment rate for that applicable period of time was something different. Some times the newly updated rate is better news for Obama, but usually it is not. The bottom line is, like much of what we hear from the current Administration, every American has to be careful when considering Washington issued information.
On the issue of unemployment, many political commentators have expressed that Obama, as well as other Democrats, will find the goal of reelection, be it in 2010 or 2012, to be an unreachable target if the percentage of Americans who are unemployed on election day remains high. The recent results of the Statewide balloting in New Jersey and Virginia confirm this prognostication.
Most recently Dr. Charles Krauthammer expressed that the American unemployment level, as it stands in November of 2010 and in November of 2012, will be a tremendous influence on the outcome of all elections. Krauthammer's position is that a voter accepted national unemployment figure of 10% or higher will insure that Republicans will replace Democrats in most contested races. If that same unemployment figure is below 8%, then the Democrats will maintain their political control, including the White House. What is most interesting was his opinion that these same races will be open, harsh and heavily contested if unemployment is between 8 and 10 percent.
What a choice conservatives have. They can hope that unemployment remains high [over 10%]and thus insure that Obama and his followers are retired from public life or wish well for their fellow citizens seeking work [unemployment falling to under 8%] and risk a second Obama term.
Reality raises its ugly head on this issue and the suffering of our nation at the hands of Obama will, unfortunately, continue with the result being victories at the polls in 2010 and 2012 by those openly and aggressively against Obama and his governmental allies.
Friday, December 4, 2009
ITEMS FOR WEEKEND THOUGHT
As the first week of the last month of 2009 comes to an end, a number of loosely related matters demand some additional exposure.
A British journalist attended President Obama's recent West Point address and was not impressed. The comments in his next day article were that this speech by the leader of the free world on the future of Afghanistan were "guarded" and "defensive" and "less than entirely convincing". The impression also was that America, among other things, was going to "back off Pakistan" particularly an open "unity" with Pakistan and pursue "dealing with Pakistan clandestinely". Clearly he saw that a waste of more American lives, assets and prestige would be the net result of this latest Obama decision.
Speaking of the "war", Congressman David Obey, who is a Democratic and who is Chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, continues to promote a "war tax" that will separately fund the expenses of our military efforts in Afghanistan. His expressed concern is that current federal government revenues must be balanced between "war costs" and "rebuilding the US economy". This "war tax" money raising scheme can not be successfully passed at this point in time so more money must come from some where and our wealthier citizens, who generally are stock investors, have been focused upon by Democrat Representative Nancy Pelosi. She is not promoting a "war tax" but does urge a "stock transaction tax" which would impact that section of Americans who still have money to invest in the stock market. As she says, "this transaction tax still has a great deal of merit." Her opinion is for Americans to sell there stock for a profit and give some, maybe alot, of that profit to Washington.
Of more concern are published statements by American economists/investors. Martin L. Gross has confirmed that, contrary to recent Obama Administration statements, the American national debt is not $1,400,000,000,000.00 but is actually $1,885,000,000,000.00. This figure of money owed was confirmed by the US Government which forced Gross to further express that this current and growing obligation is taking us down a path of "absolute destruction." Following this sentiment, Jim Rogers has stated that the US dollar is now a "terribly flawed currency" and America has become "the largest debtor nation in the history of the world." Just the amount we owe Communist China has to confirm this opinion.
Following these depressing statements came one from John Hussman who has forecast that given the extent of known American delinquent business loans and leases, there was an "80% chance of a market crash". Wrapping up these negative thoughts was another comment by the said Martin L. Gross that "we are going to spend ourselves into oblivion". The "we" he defined as the Federal Government and President Obama.
As much as I agree with the sentiments of the above quoted opinions, Americans are strong and are resilient and will want to change this nation via the ballot box in 2010 and 2012. Conservative public leaders need only to make themselves known; campaign by promoting traditional American values; and then start a real reconstruction after being elected.
A British journalist attended President Obama's recent West Point address and was not impressed. The comments in his next day article were that this speech by the leader of the free world on the future of Afghanistan were "guarded" and "defensive" and "less than entirely convincing". The impression also was that America, among other things, was going to "back off Pakistan" particularly an open "unity" with Pakistan and pursue "dealing with Pakistan clandestinely". Clearly he saw that a waste of more American lives, assets and prestige would be the net result of this latest Obama decision.
Speaking of the "war", Congressman David Obey, who is a Democratic and who is Chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, continues to promote a "war tax" that will separately fund the expenses of our military efforts in Afghanistan. His expressed concern is that current federal government revenues must be balanced between "war costs" and "rebuilding the US economy". This "war tax" money raising scheme can not be successfully passed at this point in time so more money must come from some where and our wealthier citizens, who generally are stock investors, have been focused upon by Democrat Representative Nancy Pelosi. She is not promoting a "war tax" but does urge a "stock transaction tax" which would impact that section of Americans who still have money to invest in the stock market. As she says, "this transaction tax still has a great deal of merit." Her opinion is for Americans to sell there stock for a profit and give some, maybe alot, of that profit to Washington.
Of more concern are published statements by American economists/investors. Martin L. Gross has confirmed that, contrary to recent Obama Administration statements, the American national debt is not $1,400,000,000,000.00 but is actually $1,885,000,000,000.00. This figure of money owed was confirmed by the US Government which forced Gross to further express that this current and growing obligation is taking us down a path of "absolute destruction." Following this sentiment, Jim Rogers has stated that the US dollar is now a "terribly flawed currency" and America has become "the largest debtor nation in the history of the world." Just the amount we owe Communist China has to confirm this opinion.
Following these depressing statements came one from John Hussman who has forecast that given the extent of known American delinquent business loans and leases, there was an "80% chance of a market crash". Wrapping up these negative thoughts was another comment by the said Martin L. Gross that "we are going to spend ourselves into oblivion". The "we" he defined as the Federal Government and President Obama.
As much as I agree with the sentiments of the above quoted opinions, Americans are strong and are resilient and will want to change this nation via the ballot box in 2010 and 2012. Conservative public leaders need only to make themselves known; campaign by promoting traditional American values; and then start a real reconstruction after being elected.
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
WEST POINT SPEECH FOLLOW-UP
Most recently a column was published in this Blog that was intended to show how poorly our national leader, Barack Obama, did in all regards with his West Point address on the subject of adding more combat forces to Afghanistan. That article turn out to be extremely mild as compared to the positions stated in the German magazine, Der Spiegel, by author Gabor Steingart.
The points raised by Steingart were direct and unforgiving. Obama was accused of making a meaningless decision with his directive, according to Steingart, that "30,000 US soldiers are to march into Afghanistan and then march right back out again." Certainly this is a bit of an extreme position but the point was well taken. The goals of the addition of this large number of American combat soldiers into Afghanistan were not well explained but there was no question that their return to America regardless of their success would commence in the summer of 2011. Steingart went on to define this stated Obama position as a "dizzying combination of surge and withdrawal".
Little if anything stated by Obama was well received by Steingart. Such lines as "Obama needs no opponents. He's already got himself" and "Obama's magic no longer works", clearly left the impression that, at least to this German author employed by a major German magazine, the love affair between Obama and the German press was over.
As much as I disapprove of any foreign journalist taking shots at any American political leader, it is absolutely pleasing to witness that some sections of Europe have finally seen the reality of Obama politics. This expressed negative reaction, and maybe even a bit of fear, is just what most Americans have harbored towards Washington for almost a year.
As Steingart said in closing his article, this Obama "speech left dreamers and realists feeling distraught." To writer Gabor Steingart I extend a "vielen Dank".
The points raised by Steingart were direct and unforgiving. Obama was accused of making a meaningless decision with his directive, according to Steingart, that "30,000 US soldiers are to march into Afghanistan and then march right back out again." Certainly this is a bit of an extreme position but the point was well taken. The goals of the addition of this large number of American combat soldiers into Afghanistan were not well explained but there was no question that their return to America regardless of their success would commence in the summer of 2011. Steingart went on to define this stated Obama position as a "dizzying combination of surge and withdrawal".
Little if anything stated by Obama was well received by Steingart. Such lines as "Obama needs no opponents. He's already got himself" and "Obama's magic no longer works", clearly left the impression that, at least to this German author employed by a major German magazine, the love affair between Obama and the German press was over.
As much as I disapprove of any foreign journalist taking shots at any American political leader, it is absolutely pleasing to witness that some sections of Europe have finally seen the reality of Obama politics. This expressed negative reaction, and maybe even a bit of fear, is just what most Americans have harbored towards Washington for almost a year.
As Steingart said in closing his article, this Obama "speech left dreamers and realists feeling distraught." To writer Gabor Steingart I extend a "vielen Dank".
OBAMA EXPOSED AGAIN
The most recent national, no make that international, address by President Barack Obama on the topic of Afghanistan left only a more pronounced confirmation that our President has no valid idea as to what he is doing. The bottom line of the speech, presented at the US Military Academy at West Point, was that American military forces in war-torn Afghanistan would be quickly increased by 30,000 with a Presidential "pledge" to begin withdrawing our soldiers in 18 months. That would be the Summer of 2011.
Immediate reaction by all Americans, except Obama loyalists, has to be 1) disbelief that the President is so naive; 2) disbelief that the President is so self-centered; and 3) disbelief that the President thinks the voters of this nation are so stupid.
Point 1 - Obama is naive - To the mind set of the radicals, revolutionaries and religious fanatics that have been fighting in Afghanistan for decades against various forms of central governments supported by various military forces of foreign nations, this Obama announcement has to be good news. For the next 18 months, steady but low key harassment will be maintained against our military forces and then a big push to control Afghanistan initiated once American forces begin to depart. Since when does a nation announce that it will engage in combat with an enemy but only until a certain date, not goal, has been reached? American lives and American assets will be lost for no valid purpose.
Point 2 - Obama is grossly self-centered - Already our President has begun to focus on his reelection campaign of 2012. The recent elections in New Jersey and Virginia have convinced Obama that his second term is at risk and so the balancing starts. The White House sees that it can steadily dominate the news and placate many war critics beginning in the late summer of 2011 as he welcomes our forces home. There would be a double goal of continuously publicizing the return of our military with a push for a "total" withdrawal that closely coincides with election day 2012. A few or even many deaths of American servicemen will be lightly considered by Obama.
Point 3 - Obama mis-judges Americans - The plans and intents of Obama are so obvious that less than 12 hours after the said West Point address, members of the Senate and of the Congress have expressed doubts as to just about every aspect of this most recent Obama decision. American voters see this latest White House effort for exactly what it is, a misguided attempt to placate critics and secure a second term.
Like every recent action of Obama, his aim was to promote his future and not necessarily the advancement of our nation. More and more Americans are realizing the actual intent of our President and vow to block him by election results in 2010 and 2012.
Immediate reaction by all Americans, except Obama loyalists, has to be 1) disbelief that the President is so naive; 2) disbelief that the President is so self-centered; and 3) disbelief that the President thinks the voters of this nation are so stupid.
Point 1 - Obama is naive - To the mind set of the radicals, revolutionaries and religious fanatics that have been fighting in Afghanistan for decades against various forms of central governments supported by various military forces of foreign nations, this Obama announcement has to be good news. For the next 18 months, steady but low key harassment will be maintained against our military forces and then a big push to control Afghanistan initiated once American forces begin to depart. Since when does a nation announce that it will engage in combat with an enemy but only until a certain date, not goal, has been reached? American lives and American assets will be lost for no valid purpose.
Point 2 - Obama is grossly self-centered - Already our President has begun to focus on his reelection campaign of 2012. The recent elections in New Jersey and Virginia have convinced Obama that his second term is at risk and so the balancing starts. The White House sees that it can steadily dominate the news and placate many war critics beginning in the late summer of 2011 as he welcomes our forces home. There would be a double goal of continuously publicizing the return of our military with a push for a "total" withdrawal that closely coincides with election day 2012. A few or even many deaths of American servicemen will be lightly considered by Obama.
Point 3 - Obama mis-judges Americans - The plans and intents of Obama are so obvious that less than 12 hours after the said West Point address, members of the Senate and of the Congress have expressed doubts as to just about every aspect of this most recent Obama decision. American voters see this latest White House effort for exactly what it is, a misguided attempt to placate critics and secure a second term.
Like every recent action of Obama, his aim was to promote his future and not necessarily the advancement of our nation. More and more Americans are realizing the actual intent of our President and vow to block him by election results in 2010 and 2012.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)