Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
“Here's a particularly revealing stat that the Perry pixies don't want us to see: On his watch as governor, Texas added more minimum wage jobs than all the other 49 states combined.”
Published: Wednesday 7 September 2011
Presidential wannabe Rick Perry is flitting all around the country — hither, thither and yon — spreading little "Perry Tales" about himself and the many wonders he has worked as governor of Texas.
His top Perry Tale is a creationist story about what he has modestly branded "The Texas Miracle." While the rest of the country is mired in joblessness, says the miracle worker, his state has added 1.2 million jobs during his 10-year tenure.
I've built "a job-creating machine," the governor gushed during one of his recent flits across Iowa, and a Perry PR aide smugly added, "The governor's job creation record speaks for itself."
Actually, it doesn't. Far from having the best unemployment rate in the nation, the Lone Star State ranks a middling 26th, behind New York, Massachusetts and other states whose "liberal" governments he routinely mocks.
Most news sources are funded by corporations and investors. Their goal is to drive people to advertisers while pushing the corporate agenda. NationofChange is a 501(c)3 organization funded almost 100% from its readers–you! Our only accountability is to the public. Click here to make a generous donation.
Even more damning, Perry's Texas is not creating nearly enough jobs to keep up with its fast-growing population. Those 1.2 million new positions are 629,000 short of the jobs needed just to bring the state's employment level back up to where it was in 2007. Some miracle.
Worse, probe even a millimeter into the million-jobs number that he is sprinkling around like fairy dust, and you'll learn that Perry's jobs are mostly "jobettes" that can't sustain a family. They come with very low pay, no health care or pension, and no employment security, labor rights or upward mobility — many are only part-time and/or temporary positions.
Here's a particularly revealing stat that the Perry pixies don't want us to see: On his watch as governor, Texas added more minimum wage jobs than all the other 49 states combined. More than half a million Texans now work for $7.25 an hour or less. He can brag that he's brought Texans down into a tie with Mississippi for the highest percentage of workers reduced to poverty pay.
Spreading even more fairy dust, Perry claims that his Texas Miracle is the result of him keeping the government out of the private sector's way. But peek behind that ideological curtain, and you'll find this startling fact: During Perry's decade, the greatest job growth by far has come from the public sector, which has more than doubled the number of new jobs created by the private sector.
One out of six employed Texans are now teachers, police officers, highway engineers, military personnel or other government workers — and many of these jobs were created with the federal money that Perry-the-candidate now loudly denounces. Indeed, he's running around ranting about President Obama's stimulus program, but he gladly accepted the third highest amount of stimulus funds taken by the 50 states. There's his miracle.
Interestingly, even his tea-partyish hatred — nay, loathing! — of big government's intrusion into the lives of ordinary citizens turns out to be just another Perry Tale. In fact, there would be no Rick Perry without the steady "intrusion" of government into his life.
Local taxpayers in Haskell County put him through their public school system — for free. He and his family were dry-land cotton farmers, and federal taxpayers helped support them with thousands of dollars in crop subsidies — Perry personally took $80,000 in farm payments.
State and federal taxpayers financed his college education at Texas A&M, even giving him the extracurricular opportunity to be a cheerleader. Upon graduation, he spent four years on the federal payroll as an Air Force transport pilot who never did any combat duty.
Then, in 1984, Perry hit the mother lode of government pay by moving into elected office — squatting there for 27 years and counting. In addition to getting regular paychecks from taxpayers for nearly three decades as a state representative, agriculture commissioner, lieutenant governor and governor, he also receives platinum-level health care coverage and a generous pension from the state, plus $10,000 a month for renting a luxury suburban home, a covey of political and personal aides and even a publicly paid subscription to Food & Wine magazine.
So when this taxpayer-supported lifer flits into your town to declare that he will slash public benefits and make government "as inconsequential as possible," he means in your life, not his.
Perry literally puts the "hype" in hypocrisy. Forget his tall tales and political B.S. — look at what he actually does.
The 19th Century or the Stone Age?
Tonight’s Republican Debate:
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 7, 2011
Tonight a bevy of Republican presidential hopefuls hope to emerge as finalists. Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann will battle for the right-wing nut Tea Party finals. Mitt Romney and John Huntsman will position themselves for the moderate right-wing finals. The putative winners in both these rounds will take on each other in the months ahead.
Nonetheless, listen tonight (if you can bear it) for anything other than standard Republican boilerplate since the 1920s — a wistful desire to return to the era of President William McKinley, when the federal government was small, the Fed and the IRS had yet to be invented, state laws determined worker safety and hours, evolution was still considered contentious, immigrants were almost all European, big corporations and robber barons ran the government, the poor were desperate, and the rich were lived like old-world aristocrats.
In the late 1950s and 1960s, the Republican Party had a brief flirtation with the twentieth century. Mark Hatfield of Oregon, Jacob Javits and Nelson Rockefeller of New York, Margaret Chase Smith of Maine, and presidents Dwight Eisenhower and Richard Nixon lent their support to such leftist adventures as Medicare and a clean environment. Eisenhower pushed for the greatest public-works project in the history of the United States — the National Defense Highway Act, which linked the nation together with four-lane (and occasionally six-lane) Interstate highways. The GOP also supported a large expansion of federally-supported higher education. And to many Republicans at the time, a marginal income tax rate of more than 70 percent on top incomes was not repugnant.
But the Republican Party that emerged in the 1970s began its march back to the 19th century. Ronald Reagan lent his charm and single-mindedness to the charge but the foundations had been laid long before. By the time Newt Gingrich and his regressive followers took over the House of Representatives in 1995, social conservatives, isolationists, libertarians, and corporatists had taken over the GOP once again.
Some Democrats are quietly rooting for Perry or Bachmann, on the theory that they’re so extreme that they’ll bolster Obama’s chances for a second term and make it easier for congressional Democrats to scare Independents into voting for a Democratic House and maybe even Senate.
I understand the logic but I’d rather not take the chance. A Perry or Bachmann wouldn’t just take us back to the 19th century. They’d take us back to the stone age.
This article was originally posted on Robert Reich's blog.
http://robertreich.org/
Your confusion is understandable...
Your Texas favorite couldn't cobble together a complete sentence without a speech writer...And the current herd of republican bottom feeders in congress are working 24/7 to destroy this country and benefit the t-party...just so they can blame the Administration for the repubs near criminal behavior.
There has been criticism of the president's vacation at this time. But how does the number of vacation days the president has spent compare to his predecessors? CBS Radio's Mark Knoller has kept track of presidential vacations for years and supplied the data.
So far, President Obama has taken 61 vacation days after 31 months in office. At this point in their presidencies, George W. Bush had spent 180 days at his ranch where his staff often joined him for meetings. And Ronald Reagan had taken 112 vacation days at his ranch.
Among recent presidents, Bill Clinton took the least time off -- 28 days.
To be fair, a presidential vacation away from the White House is not the same as a vacation for the average person. The president is still in contact with his advisers and on call for any emergency.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/08/17/eveningnews/main20093801.shtml
I see that...7,400sh @ $1.86
could have been a form "T" trade that did not post until after trading was closed from the regular and extended trading day...I haven't looked at a full day of trades.
Stochastics still show a lot of weakness so their message is that down in the short term is more likely than up unless the Dow gets a pop Tuesday.
Regrettably, on this subject they haven't changed.../e
From thursday...
AEZS tagged $1.87 today so another correction milestone has been hit...could head north if the rest of the world cooperates...new big number with lower correction: $3.06
Ayock
Share
Thursday, September 01, 2011 12:08:46 PM
Re: joelk post# 829 Post # of 833
The math FWIW...
The whole move from $1.41 to $2.15 corrected today to $1.97 (exactly the standard 0.236...$1.87 (0.318) and $1.70 (0.618) would also satisfy a correction if weakness shows up)...if the good news continues, the math projects a run to $3.16. Watch for the breakouts above $2.15 then $2.41 then $2.64.
The above for your amusement only...and worth about what you've paid for it...
A
:~}
Here’s Truman’s acceptance speech at the Philadelphia convention that nominated him prior to the 1948 election:
"Senator Barkley and I will win this election and make those Republicans like it… We will do that because they are wrong and we are right… [T]he people know the Democratic Party is the people’s party, and the Republican Party is the party of special interests and it always has been and always will be… The Republican Party… favors the privileged few and not the common, every-day man. Ever since its inception that Party has been under the control of special privilege, and they concretely proved it in the 80th Congress. They proved it by the things they did to the people and not for them. They proved it by the things they failed to do."
Deja Vu all over again...?
FWIW #2
There is a gap to fill at $1.88-$1.90 range (o.318 territory) so those are high probability numbers before heading up. And the one month Stochastics are rolling over so that adds fuel to the down before up story.
If you are a candles kind of guy...then the inverted hammer formation (reversal sign) on 8-30 is also a down before up signal.
Just a WAG.
The math FWIW...
The whole move from $1.41 to $2.15 corrected today to $1.97 (exactly the standard 0.236...$1.87 (0.318) and $1.70 (0.618) would also satisfy a correction if weakness shows up)...if the good news continues, the math projects a run to $3.16. Watch for the breakouts above $2.15 then $2.41 then $2.64.
The above for your amusement only...and worth about what you've paid for it...
A
:~}
800 miles of jobs...
I just returned from an 800 mile (1600 r/t) road trip down a major interstate highway. What I saw was almost continuous major highway construction the entire distance (yes, a pain if you're trying to make good time on the road)...upgrades, bridges, repavements, and etc... All with the ubiquitous sign saying, "Your Taxes At Work" and many with notations of Stimulus Act dollars at work. These were high paying family wage type jobs: heavy machinery operators, steel workers, concrete company workers, and all the services that go along with supporting these workers...food...local stores of all types, clothing (orange!!!), fuel, water, housing, trucks and more trucks. The real trickle down economy of what happens when people are put to work...and buy things.
I imagined what the drive would have been like if the Eric Cantor republican "shut it down" team had won the day to stop these projects. A faster but bleaker drive and a whole lot of people out of work... Tragically, the republican goal...beat this President by destroying the country's recovery at every turn...regardless of the human suffering.
This country needs more of these types of projects, not less.
“If he had his way taxpayers would pay states rather than the federal government for all the services and transfer payments they get.”
Of all the nonsense Texas Governor Rick Perry spews about states’ rights and the tenth amendment, his dumbest is the notion that states should go it alone. “We’ve got a great Union,” he said at a Tea Party rally in Austin in April 2009. “There’s absolutely no reason to dissolve it. But if Washington continues to thumb their nose at the American people, you know, who knows what might come out of that.”
The core of his message isn’t outright secession, though. It’s that the locus of governmental action ought to be at the state rather than the federal level. “It is essential to our liberty,” he writes in his book, Fed Up! Our Fight to Save America from Washington,“that we be allowed to live as we see fit through the democratic process at the local and state level.”
Perry doesn’t like the Federal Reserve Board. He hates the Internal Revenue Service even more. Presumably if he had his way taxpayers would pay states rather than the federal government for all the services and transfer payments they get.
This might be a good deal for Texas. According to the most recent data from the Tax Foundation, the citizens of Texas receive only 94 cents from the federal government for every tax dollar they send to Washington.
But it would be a bad deal for most other red states. On average, citizens of states with strong Republican majorities get back more from the federal government than they pay in. Kentucky receives $1.51 from Washington for every dollar its citizens pay in federal taxes. Alabama gets back $1.66. Louisiana receives $1.78. Alaska, $1.84. Mississippi, $2.02. Arizona, $1.19. Idaho, $1.21. South Carolina, $1.35. Oklahoma, $1.36. Arkansas, $1.41. Montana, $1.47, Nebraska, $1.10. Wyoming, $1.11. Kansas, $1.12.
On the other hand, fiscal secession would be a boon to most blue states. The citizens of California – harder hit by the recession than most – receive from Washington only 78 cents for every tax dollar they send to Washington. New Yorkers get back only 79 cents on every tax dollar they send in. Massachusetts, 82 cents. Michigan, 92 cents. Oregon, 98 cents.
In other words, blue states are subsidizing red states. The federal government is like a giant sump pump – pulling dollars out of liberal enclaves like California, New York, Massachusetts, and Oregon – and sending them to conservative places like Montana, Idaho, Oklahoma, Arizona, Wyoming, Kansas, Nebraska, and the Old South.
As a practical matter, then, Rick Perry’s fight to save America from Washington is really a secret plan to save blue states from red states.
Perry, it turns out, is a closet liberal.
[img]
www.nationofchange.org/sites/default/files/imagecache/opinion_author/robert_reich_opinion.png[/img]
These things really matter. We all want to fix the terrible problems the country has. But it is so important to know just what the problems are before you decide how to fix them.
Published: Tuesday 30 August 2011
Problem: Your right-wing brother-in-law is plugged into the FOX-Limbaugh lie machine, and keeps sending you emails about "Obama spending" and "Obama deficits" and how the "Stimulus" just made things worse. Solution: Here are three "reality-based" charts to send to him. These charts show what actually happened.
Spending
Government spending increased dramatically under Bush. It has not increased much under Obama. Note that this chart does not reflect any spending cuts resulting from deficit-cutting deals.
Deficits
Notes, this chart includes Clinton's last budget year for comparison.
The numbers in these two charts come from Budget of the United States Government: Historical Tables Fiscal Year 2012. They are just the amounts that the government spent and borrowed, period. Anyone can go look them up. People who claim that Obama "tripled the deficit" are either misled or are trying to mislead.
The Stimulus and Job
In this chart, the RED lines on the left side -- the ones that keep doing DOWN -- show what happened to jobs under the policies of Bush and the Republicans. We were losing lots and lots of jobs every month, and it was getting worse and worse. The BLUE lines -- the ones that just go UP -- show what happened to jobs when the stimulus was in effect. We stopped losing jobs and started gaining jobs, and it was getting better and better. The leveling off on the right side of the chart shows what happened as the stimulus started to wind down: job creation leveled off at too low a level.
It looks a lot like the stimulus reversed what was going on before the stimulus.
Conclusion: THE STIMULUS WORKED BUT WAS NOT ENOUGH!
More False Things
These are just three of the false things that everyone "knows." Some others are (click through): Obama bailed out the banks, businesses will hire if they get tax cuts, health care reform cost $1 trillion, Social Security is a Ponzi Scheme or is "going broke", government spending "takes money out of the economy."
Why This Matters
These things really matter. We all want to fix the terrible problems the country has. But it is so important to know just what the problems are before you decide how to fix them. Otherwise the things you do to try to solve those problems might just make them worse. If you get tricked into thinking that Obama has made things worse and that we should go back to what we were doing before Obama -- tax cuts for the rich, giving giant corporations and Wall Street everything they want -- when those are the things that caused the problems in the first place, then we will be in real trouble.
BTW...live right now (Monday 11:00 AM)...your community organizer addresses The American Legion in Minneapolis, Minn.
So, pull your head out of that dark spot in which it resides and chill.
It's from YOUR article einstein...
http://bluestarchronicles.com/2011/08/29/obama-snubs-veterans-first-time-in-history-white-house-ignores-vfw-national-conference/
Obama Snubs Veterans: First Time in History White House Ignores VFW National Conference
barack obama, Obama Administration, Our SoldiersAdd comments
Aug
29
2011
For the first time in history the White House ignores (???????????????) the VFW National Conference. This year is the 112th national conference and President Barack Obama won’t be there. The veterans are furious. Luckily, Rick Perry addressed the gathering. (Luckily???? no writers bias here...)
I’m not sure I’d be so upset about Barack Obama snubbing the veterans at the 112th VFW National Conference. After all, he looks decidedly uncomfortable whenever he has to be around military men and women or veterans and he obviously has no earthly idea how to relate. Still, it is a pretty significant snub. It is the first time in the history of the VFW that a high level representative from the White House hasn’t been sent to speak at the convention since the founding of the organization 112 years ago.
Well, he’s been busy on vacation at Martha’s Vineyard and had to do that photo op at the hurricane command center and all. Not to mention, as I mentioned earlier, he seemed very uncomfortable around manly men.
The White House reported that they have tried, really tried to figure out a way to get someone there to speak to the VFW.
The Veterans of Foreign Wars convention this week will not feature a top-tier official from the Obama administration, a breach in tradition that the group’s commander described as an “insult of the highest magnitude.”
However, an administration official claimed Monday that the White House made “every effort” to provide a speaker for the event, offering up a range of top officials.
“In all instances, the VFW declined those offers,” the official said.
The veterans group is accustomed to playing host to the nation’s most powerful people at its national conference. Obama addressed the VFW in 2009, followed by Vice President Biden in 2010.
But the 2-million strong VFW accused the administration of snubbing its members by not providing a “first-tier speaker” for the first time in VFW history.
“The VFW has had a long-standing tradition of inviting the sitting president to address our convention,” Richard Eubank, national commander of the organization, said in a statement, adding that the White House typically chooses a “high-level administration official” to speak if the president cannot attend.
“It is an insult of the highest magnitude that for the first time in the history of the VFW, the White House has apparently decided that this great and iconic organization of combat veterans and all of its members are not worthy of its notice by not at least offering a first-tier speaker from the administration.”
…Deputy White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said Monday that W. Scott Gould, deputy secretary of Veterans Affairs, will be addressing the convention.
Instead, presidential candidate, Texas Governor Rick Perry spoke. He had been invited to speak to the 112th VFW National Convention on behalf of Texas before he declared his candidacy for the presidency. The convention was held in San Antonio and Rick Perry spoke on Monday, August 29, 2011.
Personally, I would think that was a better choice for the venue anyway. Perhaps the Obama snub to the veterans was a blessing in disguise.
You can watch Rich Perry’s full speech to the VFW National Convention in the video below.
Not wanted...
However, an administration official claimed Monday that the White House made “every effort” to provide a speaker for the event, offering up a range of top officials.
“In all instances, the VFW declined those offers,” the official said.
Also...
AEterna's AEZS-130 Reaches Primary Endpoint In Phase III Study
9:23a ET August 30, 2011 (Dow Jones)
AEterna's AEZS-130 Reaches Primary Endpoint In Phase III Study
DOW JONES NEWSWIRES
AEterna Zentaris Inc. (AEZS, AEZ.T) said AEZS-130, a synthetic molecule that stimulates the secretion of growth hormones, reached its primary endpoint in a recent Phase III study for use as a simple oral diagnostic test for adult growth hormone deficiency.
Shares jumped 10.1% to $2.08 in recent premarket trading as the late-stage oncology drug development company said it is conducting further detailed analyses of the data and preparing for a pre-New Drug Application meeting with the Food and Drug Administration in upcoming months.
"We believe that AEZS-130 could become the first approved oral test for the diagnosis of AGHD, providing patients with a potentially safer, accurate and more convenient alternative to the current injectable tests," said President and Chief Executive Juergen Engel.
Under the parameters of the study, AEZS-130 reached specificity and sensitivity levels of 90% or greater, the company said. The study also confirmed the diagnosis of eight of its 10 newly enrolled AGHD patients.
AEZS-130 stimulates a patient's growth hormone secretion. Low growth hormone levels, despite a stimulating agent, confirm a diagnosis of AGHD.
-By Nathalie Tadena, Dow Jones Newswires; 212-416-3287; nathalie.tadena@dowjones.com
(END) Dow Jones Newswires
08-30-11 0923ET
OK...so AROON doesn't transfer in posting...
click here for...
amended chart with AROON
Good work...you're starting to get it...
Never loose sight of the bigger picture...regardless of your age.
http://www.wimp.com/starspangled/
“When environmental regulators do their job properly, that can mean serious trouble for Perry's largest political donors.”
Published: Saturday 27 August 2011
Like so many Republican officials of the tea party persuasion, Rick Perry despises the Environmental Protection Agency — a feeling he has expressed repeatedly in speeches, lawsuits, legislation and even a book titled "Fed Up!" Perhaps that is only natural for the governor of Texas, a "dirty energy" state where the protection of air, water and human health rank well below the defense of oil company profits for most politicians.
But Perry has at least one other reason for smacking down those bureaucrats so eagerly. When environmental regulators do their job properly, that can mean serious trouble for Perry's largest political donors.
The outstanding example is Harold Simmons, a Dallas mega-billionaire industrialist who has donated well over a million dollars to Perry's campaign committees recently. With Perry's eager assistance — and despite warnings from Texas environmental officials — Simmons has gotten approval to build an enormous radioactive waste dump over a crucial underground water supply.
"We first had to change the law to where a private company can own a license, and we did that," Simmons boasted in 2006, after the Texas legislature and the governor rubber-stamped initial legislation and approvals for the project. "Then we got another law passed that said (the state) can only issue one license. Of course, we were the only ones that applied."
Most Americans have never heard of Simmons, despite his fantastic wealth, because he wisely keeps his head low, generally refusing press interviews and avoiding media coverage. Last year, a local monthly in his hometown published the headline "Dallas' Evil Genius" over a scathing and fascinating investigative profile that examined not only the peculiar history of litigation between Simmons and his children (who no longer speak to him), but his political machinations, corporate raiding and continuing corporate penchant for pollution.
In D magazine, reporter Laray Polk explained how Simmons and a company he owns — innocuously named Waste Control Systems — manipulated state and federal law to allow him to build a nuclear-waste disposal site in West Texas. But construction has been delayed for years in part because the site appears to overlay the Oglalla Aquifer, an underground water supply that serves 1.9 million people in nine states, raising obvious concerns over radioactive contamination. In the Simmons profile and subsequent posts on the Investigative Fund website last year, Polk explored the controversy over the proposed WCS facility, including strong objections by staff analysts at the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality who found evidence that atomic waste might indeed leach into a huge pool of drinking water.
Now reporters for the Los Angeles Times have revived, advanced and updated the WCS story with much additional detail, including interviews with the Texas environmental officials who oversaw the approval process for the facility. For a period last summer, that process appeared to have been slowed down to allow serious consideration of the scientific data collected by the commission's staff.
In other words, the regulators were trying to do their job, which meant expensive delays and perhaps an eventual ruling against the nuclear waste site. That would have protected the Oglalla Aquifer and cost Simmons hundreds of millions in lost investment and profit. But then Perry's appointees on the commission voted by two to one to issue licenses for the WCS site.
This year, officials on another Texas commission appointed by Perry — who oversee low-level radioactive waste in the state — voted to allow the WCS site to accept nuclear waste from 34 other states in a highly controversial decision later ratified by the state legislature and signed by Perry himself. Not long after that, according to the Los Angeles Times report, Simmons gave $100,000 to Americans for Rick Perry, an "independent" committee supporting his presidential candidacy. (Back in 2004, Simmons was a major contributor to another "independent" political committee, the notorious Swift Boat Veterans group that distorted Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry's war record in a series of TV ads.)
According to a spokesman for WCS, the Texas governor's happy and lucrative relationship with Simmons did nothing to help the company except to turn the billionaire into "an easy target. ... It made the state redouble its efforts to be thorough." But the Texas officials who opposed the approval on principle have since quit their jobs with the state. As one of them told the Times reporters, "This is a stunningly horrible public policy to grant a license to this company for that site ... . Something had to happen to overcome the quite blatant shortcoming of that application. ... The only thing I know in Texas that has the potential to do that is money in politics."
As for the Texas official (and Perry appointee) who overruled his own scientists and approved the deal, he left state government, too — to work as a lobbyist for Simmons. He says that no undue influence led to the favorable outcome for his new employer.
Texas must be the only place on earth where anyone would believe that.
During an interview with former White House economic advisor Austan Goolsbee, Sean Hannity distorted economic data and claimed that overall employment is declining by 400,000 jobs per month. In fact, the Bureau of Labor Statistics says employment has been increasing for months, and the private sector has added 2.4 million jobs since March 2010.
Hannity: Employment Is Declining By 400,000 Jobs Per Month
Hannity: "We're Losing 400,000 Jobs Per Month." From the August 26 edition of Fox News' Hannity:
AUSTAN GOOLSBEE, FORMER OBAMA ADVISOR: Over the 17 months, wait take the 17 months where we're actually growing fairly robustly -
HANNITY: Growing? We're losing 400,000 jobs a month!
GOOLSBEE: Before the events at the beginning of this year -
HANNITY: We're losing -
GOOLSBEE: We added 2.5 million, we added 2.5 million jobs. When the president takes office, we're losing almost 800,000 a month. When we slow that down and turn it around, we add 2.5 million. It has taken longer than we anticipated, there's no question about that...
HANNITY: We didn't add, I can't let you get away, we've lost 2.5 million jobs.
GOOLSBEE: That's not true. [Fox News, Hannity, 8/26/11]
But Hannity Is Wrong: Employment Has Been Increasing For Almost A Year
BLS Data Show That The Economy Has Been Adding Jobs Since October 2010. According to Bureau of Labor Statistics data, employment has increased during each of the last 10 months. [Bureau of Labor Statistics, accessed 8/27/11]
Moreover, Goolsbee Is Right - The Private Sector Has Added Nearly 2.5 Million Jobs In The Past 17 Months. According to Bureau of Labor Statistics data, the economy has added 2.4 million private sector jobs since March 2007. [Bureau of Labor Statistics, accessed 8/27/11]
Michele Bachmann Isn’t Stupid, She’s Dangerous
June 16, 2011By Sarah Jones
Michelle Goldberg appeared on MSNBC’s The Last Word detailing the origins of Michele Bachmann’s far right evangelical politics as outlined in her Daily Beast article yesterday. What madness is this? Will Americans wake up to the looming political threat of far right evangelical beliefs masquerading in certain candidates as mainline Christians and too often mistaken for ignorance or gaffes?
If you’re wondering why Michele Bachmann doesn’t seem to get history, economics, science or facts, it’s not because she’s stupid or gaffe prone. These are not mistakes; these are Bachmann’s real beliefs.
Goldberg explains, “She’s a perfect product of the religious right…” In detailing Bachmann’s biblical world view that stemmed from Francis Schaeffer, “All reality is determined by theological starting point, and so basically very single aspect of public life, science, history, economics, everything is determined by your religious beliefs and only those with the correct religious beliefs can correctly perceive any sort of reality, and it’s a way in which you can dismiss huge swaths of history, evolution, you can basically say that anything that doesn’t fit with your ideology is the product of mistaken theological premise.”
As author Frank Schaeffer (son of Francis Schaeffer) explains, “Michele Bachmann says certain things that sound crazy to the general public. But to anybody raised in the environment of the evangelical right wing, what she says makes perfect sense.”
Goldberg wrote yesterday,
Belief is the key to understanding Michele Bachmann, who announced her presidential candidacy during Monday’s Republican debate. Her impressive performance, which catapulted her close to the front of the presidential pack, surprised some, who perhaps expected her to be as inarticulate as Sarah Palin, to whom she’s often compared. But in Minnesota, even those who don’t like her politics say she shouldn’t be underestimated. “The fact that she’s not a heavy lifter, the fact that she’s relatively unconcerned about the substance of legislation, does not mean that she’s not crafty, that she’s not intelligent and she’s not fast,” says former Minnesota Gov. Arne Carlson, a Republican. Her ideological radicalism should not be mistaken for stupidity.
On Monday, Bachmann didn’t talk a lot about her religion. She didn’t have to—she knows how to signal it in ways that go right over secular heads. In criticizing Obama’s Libya policy, for example, she said, “We are the head and not the tail.” The phrase comes from Deuteronomy 28:13: “The Lord will make you the head and not the tail.” As Rachel Tabachnick has reported, it’s often used in theocratic circles to explain why Christians have an obligation to rule.
Indeed, no other candidate in the race is so completely a product of the evangelical right as Bachmann; she could easily become the Christian conservative alternative to the comparatively moderate Mormon Mitt Romney. “Michele Bachmann’s a complete package,” says Ralph Reed, the former Christian Coalition wunderkind who now runs the Faith and Freedom Coalition. “She’s got charisma, she’s got an authentic faith testimony, she’s a proven fighter for conservative values, and she’s well known.” She’s also great at raising money—in the 2010 cycle, she amassed a record-breaking $13.2 million in donations. (Bachmann’s office didn’t respond to requests for comment.)
How extreme are her supporters? According to a recent poll, 35% of those who support Michele Bachmann thought the rapture was coming on May 21.
Unfortunately, the disturbing extremism that drives policies of hate toward those with whom Bachmann disagrees (most notably the gay and lesbian community) is just the tip of the religious extremism iceberg. While Bachmann is an extreme example of the far right religious movement threatening democracy in our country, if you listen to many of Republican candidates, you will hear the evangelical dog whistles that go over the majority’s head. Chris Hayes’ opened the MSNBC segment saying these dog whistles go over the “secular” heads, but I would expand that to going over mainline Christians’ heads as well, and that’s the trouble.
On the face of it, without delving into Bachmann’s troubling history on gay rights and abortion, Bachmann sells herself as a dedicated mother of 23 children (the majority of whom were fostered and while Michele leads us to believe she shepherded them from infancy on, she often only had them for weeks or months) who’s worked hard in the House and stands by her religious convictions.
The majority of Americans can admire Bachmann on the surface, and tend to assume that her religious beliefs are similar to their own or the Christians they know, and this is where the danger lay. If you haven’t been subjected to the Dominionist Reconstructionist religious views, you wouldn’t have thought twice about Bachmann’s far right evangelical signal during the debate, “We are the head, not the tail.”
The problem isn’t that Michele Bachmann is a devoted Christian, it’s that her brand of Christianity is an Old Testament fire and brimstone two eyes for an eye sect. Her brand of Christianity is so extreme as to deny science and snuggle up to the corporatists who share the belief that our resources are here to plunder. And most disturbing is the worldview of good versus evil, of a coming rapture that wars and destruction would signal. This is a belief system that automatically disqualifies the believer from being a steward of our land and people, because they seek the End Times — the return of Jesus Christ.
We saw inklings of this thinking in George W Bush, but the new crop of Republicans are an even more extreme version of this belief system than W. It’s a belief system that denies reality, history, and facts in order to sustain itself, but even more troubling, if you look far enough under the hood, it’s a belief system that not only seeks the destruction of the earth, but welcomes it and encourages it.
What madness is this? While Bachmann’s extremist ideology has been tempered in the House by being one of many, it’s absolutely unconscionable to think of our country being led by someone who holds these beliefs.
And yet any critics are called secularists, when in fact, Bachmann’s religion views even other Christian religions as the anti-Christ. As someone who believes firmly in the separation of church and state (and I need no better examples of the necessity of this belief than Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann, Scott Walker, and George W Bush), I think the time has come to challenge the language used about critics of the far right.
It’s not just atheists who have trouble with extremism; people of many faiths find religious extremism dangerous, especially when coupled with the power of government. For this reason, we need to shift the discussion about the importance of secular government back into the mainstream.
We shouldn’t allow this to be framed as a liberal issue, when it is in fact a critical issue facing our democracy that impacts all Americans. So long as we allow our ideology to separate self-labeled rationalists from all religious faith, we give power to the extremists lurking in the background with their moderate robes and wide smiles.
To this end, we need to take back the far right’s linguistic capture of the word “secular”. Secular does not necessarily imply lack of faith, but it does suggest that our government is not concerned with religion. To be for secular government should not imply that one is an “enemy of God”, and yet that is the narrative of the far right, which when lobbed at us tempts us to bite into the self-defeating fruit of a seeming extremism reaction that then allows secularism to be viewed as an extreme position held by atheists only, instead of the mainstream belief that it is.
Americans don’t wish to be governed by a religious extremist of any brand. The question is, will they see the wolf in sheep’s clothing before it’s too late? If 2010 is any indication of the general public’s awareness of this violent threat to democracy, I’m not comforted.
joelk...agreed on movement with the dow....(usually)
...the point of this brand of TA is that it suggests markers to look for for reverals or breakouts...given the direction of movement. If you look at my last two posts and the price levels suggested, then compare to actual movements, the TA missed by only a penny or two the bounce points...
not a silver bullet, but better than flying blind on a hunch...
If you buy and hold...this doesn't matter.
Hey einstein...
Order your own birth certificate to be sent to you. You will discover that it is printed on new paper stock with today's ink. Then certified by the County/State. This is what happens in the real world...
you are a hoot.
joelk...recomputed math...
So we didn't get $2.03ish near term top and broke to the downside from $1.95 (technical term: truncated 5th)....(the why is immaterial)
The new calculation based on a full move $1.41-$1.95 suggests downside to $1.74 ($1.73 actual so far @ 10:09 AM for one minute). IF it breaks to the downside again...look for $1.68 or $1.61 as new bounce points. But the $1.73-74 is "standard" at 0.382 correction, so the bounce may be in as the broader market is bouncing.
The good news...the $1.73 bounce projects $2.60ish on the upside. When $1.95 is crossed on a move upward, watch for AEZS to make a fairly fast move to this higher number range...
Isn't this fun!
glty
A
bb...you are delusional. /e
How Austerity Is Ushering in a Global Recession
TUESDAY, AUGUST 16, 2011
Not only is the United States slouching toward a double dip, but so is Europe. New data out today show even Europe’s strongest core economies – Germany, France, and the Netherlands – slowing to a crawl.
We’re on the cusp of a global recession.
Policy makers be warned: Austerity is the wrong medicine.
We all know about the weaknesses in Europe’s “periphery” – Greece, Ireland, Spain, Portugal, and Italy. But the drop in Europe’s core is dizzying.
Germany grew at an annualized rate of just half a percent last quarter, down from 5.5 percent in the first quarter of the year. France didn’t grow at all.
What’s going on in Europe’s core? Partly it’s a loss of confidence due to debt crises in the periphery. But that’s hardly all.
Europe depends on exports – especially to Asia, India, Latin America, and the United States. But exports to China and other emerging markets have been dropping. China, worried about inflation, has pulled in the reins on its sizzling economy. Brazil has been pulling back as well.
And as the United States economy sputters, exports to America have been slowing.
But chalk up a big part of Europe’s slowdown to the politics and economics of austerity. Europe – including Britain – have turned John Maynard Keynes on his head. They’ve been cutting public spending just when they should be spending more to counteract slowing private spending.
The United States has been moving in the same bizarre direction. Cutbacks by state and local governments have all but negated the federal government’s original stimulus, and no one in Washington is talking seriously about a second. The pitiful showdown over increasing the debt limit has produced the opposite: a Rube-Goldberg-like process for capping spending rather than increasing it, and a public that’s being sold the Republican lie that less government spending means more jobs.
Yes, governments on both sides of the Atlantic are deeply in debt. But policy makers on both sides seem to have forgotten that economic growth is the most important tonic.
Public debt has meaning only in relation to a nation’s GDP. When more people are working, more companies are profiting, and economies are expanding, revenues pour into national treasuries.
When economies stop growing or contract, the opposite occurs. Economies can fall into vicious cycles of slower growth, lower tax revenues, spending cuts, and even slower growth.
That’s what we’re seeing now.
What’s worse, nations are so intertwined that when every major economy is slowing the cumulative effect is larger.
With anemic growth in America and Europe, the Japanese economy comatose, and emerging markets (including China) pulling in their reins, the vicious cycle could become worldwide. If global demand for goods and services continues to fall behind the potential supply we’ll see unemployment rise further and growth slow even more — especially in Europe and the U.S.
Central banks may try to reverse this course. Ben Bernanke and company at the Fed have committed themselves to near-zero interest rates for the next two years (not exactly a rousing endorsement of America’s economic prospects in the near term). Given the sharp slowdown in Germany, the European Central Bank might now feel some pressure to lower interest rates there – or at least delay the next increase.
But when growth is slowing so dramatically and unemployment is already high, monetary policy can’t possibly do it alone.
Without an expansionary fiscal policy, low interest rates have little effect. Companies won’t borrow in order to expand and hire more workers unless they have reasonable certainty they’ll have customers for what they produce. And consumers won’t borrow money to spend on goods and services unless they’re reasonably confident they’ll have jobs.
Fiscal austerity is the wrong medicine at the wrong time.
http://robertreich.org/
A Fair and Balanced reminder...
What Fascism looks like:
Fourteen Defining
Characteristics Of Fascism
By Dr. Lawrence Britt
Source Free Inquiry.co
5-28-3
Dr. Lawrence Britt has examined the fascist regimes of Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia) and several Latin American regimes. Britt found 14 defining characteristics common to each:
1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism - Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.
2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights - Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need." The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.
3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause - The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial , ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.
4. Supremacy of the Military - Even when there are widespread
domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.
5. Rampant Sexism - The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Divorce, abortion and homosexuality are suppressed and the state is represented as the ultimate guardian of the family institution.
6. Controlled Mass Media - Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.
7. Obsession with National Security - Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.
8. Religion and Government are Intertwined - Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.
9. Corporate Power is Protected - The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.
10. Labor Power is Suppressed - Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed.
11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts - Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts and letters is openly attacked.
12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment - Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.
13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption - Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.
14. Fraudulent Elections - Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.
From Liberty Forum
Your credibility just continues to go down and down and down...
Obama is in all actuality a mild conservative...much to the dismay of his more liberal base.
your T-baggers on the other hand are truly dangerous as they support and enable the fascist state.
Flowcharts and leaders...
Reminds me of why being the "Lead Dog" is so rewarding (think dogsleds...)...if you are not the lead dog, the view is not very good, and it never changes.
joelk...actually no.
The following is like trying to predict the weather a month in advance, but the math goes like this...
The correction would be of the larger degree whole move equaling a W-1 up move ($1.41-$2.03). That move corrects in a larger degree W-2 down to $1.79 range...Then the good part is an impulse W-3 UP to the $2.80 range...another correction to $2.41 range and if a full 5 waves up in an impulse move...$3.03 is possible by the E-wave MATH.
AEZS is usually sensitive to the broader market but has moved independent in the past...time will tell. Any "Black Swan" event could blow this whole analysis...to the upside OR the downside. Has happened before.
Again, these are just potential markers to watch for activity in the reverse direction...any of the numbers not reached, or overshot will distort the analysis from that point forward, but may still be in e-wave ranges.
Use at your own risk...
gltu
A