Tues. Sept. 6, 2011 > # 120 - The Unemployment Empty Promise

[Did you ever wish that you could know about some of the wasteful spending taking place by our federal government WITH OUR TAX MONEY? Well, the Republicans in the House(who now control appropriations in the Congress]give you a chance to view such bills and indicate your desire to cut them out of the budget. You can get your opportunity to do so by going to> http://majorityleader.gov/YouCut/]

[NOTE: The following is a quote from Cal Thomas on President obama's latest choice to head his econonmic team: "Alan Krueger is the latest in a long line of professors and academics to populate this administration. Few, if any, have held real jobs in the private sector. They are mostly theorists, whose theories are often proved wrong. But in academia, as well as in government, being wrong rarely disqualifies one from a leadership post. Intentions are all that matter." For the complete article, go to: http://online.worldmag.com/2011/09/01/nightmare-on-pennsylvania-avenue/]

Posted By Mike Brownfield On August 30, 2011 // The Foundry: Conservative Policy News Blog from The Heritage Foundation - http://blog.heritage.org -

Sometime next week—we don’t quite know when—President Barack Obama is due to announce his latest jobs plan designed to lift America out of its unemployment doldrums. And though we also don’t know the exact details of the plan, there’s a pretty good chance it will include several key components we’ve heard before, one of which is the extension of unemployment benefits.

Much like the President’s other likely initiatives, this idea isn’t a new one, and the White House has made the argument before that unemployment benefits are the best thing since sliced bread when it comes to stimulating the economy. In a White House briefing earlier [last]month, press secretary Jay Carney explained the rationale :

["Extending unemployment benefits] is one of the most direct ways to infuse money into the economy because people who are unemployed and obviously aren’t earning a paycheck are going to spend the money that they get. They’re not going to save it; they’re going to spend it. And unemployment insurance, that money goes directly back into the economy dollar for dollar virtually. So it is—and when it goes back in the economy, it means that everywhere that those people—everyplace that that money is spent has added business. And that creates growth and income for businesses that then lead them to making decisions about jobs—more hiring."]

But according to a report by Heritage’s James Sherk and Karen A. Campbell [3], unemployment insurance actually leads to longer periods of unemployment and does not provide the promised stimulative effect. In their paper, they address a 2004 study which concluded that each dollar in additional unemployment insurance increased gross domestic product by $1.73. But, they say, that just isn’t so. Research shows that unemployment spending does not result in workers consuming more, and workers with extended unemployment insurance benefits remain unemployed longer. “A 13-week extension of unemployment benefits results in the average worker remaining unemployed for an additional two weeks,” they report.

Funnily enough, President Obama’s new top economist agrees. Yesterday, the President announced that Princeton University economist Alan Krueger will replace Austan Goolsbee as the White House’s chief economic adviser. And though Krueger will play a prominent role in crafting the White House’s economic strategy, Heritage’s Lachlan Markay reports that Krueger’s past research doesn’t mesh with the White House’s stance on the supposed stimulative benefits of extending unemployment insurance:

Krueger co-authored a paper for the Handbook of Public Economics in 2002 that seems to undercut the economic argument for extending unemployment benefits. The paper found that those benefits tend to increase the length of unemployment by discouraging the search for a new job, and may actually encourage layoffs. Conversely, the paper also found that unemployed persons who are ineligible for benefits search harder for a job and are therefore unemployed for less time. It’s anyone’s guess whether Krueger will change his tune now that he’s on the President’s team, but no matter. When the President launches his new jobs plan, and should he call for an extension of unemployment benefits, as expected, the reality remains the same, regardless of how Krueger addresses his earlier body of work: Unemployment benefits don’t stimulate the economy.

There certainly can be other reasons for extending unemployment benefits. Under the Obama economy, the average length of unemployment hit a new record last month, surpassing 40 weeks for the first time ever. But no one—Congress, the President, or the American people—should be under the delusion that economic stimulus and new jobs will result. [emphasis mine]

Sept. 4, 2011 - #119- Sunday Special > Why Orthodoxy Matters

[Dont miss this week's : 1) "Truth That Transforms" [An expert speaks on the real history of the Islamic Jihad.](Sunday; 5pm, ch. 55.1, Orlando); 2)"Cross Examine* (Mon., 52.2, Orlando,) and 3)Worldmag.com editorial cartoons.]

The Way or Not the Way; Orthodoxy and Why It Matters By: Chuck Colson| May 18, 2011 Breakpoint.com

Can we truly live out the Christian faith if we don’t understand its foundational tenets? According to the Pew Forum’s U.S. Religious Landscape Survey, 57 percent of self-identified Evangelical Christians agreed with this statement: “Many religions can lead to eternal life.” Think about the staggering implications of what you just heard: 57 percent of Evangelicals believe that many religions can lead to eternal life!

Yet Jesus Himself was very clear. "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” (John 14:6). Either Jesus was right, or he was wrong. What Christians, Muslims, and Jews say about the person and work of Jesus Christ can’t be reconciled. They may all be false, but they cannot all be true. It’s called the law of non-contradiction -- it goes back to Aristotle: If proposition A is true -- that is, if it conforms to reality -- then proposition B, making a contrary claim, cannot be true as well. If nearly six out of ten Evangelicals don’t believe the most basic tenets of the faith, it’s no wonder the Church is losing its influence over the culture. Because what we believe affects how we live.

Even a secular columnist for the New York Times understands this!... David Brooks recently wrote “The religions that thrive” historically have “communal theologies, doctrines and codes of conduct rooted in claims of absolute truth.” And those beliefs translate into acts of mercy and love: the kind that Brooks himself witnessed from conservative Christian missionaries reaching out to AIDS victims in Africa.

There is a remedy for this situation -- a remedy that an Augustinian monk by the name of Martin Luther discovered back in the sixteenth century. The Church in Luther’s day wallowed in its own corruption, sold indulgences, and refused to allow people to read the Bible in their own language. Luther compared the state of the Church to the Babylonian exile of the Israelites, when God punished Israel for disobeying God and worshiping false idols. So what did Luther do? He went back to the teaching of the apostles, the faith entrusted to the saints once for all. He studied the works of the ancient Church fathers, who wrote at a time when the Church’s faith was marked by unity. He studied the early councils of the Church. In short, he recovered the orthodox faith. This led to a Reformation that transformed not only the Church, but Western society and culture as well.

This is why I wrote my book, titled The Faith: Given Once, For All. It’s about the essentials of the faith that all true Christians have always believed -- the minimum, irreducible, non-negotiable tenets of Christianity, without which one cannot be a true Christian, and without which the Church cannot be the Church. I am convinced that this is what people need to defend and live the Christian faith these extraordinarily challenging times. So I urge you to purchase a copy of The Faith -- you can get it at BreakPoint.org. And by the way -- all the royalties go to the ministry of BreakPoint and Prison Fellowship.
The Church needs to know what it believes, why it believes it -- and why it matters.

Further Reading and Information
The Faith / Charles Colson & Harold Fickett | Colson Center Bookstore
Creed or Chaos/David Brooks | The New York Times | April 21, 2011
Pew US Religious Landscape Survey/Religions.PewForum.org

Sunday Funny (c/o MikeysFunnies.com) "Amazing! You hang something in your closet for a while and it shrinks 2 sizes!"

#117 - The Truth About Tea Parties /Enough Of the Baseless Attacks!

Note:<em> From the President's liberal surrogates calling them terrorists and racists, and with a leading African American Congresswoman recently even saying "The Tea Party can go to H--!", the venom and mischaracterization of these every day Amnericans, I felt it necessary to share the following perspective.

Tea Parties – Same Song, Second Verse David Barton [WallBuilders ]http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp?id=69934

America’s first Tea Party in 1773 was not an act of wanton lawlessness but rather a deliberate protest against heavy-handed government and excessive taxation. 1 Its leaders took great care to ensure that nothing but tea was thrown overboard – no other items were damaged. The “Indians” even swept the decks of the ships before they left. 2

Tea Parties occurred not only in Boston but also in numerous other locales. 3 And those who participated were just ordinary citizens expressing their frustration over a government that had refused to listen to them for almost a decade. Their reasonable requests had fallen on deaf ears. Of course, the out-of-touch British claimed that the Tea Parties were lawless and violent, 4 but such was not the case.

Interestingly, in many ways, today’s Tea Parties parallel those of long ago. But rather than protesting a tax on tea, today they are protesting dozens of taxes represented by what they call the Porkulus/Generational Theft Act of 2009 (officially called the “American Economic Recovery and Reinvestment Act”). For Tea Party members (and for most Americans), that act and the way it was passed epitomizes a broken system whose arrogant leaders often scorn the concerns of the citizens they purport to represent.

Tea Party folks agree with the economic logic of our Founders.

“To contract new debts is not the way to pay off old ones.” 5 “Avoid occasions of expense…and avoid likewise the accumulation of debt not only by shunning occasions of expense but by vigorous exertions…to discharge the debts.” 6 GEORGE WASHINGTON

“Nothing can more [affect] national credit and prosperity than a constant and systematic attention to…extinguish the present debt and to avoid as much as possible the incurring of any new debt.” 7 ALEXANDER HAMILTON

“The maxim of buying nothing but what we have money in our pockets to pay for lays the broadest foundation for happiness.” 8 “The principle of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale.” 9 THOMAS JEFFERSON

These are not radical positions – nor are the others set forth in the Tea Party platform – that Congress should: (1) provide the constitutional basis for the bills it passes; 2) reduce intrusive government regulations; (3) balance the budget;(4) limit the increase of government spending to the rate of population growth; (5) and eliminate earmarks unless approved by 2/3rds of Congress. 10 Are these positions dangerous or extreme? Certainly not. In fact, polling shows that Americans support these Tea Party goals by a margin of two-to-one. 11

Citizens are angry about the current direction of government. As John Zubly, a member of the Continental Congress in 1775, reminded the British: “My Lord, the Americans are no idiots, and they appear determined not to be slaves. Oppression will make wise men mad.” 12 But does that anger automatically equate to violence? Of course not. It does equate to action, however; but instead of throwing tea overboard, modern Tea Parties are throwing out-of-touch politicians from both parties overboard.

The Tea Parties represent much of what is right in America – citizens reacquainting themselves with the Constitution and holding their elected officials accountable to its standards. Two centuries ago, Daniel Webster could have been talking to today’s Tea Party rallies when he said: “Hold on, my friends, to the Constitution and to the Republic for which it stands. Miracles do not cluster and what has happened once in 6,000 years may not happen again. Hold on to the Constitution!” 13 [emphasis mine]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Endnotes
1. George Bancroft, History of the United States of America (New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1888), Vol. III, pp. 443-447. (Return)

2. George Bancroft, History of the United States of America (New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1888), Vol. III, pp. 456-457; “Facts You May Not Know about the Tea Party,” Boston Tea Party Historical Society (at: http://www.boston-tea-party.org/unknown-facts.html) (accessed on July 21, 2010). (Return)

3. George Bancroft, History of the United States of America (New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1888), Vol. III, p. 457 (Philadelphia, NY, SC). (Return)

4. George Bancroft, History of the United States of America (New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1888), Vol. III, p. 460. (Return)

5. George Washington, The Writings of George Washington, John C. Fitzpatrick, editor (Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office, 1940), Vol. 37, p. 177, letter to James Welch, April 7, 1799. (Return)

6. George Washington, The Writings of George Washington, John C. Fitzpatrick, editor (Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office, 1939), Vol. 35, p. 230, Farewell Address, September 19, 1796. (Return)

7. Alexander Hamilton, The Papers of Alexander Hamilton, Harold C. Syrett, editor (New York: Columbia University Press, 1966), Vol. XI, pp. 140-141. (Return)

8. Thomas Jefferson, Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Andrew A. Lipscomb, editor (Washington, D.C.: The Thomas Jefferson Memorial Association, 1904), Vol. VI, p. 188, letter to Mr. Skipwith, July 28, 1787. (Return)

9. Thomas Jefferson, Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Andrew A. Lipscomb, editor (Washington, D.C.: The Thomas Jefferson Memorial Association, 1904), Vol. XV, p. 23, letter to John Taylor, May 28, 1816. (Return)

10. “Contract From America,” TeaParty365.com, April 10, 2010 (at: http://www.teaparty365.org/contract-from-america). (Return)

11. See, for example, “Tea Party 48%, Obama 44%,” Rasmussen Reports, April 5, 2010 (at: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/april_2010/tea_party_48_obama_44); “Most Say Tea Party Has Better Understanding of Issues than Congress,” Rasmussen Reports, March 28, 2010 (at: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/march_2010/most_say_tea_party_has_better_understanding_of_issues_than_congress). (Return)

12. William B. Sprague, Annals of the American Pulpit; or Commemorative Notices of Distinguished American Clergymen or Various Denominations (New York: Robert Carter & Brothers, 1858), Vol. 3, p. 221. (Return)

13. Congressional Record: Proceedings and Debates of the 108th Congress, Second Session (Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office, 2004), Vol. 150, p. 17247, Representative Franks quoting Daniel Webster, July 22, 2004. (Return)

#116 - Sunday Special - Pulpit Freedom Sunday - A Call To End Terrorism By Tax-Exemption

[Dont miss this week's : 1) Sunday Special; 2) "Truth That Transforms" (Sunday; 5pm, ch. 55.1, Orlando); 3)"Cross Examine* (Mon., 52.2, Orlando,)and 4)Worldmag.com editorial cartoons.]

Pulpits and politics http://online.worldmag.com/2011/08/08/pulpits-and-politics/
by Janie B. Cheaney August 8, 10:19

,... there may come a time for pastors to speak to political issues. And one of those times may be Pulpit Freedom Sunday, scheduled for Oct. 2 this year.

The Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) organized the first Pulpit Freedom Sunday in 2008 as a way to challenge the Internal Revenue Service. The IRS has exercised a creeping control over what pastors in the United States can say ever since 1954, when Lyndon Johnson found himself in a bruising Senate campaign. His opponent had the backing not of the local church but of right wing organizations that castigated Johnson for being soft on communism. Johnson’s amendment to the tax code prohibited any tax-exempt organization to support a particular candidate in elections, and it breezed through the Senate with no debate and no committee hearings. (Could it be that that august body of 98 incumbents saw the value of it for their own future campaigns?)

The whole issue of tax-exempt status may seem thornier than it really is. Some Christians, including me, have wondered whether churches shouldn’t just bite the bullet and pay the taxes in return for political freedom. Or maybe it’s just the Christian thing to do; as Paul says in another context, “Why not rather suffer wrong?” (1 Corinthians 6:7).

Presumably, the IRS, deep in its cold bureaucratic heart, believes it’s doing its best to accommodate free speech in churches. The agency has tried to delineate what nonprofit groups can do in the context of a political campaign. Every election cycle it sends a friendly reminder to pastors that they can advocate for issues (in a limited way) but not for candidates. What’s wrong with that?

The ADF sees potential disaster in that. “The power to tax is the power to destroy,” wrote John Marshall (1819) in the McCulloch v. Maryland case, which involved a bank, but the ADF applies Marshall’s statement to the Church—in fact, all faiths.

Regulations on speech from the pulpit reveal a fundamental misunderstanding about God-ordained institutions. The IRS sees its bestowal of tax-exemptions as a benefit it graciously grants. This puts the church under the heel of the state, no matter how lightly that heel rests. If the church is to be salt and light as an institution (I’m not speaking of individual Christians here) she must be free. The restrictions not only have a chilling effect on what pastors say from the pulpit, but they also hinder free discussion among Christians about what is appropriate.

Should a Baptist pastor, for example, tell his congregation that if they vote for a certain candidate they should leave the church? That’s a subject for legitimate debate among Christians, but if the IRS has already muscled in and revoked tax-exempt status, the issue is moot. The ADF does not approve all pastoral positions, but insists on the right for pastors to speak freely and subject their views to Christian judgment, rather than government.

That’s why Pulpit Freedom Sunday was established in 2008 with a handful of pastors, and expanded to include about 100 pastors last year. It’s a direct challenge to the principle of government restriction. On that Sunday, pastors record their sermons and send them to the IRS with a demand to be audited. So far the IRS has not responded, suggesting that its code is not as clear-cut as it claims. The ADF invites more pastors to participate this year, and in time hopes to force a reconsideration of the Johnson Amendment. Followed by its abolishment.

State churches (supported by taxes) were the pattern in Europe, eventually leading to empty churches. IRS restrictions could have the same effect here—if not empty churches, empty sermons. If the state claims the power to restrict speech on political issues, what will keep it from restricting doctrinal issues? As the personal becomes more political, nothing at all.

#115 - The Food Stamp Party is Stimulating Poverty

[Dont miss this week's : 1) Sunday Special; 2) Truth That Transforms (Sunday; 5pm, ch. 55.1, Orlando); and 3) Worldmag.com editorial cartoons.]

Posted by Daniel Horowitz [http://www.redstate.com/dhorowitz3/2011/08/17/the-food-stamp-party-is-stimulating-poverty/] Wednesday, August 17th

The loss of jobs is only half of the result of the government interventionist equation. The other casualty of an economy driven by taxation, regulation, litigation, subsidization, monetary intervention, and debt is the crippling cost of living for all Americans. [Yes, I was about to say middle class, but we would be wise to eradicate that sort of socialist innuendo from our vernacular.]

Earlier today, the latest wholesale inflationary numbers were released. The core PPI rose 0.4% in July, while year over year PPI is now close to a three year high at 7.2%. Additionally, food prices rose another 0.6% in July. These numbers are quite disconcerting, given the sharp slowdown in economic activity. The higher wholesale costs are inevitably passed down to consumers, forcing them to pay more for basic products, such as energy, food, and transportation.While there are many cyclical factors that affect the price of food and fuel, and by extension, everything else; nonetheless, clearly central planning from the government has kept prices artificially high.

The government has foisted the ethanol beast upon every consumer of food and fuel through mandates, subsidies, and tariffs. This has created such a market distortion that 44% of all corn grown in this country is diverted for the production of ethanol. Corn prices continue to spike, engendering a cascading effect on much of the food chain. Despite the universal understanding that these policies have raised the cost of most major food items and gasoline, big-government statists in both parties continue to exhibit contumacious arrogance by refusing to repeal them.

Aside for the ethanol boondoggle, the rest of Obama’s energy agenda speaks for itself; a no-energy agenda. The administration is using every tool at its disposal to impound our oil, gas, coal, and nuclear power resources. Concurrently, Obama has sucked out all the energy investments and diverted them for 14th century style productivity; green energy. Those investments have really turned out swell for Big Solar. This is perhaps the most regressive tax on “middle class” Americans because the cost of transportation affects food prices, in addition to gas prices.

Finally, we have the plethora of spending from both fiscal and monetary stimulus that has devalued the dollar, thereby contributing to the rise in commodity prices. While the Fed issues easy money and the Treasury borrows it by the trillions, the weak dollar is wiping out the savings of the current generation. The next generation won’t have to worry about savings because all of their income will be used to service the debt.

So what is the motive behind this perfidious destruction of our savings and purchasing power? What is the end game?

Not surprisingly, the solution to every government-induced problem is…another government solution. You see, in the inane and insane cycle of government, the statists gleefully anticipate the creation of poverty resulting from their economic interventions, so they can subsidize the poverty with handouts. In this vein, Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack’s comments in praise of record food stamp enrollment should come as no surprise:

Liberals don’t view welfare and food assistance as necessary evils; they view them as necessary virtues that stimulate poverty, and in turn, dependency on the Democrat Party. Perhaps, we should start a war with aliens, and then hand out food stamps to fund the war – and we will enjoy the motherload of stimulus.

The factors that drive up the cost of living and reduce income will serve as the bread and butter issues of the campaign for the White House. Americans want a paycheck; not a food stamp. And hopefully, they will give a pink slip to those purveyors of economic ruin that currently occupy the White House.
[bold and italics emphases mine]

#113 - Needing A Leader, We Get A Blamer

Courtney Nash - Did you hear about that 16 year-old girl here in Central Florida who died over the weekend possibly from an amoeba she contracted while swimming in a river near her home? As I hope you'll pray for Courtney Nash's family and friends as they deal with her grief,I'd like to make two observations: 1) The suddenness of her death serves as a reminder of how none of us knows the length of our days. We can only pray that through her untimely death, many youth especially will be led to consider how transient life is and will consider their lives from a Biblical and eternal perspective. 2) It is said that at age 14 Courtney signed d an organ donor card. It is said that as a result 7 people have benefited from her life-giving ecision. It makes me wonder how anyone would not consider being an organ donor. [I believe Ive been an organ donor since I first learned to drive 44 years ago.]

May we all begin to pray DAILY that next year's election will yield us a leader who actually has proven strategies to help our economy finally recover from its destructive downturn and who will support a limited governement view that does not shred our Constitution.

Obama's Tour of Denial and Blame/ morningbell@heritage.org (The Heritage Foundation)

It's being billed as a listening tour—a three-state journey across the Midwest where President Barack Obama will hear directly from Americans about the economy and talk about his ideas for job growth. Instead, though, it has the characteristics of a political campaign swing, and the rhetoric the President has brought along for the ride is marked by a desperate effort to blame someone other than himself for America's economic woes.

The President's tour began yesterday in Cannon Falls, Minnesota, where in one breath he pointed his finger at Washington's broken politics and in the next he blamed "a string of bad luck ... a bunch of things taking place over the last six months that were not within our control."

'You had an Arab Spring in the Middle East that promises more democracy and more human rights for people, but it also drove up gas prices -- tough for the economy, a lot of uncertainty. And then you have the situation in Europe, where they're dealing with all sorts of debt challenges, and that washes up on our shores. And you had a tsunami in Japan, and that broke supply chains and created difficulties for the economy all across the globe.'

As much as the President would like to bill his three-state tour as an exhibition in listening or leadership, it's more of an exercise in cognitive dissonance—of blaming everything but his own policies for the reality of America's dire economic straits, rather than taking responsibility for his presidency. That reality has manifested itself in a big way. In every state, a vast majority of Americans see the economy as getting worse, according to a new Gallup poll. The only exception is in Washington, D.C., where taxpayer spending has feathered the nest of the federal government, creating a cushion from the harsh existence of 9.1 percent unemployment, an average duration of unemployment hitting a record high of 40 weeks, and a tepid pace of economic growth that could leave joblessness at permanently high levels. Contrast Obama's results with the promise of his presidency, as articulated in his inaugural address:

'The state of our economy calls for action, bold and swift. And we will act, not only to create new jobs, but to lay a new foundation for growth. We will build the roads and bridges, the electric grids and digital lines that feed our commerce and bind us together.'

Lest America forget, President Obama had two years of a Democrat-controlled Congress to effect that bold and swift action. And boy, did he take action. He and his liberal allies in the House and Senate gave America a $780 billion stimulus that the President promised would save or create 3.5 million jobs by the end of 2010. (He came up 7.3 million jobs shy.) And then there was the 2,700-page behemoth known as Obamacare, the 9,000-Earmark Omnibus Bill, $3.22 trillion in new debt, a $26.1 billion government union bailout in the summer of 2010, the $3 billion Cash for Clunkers program, and the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform bill.

Somehow, though, all that action was not enough. So in January, the President used his State of the Union Address to convey to America that he was singularly focused on job creation. And here America sits, seven months later, watching President Obama tour the Midwest delivering that same message, this time calling for piecemeal job creation policies including more stimulus and infrastructure spending, a renewal of the payroll tax cut that was initially passed in December last year, tax credits for companies who hire veterans, a trade deal that he fails to send to Congress yet blames them for not passing, and tax increases on job creators. Though the President calls his ideas new and bold, he's only delivering more of the same tired thinking that has left America in an economic rut.

On top of the spending and debt, the President has promulgated stifling regulation while calling for job-killing tax increases. Meanwhile, his Administration is going out of its way to work against job creation—the National Labor Relations Board has taken action against the Boeing Company for creating jobs in right-to-work South Carolina while also pushing for pro-union policies that harm employers and workers.

Fortunately, the President's way is not the only way. Rather than going back to the Keynesian well and relying on the hand of government, the President and Congress should restrain government and allow entrepreneurs to thrive. That doesn't require a listening tour and placing blame. That requires being a leader and recognizing that the policies of the past two and a half years have not worked—that it's time for a new way, and a new speech.
[bold and italics emphases mine]

#114 - 10 Top Reasons Obama Won't Win Re-Election

[Human Events]http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=45480 08/13/2011

[Although the next Presidential election is not for more than 14 months, at this time there are many factors which point to President Obama being denied a second term in office. This is incredible as just 6 months ago this seemed most unlikely. Whether or not you are a supporter of the President, these are factors worth considering for now at least.] ...

1. Jobless rate too high: With the latest Labor Department report showing the unemployment rate at 9.1%, jobs will likely remain the No. 1 issue for voters. Well over 2 million jobs have been lost since Obama took office, and he wasted a trillion dollars on a stimulus bill that didn’t stimulate. Unfortunately for the American people, his policies will keep the jobless rate high, right up to November 2012.

2. Economy in doldrums: It’s not just jobs, but everything about the economy remains snake-bit. With housing slumping and the stock market tanking, all Americans are feeling the impact of the down economy. With the threat of a double-dip recession looming, don’t expect a turnaround in time to help Obama’s reelection.

3. ObamaCare looms: With health care costs continuing to rise, it is clear that ObamaCare wasn’t the answer. As the implementation of the highly unpopular health care measure nears, more workers will be dumped from their employers' health care plans, taxes will rise and fewer doctors will be available—giving voters more reasons to dump its architect.

4. Out-of-control debt and credit downgrade: The debt-ceiling deal did little to fix the long-term debt problem, as the U.S. is still on tap to borrow $7 trillion over the next decade, adding to the $4 trillion Obama has already racked up since taking office. With the S&P downgrade, Obama goes down in history as the first President to lose America’s AAA credit rating.

5. Depressed base:Progressives are having buyer’s remorse and are trying to convince everyone that Obama is not even much of a liberal. The anti-war left certainly won’t be out in force on Election Day. Nor will black turnout match 2008’s historical number. More of the young will stay home. The excitement of electing the first black President has worn off and even his staunchest supporters are disappointed that Obama hasn’t fulfilled their expectations.

6. Opposition energized: The Tea Party didn’t even exist in 2008, and the 2010 midterm elections showed the country rejects the President’s big-spending policies. No matter which Republican gains the party’s nomination, expect an energized grassroots opposition to Obama’s second term.

7. Changes in battleground states: The terrain that Obama faces in his reelection bid will be more difficult to navigate in 2012 than four years ago. He starts out by losing six Electoral College votes from states he carried in 2008 due to population changes registered by the 2010 Census. Then the 2010 midterm elections saw Republicans win governors’ races previously held by Democrats in key battleground states such as Pennsylvania, Ohio, Wisconsin and Michigan—all states Obama won in 2008.

8. Foreign policy mess: From the ... mixed signals given to Middle East protesters, from the Russian “reset” to China’s economic belligerence, there is not much that Obama can tout as a foreign policy success. Now with deficit hawks setting their sights on the Pentagon, Obama is likely to preside over the dismantling of America’s superpower status.

9. Media less a adoring: Obama will still have most of the media on his side for his reelection bid, but they certainly won’t be getting thrills up their legs, admiring the crease in his pants, or writing how the seagulls were awed. Even Obamaphile Chris Mathhews has turned on the President, saying a recent Obama speech sounded like a Fox News commercial, a harsh epithet coming from the MSNBC host.

10. Aloof, inept: Now that America has seen the President up close for nearly three years, the magic that many believed in during his hope and change odyssey is clearly gone. His aloof personality and scolding partisanship will not endear him to the electorate this time. As his falling approval ratings attest, he increasingly looks pathetically inept and not up to the job he was elected to do.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HUMAN EVENTS is the news source President Reagan called his "favorite newspaper" and we still hold high the Reaganesque principles of free enterprise, limited government and, above all, a staunch, unwavering defense of American freedom.