In the past... Black people were never safe.
They were lynched.
Well, what about today?
Have we moved to a new modern form?
Here is the leader of the Republican party in the Senate. Mitch McConnell.
Here is Romney praising President Obama for the Stimulus composition and how he carried it out.
Here is Romney saying that the individual mandate is the Republican approach to free market health care
Watch him explaining his reasoning in another video here.
Ok... lets take this one step further. This is the big one. The SAME MAN wrote Romney's health care law and helped take it national with Obama. Let's see. How does he characterize the differences and Romney's honesty on this. http://www.cnn.com/video/?hpt=hp_t2#/video/health/2012/01/11/pkg-gupta-romneycare-vs-obamacare.cnn
What? Watch those again. Romney Praises Obama. And in 2006 thinks the individual mandate is the greatest idea out there? Well, that is what Obama did. And that is the part that is most hotly contested - even by Romney. Watch this video again and then watch Romney as he goes after Obama for the individual mandate.
Hopefully, the above expressions in Republicans own words. Particularly the main one running against Obama, shows you that there might be something to my statements. That Obama is only doing a bad job when the people who want his job and the rest of Democrats jobs feel like it is time to change their mind.
How did Obama develop his health care plan? In large part, he called the team that developed Romney's plan in Massachusetts and asked. What worked? What didn't?
Look at it above. And watch in shock as I do. Every time Romney goes after Obama.
Now, I want to get to the larger picture. All the elements of the puzzle together.
Hopefully, the above videos have convinced you that there just isn't a lot of truth in the arguments against Obama. There is simply a lot of smoke and mirrors. And the smoke and mirrors works better than the facts! Because the facts take time to understand.
Here is the most incredible video I have ever found. Obama went to the Republican House Caucus and in an hour and 25 minutes... One man - vs the entire Republican House membership and he debunks every single talking point that has been repeated so frequently that they believe it themselves. He even points out Frank Lutz who is in the room, who writes the talking points that are so false.
The talking points, as I will provide evidence for below, lead to actions being taken for political purposes, power grabbing, rather than problem solving. In fact, many of the talking points people come up with are so dangerous that many times Republicans have driven the country to the bring of sheer calamity. Many of the arguments made do not bear out in economic reality. No economist in their right mind would support them. Through the data and videos applied here, you will see what I mean. I'm working on covering each major topic area with a degree of completion.
How should you use this? If you hear a talking point, or a specific attack on Obama - scroll down to a headline on that subject. I am attempting to explain what is happening by subject so you can search the page and get to it.
Review sections at a time until you see how the argument I am stating here - that Obama is essentially being Lynched by Republicans - is the most supportable way of describing the situation that I could find.
I will try to sum up with what they want you to think... and what based on the data, you might consider thinking when you hear particular talking points.
There are several perspectives that I am operating from.
First, as an independent I will vote for the best person for the job. Huntsman leads that position for me with Republicans. He is less popular, but I believe he just takes more time to understand.
Second, financial conditions. Remember the "Shadow Banking System?" Credit default swaps... derivatives? This is the stuff that was being traded around the globe that caused the financial collapse. Well, the shadow system had 10,000 billion dollars flying around in it. Now there is 6,000 billion because many of the worst parts of the system have been shut down. We have 4000 billion dollars less circulating through the economy. This amount equals 26% of the gross domestic product of the country and if back in play would cause an economic explosion. But, do we want it back?
Third, that money out of the market contributes heavily to housing collapse.
Fourth, the peak in numbers of foreclosures was last summer. Each foreclosure takes 3 years. So 3 years from last summer the effects of the foreclosure crisis will be waning.
Fifth, as I write this, under the Obama administration there has been 22 months straight of job growth. During that time there has been constant cutting of government jobs. Aka. Government has been getting smaller.
Sixth, Presidential decisions take a long time to implement. They take a long time to have their impact. For example going to Iraq was a decision. The buildup took a while... and ten years out we come home. Many Presidential decisions yield results over such a timescale. Presidents are not micro-managers. They don't get involved in the small stuff. This stuff all takes time.
Seventh, history. In all forms. One perspective within history is that Republicans were out of power for decades. If Obama stormed into office and repaired all the damage that occurred under a Republican administration they would loose power for decades. This is a very big deal to them as it happened this way in the past.
Eighth, the Democracy broken post earlier sums up major elements of the problem
Nineth, the 24 X 7 media machine pumps all sorts of things into our brains. Most of it shallow, much of it manipulative. Where the media cheered the housing market up, they scared everyone to death further and further on the way down and demolished it. Where they cheered Obama all the way into the white house... now many times they have ripped him down. They allow talking points too much. They aim for conflict to keep things interesting. And they make all the problems worse. And my belief is that they are a larger force in the economy than the president is today. They convince everyone how to feel about what is happening.
Here is Fox News talking with Mitch McConnell again.
Getting debt under control how?
They won't allow tax increases, even on billionaires... And they are not even increases. Temporary tax cuts that had been extended would be allowed to expire. I applaud the success of billionaires, but I don't pity them for facing normalized tax levels.
So, no revenue increases. But, they want to get the debt under control.
The other side is cutting spending.
You can either raise revenue, or cut spending.
How do we get this country, "Straightened out," as McConnell asks?
I imagine, spending would come under the purview of the budget.
Well, the Republicans signed the budget each year. Many of the most costly items were initiated and passed by Bush. How did we get two wars? How did we get TARP? How did we get the bailouts of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac? How did we get the Bush tax cuts that ate away massively from the revenue side?
And, when would be the right time to begin to negotiate on expenditures?
Perhaps, when the budget is passed.
But, no. That is not what happened.
They signed expenditures that were in the budget. Added their own items. Just about everyone added their own earmark spending for their districts.
And when did they decide there was too much spending?
Not when they were signing the budget, or the spending bill.
When the services had been rendered and the bill came due and we had to raise the debt ceiling to pay our bills.
Imagine if you did this. You signed a mortgage document, bought a house, and then three years in, in protest, decided that you should not pay your bills.
In the effort to get the house in order what did they accomplish?
How do you get someone booted out of office? Create enough uncertainty in the economy to scare people from electing that person again. To scare people from hiring again. To scare people from spending in the economy again.
What was the "sticking point?" The tax breaks for the billionaires. The choice was to loose those, or cut spending elsewhere. Elsewhere is social security, medicare, the military, health and human services, NASA, the State Department, the entire government.
What was the result? To protect tax breaks for billionaires, they created so much uncertainty, were so unwilling to compromise, that the stock market tanked. My phones stopped ringing for business.
The result was - the value lost in the stock market - value lost to people of all levels of wealth, but including billionaires and millionaires - the value lost in the stock market was greater than what wealthy people would have lost if the tax cut were allowed to lapse in 2014! They weren't even trying to get the cuts to lapse today during the down economy. This was for the future.
So - by defending the tax cuts for the wealthy - the wealthy lost more dollars to their net worth than the tax cuts.
Lets take this one step further. During the manufactured debt crisis. What do you think Republicans were doing? Negotiating in good faith. We'll pay this if you cut that? Working with democrats? Or, was the goal to maintain the uncertainty? The uncertainty that would make it hard for Obama to get re-elected because it held the economy back.
When I speak to some CEO's they say things like, "We just don't know what is going to happen with this guy." Well, while all the uncertainty was reaching peak levels in the country due to the debt crisis. What were Republicans doing?
Well - here is the message from Democratic leadership. Talking about a "Filibuster." The tool of standing on the floor and saying anything. It could be reading the dictionary. To block legislation from being brought to the floor or negotiating.
This video shows what Democrat leaders felt was happening at that time:
Here is Democrat Dennis Kucinich summing up how to get out of debt entirely. And how to create many jobs. This is in July - a few weeks before August when we ran out of time.
One point he makes is that we basically print money. In the context, whenever uncertainty rose in the world, people bought US treasuries - and dollar currency. That was the safety currency.
Because other countries buy our currency when risks are high, the dollar maintains it's value.
So the US can print money and... our money still gets more valuable. No other country on the planet can do this. That is what he was referring to in his speech.
Here is Nancy Pelosi in the middle of this video. Saying, "we need to finish this so we can focus on job creation." Pelosi is the most maligned member of Congress. Pollsters found that her name just worked. So they piled on every single criticism of Congress leading up to the election where they gained the house - on her name. Here is what Pelosi was fighting for. http://youtu.be/qzR39ltZwIM
Here is Obama during this time. Talking about how interest rates are effected under a default.
Well, consider that the borrowing the US government has been doing has been at about zero percent interest rate. So, yes the debt is higher, but the cost to service the debt and hold it... is non-existent. But, that default would have caused the interest rate to multiply. For $200 billion dollars in interest payments due - we may have ended up with $600 billion dollars of annual interest due had we gone further with the default. In other words, the interest, under a default, would have cost the government more to pay for than the military.
And at the, Yes, higher debt levels, with no interest rate, we are actually paying similar amounts to service the debt as we were before - even though we have higher debt.
Look at this report in Bloomberg News with Geitner talking about the low interest rates we are having and how the costs will change.
Here is a quote:
"While some of the lowest borrowing costs on record have helped the economy recover from its worst financial crisis since the Great Depression, bond yields are now rising as growth resumes. Net interest expense will triple to an all-time high of $554 billion in 2015 from $185 billion in 2010, according to the Obama administration’s adjusted 2011 budget.
Here is a later example of Rep Barletta working on naming a postal building. At this time trying to honor a trooper who was shot. This was an honorable building naming. Not a filibuster. http://youtu.be/m-USqx3IUAA
And despite rumors, while we owe debt to the Chinese, the majority of the debt is owed to Americans and the US government. What? Yes, we borrow most of our money from the Social Security Trust Fund and leave IOU's because the social security trust fund has a surplus every year. What? A surplus? Yes, the crisis with social security is that the surplus is shrinking and we won't be able to use it as a back door tax to fund other government activities.
Now. Where do they get the idea that Obama raised the deficit tremendously... raised spending... tremendously.
Well, spending was raised.
But, lets review a few elements that may have contributed.
Here is a video with Democratic Rep. Peter Welch talking about where the debt came from. I found this after writing my work below. So, there is more than one person coming to the same conclusion as I am about to present. He actually makes most of my argument above and below in his statement.
Here is Senator John Thune giving a full analysis from the Republican side.
Look at what he talks about. He seems to have a problem with keeping Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac from failing. How would we resolve the mortgage issue... if the two organizations that hold all of the mortgage documents are no longer there? If the two organizations that insure all mortgages are no longer there in the middle of the foreclosure crisis. Regulations?
I heard a lot of screaming about regulations when I opened the restaurant. I was the CFO. I found that the regulations for things like... fire safety systems, and water fountains that were being complained about... were in existence all along. There are some Environmental Protection Agency regulations, but there is a problem. We actually have massive environmental issues - such as using more top soil than is being produced - which cause an even more massive problem in the future. Well, these problems were exasperated by the Bush administration ignoring the problems for so long.
As a small business, I saw massive tax reductions. I had the lowest taxes I have had my entire time in business. How is it that John Thune saw tax increases for small businesses?
I agree with him on Energy. We need investment because it takes too long to transition. But, at the same time if energy prices remain low because we keep supply up - then it is not cost effective to purchase any of the new energy technologies, which allows economy of scale, where we buy so much of the new forms of energy that the price comes down.
While Republicans are raving about Taxing and Regulations (their buzz words for decades) small business surveys showed that the largest concerns of small businesses were insurance and customer demand.
Part 1: The War Spending.
Under Bush, Enron accounting tricks were applied. The two wars were kept on "Emergency Supplementals." Do you remember? Congress approved 60 billion here... 70 billion there?
Take a look here. The emergency supplementals were logged by wikipedia here. There are links to all the sources.
Here is 2006 and 2007
- FY2006 Department of Defense appropriations: Total $50 billion, $40 billion (estimated) Iraq War.
- FY2006 Emergency Supplemental: Operations Global War on Terror; Activities in Iraq & Afghanistan: Passed February 2006, Total $72.4 billion, $60 billion (estimated) Iraq War
- FY2007 Department of Defense appropriations: $70 billion(estimated) for Iraq War-related costs
- FY2007 Emergency Supplemental (proposed) $100 billion
Well all these numbers are hidden off budget as emergency spending and do not show up as deficit.
How high does it get when the numbers are added up?
FY2008 Bush administration has proposed around $190 billion for the Iraq War and Afghanistan
Well, that looks like a lot of money right? Well, if you look at 2007 that was $170 billion, but it looks like way less. It looks like less when it is $70 billion here... $100 billion there... well, this is all sleight of hand. An illusion.
Well, this kept the wars off the budget. So two enormous wars. The most costly exercise of our government were kept off the budget!
Here is an article about Obama changing this:
This is the link to the full speech.
Here is the quote where this was announced.
"Finally, because we’re also suffering from a deficit of trust, I am committed to restoring a sense of honesty and accountability to our budget. That is why this budget looks ahead ten years and accounts for spending that was left out under the old rules – and for the first time, that includes the full cost of fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. For seven years, we have been a nation at war. No longer will we hide its price." ~ Barrack Obama
So, how do spending and deficits look when the wars are added to the budget?
I don't see a 2010 number, but look here...
- FY2009 Obama administration has proposed around $130 billion in additional funding for the Iraq War and Afghanistan.
- FY2011 Obama administration proposes around $159.3 billion for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.
Less money than in 2007 under Bush, or 2008...
And we have to pay for all the equipment as we pack it to ship home.
The report quotes a Brown University Study on the total Costs of the wars."
"The most recent major report on these costs come from Brown University in the form of the Costs of War project, which said the total for wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan is at least $3.2-4 trillion."
So what action did Obama take? He stopped hiding the wars off budget. The costs of war operations are actually lower under Obama. And he brought the troops home from Iraq, as promised during the campaign, which will remove that cost entirely.
So - the illusion is of greater spending, when really spending is down - Obama just ended the illusion. He ended the sleight of hand that fooled Americans.
Part 2: Emergency Stimulus Spending
During the great depression, we were rising out of the depression. Then the US elected a bunch of conservatives to power. They pulled their foot off the gas pedal. And the economy tanked again.
Yes - the Great Depression was two separate periods actually. One with the foot on the gas, where the economy began to rise. Followed by a major dip when conservatives took power and pulled the foot off the gas. And then, a change back to the rise when conservatives lost some power.
This dialog here captures things pretty well. Actually, ahead of when they were happening. Bush was still President and this man is talking about debt being taken on to fuel growth. Well, Obama took on some debt to break the back of the death spiral the country was in.
Here is the article http://www.urbandigs.com/2008/10/a_new_age_depression.html
Look at the chart here. Why does GDP start to rise in 1932. And then collapse in 1936 and then in 1938 start to rise again? Interesting. A two year slump. (Note, election cycles are two years. Those two years were when conservatives were in power and took the foot off the gas. The economy fell off a cliff again.)
Well let's look at 1932 the lowest point in the death spiral of the economy. What happened election wise?
Herbert Hoover was President. In that year, he lost the election by a landslide and Franklin Roosevelt took office - a Democrat. Look at the election results here.
Now - there is one thing we are missing - a trade war.
A trade war occurs when national policy goes protectionist. And we raise tariffs - the taxes on imports and exports. We raise taxes on trade from another country thinking it will give our businesses an edge. In immediate response the opposing country raises taxes on us.
Trade relies on the concept of "comparative advantage." Basically, we make things in places where it is cheaper to make. So, when we trade something we make cheap - we make money - they get a good deal. When they make something cheap - they trade with us - we get a good deal. Trade deals when written correctly are actually beneficial to all. They raise the standard of living by increasing the amount and variety of items we can buy.
What were the policies involved in the great depression?
Hoover initiated a trade war with "The Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act.
Roosevelt initiated the New Deal between 1933 and 1936. The same year the GDP went from negative to positive. Here is a complete article on the New Deal:
Scroll down in the above article and you can see GDP numbers there.
The greatest difference between the Great Depression and Now is that we have had no trade war.
We have not broken down the structure of trade causing massive wreckage in the economy of both countries involved.
How do you think I feel about Mitt Romney? And why do I like John Huntsman?
Watch this exchange...
Romney is basically calling for what Hoover did with the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act that obliterated trade and deepened the depression.
Huntsman calls him on it. Look at what I posted above. Solution to great depression was New Deal. A massive cause was a trade war. Romney set the conditions for the trade war.
What is reality? China has appreciated their currency about 30% and is moving in our direction as a result of consistent and ongoing negotiations. The greatest moves in their currency have already taken place. Obama has been working on it intensely - he appointed Huntsman to go negotiate in fact for several years - and well... without threats China has been persuaded to be more fair.
Note: Appreciating their currency in China causes inflation. This devalues the savings of the Chinese. The Chinese people are massive savers. If their currency appreciates too fast, savings of Chinese people become null and void and you have riots spiraling out of control in a country with more than a billion people. Would China just take new tariffs on the chin? No. Well what are they doing now? Transitioning forwards - aiming their economic growth to continue due to inward factors - rather than external trade... which allows them to appreciate their currency over time.
Psychological impact of stimulus is more powerful than the stimulus. Watch as Republicans circle the wagons screaming about how the stimulus won't work. "Oh this is Keynsian economics! Everybody knows that won't work." Republicans wanted the stimulus to fail so that Obama would fail. Obama would fail because the country would fail. What a risky risky game of Russian Roulette.
Reduction in Tax Revenue due to economic downturn
Watch this video on the person Obama wanted to put in the consumer protection agency.
Ahead of the crisis she was doing a complete speech on the impending collapse of the middle class. Republicans blocked her being put in place to fix the problems she saw. And now she is running for the Senate and likely to become a Senator - Elizabeth Warren
Oil spill crisis: How did this happen? If you look. Republicans blocked who Obama was putting in to the minerals regulation body of the government. Who was in power? A Bush appointee. Bush appointed a lobbyist who worked for the oil industry to run the minerals regulation body. And we get the biggest oil spill in our history.
But, if you look at video from the time, Republicans ripped Obama over and over again because after the crisis he didn't clean it up fast enough. Go find some video of Secretary Chu the person Obama sent to be on site. He is an absolute genius. Watch any video of him and you will be impressed.
And now, watch the Republican's campaigns again... what are they calling for, "Less regulation." Hmmm... does this sound like a good idea to you? Didn't we try that...? How did it turn out?
Watch Senator Bernie Sanders talking about the overall problems.
A huge thing he says is how GE came to America for a 16 billion dollar bailout and then took the jobs to China. And the revenue went up massively for wealthy people and at the same time we dropped the taxes for them. http://youtu.be/UhOAzqfMoms
Conclusions that I want to bring to a short video.
Watch Bill Clinton defending himself when Conservatives came after him with selective memory.
When he was in office, he was told he was too Obsessed with Bin Laden by conservatives.
After out of office, the Conservatives in power held no meetings on Bin Laden.
And then, once something happened said that Bill Clinton should have done more to get Bin Laden.
The difference now. With youtube. Above, I have supplied all the videos showing the candidates before and you get to see them now - after.
Here is Clinton challenged on Fox News and his response. It seems people change their tone when they don't pick up on something in advance and want to blame for failures, or own all the success.
My goal is to have a video with the basic premise that brings people to the longer analysis.
I want to organize the topics very carefully into a table of contents so people can just pick a topic from the discussion and read more and see all the analysis on each topic.
Video name: Sleight of Hand
Beginning: Premise Republicans are like a lynch mob trying to take out Obama
I am sorry I cannot make this shorter for you. These are complex issues.
We will cover Stimulus, Health Care, and Jobs. The biggest areas Obama has worked on.
And we will cover the motives and deceit behind the people who now seem to oppose them.
I will show you the results. The facts about how they worked.
1) Mitch McConnell - One term President.
2) Mitt Romney a. Calling the Individual mandate the Republican free market approach to prevent the free rider problem. b. praising Obama on the stimulus.
Middle: Specific cases.
1) Stimulus and Gross Domestic Product.
2) Health care, new covered, and drop in GDP because of health care.
3) Direction of Jobs.
1) Why would Romney praise Obama on the stimulus?
Well, first, Senator Olympia Snowe was one of three Republicans to sign it and She was pushing constantly for the stimulus to be smaller. The level it was signed is the level she would allow.
Then, a year and a half later - we found that the economy was far worse - once the data was crunched than we knew.
When the economy crashed before Obama took office, the last quarter 2008 GDP shrank in a death spiral by 8.9%. The entire output of the economy collapsed by 8.9% in the quarter before Obama took office!
Then the stimulus was passed.
And by third quarter, as the stimulus dollars began to work into the economy GDP was in positive territory.
Now this is a swing from -8.9% to positive territory and the total swing was 14.5% in the entire output of the US economy. Remember Romney praising Obama as the stimulus was being passed? There is a reason why.
2) The health care law is being rolled into place a step at a time. You saw Romney in support of an individual mandate before it was unpopular with Republicans. (He was the first to pass individual mandate when he was governor of Massachusetts. Obama's team worked directly with those who created Romney's individual mandate, and Romney's health care law and copied it. Obama's team asked, what worked? What didn't work? And then Obama's team put the best elements of the law Romney passed into his health care law. Romney is against it because he is running against Obama.
In 2011, when people up to age 26 were legally allowed to stay on their parents health care care plan 3.5 million. That is 3,500,000 young people were added to the health care rolls.
And in the last quarter of 2011 what happened to GDP? Well, it grew, but not as much as expected. What knocked it down? Here's a peak behind the headline. Initially, you might think 2.4% GDP growth - a faster growing economy is better than one that grew 1.8%... right?
Well, no. If you look behind the headline, we lost half a point of GDP because health care spending fell off a cliff. In the context of adding 3,500,000 more young people to the insured Americans.
Context: In this country you can go against the leader for legitimate reasons verbally and take his power. In another country, or another time, or perhaps in China today, going against a leader the way Romney is would be considered treason. In some times in history, he could loose his head.
With that right he is running around the country spreading all these falsehoods, outright lies (go to politifact.com and factchecker.com to see what is true and what is not) about Obama and what Romney really supported until it was no longer politically expedient.
We questioned Herman Cain's character. Well, what about Romney and the Republican party. The moment they had power their number one aim was to get more power. Their number one approach was to deceive the American public on a massive scale. Circle the wagons. And rave about things until Americans believed what Republicans were saying is true.
They wished for the failure of the President. For the President to fail, the economy had to fail.
They wished for the failure of the US Economy under Obama so that Republicans would get more power.
They aimed at blocking every single jobs measure. And they vocally undermined all laws Obama passed, even the biggest ones that they publicly supported Obama on.
If you hear Romney say, "This President, or Under this President," question is he telling the truth? Or, is he just coming out after something that he strongly supported, passed, was implemented and then all the sudden hating what he thought was the best idea too? If you hear, "This President," just think... well, didn't Obama apply Romney's plans?
If you hear Romney say, "This President," think... wasn't Obama applying the best parts of a health care law that Romney created?
If you hear, "This President grew government," ask, hey Romney didn't you support all the largest spending measures publicly?
If you hear, "This President grew government," remember the chart. Unemployment is higher today because of how many government jobs have been cut.
If you hear, sure the "President has killed jobs," remember we have had 22 months straight of private sector job growth. When Obama took office we were loosing 800,000 jobs per month. If that rate continued for 22 months we would have lost 17.6 million jobs. Instead we gained millions. And the last month of 2011, wast the best.
If you hear, "The President has killed jobs," remember where we came from. American jobs numbers were falling off a cliff and now, we have grown jobs for 22 months. Millions of them.
We are headed in the right direction. Just because the Republicans seem loudest. Doesn't mean they are being honest. It doesn't mean that they are right.
The loudest bully with the biggest megaphone... isn't the one who has the facts straight.
You will hear, "The President should be the biggest cheer leader for the economy." Really?
And how is he supposed to do that when he has to spend all day dealing with Republican lies.
Republicans. I am a magician. Leave the sleight of hand to me!
Links with video:
My believe in America fan page.
I believe in America. Follow all the reasons why by liking this fan page.
My blog post.
Massive and detailed research is behind this. Search by topic for full data and video evidence on each topic. Point-by-point research on every topic. Get smart on one topic at a time.
Entertainment idea? Can I make a video of political satire. Piano maybe. A little singing. Magic. And express this through that method?
The chorus is... Oops those pesky facts get in the way...