http://www.atlah.org The Pulpit Of Power

Help Dr. James David Manning save your children. (10 Mar. 2017)

http://twitter.com/DrJamesDManning
http://facebook.com/drjamesdavidmanning
http://instagram.com/atlahworldwide
http://google.com/+ATLAHWorldwide
http://linkedin.com/in/atlahworldwide
Give Your Gifts At: http://atlah.org/online-giving

“ATLAH: THAT’S WHAT GOD SAID.”
Anointed to establish families, churches, and businesses, unlike any the world hath seen. Indeed the final product of the land, ATLAH, will boast of being the seat of the world’s banking, business, and education centers.

http://bit.ly/wP2lQ1

Saving Babies In Jackson Mississippi Press Conference.
Recorded 15 October 2014.

“ATLAH: THAT’S WHAT GOD SAID.”
Anointed to establish families, churches and businesses, unlike any the world hath seen. Indeed the final product of the land, ATLAH, will boast of being the seat of the world’s banking, business, and education centers.

My prediction is still that Hillary Clinton will be the Democrat presidential candidate or the VP candidate for 2012. This has been my prediction since Feb, 2011 (15 months ago).

The Obama strategy of dividing America by gender, by working women vs housewives, by students vs workers, by religion, by wealth, and by race is not working. He will either drop out just before the Democrat convention for personal reasons or will announce Hillary as his running mate.

Obama’s lawyers are conceiving a deal right now to keep future presidents and Congress from looking at his college documents, forged birth certificate, and passports about his citizenship. He is negotiating immunity from prosecution just like done by Nixon and Bill Clinton.

Hillary is the Democrat weapon to Democrats to keep them from losing both the Senate and the White House. The media has been selling her for the last 18 months. The fix is in the works. An Obama loss will lose the Senate on his coat tails. Democrats will do anything to keep from losing either the White House or the Senate. They need to maintain one of them to keep a reversal from happening to all of their agenda for the last 4 years. Union bosses, bankers, and Soros are very concerned … and they control the Democrat party. Obama is raising money and building a campaign organization to hand to Hillary.

These discussions are taking place right now. Hillary and Bill are assessing the situation. Hillary might not do it if she thinks that a Romney/Rubio ticket cannot be beat. Rubio = Catholics (40% of the electorate), Hispanics (12%), youth (20%), and Florida. Obama got 3/4 of the Hispanic and youth votes in 2008. Any loss to either of them is disastrous to him. Rubio will take from both of them and add at least 5 more points to Romney. The Clintons are trying to figure out how many points can Hillary win back for herself from Romney/Rubio as Pres or to help Obama as VP?

Read these polls closely. All of Obama’s strategies are falling apart. Student loans. Fairness. Gas prices. Free Market vs. govt. War on the Catholic Church. Obamacare. War on motherhood. Blaming Bush about the economy. Did you hear Romney’s answer to Obama about the definition of “fairness” and about the state of the economy? Romney is negating every one of Obama’s tactics.

Obama cannot hide behind “fairness” or blame Bush any longer. His divisive strategy is a loser. As said by Romney, Obama had 2009 and 2010 with total control of the House and the Senate, he had 2011 and 2012 with control of the Senate … and what did he do with it? Obama wasted almost 4 years. He divides America rather than unite us.

Look at the trend lines of Romney vs Obama in the following charts to figure out for yourself where this election is going.

If Romney gets to 51% vs Obama in the polls, then Hillary is a done deal … but will she do it if Rubio adds another 5 points to Romney and pushes Romney to 56%. Hillary and Bill are trying to figure out if this is a lost cause.
Read the trend lines on these charts and polls and make up your own mind. Right now, the Democrat power guys see Obama as a bad investment. Goldman Sachs put a million dollars into Obama in 2008. Goldman Sachs is now putting all its money into Romney.

Related Articles

Radio Update: 70 percent Say Working Through College Better Than Student Loans
50% Think More Government Regulation Means Less Fairness
Most Prefer Cutting Mail Delivery to More Subsidies for the Postal Service
44% Blame Government Regulations for Higher Gas Prices
Voters See Free Market, Not Government, As What Made America Great
Virginia Senate: Allen (R) 46%, Kaine (D) 45%

Missouri Senate: Steelman (R) 49%, McCaskill (D) 42%

Wednesday, April 25, 2012

During Election 2008, Rasmussen Reports projected that Barack Obama would defeat John McCain by a 52% to 46% margin. Obama won 53% to 46%. In 2004, Rasmussen Reports was the only firm to project the vote totals for both candidates within half a percentage point. Learn more about the Rasmussen Reports track record over the years.

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Wednesday shows Mitt Romney earning 49% of the vote, while President Obama attracts support from 44%. Three percent (3%) would vote for a third party candidate, while another four percent (4%) are undecided.

As the campaign unfolds, the role of government in American society will again be debated. Just 22% of voters believe more government leads to more fairness. Fifty percent (50%) believe increased government regulation leads to less fairness.

The president and Romney have both spoken on the topic of student loans recently, but most Americans think other options should be on the table. Scott Rasmussen’s radio update notes that 70% think it’s better for a student to work through college and take six to eight years to graduate rather than taking student loans. Half (48%) believe student loans drive up the cost of tuition.

A president’s Job Approval rating is one of the best indicators for assessing his chances of reelection. Typically, the president’s Job Approval rating on Election Day will be close to the share of the vote he receives. Currently, 46% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the president’s job performance. Fifty-three percent (53%) at least somewhat disapprove.

As the U.S. Supreme Court prepares to hear the federal government’s challenge to Arizona’s immigration law, 59% of voters believe police officers should check the immigration status of those they stop for traffic violations.

Most Americans believe the price of gas could reach $5 a gallon in the next few months. Forty-four percent (44%) believe government regulations are primarily to blame, while 32% point to speculators.

Scott Rasmussen’s radio update for the WOR Radio Network earlier this week noted that only 27% think government investments made America great. A much larger number give credit to the free enterprise system.

Intensity of support or opposition can have an impact on campaigns. Currently, 24% of the nation’s voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as president. Forty-one percent (41%) Strongly Disapprove, giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -17 (see trends).

Rasmussen Reports has been a pioneer in the use of automated telephone polling techniques, but many other firms still utilize their own operator-assisted technology (see methodology). Pollsters for Presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton have cited our “unchallenged record for both integrity and accuracy.”

Daily tracking results are collected via telephone surveys of 500 likely voters per night and reported on a three-day rolling average basis. To reach those who have abandoned traditional landline telephones, Rasmussen Reports uses an online survey tool to interview randomly selected participants from a demographically diverse panel. The margin of sampling error for the full sample of 1,500 Likely Voters is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Results are also compiled on a full-week basis and crosstabs for full-week results are available for Platinum Members.

Like all polling firms, Rasmussen Reports weights its data to reflect the population at large (see methodology). It is important to remember that the Rasmussen Reports job approval ratings are based upon a sample of likely voters. Some other firms base their approval ratings on samples of all adults. Obama’s numbers are almost always several points higher in a poll of adults rather than likely voters. That’s because some of the president’s most enthusiastic supporters, such as young adults, are less likely to turn out to vote.

Among other targets, Rasmussen Reports weights data by political party affiliation using a dynamic weighting process. While partisan affiliation is generally quite stable over time, there are a fair number of people who waver between allegiance to a particular party or independent status. Our baseline targets are established based upon separate survey interviews with a sample of adults nationwide completed during the preceding three months (a total of 45,000 interviews) and targets are updated monthly. Currently, the baseline targets for the adult population are 36.1% Republicans, 32.8% Democrats, and 31.1% unaffiliated. Likely voter samples typically show a slightly larger advantage for the Republicans.

Partisan affiliation is typically a key indicator in Presidential election years. Over the past 20 years, exit polls have shown the party identification numbers ranging from even to a 7 point Democratic advantage. The Democrats’ best year was 2008 while 2004 showed the best numbers for the GOP.

Are there others that you want to send this information?

http://atlah.org Mike Master explains power of the government’s influence on the home. Recorded on 19 April 2012.

“ATLAH: THAT’S WHAT GOD SAID.”
Anointed to establish families, churches and businesses, unlike any the world hath seen. Indeed the final product of the land, ATLAH, will boast of being the seat of the world’s banking, business, and education centers.

Love us or hate us?
Please Support Us

http://bit.ly/wP2lQ1

March 28, 2012

By Michael Master

www.saveamericanow.us.com

The Supreme Court hearings about Obamacare had many fascinating moments. It is trying to determine if mandatory purchase of insurance is “necessary and proper” as defined in the Constitution.

One moment that stands out to me is when Kagan asked if tax credits could be used to motivate people to buy healthcare insurance rather than having to mandate purchase of insurance.

Another one was when Scalia asked if there are other methods to provide healthcare to people who can not afford to pay for it. If there are other methods, then why is it “necessary and proper” for the government to force people to buy insurance?

And my favorite was when Kennedy asked if the penalty for not purchasing insurance is a tax or not a tax. The government argued that it was not a tax to get the legislation passed and is now arguing that it is a tax so the penalty is constitutional according to the 16th Amendment.

Tax credits (as in my book, Rules for Conservatives): Let’s say that the government allows you to deduct your out-of-pocket expenses to purchase health insurance up to $2,000 per dependent from your tax obligation if you provide the actual insurance receipts. Are you going to purchase insurance? Of course. You will at least purchase catastrophic insurance. As a young person under the age of 35, catastrophic insurance will probably cost less than $1500 per year.

Let’s assume that you pay no income taxes, so then the government will return to you what you paid out-of- pocket for insurance up to $2000 per dependent. A family of 4 could get an $8,000 rebate. Would you at least buy catastrophic insurance? Of course you would.

No government mandate would be needed to make people buy insurance. It would increase taxes some to cover these credits, but not anything close to the $2.4 trillion that is now projected as the cost for Obamacare for the next 10 years.

Other methods of providing healthcare: Does everyone need insurance in order to provide healthcare to those who cannot afford it? Of course not. SChips and other government programs assured healthcare providers that they would get paid. As Scalia said, Obamacare just shifts who is writing the check from the government to the insurance companies, but the tax payers are still paying for it.

Is the penalty for not purchasing insurance a tax? The Democrats argued that it is not a tax when they fought to get the legislation passed and now they argue that it is a tax to make it constitutional. So is it a tax or not? And if you pay the penalty, then you still don’t have insurance, so what is accomplished by the penalty? One thing that we know for sure from this is that this administration will say anything to get its way … depending on the audience. It cannot be trusted.

If there are other methods to pay for healthcare or to motivate people to purchase insurance, then how can the current government claim that mandating the purchase of insurance is the only way to provide healthcare … that it is “necessary and proper” to provide healthcare to Americans?

In my mind, they lied to us to get legislation passed to reward the insurance industry. How many Americans realize that insurance industry lobbyists wrote the actual Obamacare legislation?

As stated in an op ed written by me for World Net Daily two years ago, Insurance Companies are the winners with ObamaCare:

As the insurance companies complain about the healthcare insurance bill, Democrats have written a bill that benefits those insurance companies. It mandates that all Americans must purchase insurance so it provides more young profitable customers to the insurance companies. It allows the government to reduce benefits so the insurance companies make more profit. It regulates fees paid to hospitals and doctors so the government acts as the negotiator for the insurance cartel.

….. Congress is about to pass a bill of 2700 pages that will forever change the nature of healthcare in America without really understanding what is in the bill. And Obama is labeling opposition to ObamaCare as being against healthcare reform.

According to statistics maintained by the Center for Responsive Politics….

1. The top three Senate recipients for insurance industry contributions — all Democrats — are Sens. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., Chris Dodd, D-Conn., and Harry Reid, D-Nev., according to the center’s research. And in the House, it’s another trio of Democrats: Reps. Melissa Bean, D-Ill., Earl Pomeroy, D-N.D., and Barney Frank, D-Mass.

2. According to the Wall Street Journal of April 30, 2007, Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer received a combined total of $2.4 million from the insurance companies.

3. The Washington Post of July 21, 2009 states “Chairman Baucus (D-Mont.) has emerged as a leading recipient of Senate campaign contributions from the hospitals, insurers and other medical interest groups … Health-related companies and their employees gave Baucus’s political committees nearly $1.5 million in 2007 and 2008.”

4. The Center for Responsive Politics shows that President Obama received a staggering $20,175,303 from the healthcare industry during the 2008 election cycle, nearly three times the amount of his presidential rival John McCain.

Just like in the “Song of the South” when the rabbit says to the bear, “Don’t throw me in that briar patch,” the insurance companies are saying don’t pass this bill … but they really want it. Otherwise, why would these Democrats be pushing it when they get so much money from insurance companies?

If for some crazy reason, the Supreme Court finds that mandating the purchase of insurance is “necessary and proper” to provide healthcare to Americans, then we taxpaying Americans need to do everything “necessary and proper” to get it repealed so we can implement other alternatives.

Michael Master is the author of “Save America Now!” and “Rules for Conservatives” which can be ordered at www.saveamericanow.us.com

By Michael Master

www.saveamericanow.us.com

According to the Department of Labor, the unemployment rate fell 1/10th of one percent from 8.3 to 8.2 for the end of March, 2012.

Help me understand “how did that happen?”

According to that very same Department of Labor, a net of 170,000 additional people join the work force every month as the population grows and as students graduate. That is a net of 170,000 more than those who retire.

So how did the unemployment rate drop from 8.3% to 8.2% when a net of more people entered the work force than the number of net new jobs that were created?

The Department of Labor says that fewer people are looking for jobs so there are fewer people available to work when it calculates the unemployment rate.

Wow!

Let’s look at this another way. According to the Department of Labor, 131 million people are working. Some are part time and many are under employed. But if we work backwards from their 8.2% unemployment rate, that means that the Labor Department believes that there are 143 million people available for work. At the end of 2008, there were 145 million people available for work with 134 million employed (according to the Department of Labor). The unemployment rate was 7.6 %.

So what happened to 2 million people since December, 2008? And what happened to the net of 170,000 people who entered the work force each month (2.5 million total since December, 2008)? Where are those 4.5 million workers? What happened to them? There should be 147.5 million available for work, not the 143 million that the Department of Labor is using. And the real unemployment rate should be 11.2% with an underemployment, part time, and unemployment rate that is really about 23%. Almost one out of every 4 people is either underemployed, unemployed, or only working part time.

So how could this difference in the unemployment rate be possible? How could they decrease the number of people available for work by 4.5 million people in calculating the unemployment rate?

The Department of Labor reports to the president. Is the president conning America again … this time through the Department of Labor? Add this to the long list of deceptions by Obama through government agencies that report to him … i.e. Department of Justice (Holder), Department of Homeland Security (Napolitano), Treasury Department (Geithner), EPA (Jackson), Department of Energy (Chu) … just for a start.

And for those who think the economy is doing better because the stock market is improving … not so. As stated by me a couple of years ago, the stock market is increasing in value because:

– low interest rates drive up the price of stocks.

– more available money (printing it) creates more money to buy stocks which increases stock prices.

– other competitive investments (like real estate) are unattractive so there is more money for stocks.

If the economy stays as it is right now, the stock market will crater when the USA stops printing money, or increases interest rates, or has an improved real estate market.

The Obama administration is deceiving America again. The economy is no better. If we only use the same number of available people for work as there were at the end of 2008 (145 million), then the unemployment rate right now is more like 9.1% … and Obama promised to keep it under 8%. We citizens and taxpayers assumed he meant 8% at the same number of available workers plus the additional people entering the work force. He inherited an unemployment rate of 7.6% and turned it into 11.2%. That is almost a 50% increase.

The programs of the Obama administration failed. And why? Because they focus on financial solutions and legislation … rather than helping free enterprise flourish. Obama’s programs do not motivate the wealth creators in America … instead, his programs redistribute wealth. And wealth redistribution does not create anything … it just moves the money around like moving the deck chairs on the Titanic.

The government needs to get out of the way. It needs to cut regulations, cut taxes, cut restrictions on private enterprise, and be a consumer of products rather than an investor in crony owned companies like Solyndra … so the wealth creators can do their thing and create more wealth opportunity for everyone in our economy.

Obama will never do this because he does not believe in free enterprise … he believes in a government centered society where decisions are made by an elite ruling class. Therefore, the USA economy will stay stuck as long as Obama is in the White House.

Michael Master is the author of “Rules for Conservatives” and “Save America Now!” They can be ordered at
www.saveamericanow.us.com

By Michael Charles Master
www.saveamericanow.us.com

The tax system in the USA is a disaster. It is used by politicians to divide Americans in class warfare. It is used to reward political supporters. It is so complex that it caused the creation of an entire industry of lawyers, accountants, and IRS employees who suck capital from the economy for their services that could be used by Americans to purchase products that would employ many more Americans.

As a fix for these problems, let me propose these 8 simple changes to the tax code:

1. Tax credits for charitable contributions up to 10% of owed taxes and elimination of pre tax charitable deductions. Today, the tax law allows deductions from income for contributions to government approved nonprofit organizations before the tax obligation is calculated. Therefore, the real impact of charitable deductions on taxes is only equal to the tax rate of the individual, so no real incentive is achieved. This change eliminates pre tax deductions for contributions to nonprofit organizations. It will only be a tax credit. Therefore, all individuals are motivated to make charitable contributions up to the 10% tax credit amount and deducted from the tax obligation. Nonprofit organizations will be forced to advertize in the light of day to Americans to receive contributions rather than lobby government officials. The government will be removed from making contributions to nonprofit organizations. Lobbyists will no longer be needed by charitable organizations because the federal government will be out of the business of funding nonprofit organizations. The individuals who are paying the taxes will be making the decisions as to who receives the contributions rather than the government making those decisions.

2. Tax credits for purchase of healthcare insurance up to $1500 per person with rebates for payments larger than the tax obligation. Once the tax obligation is determined, then the tax payer can deduct a tax credit up to $1500 per each person represented on the tax return for documented payments to purchase healthcare insurance. And if the tax obligation is negative after the tax credit is applied, then the government will refund the negative amount to the tax payer as an overpayment rebate. Each person will be motivated to purchase some healthcare insurance, even if it is only catastrophic insurance. A mandate forcing people to purchase insurance will not be needed. And even low income Americans will file tax returns to receive rebates.

3. Elimination of taxes on corporate profits, elimination of all subsidies to corporations, and an increase of tax rates on stockholder dividends and capital gains as “ordinary income.” Today, the stockholder is taxed twice for profits made by a corporation … once as profits to the company at an approximate rate of 35% and then again as a disbursement of cash at 15% for a total of approximately 45%. That encourages stock holders to take money out of the corporation that could be used to grow the company. Instead of this double tax that many Americans do not understand, a tax will only be charged to the stockholder as “ordinary income” on disbursements and capital gains. All taxes on corporate profits are eliminated. This will encourage corporations to locate their businesses to the USA and it will encourage them to leave their profits in the companies as retained earnings to grow the businesses. All subsidies to corporations will be eliminated because there are no taxes on corporations to apply subsidies. This will increase jobs in America and it will eliminate the class warfare and pandering used by politicians.

4. Elimination of the AMT. The Alternate Minimum Tax should be eliminated. It adds an extra burden on all Americans. It eliminates charitable contributions and other deductions that are needed to motivate spending in America. And it adds taxes on higher incomes that are not recognized by lower income people who wrongly believe that higher paid earners do not pay a fair share of taxes.

5. Flat tax rate and a standard set of deductions for all people. This is one tax rate and one set of simple deductions for all Americans. My suggestion is to implement a 35% tax rate after these deductions are used to adjust the taxable income:
a. $10,000 deductions for each head of household and for each dependent.
b. Mortgage interest payment deduction up to a maximum of 20% of “ordinary income.”
c. Education deduction up to $5,000 for actual receipts per each person.
d. Out of pocket medical costs up to a maximum of 10% of “ordinary income” for appropriate receipts.
The average family of 4 individuals with income of $50,000 will probably pay no income taxes while the average family of 4 with income of $500,000 dollars will pay an approximate tax of $115,000 (23%). A family of 4 who earns a million dollars will probably pay about $270,000 (27%). A single person who makes a million dollars with no other tax deductions will pay $347,000 (almost 35%). Taxes will be simpler. Class warfare is eliminated. Loop holes that favor the rich are eliminated. Marriage vs unmarried penalties/advantages are eliminated. And all Americans will have an interest in what the government is doing with tax regulations.

6. All laws/taxes apply to all Americans equally. All too often, politicians pass laws with imbedded taxes or benefits or subsidies that only apply to selected groups. And politicians make selected groups exempt from laws/taxes. These practices cause support for those laws/taxes from people who benefit from those actions. That is detrimental to a democracy. Many groups supported the Affordable Healthcare Act because they would not be affected by it, like unions, government employees, and major contributors to the Democrat Party, not because the law helped America. At the same time, laws that help owners of some businesses are passed to secure the support from those businesses … like with farm subsidies and oil company subsidies. To cure our tax inequities, these practices must end. All laws/taxes must apply to all citizens with no special privileges or exemptions so that all Americans have a vested interest in what the politicians do.

7. Repeal of the Sixteenth Amendment. While the Sixteenth Amendment was meant to give more flexibility for taxation to our elected officials, the Sixteenth Amendment has been abused by politicians to tax America much more than could ever have been imagined and for uses that clearly are not for the common defense and general welfare of the United States.

8. No American funds to foreign entities. No monies collected in taxes from American citizens can be used to make any type of payments to foreign entities. Today, tax monies from Americans are used by the federal government to pay foreign governments, to purchase foreign products, and to employ foreign workers. All of these actions dilute the integrity and industry of America. These actions lead to corruption of American political leaders by foreign entities. The government can use taxes collected from foreign entities like import taxes to make payments to foreigners. But payments to foreign entities from taxes paid by Americans must end.

If our political leaders are serious about fixing the inequities in America, then they must implement programs to fix the tax system. Otherwise, America is doomed to follow the same demise as all other great societies who allow their tax systems to succumb to corruption.
Michael Master is the author of “Rules for Conservatives” and “Save America Now!” They can be ordered at www.saveamericanow.us.com

Hon. James David Manning, PhD says we must remove Barack Hussein (The Long Legged Mack Daddy) Obama to save America. Recorded on 2 December 2011.

www.saveamericanow.us.com

Many liberals point to the fact that the USA was founded by immigrants and that is why the USA should open its borders to more immigrants now.

Yes, and our founding fathers were also cautious about the effects of immigration. That is exactly why they demanded in the Constitution that the president be a natural born citizen.

Without immigrants and their offspring for the last forty years, the USA population would be 200 million today instead of 300 million. One third of the current population is from immigration which is too much for a culture and an economy to assimilate, so now our culture and our economy are paying the price.

A congressman who wishes to remain anonymous discussed this with me for an hour in his Washington office in the spring of 2010. He said that Congress was well aware of the problems caused by too low of a birth rate to Caucasians in the 70s and 80s. He went on to say that the federal government deliberately allowed immigration in large numbers in the 90s and early 2000s to compensate for those low birth rates so there would be enough young, lower paid employees to work at McDonalds, pick our crops, clean our homes, and mow our lawns. He said that Congress did not foresee the problems that would be caused by such a huge amount of immigration. Congress underestimated the effects on our health system, our schools, and our communities.

He said that “Congress did not foresee the problems of increased immigration.”

Wow, Congress did not foresee the problems. And how many other problems does Congress not foresee from its actions? How about Obamacare, increasing the debt ceiling, and increasing the federal deficit?

This immigration problem is not only in the USA. It is throughout the industrialized world. England is feeling it. France is feeling it. All of Europe is feeling the pains of increased immigration to offset the impact of low birth rates to Caucasians. On October 17, 2010, the BBC posted an article about German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, titled “Merkel says German multicultural society has failed.” Merkel states: “(at) the beginning of the 60s our country called the foreign workers to come to Germany and now they live in our country.” She added: “We kidded ourselves a while, we said: ‘They won’t stay, sometime they will be gone’, but this isn’t reality.” “And of course, the approach [to build] a multicultural [society] and to live side-by-side and to enjoy each other… has failed, utterly failed.”

Why did the Germans encourage immigrants to come to Germany for the last fifty years? Because they did not have enough younger, lower paid German employees to do the lesser jobs due to a negative birth rate. All of the industrialized nations had too low of intrinsic birth rates and all of them encouraged immigration to solve it. So, all of them are paying a price economically and culturally because of high immigration to offset low birth rates. And this is exactly what liberals and the New World Order want. It is the ultimate method to redistribute the wealth and to dilute the dominance of conservatives in traditional western cultures.

The huge amount of immigration to industrialized countries from third world countries has been disastrous. Yahoo News posted this article on February 10, 2011:

PARIS (AFP) – French President Nicolas Sarkozy declared Thursday that multiculturalism had failed, joining a growing number of world leaders or ex-leaders who have condemned it.

“My answer is clearly yes, it is a failure,” he said in a television interview when asked about the policy which advocates that host societies welcome and foster distinct cultural and religious immigrant groups.

“Of course we must all respect differences, but we do not want… a society where communities coexist side by side.”

“If you come to France, you accept to melt into a single community, which is the national community, and if you do not want to accept that, you cannot be welcome in France.”

“We have been too concerned about the identity of the person who was arriving and not enough about the identity of the country that was receiving him.”

British Prime Minister David Cameron, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Australia’s ex-prime minister John Howard and Spanish ex-premier Jose Maria Aznar have also recently said multicultural policies have not successfully integrated immigrants.

The issue is not immigration. The issue is the volume of immigration. The issue is assimilation into the culture. Industrialized countries allowed huge amounts of immigration because their birth rates were so low. That huge volume hampered assimilation. Western Europe learned the hard way. What will it take for the USA to learn that it needs to curtail immigration and make more babies … quickly?

Michael Master is the author of “Save America Now!” It can be ordered at
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1616235756

www.saveamericanow.us.com

Even though the Obama administration claimed “mission accomplished” when the GDP finally increased, this economy is still in trouble.

GDP is increasing because of increased prices and not because of increased product volumes. Costs for labor and services are increasing … but not product volumes. Manufacturing and housing construction remain low and that spells disaster.

My comments of last April stated: “if the USA grew exports by 100%, that would only take us to 22% (of GDP) which would still be a far cry from 35% in 2000. Also, the world competitors are not about to allow the USA to grow 100%. They will adjust.”

The Kiplinger Letter of June 17, 2011 states: “The economy seems especially fragile… 2% GDP growth (that is much less than inflation) … so far the average is just 72,000 (jobs) per month (200,000 is needed to maintain the current unemployment level and 400,000 are needed to reduce the unemployment level substantially) … (oil) $90 a barrel (50% more than just one year ago) … will businesses opt out of health coverage? Paying a penalty for not covering workers would be less costly than providing coverage… The US trade deficit will rise this year … exports will grow by 12% … but imports … also up 12%.”

Drudge posted on June 20, 2011 that unemployment among blacks in the USA is at 16% with 17.5% for black males and almost 41% for teenage blacks.

So what exactly is so good about the economy?

Nothing. As stated by several economic sources: this is the slowest recovery since 1932. This administration certainly owns the failure of the recovery. This administration is a failure.

Why do blacks continue to support this administration? Why does Wall Street continue to pump lots of money into the Obama campaign? Why do young single women continue to endorse Obama?

Because other things are more important to them than the economy.

Well, why did 80% of Jews vote for Obama? Why do they provide 25% of the funding for Democrats? Given the continued economic failures of Democrats since they took control of Congress in 2007, Jewish support of Democrats cannot be based on economic reasons.

Why would 96% of blacks vote for Obama when 17.5% of black males are unemployed?

Why did 70% of single white women under 40 years old vote for Obama?

There is racism in America. There is communism in America. There is hatred towards white Christian men. The votes of blacks, Jews, and single young white women are for reasons other than what is economically good for America … and now America is paying a huge economic price because of it.

According to the latest estimates from the OMB, Obamacare will cost America another $2.4 trillion over the next 10 years. As more corporations choose to opt out of providing healthcare, benefits will decrease and premiums will increase for the average American. $2.4 trillion equates to somewhere between 1 1/2 and 2 million killed jobs. So why would single women, blacks, and Jews want to continue with Obamacare?

Race, communism, and rebuff of white Christian men.

According to Money Magazine, Forbes, and Kiplinger, this recession will continue longer than necessary because of wasted money on stimulus programs that had no multiplier effects on the economy. Implementation of Obamacare will exacerbate it.

When George W. Bush was president, liberals complained that the economy was in horrible trouble when unemployment was 6%. John Kerry personally labeled it irresponsible. So why are liberals so accepting of 9% unemployment now? Why do they not condemn Obama for this 9% unemployment when he promised to keep it under 8%?

Liberals are not really interested in the economy. They are more interested in the goodies that government will give them, in having the government take care of them, and in keeping the white Christian men from dominating them … even against their own best economic interests.

Young single women, blacks, and Jews elected Obama. We need to help educate them about how they harmed America and themselves when they voted for Obama in 2008 so they will not do it again in 2012.

We need to help them see that this is still about the economy.

Michael Master is the author of “Save America Now!” It can be ordered at http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1616235756