Thursday, February 16, 2012

Barker's Newsbites: Thursday, February 16, 2012


Read today's opening newsbite and... if you're learning about this obscenity for the first time... understand... it's no accident that you're hearing about it here rather than on TV or radio MSM news programming.

Folks. You're manipulated day in and day out by the media - including, unfortunately, Fox News and other so-called "conservative" mainstream media outlets.

Why just this morning I'm flipping channels and upon stopping at the Fox Business Channel for a moment there's Stuart Varney babbling on about the latest government stats showing "no inflation."

(*JUST SHAKING MY HEAD*)

Folks... Varney knows as well as you and I (assuming you're properly educated and/or a longtime reader of Usually Right) that's government stats deliberately understate inflation via not including "little things" like... oh... food and fuel.

(*SMIRK*)

Certainly all of you reading this are well aware that week after week you're spending more on the same amount and quality (perhaps less!) of food and fuel that you purchased last month and the month before that and so on.

Folks... most of you drive every day - either that or you use public transportation that relies upon "fuel."

Folks... you eat every day - do you not? You - or your spouse - shop for food weekly... perhaps several times a week. We're in the midst of yet another inflationary price spiral at the supermarket with prices continuing to rise while at the same time package size - "unit size" - continues to shrink so that even if the "per item" price "seems" to be holding steady, the .99-cents that once bought you a 16 oz. box of pasta and then a 15 oz. and then a 13 oz. may now only buy you a 12 oz. box of spaghetti.

(*SHRUG*)

Folks... understand... you're being constantly lied to and deliberately misled and thus manipulated day in and day out by the media. I'm not talking just lies about economics... I'm talking lies about everything from social policy to politics to foreign policy.

And what most of you don't know... don't know because you weren't taught it in school and because few of you have the time or propensity to delve into the wide range of reporting and analysis I absorb and consider daily... is often information that if you did know it... it would change your perceptions of what's actually happening as opposed to what the media would have you believe is going on.

I know I'm beating a dead horse here. All I'm saying... keep on reading newsbites. Keep on tuning in here at Usually Right.

Utilize
my fact-sharing here at Usually Right and my analysis of the news I read.

I can't cover everything and I don't claim to try to. That said, anyone who regularly spends even five or ten minutes a day browsing through my newsbites and stand-alone posts is gonna learn stuff they didn't know and gain an appreciation of what's going on "between the lines" of mainstream news reporting.

Anyway...

(*SHRUG*)

6 comments:

William R. Barker said...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/republicans-want-to-deny-child-tax-credit-to-illegal-immigrants-to-pay-for-payroll-tax-cut/2012/02/08/gIQAZ8IXzQ_story.html

Republicans are looking to stop illegal immigrants from claiming federal child tax credits, including refund checks averaging $1,800. It’s an effort that has roused anger among Hispanics and some Democratic lawmakers.

* 1) WHY ARE ILLEGAL ALIENS RECEIVING FEDEAL CHILD TAX CREDITS AVERAGING ONE-THOUSAND, EIGHT-HUNDRED DOLLARS...???

* WHY ARE NOT *DEMOCRATS* AS WELL AS REPUBLICANS LOOKING TO STOP THIS...?!?!

The proposal would require people who claim the credit to have Social Security numbers as proof that they’re legal workers.

* SOUNDS REASONABLE...

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada says the proposal unfairly goes after the children of poor Hispanic workers.

* SOUNDS INSANE!

* FOLKS... YES... THIS PARTICULAR NEWSBITE IS FROM A MSM ORGAN - THE WASHINGTON POST. BUT HAVE YOU HEARD ABOUT THIS ANYWHERE ELSE THOUGHOUT THE MSM?

(*JUST SHAKING MY HEAD*)

* AH... JUST NOTICED... THE WP GOT THIS FROM THE AP AND DEDICATED A FULL... (*SMIRK*)... THREE PARAGRAPHS TO THE STORY BURIED IN THE BUSINESS SECTION.

(*SPITTING ON THE GROUND*)

William R. Barker said...

http://www.cnbc.com/id/46401756

[Home] numbers are going up again.

One in every 624 U.S. households received a foreclosure filing in January, up 3 percent from the previous month, according to a new report from RealtyTrac.

* WHICH IS ACTUALLY HEALTHY... BUT OF COURSE OBAMA AND THE DEMS ARE EVEN NOW DOING ALL WITHIN THEIR POWER TO ARTIFICALLY HALT THE FREE MARKET PROCESS AND THEREFORE KICK THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD ONCE AGAIN.

* FOLKS... JUST AS YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE A CAR YOU CAN'T AFFORD, JEWERY YOU CAN'T AFFORD, VACATIONS AND RESTURANT OUTINGS YOU CAN'T AFFORD... YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE A HOUSE YOU CAN'T AFFORD! IT'S NOT GOOD FOR ANYONE! ARTIFICIALLY INFLATING THE HOUSING MARKET HURTS EVERY YOUNG PERSON AND YOUNG COUPLE SEARCHING FOR THEIR FIRST HOUSE! IN THE END ARTIFICALLY SKEWING THE FREE MARKET HURTS THE FREE MARKET AND HURTING THE FREE MARKET EVENTUALLY HURTS ALL OF US!

Bank repossessions, the final stage of the foreclosure process, increased at least 30% year-over-year in several states, including Massachusetts, which saw a 75% spike.

Bank-owned or REO (real estate owned) activity hit a 16-month high in Illinois and a 15-month high in Indiana.

Default notices, the first stage of foreclosure, were flat nationally in January, but spiked in judicial states, like Connecticut and Pennsylvania (up 112%) and even in non-judicial states like Maryland (up 100%).

Nevada still posted the highest foreclosure rate...

* HAR-RY REID! HAR-RY REID! HAR-RY REID! (*SARCASTIC CLAPPING*)

As optimism seems to abound for the spring, at least among the nation's home builders whose sentiment index jumped to the highest level in four years this month, foreclosures still stand in the way of a robust recovery.

* PERFECT EXAMPLE OF WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT IN THE "GATEWAY" POST TO TODAY'S NEWSBITES: THE REPORTERS AND EDITORS VIEW HOUSING INFLATION AS REASON FOR OPTIMISM WHILE VIEWING A NATURAL AND MUCH NEEDED LIQUIDATION OF UNSUPPORTABLE INVENTORY AS "STANDING IN THE WAY OF A ROBUST RECOVERY."

(*JUST SHAKING MY HEAD*)

* JEEZUS... UNFRIGG'NBELIEVEABLE... AT THE VERY END OF THE STORY THEY ACTUALLY UNDERCUT THEIR PREVIOUS WORLDVIEW AND BUTTRESS THE POINTS *I* HAVE BEEN MAKING! HERE... CHECK THIS OUT:

Until banks work through the enormous backlog of foreclosures, which number in the millions, home prices will not hit a firm bottom, especially in the most troubled local real estate markets.

(*SNORT*) (*JUST SHAKING MY HEAD*)

William R. Barker said...

http://nationaljournal.com/2012-presidential-campaign/cnn-cancels-march-1-debate-after-candidates-decline-20120216

CNN canceled its March 1 Republican presidential debate on Thursday after three of four candidates declined to participate, citing busy campaign schedules leading to Super Tuesday on March 6.

"Mitt Romney and Ron Paul told the Georgia Republican Party, Ohio Republican Party, and CNN Thursday that they will not participate in the March 1 Republican presidential primary debate," CNN said in a statement. "Without full participation of all four candidates, CNN will not move forward with the Super Tuesday debate."

Former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum also said he would not participate, leaving only former House Speaker Newt Gingrich committed to attending.

* SEE, FOLKS... THERE ARE MANY, MANY REASONS WHY I JUST DON'T TRUST SANTORUM.

* ROMNEY? I'D EXPECT THIS FROM HIM. PAUL? I'M DISAPPOINTED.

* NOTE: NEWT GINGRICH HAS THE BALLS TO LAY IT OUT FOR A NATIONAL AUDIENCE ANY TIME, ANYWHERE.

[Gingrich noted,] "The Romney model is to go to Wall Street and raise huge amounts of money to run negative ads," he said. "And you can understand why having to defend that strategy is probably not something he's very happy with."

William R. Barker said...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204795304577220950656734864.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

Offended by President Obama's decision to force health insurers to pay for contraception and surgical sterilization?

It gets worse:

In the future, thanks to ObamaCare, the government will issue such health edicts on a routine basis—and largely insulated from public view. This goes beyond contraception to cancer screenings, the use of common drugs like aspirin, and much more.

Under ObamaCare, a single committee—the United States Preventative Services Task Force - is empowered to evaluate preventive health services and decide which will be covered by health-insurance plans.

* REMEMBER HOW OBAMA TOLD YOU HOW YOU COULD KEEP "YOUR" HEALTH CARE INSURANCE IF YOU LIKED IT? (ASSUMING THE COMPANY OFFERING IT DIDN'T GO BACKRUPT?) WELL... UNDERSTAND... OBAMA VIEWS ALL HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANIES AS *HIS* COMPANIES - MEANING THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WILL DECIDE WHAT THEY WILL AND WON'T PROVIDE. THE TECHNICAL TERM FOR SUCH AN ECONOMIC SYSTEM IS FASCISM.

(*SHRUG*)

The task force already rates services with letter grades of "A" through "D" (or "I," if it has "insufficient evidence" to make a rating). But under ObamaCare, services rated "A" or "B"—such as colon cancer screening for adults aged 50-75—must be covered by health plans in full, without any co-pays. Many services that get "Cs" and "Ds"—such as screening for ovarian or testicular cancer—could get nixed from coverage entirely.

* REMEMBER WHEN OBAMA JUMPED THE GUN AND TIPPED HIS HAND ABOUT HOW BREAST CANCER SCREENINGS WOULD BE LIMITED? REMEMBER HOW HE THEN PULLED BACK FROM THAT WHEN THERE WAS A FUSS? HE PULLED BACK THEN BECAUSE HE KNEW THAT COME 2013... HE'LL HAVE TO POWER TO ACT BY FEDERAL FIAT.

(*PURSED LIPS*)

* FOLKS... I STRONGLY URGE YOU TO READ THE FULL ESSAY BY DR. GOTTLIEB.

William R. Barker said...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203824904577217792498104980.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_AboveLEFTTop

Jobless payments typically end after 26 weeks, with some states providing longer benefits.

* AND BY THE WAY... PREMIUMS ARE PRICED ACCORDINGLY! EXTENDING UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS IS SIMPLY ROBBING PETER TO PAY PAUL - OR RATHER, ROBBING US ALL SINCE THIS DEFICIT FINANCING OF UNDESERVED EXTENDED BENEFITS IS A DEBT (WITH INTEREST!) THAT WE AND OUR CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN ARE NOW RESPONSIBLE FOR.

The idea is that these payments should assist a worker who loses a job during a transition to finding new work, instead of becoming a semi-permanent sinecure.

But for the last three and a half years those payments—about 35% to 40% of the worker's last pay check—have been extended eight times to an all-time high 99 weeks in many states.

So now taxpayers pick up the check for as much as two years of not working, even as jobs become [at least supposedly - according to the President's own fixed unemployment numbers] easier to find.

* FUNNY THING... (READ ON!)

Two of President Obama's most senior economists - former White House aide Larry Summers and current Council of Economic Advisers chairman Alan Krueger - have published studies documenting this antiwork incentive [inherent in extending unemployment benefits].

According to a study co-authored by Mr. Krueger in 2002: "Higher and longer duration unemployment insurance benefits will cause unemployed workers who receive unemployment benefits to take longer to find a new job."

(*SMIRK*)

This is surely one reason that the share of the jobless out of work for six months or more is still 42.9%.

* YA THINK...?!?!

Democrats have kept the jobless rate higher for longer by trying to turn jobless insurance into a long-term entitlement. Democrats have also burdened state budgets with higher costs that they will have to make up with higher payroll taxes on business. This will slow the rate of business rehiring.

* AND BY AND LARGE... (*GRITTING MY TEETH*)... THE BOEHNER/MCCONNELL REPUBLICANS HAVE GONE ALONG WITH THEM.

William R. Barker said...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204880404577225122340276052.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEFTTopOpinion

Former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher once said that the problem with socialism is that eventually you "run out of other people's money." And it's not just tax dollars she was talking about, as the Obama presidency has shown.

Take the decision to force Catholic institutions to provide health-insurance coverage for sterilization, contraception and abortion-inducing drugs. When this decision caused an outcry, Mr. Obama offered the following compromise: Insurance companies will be ordered to provide such coverage "free" to employees of Catholic churches and organizations.

But of course, this coverage won't be free. Insurance companies will pass the cost on to policyholders, including those same Catholic institutions. In short, Other People's Money will be used.

* WAKE UP, PEOPLE... OBAMA IS MOVING US TOWARDS DICTATORSHIP.

Another example: To appear empathetic about housing foreclosures, the Obama administration pressured five banks to cough up $25 billion—$3 billion to the federal and state governments, and nearly $22 billion for payments to people foreclosed upon and to reduce the principal of mortgages with balances greater than the home's current value.

This will bail out no more than 10% of homeowners whose mortgages are underwater, according to an estimate by Chris Papagianis of the nonpartisan policy-research institute e21, who notes there is roughly $700 billion in residential negative equity across the country.

But the political optics are good—the banks can be tarred because of their paperwork foul-ups—and the $25 billion isn't from the federal budget. This also constitutes a use of Other People's Money, paid by all bank customers through bigger fees and higher interest rates.

* AGAIN... WAKE UP, PEOPLE...

Similarly, when Mr. Obama set up a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau in 2010 to make sure people are treated fairly, he wanted to hide the new bureaucracy's cost and limit congressional budget oversight. So he gave it an automatic draw on the Federal Reserve's balance sheet. Now the massive new financial regulatory agency will take money collected from every bank and institution (and, in turn, their customers) that does business with the Fed.

(*PURSED LIPS*)

Consider the provision in the president's health-care law that prohibits insurers from charging younger, healthier policyholders substantially less than older, less healthy policyholders. The upshot: Healthy 30-year-olds who go to the gym pay higher prices for health insurance than they should, thereby subsidizing the insurance of older policyholders who drink and smoke. The subsidies are all "free"!

(*RUEFUL CHUCKLE TURNING TO SOBBING*)

Candidate Obama promised to cut taxes for 95% of Americans. But according to the Tax Policy Center, some 76 million Americans who file income-tax returns, or 46.4% of the total, won't pay any taxes. No problem. Through 2018, according to the congressional Joint Committee on Taxation, the administration's "Making Work Pay" program—if it is made permanent—would take $640 billion from people who do pay income taxes and give to those who don't in the form of a refundable tax credit.

In other words, the government will cut them a check. That was once called "welfare." Using Other People's Money allows Mr. Obama to call it "tax cuts."

* FOLKS... I'M GETTING SICK TO MY STOMACH READING THIS. PLEASE USE THE LINK AND READ THE REST OF THE ESSAY FOR YOURSELVES.