10 Job Killers That the Obama Administration is engaged in

Arthur Brooks: Top 10 ways government kills jobs in America

Our politicians all seem to agree on at least one thing: There will be no recovery unless America gets back to work.


But that’s often where the agreement ends. Once you move on to discuss how to get America back to work, opinions begin to diverge.


As we listen to the rhetoric, remember the reality. These are the Top job killers in America.


1. Uncertainty and business: What you don’t know can (and does) hurt you. Businesses plan around rules. And THEY ARE UNLIKELY TO INVEST IF THEY CAN’T BE REASONABLY SURE ABOUT WHAT THE RULES WILL BE. When things are uncertain, businesses hold back cash to protect themselves—and this kills jobs. My colleague Allan Meltzer has made this point in two recent WSJ op-eds: “High uncertainty is the enemy of investment and growth,” he declares in one . “The most important restriction on investment today is not tight monetary policy, but uncertainty about administration policy,” he argues in the other.


2. Uncertainty and the consumer: Uncertainty isn’t just bad for companies—IT’S BAD FOR CONSUMERS, TOO. If I think government policy may provoke a double dip in the economy and my job is on the line, there’s no way I’m going out to buy a new car. For that matter, even the possibility of a huge gas tax would make me less likely to make a car purchase decision. All this kills jobs.


3. High corporate taxes


4. Unhealthy health insurance costs


5. The threat of unionization


6. Inability to hire and fire


7. Trade restrictions


8. Credit


9. Increasing unemployment insurance


10. Encouraging frivolous lawsuits

It’s an interesting read and you can see the comments for number 3 through 10 here:

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columns/OpEd-Contributor/Arthur-Brooks-Top-10-ways-government-kills-jobs-in-America-105302968.html#ixzz12uRgJQld
More bad news for Democrats

Among the 10 surveys they released, ONLY TWO WILL GIVE DEMOCRATS GENUINE REASONS TO HOPE. Their polling shows Rep. Mike Arcuri, D-N.Y., leading Republican Richard Hanna by a surprisingly wide margin of 47 to 37 percent. They also show Rep. Patrick Murphy, D-Pa., clinging to slim 46-43 lead over Republican Mike Fitzpatrick. Other than that, it’s bad news for Democratic sophomores like Travis Childers, Carol Shea-Porter, Bill Foster, Harry Mitchell, and Steve Kagen, who all trail. Reps. Chris Carney, Pa., and John Hall, N.Y., are tied with their GOP challengers and poll in the low 40s.


The Schilling-Hare poll’s sample of 417 likely voters backed Barack Obama in 2008, 47 to 40 percent. But this year, they disapprove of his job performance, 52 to 45 percent.

There is also a great (if you are a Republican) ad against Phil Hare on the link.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/new-hill-poll-has-schilling-up-by-7-over-hare-105320008.html#ixzz12u9AOSuH

"All they've done is spend, spend, spend."


A new poll is out by Associated Press GfK. I’ve posted a couple of paragraphs from through out the story, but it is worthwhile reading the whole article.

WASHINGTON -- All signs point to HUGE REPUBLICAN VICTORIES IN TWO WEEKS, with the GOP now leading Democrats on virtually every measure in an Associated Press-GfK poll of people likely to vote in the first major elections of Barack Obama’s presidency.


In the final survey before Election Day, likely voters say the GOP would do a better job than Democrats on handling the economy, creating jobs and running the government….


In another worrisome sign for Democrats, WOMEN NOW SPLIT PRETTY EVENLY BETWEEN THE TWO PARTIES, 49 percent favoring Democrats, 45 percent Republicans. In 2006, Democrats took over Capitol Hill in part by winning 55 percent of the female vote to 43 percent for Republicans.


Thus, women are the constituency as Democrats look to try to minimize expected losses. Obama is holding events aimed at courting them in the final homestretch, and Democratic candidates are making overtures to them across the country……


Republicans get higher marks with likely voters than Democrats on HANDLING THE ECONOMY, TAXES, THE DEFICIT, JOB CREATION, IMMIGRATION AND NATIONAL SECURITY, AND ON MANAGING THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. Likely voters are evenly split on which party would best handle health care and Social Security

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/20/AR2010102004269.html

Democrats: It's not Me, It's You

It was nearly fourteen years ago. The presidential election was less than two weeks off. Bob Dole was desperate. "I WONDER SOMETIMES WHAT PEOPLE ARE THINKING ABOUT, IF PEOPLE 
ARE THINKING AT ALL," Dole said at a Florida rally. "Something's wrong in America."


Clinton's White House press secretary, Mike McCurry, responded: "In my time in politics, I think it's best not to accuse the American people of not thinking when you're trying to earn their support and trust."


It never helps to blame the voter. It's like a business criticizing consumers for not buying its product. The consumer is always right in politics, like business.


Yet here is President Obama, last weekend, at a Democratic fundraiser: "Part of the reason that our politics seems so tough right now and facts and science and argument does not seem to be winning the day all the time is because WE'RE HARDWIRED NOT TO ALWAYS THINK CLEARLY WHEN WE'RE SCARED. And the country's scared."

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/10/20/democrats_its_not_me_its_you_on_blaming_the_voter_107649.html


The New Republican Right

A fundamental change is gripping the Republican grass roots as they animate the GOP surge to a major victory in the 2010 elections. No longer do evangelical or social issues dominate the Republican ground troops. Now economic and fiscal issues prevail. THE TEA PARTY HAS MADE THE REPUBLICAN PARTY SAFE FOR LIBERTARIANS.


There is still a litmus test for admission to the Republican Party. But no longer is it dominated by abortion, guns and gays. Now, keeping the economy free of government regulation, reducing taxation and curbing spending are the chemicals that turn the paper pink

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/10/20/the_new_republican_right_107653.html


Hope and Change in  2010


What a difference two years of Progressive Policies make.

SCOTTSDALE, Ariz. -- For Republican House candidate David Schweikert, the difference in the political environment he faced when trying to unseat Democratic Rep. Harry Mitchell in 2008 and the one he enjoys in the rematch in 2010 was best encapsulated by his visits to the same south Scottsdale home in each year.


In 2008, he knocked on the independent voter's home, introduced himself as someone who grew up in the area and asked the man who greeted him to sign his nominating petition.


"You're a Republican, aren't you?" the man asked, before knocking the clipboard out of Schweikert's hands and SLAMMING THE DOOR ON HIM.


In February of this year, Schweikert said he returned to the same home and was greeted by the same man, but there was no violent reaction this time around. Instead, THE VOTER GRABBED SCHWEIKERT'S CLIPBOARD, SIGNED THE NOMINATING PETITION ALONG WITH HIS WIFE, AND ASKED IF HE COULD PUT A SIGN IN HIS YARD.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/10/20/az-05_rematch_looks_different_than_2008_race_107652.html


Since Yesterday on RCP

Since yesterday’s look at Democrats, Repubicans and toss ups, the Democrats have gain one seat to 180 while the Republicans have gained two seats to 214. There are 41 toss ups. Of those 41 toss ups, the Republicans need to win 4 to take control of the House.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2010/house/2010_elections_house_map.html


Obama Rules That SEIUs Law Breaking is OK By Him

With a recent Federal Election Commission decision, Obama’s government has ruled in favor of the SEIU’s illegal kickback scheme and decided that such law breaking it is A’OK as far as he is concerned.


Ostensibly, FEC law states that unions cannot require member locals to pay a specific amount of money into a union’s political action committee (PAC) fund. PAC contributions by the locals are supposed to be voluntary and not forced by rules from the main HQ. This year, however, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) has handed down rules from its Washington HQ that locals must send $25,000 each to the SEIU political PAC or face a “fine” of $37,500 from the main office in DC. This clearly violates FEC rules.

It seems rules, laws, etc. in the Obama administration are simply guidelines they can observe or ignore. It’s time to move out this gang of crooks.

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/28971

Whose to Blame?

It’s interesting to watch was it being said online. This past summer I saw more and more generic polling indicating the Republicans were way ahead of the Democrats. I’m now seeing more and more articles trying to determine what happened to the Democrats and who’s to blame for what looks like will be happening in November.

Occasionally you see article talking about how it might not be so bad for the Democrats, but if you are following this closely you know it’s pretty well over for them. What we are really waiting to see is just how big the Republican wave will be. As Michael Barone asked, will it be 1994 again (Democrats lost 54 seats) or 1894 again (Democrats lost 100 seats).

An important fact is that every time there has been a major shift in the House of Representatives, the Senate has also been lost by the ruling party. Not good news for the Democrats in the Senate who figured to sail by this year.

Do we have a tax problem or a spending problem?

According to Congressional Budget Office (CBO) data, extending the tax cuts on top earners would create a budget shortfall of $700 billion over ten years. That’s $70 billion a year. Meanwhile, extending the tax cuts on the middle class would create a budget shortfall of $3,000 billion over ten years.

Now, thinking like a government official, this means that extending the tax cuts would “cost” the government $3.7 trillion over ten years. This sounds like a lot of money, but let’s put it in perspective and look at how much the federal government will be spending over the course of the next ten years.

http://www.american.com/archive/2010/october/taxes-and-presidential-math

Hispanic voters may sit this election out

Here's more bad news for the Democrats.

"They show the very same enthusiasm gap. Republican Latinos are more
positive, the Democratic Latinos are more demoralized. How is that different
from anyone else? It isn't," said James G. Gimpel, a government professor at the
University of Maryland who studies voting and immigration policy.

"Rather, they rank education, jobs and health care as their top
three issues of concern for this year's congressional campaign. Immigration
ranks as the fifth most important issue for Latino registered voters," said Mark
Hugo Lopez, associate director of the center and the report's author.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/oct/5/hispanics-not-motivated-2010-election/

Some interesting tidbits, worth the read.

AP-GfK Poll: Working-class whites shun Dems

WASHINGTON – Desperate for jobs and cool toward President Barack Obama,
working-class whites are flocking to Republicans, turning a group long wary of
Democrats into an even bigger impediment to the party's drive to keep control of
Congress.

An Associated Press-GfK poll shows whites without four-year college
degrees preferring GOP candidates by twice the margin of the last two elections,
when Democrats made significant gains in the House and Senate. The poll,
conducted last month, found this group favoring GOP hopefuls 58 percent
to 36 percent — a whopping 22 percentage-point gap.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101006/ap_on_el_ge/us_ap_poll_working_class_whites;

_ylt=Al5hiD9wGEjhvaC9pTRVY8Vp24cA;_ylu=X3oDMTM1dXY0bTdvBGFzc2V0A2FwLz

IwMTAxMDA2L3VzX2FwX3BvbGxfd29ya2luZ19jbGFzc193aGl0ZXMEcG9zAzQEc2Vj

A3luX3BhZ2luYXRlX3N1bW1hcnlfbGlzdARzbGsDYXAtZ2ZrcG9sbHdv

Recently Joe Biden made the charge; this isn’t your father’s GOP. That probably goes double for the Democrat Party. It isn’t the party of the working man anymore.

The Democrats are widening the enthusiasm gap

The Democrats are widening the enthusiasm gap against them by running
exclusively negative campaigns against their insurgent Republican rivals. The
vast proportion of Democratic and allied independent-expenditure media is
negative, portraying Republican congressional candidates as tax evaders, spousal
abusers, mob-linked, eccentric flakes, sexual molesters and absentee
officeholders (all actual charges against key GOP candidates). While these ads
may chip away at the Republican vote share in the polls, they do nothing
to generate a Democratic turnout.

The Democrats are without a theme, a message or a positive reason
to go vote. Negative ads are supposed to depress turnout — the
last thing Democrats need. But when they come up against Republican enthusiasm, they may not do much to check the GOP rise.

http://thehill.com/opinion/columnists/dick-morris/122819-the-widening-turnout-gap

Why are the Democrats not as enthusiastic as the Republicans

Here’s an interesting look at the lack of Democrat enthusiasm. I noticed at the One Nation Rally that parts of the demonstrators were demonstrating against Obama. This article explains it.

So why are Democrats less enthusiastic? And why has "the progressive
donor base," as Democratic consultant Jim Jordans reports, "stopped writing
checks"?

I don't think it's just because the economy remains sour or that
President Obama failed to jam a public option in the health care bill.

I find a more convincing explanation in an offhand phrase in a
subordinate clause in a brief article by Adam Serwer of the Center for American
Progress on the Washington Post's opinion pages. "There's no question," Serwer
writes, defying anyone to disagree, "that Obama has completely reversed on his
promises to roll back Bush-era national security policies."

For it is not economics but foreign policy that has motivated the
left half of the Democratic Party over the last decade.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/Dems-turn-on-Obama-over-Iraq_-Afghanistan_-Gitmo-1121526-104371073.html#ixzz11ZfvtLCW

I also found this article by Victor David Hansen which nicely fits with the article above. Notice what has happened to our foreign policy under President Obama.

But suddenly Barack Obama’s brief tenure has reminded us that, in fact,
almost all the world’s crises arose before the Bush presidency and continued
during and after it. Examine current American foreign policy toward every
region, and one of three general patterns emerges: Either things are no better since the end of 2008, or they are much worse, or the Obama administration has reverted to the Bush way of doing things — despite constant assurances to the world that Bush was at fault, American foreign policy was now reset, and global animosity arose out of past misunderstanding, insensitivity, and American hubris.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/248883/gift-obama%E2%80%99s-foreign-policy-victor-davis-hanson


What went wrong for the Democrats?

This is a pretty interesting article. I highly recommend it.

Obama was elected as the corrective to the Bush years. Yet when you're
the winner, the temptation is always there to see yourself as something more
than just an alternative -- something larger, like a paradigm-changer or a
transformational political figure. And Obama wanted nothing less than a change
from conservatism to his own brand of 21st century activism.

"When you win an election," says political scientist Bill Galston, "you are always
inclined to believe you won for the reasons you wanted to win."

In other words, you believe you won for the big stuff, not just because the voters didn't like the other guy.

...... Maybe he overestimated his personal capacity and appeal. Or his mandate. Or the extent to which the nation is actually divided on both principle and policy. Some, including his own pollster, according to knowledgeable sources, counseled caution. People wanted the president to focus on the economy, some told the president: Don't go for it all now.

But he did, precisely because he was riding high, ready to use his political capital.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/10/06/gloria.borger.sweep/index.html

Private sector sheds 39,000 jobs in September

More disasterous news for the Democrats.

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Private employers unexpectedly cut 39,000 jobs
in September after an upwardly revised gain of 10,000 in August, a report by a
payrolls processor showed on Wednesday.

The August figure was originally reported as a loss of 10,000.

The median of estimates from 38 economists surveyed by Reuters for
the ADP Employer Services report, jointly developed with Macroeconomic Advisers LLC, was for a rise of 24,000 private-sector jobs in September.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Private-sector-sheds-39000-rb-1277482169.html?x=0&.v=1

Minnesota Congressional Race Gets Profane

Democratic Minnesota congressional candidate and state Sen. Tarryl Clark
released a provocative video on her campaign Web site today, one including a few
choice words for her opponent, incumbent GOP Rep. Michele Bachmann. The spot's voice-over accuses Bachmann of standing up for "special interests" in Washington and backing BP during the fallout over the Gulf Coast oil spill, while
concluding that she's "not doing @#%! for the people of the Sixth District."
(The presumed expletive is bleeped out.)

This is a sure sign of desperation. You’ll hear more of this as we get closer to November 2.

http://www.newsweek.com/blogs/the-gaggle/2010/10/05/clark-calls-out-bachmann-in-new-campaign-ad.html

Radically Redefining the Airplane

The Brilliant Idea: A cleaner, quieter craft with a radical new design,
setting the stage for a fundamental shift in aviation.

Just an interesting article I thought I would share. It has a mock up of what the plane would look like.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/aviation/news/radically-redefining-the-airplane-breakthrough?click=pm_news

One Nation Rally—who was there?

An interesting video.

http://www.pjtv.com/?cmd=mpg&mpid=174&load=4239

Panel: Gov't thwarted worst-case scenario on spill

Incompetence on display

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration blocked efforts by government scientists to tell the public just how bad the Gulf oil spill could become and made other missteps that raised questions about its competence and candor during the crisis, according to a commission appointed by the president to investigate the disaster.

In documents released Wednesday, the national oil spill commission's staff describes "not an incidental public relations problem" by the White House in the wake of the April 20 accident.
Among other things, the report says, the administration made erroneous early estimates of the spill's size, and President Barack Obama's senior energy adviser went on national TV and mischaracterized a government analysis by saying it showed most of the oil was "gone." The analysis actually said it could still be there.

"By initially underestimating the amount of oil flow and then, at the end of the summer, appearing to underestimate the amount of oil remaining in the Gulf, the federal government created the impression that it was either not fully competent to handle the spill or not fully candid with the American people about the scope of the problem," the report says.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gIXWYBTpLtSayJtg41LKXpxSxVPAD9IMDP100?docId=D9IMDP100