Archive for June, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 80, June 28, 2012: Segment 0:Tea Party Tax Revolt–March On Washington D.C. Tea Party–July 4, 2012–Protest The Supreme Court Obamacare Decision–Repeal Obamacare’s Massive Tax Increase!–Economy Goes Into Recession–Unemployment Skyrockets–Obama Lied–The Economy Died–Videos

Posted on June 28, 2012. Filed under: American History, Budgetary Policy, Business, Communications, Economics, Employment, Federal Government, Fiscal Policy, Government, Health Care, Health Care Insurance, History, Labor Economics, Law, Media, Public Sector Unions, Tax Policy, Unions, Videos | Tags: , , , , , , , , |

EXPANDED UPDATED: July 5, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 80: June 28, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 79: June 27, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 78: June 20, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 77: June 13, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 76: June 6, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 75: May 30, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 74: May 21, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 73: May 9, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 72: May 2, 2012

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 79-80

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-78

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 22-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1-9

Segment 0: Tea Party Alert–Tax Revolt–March On Washington D.C.–Tea Party–July 4, 2012–Protest The Supreme Court Obamacare Decision–Repeal Obamacare’s Massive Tax Increase!–Economy Goes Into Recession–Unemployment Skyrockets–Obama Lied–The Economy Died–Videos

“There is really no essential difference between the unlimited power of the democratic state and the unlimited power of the autocrat.”

Ludwig von Mises, Socialism, pages 64-65

The Welfare State is merely a method for transforming the market economy step by step into socialism.”

Ludwig von Mises, Planning for Freedom, page 219

“Upon the supposition, that the bank is constitutionally created, this is the only question; and this question seems answered, as soon as it is stated. If the states may tax the bank, to what extent shall they tax it, and where shall they stop? An unlimited power to tax involves, necessarily, a power to destroy; because there is a limit beyond which no institution and no property can bear taxation. A question of constitutional power can hardly be made to depend on a question of more or less. If the states may tax, they have no limit but their discretion; and the bank, therefore, must depend on the discretion of the state governments for its existence. This consequence is inevitable. The object in laying this tax, may have been revenue to the state. In the next case, the object may be to expel the bank from the state; but how is this object to be ascertained, or who is to judge of the motives of legislative acts?”

McCulloch v. Maryland, (1819),Chief Justice John Marshall

Full Text of Supreme Court Decision

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/Sections/NEWS/scotus_opinion_on_ACA_from_msnbc.com.pdf

Chief Justice John Roberts Comes Out of The Progressive Closet

ONE FOR THE TEAM

A progressive Republican President George W. Bush appointed another progressive Republican to be Chief Justice– John Roberts.

The result of this decision is the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is declared Constitutional by the Supreme Court of the United States!

A progressive Democratic President Barack Obama lead the Democratic Party in passing the Affordable Care Act better known as Obamacare. The Constitutional authority cited for the passage of the bill was the commerce clause, which gives Congress the power to regulate commerce. Both Obama and the Democratic Party deliberately did not use their taxing powers under the Constitution as their authority for passing the bill.

Obama Goes Toe-To-Toe With Stephanopoulos On “Tax Increases”

The reason for not using the Congress’ taxing authority was Obamacare would never had passed for it would have been viewed as one of the biggest increases in taxes in the history of the United States. Just remember candidate Obama’s promise, now a big lie, to never increase the taxes of Americans earning less than $250,000:

President Obama’s Pledge Never to Raise Taxes on Anyone Making Less Than $250,000 a Year

Both the majority and dissenting decisions clearly state that the commerce clause cannot be used to justify Obamacare or more specifically the mandate that requires individuals to purchase health insurance. The mandate is clearly unconstitutional.

Chief Justice Roberts was joined by the four progressive or liberal justices in declaring Obamacare Constitutional because it was a tax and Congress has the power to tax under the Constitution.

Instead of simply declaring the act unconstitutional for exceeding their powers under the Commerce clause, the majority of the justices said correctly that the act is a tax, even though the bill was not written as a tax.

While it is clearly the function of the Supreme Court to review acts of Congress and decide whether an act is Constitutional or unconstitutional, it is decidedly not the function of the Supreme Court to legislate by in effect rewriting the act and giving it the correct justification.

The act should have been declared unconstitutional and sent back to Congress for them to rewrite the act and use their taxing powers as justification.

If this had been done, Obamacare or the Affordable Care Act would never had been passed–it would have been repealed.

The majority of the American people never asked for Obamacare.

Today at least 2 out of 3 Americans want the repeal of Obamacare.

Chief Justice Roberts should have joined the dissenting justices in a 5 to 4 decision to rule that Obamacare or the Affordable Care Act is unconstitutional because Congress exceeded its authority or powers under the commerce clause.

This would have ended Obamacare, a bill that at least 2 out of 3 Americans do not want and cannot afford.

Instead, Chief Justice has come out of the closet and revealed that he is really a progressive Republican that talks conservative but acts progressive.

Shame on Justice Roberts and the justices that joined him for exceeding their own authority and the will of the American people.

While the majority of the American people consider themselves conservative, both the Democratic and Republican parties are controlled by progressives that want the government to intervene in the economy at home and other nations abroad.

Beware of progressives Republicans that talk conservative to get elected and once elected act like progressives.

Mitt Romney reacts to the health care ruling

Since both Obama and Romney have a record of flip flopping, I suggest American follow the advice of the late President Reagan.

Trust but verify

Not a Dime in Tax Increase for Those Earning Less than $250,000

Health Care: Mitt Romney flip-flops on Health Care

Romney: Mass. Health Law Differs From Obama’s

ObamaCare is RomneyCare 2.0

Remember, it was another Progressive Republican President, George H.W. Bush, who said, “Read my lips, no new taxes.”

George H. W. Bush

Trust but verify.

Obamacare is a tax and as such should have originated in the House of Representatives, the people’s house, and it did not.

The reason is simple, the bill that eventually become Obamacare or the Affordable Care Act, would have been one of the largest taxes increases in United States history and would have clearly broken Obama’s promise not to increase taxes on anyone making less than $250,00.

Hence Obama’s repeated assertion of the big lie that Obamacare orthe Affordable Care Act is not a tax.

Busted: Audio of Obama Lawyer Arguing Obamacare Is a Tax

Rush Limbaugh on fighting to defeat Obamacare

Coburn on how ACA “sovietizes” health care

The American people know a liar when they hear him.

The American people knew all along that Obamacare was a massive tax increase, especially on young.

They did not need a Chief Justice of the Supreme Court with a Harvard Law degree to point out the obvious.

Obamacare generates signficant uncertainty for businesses–the wealth, income and job creators of America.

Businesses do not know what the cost of their employee group health care insurance will be in future years.

Nor do businesses know what taxes they will paying in the future years.

This massive uncertainty as to the cost of doing business results in lower economic growth and reducing hiring of new employees.

The economic consequences of the passage of Obamacare have been unemployment rates exceeding 8 percent for 42 months and most likely the entire Obama administration.

As the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, John Marshall said in McCulloch v. Maryland in 1819, An unlimited power to tax involves, necessarily, a power to destroy.”

Chief Justice John Roberts is simply not in the same league as Chief Justice Marshall.

Roberts originally was going to vote with the dissenting justices and if he did, Obamacare would have been declared unconstitutional.

Inside Justice Roberts’ health care decision

This would have dramatically reduce business uncertainty.

Instead, he came out of the progressive closet and sided with the four progressive justices.

Obamacare is wrecking the economy, destroying jobs and killing the American dream.

Outrage Over Judicial Activism and Obamacare

The vast majority of the American people never wanted Obamacare.

Yet a small elite of progressive Harvard Law graduates are telling the American people that they must buy something that do not want and many cannot afford.

The time for action is now.

Obamacare is a massively huge tax increase and an assault on the consumer sovereignty of the American people

Rush Limbaugh on fighting to defeat Obamacare

March on Washington, D.C. on July 4, 2012!

Washington Tea Party!

The time is now for Americans all across this nation to have tea parties in protest of Obamacare and massive unbalance budgets that will add more than $5 trillion or $5,000 billion in the four-year of the Obama administration.

WHY DON’T YOU MIND MY OWN BUSINESS?

Repeal Obamacare!

Background Articles and Videos

3 Reasons to End Obamacare Before it Begins!

Mark Meckler on the Tea Party Movement

Judge Napolitano: “Individual Mandate Most Bizarre Tax in the History of the Country”

Supreme Court Upholds Obamacare – Conservative Reaction Absurd

Obama reacts to health care supreme court ruling. 6/28/12

Obama Tax Promises

Obama on single payer health insurance

Obama will cut deficit in half FEB 2009

If You Like Your Health Care Plan You Can’t Keep It!

Healthcare Summit Reveals Industry Movement Independent of Reform

Boehner: We Must Repeal ObamaCare In Its Entirety #4jobs

Who knew individual mandate was a tax? NOT Obama!

CNBC: Senator Rubio Comments on Supreme Court’s Decision on ObamaCare

The Meaning of Independence Day – Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights

Obamacare and the Supreme Court with Richard Epstein and John Yoo

Richard Epstein on Barack Obama, his former Chicago Law Colleague

Obamacare Ruling May Be Bad News For Stressed Tax Code

Howard Gleckman, Contributor

“…Because the High Court found that the penalty for not having coverage is a tax and not a fee or a banana, it ruled Congress has the constitutional authority to impose such a levy. In effect, the 5-4 decision written by Chief Justice Roberts concluded that Congress can tax you for failing to acquire insurance. Thus, the mandate as created by the ACA is constitutional.

But the Court rejected the White House’s main legal argument—that Congress has the authority under the Commerce Clause to require people to get insurance. It will be interesting to see how legal scholars read this in the coming weeks: Is the Court saying that tax policy is the only tool Congress has to enact certain social welfare programs? If so, it would put an already-stressed tax code under even greater pressure.

The ACA includes a number of tax provisions—only a few of which are related to insurance reform.

Among them:

The tax on those who don’t have health insurance. The key to the individual mandate, this provision would penalize those who do not have insurance starting in 2014. The penalty begins at $95 and phases up to a maximum of $695 or 2.5 percent of income by 2016.

Subsidies for buyers. These subsidies are aimed at helping low-income households purchase individual insurance through the health exchanges created by the law. The subsidies are effectively refundable tax credits managed by the Internal Revenue Service.

Small business tax credits. These subsidies, initially up to 35 percent of an employer’s premium contribution, are already in effect. The subsidy gradually phases out as the firm’s average wage and the number of its employees increase.

Medicare payroll tax. Starting in 2013, the ACA raises the Medicare Part A payroll tax by 0.9 percent for those making $200,000 or more (couples making $250,000).

Taxes on unearned income. The law also imposes a new 3.8 percent tax on investment income and other unearned income for wealthy households, also starting in 2013.

Increasing the threshold for itemized medical expenses. Today, taxpayers can deduct medical expenses that exceed 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income. The ACA raises that threshold to 10 percent beginning next year.

Taxing high-value employer-sponsored health plans. Technically imposed on insurers, the law sets an excise tax on individual coverage that exceeds $10,200 or family coverage of more than $27,500. The levy, effective beginning in 2018, is equal to 40 percent of the premiums that exceed these thresholds. Because it is indexed by the rate of the consumer price index (which rises more slowly than medical costs), the tax will gradually apply to less generous policies.

Other revenue raisers. The law includes a number of other minor taxes intended to help pay for the health coverage expansion. These include new penalties on Health Savings Accounts, limits on Flexible Savings Accounts, and an excise tax on indoor tanning salons.

The Court upheld all of these taxes with the rest of the law (except for a requirement that states expand their Medicaid coverage for the working poor).

The political fate of the ACA remains to be seen, of course. But the Supreme Court has at least settled the dispute over whether it is constitutional. …”

http://www.forbes.com/sites/beltway/2012/06/28/obamacare-ruling-may-be-bad-news-for-stressed-tax-code/

A Vast New Taxing Power

The Chief Justice’s ObamaCare ruling is far from the check on Congress of right-left myth.

“…The commentary on John Roberts’s solo walk into the Affordable Care Act wilderness is converging on a common theme: The Chief Justice is a genius. All of a sudden he is a chessmaster, a statesman, a Burkean minimalist, a battle-loser but war-winner, a Daniel Webster for our times.

Now that we’ve had more time to take in Chief Justice Roberts’s reasoning, we have a better summary: politician. In fact, his 5-4 ruling validating the constitutional arguments against purchase mandates and 5-4 ruling endorsing them as taxes is far more dangerous, and far more political, even than it first appeared last week.

This is a minority view. By right-left acclaim, at least among elites, the Chief Justice has engineered a Marbury v. Madison-like verdict that camouflages new limits on federal power as a reprieve for President Obama’s entitlement legacy and in a stroke enhanced the Supreme Court’s reputation—and his own. This purported “long game” appeals to conservatives who can console themselves with a moral victory, while the liberals who like to assail the Chief Justice as a radical foe of democracy can continue their tantrum.

It’s an elegant theory whose only flaw is that it is repudiated by Chief Justice Roberts’s own language and logic. His gambit substitutes one unconstitutional expansion of government power for another and rearranges the constitutional architecture of the U.S. political system.

His first error is the act of rewriting the plain text of a law, instead of practicing the disinterested interpretation that is the task of the judiciary, regardless of the partisan outcome. The second error is converting the health insurance mandate’s penalty into a tax. Ninety years of precedents have honed precise and widely divergent legal meanings for taxes and penalties for violating laws or regulations, and they are not interchangeable.

The Chief Justice did not simply change a label—as if Congress said something was a penalty when it was really a tax. Rather, these categories are defined by their purposes and effects, by how they operate in practice. Taxes are “exactions” whose main goal is raising revenue, while penalties punish individuals for breaking the law. The boundaries can blur—legitimate taxes may also have strong punitive aims—but scarcely so in this case. ObamaCare’s mandate was designed to regulate individual conduct to help achieve universal coverage. If it succeeds perfectly, it should collect $0.

Even if Democrats had passed the mandate tax as rewritten by the Chief Justice, and they did not, the Supreme Court until Thursday has never held that Congress can call anything it wants a tax. The taxing power like the Commerce Clause is broad, and the courts are generally deferential. But all powers the Constitution enumerates are also limited, and these limits—unique to each power—must be meaningful and enforceable by the legal system.

The Chief Justice’s compounding errors deprive the taxing power of any viable limiting principles. Article I, section 8 gives Congress an independent grant of power to “lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States.” Taxes must originate in the House, the political body designed to be most responsive to voters. There are also important additional safeguards on the type of exactions known as “direct taxes.”

Indirect taxes—”duties, imposts and excises”—are taxes on activities and products. They are passed on by a seller, triggered by a transaction and more or less optional: Consumers don’t have to buy taxed goods and services. Direct taxes, on the other hand, are those that the federal government is empowered to impose on individuals as citizens. They cannot be avoided because they are levied on the existence of people.

America has its origins in a rebellion against arbitrary and pernicious taxation and the Framers wanted to make it extremely difficult to impose or raise direct taxes. These can easily morph into plenary police powers, the regulation of private behavior and conduct that the Constitution vests in the states. For this reason, while the taxing power in addition to raising revenue can achieve regulatory results, those regulatory results must be constitutional themselves. …”

“…Chief Justice Roberts’s ruling is careless about these bedrock tax questions, and they are barely addressed by either the Court’s liberal or conservative wings. His ruling, with its multiple contradictions and inconsistencies, reads as if it were written by someone affronted by the government’s core constitutional claims but who wanted to uphold the law anyway to avoid political blowback and thus found a pretext for doing so in the taxing power.

If this understanding is correct, then Chief Justice Roberts behaved like a politician, which is more corrosive to the rule of law and the Court’s legitimacy than any abuse it would have taken from a ruling that President Obama disliked. The irony is that the Chief Justice’s cheering section is praising his political skills, not his reasoning. Judges are not supposed to invent political compromises.

“It is not our job,” the Chief Justice writes, “to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices.” But the Court’s most important role is to protect liberty when the political branches exceed the Constitution’s bounds, not to bless their excesses in the interests of political or personal expediency or both. On one of the most consequential cases he will ever hear, Chief Justice Roberts failed this most basic responsibility.”

A version of this article appeared July 2, 2012, on page A10 in the U.S. edition of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: A Vast New Taxing Power.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303561504577496603068605864.html

The Roberts Rules

The Chief Justice rewrites ObamaCare in order to save it.

“…The Chief Justice ruled that ObamaCare’s mandate violated the Commerce Clause, joined by the Court’s conservative bloc, but he also said that the mandate fell within Congress’s power to tax, joined by the Court’s liberal bloc. In practice this is a restraint on federal power without real restraint—and, worse, the Chief Justice had to rewrite the statute Congress passed in order to salvage it. The ruling will stand as one of the great what-might-have-beens of American constitutional law.

The novel question raised by ObamaCare’s command to buy health insurance or else pay a penalty—the first-ever purchase mandate in U.S. history—was whether Congress could create commerce in order to regulate it. In his 1-4-4 opinion, Chief Justice Roberts writes that construing the Commerce Clause as the Obama Administration argued “would open a new and potentially vast domain to congressional authority. . . . The Framers gave Congress the power to regulate commerce, not to compel it, and for over 200 years both our decisions and Congress’s actions have reflected this understanding.”

Note that this rejection of federal compulsion, which the four conservatives supported albeit in dissent, is the same one that the liberal legal establishment spent years deriding as frivolous and beyond debate: Of course Washington has carte blanche to do whatever it wants to do. “That is not the country the Framers of our Constitution envisioned,” the Chief Justice writes, before going on to envision it himself by grounding the mandate in Congress’s power to “lay and collect Taxes.”

According to Chief Justice Roberts, the penalty is merely a tax on not owning health insurance, no different from “buying gasoline or earning income,” and it thus complies with the Constitution. This a large loophole. The result is that Washington has unlimited power to impose new purchase mandates and the courts will find them constitutional if Congress calls them taxes, or even if it calls them something else and judges call them taxes.

That was true with ObamaCare. The Pelosi Democrats explicitly structured the mandate as a regulatory “penalty.” Congress voted down a direct tax in 2009. Supreme Court precedents going back to the 1920s and 1930s define penalties and taxes as mutually exclusive and critically different.

Every lower court that heard the health-care cases rejected the taxing argument. Administration lawyers devoted only 21 lines of their reply brief to this argument and it barely came up at oral arguments. The Chief Justice in effect revised the statute in order to find it constitutional. …”

“…One telling note is that the dissent refers repeatedly to “Justice Ginsburg’s dissent” and “the dissent” on the mandate, but of course they should be referring to Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s concurrence. This wording and other sources suggest that there was originally a 5-4 majority striking down at least part of ObamaCare, but then the Chief Justice changed his mind.

The Justices may never confirm this informed speculation. But if it is true, this is far more damaging to the Court’s institutional integrity that the Chief Justice is known to revere than any ruling against ObamaCare. The political class and legal left conducted an extraordinary campaign to define such a decision as partisan and illegitimate. If the Chief Justice capitulated to this pressure, it shows the Court can be intimidated and swayed from its constitutional duties. If this was a play to compete with John Marshall’s legacy, the result is closer to William Brennan’s.

The Court did rule 7-2 against ObamaCare’s expansion of Medicaid, the supposedly voluntary federal-state program that once covered only the poor. The majority included liberal Justices Stephen Breyer and Elena Kagan, who held this expansion to be unconstitutional because the feds commandeered state resources.

The problem is that this also involved rewriting the law. The majority merely created an opt-out that Governors and states could elect to preserve some measure of independent control, instead of telling Congress to start over. Still, this is the first time the Court has found a law enacted under Congress’s spending power to be unconstitutionally coercive.

But this and even the five votes limiting Congress under the Commerce Clause pale against the Chief Justice’s infinitely elastic and dangerous interpretation of the taxing power. Nancy Pelosi famously said we need to pass ObamaCare to find out what’s in it. It turns out we also needed John Roberts to write his appendix.”

A version of this article appeared June 29, 2012, on page A12 in the U.S. edition of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: The Roberts Rules.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304058404577494400059173634.html

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Syllabus
NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDEPENDENT
BUSINESS ET AL. v. SEBELIUS, SECRETARY OF
HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, ET AL.
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
No. 11–393. Argued March 26, 27, 28, 2012—Decided June 28, 2012*
In 2010, Congress enacted the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act in order to increase the number of Americans covered by health insurance and decrease the cost of health care. One key provision is the individual mandate, which requires most Americans to maintain“minimum essential” health insurance coverage. 26 U. S. C. §5000A.For individuals who are not exempt, and who do not receive health insurance through an employer or government program, the means of satisfying the requirement is to purchase insurance from a private company. Beginning in 2014, those who do not comply with the mandate must make a “[s]hared responsibility payment” to the Federal Government. §5000A(b)(1). The Act provides that this “penalty”will be paid to the Internal Revenue Service with an individual’s taxes, and “shall be assessed and collected in the same manner” as tax penalties. §§5000A(c), (g)(1).Another key provision of the Act is the Medicaid expansion. The current Medicaid program offers federal funding to States to assist pregnant women, children, needy families, the blind, the elderly, and the disabled in obtaining medical care. 42 U. S. C. §1396d(a). The Affordable Care Act expands the scope of the Medicaid program and increases the number of individuals the States must cover. For ex——————
*Together with No. 11–398, Department of Health and Human Services et al. v. Florida et al., and No. 11–400, Florida et al. v. Department of Health and Human Services et al., also on certiorari to the same court.
2 NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDEPENDENT
BUSINESS v. SEBELIUS
Syllabus
ample, the Act requires state programs to provide Medicaid coverage by 2014 to adults with incomes up to 133 percent of the federal poverty level, whereas many States now cover adults with children only if their income is considerably lower, and do not cover childless adults at all. §1396a(a)(10)(A)(i)(VIII). The Act increases federal funding to cover the States’ costs in expanding Medicaid coverage. §1396d(y)(1).But if a State does not comply with the Act’s new coverage requirements, it may lose not only the federal funding for those requirements, but all of its federal Medicaid funds. §1396c.
Twenty-six States, several individuals, and the National Federation of Independent Business brought suit in Federal District Court,challenging the constitutionality of the individual mandate and the Medicaid expansion. The Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit upheld the Medicaid expansion as a valid exercise of Congress’s spending power, but concluded that Congress lacked authority to enact the individual mandate. Finding the mandate severable from the Act’s other provisions, the Eleventh Circuit left the rest of the Act intact.
Held: The judgment is affirmed in part and reversed in part.
648 F. 3d 1235, affirmed in part and reversed in part.
1. CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS delivered the opinion of the Court with respect to Part II, concluding that the Anti-Injunction Act does not bar this suit.
The Anti-Injunction Act provides that “no suit for the purpose of restraining the assessment or collection of any tax shall be maintained in any court by any person,” 26 U. S. C. §7421(a), so that those subject to a tax must first pay it and then sue for a refund. The present challenge seeks to restrain the collection of the shared responsibility payment from those who do not comply with the individual mandate. But Congress did not intend the payment to be treated asa “tax” for purposes of the Anti-Injunction Act. The Affordable Care Act describes the payment as a “penalty,” not a “tax.” That label cannot control whether the payment is a tax for purposes of the Constitution, but it does determine the application of the Anti-Injunction Act. The Anti-Injunction Act therefore does not bar this suit. Pp. 11–
15.
2. CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS concluded in Part III–A that the individual mandate is not a valid exercise of Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause and the Necessary and Proper Clause. Pp. 16–30.
(a) The Constitution grants Congress the power to “regulate Commerce.” Art. I, §8, cl. 3 (emphasis added). The power to regulate commerce presupposes the existence of commercial activity to be regulated. This Court’s precedent reflects this understanding: As expansive as this Court’s cases construing the scope of the commerce
Cite as: 567 U. S. ____ (2012) 3
Syllabus
power have been, they uniformly describe the power as reaching “activity.” E.g., United States v. Lopez, 514 U. S. 549, 560. The individual mandate, however, does not regulate existing commercial activity. It instead compels individuals to become active in commerce by purchasing a product, on the ground that their failure to do so affects interstate commerce.
Construing the Commerce Clause to permit Congress to regulate individuals precisely because they are doing nothing would open a new and potentially vast domain to congressional authority. Congress

3. CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS concluded in Part III–B that the individual mandate must be construed as imposing a tax on those who do not have health insurance, if such a construction is reasonable.
The most straightforward reading of the individual mandate is that it commands individuals to purchase insurance. But, for the reasons explained, the Commerce Clause does not give Congress that power.It is therefore necessary to turn to the Government’s alternative argument: that the mandate may be upheld as within Congress’s power to “lay and collect Taxes.” Art. I, §8, cl. 1. In pressing its taxing power argument, the Government asks the Court to view the mandate as imposing a tax on those who do not buy that product. Because “every reasonable construction must be resorted to, in order to save a statute from unconstitutionality,” Hooper v. California, 155
U. S. 648, 657, the question is whether it is “fairly possible” to inter4
NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDEPENDENT
BUSINESS v. SEBELIUS
Syllabus
pret the mandate as imposing such a tax, Crowell v. Benson, 285
U. S. 22, 62. Pp. 31–32.
4. CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS delivered the opinion of the Court with respect to Part III–C, concluding that the individual mandate may be upheld as within Congress’s power under the Taxing Clause. Pp. 33–
44.
(a) The Affordable Care Act describes the “[s]hared responsibility payment” as a “penalty,” not a “tax.” That label is fatal to the application of the Anti-Injunction Act. It does not, however, control whether an exaction is within Congress’s power to tax. In answering that constitutional question, this Court follows a functional approach,“[d]isregarding the designation of the exaction, and viewing its substance and application.” United States v. Constantine, 296 U. S. 287,
294. Pp. 33–35.
(b)
Such an analysis suggests that the shared responsibility payment may for constitutional purposes be considered a tax. The payment is not so high that there is really no choice but to buy health insurance; the payment is not limited to willful violations, as penalties for unlawful acts often are; and the payment is collected solely by the IRS through the normal means of taxation. Cf. Bailey v. Drexel Furniture Co., 259 U. S. 20, 36–37. None of this is to say that payment is not intended to induce the purchase of health insurance. But the mandate need not be read to declare that failing to do so is unlawful. Neither the Affordable Care Act nor any other law attaches negative legal consequences to not buying health insurance, beyond requiring a payment to the IRS. And Congress’s choice of language—stating that individuals “shall” obtain insurance or pay a “penalty”—does not require reading §5000A as punishing unlawful conduct. It may also be read as imposing a tax on those who go without insurance. See New York v. United States, 505 U. S. 144, 169–174. Pp. 35–40.
(c)
Even if the mandate may reasonably be characterized as a tax, it must still comply with the Direct Tax Clause, which provides:“No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.” Art. I, §9, cl. 4. A tax on going without health insurance is not like a capitation or other direct tax under this Court’s precedents. It therefore need not be apportioned so that each State pays in proportion to its population. Pp. 40–41.

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/Sections/NEWS/scotus_opinion_on_ACA_from_msnbc.com.pdf

Bachmann Got It Right Two Years Ago!

Bachmann: Obamacare Likely Largest Middle Class Tax Hike Ever

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Pronk Pops Show 79, June 27, 2012: Segment 0: Criminal Alien Removal–Drop A Dime On Employers Employing Illegal Aliens–Videos

Posted on June 27, 2012. Filed under: American History, Business, Communications, Employment, Federal Government, Government, History, Illegal Immigration, Immigration, Media, Philosophy, Politics, Polls, Pro Life, Regulation, Technology, Videos, Violence, War | Tags: , |

Pronk Pops Show 79: June 27, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 78: June 20, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 77: June 13, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 76: June 6, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 75: May 30, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 74: May 21, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 73: May 9, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 72: May 2, 2012

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 79

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-78

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 22-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1-9

Immigration by the Numbers — Off the Charts

Numbers USA – Immigration By the Numbers – Part 1

Numbers USA – Immigration By the Numbers – Part 2 of 2

The Dangers of Unlimited Legal & Illegal Immigration

Stop Amnesty for Illegal Immigrants – Expert Reveals the True Cost of Amnesty

Arizona Gov. Declares Supreme Court Victory as Latino Community Vows to Resist

Krauthammer: Obama Intent On Not Enforcing Immigration Law

Reality Check: President Obama’s Immigration Reform Rings Hollow

Judge Napolitano on Supreme Court Arizona Immigration Law Decision

“Almost Inconceivable Obama Can Carry AZ After What He’s Done to Their Sovereignty”

Supreme Court Ruling on Arizona Immigration Law (SB1070)

Sheriff Arpaio: “This Is Amnesty, We Know What’s Going On”

Obama grants immunity to undocumented immigrants

Watch President Obama’s Remarks on New Immigration Policy

Obama To Stop Deporting Young Illegal Immigrants

Polling Immigration

Has Obama finally found a winning issue? Reply hazy, try again.

By JAMES TARANTO

A Bloomberg poll, noted here yesterday, seemed to be good news for President Obama in the wake of his largely symbolic Friday announcement on immigration enforcement. It found that 64% of likely voters, including 65% of independents, said they favored what the news service called Obama’s “policy.”

These numbers are probably too good to be true for the president. Today Bloomberg released the same poll’s findings on the presidential race, and the result was unbelievable, in the straightforward sense of “impossible to believe”: Obama 53%, Mitt Romney 40%. Either all the polls showing a close race are wrong, there has been a sudden and dramatic shift in public opinion in Obama’s favor, or the Bloomberg poll is an outlier. We’d put the odds of the last possibility at close to 1 in 1.

If the Bloomberg poll is unrealistically favorable toward Obama, it almost certainly follows that it is unrealistically favorable toward Obama’s most recent high-profile action as well. Thus it is probably not the case that almost two-thirds of likely voters back the Obama “policy.” The low to mid-50s sound more like it, though this is but an educated guess. It would probably be fair to say the “policy” is more popular than the president, which in a sense is good news for him.

“…First, there is no presidential executive order, only a directive from the secretary of homeland security to her department’s agencies that administer immigration law. Second, as we explained yesterday, the memo cannot be construed “as immigration law”; it merely instructs the agencies in how to set enforcement priorities consistent with existing law.

Third, Congress does not have the power to forbid the president or agency heads to give lawful orders to their subordinates. Absent unlimited resources, by necessity the agencies that enforce immigration laws will exercise discretion in choosing which cases to pursue, and the exercise of such discretion is inherently an executive function. A blanket ban on the exercise of discretion in a particular area of law would be logically impossible to follow, enforce or interpret, unless perhaps the law in question is so narrow that it is practicable to mandate its enforcement in every case.

Congress can limit executive discretion through substantive lawmaking. In this case, for example, it could pass a law prohibiting the issuance of work permits to any illegal alien. But the Rasmussen poll suggests that would be foolish politically, and it would be foolish policy to mandate that aliens who are not deported remain idle. …”

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304765304577478702376369064.html

Federation of American Immigration Reform

Public Opinion Polls on Immigration

The general public overwhelmingly favors immigration reform. Poll after poll shows that Americans want well-enforced, sensible, and sustainable immigration laws.

  • 59% of likely voters believe that the “policies and practices of the federal government encourage illegal immigration.” Only 23% disagree (Rasmussen, September 2011).
  • 72% of likely voters believe parents should be required to prove they are legal residents when registering their child for public school; only 21% oppose such a requirement. Only 32% believe that children of illegal aliens should be allowed to attend public school in the U.S., opposed to 53% who disagree (Rasmussen, August 2011).
  • 81% of likely voters oppose granting in-state tuition to illegal aliens in their state, with 12% supporting tuition breaks for illegal aliens (Rasmussen, August 2011).
  • 66% of likely voters say that gaining control of the border is more important than amnesty for illegal aliens. Only 27% believe amnesty is more important (Rasmussen, July 2011).
  • 43% of Americans believe that immigration to the U.S. should be decreased, 35% believe that it should be remain at its present level, while only 18% believe that it should be increased (Gallup, June 2011).
  • 60% of likely voters believe that the “policies and practices” of the federal government encourages illegal immigration (Rasmussen, May 2011).
  • Only 30% of likely voters say that the U.S. border with Mexico is secure; 64% say that the border is not secure (Rasmussen, May 2011).
  • 59% of likely U.S. voters favor cutting off federal funds to sanctuary cities, with just 28% opposed (Rasmussen, May 2011).
  • 61% of likely American voters “believe that a child born in the United States to a woman who is here illegally should not automatically become a U.S. citizen” (Rasmussen, April 2011).
  • 61% of American adults believe that there would be less poverty in the United States if immigration laws were enforced. Only 19% disagree (Rasmussen, April 2011).
  • 67% of likely U.S. voters believe law enforcement officers should check immigration status during traffic stops (Rasmussen, March 2011).
  • 66% of likely U.S. voters support strict government sanctions on employers who hire illegal immigrants (Rasmussen, March 2011).
  • 67% of likely U.S. voters believe that states should enforce immigration laws if the federal government fails to do so (Rasmussen, February 2011).
  • 54% of likely voters oppose the DREAM Act, compared to 38% who support its passage (Pulse, November 2010).
  • U.S. registered voters support stricter enforcement of immigration law over “integrating illegal immigrants into American society” 68% to 24% (Quinnipiac, September 2010).
  • Americans oppose, 58% to 34%, granting automatic citizenship to a child born in the U.S. to an illegal immigrant (Rasmussen, August 2010).
  • Two major polling firms asked Americans to rate President Obama’s performance on a series of issues.
    1. 23% of likely voters rated Obama’s performance on immigration as positive, while 74% rated his performance negative, including 58% who rated his performance poor (Zogby, August 2010).
    2. Only 29% of U.S. adults approved of President Obama’s handling of immigration compared to 62% who disapproved (Gallup, August 2010).
  • 61% of likely U.S. voters oppose “sanctuary cities” that prohibit police officers from inquiring about an individual’s immigration status. Only 26% support sanctuary polices. 54% believe that the Justice Department should take legal action (Rasmussen, July 2010).
  • 61% of likely U.S. voters support a law similar to Arizona SB1070 for their own state (Rasmussen, July 2010).
  • 56% of likely U.S. voters disagree with the Justice Department’s lawsuit challenging Arizona SB1070. 28% agree with the lawsuit (Rasmussen, July 2010).
  • 62% of Americans believe that illegal aliens are a cost burden on U.S. taxpayers, while 32% of Americans believe that illegal aliens pay their fair share in taxes (Gallup, July 2010).
  • 58% of Americans support Arizona SB1070 (Washington Post/ABC, June 2010).
  • U.S. voters agree with Arizona Governor Jan Brewer over President Obama on immigration policy, 55% to 34% (Rasmussen, June 2010).
  • 67% of U.S. voters say that military troops should be deployed to the Mexican border to prevent illegal immigration (Rasmussen, May 2010).
  • 88% of Americans say more federal law enforcement officials are needed along Mexican border (CNN, May 2010).
  • 70% of likely Arizona voters approve of the state’s new law authorizing police officers to inquire about an individual’s immigration status; only 23% oppose it (Rasmussen, April 2010).
  • 60% of likely voters nationwide favor the passage of a law authorizing police to inquire about an individual’s immigration status, while 31% are opposed (Rasmussen, April 2010).
  • 66% of Americans believe that the U.S. “should not make it easier for illegal immigrants to become citizens” (CNN, April 2010).
  • 59% of Americans believe that the U.S. should continue to build a fence along the Mexican border. Just 26% believe the U.S. should stop building the fence (Rasmussen, March 2010).
  • 68% of likely voters think that securing the border is more important than granting amnesty to illegal aliens, but only 20% believe that Congress will take steps to secure the border in within the next year (Rasmussen, March 2010).
  • 67% of likely voters believe illegal immigrants are a “significant strain” on the U.S. budget (Rasmussen, March 2010).
  • 68% of African-Americans, 56% of Hispanics, and 57% of Asian-Americans believe that immigration is too high (Zogby, February 2010).

  • 87% of U.S. voters believe that anyone receiving federal health care subsidies should be required to prove they are in the United States legally (Rasmussen, December 2009).
  • 67% of likely voters including — 63% of Executives, 70% of Small Business Owners, and 63% of Union Member Households — believe that immigration to the U.S. is too high (Zogby, November 2009).
  • 71% of likely voters including — 61% of Executives, 65% of Small Business Owners, and 72% of Union Member Households — believe there are enough American workers available to fill unskilled jobs (Zogby, November 2009).
  • 85% of likely voters say that individuals should be able to prove that they are in the country legally before they receive any federal, state, or local government services. Only 8% disagree (Rasmussen, November 2009).
  • 68% oppose the creation of sanctuary cities (jurisdictions that have a policy of not enforcing immigration law) with only 13% in favor (Rasmussen, October 2009).
  • 73% of Americans want to see a decrease in illegal immigration, while only 3% believe there should be an increase (CNN, October 2009).
  • 56% of Mexicans believe that granting amnesty to illegal aliens in the United States would make it more likely that people they know would attempt to illegally migrate to United States. Only 17% think it would make people less likely to migrate illegally to the United States (Zogby, October 2009).
  • 65% of Mexicans who have a member of their immediate household in the United States said that amnesty would make people they know more likely to attempt to illegally migrate to America (Zogby, October 2009).
  • 55% of Mexicans who expressed a desire to migrate to the U.S. said they would attempt to enter the U.S. illegally (Pew Hispanic Center, September 2009).
  • 56% of U.S. voters believe that the policies of the federal government encourage illegal immigration (Rasmussen, October 2009).
  • 83% of U.S. voters say that citizenship verification should be part of any health care reform legislation (Rasmussen, September 2009).
  • 78% of likely U.S. voters believe that mass immigration has adversely impacted the quality and cost of the U.S. health care system (Pulse Opinion Research, August 2009).
  • 78% of likely U.S. voters oppose amnesty, with 19% in favor. 88% of African-Americans oppose amnesty. (Pulse Opinion Research, August 2009).
  • 70% of American voters feel that increased border control should be the most important priority in immigration reform. Only 22% prioritized legalization of illegal aliens (Rasmussen, August 2009).
  • 50% of American think immigration to the U.S. should be decreased, while only 14% want to see an increase in immigration to the U.S. (Gallup, August 2009).
  • 68% of adults think limiting care to illegal aliens is a good to excellent way to reduce overall health care costs (Zogby, July 2009).
  • 80% of likely voters oppose healthcare coverage for illegal aliens (Rasmussen, June 2009).
  • 67% of liberals and progressives believe that the level of immigration into the U.S. is too high (Pulse Opinion, April 2009).
  • 68% believe that employers who hire illegal aliens should be punished (Rasmussen, March 2009).
  • 79% of voters say the military should be used along the border with Mexico (Rasmussen, March 2009).
  • 73% believe law enforcement officers should check immigration status during traffic stops (Rasmussen, March 2009).
  • Only 32% of Obama voters considered his support for amnesty as a factor in their decisions to vote for him (Zogby, November 2008).

These are only a few examples of the many statistics demonstrating that Americans want lower immigration, greater enforcement, and more commitment to making immigration work in the best interests of the nation.

http://www.fairus.org/facts/public-opinion

Obama deportation numbers a ‘trick’

By REP. LAMAR SMITH | 10/25/11 9:26 PM EST

“…Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano last week announced that the Obama administration has deported a record number of illegal immigrants in the past year.

But the Obama administration is using smoke and mirrors to achieve its so-called historic record. Take away the illusion, and the facts show that the administration conjures up its deportation statistics.

The administration appears to have artificially inflated its deportation numbers. It includes voluntary removals in the deportation statistics. But this is not removal because an illegal immigrant is not then subject to penalties for returning to the United States. For example, a single illegal immigrant can show up at the border and be voluntarily returned numerous times in one year — and counted each time as a removal.

Even The Washington Post found the Obama administration used questionable methods to achieve its deportation numbers last year. Just like pulling a rabbit out of a hat, the Obama administration’s record is a trick. In reality, President Barack Obama and his administration are giving amnesty to illegal immigrants through inaction. It’s no wonder that the president recently admitted to Hispanic voters that his administration’s deportation numbers are “deceptive.”

Take away the hocus-pocus, and it is clear the Obama administration is neglecting to enforce immigration laws. The administration has all but abandoned worksite enforcement actions. Over the past two years, worksite enforcement has plummeted 70 percent.

Under this administration, there have been fewer arrests of illegal workers, fewer criminal arrests, fewer indictments and fewer convictions. This means illegal workers continue to take jobs away from unemployed Americans.

Without worksite enforcement, we can’t stop employers from hiring illegal workers. And as long as the jobs magnet exists, millions of illegal immigrants most likely will come to the U.S. and take jobs from lawful workers.

The president and his administration have also decided to grant administrative amnesty to illegal immigrants. …”

Obama Admin Breaking Immigration Promises

“…Syracuse University just released a pretty damning report that essentially calls into question the one promise President Obama has made regarding immigration. Since President Obama entered the White House, the average number of deportations per year has been about 400,000, according to the Department of Homeland Security. But last summer the Obama administration promised to focus on those with criminal records, as opposed to those who came here as children, or those who have been good citizens, working hard. The Immigration and Customs Enforcement, directed by the Executive branch was expected to do something, filter out non-priority deportation cases involving veterans, parents of U.S. citizen children, students and the elderly and focus on those with criminal records. And this is just another thing the Mainstream media decided to miss. …”

Agency’s Immigration Enforcement Claims Not Supported By Own Data

“…Syracuse, N.Y. — Case-by-case records provided by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) show that many fewer individuals were apprehended, deported or detained by the agency than were claimed in its official statements — congressional testimony, press releases, and the agency’s latest 2010 Yearbook of Immigration Statistics.

The ICE data was provided to the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) at Syracuse University in late December, almost two years — 582 days — after TRAC had requested it on May 17, 2010.

Details about the vast differences between the agency activities documented by the data and its public statements are laid out in a FOIA appeal filed by TRAC on January 4. The surprising size of the discrepancies, the TRAC appeal said, indicated that either “ICE has been making highly exaggerated and inaccurate claims about the level of its enforcement activities,” or it is “withholding on a massive scale.”

TRAC’s appeal emphasized that this was not an inconsequential bookkeeping problem, noting “that the alleged failure of the federal government to enforce the immigration laws has been a hotly debated topic during both the Bush and Obama administrations.”

“Thus, the agency’s apparent inability to substantiate the level of its claimed enforcement activities is a very significant matter,” the appeal continued. “Indeed it is central to the current public debate on federal enforcement policy in the ongoing presidential election campaign.”

TRAC requested a formal agency investigation of the matter or that it be referred to the Office of Inspector General. …”

http://trac.syr.edu/foia/ice/20120104/

Software Compliance

The Software & Information Industry Association.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Pronk Pops Show 78, June 20, 2012: Segment 2: Obama’s Kill List–On Terrorist Tuesdays Obama Targets “Innocent” Civilian and American “Terrorists”–Deeply “Offensive”–Murder Boards Replace Water Boards!–Progressive Neocons Cheer–Videos

Posted on June 20, 2012. Filed under: Business, College, Communications, Computers, Consitutional Law, Economics, Employment, Federal Government, Foreign Policy, Government, Government Spending, Illegal Immigration, Immigration, Investments, Law, Media, Medicine, Politics, Radio, Regulation, Science, Security, Success, Technology, Videos, Violence, War, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , |

Pronk Pops Show 78: June 20, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 77: June 13, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 76: June 6, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 75: May 30, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 74: May 21, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 73: May 9, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 72: May 2, 2012

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-78

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 22-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1-9

Segment 2: Obama’s Kill List–On Terrorist Tuesdays Obama Targets “Innocent” Civilian and American “Terrorists”–Deeply “Offensive”–Murder Boards Replace Water Boards!–Progressive Neocons Cheer–Videos

UPDATED June 14, 2012

Obama defends his Leaky Kill List and Drone Attacks

“…President Barack Obama strongly denied Friday that his administration deliberately leaked classified national security information.
Obama responded to a mounting controversy over two blockbuster stories in the New York Times, both of which divulged highly sensitive details about his national security policies. One story focused on Obama’s so-called “kill list.” Another looked at his ordering of cyberattacks against Iran.
Over the past week, Republicans and Democrats have condemned the leaks, with key members of Congress pledging to investigate them.
Some Republicans, most prominently Senator John McCain, have accused the White House of purposefully leaking the information in order to play up his national security record in an election year.
The Times, for its part, has denied that it was the recipient of any planted leaks. Managing editor Dean Baquet told The Huffington Post that the stories were simply the result of good reporting.
Obama forcefully rebuked the accusations at a Friday press conference in the White House. …”

How Obama Maintains His Secret ‘Kill List’

Glenn Greenwald: Obama’s Secret Kill List “The Most Radical Power a Government Can Seize”

Ok For White House To Leak Classified Info, But Not Whistleblowers?

Former CIA Director Against Drone Strikes

Obama Drone Strikes Are ‘Mass Murder’ – Jeremy Scahill

Obama Denies National Security Leaks Came From White House

Reality Check: President Obama’s “Kill List” and What It Means For You

Remote Control War

Drones In America

Judge Napolitano : 30,000 Drones In U.S. Skies to spy on you violates Constitution (May 14, 2012)

Judge Napolitano: Killing US citizen Anwar al-Awlaki is Unconstitutional & Against American Values

Obama Death Panel Puts Americans on ‘Secret Kill List’

Judge Napolitano Asks ‘Who Will Obama Illegally Kill Next?’

As U.S. Drone Strikes Escalate in Pakistan, “Kill List” Stirs Fears of High Civilian Toll

Obama’s kill list revealed

Obama is Out-NeoConning the NeoCons [Kill-List, Drone Strikes, No-Trial]

Obama Kill List

Obama Kill List

“…”Memorial Day weekend brought news of more U.S. drone attacks in Pakistan and Afghanistan as The New York Times raises new questions about President Obama’s so-called “Kill List” of terrorists targeted for assassination. An extensive report in Tuesday’s paper looks at the use of targeted attacks to take out terrorism suspects in other parts of the world, an increasingly important part of the government’s anti-terrorism policies that Barack Obama himself has taken personal responsibility for. According to the story, the President approves every name on the list of terrorism targets, reviewing their biographies and the evidence against them, and then authorizing “lethal action without hand-wringing.”
As the president has slowly drawn down American forces in Afghanistan and Iraq, the use of drone attacks to take out senior leaders of al-Qaeda and the Taliban has become the primary tactic for fighting terrorism overseas. However, it raises a lot of legal and ethical questions about extra-judicial killings of individuals, particularly those who happen to be American citizens…”.* The Young Turks host Cenk Uygur breaks it down. …”

US justifying killing any American citizens ACCUSED of terrorism… Wow not even in Banana Republic!

“We’re Committing A War Crime! And It’s Clear That’s What We’re About!”

Nobel Peace Prize Obama´s “Counter-Terrorism Chief John Brennan the Assassination Czar?”

Obama admits drone strikes kill innocent Pakistanis

The girl killed by Barack Obama – she never saw it coming

US is lying about civilian deaths from its drone attacks in Pakistan

US drone strikes in Pakistan have risen from one a year in 2004 to one every four days under President Obama. There have been no civilian deaths from US drone attacks in Pakistan since August 2010, says the US. They must know this is a lie. As this BBC Newsnight report makes clear, at least 100 have been killed, many of them women and children. The use of pilotless drones has increased dramatically under Nobel Peace Prize winner Barack Obama’s presidency, more than doubling George Bush’s record.

Obama’s secret drone war explained by Reuters’ David Rohde – Fast Forward

Background Articles and Videos

Authors at Google: Peter Bergen

Obama Death Panel Puts Americans on ‘Secret Kill List’

David Swanson: US drone program killing civilians f.e. in Pakistan plead for justice

White House Has a Secret Kill List!

Jeremy Scahill on can the CIA kill whoever they want

END WAR In Pakistan US CIA-Xe Drone Strikes Kill Civilians; To Continue Strikes Even If Pak Against

Alex Jones: Government using drones against Americans

Pentagon drones flying domestic; declaring war on your privacy?

GGN: Technocrat’s Vision for America, Feds Organize Most Terror Plots, Americans to be Drone Bombed

Mobsters- Murder, Inc.

Secret ‘Kill List’ Proves a Test of Obama’s Principles and Will

By JO BECKER and SCOTT SHANE

“…This was the enemy, served up in the latest chart from the intelligence agencies: 15 Qaeda suspects in Yemen with Western ties. The mug shots and brief biographies resembled a high school yearbook layout. Several were Americans. Two were teenagers, including a girl who looked even younger than her 17 years.

President Obama, overseeing the regular Tuesday counterterrorism meeting of two dozen security officials in the White House Situation Room, took a moment to study the faces. It was Jan. 19, 2010, the end of a first year in office punctuated by terrorist plots and culminating in a brush with catastrophe over Detroit on Christmas Day, a reminder that a successful attack could derail his presidency. Yet he faced adversaries without uniforms, often indistinguishable from the civilians around them.

“How old are these people?” he asked, according to two officials present. “If they are starting to use children,” he said of Al Qaeda, “we are moving into a whole different phase.”

It was not a theoretical question: Mr. Obama has placed himself at the helm of a top secret “nominations” process to designate terrorists for kill or capture, of which the capture part has become largely theoretical. He had vowed to align the fight against Al Qaeda with American values; the chart, introducing people whose deaths he might soon be asked to order, underscored just what a moral and legal conundrum this could be.

Mr. Obama is the liberal law professor who campaigned against the Iraq war and torture, and then insisted on approving every new name on an expanding “kill list,” poring over terrorist suspects’ biographies on what one official calls the macabre “baseball cards” of an unconventional war. When a rare opportunity for a drone strike at a top terrorist arises — but his family is with him — it is the president who has reserved to himself the final moral calculation.

“He is determined that he will make these decisions about how far and wide these operations will go,” said Thomas E. Donilon, his national security adviser. “His view is that he’s responsible for the position of the United States in the world.” He added, “He’s determined to keep the tether pretty short.”

Nothing else in Mr. Obama’s first term has baffled liberal supporters and confounded conservative critics alike as his aggressive counterterrorism record. His actions have often remained inscrutable, obscured by awkward secrecy rules, polarized political commentary and the president’s own deep reserve. …”

“…Moreover, Mr. Obama’s record has not drawn anything like the sweeping criticism from allies that his predecessor faced. John B. Bellinger III, a top national security lawyer under the Bush administration, said that was because Mr. Obama’s liberal reputation and “softer packaging” have protected him. “After the global outrage over Guantánamo, it’s remarkable that the rest of the world has looked the other way while the Obama administration has conducted hundreds of drone strikes in several different countries, including killing at least some civilians,” said Mr. Bellinger, who supports the strikes.

By withdrawing from Iraq and preparing to withdraw from Afghanistan, Mr. Obama has refocused the fight on Al Qaeda and hugely reduced the death toll both of American soldiers and Muslim civilians. But in moments of reflection, Mr. Obama may have reason to wonder about unfinished business and unintended consequences.

His focus on strikes has made it impossible to forge, for now, the new relationship with the Muslim world that he had envisioned. Both Pakistan and Yemen are arguably less stable and more hostile to the United States than when Mr. Obama became president.

Justly or not, drones have become a provocative symbol of American power, running roughshod over national sovereignty and killing innocents. With China and Russia watching, the United States has set an international precedent for sending drones over borders to kill enemies.

Mr. Blair, the former director of national intelligence, said the strike campaign was dangerously seductive. “It is the politically advantageous thing to do — low cost, no U.S. casualties, gives the appearance of toughness,” he said. “It plays well domestically, and it is unpopular only in other countries. Any damage it does to the national interest only shows up over the long term.”

But Mr. Blair’s dissent puts him in a small minority of security experts. Mr. Obama’s record has eroded the political perception that Democrats are weak on national security. No one would have imagined four years ago that his counterterrorism policies would come under far more fierce attack from the American Civil Liberties Union than from Mr. Romney.

Aides say that Mr. Obama’s choices, though, are not surprising. The president’s reliance on strikes, said Mr. Leiter, the former head of the National Counterterrorism Center, “is far from a lurid fascination with covert action and special forces. It’s much more practical. He’s the president. He faces a post-Abdulmutallab situation, where he’s being told people might attack the United States tomorrow.”

“You can pass a lot of laws,” Mr. Leiter said, “Those laws are not going to get Bin Laden dead.” …”

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/29/world/obamas-leadership-in-war-on-al-qaeda.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&ei=5065&partner=MYWAY

Related Posts On Pronk Pops

Pronk Pops Show 78, June 20, 2012: Segment 0: Microsoft’s No Compromises–Surface–Doing More With Less Than $500?–Real Cool–iPad Killer?–Videos

Pronk Pops Show 78, June 20, 2012: Segment 1: Obama Flip Flops On Illegal Immigration and Fails To Enforce Immigration Law–Breaks Oath of Office–Back Door Amnesty–No More Years–Out Obama–Videos

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Pronk Pops Show 78, June 20, 2012: Segment 1: Obama Flip Flops On Illegal Immigration and Fails To Enforce Immigration Law–Breaks Oath of Office–Back Door Amnesty–No More Years–Out Obama–Videos

Posted on June 20, 2012. Filed under: Business, Communications, Culture, Education, Employment, Illegal Immigration, Immigration, Legal Immigration | Tags: , , , , , , |

Pronk Pops Show 78: June 20, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 77: June 13, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 76: June 6, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 75: May 30, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 74: May 21, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 73: May 9, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 72: May 2, 2012

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-78

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 22-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1-9

Segment 1: Obama Flip Flops On Illegal Immigration and Fails To Enforce Immigration Law–Breaks Oath of Office–Back Door Amnesty–No More Years–Out Obama–Videos

Obama Bribes Illegal Aliens for Votes – 6/15/2012

Flip

Flashback: President Obama says he has to use the legislative process to change immigration law

Flop

Obama: Young Illegals Are Americans In Every Way Except “On Paper”

Obama interrupted at ‘Dream Act’ speech

Should DREAM Students Believe Obama?

Charles Krauthammer calls Obama Lawless!

Rush Limbaugh on Illegal Immigration

Watch President Obama’s Remarks on New Immigration Policy

Mitt Romney Responds to Obama’s New Immigration Policy, Suggests Voting Romney 2012 to Stop it!

Romney says immigration decision complicates issue

Rubio Discusses the DREAM Act, Romney’s Immigration Policy, and the Latino Vote

Romney’s stance on immigration issues

Immigration by the Numbers — Off the Charts

Numbers USA – Immigration By the Numbers – Part 1

Numbers USA – Immigration By the Numbers – Part 2 of 2

2/23/12 Webcast – E-Verify Self Check

Background Articles and Videos

Support a Moratorium on All Immigration, Legal and Illegal

Stop Amnesty for Illegal Immigrants – Expert Reveals the True Cost of Amnesty

The Dangers of Unlimited Legal & Illegal Immigration

Ambassador Alan Keyes on Stopping Illegal Immigration

Dr. Alan Keyes – “Obama is a Radical Communist – Will Destroy America!”

Obama Vs. Keyes: Christianity

Obama on homosexuality

Jay Sekulow on Fox News Discussing Illegal Immigration at the Supreme Court

Supreme Court Reviews Arizona Immigration Law

Immigration law: an overview

“…Federal immigration law determines whether a person is an alien, the rights, duties, and obligations associated with being an alien in the United States, and how aliens gain residence or citizenship within the United States. It also provides the means by which certain aliens can become legally naturalized citizens with full rights of citizenship. Immigration law serves as a gatekeeper for the nation’s border, determining who may enter, how long they may stay, and when they must leave.

Congress has complete authority over immigration. Presidential power does not extend beyond refugee policy. Except for questions regarding aliens’ constitutional rights, the courts have generally found the immigration issue as nonjusticiable.

States have limited legislative authority regarding immigration, and 28 U.S.C. § 1251 details the full extent of state jurisdiction. Generally, 28 U.S.C. § 994 details the federal sentencing guidelines for illegal entry into the country.

By controlling the visa process, the federal government can achieve the goals of its immigration policies. There are two types of visas: immigrant visas and nonimmigrant visas. The government primarily issues nonimmigrant visas to tourists and temporary business visitors. The government divides nonimmigrant visas into eighteen different types, but for most types, does not impose a cap on the number that may be granted in a year. Only a few categories of non-immigrant visas allow their holders to work in the United States. Immigrant visas, on the other hand, permit their holders to stay in the United States permanently and eventually to apply for citizenship. Aliens with immigrant visas can also work in the United States. Congress limits the quantity of immigrant visas, which numbered 675,000 in 1995. Many immigrant visas remain subject to per-country caps.

Early history of American immigration law

Congress’s first attempt to set immigration policy came in 1790 with the enactment of the Naturalization Act of 1790. This Act restricted naturalization to “free white persons” of “good moral character” and required the applicant to have lived in the country for two years prior to becoming naturalized. In 1795 an amendment increased the residency requirement to five years. The five-year requirement remains on the books to this day.

Upon ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment, all children born within the United States received citizenship at birth. In 1870 Congress broadened naturalization laws to allow African-Americans the right to become naturalized citizens. Asian Americans, however, did not receive such a right for many years. Xenophobia from an influx of Asians between 1850 and 1882 prompted Congress to pass the Chinese Exclusion Act, which restricted further Chinese immigration.

In 1921 Congress passed the Emergency Immigration Act, creating national immigration quotas, which gave way to the Immigration Act of 1924, capping the number of permissible immigrants from each country in a manner proportional to the number already living within the United States. The aggregate number from the eastern hemisphere could not eclipse 154,227 immigrants. Franklin D. Roosevelt’s Administration essentially closed to the country to immigration essentially during the Great depression, drastically reducing the numbers per country that could enter the United States.

Modern immigration law

The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (INA), also known as the McCarran-Walter Act, eliminated all race-based quotas, replacing them with purely nationality-based quotas. The INA continues to influence the field of American immigration law. To enforce the quotas, the INA created the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS). The INS served as the federal agency that enforced these caps for remainder of the 20th century.

When Congress passed the INA, it defined an “alien” as any person lacking citizenship or status as a national of the United States. Different categories of aliens include resident and nonresident, immigrant and nonimmigrant, and documented and undocumented (“illegal”). The terms “documented” and “undocumented” refer to whether an arriving alien has the proper records and identification for admission into the U.S. Having the proper records and identification typically requires the alien to possess a valid, unexpired passport and either a visa, border crossing identification card, permanent resident card, or a reentry permit. The INA expressly refuses stowaway aliens entry into the U.S.

The need to curtail illegal immigration prompted Congress to enact the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) of 1986. The IRCA toughened criminal sanctions for employers who hired illegal aliens, denied illegal aliens federally funded welfare benefits, and legitimized some aliens through an amnesty program. The Immigration Marriage Fraud Amendments of 1986 sought to limit the practice of marrying to obtain citizenship. The Immigration Act of 1990 thoroughly revamped the INA by equalizing the allocation of visas across foreign nations, eliminating archaic rules, and encouraging worldwide immigration.

The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA) of 1996 revolutionized the process of alien entry into the United States. The IIRIRA eliminated the term “entry,” replacing it with “admission.” An application for admission occurs whenever an alien arrives in the U.S. regardless of whether the arrival occurs at a designated port-of-entry. Applicants at either designated ports or otherwise must submit to an inspection by U.S. customs, even if the applicant possesses an immigrant visa. The IIRIRA also employs the term “arriving alien” to describe applicant aliens attempting to enter the U.S., regardless of whether they arrive at a designated port, a non-designated point on the border, or are located in U.S. waters and brought to shore.

Post-9/11 reform

On March 1, 2003, the Department of Homeland Security opened, replacing the INS. The Bush Administration had designed the Department of Homeland Security to foster increased intelligence sharing and dialogue between agencies responsible for responding to domestic emergencies, such as natural disasters and domestic terrorism. Within the Department, three different agencies – U.S. Customs and Border Enforcement (CBE), U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) – now handle the duties formerly held by the INS. Currently, the CBE handles the INS’s border patrol duties, the USCIS handles the INS’s naturalization, asylum, and permanent residence functions, and the ICE handles the INS’s deportation, intelligence, and investigatory functions.

Refugee and asylum seekers

The Refugee Act of 1980 defines the U.S. laws relating to refugee immigrants. Under the Refugee Act, the term “refugee” refers to aliens with a fear of persecution upon returning to their homelands, stemming from their religion, race, nationality, membership in certain social groups, or political opinions. Anyone who delivers a missing American POW or MIA soldier receives refugee status from the United States.

The United States, however, denies refugee status to any alien who actively persecuted individuals of a certain race, political opinion, religion, nationality, or members of a certain social group. As a matter of public policy, the government also typically refuses refugee applicants previously convicted of murderer. For refugees who have “firmly resettled” in another country, the United States will deny a request for refugee admission. The government considers refugees “firmly resettled” if the refugees have received an offer of citizenship, permanent residency, or some other permanent status from a foreign country.

Under international law, the Geneva Convention, or the laws of the United States, foreign citizens who have become disillusioned with their homeland cannot take temporary refuge within the United States. The Refugee Act of 1980 specifically leaves out temporary refuge as a form of refugee status that the U.S. government will recognize.

To qualify for refugee status under the persecution provision, the refugee applicant must prove actual fear. A proof of actual fear requires meeting both a subjective and an objective test. The subjective test requires that the refugee actually have an honest and genuine fear of being persecuted for some immutable trait, such as religion, race, and nationality. Seekers of asylum must show a fear that membership in a social or political group has caused past persecution or has caused a well-founded fear that persecution will occur upon returning. The applicant meets the objective standard by showing credible and direct evidence that a reasonable possibility of persecution exists upon the applicant’s return to the homeland.

The President retains the ultimate decision making authority when determining the number of refugees to allow into the country during a given year.

Deportation

Deportation refers to the official removal of an alien from the United States. The U.S. government can initiate deportation proceedings against aliens admitted under the INA that commit an aggravated felony within the United States after being admitted. An alien’s failure to register a change of address renders the alien deportable, unless the failure resulted from an excusable circumstance or mistake. If the government determines that a particular alien gained entry into the country through the use of a falsified document or otherwise fraudulent means, the government has the grounds to deport.

Other common grounds for deportation include the following: aiding or encouraging another alien to enter the country illegally; engaging in marriage fraud to gain U.S. admission; participating in an activity that threatens the U.S.’s national security; voting unlawfully; and failing to update the government with a residential address every three months, regardless of whether the address has changed. The last of these policies served as the grounds for the government to deport 2,000 Pakistanis following the September 11th attacks.

If the government brings a proceeding for deportation because of fraud or falsification, the government bears the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that alleged falsification or fraud occurred and that the falsification or fraud proved material to the granting of admission to the alien. Upon such a proof, the government has established a rebuttable presumption that the alien gained admission through material falsification or fraud. To rebut the presumption, the alien must demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that admission would have been granted even without the falsification or fraud. …”

http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/Immigration

Related Posts On Illegal Immigration

Obama’s Executive Order On Illegal Immigration Violates Oath Of Office and Immigration Law–An Impeachable And Criminal Offense–Amnesty For Illegal Aliens–Videos

Related Posts On Pronk Pops

Pronk Pops Show 78, June 20, 2012: Segment 0: Microsoft’s No Compromises–Surface–Doing More With Less Than $500?–Real Cool–iPad Killer?–Videos

Pronk Pops Show 78, June 20, 2012: Segment 2: Obama’s Kill List–On Terrorist Tuesdays Obama Targets “Innocent” Civilian and American “Terrorists”–Deeply “Offensive”–Murder Boards Replace Water Boards!–Progressive Neocons Cheer–Videos

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Pronk Pops Show 78, June 20, 2012: Segment 0: Microsoft’s No Compromises–Surface–Doing More With Less Than $500?–Real Cool–iPad Killer?–Videos

Posted on June 20, 2012. Filed under: Applications, Business, Communications, Computers, Economics, Education, Hardware, Media, Philosophy, Politics, Software, Technology, Videos, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , |

Pronk Pops Show 78: June 20, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 77: June 13, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 76: June 6, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 75: May 30, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 74: May 21, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 73: May 9, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 72: May 2, 2012

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-78

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 22-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1-9

Segment 0: Microsoft’s No Compromises–Surface–Doing More With Less Than $500?–Real Cool–iPad Killer?–Videos

Microsoft Surface – Keynote (Re-live the mystery)

Microsoft Surface Pro vs Surface RT

First Thoughts: Microsoft Surface Tablet

Microsoft Surface Tablet Specifications,Price and Photos – For Windows OS

Microsoft Surface Tablet – The Great Team Behind

Surface by Microsoft

Microsoft’s Apple iPad Killer – Windows 8 RT Surface Tablet Hands on Review

Microsoft Surface Tablet Windows 8 – Hands on with Touch cover Keyboard – iPad Killer

Microsoft Surface Tablet Windows 8 – Hands on with Touch Screen – iPad Killer

Microsoft Surface Tablet – Windows RT / Windows 8

Microsoft Surface Tablet – Cooling System

Microsoft Surface tablet release date, news and price

By Gary Marshall

“…Microsoft Surface tablet runs Windows 8 Pro and Windows RT

There will be two Surface models, one running Windows 8 Pro and one running Windows RT. The Surface RT processor will be an ARM one and the Surface Pro processor will be Intel. The Pro model will be more powerful, with a higher resolution and a slightly chunkier case.

The Microsoft Surface specifications are quite nifty

The Windows RT model weighs 676g, is 9.3mm thin and comes with what Microsoft calls a 10.6″, 16:9 ClearType HD display. The battery’s a 31.5W-h model, you can choose between 32GB and 64GB of on-board storage, and connectors include MicroSD, USB 2.0, Micro HD VIdeo and 2×2 MIMO antennae for better WiFi performance. The processor hasn’t been named but the smart money’s on a Tegra 3.

The Pro model is heavier – 930g – and thicker – 13.5mm – to make room for an Intel Ivy Bridge i5 processor. This time the ClearType display is “Full HD”, which implies 1920×1080 resolution. The battery’s bigger too, at 42W-h, and the connectors include MicroSDXC, USB 3.0, Mini DisplayPort and the same antennae. Storage options for the big Surface are 64GB and 128GB.

Both tablets have twin cameras, stereo speakers and dual microphones tuned for Skype, and their cases are made of VaporMg, a magnesium alloy that’s very light and strong.

The Surface tablet also includes an integrated kickstand to prop up your tablet when you’re watching video.

The Surface Pro tablet has a pen

The Windows 8 Pro Surface tablet supports pen input at 600dpi resolution, and there’s a palm block so you don’t lose focus when your palm touches the screen. The pen can be used just like a real one, with digital ink annotating documents or filling in forms.

The Windows RT Surface includes Microsoft Office

Microsoft Home and Student 2013 RT is pre-installed on the Windows RT Surface tablet.

Both Surface tablets have a touch cover and a type cover

Microsoft has come up with a brilliant idea: a protective cover that doubles as a pressure sensitive multi-touch trackpad and keyboard and that attaches magnetically. If you’d rather have a chiclet keyboard, there’s one of those too: an ultra-thin one that, while it’s naturally a bit thicker than the touch one (5mm compared to 3mm), still doesn’t add too much bulk to the device.

The keyboards have built-in accelerometers, which mean they can tell when you fold them back over the screen: when you do, they stop drawing power. When you compare them to the kinds of keyboard docks we’ve seen for other tablets, such as Asus’s Transformers, they’re clearly remarkable bits of engineering.

The Microsoft Surface price will be competitive

Microsoft’s keeping its cards close to its chest with this one: while it promises that both the Windows RT and Windows 8 Pro Surface tablets will be priced competitively with rival devices, it doesn’t say which rival devices, let alone commit to a price range. We’d expect prices to be similar to high-end Android tablets and, of course, the iPad, even if that means making a loss: as we know from the Xbox, Microsoft isn’t afraid to lose money for a long time if that’s what it takes to build market share.

The Microsoft Surface release date isn’t imminent

The RT Surface tab is due to be released “this fall”, with the Surface Pro shipping roughly 90 days later.

The Surface tablets will have Xbox integration and SmartGlass

Microsoft’s twin-screen SmartGlass is an obvious feature for the Surface tablets, and Microsoft says it’s coming alongside Xbox integration.

Surface is designed to give Microsoft’s partners a poke

Microsoft normally lets OEMS (Original Equipment Manufacturers) do the hardware stuff, so Surface is something of a departure from the normal PC business. It’s a tacit admission that sometimes, PCs are crappier than they ought to be: as Mary Branscombe explains, “Not only does Surface deliver hardware innovations that the OEMs can’t turn around and put on their Android tablets; it also take advantage of the hardware experts at Microsoft and their 3,200 hardware patents and lets Microsoft deliver the PC it thinks Windows 8 will run best on, not a PC maker’s interpretation of that.”

It’ll be interesting to see how Microsoft’s OEM partners react to that: can Microsoft be their best pal as well as their biggest rival? …”

http://www.techradar.com/news/mobile-computing/tablets/microsoft-surface-tablet-release-date-news-and-price-1085679

7 reasons Microsoft’s new tablet could worry Apple

By Erik Sherman

“…There are skeptics aplenty, including Stephen Chapman at ZDNet, MoneyWatch’s sister site. Skepticism is necessary and healthy, as this would be far from a cakewalk for Microsoft. But if you’re trying to understand where computing is headed, cynicism would be dangerous. Microsoft has many strengths that could help, and Apple knows it. Here are seven things that Tim Cook is likely weighing.

Corporate buy-in
Apple is the king of consumer electronics, no question. But even with its again growing use in corporations, Microsoft has an establishment in corporate computing that is remarkable. From the operating system on the vast majority of desktops to software that is pervasive, including databases, Office, major corporate applications, and middleware, the company is there, no matter where you turn.

Yes, iPads have become very popular, but they don’t naturally integrate with existing systems the way corporations would like. Get the same type of functions in an enterprise-friendly form, and you’ve provided companies with a powerful reason to buy hardware. Furthermore, the greater number of form factors that will be available are more likely to hit corporate needs, including docking stations for people who have to create and edit documents and spreadsheets and find the experience on a pure tablet wanting, even with the availability of Bluetooth keyboards. (I’ve been using a Google (GOOG) Android-based system that I bought for traveling, and the ability to seat a tablet to a keyboard with touchpad and extra battery that adds little in weight has been great. Once a Windows-equivalent is available, I’ll likely jump just for the desktop software compatibility.)

Massive existing developer base
As Chapman noted, Microsoft will need app developers to compete. I’m wary of the whole “apps are the reason people buy devices,” because both Apple’s iOS and Google Android managed to build large audiences even without their current levels of app mania. After all, most of the sales and free downloads are from a relatively small slice of the available offerings. But the perception of availability of software is important.

Where Chapman goes wrong, I think, is to say that cross-platform development tools are what could aid Microsoft in this. While they could, he’s discounting just how large the Microsoft Windows development camp is. Virtually all corporations putting programmers to work for custom software or to adapt third-party applications have deep Microsoft experience. The most popular software packages, period, have versions for Windows. That’s the app strength that Microsoft hopes to leverage, whether on an Intel-based desktop or a tablet or even phone with an ARM chip. Porting isn’t an afterthought, but going from one versions of Windows to another? A much easier jump.

Home TV tie-in
Work tie-in is important, but so is home entertainment. That’s one place where Microsoft is far better established than Apple because of the Xbox. It’s a major streaming platform and has lots of content available. Microsoft is pushing a cheap-up-front Xbox ($99) with an ongoing Xbox Live paid account, plus it has a full motion detection and navigation system, which makes a multi-touch interface look passé.

So the tablet becomes an extension of TV. For the millions of households that already have an online account with Microsoft, it could be a compelling choice.

Unusual determination
Microsoft has screwed up on consumer devices many times. (Can you say Zune or Kin?) But one thing the company has going for it is determination and patience that actually matches Apple’s. Yes, there are companies that have eventually beaten Microsoft badly enough that it gave up. The personal finance software category comes to mind.

But it took Microsoft a decade to drop its desktop finance programs. You could call that a waste of time and resources, but it shows how long the company is willing to go to eventually come out on top. The Xbox platform was a major money loser for many years. But Microsoft, like Apple, is in it for the long haul.

Wide range of innovation
Microsoft is one of the largest patent holders in the world, second to IBM. Patents aren’t the same as innovation, but the number it holds shows how much investment the companies does in that area. Even rule out many of the piddling patents, and Microsoft has done foundational work in a lot of areas. Much of what it does is invisible to people looking at the consumer electronics space. That doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist or has no usefulness.

This isn’t about a potential legal battle; Apple and Microsoft wisely made peace with each other years ago. But Microsoft has tried often and succeeded a fair amount of time. So, what new things could it bring to a tablet? Hard to tell, but it opens the possibility of approaches that will attract users.

New Borg strategy
The new SmartGlass technology shows how Microsoft has begun to move past the “Windows only, Windows often” approach. Sure, it still wants to sell Windows to everyone multiple times, but as the computing world has changed, the company has been morphing a longtime basic strategy. When you’re willing to surround and absorb anyone and everything else, you stand a much greater chance of success, particularly if you want to sell to corporations that aren’t crazy about single-vendor solutions anymore and then extend corporate use to the home. …”

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505124_162-57455077/7-reasons-microsofts-new-tablet-could-worry-apple/

Background Information and Videos

Top 5 tablets (May 2012)

What’s The Best 10″ Tablet Under $400?

10 top tablets 2012

Tablet PC Comparison

Compare all tablets

http://www.tabletpccomparison.net/

Side by side tablets comparison

http://www.tabletpccomparison.net/side-by-side/items/1

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

Microsoft and Nokia Partnership On Smart Phones–Videos

Windows Phone Series 7–Videos

Bill Gates–Videos

Bill Gates Goes Nuclear with The TerraPower Traveling Wave Reactor–The Next Big Thing–Innovation and Technology Making A Difference

Bill Gates Wants More Best, Bright, and Cheap Foreign Labor–More Jobs and Competition In Amercan Labor Market Is Needed–Not More Visas and Subsidies!

The History of Microsoft–Videos

A Kinder Gentler Wiser Microsoft Gives Away Valuable Software Developer Tools to Students Around The World!

Bill Gates–Hope, Change and Rapid Affluence Development–Creative Capitalism!

Wealth, Income and Job Creation: Let A 1000 Microsofts Bloom

Microsoft’s Channel 9 Coffeehouse Community Killer–spam

Microsoft Expression Studio–Videos

Related Posts On Pronk Pops

Pronk Pops Show 78, June 20, 2012: Segment 1: Obama Flip Flops On Illegal Immigration and Fails To Enforce Immigration Law–Breaks Oath of Office–Back Door Amnesty–No More Years–Out Obama–Videos

Pronk Pops Show 78, June 20, 2012: Segment 2: Obama’s Kill List–On Terrorist Tuesdays Obama Targets “Innocent” Civilian and American “Terrorists”–Deeply “Offensive”–Murder Boards Replace Water Boards!–Progressive Neocons Cheer–Videos

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Pronk Pops Show 77, June 13, 2012: Segment 0: Obama’s Jobs Deficit Hits 5.2 Million!–Hopeless Obama Presidential Economics (HOPE)–It’s Really The Economy Stupid–Where Are The Jobs?–Pee Wee President–Videos

Posted on June 13, 2012. Filed under: American History, Budgetary Policy, Business, College, Communications, Consitutional Law, Economics, Education, Employment, Federal Government, Fiscal Policy, Government, Government Spending, Health Care, Health Care Insurance, History, Investments, Labor Economics, Law, Media, Monetary Policy, Philosophy, Politics, Radio, Success, Tax Policy, Technology, Videos, War, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , |

Pronk Pops Show 77: June 13, 2012 

Pronk Pops Show 76: June 6, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 75: May 30, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 74: May 21, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 73: May 9, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 72: May 2, 2012

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-77

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 22-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1-9

Pronk Pops Show 77: June 13, 2012

Pee-Wee’s Morning

Obama To 23 Million Struggling Americans: “The Private Sector Is Doing Fine”

The Platters – Great Pretender, Only You (live)

http://www.federalbudget.com

Click on Image Below To Enlarge

Source: Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics

http://www.bls.gov

Obama’s Jobs Deficit Hits 5.2 Million!

5.2 million =130,000 Per Month New Entrants to Labor Force Times 40 Months

Grim recovery outlook from BLS Commissioner Hall

Rep. Brady Questions BLS Commissioner on the Need for Private Sector Job Growth

http://www.shadowstats.com/

Peaked in November 2007 at 146.5 Million–Unemployment Rates: 4.7% (U-3) and 8.4% (U-6)

Level in January 2009 at 142.1 Million–Unemployment Rates: 7.8% (U-3) and 14.2% (U-6)

Bottomed in December 2009 at 137.9 Million— Unemployment Rates: 9.9% (U-3) and 17.1% (U-6)

Currently in May 2012 at 142.2 Million–Unemployment Rates: 8.2% (U-3) and 14.8% (U-6)

Employment Level

Series Id: LNS12000000 Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Employment Level
Labor force status: Employed
Type of data: Number in thousands
Age: 16 years and over

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual
2001 137778 137612 137783 137299 137092 136873 137071 136241 136846 136392 136238 136047
2002 135701 136438 136177 136126 136539 136415 136413 136705 137302 137008 136521 136426
2003 137417(1) 137482 137434 137633 137544 137790 137474 137549 137609 137984 138424 138411
2004 138472(1) 138542 138453 138680 138852 139174 139556 139573 139487 139732 140231 140125
2005 140245(1) 140385 140654 141254 141609 141714 142026 142434 142401 142548 142499 142752
2006 143150(1) 143457 143741 143761 144089 144353 144202 144625 144815 145314 145534 145970
2007 146028(1) 146057 146320 145586 145903 146063 145905 145682 146244 145946 146595 146273
2008 146397(1) 146157 146108 146130 145929 145738 145530 145196 145059 144792 144078 143328
2009 142187(1) 141660 140754 140654 140294 140003 139891 139458 138775 138401 138607 137968
2010 138500(1) 138665 138836 139306 139340 139137 139139 139338 139344 139072 138937 139220
2011 139330(1) 139551 139764 139628 139808 139385 139450 139754 140107 140297 140614 140790
2012 141637(1) 142065 142034 141865 142287
1 : Data affected by changes in population controls.

http://www.bls.gov

U-3 Unemployment Rate

Series Id: LNS14000000 Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Unemployment Rate
Labor force status: Unemployment rate
Type of data: Percent or rate
Age: 16 years and over

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual
2001 4.2 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.3 4.5 4.6 4.9 5.0 5.3 5.5 5.7
2002 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.9 5.8 5.8 5.8 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.9 6.0
2003 5.8 5.9 5.9 6.0 6.1 6.3 6.2 6.1 6.1 6.0 5.8 5.7
2004 5.7 5.6 5.8 5.6 5.6 5.6 5.5 5.4 5.4 5.5 5.4 5.4
2005 5.3 5.4 5.2 5.2 5.1 5.0 5.0 4.9 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.9
2006 4.7 4.8 4.7 4.7 4.6 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.4
2007 4.6 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.4 4.6 4.7 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.7 5.0
2008 5.0 4.9 5.1 5.0 5.4 5.6 5.8 6.1 6.1 6.5 6.8 7.3
2009 7.8 8.3 8.7 8.9 9.4 9.5 9.5 9.6 9.8 10.0 9.9 9.9
2010 9.7 9.8 9.8 9.9 9.6 9.4 9.5 9.6 9.5 9.5 9.8 9.4
2011 9.1 9.0 8.9 9.0 9.0 9.1 9.1 9.1 9.0 8.9 8.7 8.5
2012 8.3 8.3 8.2 8.1 8.2

http://www.bls.gov

U-6 Unemployment Rate

Series Id: LNS13327709
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (seas) Total unemployed, plus all marginally attached workers plus total employed part time foreconomic reasons, as a percent of all civilian labor force plus all marginally attached workers
Labor force status: Aggregated totals unemployed
Type of data: Percent or rate
Age: 16 years and over
Percent/rates: Unemployed and mrg attached and pt for econ reas as percent of labor force plus marg attached Unemployment

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual
2001 7.3 7.4 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.9 7.8 8.1 8.7 9.3 9.4 9.6
2002 9.5 9.5 9.4 9.7 9.5 9.5 9.6 9.6 9.6 9.6 9.7 9.8
2003 10.0 10.2 10.0 10.2 10.1 10.3 10.3 10.1 10.4 10.2 10.0 9.8
2004 9.9 9.7 10.0 9.6 9.6 9.5 9.5 9.4 9.4 9.7 9.4 9.2
2005 9.3 9.3 9.1 8.9 8.9 9.0 8.8 8.9 9.0 8.7 8.7 8.6
2006 8.4 8.4 8.2 8.1 8.2 8.4 8.5 8.4 8.0 8.2 8.1 7.9
2007 8.4 8.2 8.0 8.2 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.8
2008 9.2 9.0 9.1 9.2 9.7 10.1 10.5 10.8 11.1 11.8 12.7 13.5
2009 14.2 15.1 15.7 15.8 16.4 16.5 16.5 16.7 16.8 17.2 17.1 17.1
2010 16.7 16.9 16.9 17.0 16.6 16.5 16.5 16.6 16.9 16.8 16.9 16.6
2011 16.1 15.9 15.7 15.9 15.8 16.2 16.1 16.2 16.4 16.0 15.6 15.2
2012 15.1 14.9 14.5 14.5 14.8

http://www.bls.gov

Out of Touch Obama…Says “The Private Sector is JUST FINE!”

Obama Backtracks: “It’s Absolutely Clear The Economy Is ‘Not’ Doing Fine”

Three Times, Axelrod Dodges “Yes Or No” If The “Private Sector Is Doing Fine”

“Fine?”

Limbaugh: Maybe to Obama, 2X as Many People on Food Stamps Means “Private Sector Doing Fine”

Keynesian Economics Is Wrong: Bigger Gov’t Is Not Stimulus

Keynesian Economics vs. Austrian Economics

Romney: Obama ‘Is So Out of Touch’

Christie: Obama driving America off a “fiscal cliff”

GOP to Obama: Private Sector Not Doing Well

Peter Schiff: ‘Obama likes it when he thinks the free market is failing’

Sen. McConnell: “Obama Must Be On Another Planet”

“Doing Fine”

The Beach Boys – 409

Unemployment Level

Series Id: LNS13000000 Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Unemployment Level
Labor force status: Unemployed
Type of data: Number in thousands
Age: 16 years and over

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual
2001 6023 6089 6141 6271 6226 6484 6583 7042 7142 7694 8003 8258
2002 8182 8215 8304 8599 8399 8393 8390 8304 8251 8307 8520 8640
2003 8520 8618 8588 8842 8957 9266 9011 8896 8921 8732 8576 8317
2004 8370 8167 8491 8170 8212 8286 8136 7990 7927 8061 7932 7934
2005 7784 7980 7737 7672 7651 7524 7406 7345 7553 7453 7566 7279
2006 7064 7184 7072 7120 6980 7001 7175 7091 6847 6727 6872 6762
2007 7116 6927 6731 6850 6766 6979 7149 7067 7170 7237 7240 7645
2008 7678 7491 7816 7631 8395 8578 8950 9450 9501 10083 10544 11299
2009 12049 12860 13389 13796 14505 14727 14646 14861 15012 15421 15227 15124
2010 14953 15039 15128 15221 14876 14517 14609 14735 14574 14636 15104 14393
2011 13919 13751 13628 13792 13892 14024 13908 13920 13897 13759 13323 13097
2012 12758 12806 12673 12500 12720

http://www.bls.gov

Billie Holiday : Fine and mellow (1957)

Background Articles and Videos

U.S. Debt Clock

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

The Debt to the Penny and Who Holds It

( Debt Held by the Public vs. Intragovernmental Holdings )

Current Debt Held by the Public Intragovernmental Holdings Total Public Debt Outstanding
06/11/2012 10,999,435,913,618.62 4,738,474,273,896.26 15,737,910,187,514.88

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Pronk Pops Show 76, June 6, 2012: Segment 3: Remembering the 68th Anniversary of the D-Day landings 1944-2012

Posted on June 6, 2012. Filed under: American History, Budgetary Policy, Business, Economics, Fiscal Policy, Foreign Policy, Government, Government Spending, History, Labor Economics, Law, Media, Monetary Policy, Philosophy, Politics, Polls, Success, Tax Policy, Technology, Videos, War, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , |

Pronk Pops Show 77: June 13, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 76: June 6, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 75: May 30, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 74: May 21, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 73: May 9, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 72: May 2, 2012

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-76

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 22-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1-9

Segment 3: Remembering the 68th Anniversary of the D-Day landings 1944-2012

General Eisenhower – D Day Message

D-Day 6/6/44

FDR D-Day Speech June 6, 1944

Normandy Speech: President Reagans Address Commemorating 40th Anniversary of Normandy/D-Day

Remembering the 68th Anniversary of the D-Day landings 1944-2012

NATIONAL MEMORIAL DAY CONCERT | Charles Durning | PBS

Background Articles and Videos

Operation Overlord was the code name for the Battle of Normandy, the operation that launched the invasion of German-occupied western Europe during World War II by Allied forces. The operation commenced on 6 June 1944 with the Normandy landings (Operation Neptune, commonly known as D-Day). A 12,000-plane airborne assault preceded an amphibious assault involving almost 7,000 vessels. Nearly 160,000 troops crossed the English Channel on 6 June; more than 3 million troops were in France by the end of August.
Allied land forces that saw combat in Normandy on D-Day itself came from Canada, the United Kingdom and the United States of America. Free French Forces and Poland also participated in the battle after the assault phase, and there were also minor contingents from Belgium, Greece, the Netherlands, and Norway. Other Allied nations participated in the naval and air forces.
Once the beachheads were secured, a three-week military buildup occurred on the beaches before Operation Cobra, the operation to break out from the Normandy beachhead, began. The battle for Normandy continued for more than two months, with campaigns to expand the foothold on France, and concluded with the closing of the Falaise pocket on 24 August, the Liberation of Paris on 25 August, and the German retreat across the Seine which was completed on 30 August 1944.

D-Day 6.6.1944 [1/5] BBC Documentary

D-Day 6.6.1944 [2/5] BBC Documentary

D-Day 6.6.1944 [3/5] BBC Documentary

D-Day 6.6.1944 [4/5] BBC Documentary

D-Day 6.6.1944 [5/5] BBC Documentary

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

Remembering D Day, Operation Overload, June 6, 1944–Videos

Related Posts On Pronk Pops

Pronk Pops Show 76, June 6, 2012: Segment 0: Wisconsin Citizens and Governor Scott Walker Defeat Government Union Thugs and Their “Big Pal” Barack Obama–Recall Obama Golfing–Videos

Pronk Pops Show 76, June 6, 2012: Segment 1: 12.7 Million Unemployed Americans–Unemployment Rate Increases To 8.2% and Stays Above 8% For More Than 40 Months–Only 69,000 Jobs Created in May–140,000 Jobs Per Month Needed To Keep Up With American Population Growth–Fire Obama–Videos

Pronk Pops Show 76, June 6, 2012: Segment 2: U.S. Real Gross Domestic Product (GDP) Declined From 3% in Fourth Quarter 2011 to 1.9% in First Quarter of 2011–U.S. GDP Peaked Heading Toward Recession in Second Half of 2012–Diving Off The Fiscal Cliff–Videos

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Pronk Pops Show 76, June 6, 2012: Segment 2: U.S. Real Gross Domestic Product (GDP) Declined From 3% in Fourth Quarter 2011 to 1.9% in First Quarter of 2011–U.S. GDP Peaked Heading Toward Recession in Second Half of 2012–Diving Off The Fiscal Cliff–Videos

Posted on June 6, 2012. Filed under: American History, Budgetary Policy, Business, College, Communications, Economics, Employment, Energy, Federal Government, Fiscal Policy, Foreign Policy, Government, Government Spending, Health Care, Health Care Insurance, History, Housing, Illegal Immigration, Immigration, Labor Economics, Law, Media, Monetary Policy, Philosophy, Politics, Polls, Regulation, Resources, Security, Tax Policy, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , |

Pronk Pops Show 76: June 6, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 75: May 30, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 74: May 21, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 73: May 9, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 72: May 2, 2012

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-76

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 22-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1-9

Segment 2: U.S. Real Gross Domestic Product (GDP) Declined From 3% in Fourth Quarter 2011 to 1.9% in First Quarter of 2011–U.S. GDP Peaked Heading Toward Recession in Second Half of 2012–Diving Off The Fiscal Cliff–Videos

Current Numbers:
  • 1st quarter 2012: 1.9 percent
  • 4th quarter 2011: 3.0 percent
Quarterly data: Real gross domestic product — the output of goods and services produced by labor and property located in the United States — increased at an annual rate of 1.9 percent in the first quarter of 2012 (that is, from the fourth quarter to the first quarter), according to the “second” estimate released by the Bureau of Economic Analysis. In the fourth quarter of 2011, real GDP increased 3.0 percent.

Real gross domestic product (GDP) rose 1.9 percent in the first quarter of 2012 after rising 3.0 percent

in the fourth quarter, according to the second estimate released today by the Bureau of Economic Analysis. The

first-quarter growth rate was 0.3 percentage point less than the “advance” estimate released in April.

Over the past 4 quarters, real GDP grew 2.0 percent.

First-quarter highlights

An acceleration in consumer spending in the first quarter was more than offset by a slowdown in inventory investment.

Consumer spending was strong in the first quarter, rising 2.7 percent after rising 2.1 percent in the fourth quarter. The

firstquarter increase was the largest since the fourth quarter of 2010. Spending on services and nondurable goods accelerated,

more than offsetting a slowdown in spending on durable goods (mainly motor vehicles and parts).

The slowdown in inventory investment reflected a sharp downturn in inventory investment by nondurablegoods

wholesalers and manufacturers. A slowdown in business investment, mainly in industrial equipment and

in computers and software, also contributed to the slowdown in economic growth.

Revisions to GDP The downward revision of real GDP growth for the first quarter was largely accounted for by a downward

revision to inventory investment; manufacturing, wholesale, and retail inventories were all revised down. In addition,

imports was revised up. Partly offsetting these revisions, business investment and exports were revised up.

http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/gdphighlights.pdf

Economy tanking under Obama

Economy slides as Obama campaigns

World Business and Economy Look (US, UK Europe) – Economies slow down CNN (31-05-2012)

U.S. Fiscal Cliff – Martin Feldstein

CNBC:Global Recession? Marc Faber: 100%

Background Articles and Videos

U.S. Recession a Possibility in 2012, Shilling Says

2012 recession coming to the world

Roubini Says Stimulus Will Sap Second-Half U.S. Growth

Sept. 3 (Bloomberg) — Nouriel Roubini, chairman and co-founder of Roubini Global Economics LLC, talks about the outlook for the global economy and the possible impact of a double-dip recession or an increase in risk aversion on gold and currencies. He talks with Francine Lacqua in Cernobbio, Italy, on Bloomberg Television’s “Countdown.” (Source: Bloomberg)

Glenn Beck Interviews Ron Paul About U.S Recession (2/2/2012)

U.S. recession still possible in 2012, says Shiller

Crandall: Europe’s banks a worry

 Related Posts On Pronk Pops

Pronk Pops Show 76, June 6, 2012: Segment 0: Wisconsin Citizens and Governor Scott Walker Defeat Government Union Thugs and Their “Big Pal” Barack Obama–Recall Obama Golfing–Videos

Pronk Pops Show 76, June 6, 2012: Segment 1: 12.7 Million Unemployed Americans–Unemployment Rate Increases To 8.2% and Stays Above 8% For More Than 40 Months–Only 69,000 Jobs Created in May–140,000 Jobs Per Month Needed To Keep Up With American Population Growth–Fire Obama–Videos

Pronk Pops Show 76, June 6, 2012: Segment 3: Remembering the 68th Anniversary of the D-Day landings 1944-2012

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Pronk Pops Show 76, June 6, 2012: Segment 1: 12.7 Million Unemployed Americans–Unemployment Rate Increases To 8.2% and Stays Above 8% For More Than 40 Months–Only 69,000 Jobs Created in May–140,000 Jobs Per Month Needed To Keep Up With American Population Growth–Fire Obama–Videos

Posted on June 6, 2012. Filed under: American History, Budgetary Policy, Business, College, Communications, Economics, Education, Employment, Federal Government, Fiscal Policy, Foreign Policy, Government, Government Spending, History, Immigration, Investments, Labor Economics, Law, Media, Monetary Policy, Philosophy, Politics, Polls, Radio, Resources, Tax Policy, Videos, Violence, War, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Pronk Pops Show 76: June 6, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 75: May 30, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 74: May 21, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 73: May 9, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 72: May 2, 2012

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-76

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 22-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1-9

Segment 1: 12.7 Million Unemployed Americans–Unemployment Rate Increases To 8.2% and Stays Above 8% For More Than 40 Months–Only 69,000 Jobs Created in May–140,000 Jobs Per Month Needed To Keep Up With American Population Growth–Fire Obama–Videos

Peter Schiff: ‘Obama likes it when the free market is failing’

June 1st 2012 CNBC Stock Market Squawk Box (May Jobs Report)

Unemployment to bury Obama?

Jobs Numbers Miss Expectations; Spark Worries of Another Economic Recession

CNBC – Stocks Plunge On Disappointing Jobs Report 6-1-2012

May Unemployment Rate Rises to 8.2% with only 69,000 New Jobs (6/1/12)

383,000 New Unemployment Claims Last Week- Up 10,000 – U.S. Labor Dept.

US Economic Review New Jobs Still Not Enough To Drop Unemployment Rate

May Unemployment Rate 8.2% From April’s 8.1%

CNN’s Soledad O’Brien » Jobs Moving for Better Opportunities Overseas

U.S. Employers Added 69,000 Jobs In May As The Unemployment Rate Rose To 8.2 Percent

“…The U.S. economy suddenly looks a lot weaker.
U.S. employers created only 69,000 jobs in May, the fewest in a year, and the unemployment rate ticked up.
The dismal jobs data will fan fears that the economy is sputtering. It could also damage President Barack Obama’s re-election prospects. And it could lead the Federal Reserve to take further steps to help the economy.
The Labor Department also said Friday that the economy created far fewer jobs in the previous two months than first thought. It revised those figures down to show 49,000 fewer jobs created. The unemployment rate rose to 8.2 percent from 8.1 percent in April, the first increase in 11 months.
Dow Jones industrial average futures, which were already down 100 points before the report, fell an additional 100 points within minutes of its release. …”

Unemployment Level

Series Id: LNS13000000 Seasonally Adjusted

Series title: (Seas) Unemployment Level

Labor force status: Unemployed

Type of data: Number in thousands

Age: 16 years and over

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual
2001 6023 6089 6141 6271 6226 6484 6583 7042 7142 7694 8003 8258
2002 8182 8215 8304 8599 8399 8393 8390 8304 8251 8307 8520 8640
2003 8520 8618 8588 8842 8957 9266 9011 8896 8921 8732 8576 8317
2004 8370 8167 8491 8170 8212 8286 8136 7990 7927 8061 7932 7934
2005 7784 7980 7737 7672 7651 7524 7406 7345 7553 7453 7566 7279
2006 7064 7184 7072 7120 6980 7001 7175 7091 6847 6727 6872 6762
2007 7116 6927 6731 6850 6766 6979 7149 7067 7170 7237 7240 7645
2008 7678 7491 7816 7631 8395 8578 8950 9450 9501 10083 10544 11299
2009 12049 12860 13389 13796 14505 14727 14646 14861 15012 15421 15227 15124
2010 14953 15039 15128 15221 14876 14517 14609 14735 14574 14636 15104 14393
2011 13919 13751 13628 13792 13892 14024 13908 13920 13897 13759 13323 13097
2012 12758 12806 12673 12500 12720

Unemployment Rate U-3

Series Id: LNS14000000 Seasonally Adjusted

Series title: (Seas) Unemployment Rate

Labor force status: Unemployment rate

Type of data: Percent or rate

Age: 16 years and over

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual
2001 4.2 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.3 4.5 4.6 4.9 5.0 5.3 5.5 5.7
2002 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.9 5.8 5.8 5.8 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.9 6.0
2003 5.8 5.9 5.9 6.0 6.1 6.3 6.2 6.1 6.1 6.0 5.8 5.7
2004 5.7 5.6 5.8 5.6 5.6 5.6 5.5 5.4 5.4 5.5 5.4 5.4
2005 5.3 5.4 5.2 5.2 5.1 5.0 5.0 4.9 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.9
2006 4.7 4.8 4.7 4.7 4.6 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.4
2007 4.6 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.4 4.6 4.7 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.7 5.0
2008 5.0 4.9 5.1 5.0 5.4 5.6 5.8 6.1 6.1 6.5 6.8 7.3
2009 7.8 8.3 8.7 8.9 9.4 9.5 9.5 9.6 9.8 10.0 9.9 9.9
2010 9.7 9.8 9.8 9.9 9.6 9.4 9.5 9.6 9.5 9.5 9.8 9.4
2011 9.1 9.0 8.9 9.0 9.0 9.1 9.1 9.1 9.0 8.9 8.7 8.5
2012 8.3 8.3 8.2 8.1 8.2

Employment Level

Series Id:           LNS12000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Seas) Employment Level
Labor force status:  Employed
Type of data:        Number in thousands
Age:                 16 years and over

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual
2001 137778 137612 137783 137299 137092 136873 137071 136241 136846 136392 136238 136047
2002 135701 136438 136177 136126 136539 136415 136413 136705 137302 137008 136521 136426
2003 137417(1) 137482 137434 137633 137544 137790 137474 137549 137609 137984 138424 138411
2004 138472(1) 138542 138453 138680 138852 139174 139556 139573 139487 139732 140231 140125
2005 140245(1) 140385 140654 141254 141609 141714 142026 142434 142401 142548 142499 142752
2006 143150(1) 143457 143741 143761 144089 144353 144202 144625 144815 145314 145534 145970
2007 146028(1) 146057 146320 145586 145903 146063 145905 145682 146244 145946 146595 146273
2008 146397(1) 146157 146108 146130 145929 145738 145530 145196 145059 144792 144078 143328
2009 142187(1) 141660 140754 140654 140294 140003 139891 139458 138775 138401 138607 137968
2010 138500(1) 138665 138836 139306 139340 139137 139139 139338 139344 139072 138937 139220
2011 139330(1) 139551 139764 139628 139808 139385 139450 139754 140107 140297 140614 140790
2012 141637(1) 142065 142034 141865 142287
1 : Data affected by changes in population controls.

Civilian Labor Force Level

Series Id:           LNS11000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Seas) Civilian Labor Force Level
Labor force status:  Civilian labor force
Type of data:        Number in thousands
Age:                 16 years and over

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual
2001 143800 143701 143924 143569 143318 143357 143654 143284 143989 144086 144240 144305
2002 143883 144653 144481 144725 144938 144808 144803 145009 145552 145314 145041 145066
2003 145937(1) 146100 146022 146474 146500 147056 146485 146445 146530 146716 147000 146729
2004 146842(1) 146709 146944 146850 147065 147460 147692 147564 147415 147793 148162 148059
2005 148029(1) 148364 148391 148926 149261 149238 149432 149779 149954 150001 150065 150030
2006 150214(1) 150641 150813 150881 151069 151354 151377 151716 151662 152041 152406 152732
2007 153144(1) 152983 153051 152435 152670 153041 153054 152749 153414 153183 153835 153918
2008 154075(1) 153648 153925 153761 154325 154316 154480 154646 154559 154875 154622 154626
2009 154236(1) 154521 154143 154450 154800 154730 154538 154319 153786 153822 153833 153091
2010 153454(1) 153704 153964 154528 154216 153653 153748 154073 153918 153709 154041 153613
2011 153250(1) 153302 153392 153420 153700 153409 153358 153674 154004 154057 153937 153887
2012 154395(1) 154871 154707 154365 155007
1 : Data affected by changes in population controls.

Employment Situation Summary

Transmission of material in this release is embargoed                       USDL-12-1070
until 8:30 a.m. (EDT) Friday, June 1, 2012

Technical information:
 Household data:       (202) 691-6378  *  cpsinfo@bls.gov  *  www.bls.gov/cps
 Establishment data:   (202) 691-6555  *  cesinfo@bls.gov  *  www.bls.gov/ces

Media contact:         (202) 691-5902  *  PressOffice@bls.gov

                       THE EMPLOYMENT SITUATION -- MAY 2012

Nonfarm payroll employment changed little in May (+69,000), and the unemployment rate
was essentially unchanged at 8.2 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported
today. Employment increased in health care, transportation and warehousing, and wholesale
trade but declined in construction. Employment was little changed in most other major
industries.

Household Survey Data

Both the number of unemployed persons (12.7 million) and the unemployment rate (8.2
percent) changed little in May. (See table A-1.)

Among the major worker groups, the unemployment rates for adult men (7.8 percent) and
Hispanics (11.0 percent) edged up in May, while the rates for adult women (7.4 percent),
teenagers (24.6 percent), whites (7.4 percent), and blacks (13.6 percent) showed little
or no change. The jobless rate for Asians was 5.2 percent in May (not seasonally
adjusted), down from 7.0 percent a year earlier. (See tables A-1, A-2, and A-3.)

The number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks and over) rose from 5.1
to 5.4 million in May. These individuals accounted for 42.8 percent of the unemployed.
(See table A-12.)

The civilian labor force participation rate increased in May by 0.2 percentage point
to 63.8 percent, offsetting a decline of the same amount in April. The employment-
population ratio edged up to 58.6 percent in May. (See table A-1.)

The number of persons employed part time for economic reasons (sometimes referred to
as involuntary part-time workers) edged up to 8.1 million over the month. These
individuals were working part time because their hours had been cut back or because
they were unable to find a full-time job. (See table A-8.)

In May, 2.4 million persons were marginally attached to the labor force, up from 2.2
million a year earlier. (The data are not seasonally adjusted.) These individuals were
not in the labor force, wanted and were available for work, and had looked for a job
sometime in the prior 12 months. They were not counted as unemployed because they had
not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey. (See table A-16.)

Among the marginally attached, there were 830,000 discouraged workers in May, about the
same as a year earlier. (The data are not seasonally adjusted.)  Discouraged workers are
persons not currently looking for work because they believe no jobs are available for
them. The remaining 1.6 million persons marginally attached to the labor force in May
had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey for reasons such as school
attendance or family responsibilities. (See table A-16.)

Establishment Survey Data

Total nonfarm payroll employment changed little in May (+69,000), following a similar
change in April (+77,000). In comparison, the average monthly gain was 226,000 in the
first quarter of the year. In May, employment rose in health care, transportation and
warehousing, and wholesale trade, while construction lost jobs. (See table B-1.)

Health care employment continued to increase in May (+33,000). Within the industry,
employment in ambulatory health care services, which includes offices of physicians
and outpatient care centers, rose by 23,000 over the month. Over the year, health care
employment has risen by 340,000.

Transportation and warehousing added 36,000 jobs over the month. Employment gains in
transit and ground passenger transportation (+20,000) and in couriers and messengers
(+5,000) followed job losses in those industries in April. Employment in both industries
has shown little net change over the year. In May, truck transportation added 7,000 jobs.

Employment in wholesale trade rose by 16,000 over the month. Since reaching an employment
low in May 2010, this industry has added 184,000 jobs.

Manufacturing employment continued to trend up in May (+12,000) following a similar
change in April (+9,000). Job gains averaged 41,000 per month in the first quarter of
this year. In May, employment rose in fabricated metal products (+6,000) and in primary
metals (+4,000). Since its most recent low in January 2010, manufacturing employment has
increased by 495,000.

Construction employment declined by 28,000 in May, with job losses occurring in specialty
trade contractors (-18,000) and in heavy and civil engineering construction (-11,000).
Since reaching a low in January 2011, employment in construction has shown little change
on net.

Employment in professional and business services was essentially unchanged in May. Since
the most recent low point in September 2009, employment in this industry has grown by
1.4 million. In May, job losses in accounting and bookkeeping services (-14,000) and in
services to buildings and dwellings (-14,000) were offset by small gains elsewhere in
the industry.

Employment in other major industries, including mining and logging, retail trade,
information, financial activities, leisure and hospitality, and government, changed 
little in May.

The average workweek for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls edged down by 0.1 hour
to 34.4 hours in May. The manufacturing workweek declined by 0.3 hour to 40.5 hours, and
factory overtime declined by 0.1 hour to 3.2 hours. The average workweek for production
and nonsupervisory employees on private nonfarm payrolls was unchanged at 33.7 hours.
(See tables B-2 and B-7.)

In May, average hourly earnings for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls edged up
by 2 cents to $23.41. Over the past 12 months, average hourly earnings have increased
by 1.7 percent. In May, average hourly earnings of private-sector production and
nonsupervisory employees edged down by 1 cent to $19.70. (See tables B-3 and B-8.)

The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for March was revised from +154,000 to +143,000, and the change for April was revised from +115,000 to +77,000. 
_____________
The Employment Situation for June is scheduled to be released on Friday, July 6, 2012,
at 8:30 a.m. (EDT).

US Creates 69,000 New Jobs, Unemployment Rate 8.2%

By: Jeff Cox

The American jobs engine hit stall speed in May, with the economy adding just 69,000 new jobs while the unemployment rate climbed to 8.2 percent.


As another summertime swoon looms, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that job creation missed economist estimates for 158,000 new positions, and said labor force participation remains near 30-year lows though incrementally better than last month.

The unemployment rate that counts discouraged workers rose as well, swelling to 14.8 percent.

In May, stocks suffered through their worst month in two years, and the job-creation figures only added to the gloom.

Stock market futures indicated a sharply lower open for Wall Street, while investors continued to pour into bonds, sending the 10-year Treasury note yield tumbling to near 1.47 percent.

The bulk of the gains came from the service sector, which added 84,000 jobs, while manufacturing grew 12,000.

Construction took the biggest hit, dropping by 28,000 for the month.

“It’s painfully obvious the economic recovery in the U.S. isn’t just slowing down, it’s pulling up the emergency brake. And, lack of job creation isn’t the only critical concern. Wages/Income is sharply lower,” said Todd Schoenberger, managing principal The BlackBay Group in New York.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/47643788

Background Articles and Videos

The Unemployment Game Show: Are You *Really* Unemployed?

Unemployment and the Unemployment Rate

Types of Unemployment

U.S. job growth trips again, opens door to more Fed moves

Reuters

“…U.S. job growth braked sharply for a third straight month in May and the unemployment rate rose for the first time in nearly a year, raising chances of further monetary stimulus from the Federal Reserve to support the sputtering recovery.

Employers added a paltry 69,000 jobs to their payrolls last month, the least since May of last year, and 49,000 fewer jobs were created in the previous two months than had been thought, the Labor Department said on Friday.

The report is troubling for President Barack Obama, whose prospects of winning re-election in November could hinge on the economy’s health. Republican opponent Mitt Romney called the report “a harsh indictment” of Obama’s policies.

The jobless rate rose to 8.2 percent in May from 8.1 percent in April, although the increase reflected more people entering the labor force to look for work, a possible sign of growing confidence.

The data offered the clearest evidence yet that the deepening debt crisis in Europe and a slowdown in China were starting to dampen an already lackluster U.S. recovery. Concerns over the course of U.S. fiscal policy may also be weighing.

“The U.S. is not an island. What happens abroad matters here,” said Diane Swonk, chief economist at Mesirow Financial in Chicago. “It is difficult for anyone to commit to hire when growth remains subdued, and our fiscal problems both at home and abroad appear to be compounding.”

Data from other major economies was also worrisome. Chinese factory output barely rose in May and manufacturing activity in Britain shrank at its fastest pace in three years. Earlier reports had shown factory activity also declined in Germany and France.

Stocks on Wall Street ended down more than 2 percent, extending May’s rout. The Dow Jones industrial average sank into negative territory for the year.

Investors fearful of a global economic slump rushed into the safety of U.S. government bonds, pushing the yield on the benchmark 10-year Treasury note to a record low below 1.5 percent. The dollar fell against a basket of currencies.

The broadly weak payrolls report raised the odds of the Fed launching a third round of bond purchases or expanding on other efforts to help the flagging recovery. But many economists said it was unlikely the U.S. central bank would pull the trigger at its next policy meeting on June 19 and 20.

Economists had expected payrolls to rise 150,000 and the unemployment rate to hold steady at 8.1 percent. …”

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/job-growth-falters-may-123604088.html

Related Posts On Pronk Pops

Pronk Pops Show 76, June 6, 2012: Segment 0: Wisconsin Citizens and Governor Scott Walker Defeat Government Union Thugs and Their “Big Pal” Barack Obama–Recall Obama Golfing–Videos

Pronk Pops Show 76, June 6, 2012: Segment 2: U.S. Real Gross Domestic Product (GDP) Declined From 3% in Fourth Quarter 2011 to 1.9% in First Quarter of 2011–U.S. GDP Peaked Heading Toward Recession in Second Half of 2012–Diving Off The Fiscal Cliff–Videos

Pronk Pops Show 76, June 6, 2012: Segment 3: Remembering the 68th Anniversary of the D-Day landings 1944-2012

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Pronk Pops Show 76, June 6, 2012: Segment 0: Wisconsin Citizens and Governor Scott Walker Defeat Government Union Thugs and Their “Big Pal” Barack Obama–Recall Obama Golfing–Videos

Posted on June 6, 2012. Filed under: American History, Budgetary Policy, Business, Communications, Crime, Economics, Education, Employment, Energy, Federal Government, Fiscal Policy, Golf, Government, Government Spending, Health Care, Health Care Insurance, History, Housing, Immigration, Labor Economics, Law, Media, Medicine, Philosophy, Politics, Polls, Public Sector Unions, Radio, Regulation, Resources, Social Science, Sports, Success, Tax Policy, Technology, Unions, Videos, War, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Pronk Pops Show 76: June 6, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 75: May 30, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 74: May 21, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 73: May 9, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 72: May 2, 2012

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-76

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 22-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1-9

Segment 0: Wisconsin Citizens and Governor Scott Walker Defeat Government Union Thugs and Their “Big Pal” Barack Obama–Recall Obama Golfing–Videos

Sarah Palin On Wisconsin: “Obama’s Goose Is Cooked”

BO:”Now what do I do?”

Bill:”First–Replace Joe with Hillary,

Second–Let Hillary Do Your Job

Third–Play more golf!

BO: Sounds like a plan.

Note: Color Co-ordinated Golf Shirt & Shoes!

It’s Been Three Years

Clinton: “No Question” Being Gov And “Sterling Business Career” Makes You Qualified

 

Scott Walker Will Survive Wisconsin Recall: Reason-Rupe Poll Results

Did it Right – It’s Working Wisconsin

Records

Governor Walker “On The Record” w/ Greta Van Susteren 05/16/12

What Is Wisconsin Recall All About?

Scott Walker CPAC vs NEA Teachers Union

You + Two= Victory

Governor Walker on “Hannity” 05/30/12

Gov Scott Walker Recall Election Victory Speech

Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker Easily Wins, But So Might Obama

“Obama’s Goose is Cooked” Sarah Palin on Greta 6/5/2012

Gov. Scott Walker Wins!

Background Articles and Videos

Wisconsin Recall Amnesia

Why aren’t Democrats running against Scott Walker’s union reforms?

“…Since Mr. Walker’s reforms went into effect, the doom and gloom scenarios have failed to materialize. Property taxes in the state were down 0.4% in 2011, the first decline since 1998. According to Chief Executive magazine, Wisconsin moved up four more places this year to number 20 in an annual CEO survey of the best states to do business, after jumping 17 spots last year.

The Governor’s office has estimated that altogether the reforms have saved Badger State taxpayers more than $1 billion, including $65 million in changes in health-care plans, and some $543 million in local savings documented by media reports. According to the Wisconsin-based MacIver Institute, Mayor Barrett’s city of Milwaukee saved $19 million on health-care costs as a direct result of Mr. Walker’s reforms. Awkward turtle.

Some of the good news has been in the schools, because districts have been able to avoid teacher layoffs and make ends meet because of flexibility created by the changes. In the Brown Deer school district, savings created by pension and health-care contributions from employees allowed the school to prevent layoffs and save some $800,000 for taxpayers.

In Fond du Lac, school board president Eric Everson says the district saved $4 million as a result of last year’s reforms, including $2 million from the changes in employee contributions to their pensions.

Another 52 schools across the state saved an average of $220 per student thanks to the ability to introduce competitive bidding for health insurance, rather than automatically going through WEA Trust, the favored provider of the Wisconsin Education Association Council. If the savings are even half as large as the Governor’s surveys indicate, they are still enormous.

All of this is making an impression on Wisconsin voters. According to a Marquette University Law School poll released Wednesday, only 12% of Wisconsin voters say “restoring collective bargaining rights” is their priority, which explains the Democratic decision to fight on other issues. …”

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303916904577377963809965708.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

Why aren’t Wisconsin Democrats running against Walker’s PEU reforms?

by Ed Morrissey

“…Democrats and Big Labor — pardon the redundancy, but it matters in this story — teamed up to recall Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, Lt. Governor Rebecca Kleefisch, and a handful of Republican state senators over the public-employee union reforms passed by Walker and the state legislature.  One would then expect that the recall election would feature a debate over the PEU reforms and their outcomes on Wisconsin … right?  Wrong, as the Wall Street Journal reports — because the outcomes are relentlessly positive:

Since last summer, unions have been throwing millions at defeating the man who reformed collective bargaining for government workers and required union members to pay 5.8% of their paychecks toward pensions and 12.6% of their health insurance premiums, modest contributions compared to the average in private business. As the May 8 Democratic recall primary nears to determine who will run against Mr. Walker on June 5, this should be their rhetorical moment ne plus ultra.

So, let’s see. Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett, the front-runner, has focused his campaigns on jobs, education, the environment and “making communities safer.” One of Mr. Barrett’s ads singles out “Walker’s War on Women,” with nary a mention of collective bargaining. Former Dane County Executive Kathleen Falk is heavily supported by union groups, but even her issues list makes only passing reference to collective bargaining.

No wonder. Since Mr. Walker’s reforms went into effect, the doom and gloom scenarios have failed to materialize. Property taxes in the state were down 0.4% in 2011, the first decline since 1998. According to Chief Executive magazine, Wisconsin moved up four more places this year to number 20 in an annual CEO survey of the best states to do business, after jumping 17 spots last year.

The Governor’s office has estimated that altogether the reforms have saved Badger State taxpayers more than $1 billion, including $65 million in changes in health-care plans, and some $543 million in local savings documented by media reports. According to the Wisconsin-based MacIver Institute, Mayor Barrett’s city of Milwaukee saved $19 million on health-care costs as a direct result of Mr. Walker’s reforms. Awkward turtle.

So now the recall election will be fought on mundane political issues like jobs, education, and the environment?  Why, pray tell, did Wisconsin need a recall election to revisit these long-term issues?  If Wisconsin voters want two-year terms for their chief executive, they could amend their state constitution to provide for that.  That way, they could budget properly for two-year terms and plan for all of the costs of the elections.

And don’t kid yourselves — those costs are considerable: …”

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/05/04/why-arent-wisconsin-democrats-running-against-walkers-peu-reforms/

Public Employee Union Membership in Wisconsin Drops After Collective Bargaining Law

By: David Dayen Thursday May 31, 2012 11:06 am

“…To figure out what will really happen, I think you have to factor in what Sargent writes here:

Labor and Dems are widely believed to have a superior ground game to that of Walker, though it’s still unclear whether it will be enough to compensate for Walker’s seeming lead in the polls. A Clinton visit, Dems hope, will galvanize base turnout (the black vote in Milwaukee, for example) just enough to put Barrett over the top.

Ah, the ground game. This is seen as the savior, with labor throwing a lifeline to Barrett to pull him over the finish line. There’s one thing about this that I can’t get past. The goal of Walker’s anti-worker bill was to decimate public sector unions, to ruin the funding base for Democrats in Wisconsin elections. In other words, the bill was designed to deal with close races like this, to give Republican candidates an advantage. And a story in the Wall Street Journal sticks out like a sore thumb on this point:

Public-employee unions in Wisconsin have experienced a dramatic drop in membership—by more than half for the second-biggest union—since a law championed by Republican Gov. Scott Walker sharply curtailed their ability to bargain over wages and working conditions […]

Wisconsin membership in the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees—the state’s second-largest public-sector union after the National Education Association, which represents teachers—fell to 28,745 in February from 62,818 in March 2011, according to a person who has viewed Afscme’s figures. A spokesman for Afscme declined to comment.

Much of that decline came from Afscme Council 24, which represents Wisconsin state workers, whose membership plunged by two-thirds to 7,100 from 22,300 last year […]

Membership declines could be self-perpetuating, said Mr. Chaison of Clark University. With diminished dues, unions deliver fewer services, making membership less appealing and hampering recruiting.

Simply put, public employee unions were decimated by the assault on collective bargaining. They’re losing members at a rapid rate. That means they’re losing their funding base. And that means that their efforts will be that much less effective. That was the entire point.

This could be much of the reason why, in that Marquette poll out yesterday, when asked whether they supported restrictions on collective bargaining for public employee unions, one year after the anti-worker law, 55% of Wisconsin voters said yes, and 41% said no. There isn’t really anyone left to tell voters otherwise. …”

http://news.firedoglake.com/2012/05/31/public-employee-union-membership-in-wisconsin-drops-after-collective-bargaining-law/

Insurance Scam Driving Wisconsin Union Debate

Kyle Olson

“…Much of the current controversy in Wisconsin involves the impending loss of most collective bargaining privileges for state employees, including public school teachers.

The fact is that the Wisconsin Education Association Council, the largest teachers union in the state, has grossly abused that privilege for decades, resulting in the unnecessary siphoning of millions of dollars from Wisconsin public schools. Under current Wisconsin law, the identity of the insurance company that provides health coverage to school employees is a matter of collective bargaining in each school district. I

n the majority of districts around the state, WEAC negotiators have used that law to pressure local school boards into purchasing coverage from WEA Trust, an insurance company established by and closely associated with the union.

WEA Trust offers very comprehensive health coverage, at a very high cost to schools. Most of the districts with the most expensive health premiums in the state are clients of WEA Trust. Most of the districts with the lowest premiums do business with other insurance carriers.

A few dozen districts have managed to dump WEA Trust insurance over the past few years, despite the protests of teachers and their union. Officials from many of those districts say they managed to save at least six figures their first year with a different carrier, and maintained steady rates in subsequent years, while still offering quality health coverage to employees.

Officials from other districts say they’re also eager to dump WEA Trust coverage, but need their employees’ anonymous claim histories from WEA Trust to share with other bidders. Several say they have never requested that information because they were told WEA Trust would punish them by pulling them out of local insurance pools, resulting in skyrocketing premiums.

Today many Wisconsin school boards consider themselves stuck with expensive WEA Trust health coverage, until state law is altered to take the identity of the insurance carrier off the collective bargaining table. Gov. Scott Walker’s current legislative proposal would do just that, giving school boards the opportunity to freely shop for insurance and save millions of tax dollars for instructional purposes.

In fact, Gov. Walker recently cited WEA Trust as the #1 reason for collective bargaining reform. …”

http://townhall.com/columnists/kyleolson/2011/02/23/insurance_scam_driving_wisconsin_union_debate/page/full/

Change Direction

Change Direction 2

Change Direction 3

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

Edward Klein–The Amateur: Barack Obama in The White House–Obama Crony Eric Whitaker Tried to Bribe Jeremiah Wright in 2008 to Keep His Mouth Shut –Videos

Related Posts On Pronk Pops

Pronk Pops Show 76, June 6, 2012: Segment 1: 12.7 Million Unemployed Americans–Unemployment Rate Increases To 8.2% and Stays Above 8% For More Than 40 Months–Only 69,000 Jobs Created in May–140,000 Jobs Per Month Needed To Keep Up With American Population Growth–Fire Obama–Videos

Pronk Pops Show 76, June 6, 2012: Segment 2: U.S. Real Gross Domestic Product (GDP) Declined From 3% in Fourth Quarter 2011 to 1.9% in First Quarter of 2011–U.S. GDP Peaked Heading Toward Recession in Second Half of 2012–Diving Off The Fiscal Cliff–Videos

Pronk Pops Show 76, June 6, 2012: Segment 3: Remembering the 68th Anniversary of the D-Day landings 1944-2012

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Liked it here?
Why not try sites on the blogroll...