Oddly enough, the number of jobs the Obama administration claims to have saved or created keeps rising. Right along with unemployment.
Obviously, the two stats are mutually exclusive. And based on investigations by newspapers around the country, the President’s stat is as phony as Joe Biden’s hairline.
Let’s start in Massachusetts with this information from the Boston Globe:
While Massachusetts recipients of federal stimulus money collectively report 12,374 jobs saved or created, a Globe review shows that number is wildly exaggerated. Organizations that received stimulus money miscounted jobs, filed erroneous figures, or claimed jobs for work that has not yet started.
The Globe details some of the “errors.”
One of the largest reported jobs figures comes from Bridgewater State College, which is listed as using $77,181 in stimulus money for 160 full-time work-study jobs for students. But Bridgewater State spokesman Bryan Baldwin said the college made a mistake and the actual number of new jobs was “almost nothing.’’ Bridgewater has submitted a correction, but it is not yet reflected in the report.
In other cases, federal money that recipients already receive annually – subsidies for affordable housing, for example – was reclassified this year as stimulus spending, and the existing jobs already supported by those programs were credited to stimulus spending. Some of these recipients said they did not even know the money they were getting was classified as stimulus funds until September, when federal officials told them they had to file reports.
“There were no jobs created. It was just shuffling around of the funds,’’ said Susan Kelly, director of property management for Boston Land Co., which reported retaining 26 jobs with $2.7 million in rental subsidies for its affordable housing developments in Waltham. “It’s hard to figure out if you did the paperwork right. We never asked for this.’’
The federal stimulus report for Massachusetts has so many errors, missing data, or estimates instead of actual job counts that it may be impossible to accurately tally how many people have been employed by the massive infusion of federal money. Massachusetts is expected to receive an estimated $1 billion more in stimulus contracts, grants, and loans.
Next, the Denver Post took a closer look at the 8,094 jobs the administration claims to have created or saved in Colorado:
• Englewood-based TeleTech Government Solutions listed the equivalent of 635 full-time jobs credited to Colorado created by recovery funds used to set up call centers on the conversion to digital television. Only the equivalent of 34 of them were filled in Colorado. The rest are scattered across the country.
• The city of Westminster reported that its $150,438 contract for road work on Lowell Boulevard would create 117 jobs. That would equate to $1,286 per job. The city said the estimate is based on anyone who will work on the project, even if it was for only one day. No federal officials told the city to convert to the number of full-time-equivalent slots, an official said.
• Two child-development centers — one in Colorado Springs and the other in Saguache County — reported they had created or saved more than 292 jobs combined. However, the money — totaling about $650,000, or $2,226 a job — was used to give employees cost- of-living raises. Only three new jobs were created.
• Some subsidized-housing projects listed their entire staffs as jobs retained as a result of stimulus spending even if the money was the same rental assistance for their tenants they had received in previous years. Combined, they could total as many as 200 jobs.
And in Washington, the Tacoma News-Tribune reports even more bogus job figures:
New numbers released by the federal government Friday estimate that the federal stimulus package has helped create or save 34,500 total jobs in Washington, making it the state with the third-largest reported number of stimulus jobs behind California and New York.
But there’s a caveat on those job creation numbers: 24,000 of them probably weren’t in danger in the first place.
State officials used a chunk of stimulus money to cover paychecks for 24,000 teachers who were already contracted to finish out the school year. That money came from a pot of stimulus funds given to the state to help offset budget cuts.
The story is the same in state after state – Virginia, Texas, Florida, Ohio, and on and on.
This. Administration. Just. Make. Shit. Up.
Source: HotAir.com, Gateway Pundit, Boston Globe, Denver Post, Tacoma News-Tribune
Subscribe, tweet, share, tell a friend!
Browse before and after this article
OLDER: History repeats itself: Obama doesn’t get that national anthem thingNEWER: Good for thee, but not for me: Congressional Democrats don’t want to be covered by ObamaCare
Related Posts
- Stimulus money created or saved 796 jobs in New Hampshire. 700 of them were government jobs.
- In addition to saving or creating jobs, Obama’s now saving and creating entire congressional districts
- How many jobs have been saved or created? Pick a number, any number.
- Oregon spends $176 million in stimulus funds to create jobs that only last one week
- The good news: North Dakota adds 1,800 jobs. The bad news: the other 49 states lost jobs
{ 48 comments… read them below or add one }
BHO fires Anita Dunn & then hires her husband (a saved job) for unemployed Americans, but then he fires Greg Craig.. and Mr. Dung get his job…Math at the WH the immaculate conception?
Hey Barrack is quickly catching up with Al Gore, otherwise known as “The inventor of Fire”
Hey Pat from Michigan, did you hear that GM plans to pay back $6.7 Billion in bailout money ahead of schedule? Apperantly the company is doing well. How many Michigan jobs does that save? What? no credit to Obama? Remember the Republicans were saying that the government should let G.M. fail remember? If you’re from Michigan you gotta like the news. If you don’t then you have motives other than the well being or prosperity of Michigan and or your country.
Jon:
Certainly don’t mean to burst your bubble, but as you can see in the attached article, the loan payback that you reference is just more creative accounting from the Obama administration. Even the liberal Los Angeles Times New York Times see the hypocrisy in the story (as reported by the New York Times):
LA Times commenting on NY Times stsory:
The headline on the New York Times piece linked atop this item originally read, “G.M., Citing Progress, Reports Loss of $1.15 Billion.” Perhaps aghast at the notion that this might bring a modicum of joy into readers’ lives, some editor changed it to “G.M. Shows Signs of Recovery Despite New Loss”:
G.M. said Monday that while it was still losing money, it had stabilized enough that it could take an important symbolic step and begin returning some of the $50 billion that the federal government provided to help give it a second chance.
The Times acknowledges that “paying back government loans hardly constitutes a clean bill of health for G.M. The money it is returning to the government is simply part of the loan that the company does not need.” That explanation is tautological, but the Associated Press elaborates:
The repayment of government loans will begin with a $1.2 billion installment in December. GM said it plans to repay the debt over the next two years and possibly as early as next year.
That money will come from a $16.4 billion contingency fund set up by the U.S. government in case sales worsened or other problems cropped up. The seemingly circular payment plan was already stirring controversy in Congress.
“What is the logic in repaying government loans with taxpayer dollars?” asked Brooke Buchanan, a spokeswoman for Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.
The LA Times continues its comment:
But hang on a second. Who exactly is paying the money back? “The government owns 61 percent of the company,” the AP notes. So the government is paying back a loan from the government with money lent to it by the government. It seems like a zero-sum game, but we suspect the taxpayers are going to end up footing the bill somehow.
The LAT calls is “a zero sum game.” IHateTheMedia.com calls it a circle jerk.
No apologies necessary, no bubbles busted. I have never suggested that G.M. is in the clear, or that they don’t have a lot of work to do. But the primary focus of the article is that G.M. has stabilized and is on more solid footing. This is not a good time for any auto manufacturer. Ford is doing well, but that’s by way of comparison only.
You omitted this part of the NY times article:
G.M.’s results showed a healthier balance sheet, ample cash, and factory production much more in line with consumer demand — improvements it owes largely to the bankruptcy process, the helping hand of the federal government and a modest increase in car sales.
Even with that help, the nation’s largest automaker lost nearly $1.2 billion in the third quarter.
But G.M.’s managers and directors have also made some fast decisions to help the company. They have shaken up the company’s famously bureaucratic culture. And they have used aggressive marketing, including a 60-day money-back guarantee, and some well-received new products, like the Cadillac SRX crossover, to bring shoppers back to showrooms.
As a result, even though G.M. has shed four of its brands, it has managed to hold onto roughly a fifth of the overall car market in the United States. The company is also generating cash now, rather than bleeding it.
That is why the company is in a position to begin paying back $6.7 billion in federal loans as soon as next month. “We think it’s important that we show the taxpayer we can repay this investment,” G.M.’s chief executive, Fritz Henderson, said Monday.
The primary thrust of your argument is that they are using government money to repay the loan. And they are but it’s the money G.M. already borrowed.
Let me put it this way, let’s say Editor borrows $20 grand to save his failing conservative blog-spot. He uses some of the money, stems the tide, stabilizes his business and does it all for $15 grand. According to you, Editor should then go out and blow the remaining $5 grand, and then earn it back and start paying off the $20 grand he borrowed. Do you realize that what G.M. is doing is no different than what businesses, and citizens do all the time. They took out a loan, used what they needed and started paying down the loan with the remainder.
These are very basic concepts and as much as I don’t like you I don’t beleive you’re that stupid. Here’s what it boils down to: you hate Obama and the Democrats so much, you would rather see the U.S. fail than see them do a good job.
“These are very basic concepts and as much as I don’t like you I don’t beleive you’re that stupid.”
Gosh, Jon, I can’t tell if that is a compliment or not. I must be stupid as well. Very clever. You really got him on that one.
Here’s what it boils down to: you hate Obama and the Democrats so much, you would rather see the U.S. fail than see them do a good job.”
Yes, I see how you drew that conclusion from Editor’s comment.
Jon, I’m going to be the hardass here. While you manage to be semi-articulate, Editor and I have laughed at your ignorance and childish understanding of the world. And we understand that you have provided some entertainment for the other readers. But pay attention: We understand that as a graduate of the Saul Alinsky School of Debate that you you believe yourself to be a master of the art of ridicule. You’re not bad, but you are more transparent than you believe.
We enjoy your having you post your opposing points, absurd and inaccurate as they there. But, we’re getting a a bit tired of the constant not-so-between-the-lines digs at the others. You are a guest of our house (no, it’s not a government program where you have a “right” to be here), and as such, I’m telling you that need to behave yourself better.
You won’t hear back from me again, unless it’s to tell you you’ve been kicked off the site. I honestly hope that does not happen.
O.k. so you’re conceeding the G.M. argument. Thanks.
No doubt you’ve seen the corrosive language used against me, but are willing to overlook it. How about I respond in-kind to anyone who digs at me? That’s as much as you can ask anyone.
Yeah that can’t be true. There’s no way Obama has been able to fix even a fraction of Bush’s damage.
Hey, I no wut! lets git us another hickey doodle up ere in warshinton! attle fix er! Maybe a Sarah Palin! she’s stupid enough to appeal to us.
But on a more somber note, somewhere Glen Beck is crying. Well odds are anyway. He’s cries so often I’m bound to be right now and again.
Jon,
Would that any dubmocrat loves america the way glenn beck does, it would be a better place-but since barack, and most of the rest of der furher’s party hate america, the country is doomed.
Which is he, Der Furher was a “Fascist” and as such he abhored “Communism”. I know you want Obama to be everything and anything evil, but he can’t be both.
Glen Beck (real name Harry Hill, I don’t trust a man who uses an alias) does not love his country. His patriotism is for sale to the highest bidder. He’s a wind bag and a cry baby. He fancies himself a modern “Thomas Paine” and is nothing of the sort. He keeps talking about our founding fathers and taking back the country. Well our founding fathers implemented a representative government, and Barack Obama and for the most part the Democrats are our elected representatives. So what is Harry crying about? Does he plan to take our country back from those who have honored the traditions of our founding fathers?
Thomas Paine would call Beck a rabble rouser and probably accuse him of insurrection or possibly treason.
Where did you get this Harry Hill? Are you just making up stuff like most liberals do so a bunch of your sheep-like minions will parrot the nonsense and pretty soon it is the truth??
Sheep like minions, parroting a non truth? since when did the subject become Obama’s birth certificate or Death Panels?
Shame on us. We just accepted your statement that Glenn Beck’s real name is “Harry Hill” and assumed that Beck was an air name he had adopted in his DJ days. But we can find nothing that indicates Beck’s birth name is anything other than Glenn Lee Beck.
Your wild assertions have already caused everyone at IHTM to doubt your sanity as well as your honesty. If you can’t cite a credible source or two regarding the Harry Hill statement, you’ve proven yourself to be either delusional or a lying sack of excrement.
Shall we open it up to a vote?
my vote is he is both and he (if he is really a he) should just be content listening to that loon Rhandi Rhodes. She is both of those things as well.
vh5150,
Are you actually trying to be the “wrongest” person ever? You said earlier that I didn’t know the difference between fascism and communism and I proved I did and you bailed on that argument. All you got now is pretending I might be a woman? as if that’s suppose to hurt. Dude, you are weak. You need to hit the books or something.
P.S. Really? 5150? Isn’t that the album where Eddie Van Halen had the blistering KEYBOARD solos? Man get something right every once in a while. How bout some Diver Down, or Women and Children First, hell, I’d even take an OU812.
I vote that you are very bad at google searches. Really, must I do everything for you?
By the way, what’s with this “us” stuff. Are you the Borg or something? Or does it actually take several of you to peck out a paragraph.
Even if I was a lying sack of excrement, you have to admit I’m the most entertaining person on here. Without me you got a bunch of fat pasty nancy boys patting each other on the back.
Well, Jon, the Founding Fathers also created this thing called the Constitution which, by the way, is a document limiting the power of the federal guberment. Seems the libs overlooked this small and, in their minds, minor detail . No doubt using the word “limit” and “federal guberment” in the same sentence is hateful to their sensitivities. Fortunately, many have read and understand the document. Unfortunately, not many libs understand it or even want to. Its really not a hard document to understand, either. Of course the libs like to obfuscate it in artificial complexity, misrepresent it, and even pretend it doesn’t exist. The goons in Washington have learned to circumnavigate the Constitution legislatively but this does not change the fact there are only two legal ways of changing it, and that is through a constitutional amendment or a Constitutional Convention. So, I ask, where is the Constitutional Authority for much of the legislation that has passed or in the process of passing?
I’ll not pretend to know what Thomas Paine or any other Founding Father of this once great nation would say concerning the convoluted mess this country is in. However, given the circumstance of the striking similarities between our federal guberment and the court of King George III, I would say there is a very good chance they would not put up with the nonsense that is our federal guberment. And, I think there is a good chance Beck would be wearing a blue coat while you would be wearing red.
Which legislation are you referring to that violates the constitution, and in what way does it violate the constitution? I am more than willing to debate the issue with you but you’re going to have to be more specific. I can neither defend or denounce legislation that is unknown to me. So get that stuff together and we’ll look it over.
You mentioned two ways in which you could change the constitution (ammendment or convention). So which of these legal paths did the Bush administration follow when it illegally wire tapped the phone lines in violation of our right to privacy?
That the Bush administration did this is not in question. They did it, they admit they did it but said it was in the interest of national security.
Did you know that the suspension of rights in the interest of national security is one of the most common occurances in a fascist regime?
You say liberals try to make our rights seem more complicated than they are, but the truth is that liberals tread lightly where our rights are concerned because they understand the value of those rights and the dangers of eroding them.
Conservatives like you are more willing to give up your rights because you have been convinced by way of fear based politics that it will somehow make you safer. The same people you are now defending, are constantly attacking the elected representative government of your nation. That same representative government that the founding fathers put in place. And at the end of the day, it’s only because they had their collective a*ses handed to them in two consecutive elections. Republicans can’t convince people to vote them into office, so the government doesn’t work.
If you want to live in fear, hoping that the Republicans can legislate all the boogymen away then that’s your choice. Understand though, the boogymen will never stop coming. There will always be another threat, another conspiracy, another excuse for you to vote out of fear.
For myself, “Give me liberty or give me death”. If I have to die at the hands of a terrorist or whatever I’ll die with my boots on. Not as some week and stupid coward who gave his rights away.
Your visceral hatred of Bush is quite apparent and affects you to the extent that you see in my post that which is not there. Its fascinating, and I might add, fun to see a lib squirm. By the way, you might be totally surprised to know we haven’t had a “conservative” president since Regan. But before him, we had your own venerable Jimmah Cartah, that mental giant that almost single-handedly destroyed the American economy. And theah wasn’t even a woah goin’ on!
In your reply you said “Did you know that the suspension of rights in the interest of national security is one of the most common occurrences in a fascist regime?”. I guess that made Abraham Lincoln a fascist before fascism became popular? You also said “You say liberals try to make our rights seem more complicated than they are, but the truth is that liberals tread lightly where our rights are concerned because they understand the value of those rights and the dangers of eroding them.” Read again. Not rights, but the law of the land they make complicated to obfuscate. This is a common tatic used to confuse control the rights.
The statement “Conservatives like you are more willing to give up your rights because you have been convinced by way of fear based politics that it will somehow make you safer.” Shows just how far in left field you are. Who is it that constantly attacks the 2nd Amendment? I fear all government, as anyone in their right mind should. I fear most, however, those who work so hard to dispense with this amendment, and it isn’t conservatives.
Fear? You bet I fear what libs are doing and plan to do with this country. Something that is not clear to libs is that freedom is not a gift from the guberment. Rather, the guberment can only protect or encroach upon it. Certainly we cannot live in an environment of absolute freedom for that would be a state of anarchy. Neither can we live in an environment of zero freedom for that would be a state of tyranny. There must be a compromise somewhere between the two.
Our Founding Fathers, in wisdom that seems to dwarf our current crop of politicians, found a workable compromise. That compromise coalesced into what is known as the Constitution. This document is not complicated and is nothing more than instructions on how the federal guberment is to function and the boundaries of its power. Now this is a point where libs really get confused: It grants nothing to the people. Yep, you got it. It does not grant the right of free speech or to own guns or any right whatsoever. What it does do is guarantee the federal guberment will not tamper with the rights of the states or the people. This is what is called — and I will use a term that sends whacko lefties over the edge — the Original Intent.
As the federal guberment consolidated power, it began to tamper with the constitution. For its power to broaden, the 10th Amendment had to be largely ignored. One of the favorite methods of encroachment upon the 10th is the Interstate Commerce Clause which has been broadened to the point of absurdity. Agencies whose regulations have the force of law is another. Pretty much the same can be said for the 9th. And the 2nd? Libs don’t know what the phrase “shall not be infringed” means. You want specific examples? Compare what the federal guberment has done in the last several decades with what the Constitution allows.
But, alas, this discourse is useless to those who obtain their information from the Huffandstoned Post, Moron.org and their ilk. Rather than read that drivel, try reading the history of our founding fathers and the arguments put forth in the formation of the Constitution. I realize getting that close to Original Intent is extremely painful to libs, but hey, it won’t kill you. With this, I am done with you. You are a troll and no amount of reason will revive you out of your lib-hazed mind.
Well it took you two chapters to say nothing. Can we consider this a preview of the new Palin book?
The most sweeping changes in american’s right to bear arms were contained in the Brady Law. It was brought on in large part by a Republican’s wife (who I assume was a Republican herself). Most likely James Brady never cared about gun control, nor is it likely that his wife did before he was shot. Just as Nancy Reagan probably would never have cared about stem cell research had her husband not suffered with alzheimer’s.
Both cases support a long held beleif of mine and that is that Republicans, or conservatives suffer from what I call “empathy disconnect”. You’re incapable of seeing things from someone elses point of view. As long as you have a job, health insurance, no terminal illness, or gunshot wound why shoud you care? It’s not until after it happens to you that you understand the severity of the issue and what it means to the person suffering under the condition.
In the end, conservatives (being human) are no different from liberals. The only thing that really separates the two is that a liberal is able to open his mind and put his/herself in another person’s shoes. Conservatives actually have to suffer a severe and debilitating gunshot wound to the head before they can understand the importance of regulating who has fire arms and or which types of fire arms they are permitted to use.
The same can be said for any number of issues. Look at all the conservatives that stood against health care reform when the Clinton’s tried to pass legislation. No doubt many of them, just like every one else developed terminal illnesses over the following decade. Many of these people had their coverage pulled out from under them the first time they needed it, or found that the co-pays themself were enough to bankrupt them. And as they sat there dying (not because treatments weren’t available, but becuase they didn’t have the money) no doubt they changed their position on the state of health care in this country. But what does it matter at that point? All the healthy conservatives have no time to listen to them complain about their situation.
As far as the Government tampering with the constitution goes, you can’t say the Republicans don’t do it. Bush tried to pass an ammendment to ban gay marriage. Fact is, the United States does not exist in a vacuum. The world changes, societies change, old pre-conceptions are shattered and new ones erected. Our constitution will continue to change as we do. Some people, entrenched in their beleif system will be frightened and recalcitrant, but will eventually be forced to evolve with the rest of society.
You say I only get my information from the Huffington Post. And yet I am here, reading the articles here on this site and what do you offer in the way of knowlege and enlightenment? An article on how Obama stands when hearing the national anthem? or how he bows to show common courtesy to foreign dignitaries?
The fact that I’m here, and you’re not on the Huffington Post would suggest that I am the one who considers multiple sources and you are the troll that needs the same spoon-fed garbage over and over from sources that have the same point of view.
Your argument can only serve to convict you.
BTW, if you are so enamored with what you perceive as freedom and liberty, I find it fascinating you cling so tightly to the federal guberment teat. In the final analysis, governments are antithesis to freedom and liberty.
That’s because the reality of life is that the government is the lesser of the two evils. If the government is reduced, and weakened enough, control will not fall to the people. If you beleive that you are sadly mistaken. Power will shift to industry and corporations. They already try to control as much legislation as they can, you think they’re gonna back off after you succeed in weakening the government?
My father use to work in a coal mine in Kentucky. Back then they wouldn’t even pay their workers in U.S. Dollars. They paid my father with what they called “Company Script” that was only usable at the company store. When my oldest sister was born, and my mother and father needed a high chair, he had to give up almost an entire pay check to buy it at the company store while Sears Roebuck had the exact same chair for one third the price. No doubt this policy and practice saved the company a load of money. At the end of the day they were really paying their workers one-third the going wage because they were getting two thirds of their money back by way of the company store.
Look at the history of the labor movement in this country, and look at what companies have done in their efforts to exploit working americans. From Ford’s thugs shooting picketing workers, to the sherif (on the payrole of the coal companies) who rented an airplane to drop pipe bombs on striking miners. Read about the Sherif in Virginia who would not take coal company money. The coal company would send thugs around to beat and shoot up the houses of labor leaders. When they came to this particular sherif’s town, he and his deputy met them, there was a shootout and the sherif and his deputy won. The sherif was given and award and on the day he was to be presented with it, coal company thugs gunned him, his deputy and their wifes down on the courthouse steps. Do you think the nature of big business has changed? you don’t see these egregeous crimes because our government has enacted laws against it. You weaken the government or repeal those laws and it will happen again. Look at the health insurance companies. They have set laws that prevent them from being prosecuted for anti-trust. They’ve got these big organizations and everyone is working toward the bottom line. Cutting costs and saving the company money is the objective of any young executive. Why would any company, that can easily cancel a contract (thereby not paying for say cancer treatment) without impunity (no anti-trust) pay for these services? It is the height of naivety to think that they would. Companies are not made up of evil people. But many people working together to watch the bottom line, and cut costs, usually find themselves employing evil policies.
The reason we have clean air, clean water, safe working environments, and consumer protection, is not because big business is too benevalent to polute, abuse, or rip us off. It’s because in spite of all the millions they spend and all the dis-information they have sewn, our elected representative government has passed laws restricting them from doing so.
apparently Jon doesn’t know the difference between Fascism and Communism. Central control of industry, suppression of dissent….sounds like Obama to me…
You leftist have issues with that and try to change the meaning to fit your foolishness. You then use it as one of the names you like to call since that is how you all try to win arguments. That and changing the subject…after all we are trying to discuss how Dear Leader can’t seem to ever tell the truth.
Dr. Lawrence Britt has examined the fascist regimes of Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia) and several Latin American regimes. Britt found 14 defining characteristics common to each:
1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism – Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.
2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights – Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of “need.” The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.
3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause – The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial , ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.
4. Supremacy of the Military – Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.
5. Rampant Sexism – The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Divorce, abortion and homosexuality are suppressed and the state is represented as the ultimate guardian of the family institution.
6. Controlled Mass Media – Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.
7. Obsession with National Security – Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.
8. Religion and Government are Intertwined – Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed
to the government’s policies or actions.
9. Corporate Power is Protected – The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.
10. Labor Power is Suppressed – Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed.
11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts – Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts and letters is openly attacked.
12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment – Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.
13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption – Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.
14. Fraudulent Elections – Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.
Sound like any Republicans you know? Ooo! look at that “I want my country back” T-shirt with the american flag on it. I refer you to number 1.
I see obama
jon,
Most of the fascist regimes around the earth now bear some semblance of communism in their structure. So that is a moronic argument.
Beck isn’t for sale-and by the way about 75% of all broadcasters use “stage names” so that idiots don’t attack them at home(I will be Lou Dobbs is wishing he used an alias in his broadcasting career). As for a representative government, when the president spends over a billion dollars of donations from FOREIGNERS, he is not representative of AMERICANS. Barack Obama isn’t an American(1), is a muslim plant(2), hates, and I mean hates America and everything it stands for, thus he is bent on changing it to a 3rd world country-so he gets the global emperor position Soros wants him in(because he is owned by soros and does everything soros tells him to do(3), and the majority of this country are conservative-only takes a 4th grade reading level to read all of the polls for all of history to see this(4), and the congress(both houses) are not representative of the American public, as they are going to further socialize the US(5)-as of this week, the FDA plans on pulling all alcohol and caffeine from the shelves until the mfr’s can prove they aren’t hurtful to Americans, the Democrat congress is going to forcibly take over the light rail and subway systems around the country-so there are 100 more industries they are going to confiscate(rail, mfr of rail machinery, etc…, coffee, soda, all food items with chocolate in them(it has caffeine in it), tea, etc….it is all part of the push to silence once and for all, voters with brains(which excludes democrats), and to push this country to a communist way of life where all men/women work for the government owned industries, get their insurance, gas, utilities, automobiles, money, from the government, and this will be achieved through a fascist regime that will dictate how/when we pee and poop. So you see Jon, your statement about communism/fascism is kind of off base, since you don’t understand the two and their similarities, and the fact that it usually takes one to weaken the public’s will to achieve the other.
Lastly, don’t you have a nasty rant put up on on huffington or koz about how you hope tony snow suffered greatly in his final days, or how W should be tortured at GTMO, or something like that, rather than posting rebuttals to the truth here? in the immortal words of Nicholson’s character in “A Few Good Men” …..
YOU CAN”T HANDLE THE TRUTH….furthermore, have you ever noticed that Democrats don’t serve in the military? the ones who do or have, lie about their service(john kerry, etc) Just a thought!
Wow, so how long have you been off your meds? Listen, I know Beck’s knuckleheaded cronies like to think they are informed but you are not. In fact, if you keep getting your information (or conspiracy therories) from Harry Hill, educated, intelligent, and courageous patriots like me are going to continue to make a fool of you.
So when all the alcohol and caffeine doesn’t get pulled from the shelves what then will you say? Surely so evil a campaign against america will succeed. And when a Re-jokelican gets elected president sometime down the line, what then will you say? Conspiracy theories tend to stay theories forever, only the particular arguments change. Don’t worry, I know that all americans are not strong, I will carry you if I must.
Will BlueDog Dems and Republican Sell-Outs on Gov’t Controlled Health Care be surprised to learn they are counted on the WH rolls as ’saved jobs’. It’s more WH immaculate conception math.
If Obama can claim he ‘created or saved’ 1,000,000 jobs, Bush can say he ‘created or saved’ 10,000,000 lives.
He ‘created’ lives by frustrating the ‘free abortions for all’ crowd.
And he ’saved’ lives by stopping any terrorist attacks in America after 9/11.
I estimate the end result at 9,698,084 lives (not counting future progeny of those now living that wouldn’t be if not for Bush).
Makes as much sense as Obama’s fuzzy math fantasies.
I understand that you are making some stretches here and not counting all people who died under Bush’s watch and the service men and women lost fighting in Iraq (which was an unnecessary war) not counting all the innocent Iraqi’s killed or any of these people’s progeny.
The issue I take is in your pretending that the president with the worst record on national defense in history somehow saved lives. Convenient how you start the clock after 9/11 but why? he was on duty for eight months when that happened. Why does he get a pass on 9/11. Would you have been so lenient on Clinton if it had happened on 9/11 1993? Would his record for the next seven years four months make any difference to you? Or how about Obama? Let’s say the 9/11 attacks came this year instead of 2001. Would you credit Obama with saving lives at the end of his eight years?
How many lives did all the other presidents save by not allowing a massive terrorist attack on their watch? Already Obama has surpassed Bush in the annals of history as being a better protector of the american people. By this time in Bush’s first term we had thousands dead.
Think about what you say. That boob saved no-one. Not even his government intervention into health care could save Terry Scheivo. He was a bumbling infant who should never have been elected, and his innept and clumbsy mis-steps led to thousands of american deaths including those suffered in the wake of Katrina.
Like I said, “Makes as much sense as Obama’s fuzzy math fantasies.”
Get it?
Well, he may be fudging the employment numbers, who really knows. I know this, G.M. announced that it will be paying back $6.7 Billion of its loan money ahead of schedule. Apperantly the company is doing better than expected. All of the Republicans were saying that G.M. should be allowed to fail remember? So this is a fact, those jobs, the G.M. jobs and all the tooling jobs, and supplier jobs and every other business that does the bulk of their business with G.M. was saved by his actions. To those people it makes a hell of a difference especially to those in Michigan.
Jon, keep pounding those keys. Using more fuzzy Obama math, I estimate your abundant words of wisdom have ‘created or saved’ 100 million liberal voters. With your mighty keyboard, you will lead us to a Worker’s Paradise. March onward!
Thanks for the accolades but honestly, I really only intended to offend one stupid conservative, but hey I’ll take the praise.
By the way, what exactly is your beef with workers? Do you not like the way they build your products or provide your services? Someone’s gotta make all those twinkies and Big Macs you shove down your fat diabetic neck.
Jon your funny…
Thanks, and it’s not just my looks, I tell jokes too.
We have all heard the jokes, Jon. You are hilariously funny. Can you take this act on the road.. ? Daddy said to tell you to keep that clock punching day job, just in case.
The whole issue is we do exactly what the major players in this country want…we argue about right and left…when in essence they are exactly the same when you get down to it…the differences are only superficial.
The left supports the right and the right supports the left and behind closed doors the major players do whatever the hell they want we we discuss the good and evil of the D’s and R’s…….
It is very enlightening to “see” into the mind of a lib (Jon). ‘Bout scares me to death to think he may procreate.
Well, you’re a conservative, apperantly everything bout scares you to death.
Opinions of the uneducated in denial, keeps us all in touch with the ignorance that’s out there and how they roll. Roll-On.. :O)
Palin and Beck. One doesn’t know their ass from a hole in the ground and the other suspects she really does, but it’s a cover up.
Got your nerve talking about uneducated. Hey, go check the polls and see the numbers of americans who support Obama and the Dems by education level. The more educated the segment, the more the liberal approval numbers climb. Post graduate is through the roof.
But they’re all dummies who don’t get it right? The guy with a gun strapped to his hip and a sign that says “Keep the governments hands of my medicaid” now that’s the real genius. And he’s brave too. That’s why he carries a gun.
I don’t get my opinions from Beck or Palin. Uneducated refers to your personal insecure exclusive sensitivity, Please don’t feel it necessary adjoin yourself with the educated, in whose shadow you continue to dampen.
IMO,
“Please don’t feel it necessary adjoin yourself with the educated, in whose shadow you continue to dampen.”
What the hell does that even mean? Is it a haiku or something?
I tested out of any english requirements in college, but that must have been a mistake because I don’t have a clue as to what you are saying.
Oh well, take this:
You don’t would have to fite with smartiness!
It’s so convenient to proclaim to be educated & yet when it doesn’t suit you, proclaim ignorance. Sadly you’re the only one that doesn’t get it, because it couldn’t have been more Simple Simon.. Take one step forward.
You win. Movin’ on.
Indoctrinating youth is a common trait of totalitarian regimes. Hitler did it, Stalin, Mao, Kim Jong Il and the Khmer Rouge as well. Young minds are much easier to influence than older minds with actual life experience.Much easier to convince a youngster with a billy club to bash brains in than an older person who has had time to ponder life and value family. Jon is a sofheaded youngster that I can identify with. I used to be the same way till I had a few kids and a mortgage to pay. My wife and I made the slow transformation from screaming liberal to Constitutionalists. Jon will come around after graduating college and paying taxes for a few years. Good luck Jon.
Jon is 40. Are you even reading my posts?
Listen, because you need to read this. Conservatives complain about lots of things. Mainly taxes and government. If someone else says stop complaining, the conservative says “well you lay around on welfare, or you’re too young to know better”. Fact is lots of liberals get up, go to work, pay taxes, raise children, pay down mortgages and so on and so on. They experience all the same things as conservatives do. The only difference is they don’t piss and moan the whole time they’re doing it.
Conservatives are notorious for telling people they should have made different choices.
If paying down a mortgage was too hard, if raising children was too hard, if working and paying taxes was too hard you shouldn’t have done those things. You should have never bought a house, had kids, or got a job. Problem solved.
The life that you are suffering through is not exclusive to you, The only difference is other people gotta do all the things you did with you crying in their fu*#ing ear the whole time.