Contact Form


Email *

Message *

Saturday, June 4, 2016

Obama Administration Lies Shows Up In Goofy Jobs Report.

Trump Calls 'Terrible' Jobs Report a 'Bombshell'

Image: Trump Calls 'Terrible' Jobs Report a 'Bombshell'Donald Trump (AP/John Minchillo)
Friday, 03 Jun 2016 09:43 AM
Presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump said the surprisingly weak U.S. jobs data for May released on Friday was "terrible" and a "bombshell."
"Terrible jobs report just reported. Only 38,000 jobs added. Bombshell!" Trump said in a post on Twitter shortly after the U.S. government released the data.

The U.S. economy created the fewest number of jobs in more than five years in May, hurt by a strike by Verizon workers and a fall in goods producing employment, pointing to labor market weakness that could make it difficult for the Federal Reserve to raise interest rates.

Nonfarm payrolls increased by only 38,000 jobs last month, the smallest gain since September 2010, the Labor Department said on Friday. Employers hired 59,000 fewer workers in March and April. The government said the month-long Verizon strike had depressed employment growth by 34,000 jobs.

The goods producing sector, which includes mining and manufacturing, shed 36,000 jobs, the most since February 2010.

Even without the Verizon strike, payrolls would have increased by a mere 72,000.

The Verizon workers, who were considered unemployed because they did not receive a salary during the payrolls survey week, returned to their jobs on Wednesday. They are expected to boost June employment.

The jobless rate fell three-tenths of a percentage point to 4.7 percent in May, the lowest since November 2007. The decrease in the unemployment rate was in part due to a people dropping out of the labor force.

Economists polled by Reuters had forecast payrolls rising 164,000 in May and the unemployment rate falling to 4.9 percent.

Fed Chair Janet Yellen has said monthly gains of roughly 100,000 jobs are needed to keep up with growth in the work-age population. The U.S. central bank has signaled its intention to raise rates soon if job gains continued and economic data remained consistent with a pickup in growth in the second quarter.

© 2016 Thomson/Reuters. All rights reserved.

Read more: Trump Calls Weak U.S. Jobs Report for May "bombshell"
Important: Can you afford to Retire? 

The Obama Administration Lies On The Economy Cannot Change The Reality Faced By Average Americans

FT: High-Tech Hubs Not Immune to America's Collapsing Middle Class

Image: FT: High-Tech Hubs Not Immune to America's Collapsing Middle Class(Stock Photo Secrets)
By R Williams   |   Friday, 03 Jun 2016 11:53 AM
High-tech hubs like the Raleigh Research Triangle in North Carolina, Silicon Valley and Austin, Texas, aren’t immune to a collapse in the middle class that is gripping the United States.

“While Raleigh’s population continues to grow, the new data from Pew shows that the robust population growth has not necessarily translated into higher incomes for its new residents,” according to the Financial Times, citing income data from the non-partisan Pew Research Center. “In the areas surrounding tech-friendly San Francisco and neighboring San Jose, both median incomes and the middle class’s share of the population have fallen. In Austin, a more direct rival to Raleigh, median incomes for a household of three fell to just over $74,000 from just under $78,000 in 1999.”

Raleigh has attracted the biotech industry because of research universities in the area that turn out highly educated professionals, but the city is also grappling with a declining middle class and growing poverty, the FT reports.

“Raleigh is confronting a growing poverty problem driven by existing populations and the arrival of less-educated migrants … in search of lower-end construction and service jobs, when the real job openings are in technology or healthcare and other high-skilled industries,” the newspaper reports. “Groups working with Raleigh’s poor say that, even years on from the 2007-08 global financial crisis and the recession that followed, they are busier than ever.”
Latest News Update

Middle-class Americans, once considered to be the bedrock of the country’s thriving economy, are becoming a dying breed as wealth distribution is increasingly split by the ultra-rich and everybody else.

The middle class has retreated in nine out of 10 U.S. metropolitan areas since 2000, as income inequality widened after the recession, CBS News says on its website, citing a Pew report.

“The report expands the organization's research into the fortunes of the country's middle class, which Pew in December found had declined to less than 50 percent of households, representing a major shift in America's economic fabric,” CBS reports.

The “hollowing out” of America's economy has become a major campaign issue for politicians across the ideological spectrum and partly explains the popularity of “outsider” presidential candidates like Republican front-runner Donald Trump and Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent seeking the Democratic nomination.

Both candidates are running on a platform of helping America's dying middle class, particularly by renegotiating trade deals with low-cost countries like China and Mexico.

Pew defines the middle class as households with annual income between two-thirds to double the national median — that's about $42,000 on the low end to $125,000 at the upper limit for a family of three. The portion of Americans living in middle-income households fell from 55 percent in 2000 to 51 percent in 2014.
© 2016 Newsmax Finance. All rights reserved.

Read more: FT: High-Tech Hubs Not Immune to America's Collapsing Middle Class
Important: Can you afford to Retire? 

Bush Father And Son Should Suck It Up

Huckabee: Bushes Should Do This If They Won’t Back Trump as Nominee


May 23rd, 2016
Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee recently slammed former Presidents George H.W. Bush and his son, George W., for not endorsing Donald Trump as the GOP nominee. Huckabee said that if they can’t support the GOP nominee they should get out of the party.
Here’s what he told Fox News’ “America’s Newsroom” co-host Bill Hemmer as reported by Newsmax:
“When we nominated various people over the past several election cycles to be president, there were many of us who had heartburn. But we sucked it up and went out there and vigorously supported our nominee. If they are not going to support the people the Republicans nominated, they need to get out of the Republican Party and admit they are not Republican or be honest and say I only want it when I get my way.”
Huckabee said he supported both Bushes for president, even though he had misgivings about them, and when Hemmer noted the Bush family would argue Trump isn’t a conservative, Huckabee pointed out that Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton isn’t one either.
Anything that doesn’t help Trump helps Hillary. They could say I will support the Republican nominee and that means I won’t say anything bad and I’ll stay out of it. That I get. But I think it’s problematic if they indicate they won’t even vote for the person the party nominates. That’s a problem.” 
Huckabee hits the nail on the head. Most grass-roots conservatives sucked it up, held their noses and voted for less-than-conservative candidates such as George H.W. Bush, John McCain and Mitt Romney. But now that the GOP nominee isn’t someone people in the establishment (like the Bushes) support, they’ll take their political ball and go home.
This leads us to believe that the Republican establishment only cares about political power instead of party unity – and defeating Hillary Clinton.
Do you agree with Mike Huckabee that the Bushes should leave the GOP if they can’t (or won’t) support Trump as the presidential nominee?

Is ObamaCrapCare Nearing Its End? How Long Can It Continue With Massive Rate Increases And Insurance Companies Pulling Out?

Texas Health Care Costs Skyrocket 60% in 2017: Obamacare At “Unaffordable Levels For Everyone”

Melissa Dykes
June 3rd, 2016
The Daily Sheeple
Comments (40)
Read by 1,108 people

This article was written by Melissa Dykes and originally published at The Daily Sheeple.
Editor’s Comment: A perfect storm of unconstitutional mandates are coming together, as it becomes increasingly clear that funding for Obamacare – out of the pockets of American taxpayers at gunpoint – is actually a heist that is taking place on official seal and under the pretenses of authority and legality. Such is the modern state of organized crime.
Who is going to be able to pay 60% increases in health care costs? Where is this money really going to, and how much do they intend to squeeze out of the average person before this is all over?
Blue Cross Blue Shield Requests Whopping 60% Rate Hike in 2017 Thanks to Obamacare
by Melissa Dykes
If you like your healthcare provider you can keep your healthcare provider… provided you pay a whopping 60% rate hike starting next year.
The Houston Chronicle is reporting that Blue Cross Blue Shield has requested a 60% rate increase in 2017 in Texas following complaints from the company that it is “losing money in the federal health exchanges because some customers have proven more costly to cover than anticipated.”
In other words, the cost of insuring people under the so-called “Affordable” Care Act is going to force prices to skyrocket to potentially unaffordable levels for everyone.
According to filings listed on, Blue Cross and Blue Shield seeks increases between 57.33 percent and 59.35 percent for two of its Blue Advantage Plus plans. A Blue Advantage Health Maintenance Organization Plan is asking for a 58.6 percent hike…
In a country where the cost of living is going up on virtually all fronts but wages and jobs are not increasing, exactly who is going to be able to afford this insane rate hike? And that’s just to pay for the insurance in case you get sick…
According to the report, it is unclear what will happen if the rate hike request is not granted. When the same company requested a 51% increase in rates in New Mexico last year and the request was denied, the company simply withdrew all healthcare plans from the entire state.
It’s a domino effect. Obamacare is imploding the nation’s health care system.
Insurers across the nation, including Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Texas, have complained vigorously that they are losing money in the federal exchanges as some customers have proven more costly to cover than anticipated.
Blue Cross Blue Shield isn’t the only company that has been reporting large profit losses due to Obamacare. UnitedHealthcare has reported losses of $650 million. Humana reported a 46% loss in the first quarter of 2016 alone.
As more and more private health insurance companies complain of profit losses and pull out of states who refuse to hike rates to unaffordable levels, it is highly likely the situation will become unsustainable and ultimately used as an excuse for the government to take control over all healthcare, moving the US to a national system just like in the UK or Canada.
In fact, this is exactly what Senator Harry Reid said that Obamacare was a step towards when it was first rolled out: a single-payer national health care system. Now we’re watching it happen.
But look at the way our servicemen and women who go to the VA in this country are treated. They die waiting in two-year-long lines to receive care. It’s so bad, one Navy vet recently set himself on fire in front of a VA in protest.
Considering our government can’t even make a noodle salad efficiently, the crash and burn of Obamacare as a problem-reaction-solution forcing us onto a single-payer national system could be a nightmare for anyone who depends on America’s already broken health care system for their health.

Melissa Dykes is a writer, researcher, and analyst for The Daily Sheeple and a co-creator of Truthstream Media with Aaron Dykes, a site that offers teleprompter-free, unscripted analysis of The Matrix we find ourselves living in. Melissa also co-foundedNutritional Anarchy with Daisy Luther of The Organic Prepper, a site focused on resistance through food self-sufficiency. Wake the flock up!

Once Again The French Seek Out The Low Road

  • France's Socialist Party government has unveiled a new legislative program designed to decrease the likelihood of further Islamic atrocities, largely it seems that would have ensured the success of the jihadist attacks committed so far.
  • In the measures revealed, proactively combatting criminals appears to have taken a back seat to placating the communities from which they are drawn.
  • Whereas protests by French people against Islamization or government policy, have been rigorously curtailed by the authorities, migrant gangs have still felt able to terrorize French towns, stampede French motorways, or conduct mass armed brawls in Paris, with little fear of intervention from either security services or the law.
  • In 2014, an ICM poll discovered that 27% of French citizens aged 18-24 supported ISIS.
Last year Muslim jihadists murdered more people in France, than were killed by terrorism in the country during the entire 20th century.
In response, the Prime Minister of France, Manuel Valls, has announced a range of innovative legal measures, introduced in response to the terrorist outrages which struck France in 2015.
On January 7, of that year, Saïd and Chérif Kouachi stormed the Paris offices of the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo, massacring twelve and injuring eleven others.
In the days that followed, a comrade of the earlier jihadists committed a string of murders, which culminated in a siege at the kosher supermarket. Amedy Coulibaly killed five and injured eleven more.
On February 3, 2015, three military personnel guarding a Jewish community center in Nicewere stabbed, by Moussa Coulibaly.
On June 26, the severed head of Hervé Cornara was placed on display, at the gas factory near Lyon where he worked, alongside twin ISIS flags, by Yassine Salhi.
On August 21, an attempted mass shooting on the Thalys high-speed train between Amsterdam and Paris, by Moroccan-born Ayoub El Khazzani, was foiled by American tourists, leading to the wounding of four.
In two days, starting on November 13, multiple jihadist attacks once again struck the French capital. 130 were killed and 352 injured, by perpetrators operating in three teams of three, which included suicide bombers.

Last January, Amedy Coulibaly (left) murdered a policewoman and four Jews in Paris, before being shot dead by police. Right: Medics carry a victim wounded in an attack by Islamist terrorists, who shot hundreds of concert-goers, killing 90, at the Bataclan theater in Paris on November 13, 2015.

France's Socialist Party government has unveiled a new legislative program designed to decrease the likelihood of further Islamic atrocities, largely it seems that would have ensured the success of the jihadist attacks committed so far.
"A range of measures" are set to be introduced to combat the alleged "Social, Ethnic and Territorial Apartheid" currently blighting France.
Not only were the jihadist proclivities of most of last year's perpetrators fully known to the authorities in France, some had been released from prison early following crimes of violence involving automatic weapons.
In the measures revealed by Prime Minister Manuel Valls, however, proactively combattingcriminals appears to have taken a backseat to placating the communities from which they are drawn.
The first aim of the new laws contained within the Equality and Citizenship bill, reports Le Monde, is to centralize the provision of social housing in France. Until now the growth ofIslamized areas has largely been limited to suburbs around major urban centers.
Much as in Germany, where Muslim migrants to Europe are being sent directly into rural areas, the prime minister is proposing a new nationwide system designed, "to make a better distribution of the public housing supply" in France. This nationwide transformation of housing policy is aimed at curtailing "concentrations of poverty," within problematic Islamic enclavesinfamous as no-go zones.
"Recalcitrant" locally-elected mayors who oppose the construction of new housing projects in their areas will be overruled by the state in the interests of "social diversity."
Second, in the guise of improving literacy in French amongst those of immigrant descent, a new fast-track employment scheme has also been drawn up.
The scheme "will allow youths with few or no qualifications" to enter France's "citizens' reserve," a government initiative established last year which links the nation's education system with its civil service, allowing an accelerated path into state employment.
The euphemism "youths" is used in the French media to describe the country's increasingly problematic young Muslim population. In 2014, an ICM poll discovered that 27% of French citizens aged 18-24 supported ISIS.
The glowing account given to the proposals being forwarded by Prime Minister Valls, in his country's leading left-wing daily, fails to mention how the newly foreseen "third path" job scheme will address the greater key issues.
Unease is growing at the level of Islamist sympathies already held by state employees in France, such as members of the military and police.
Third, as nationwide protests continue to mount over migrant chaos in French towns, spread across the coast of the English Channel, even greater criminal penalties against free speech are also set to be introduced by the new bill.
Verbal communication has, apparently, been largely exempted from legal free speech curtailment in France, unless recorded and posted online. Such cases then fall under the same strict law that governs the printed word, originally passed in 1881.
This law is why Charlie Hebdo is famous for distributing its most challenging content in the form of cartoons, thereby seeking to exempt itself from strict sanctions against "defamation" in print. Fictional novels published this year about France's Islamic future have sought to do the same.
Under the legislation currently being proposed by Valls, this existing status quo is set for a radical shake-up. The new restrictions planned for France are more in line with the Europe-wide harmonization of hate speech offences, mandated by the European Union.
The augmented provisions against incitement to hatred, previously limited to the 1881 press law, are set to be expanded throughout the French criminal justice system, under the new bill.
Much as in the UK, the new creation of aggravated offences will also ensure that any existing crime can be claimed, by its victim, also to contain a "hate speech" component, incurring far stiffer penalties against the alleged perpetrator.
The application of existing French laws, however, after the last major atrocity in Paris, on November 13, point to the likely reasons for the new proposals being put forward by France's government.
Since the massacre at the Bataclan nightclub and suicide bombings that struck the French capital, the Republic of France has been in a state of emergency. This gives the country's President, François Hollande, "extraordinary powers" under Article 16 of the French Constitution.
In February, the duration of these powers, which enable warrantless searches whilst limiting freedom of expression and peaceful assembly, were extended until May 26 by the lower house of the French legislature, the Assemblée Nationale.
In the intervening period, soldiers have become such a common sight in the French capital, that they often give Paris the impression of being under martial law. Half of the country's army is now deployed on the streets of France.
Yet, whereas protests by French people against Islamization or government policy have been rigorously curtailed by the authorities, migrant gangs have still felt able to terrorize French towns, stampede French motorways, or conduct mass armed brawls in Paris, with little fear of intervention from either security services or the law.
Although the law being introduced by Mr. Valls is chiefly claimed to be about "youth engagement," the new bill seems more the result of a realization that one group in France -- its natives -- can generally be relied upon to obey the law, while apparently another cannot.
There is a certain group of young people, however, with whom Manuel Valls clearly does notwish to engage. He recently excoriated members of the controversial Europe-wide Identitarian Movement, a nationalist youth group notorious for engaging in acts of civil disobedience in response to the changing culture and demography of France and Europe.
Described as the "hipster right" by some outlets, Mr. Valls decried supporters of the movement -- which began in his country -- as "those who want the country closed while dreaming of going back to a France that never existed."
"I believe in my country, in its message and its universal values," Valls added. In the interviewpublished by Libération, on April 12, he continued:
I would like us to be capable of demonstrating that Islam, a great world religion and the second religion of France, is fundamentally compatible with the Republic, democracy, our values, and equality between men and women.
Manuel Valls was later forced to admit, in the interview, that this "compatibiconservative blogs, conservative musings, conservataive tomlity" is something doubted by "a majority of our fellow citizens."
Some 3.3 million people have dual citizenship in France, most of them Muslim. After President Hollande had announced that his country was "at war," in the immediate aftermath of November's attacks, the French Prime Minister unveiled plans to amend France's constitution.
The proposed amendment was intended to strip French citizenship from dual-nationals convicted of terrorism offences. At the time Manuel Valls was described, in the left-wing media, as a "strongman" who had taken a "hard line against terror."
On March 30, however, after a split within the Socialist Party over the issue, the Prime Minister's plans were dropped.
The new, more comprehensive, legislative proposals are set to go before the Assemblée nationale this month.
George Igler, a political analyst based in the City of London, is the Director of theDiscourse Institute.

© 2016 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. No part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute.