I've lived in all three, I must have lost my mind and everything else! - Faltered States: Is There Any Hope for California, New York, and New Jersey?

PJTV - Faltered States: Is There Any Hope for California, New York, and New Jersey? - Hicks File

http://www.pjtv.com/?cmd=mpg&mpid=74&load=4370

November 3, 2010

Jobs and Voters Exit Unreformed New York

By Steven Malanga

When David Paterson ascended to the governor's position in New York State in 2008, he recounted how he began hearing from old friends who had left the state years earlier but were now getting back in touch with him to offer their congratulations. As Paterson described it, these old friends told him, "'Good luck in New York State, but we can't pay the taxes. The opportunities aren't there.'"

Yesterday, the electoral tidal wave that swept over the country only touched down lightly in New York, our third most populous state. In the race that counts most for change in the Empire State, an uncompetitive gubernatorial election, Democrat Andrew Cuomo, who ran on an agenda of timid reforms, easily defeated the unpredictable Republican nominee, Carl Paladino. Now Cuomo must try to change New York by operating from within a Democratic Party that is dominated by the very forces, public unions and social advocacy groups, whose spending agenda has helped run the state into the ground.

In this season of political turmoil, New York is an object lesson in how change is never inevitable but has to be fought for and earned. Paterson shouldn't count on his friends moving back into the state any time soon.

A recent study using an innovative jobs-database neatly sums up the dire situation: The Empire State is losing jobs rapidly to other states, and has been for years. According to an analysis of the National Establishment Time-Series (NETS) Database by the Manhattan Institute's Empire Center, New York gained some 272,000 jobs from relocations into the state from 1993 through 2008, but lost more than 392,000 jobs to outmigration during that same period. That was largest net loss of any state.

Job migration reflects an overall environment that isn't friendly to employment growth, as the NETS data suggests. New York is also near the bottom among the states in the balance between economic creative destruction, losing some 650,000 more jobs to closures, or "deaths," than it gained from firm startups, or "births" during the period studied. That's one reason that the state's overall job creation has lagged the country for years. Not surprisingly, executives consistently rate New York as one of the worst places (if not the absolute worst place) to start or relocate a business.

One reason is certainly the state's high tax burden. In a just-released ranking by the Tax Foundation, New York is judged as having the worst business tax climate in the country. Among the problems, according to the foundation, is the third most burdensome income tax in the country, the ninth worst corporate tax, and the country's worst property taxes.

There's not much to like about New York these days. In an April report by the American Legislative Exchange Council titled "Rich States, Poor States," New York ranked last in economic outlook because of its combination of high taxes, big debt, and the size of its government relative to its population.

New York has been able to sustain itself despite its enormously high spending and tax burden because of the enormous revenue generating capacity of Wall Street, which accounts for just 3 percent of the state's jobs but 20 percent of state taxes as of 2008. While a host of other industries led by manufacturing, wholesaling and insurance have fled the state, Wall Street stuck around because it could afford to. While that's kept New York City and some of its suburbs viable, one-fifth of housing in Buffalo is abandoned. Even Eliot Spitzer as a gubernatorial candidate compared parts of upstate New York to Appalachia.

But even financial firms are becoming far more cost sensitive in the post-meltdown age. When Albany proposed a new $900 million tax on hedge funds this year, neighboring states heavily courted the industry's biggest players, forcing even New York's notoriously spendthrift politicians to back down on a tax hike.

Now New York also faces the prospect of neighboring New Jersey becoming more competitive for business under Gov. Chris Christie. Jersey, which had one of the country's lowest tax burdens back in the 1960s, benefited for years from firms migrating from New York, including a host of Fortune 500 companies that left Gotham.

But Jersey's own era of high taxes and growing regulation gradually made it a net job loser, too. Christie aims to change that, if he can tame the state's budget. Merely by not raising taxes this year, Jersey dropped out of the bottom spot in the Tax Foundation's most recent business climate survey, the spot now occupied by New York.

Running on reform is easy. Governing that way is not. Before Christie, Democrat Jon Corzine won election in Jersey in 2005 on a reform agenda promising many of the things Cuomo offered voters, including spending and tax caps and more reasonable public employee pension costs. But the ‘reforms' that ultimately emerged from Corzine were feeble and so full of loopholes that they accomplished little, and voters weren't fooled.

The next year, Eliot Spitzer won New York's governor's race also promising a reform agenda, which lasted about two weeks. Because of the spectacular nature of Spitzer's demise when he was revealed to be client 9 of an escort service, we forget that he had such a bad start governing that he was well on his way to becoming New York's worst governor in decades, which is saying something.

States like California, New Jersey, Illinois and New York don't merely require a little tinkering, or a bit of public policy window dressing. They need big change that upsets apple carts and reestablishes the balance between the public and private sectors. Once our most prosperous state, New York lost that balance decades ago. It will take more than another set of reform promises for businesses and residents to stop packing the moving vans.

Steven Malanga is an editor for RealClearMarkets and a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute

New Jersey Backslides as did California, Most N.J. Democrats retain U.S. Congressional seats despite national trend

At least one democrat is out! Little thanks to the Republican Party and Democrat fake Tea Party candidate.

Most N.J. Democrats retain U.S. Congressional seats despite national trend | NJ.com

The Republican tidal wave that swept through the country left New Jersey relatively unscathed today, knocking out one Democratic incumbent, but leaving two others still standing after unexpectedly tough re-election challenges...

With the win, six of the state’s 13 congressional seats will now be held by the GOP, with the other seven to remain with the Democrats. Neither of the U.S. Senate seats were up for election...

In the 6th District, which winds through parts of Middlesex, Monmouth, Somerset and Union counties. Frank Pallone, the 22-year Democratic incumbent who has never faced a serious election challenge, found himself in a place he had never been before, as he was forced to deal with surging tea party-backed Republican Anna Little — the feisty Highlands mayor who waged an upstart grass-roots campaign. Pallone won, 54 to 44 percent.

During October, Little had gain appeared to be gaining traction thanks in large part to "Anna’s Army" of followers that knocked on 100,000 doors during the campaign. But Pallone repeatedly painted Little as "definitely outside the mainstream for New Jersey," hitting on what he called her "extreme tea party positions."

In a Rutgers-Eagleton Poll released Monday, New Jersey voters said taxes, the economy and unemployment were primarily on the minds as they headed to the polls, and believed Republican policies were more likely to fix the economy. Overall, they indicated they were less favorable toward Democratic measures such as government stimulus spending. Most of those concerned about taxes said they would likely vote Republican.

Pallone, she said, was able to pull out a victory despite the political climate and the national concerns he was identified with. And Holt’s victory, she said, was a testament to incumbency in a district where voters have always been very independent minded.

[The reality is his district, like the 8th District, are so gerrymandered that a major earthquake would be only thing that could straighten the boundary lines of these districts.]

...In the 8th District, long-time Democratic incumbent Bill Pascrell Jr. once again coasted to victory over Republican rival Roland Straten, a community activist and retired businessman from Montclair, who had hoped that support from the North New Jersey Tea Party Group would have made the difference.

...Donald M. Payne in the 10th District... Is a socialist from Newark who is in the safest unchanging, unthinking district in the State.

EXCLUSIVE: Witness: Same New Black Panther; Same Polling Place; Same Polling Threat!

Why stop threatening white voters when past threats are rewarded by Holder?

Breitbart.tv » EXCLUSIVE: Witness: Same New Black Panther; Same Polling Place; Same Polling Threat!

Obama administration National Endowment for the Humanities- U.S. military and its veterans constitute an imperialistic, oppressive force

I never realized we bombed ourselves at Pearl Harbor!

Power Line - Investigate this

November 1, 2010 Posted by Scott at 6:47 AM

In a series of posts on Obama administration National Endowment for the Humanities Chairman Jim Leach, we have followed the descent of the NEH into political partisanship and rank buffoonery. Now we turn to problematic programming funded by the NEH.

In July 2010 the NEH sponsored a workshop for college professors at the East-West Center, University of Hawaii. The title of the conference was "History and Commemoration: The Legacies of the Pacific War." As one of the 25 American scholars chosen to attend the workshop, Professor Penelope Blake anticipated an opportunity to visit hallowed sites such as Pearl Harbor, the Arizona Memorial and the Punchbowl Cemetery and engage with scholars who share her interest in studying this often neglected part of World War II history.

Instead, Professor Blake was treated to the most disturbing experience of her academic career, a conference which she found to be driven by an overt political bias and a blatant anti-American agenda. Professor Blake has forwarded to us the following letter dated September 12, 2010, to Illinois Rep. Donald Manzullo, her congressman, documenting examples of what transpired at the conference. Copies of the letter were also sent to members of the NEH Council and to Leach. Professor Blake writes (all emphases are in the original):

Dear Congressman Manzullo:

As one of twenty-five American scholars chosen to participate in the recent National Endowment for the Humanities Summer Workshop, "History and Commemoration: Legacies of the Pacific War in WWII," at the University of Hawaii, East-West Center, I am writing to ask you to vote against approval of 2011 funding for future workshops until the NEH can account for the violation of its stated objective to foster "a mutual respect for the diverse beliefs and values of all persons and groups" (NEH Budget Request, 2011).

In my thirty years as a professor in upper education, I have never witnessed nor participated in a more extremist, agenda-driven, revisionist conference, nearly devoid of rhetorical balance and historical context for the arguments presented.

In both the required preparatory readings for the conference, as well as the scholarly presentations, I found the overriding messages to include the following:

1. The U.S. military and its veterans constitute an imperialistic, oppressive force which has created and perpetuated its own mythology of liberation and heroism, insisting on a "pristine collective memory" of the war. The authors/presenters equate this to Japan's almost total amnesia and denial about its own war atrocities (Fujitani, White, Yoneyama, 9, 23). One presenter specifically wrote about turning down a job offer when he realized that his office would overlook a fleet of U.S. Naval warships, "the symbol of American power and the symbol of our [Hawaiians'] dispossession...I decided they could not pay me enough" (Osorio 5). Later he claimed that electric and oil companies were at the root of WWII, and that the U.S. developed a naval base at Pearl Harbor to ensure that its own coasts would not be attacked (9, 13).

2. The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor should be seen from the perspective of Japan being a victim of western oppression (one speaker likened the attack to 9-11, saying that the U.S. could be seen as "both victim and aggressor" in both attacks); that American "imperial expansion" forced Japan's hand: "For the Japanese, it was a war to defend their unique culture against Western Imperialism" (Yoneyama 335-336); and the Pearl Harbor attack could be seen as a "pre-emptive strike." (No mention of the main reason for the Pearl Harbor attack: the U.S. had cut off Japan's oil supply in order to stop the wholesale slaughter of Chinese civilians at the hands of the Japanese military.) Another author argued that the Japanese attack was no more "infamous" or "sneaky" than American actions in Korea or Vietnam (Rosenberg 31-32).

3. War memorials, such as the Punchbowl National Memorial Cemetery (where many WWII dead are buried, including those executed by the Japanese on Wake Island and the beloved American journalist Ernie Pyle), are symbols of military aggression and brutality "that pacify death, sanitize war and enable future wars to be fought" (Ferguson and Turnbull, 1). One author stated that the memorials represent American propaganda, "the right to alter a story" (Camacho 201).

4. The U.S. military has repeatedly committed rapes and other violent crimes throughout its past through the present day. Cited here was the handful of cases of attacks by Marines in Okinawa (Fujitani, et al, 13ff). (What was not cited were the mass-murders, rapes, mutilations of hundreds of thousands of Chinese at the hands of the Japanese throughout the 1930s and 40s. This issue is a perfect example of the numerous instances of assertions made without balance or historical context.) Another author stated that the segregation in place within our military and our "occupation" of Germany after the war was comparable to Nazism ('we were as capable of as much evil as the Germans") even though the author admits, with some incredulity, that he "saw no genuine torture, despite all the [American] arrogance, xenophobia and insensitivity." He attributes American kindness towards conquered Germans to our "wealth and power" which allowed us to "forego the extreme kinds of barbarism" (Davis 586). Another author/presenter compared the temporary relocation camps erected by Americans during the war to Nazi extermination camps (Camacho 206). (This is perhaps the most outrageous, offensive and blatantly false statement I have ever read in a supposedly scholarly work).

5. Those misguided members of the WWII generation on islands like Guam and Saipan who feel gratitude to the Americans for saving them from the Japanese are blinded by propaganda supporting "the image of a compassionate America" or by their own advanced age. One author/presenter questioned whether the Americans had saved anyone from anything (Camacho 177, 209), arguing that the Americans could be seen as easily and justifiably as "conquerors and invaders" (199).

6. It was "the practice" of the U.S. military in WWII to desecrate and disrespect the bodies of dead Japanese (Camacho 186). (Knowing this to be absolutely false, I challenged the speaker/author, who then admitted that this was not the "practice" of our military. Still, the word remains in his publication. As he obviously knew this to be false, I can only assume that his objective was not scholarship but anti-military propaganda.)

7. Conservatives and veterans in the U.S. have had an undue and corrupt influence on how WWII is remembered, for example, successfully lobbying to remove from the Smithsonian Enola Gay exhibit images of the destruction caused by the atom bomb and the revisionist portrayal of the Japanese as victims in the war (Yoneyama). (What the presenter and author, Ms. Yoneyama, failed to explain was why all representations of Japan's murderous rampages throughout China and the Philippines were removed from the exhibit as well...surely not at the request of American veterans or conservatives. When I challenged Ms. Yoneyama to explain this issue, a tense exchange ensued, but I finally established that Japanese influences had also played a role in "shaping" the exhibit. This never would have been mentioned had I not demanded the speaker address this distortion in her presentation. Ms. Yoneyama clearly intended to present a one-sided attack on those who wanted the exhibit to emphasize the many reasons why the atom bombs were necessary.) Ms. Yoneyama concluded her essay with a parting shot at the veterans, whom she mockingly labels "martyrs of their sacred war," and "conservative elites" who objected to the Smithsonian's revisionist history: "the Smithsonian debate ended in the defeat of those who sought critical rethinking, as well as the defeat of those who questioned the self-evident..., and the victory of those who felt threatened by obfuscation of the contours of conventional knowledge" (emphasis mine, 329,339). The author's elitist dismissal of those who questioned the Enola Gay exhibit is representative of the perspectives and tone of much of the conference, as illustrated by the following point.

8. Conservatives are reactionary nationalists (no distinction was made between nationalism and patriotism), pro-military "tea baggers" who are incapable of "critical thinking." Comments were made about "people who watch Fox News" not caring if the news "is accurate or not" (Yoneyama, Lecture). The end result of this deprecation within the conference room was to discourage debate and create an atmosphere of intolerance to opposing views, in direct violation of the stated objectives of the NEH. Several participants told me privately that they considered me "brave" for speaking up, thus begging the question: At a conference supposedly committed to openness and tolerance of all views, why should it take bravery to speak one's mind?

9. Relating to the above, even members of the NEH review board are not immune to "reactionary" pro-military views. One essay recounts how an earlier attempt to receive funding for a similar conference was denied because some NEH reviewers thought the "program lacked diversity and balance among points of view"....and that the organizers possessed "a very specific, 'politically correct' agenda," noting that "bias is dangerously threatening throughout." The authors of the essay dismissed and denigrated these NEH reviewers with the same elitist attitude they exhibited towards the "Fox News" viewers: "Clearly this reviewer was unable to comprehend our understanding" of the conference objectives (in other words, he/she is stupid), and "what he or she really desired was the inclusion of defenders of American nationalism and militarism" (Fujitani, et al, 24).

10. Veterans' memories of their own experiences in the war are suspect and influenced by media and their own self-delusion (Rosenberg, 18, 24). Therefore, it is the role of academics to "correct" their history. As one organizer commented, this will be more easily accomplished once the WWII generation has passed away. Another wrote, "America's nostalgic war memories are beginning to fray around the edges" (White, 267).

11. War memorials like the Arizona Memorial should be recast as "peace memorials," sensitive to all viewers from all countries, especially the many visitors from Japan. The conference dedicated significant time to the discussion of whether or not a Japanese memorial in honor of victims of the atom bombs should be erected at the Arizona Memorial site, in order to pacify Japanese visitors who may be offended by the "racism" [anti-Japanese] of the Arizona Memorial. To this end, the conference organizers discussed a revised film (1992) shown to visitors to the Arizona Memorial which removed some of the earlier (1980) film's "Japan-bashing" and warnings about the need for the American military to remain prepared in the future. The new film, which emphasizes the reasons (justifications?) for the Japanese bombings of Pearl Harbor, includes fewer battle scenes and "transforms the triumphant feelings of victory with a more mournful reflection of losses inflicted by war" (White 285), thus sending a more pacifist, anti-war message and offering a perspective which makes people "less angry" after viewing the film (the author acknowledges that this has worked well, except for "older citizens" who are outraged by the "revisionist" sympathy towards the Japanese) (287). The new, more "inclusive" film features visual images of both American and Japanese dead, Japanese Buddhist monks visiting the memorial, and a culminating text which reads "Mourn the dead" as opposed to "Mourn American dead" or "Mourn our dead" so that "it represented the U.S. and Japanese" (emphasis mine, 288). The memorial's superintendent, Donald Magee, summed up the tone of the new film: "We don't take sides....here at Pearl Harbor we don't condemn the Japanese" (292). Based on the author's description, I refused to attend a viewing of the film, in protest of its appeasement of treachery and attempts to revise historical fact.

As overwhelming and pervasive as these politically-correct and revisionist messages were, the conference did feature a few presentations and articles which represented truly excellent examples of balanced, well-researched scholarship. One highpoint of the conference was a panel of WWII veterans who shared with us their personal experiences of the war. But, given the overall anti-military bias present at this conference, I could not help but shudder to think how these amazing men would feel if they knew the true focus of the conference. I honestly felt ashamed of my profession and my government for sponsoring this travesty.

I am aware that my comments may well have been dismissed by the conference organizers in the same manner they dismissed other opposing voices as "nationalistic" or simplistic. So be it. But I am no blind patriot, Congressman Manzullo, nor am I ignorant of the complexities inherent in the telling and re-telling of history. I also acknowledge, research and teach the many mistakes this country has made, and I am as suspect of the extreme right as I am of the extreme left. But I am also a historian who knows that despite all of their mistakes, this nation and its military have defended, protected and freed more people in their comparatively brief existence than all of the nations in Europe and Asia combined. Allied efforts, however imperfect, defended the world against two of the greatest forms of evil the world has ever known, European Fascism and Japanese Imperialism. This perspective was never, not once, offered at this conference except as a concept that will be well-buried with the WWII generation. If nothing else, I have shown that any imminent celebration of the demise of these concepts may be premature.

As a daughter of two WWII veterans and the niece of a man who gave his life to help defend his country in WWII, I simply will not stand by and allow their history to be usurped and corrupted by a revisionist and iconoclastic political agenda within academe.

The NEH is requesting an operating budget of 161 million dollars for 2011, including over 71 million to support conferences like the one I have described. I ask that you do everything in your power to delay approval of this request until the NEH does the following:

1. Reviews all NEH conference and workshop proposals and supporting materials to eliminate any overt political agenda;

2. Illustrates to Congress and the American people an ability to create programs which support sound and objective scholarship and provide forums for debate in which all sides are recognized and encouraged;

3. Eliminates all intolerance and pejorative language towards any group or viewpoint;

4. Commits itself to a fair and balanced view of our nation's history and humanities, acknowledging its mistakes but also honoring its achievements.

To demonstrate the above, any group or institution requesting a grant from the NEH should be required to submit its entire schedule of presenters and a complete list of the literature which will be discussed at the conference to ensure that varied sides of any issue will be represented and respected.

Until these actions are taken, I sincerely doubt that the majority of Americans would approve of their tax dollars supporting this academic attack on American history and culture. I plan to do everything in my power to inform American voters of this issue, and I trust our elected officials will take heed of their constituents' reactions.

Citations for the sources I have used are attached to this letter. Should you wish any further documentation on the issues I have raised or have any questions, feel free to contact me.

Sincerely,

Penelope A. Blake, Ph.D.

What is to be done? The East-West Center has already been funded by NEH to conduct a similar workshop in the coming summer, plus one for high-school teachers that is likely to be similarly tendentious. These expenditures could be frozen pending a full investigation, or rescinded, or otherwise handled in a way that recognizes the seriousness of the problem.

Professor Blake makes reference in her letter to various parts of a book called Perilous Memories, coedited by Geoffrey White; White was the director of the workshop attended by Professor Blake. This book (or parts of it) was required preliminary reading for the participants in the workshop, and is something like the ur-text that reveals the intentions and worldview behind the workshop itself. It is an appalling if characteristic example of radical postmodernist gibberish complete with all the buzzwords about transnationality, the construction of public memory, and so on.

Professor Blake teaches Humanities at Rock Valley College in Rockford, illinois. Readers desiring a copy of the sources cited in her letter can write me at powerlinefeedback@gmail.com with "Sources" in the Subject line. Thanks to Professor Blake for entrusting this story to us.

No Media Bias?- Hello to gridlock ... and goodbye to recovery? - Business - Economy at a Crossroads - msnbc.com

This is suppose to be an AP news story. It just portends the bad results of Republican gains in Congress after the election, BEFORE THE ELECTION.

Hello to gridlock ... and goodbye to recovery? - Business - Economy at a Crossroads - msnbc.com

Vote As Though Your Freedom Is At Stake - Because It Is, from Hyscience

Hyscience

Vote As Though Your Freedom Is At Stake - Because It Is

Today is the day.

Dr. Robert Owens has noted, the mid-term elections may well be the most important in our lifetime. America faces a crisis as profound as the Revolution and as divisive as the Civil War. Tthe time has come for peaceful citizens to let those who love Liberty use their guaranteed rights to write, speak, assemble, and vote to preserve what we've been given for our children and our grandchildren. And indeed, If American voters do not, with loud and clear voices, issue a commanding halt to the leftward slide on November 2nd, such a time is likely to never come again. It's November 2nd, or never.

James P. Gannon frames it similarly in his excellent piece at The American Spectator titled "The Tipping Point" in which he speaks of America having reached a Resistance movement, standing athwart the flow of Obama history, shouting, "STOP!" - we've reached an historical moment. If it was not clear during Obama's 2008 campaign (and he made deliberate efforts to obscure it) certainly in late 2010 it is clear where he wants to take the county -- toward a European-style socialism, a command economy, driven by an all-powerful central government, determined to redistribute wealth and remake America as a multicultural, secular humanist state.

And as Gannon goes on to point out, the election of November 2nd isn't about returning the Republican Party to power in Washington. It is about stepping back from this tipping point, this precipice that Obama and the Pelosi-Reid Congress have led us to. There is a pervasive sense that this is momentous. The alarm and the urgency that is felt by so many conservatives, independents, and even Democrats who feel they were duped in 2008, arises from the conviction that this may be a one-time chance to pull back from the edge. If American voters do not, with loud and clear voices, issue a commanding halt to the leftward slide next month, it may be too late in 2012 or beyond.

The take-home message is clear. Today is the day. Vote as if your freedom and the American way of life is at stake - because it is.

I hate it when that happens-Horse riding teen suspended from school

Horse riding teen suspended from school

Monday, 01 Nov 2010

HAMILTON (FOX 25 / MyFoxBoston.com) - A teen's spirit week stunt has landed him in hot water.

Hamilton-Wenham Regional High School Senior Dan Depaolis, dressed in medieval garb, rode a horse into the school's parking lot as part of spirit week.

What he, and his parents, thought was a good-natured stunt, the school deemed dangerous. Depaolis was suspended from school for two days.

The vice principal allegedly suspended the 17-year-old even after the boy’s father explained that the horse was brought in on a trailer and that no one was in danger.

The father tells FOX25 the school compared the stunt to bringing a “loaded firearm” to school and that he and his wife were shocked to hear about the suspension, saying that the 1100-pound horse, named Pierre, would never hurt a fly.

The school would not comment, saying that they do not talk about any aspect of student discipline.

The family says they plan to contest the suspension.

See also:

Catholic school boots boy for long hair even though his angelic locks were to be donated to kids with cancer.

This is good too. WTF is tht problem in Wakefield? Three little letters are causing a stir in one town. The Wakefield Track and Field team's sweatshirts are the talk of the town.

Inflation is one way to pay debt - US Federal Reserve: Fed Easing May Mean 20% Dollar Drop

US Federal Reserve: Fed Easing May Mean 20% Dollar Drop: Gross - CNBC

The dollar is in danger of losing 20 percent of its value over the next few years if the Federal Reserve continues unconventional monetary easing, Bill Gross, the manager of the world's largest mutual fund, said on Monday.

"I think a 20 percent decline in the dollar is possible," Gross said, adding the pace of the currency's decline was also an important consideration for investors.

"When a central bank prints trillions of dollars of checks, which is not necessarily what (a second round of quantitative easing) will do in terms of the amount, but if it gets into that territory—that is a debasement of the dollar in terms of the supply of dollars on a global basis," Gross told Reuters in an interview at his PIMCO headquarters.

The Fed will probably begin a new round of monetary easing this week by announcing a plan to buy at least $500 billion of long-term securities, what investors and traders refer to as QE II, according to a Reuters poll of primary dealers.

"QEII not only produces more dollars but it also lowers the yield that investors earn on them and makes foreigners, which is the key link to the currencies, it makes foreigners less willing to hold dollars in current form or at current prices," Gross added.

To a certain extent, that is what the Treasury Department and Fed "in combination" want, said Gross, who runs the $252 billion Total Return Fund and oversees more than $1.1 trillion as co-chief investment officer.

"The fundamental problem here is that our labor and developed economy labor relative to developing economy labor is so mismatched—China can do it so much more cheaply," he said.

[more at above link]

Obama seeks to blunt Republican attack over comment that Americans are the "Enemy"

Obama seeks to blunt Republican attack over comment | Reuters

WASHINGTON | Mon Nov 1, 2010 6:35pm EDT

(Reuters) - President Barack Obama said on Monday he should not have used the word "enemies" to describe his political opponents as Republicans sought to make an issue of the comment a day before congressional elections.

The new enemies list, US.

Here is the Problem, the Pathology of Idolatry...especially one with feet of clay

Maybe he's praying for Obama to go away so the traffic will clear and people can get on with their lives instead of his big ego! This is creepy!

A man gets on his knees next to a car carrying U.S. President ... - Yahoo! News Photos

A man gets on his knees next to a car carrying U.S. President Barack Obama as he pulls away from Valois restaurant in Chicago, October 31, 2010.

This guy is just doing some begging. He wants to eliminate all the taxes and bureaucrats taking their cut in between.