Image via Wikipedia

I keep hearing the news talk about jobs getting better. But then again. I have noticed that most of those jobs are from the census bureau.
I mean really a 2 week job is what they are counting as jobs?
I bet many don't realize the impact of this administration.
The worst ever.

clipped from dailyreckoning.com US Jobs Data: One Reason Why It Might Not Be Getting Better Ever Had A Job? A chart that showed past presidents and the percentage of each president’s cabinet appointees who had previously worked in the private sector – you know, a real life business, not a government job? Remember what that is? A private business? Roosevelt – 38% Taft – 40% Wilson – 52% Harding – 49% Coolidge – 48% Hoover – 42% FDR – 50% Truman – 50% Eisenhower – 57% Kennedy – 30% LBJ – 47% Nixon – 53% Ford – 42% Carter – 32% Reagan – 56% GHWB – 51% Clinton – 39% GWB – 55% And the Chicken Dinner Winner is……………………. Obama – 8%* This is the guy who wants to tell YOU how to run YOUR life! ONLY ONE IN TWELVE in the Obama Cabinet HAS EVER HAD A JOB. *YEP, EIGHT PERCENT! And these are the guys holding a “job summit”; going to tell us how to run our businesses, make our decisions for us? Do you want to trust them with every aspect of your life?

Related articles by Zemanta

• Terry Newell: Presidents and Polls: The Only Way Seems Down (huffingtonpost.com)
• 3 reviews of US President Could Serve More Than Two Terms (rateitall.com)
• George Bush: Worst. President. Ever? | Richard Adams (guardian.co.uk)
• Branding the presidency (timesunion.com)
• Daniel Cluchey: Hoover v. Roosevelt: Decision 2010 (huffingtonpost.com)
• Learning the Presidents of the United States IN ORDER The remainder of them (teachstreet.com)
• Does executive experience really make for better presidents? (salon.com)
• The Complete Net Worth Of The American Presidents: From Washington To Obama (businessinsider.com)

Obama's New World Order manifesto

Image via Wikipedia

Obama's New World Order manifesto

3 minutes ago from todaysworld

• 
  
  read more on www.wnd.com
  Lost in all the chaos of the Gulf oil spill is Barack Obama's 52-page manifesto for a New World Order.
  I invite you to read for yourself his misnamed "National Security Strategy" – misnamed because it is actually a blueprint for running the whole world like he's been running the United States since January 2009.
  Obama is hardly the first president to plead for America to join a New World Order. It started with the first George Bush and has continued unabated through three more administrations. But Obama's so-called "National Security Strategy" has little to do with securing the U.S. from threats and much more to do with turning over the U.S. to the illegitimate authority of global organizations.
  It starts early in the table of contents: "Promoting a Just and Sustainable International Order."
  Woodrow Wilson tried with the League of Nations. Franklin D. Roosevelt tried with the United Nations. I guess we're going to keep trying this path until we get it right.
  Nowhere in this document will you see the word "sovereignty" used in regard to the United States – only about Iraq and Russia. (Maybe all of us who want to live in a free and independent nation need to move to one of those locales?)
  The last seven pages of the document are about this new "international order" Obama wants to build – a pretty ambitious agenda for a guy who has never run any business or served in any executive capacity before assuming the presidency. But don't worry. His plan is to bring in some people with lots of experience running things – the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, to name a few.
• 
  
  read more on www.whitehouse.gov
  International Order
  "As President of the United States, I will work tirelessly to protect America's security and to advance our interests. But no one nation can meet the challenges of the 21st century on its own, nor dictate its terms to the world. That is why America seeks an international system that lets nations pursue their interests peacefully, especially when those interests diverge; a system where the universal rights of human beings are respected, and violations of those rights are opposed; a system where we hold ourselves to the same standards that we apply to other nations, with clear rights and responsibilities for all."
  —President Barack Obama, Moscow, Russia, July 7, 2009
• 
  
  read more on www.whitehouse.gov
  International institutions—most prominently NATO and the United Nations—have been at the center of our international order since the mid 20th century. Yet, an international architecture that was largely forged in the wake of World War II is buckling under the weight of new threats, making us less able to seize new opportunities. Even though many defining trends of the 21st century affect all nations and peoples, too often, the mutual interests of nations and peoples are ignored in favor of suspicion and self-defeating competition.
  What is needed, therefore, is a realignment of national actions and international institutions with shared interests. And when national interests do collide—or countries prioritize their interests in different ways—those nations that defy international norms or fail to meet their sovereign responsibilities will be denied the incentives that come with greater integration and collaboration with the international community.
  No international order can be supported by international institutions alone. Our mutual interests must be underpinned by bilateral, multilateral, and global strategies that address underlying sources of insecurity and build new spheres of cooperation. To that end, strengthening bilateral and multilateral
• 
  
  read more on goodtimepolitics.com
  Barack Obama can call his new World Order anything he likes; it's still the old Karl Marx manifesto reworked. Their corps principles are the people are dependent on and responsible to the state. The state is the primary decision maker in all cases. The problem with Obama-ism [aka] socialism is it stifles the individual's incentives to perform to think to create. When the first pilgrims came to the new world they had no government, they were the government and as Americans we've struggled for nearly 400 years to keep it where we the people are the government and the bureaucracy is solely responsible to the people. Every so often the politicians must be reminded it's "We [not they] the people" who are in charge. When things go wrong it's the President who gets the blame, a president can't act without the support of congress. In the case of the Obama administration congress has completely acquiesced to their masters demands. In the past 16 months every safeguard the founders put in the constitution to prevent a dictatorial government has been violated by the Obama administration and the 111th congress, this can't be tolerated any further. READ MORE AT SOURCE
• 
  
  read more on www.thelandofthefree.net

  Obama-ism Is Nothing But Ground Up Socialism

  
  By: Ken Hughes Barack Obama can call his new World Order anything he likes; it's still the old Karl Marx manifesto reworked. Their corps principles are the people are dependent on and responsible to the state. The state is the primary decision maker in all cases. The problem with Obama-ism [aka] socialism is it stifles the individual's incentives to perform to think to create.

Share 

0comments       

See and download the full gallery on posterous

Posted via email from Todays World

Related articles by Zemanta

• The Post WW2 New World Order Map (grantlawrence.blogspot.com)
• G-20 Issue: How Much Should Nations Push Growth? (online.wsj.com)
• World 'can't rely as much on US' (news.bbc.co.uk)
• World 'cannot rely as much on US' (news.bbc.co.uk)
• The Icarus Syndrome (tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com)
• How Canada made the G20 happen (theglobeandmail.com)
• Key issues at G20 summit (theglobeandmail.com)

Projecting the winner in World War 3: The odds are not necessarily in USA's favor

Image by ViaMoi via Flickr

• Projecting the winner in World War 3: The odds are not necessarily in USA's favor

  "In 2005, General Chi Haotian of China, its "Minister of National Defense" since 1993 to 2003, revealed in his speeches that in China's war on the U.S.A., from one-third to two-thirds of Americans would be poisoned or infected biologically by the Chinese, and their homes and property would be transferred over to Chinese settlers, since the Chinese (and not the Germans, as Chi stipulated in his speech) are the superior race and must have everything best in the world. Anyway, a slave state (China) has this advantage over a free country (the United States): it can reward (enrich!) 100 million or 200 million of its troops and its civilians with what those killed (poisoned and infected) Americans and their ancestors had been acquiring for the past two and a half centuries. In the United States , an American's betrayal of his country to China may well be seen to be his use of his freedom. This certainly applies to the U.S. Presidents, whose elections (which have little to do with the appointment of the prime minister in Britain) contradict the knowledge of mental ability, according to which the value of a thought may include its exclusivity: Einstein said that he was understood by seven people in the world. It was only owing to Einstein's letter to President Roosevelt in 1939 that the Americans got the nuclear bombs before Hitler's Germany completed its nuclear project. "

  tags: Global, prophecy, Government, China, World, War, 3, WW3, Armageddon, Gog, of, Magog, Military

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.

Related articles by Zemanta

• China as World's No. 2 Economy Within Reach (nytimes.com)
• Chinese economy grows by more than 10% (guardian.co.uk)
• China on Path to Become Second-Largest Economy (nytimes.com)
• Influence of Speculation on Chinese Foreign Reserves Is Downplayed (nytimes.com)