8/19/12, "Chart Of The Day: Americans At Or Below 125% Of The Poverty Level," Zero Hedge
"From AP: "the number of Americans with incomes at or below 125 percent of the federal poverty level - the income limit for qualifying for legal aid - is expected to reach an all-time high of 66 million this year. A family of four earning 125 percent of the federal poverty level makes about $28,800 a year, government figures show." And visually..."
Chart begins at 2000. Via Census Bureau, AP, Zero Hedge
---------------------------------------------------
8/19/12, "Lawyers across US urged to give more free services ," AP, Dave Collins
(parag. 10): "And the number of Americans with incomes at or below 125 percent of the federal poverty level - the income limit for qualifying for legal aid - is expected to reach an all-time high of 66 million this year. A family of four earning 125 percent of the federal poverty level makes about $28,800 a year, government figures show."....
--------------------------------------------------
Following written about Obama and his electorate in April 2010:
4/1/2010, "The Obama Coalition," The Atlantic, Thomas Byrne Edsall
"Over the last two years, there has been a massive increase in the number of people who have no place to turn except to the government. Enactment of the Obama administration’s health care reform legislation demonstrates the growing power of this burgeoning constituency—a constituency which will reap a disproportionate share of the $1 trillion in new health care spending over the next decade.
There are many ways to measure the expanding multitudes of those in need. From February 2008 to February 2010, the number of unemployed men and women doubled from 7.4 million to 14.9 million."...
"Single women voted by better than two to one for Obama over McCain (70-29 percent). In a post-election analysis, the polling firm Greenberg Quinlan Rosser concluded: “Barack Obama would have lost the women’s vote and the 2008 election if it were not for the contribution of the unmarried woman. All told, Obama split men 49-48 percent, but lost married women 47-50 percent. Unmarried women, however, delivered 70 percent of their vote to the Democratic candidate, up from 62 percent in 2004."... (this item about a third into the article)
(continuing, Edsall): "While both the “have” and “have-not” coalitions have been growing, with the middle waning, the devastating effects of the Great Recession, the inexorable enlargement of the minority electorate, and the legions of single voters now give greater momentum to the left and to the Democratic Party.
The problem facing the Democratic Party and the Obama administration lies in maintaining the fragile alliance between their constituents: those looking to the government for resources and protection; millions of ideologically moderate working-class whites upon whom the party continues to depend; and college-educated professionals, many with advanced degrees, who represent the Democrats’ newfound strength among “knowledge workers.“ These Democrats are relatively well-off and socially liberal. They are not bread-and-butter voters, but ideological voters, seeking a government that defends post-materialist rights and values, especially women’s rights, civil rights, and sexual freedom. Many are anti-war. These are the Democratic “haves.”
The party suffered throughout the past four decades from inevitable coalitional conflicts that produced Republican victories with the votes of
- the Silent Majority (1972),
- Reagan Democrats (1980 and 1984),
- Angry White Men (1994), and
- Security Moms (2002 and 2004)....
"He (Obama) could effect—as promised—the long-awaited transformation of American politics."...(Edsall describes this 'transformation' above as the elimination of the middle class. This is 'the promise' of the left).
--------------------------------------------------------
Edsall had one thing quite wrong:
Edsall: "The 2008 election demonstrated that the country is moving into a period of post-racial politics"...(item 6th parag. from end)
Mr. Edsall, the media cannot survive without inventing, lying about, and otherwise fanning flames of racial hatred and politics at all times (links below). Obama gave them a helping hand because he personally chose to make racial politics and division much worse. Most people living today did not grow up having slaves or drinking from separate water fountains. Many today are descendants of people who died to free slaves or died in other wars defending this country. Obama has been given everything by this country which made him a multi-millionaire set for life. Most people who voted for him in 2008 will never have a fraction of the wealth and comfort that he has. Yet he and those he brought with him whose salaries we pay despise this country.
-------------------------------------------------
A few examples of NY Times fabricating events to incite racial hatred and violence:
April 2012: NY Times edit of dispatcher transcript makes it appear Zimmerman volunteered that Trayvon Martin "looked Black," or was "in a gray hoodie, looked Black." This is at minimum inciting violence, but the NY Times views this as their job:
4/3/12, "NYT Zimmerman Edit Even Worse in Print Edition," Breitbart, Big Journalism, Joel B. Pollak
"After Breitbart.com pointed out yesterday that the New York Times had joined NBC and MSNBC in selectively editing George Zimmerman's 911 call to make him look like a racist, a reader emailed us to note that the misleading edit was even worse in some print editions of the newspaper.
Here is the 911 call transcript:
ZIMMERMAN: This guy looks like he's up to no good, or he's on drugs or something. It's raining and he's just walking around, looking about.
911 DISPATCHER: Okay. And this guy, is he white, black, or Hispanic?
ZIMMERMAN: He looks black.
And here is what the Times reported--online:
"“Hey, we’ve had some break-ins in my neighborhood,” Mr. Zimmerman said to start the conversation with the dispatcher. “And there’s a real suspicious guy.”
This guy seemed to be up to no good; like he was on drugs or something; in a gray hoodie. Asked to describe him further, he said, “He looks black.”"
Now--here is what the Times reported in some print editions (emphasis added below, scanned image above):
- "“Hey, we’ve had some break-ins in my neighborhood,” Mr. Zimmerman said to start the conversation with the dispatcher. And there's a real suspicious guy.
- This guy seemed to be up to no good; like he was on drugs or something; in a gray hoodie; looked black. "Now he's just staring at me," he [Zimmerman] said."
The Times has not yet issued a correction or apology."
- --------------------------
4/2/12, "New York Times Repeats NBC Smear With Selective Edit of Zimmerman 911 Call," Breitbart, Big Journalism, Joel B. Pollak
"Today's front-page article in the New York Times on the Trayvon Martin case repeated NBC's attempt to cast George Zimmerman as a racist by selectively editing his 911 call."
---------------------------------------------------
More, 5/6/12, "NY Times Goes Hunting for Racist 'Ultraconservatives' in Ohio Who Won't Support Obama," NewsBusters, Tim Graham
---------------------------------------------
5/4/12, "The NYT accuses American voters of opposing Obama because he's black." Ann Althouse
"This is a scurrilous article! Where's the evidence? It's just creepy, New York aversion to the fly-over people.
While Mr. Obama will always be known to the history books as the country’s first black president, his mixed-race heritage has only rarely surfaced in visible and explicit ways amid the tumult of a deep recession, two wars and shifting political currents.Exactly. It's remarkable, the absence of racism. But the NYT is just so eager to rake some up anyway.
- The Obama campaign aggressively monitors any racial remarks made against the president, but officials rarely openly discuss Mr. Obama’s race....
----------------------------------------------------
How the NY Times viciously misreported the 1991 Crown Heights riots:
8/9/11, "Telling It Like It Wasn’t," Jewish Week, Ari Goldman
"Yet, when I picked up the paper, the article I read was not the story I had reported. I saw headlines that described the riots in terms solely of race. “Two Deaths Ignite Racial Clash in Tense Brooklyn Neighborhood,” the Times headline said. And, worse, I read an opening paragraph, what journalists call a “lead,” that was simply untrue:
“Hasidim and blacks clashed in the Crown Heights section of Brooklyn through the day and into the night yesterday.”
In all my reporting during the riots I never saw — or heard of — any violence by Jews against blacks. But the Times was dedicated to this version of events: blacks and Jews clashing amid racial tensions. To show Jewish culpability in the riots, the paper even ran a picture — laughable even at the time — of a chasidic man brandishing an open umbrella before a police officer in riot gear. The caption read: “A police officer scuffling with a Hasidic man yesterday on President Street.”
I was outraged but I held my tongue. I was a loyal Times employee and deferred to my editors. I figured that other reporters on the streets were witnessing parts of the story I was not seeing."...
=================================The media ran 24/7 with a perverted lie for weeks that someone from the Tea Party spat on and said the N-word at a rally around the time of the ObamaCare vote. No one even thinks like this in 2012 much less acts like it unless you're the media or have other mental problems. No proof of such acts was ever found among ample video and audio recordings made at the time. Andrew Breitbart offered $100,000 to anyone who could provide such proof.
9/6/11, "(Rep.) Andre Carson's True Colors," Breitbart, Larry O'Connor
"You should also know by now that Andrew Breitbart offered a $100, 000 reward for anyone who can produce video proof of the supposed racial hatred. The only videos uncovered were found by the Big Government staff. They show the exact moment Carson described, "down the steps of Cannon", from four different angles. Not only were there no slurs heard on any of the videos, but the scene is not at all how Carson described it to Capitol Hill reporters."...
-----------------------------------------
Ed. note: In both Google and Yahoo search engines, the first item that came up when I input "Breitbart offered $100,000 reward" was a website mocking and ridiculing Brietbart and the Tea Party, saying they were sure Breitbart would never pay the award anyway. My, my, what a surprise.
.
No comments:
Post a Comment