When in Rome, 2015 and the climate it’s a changin’

Well, 2015 is already shaping up as a significant year. It’s gotten off to a rocky start as we see, in the first quarter we had 0.2 percent GDP growth. (subject to later revision) That could basically be considered flat-lining and a few whiskers short of contraction. Hey, what’s a few tenths of a percent? Everything .

Then politically it is filled with the same turmoil that got us a new and improved Congress in 2014, and the disenchantment the left and the White House has over that. It’s a little more than a year before the next presidential election, without an incumbent — unless you consider Hillary an incumbent. All of it raising questions about the future.

We’re already deep into protest-palooza spreading across state lines, across the country. They are now a greater threat than natural disasters and storms. National security and terrorism is right back on the front burner with all the hot items the left would like to accentuate.

But then there’s Obama, in whatever scorched earth agenda he has left, trying to navigate the issues in the social chaos he ushered in. His favorite theme of late is there is no greater threat to the world than global warming or climate change. But its a crowd pleaser. Among his leftist base it is on par with income disparity and their demonize the rich campaign. (except for uber-rich leftists)

Reminds me of the old song, Times they are a changin’ (’64). In the words of Bob Dylan, “There’s a battle outside, And it is ragin’.”

Then there’s the creation-worshiping cult of the left. Speaking of religiosity of the faith-based global warming, climate change, or its broader globalism theory, the Pope of Rome has decided to weigh in on the subject.

Pope Francis poised to weigh in on climate change with major document

By Michelle Boorstein — April 27 | Washington Post

The largely secular climate movement is about to get what some predict will be a historic boost from an intriguing source: Pope Francis.
Francis is putting the final touches on what may be the most authoritative papal teaching ever on the environment, a topic bound up with economics, global development and politics and thus very controversial. …/
The encyclical is expected to be published in early summer and,… to influence a civil process — in this case, a major U.N. summit in December on climate change. …/
Continue reading: http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/pope-francis-poised-to-weigh-in-on-climate-change-with-major-document/2015/04/27/d5c268b2-df81-11e4-a500-1c5bb1d8ff6a_story.html

So we’ll be in a holding pattern for the encyclical, and the left will be building the hype and suspense until it comes. Meanwhile, they can cite the Pope as a global warming colleague.

Just when you thought the year seemed chock full of turmoil and political fodder — dark enough to block sunlight — it is going to get a whole lot more “heated” before it’s over. If you thought smoldering buildings and looting from protests-gone-rad were bad, stay tuned for the uber-sized battle of global warming coming down the pike – scorched earth style. Now that the Pope is officially joining the fray, it will enlist all the resources it can.

The Climate Caliphate is getting very restless. Jihad is on. If Obama has an unwavering appetite for war on anything, it is for war on coal, energy, the economy, rural America, conservatives and anything standing in his way — he takes no prisoners. It’s a nice diversion from real, immediate problems and threats. ( like an 18 tillion-$ diversion)

Obama’s phony falling deficit claim

Deficits Falling (From Way Up)

Factcheck -Robert Farley- Posted on August 1, 2013

In recent speeches, President Obama has repeatedly claimed that “our deficits are falling at the fastest rate in 60 years.” The White House says he’s referring to the decline in the deficit as a percentage of the nation’s economy from 2009 to 2012. But that’s not the “fastest rate” of deficit reduction in 60 years. It fell at a faster rate from 2004 to 2007.

Obama has dropped the talking point into no fewer than five speeches focused on “Jobs for the Middle Class” during the course of a week.

July 30 in Tennessee: Our deficits are falling at the fastest rate in 60 years.
July 24, in Illinois: And our deficits are falling at the fastest rate in 60 years.
July 25, in Missouri: And our deficits are falling at the fastest rate in 60 years.
July 25, in Florida: And our deficits are falling at the fastest rate in 60 years.
July 27, weekly address: Our deficits are falling at the fastest rate in 60 years.

It sounds like an impressive accomplishment to bolster the president’s case that the economy is getting better. And if the official White House transcripts are any indication, it is a reliable applause line.

To back it up, the White House press office points to historical data showing that deficits, as a percentage of gross domestic product, fell from 10.1 percent in 2009 to 7 percent in 2012. (See Table 1.2.) That’s a 3.1 percentage point drop, and the last time the U.S. saw a larger drop over an equivalent period of time was 1946 to 1949, when the deficit went from 7.2 percent of GDP to a surplus of 0.2 percent of GDP (a change of 7.4 percentage points), White House spokesman Bobby Whithorne wrote to us in an email.

To be sure, that is a marked drop in the deficit. But it’s not the “fastest rate” of deficit reduction — which speaks to relative speed.  That may sound like a mathematical technicality, but it reveals a large contextual difference.

Due to the recession, the deficit as a percentage of GDP spiked in 2009 to a level not seen since the mid-1940s. So it had further to fall than usual.

When Obama took office in 2009, he inherited a projected deficit of $1.2 trillion. He added another $200 billion in deficit spending to that. As a percentage of GDP, the deficit in fiscal year 2009 came to 10.1 percent. That’s by far the highest percentage over the last 60 years (you have to go back to the World War II years between 1942 to 1945 to see higher figures). Over the last 60 years, deficits as a percentage of the GDP have averaged 2.4 percent. The deficit was 3.2 percent in 2008, the year before Obama took office; and it was 1.2 percent the year before that. In other words, it had a long way to drop from 2009.

“Think about it this way,” Steve Ellis of Taxpayers for Common Sense wrote to us in an email. “I like to compare budget numbers to diets. Bob weighs 400 pounds and loses 60 pounds in a year. Ralph is 210 pounds and loses 40 pounds in a year. Bob has lost more weight than Ralph, but Ralph is losing it faster, at a 19% rate versus a 15% rate.”

Ellis noted, correctly, that the deficit as a percentage of GDP fell 31 percent from fiscal 2009 to fiscal 2012. But he pointed to two other four-year periods when the deficit fell at a faster rate — in fact, more than twice as fast:

  • The rate of deficit reduction was 64 percent from fiscal 1993 to fiscal 1996, when the deficit fell from 3.9 percent of GDP to 1.4 percent.
  • Similarly, the rate dropped 66 percent from fiscal 2004 to fiscal 2007, when the deficit went from 3.5 percent of GDP to 1.2 percent.

“So anyone can play with the numbers,” Ellis said. “Obviously, it’s a significant reduction. But let’s face it there was a lot to reduce. The deficit was morbidly obese.”

Indeed, the numbers can be sliced many different ways. The White House chose a four-year window for its comparison, but the deficit as a percentage of GDP has fallen more over shorter periods of time. For example, it fell 3.2 percentage points in 1969 (from a deficit of 2.9 percent in 1968 to a surplus of 0.3 percent of GDP in 1969).

[…] – More at: Factcheck.org

– Robert Farley

Obama: Honey, I shrunk the economy

In the summer of 2011, propaganda minister Jay Carney announced the economy was “vastly improved”. Now the pm says that it’s the Republicans’ fault the economy is on death watch.

Washington Post:

Gross domestic product fell at a 0.1 percent annual rate in the fourth quarter, the Commerce Department said Wednesday, far below the 1.1 percent gain that analysts had forecast.

Second to the decline in defense spending:

A drop in business inventories was the second major drag on growth. Firms drew down their inventories by more than $40 billion, which subtracted 1.25 percentage points from GDP growth. With companies focusing on selling goods already sitting on their store shelves and in their warehouses, production in the nation’s farms and factories was not as high as one might expect given consumer and business spending.

/…

Still, there are reasons for concern in 2013: While consumer spending held up in the final months of 2012, that was before the payroll tax break expired in January, siphoning income from workers’ paychecks. And if negotiations over the sequester force steep cuts in defense and other government spending in the months ahead, GDP could suffer a steeper decline.

Never fear, Jay Carney to the rescue with an explanation.

So the progressives who want to cut defense spending are blaming it on a cut in defense spending, which in turn they blame on those rascal republicans for the numbers. The cuts in defense spending?…. those Republicans in Congress, again. Then he shifts the blame train into hyperdrive:

Our economy is facing major headwinds, and that’s Republicans in Congress,” the artful Carney said.

At this rate, the propaganda dept of the White House will never run out of work.