This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
I recently became aware of an extremely interesting book that clearly explains how Obama, and earlier Presidents, focuses on creating a false impression of what is achieved rather than on actually accomplishing something worthwhile. At first I was a bit dubioius but the author, Alan Beasley, backs his claims with hard evidence in the form of statistics and actual government reports. This is a must read for anyone who is in the least bit skeptical of government claims and would like to see their skepticism supported. Personally I was under the impression that Clinton, despite some obvious shortcomings, had done a great job of managing the economy during his term in office. Alas that was not the case as Mr. Beasly so throughly establishes. It is amazing the amount of misinformation and false claims a President or his followers can get away with when the news media actively cooperates in the falsification. You really should read this book to get an idea of what goes on. I’ve read enough of the book to know that this is something that must be shared so I did a live radio interview with Alan Beasley on Monday night, October 28th. It was a great interview and it is available for rebroadcast any time you’d like to listen. Just go to: http://www.blogtalkradio.com/angelsandwarriors/2013/10/29/books-andpolitics. I have listed below some, but not all, of the questions I plan to asked and Alan’s written responses. Read this to get an idea but please listen to the live show for far more information and some truly revealing facts about how we are misled and deceived by Obama and others in the highest office in our land. It is truly disgusting! The first nine questions with written answers (not necessarily the same as on the show) follow:
1. Alan, I have read parts of your book and find it fascinating. I have a lot of questions and there are things I’m sure our listeners will find interesting. So, to begin with, could you tell a little about yourself and your qualifications for writing “Legacy of Success”? I spent 30 years in NY. I enjoy current events, and watching the news. I grew up watching the press praise Carter as a great President - but ridicule Reagan as a terrible, feeble, corrupt President. The facts in the late 1970s and 1980s showed the opposite was true. But reporters at the time obviously protected Carter and went out of their way to try to criticize Reagan. It frustrated me that most people didn't see the bias. Then Clinton was given credit for things that didn't happen. Clinton added more to the debt then any President before him, ignored terrorism which led to 9/11 attack, left the country in a terrible recession with corporate malfeasance and the WH image tarnished due to Impeachment and massive corruption. 2. Why did you write “Legacy of Success,” what do you hope to accomplish with it? I wrote the book with the hope that many people on the left would see the Press bias in the US. Many of my friends are Democrats and are literally brain washed by the Press on the left. If people on the left simply saw relevant examples of the bias, they would be more cynical. For example, when I tell Democratic friends that Clinton left office with the economy shedding hundreds of thousands of jobs every month and that Clinton never had a surplus – they laugh in disbelief. Then I show them the government data (online) and they are mad at the deception. On page 47 I show BLS data of the jobs lost in 2001, 2002, and 2003. Then on page 49, I contrast that with the jobs gained when Clinton walked into the WH. On page 36, I show the US Debt by year from 1990-2011. The US Debt increased every year. Clearly if the US had a surplus and “paid down the debt”, the debt would decrease. But it doesn’t. I also wanted to give people a heads up
that Obama would be credited with being one of the best Presidents ever, regardless of the facts. I believe that from the 1st day in the WH (Jan 20th 2009), Obama has been "Legacy driven" and is using clever talking points to achieve this. 3. Many years ago I worked as a Tax Manager for a very large, multinational corporation. My job was to minimize the taxes we paid in various countries. To do this it was necessary to mislead or confuse the tax authorities. I found that this was best accomplished by using ‘the truth’ in clever ways rather than lying. When you tell ‘the truth’ and someone reaches the wrong conclusion they are at fault. When you ‘lie’ and get caught you are to blame. I mention this because I get the impression that a major theme of your book is that politicians are highly skilled at using ‘the truth’ in extremely misleading ways. Am I right about this? You are 100% correct. In fact, I included a section entitled: "Double Meaning Words" to show how Obama crafts sentences that sound like one thing, without outright lying. I believe the use of a teleprompter is critical for this type of deception since if he doesn't read the sentence exactly – word for word - he would be simply lying. 4. Since you are highly critical of Obama and Clinton as well one could easily assume you have a huge Republican bias. However, it seems to me that George Bush Jr. is also guilty of a lot of misrepresentation. So I’d assume you aren’t taking sides as much as just pointing out the facts. Is this correct? Again 100% correct! I use Clinton to show examples of how the Press protects his reputation and legacy (as they are now doing with Obama). To this day Clinton continues to deceive! Clinton continues to get away with this deception because the Press doesn't object. For example, at the 2012 DNC Clinton claims “more jobs are created during Democrat Administrations.” But he leaves out the critical fact that when he (and Carter) entered
the WH, the economy was creating 300k-400k each month. And and this is really important - when Clinton (and Carter) left office, the economy was losing 300k-400k jobs per month. So both Reagan and Bush II began their 8 year terms with a "jobs deficit" of a few million jobs while they implemented policies to turn around the recession they inherited. And Clinton is aware of this! But he is confident that none of the Press will point out that Democrats inherit awesome economies, but leave office with the economy losing millions of jobs. And most Americans have no time to research the BLS website to see the actual facts. 5. To be honest I’ve been under the impression that Clinton had done a good job economy wise. Would you point out where this misleading idea came from and what his real record was? This is a great example of Press bias! The Press repeats over and over that Clinton was successful. They say he balanced the budget and paid down the debt with surpluses for 1 – 3 years. Untrue! Press says 18-30 million jobs were created from 19922000. Untrue! They said he expanded global trade for the USA which helped the Manufacturing sector in the USA. Untrue! (In fact, Manufacturing collapsed in the USA in the late 1990s). And the Press gives Clinton credit for some successes when the Republican controlled House is given no credit for forcing Clinton to do things that – at the time – infuriated his base. Contrast that with the reporting during the Bush years: 1. Unemployment was reduced to 5.1% (or less) from May 2005 to May 2008 2. When American home ownership hit an all-time record 3. The number of people with jobs hit an all-time record in 2007 ($146.5 million). 4. Seniors saw huge cost decreases for prescription drugs Many people on the right were disappointed when (in Nov 2006),
Democrats won control of the House of Representatives. And the 1st Budget by the Democrat controlled Congress began on Oct 1st 2007. But many of us were not surprised that 9 months later the economy began to collapse. Did the Press criticize the Democrats then? No. Yet the Republicans are regularly criticized for hurting the Obama record even though they controlled neither the House nor Senate for the 1st 2 years of Obama Admin. From Jan 2011 to Today, Republicans only control the House.
6. Somewhere I read that you designed the cover of your book and that it tells a story. Could you describe the cover and the story it tells? That is correct. The top 1/3 of the cover shows Sunshine, Rainbows, Unicorns and Butterflies. This is what Americans were promised by Obama Campaign in 2008. Then the word “Change” is displayed upside down and reversed. The bottom 1/3 of the book shows clouds and has 4 images” 1. Gasoline prices between $3.83 and $4.19 2. Tent cities – which have cropped up all over America since 2010 3. Chart of Food-stamps showing the number dependent has doubled under Obama 4. Senior Citizen begging – a result of ObamaCare cuts of $716B from Medicare 7. Your book explains the true meaning of phrases like: a. "Jobs Created or Saved" b. "My Admin increased spending at the slowest rate in 60 years" c. "Look, the Private Sector is doing fine" Could you deconstruct these phrases for our listeners? a. These are statements purposefully designed to deceive. No president has ever been allowed to use such a meaningless measurement as “Saved or Created”. Logically, one would have to “predict” the number of jobs
that would be lost, to attempt to then claim they were saved. If Bush said he created or saved 20 or 30 million jobs – the Press would laugh and ridicule Bush. In fact, during the Bush 8 years, the Employment Level (BLS LNS12000000) shows an increase of 5,755,000 jobs (from 137,614,000 to 143,369,000). And in Nov 2007, BLS showed there were 146,595,000 employed – an all-time record high. As of Sept 2013, there were 144,303,000 employed. This shows that since Obama entered the WH, only 934k jobs have been created – and this is 2,292,000 less than the all-time high of 146,595,000. But what truly highlights the Press bias is that back in Sept 2012 when there were 142,974,000 jobs, no one questioned Obama’s claim of creating 5 million jobs. But the facts show that there were still 395k fewer jobs in America (143,369,000 – 142,974,000). Obama counted jobs created but not jobs lost. Again – what would the Press say if Bush claimed he added 30 million jobs? b. Former Sec of Treasury Geithner was asked years ago about the claim “increased spending at the slowest rate in 60 years” and he dogged it eventually explaining that they didn’t believe they needed to include any spending on things they didn’t support – The Wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were the largest items they excluded. The Stimulus Bill was excluded because they said it was fixing something that broke during the Bush years. In fact we saw the last deficit under Bush come in at $419B and balloon to over $1.2T in the 1st Obama deficit. And guess what? Even though Obama signed a $787B Stimulus Bill and then joked: “Shovel ready wasn’t as shovel ready as we though” – he tries to blame all that spending on Bush! That is why Obama claims he inherited a deficit of over $1 billion – not the true amount of $420B. Imagine if Bush, who was forced to spend over $4T on a
response to 9/11, creation of DHS, rebuild military, etc. Claimed he had a surplus all 8 years he was in the WH because that $4T in spending was because of Clinton failures?!? c. The Private Sector comment is a mystery and was made when the recession ended. And in fact, in April 2010 and May 2010 - 229k jobs and 521k jobs were created respectively. But since then, we have seen only a couple months about 230k jobs creted and most economists say 350k jobs are needed per month (for 18 months) to reduce unemployment below 7%.
8. One obvious question that comes to mind after reading just a little of your book is how can we evaluate the performance of a President? Clearly looking at what the economy dues during the four or eight years they are in office is not appropriate. What is the relevant time frame? And what measures are significant?
For the last 70+ years, most Presidents were given 6 or 12 months grace period. Negative things that happened in the first 12 months were blamed on the previous Administration. Oddly, positive things in the 1st 12 months are typically claimed by the existing Administration – of both parties. Blaming the previous Administration for 2, 3, or 4 years was never done before Obama. This is an example of the Press doing whatever it takes to protect Obama.
9. Alan, in my opinion we have a huge problem in our country with out of control medical care costs and prescription drug costs. But basic economics tells me that when something costs too much there are only two ways to change things. 1. Increase supply, or 2. Decrease demand. Insurance, government or otherwise, does neither of these two things so how can people think Obamacare offers a solution?
ObamaCare (ACA) will make everything worse. It will increase costs for all, reduce quality of service and will increase the number of uninsured. Very few times in the last 100 years have the number of uninsured leveled off or decreased. But each time it did happen, it was a result of very low unemployment. Employers are then forced to give perks to attract talent and Health Insurance is one of those perks. But your question is more about decreasing costs. The main problem is the average person is unable to see what constitutes ridiculess Healthcare costs.
Obviously I asked Alan where listeners could obtain a copy of his book. The simple answer is that it is available at Amazon.com. You can search for Alan Beasley to find it. I highly recommend a purchase, maybe several since it would make a great Christmas gift, especially for liberal friends who might have their eyes opened a bit. Please listen in to the live interview. Again it is available 24/7 at: http://www.blogtalkradio.com/angelsandwarriors/2013/10/29/book s-and-politics
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue listening from where you left off, or restart the preview.