Why the FED's low rates hurting the economy

"Lower rates drive up the cost of commodities: oil and food. And money that is spent on oil is sent out of the country to the Mideast and it doesn't help, and takes out income from people's pockets that could otherwise be spent on other goods. The second [ZH: and this is by far the biggest thing that the Fed refuses to acknowledge] is that not being able to earn a safe return on savings, is causing people to hoard savings rather than consume. In other words if I know I am going to earn 3% in the bank I can spend that income and I can have visibility towards that, but if I know I'm going to earn zero in the bank, in order to figure out how much I need to save for retirement I need to save a much bigger number. Which means I can't spend much now, I need to save more now, to build up those savings for retirement. If I am already retired and I am on fixed income, my income has now really gone down and I have to hoard money so I can spread it out thinner over a longer part of my life. So by denying individuals savings or interest on income on their savings, it is causing hoarding which is driving down consumption which is hurting the economy."

Mark Levin rips ‘egomaniac,’ ‘schmuck’ Colin Powell: ‘You’re a partisan hack’

On Thursday, former Secretary of State Colin Powell went on “CBS This Morning” and endorsed President Barack Obama — a move that drew the intense ire of conservative talker Mark Levin, the author of “Ameritopia: The Unmaking of America.”

On his Thursday radio show, Levin excoriated Powell, who served in the administration of former President George W. Bush.

“Oh wow – wow, well that’s convinced me,” Levin quipped. “I’ve been wrong all the time, because Colin’s Powell, or Powell’s colon — Colin Powell has announced he’s voting for Obama in 2008, so he’s going to vote for him in 2012. Now that right there is compelling. The logic is compelling. The man is compelling. What a jerk.”

Levin was careful not to criticize Powell for his military service.

“Other than that, he’s really quite the schmuck,” Levin said. “I’m just being honest with you. He’s an egomaniac. He was a terrible secretary of state. But I would ask Mr. Powell this question: Ronald Reagan plucked you from obscurity, specifically [former Secretary of Defense Caspar] ‘Cap’ Weinberger did, Mr. Powell. What do you think ‘Cap’ Weinberger would think of what’s happening to the United States Navy, in general the United States Armed Forces, Mr. Powell? ‘Cap’ Weinberger, who was behind the 600-ship navy, that is just now going to be under 300? What do you think about that, Mr. Powell? Ronald Reagan would be repulsed by Obama, by his conduct in the Oval Office, by the way he campaigns, by the way he lies, by his philosophy, by his policies, by what he’s done to this nation and the private sector, Mr. Powell. So why did you endorse Barack Obama, Mr. Powell?”

Levin went on to say Powell should have considered the president’s recent difficulty on the international stage.

“I think nobody gives a damn what you think,” Levin said. “Notice he didn’t mention the consulate in Libya. Notice how he is brushing off, or doesn’t want to get into — is just spinning? By the way, I have a list of admirals, a list of generals who are endorsing Romney. I don’t have such a list for Obama.”

“But what’s obvious to me – I don’t mean to be rude, I say this with all due respect — Colin Powell is a chameleon,” Levin said. “With all due respect — and again, not to trash his military service, but to expose his service as a politician and in these other positions — did anyone doubt that Colin Powell was going to be endorsing Barack Obama? And despite his little spin here, he didn’t give a serious reason why … Mr. Powell, you’re totally out of touch with the people of this country if you think this economy is turning around. … You know what you are? You’re a partisan hack. Get out of my party.”

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/26/mark-levin-rips-egomaniac-schmuck-colin-powell-youre-a-partisan-hack/#ixzz2AOKwccRZ

Sandy Seen as Worst Storm in 100 Years for Northeast U.S.

Hurricane Sandy will probably grow into a “Frankenstorm” that may become the worst to hit the U.S. Northeast in 100 years if current forecasts are correct.
Sandy may combine with a second storm coming out of the Midwest to create a system that would rival the New England Hurricane of 1938 in intensity, said Paul Kocin, a National Weather Service meteorologist in College Park, Maryland.
“What we’re seeing in some of our models is a storm at an intensity that we have not seen in this part of the country in the past century,” Kocin said in a telephone interview. “We’re not trying to hype it, this is what we’re seeing in some of our models. It may come in weaker.”
The hybrid storm may strike anywhere from the Delaware- Maryland-Virginia peninsula to southern New England. The current National Hurricane Center track calls for the system to go ashore in New Jersey on Oct. 30, although landfall predictions often change as storms get closer to shore.
“If the storm follows the current hurricane center forecast, we are looking at over $5 billion in damage,” said Chuck Watson, director of research and development at Kinetic Analysis Corp. in Silver Spring, Maryland.
Watson said the track may change quite a bit between now and early next week. An accurate assessment of potential damage from wind and rain probably can’t be made until late this week.
As of 8 p.m. New York time, Sandy was located 35 miles (55 kilometers) southeast of Eleuthera Island in the Bahamas, with top winds of 100 miles per hour, a Category 2 hurricane on the five-step Saffir-Simpson scale, according to the hurricane center in Miami. It was moving north-northwest at 17 mph.
1938 Storm
The 1938 hurricane killed more than 500 people after crossing Long Island and going on to batter Connecticut and Rhode Island.
“We can say even now our worst fears may be realized,” Kocin said. “If we were seeing what we’re seeing today one day out, we would really be shouting the alarms.”
Governments along the East Coast are preparing for Sandy’s impact. New York Governor Andrew Cuomo directed state agencies to monitor the storm and Massachusetts’s Emergency Management Agency warned residents to expect the worst.
New York City has a 55 percent chance of winds of at least 39 mph by Oct. 30, according to estimates by Tropical Storm Risk, a consortium of experts on insurance, risk management and climate supported by the U.K. government.
The center’s track predicts landfall between Atlantic City and Toms River, New Jersey.
New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg said the city was taking routine precautions at this stage.
NYC Prepares
“A good message to everybody is you should always have a ‘go’ plan,” he said at a news conference. “Particularly if you live near the water in a low area, you may have to be evacuated. I wouldn’t plan on it today. Listen to the radio and if necessary follow the instructions.”
The mayor is the founder and majority owner of Bloomberg LP, the parent company of Bloomberg News.
Utilities along the East Coast were monitoring the storm. Nine mid-Atlantic power companies held their first conference call yesterday to discuss how crews will be dispatched to the hardest-hit areas, Myra Oppel, a spokeswoman for Pepco, Washington’s electric utility, said today in an interview.
Pepco retained 400 contractors already working on its system so they’d be available if the storm hits that area, Oppel said. New Jersey’s Public Service Electric & Gas Co. prepared sandbags to protect substations.
Exelon Corp.’s Baltimore Gas & Electric urged its 1.2 million power customers in central Maryland to prepare for power failures and flooding. “We’re taking this extremely seriously,” Robert Gould, a utility spokesman, said today in an interview.
Storm’s Track
The system crossed Jamaica yesterday and Cuba early today, tracking north to the central Bahamas, where a hurricane watch was posted for many of the islands. A tropical storm watch has been issued for Florida’s east coast from north of Flagler Beach to Fernandina Beach, as well as the upper Keys from Ocean Reef to Craig Key. The watch also extends to Florida Bay.
Winds of at least 74 mph extend 35 miles from Sandy’s core, while winds of 39 mph reach out 205 miles. The distance from Freeport, Bahamas, to Fort Lauderdale, Florida, is 94 miles.
“Sandy is expected to grow larger in size during the next couple of days,” the hurricane center said. “Some weakening is forecast during the next 48 hours but Sandy is expected to remain a hurricane for the next couple of days.”
On Jamaica, 70 percent of the island lost power, roofs were torn from homes and roads were blocked by downed trees and floods as Sandy roared ashore, according to Air Worldwide.
Buckeye Partners LP suspended operations at the BORCO terminal in the Bahamas, Kevin Goodwin, a company spokesman, said. The terminal can hold 21.6 million barrels of crude, fuel oil and other refined products.
The amount of damage the East Coast is going to absorb is hard to estimate because the storm’s track is in flux, said Tom Larsen, senior vice president and product architect at Eqecat Inc., a risk modeler in Oakland, California.
Larsen said he doesn’t expect Sandy to be worse than Irene, which struck the East Coast in August 2011, killing at least 45 people and causing at least $15.8 billion in damage, according to the hurricane center.


Read more on Newsmax.com: Sandy Seen as Worst Storm in 100 Years for Northeast U.S.
Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama's Re-Election? Vote Here Now!

Obama & Libya – A Case Study in Treason

When a president fails to lift a finger to protect Americans, at home or abroad, in the face of overwhelming intelligence and evidence, by ignoring obvious warning signs and the advice of those entrusted to offer such protection…

It is treason.

Emails were sent to 400 people in the first 2 hours of the attack in Benghazi indicating that the attack was a terrorist attack.

Those emails went to the State Department.

Those emails went to the FBI.

Those emails went directly to the White House Situation Room.

At the time the email went to the White house Situation Room…Obama was in a meeting with his security team.

The first email – 4:05pm EST

“U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi Under Attack (SBU).” 

 ”The Regional Security Officer reports the diplomatic mission is under attack. Embassy Tripoli reports approximately 20 armed people fired shots; explosions have been heard as well. Ambassador Stevens, who is currently in Benghazi, and four COM personnel are in the compound safe haven. The 17th of February militia is providing security support.  The operations Center will provide updates as available.” 

Second Email – 4:45pm EST

“Update 1: U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi (SBU)” 

“Embassy Tripoli reports the firing at the U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi has stopped and the compound has been cleared. A response team is on site attempting to locate COM personnel.” 

Third Email – 6:07pm EST

“Update 2: Ansar al-Sharia Claims Responsibility for Benghazi Attack (SBU).” 

“Embassy Tripoli reports the group claimed responsibility on Facebook and Twitter and has called for an attack on Embassy Tripoli.”

Let me make this absolutely crystal clear…

WHEN THOSE EMAILS CAME INTO THE WHITE HOUSE STTUATION ROOM…WHILE THE ATTACK WAS STILL IN PROGRESS…OBAMA WAS MEETING WITH HIS SECURITY TEAM.

At the Department of State…THEY WERE WATCHING THE ATTACK…IN REAL TIME…AS IT OCCURRED.

When asked “when did the president become aware of the emails?” Debbie Bird of the White House National Security Staff responded yesterday: “I have been asked by one of our spokespeople to relay ‘that we decline to comment.”

There is no way…NO WAY…On this earth that Obama didn’t know what was happening or who was behind it…WHILE IT WAS HAPPENING.

There is no way…NO WAY…On this earth that Hillary Clinton didn’t know what was happening or who was behind it…WHILE IT WAS HAPPENING.

4 Americans were killed…WHILE THEY WATCHED IT IN REAL TIME…at the State Department.

4 Americans were killed while Obama met with his security team as the email alerts came into the White House Situation Room.

Regardless of whether Obama said it was an “act of terror” in the rose garden the next day or whether he was referring to “acts of terror” in a generic sense…

For the next 2+ weeks…both Obama and Hillary Clinton blamed a You Tube video. They sent their minions…Jay Carney and the Obama campaign team out to any available microphone to blame it on a You Tube video.

They sent Ambassador Susan Rice to 5 Sunday shows to blame it on a You Tube video.

Obama blamed it on a You Tube video 6 times at the United Nations.

On Univision…Obama said they were still investigating the cause of the Benghazi attack.

On Letterman…Obama said they were still investigating the cause of the Benghazi attack.

When Obama and Hillary stood in front of the caskets of the 4 Americans killed in the Benghazi attack…They blamed the You Tube Video.

When Obama appeared on The View…He said they were still investigating the cause of the attack in Benghazi.

There was a drone over the Consulate in Benghazi monitoring the attack as it happened.

There were military personnel in Tripoli that were not sent into Benghazi.

There were Special Ops forces with Blackhawk Helicopters in Southern Italy, only 450 miles from Benghazi that were not sent to Benghazi.

And then, there’s THIS:
Popout
Bald-faced, unadulterated lies.

On The Daily Show, Obama said: “Every piece of information that we get, as we got it, we laid it out to the American people.”

Yesterday was October 23^rd. The attack happened on September 11^th.

42 days.

It took 42 days to get the information contained in those emails that went to 400 people…The State Department and the White House Situation Room. “Every piece of information that we get, as we got it, we laid it out to the American people,” indeed.

More bald-faced, unadulterated lies.

Also from The Daily Show: “I wasn’t confused about the fact that we needed to ramp up diplomatic security around the world right after it happened.”

…After it happened.

Before it happened, there were 234 terrorist attacks in Libya in the last 16 months.

Before it happened there were 48 terrorist attacks in Benghazi in the last 16 months.

Before it happened, there were 2 bombings at our Consulate in Benghazi.

Before it happened, there were 2 attempts on the life of the British Ambassador.

Before it happened there was an attack on the Red Cross in Benghazi.

Before it happened, both the British and the Red Cross pulled out of Benghazi.

BEFORE IT HAPPENED…FOR SEVERAL MONTHS…OUR SECURITY PEOPLE IN LIBYA WERE LITERALLY BEGGING THE STATE DEPARTMENT FOR MORE SECURITY AND EVENTUALLY…JUST TO KEEP THE SECURITY LEVEL THEY HAD.

Before it happened, every single request for more security in Libya was denied by the State Department.

Before it happened, rather than leave in place the security team that was already there, the State Department DECREASED security by pulling that team OUT of Libya.

Before it happened…the anniversary of 9-11 was approaching.

“I wasn’t confused about the fact that we needed to ramp up diplomatic security around the world …right AFTER it happened.”

Again, from The Daily Show: “And I wasn’t confused about the fact that we were going to hunt down whoever did it and bring them to justice.”

For 22 days, the FBI stayed in Tripoli because it was deemed too dangerous to go to the scene of the attack in Benghazi.

Within 3 days of the attack, CNN sent in a reporter who came out of Benghazi with the journal of Ambassador Stevens.

It’s now been 42 days and Obama continues to say, “we were going to hunt down whoever did it and bring them to justice.”

A reporter from the New York Times and Fox News reporter Greg Palkot both found one of the key suspects, who was seen in the video of the terrorist attack…SITTING IN A CAFÉ…SIPPING ON A STRAWBERRY FRAPPE…and laughing at Obama and the United States.

Yesterday, Hillary Clinton spoke regarding the emails which indicated Ansar al-Sharia, a known al Qaeda affiliate, had claimed responsibility on a Facebook post and said: “Posting something on Facebook is not in and of itself evidence.”

Yet, for 2 weeks…In front of the caskets of the 4 dead Americans…On the U.N. podium…From the White House Briefing Room and from 5 separate Sunday shows…IT WAS A-OK TO BLAME THE BENGHAZI ATTACK ON A…YOU TUBE VIDEO?????

Put it all together and ask the question.

Why?

The answer or answers seem clear.

234 red flag warnings ignored because politically, Libya was supposed to be a shining example of the success of Obama’s “lead from behind” strategy.

Numerous attempts from heads of security to increase or keep current security levels ignored because, politically, to publicly admit Libya or Benghazi was deteriorating into a haven for al Qaeda would not fit the Obama narrative that al Qaeda was on their heels.

During the attack, moving military elements into Benghazi would have exposed the false narrative and the false claim that Libya was an Obama success.

After the attack…All of the above…The ignoring of the red flag warnings, ignoring pleas for added security, and not doing everything possible militarily to beat back the attackers or rescue our personnel, would have pointed to a known threat of terrorism and it’s devastating conclusion being shoved aside for purely political reasons therefore…Blame it on a video and call it a “spontaneous” event.

The strategy…Ride it out for a few weeks until after the election and throw anybody under the bus except Obama…Susan Rice…Hillary Clinton…The State Department…The Intell Community…James Clapper…Jay Carney…Anybody but Obama.

Blame Romney for “shooting first and aiming later”…Blame Romney for keeping this in the news for political reasons…

This was orchestrated by the Obama Campaign Administration. Do anything, say anything, blame anything or anyone other than Obama…Keep the candidate out of it…ride it out until after the election…Paint Romney as the war monger…Then the campaign…The Obama puppet masters can make Obama look tough…After the election we’ll get to the bottom of it…after the election we’ll go after the terrorists…after the election.

The Obama Campaign Administration never counted on Fox News, never counted on Catherine Herridge who should get a Pulitzer for her work on this story, never counted in CNN getting the Ambassador’s journal…NEVER counted on the NYT or Palkot finding the ring leader sipping a strawberry frappe, never counted on career people at the State Department or the Intell Community being upset about being thrown under the bus, never counted on whistle blowers.

The campaign, it seems, felt it was more important to keep their socialist in the white house than admit Libya was not the success that it was being portrayed to be.

Obama’s myths, it appears, were NOT expendable but, our people…Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty…Were expendable.

Of so little value were those expendable Americans to Obama…Knowing what was happening TO them WHILE it happened…KNOWING it was a terrorist attack because the emails stating that arrived IN THE SITUATION ROOM WHILE THE ATTACK WAS STILL IN PROGRESS…Knowing that people in the State Department WERE WATCHING IT HAPPEN IN REAL TIME…The next day, Obama flew to Las Vegas for a fund raiser and over the next few days…Appeared on The View, Letterman and a radio show with somebody called, “Pimp With a Limp” and partied with Jay Z and Beyonce.

What happened BEFORE the attack in Benghazi, leaving our own unprotected amid the growing lethal threat of terrorism, for purely political reasons, was treason…Everything that’s happened after, the lies and misdirections, the blame came and stalling has been to cover up the treason.

Obama Knew

Obama knew.

Say again, Obama knew.

So. The question.

If what happened in Benghazi wasn't incompetence -- was it ideology?

Did Sharia kill Ambassador Chris Stevens, Foreign Service officer Sean Smith, and two Navy SEALs?

And is Hillary Clinton's insistence yesterday that the leaked State Department e-mails were "not evidence" yet more evidence that indicates the Obama White House not only knew what was going on but deliberately turned a blind eye to Benghazi because of that ideology?

Specifically, did an ideological soft spot for Sharia -- Obama's name is being used by his step-grandmother to raise funds to educate kids in Sharia -- blind the U.S. government to the threat posed by Ansar Al-Sharia? A group whose objective, says its Libyan leader, is to "impose Sharia" on Libya.

A group whose namesake in Yemen is a subsidiary of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula ("AQAP" in State Department language). It was, recall, Obama himself who first dismissed the so-called "Underwear Bomber" as an "isolated extremist." Finally the administration was forced to admit that AQAP was responsible for "the December 25, 2009 attempted attack on Northwest Airlines Flight 253 from Amsterdam to Detroit, Michigan."

First, the e-mails.

In a stunning leak (and as this is written the leaks discussed below are expanding, with more gushing forth), Fox News producer Chad Pergram has discovered one of the biggest stories of the fall campaign:

A series of internal State Department emails obtained by Fox News shows that officials reported within hours of last month's deadly consulate attack in Libya that Al Qaeda-tied group Ansar al-Sharia had claimed responsibility.

Catch that phrase? The Obama Administration knew specifically "within hours" that the attack on the Libyan consulate was a terrorist attack and that, per one e-mail, "Ansar Al-Sharia Claims Responsibility for Benghazi Attack." (Note: interestingly, both Reuters and CBS ran this story -- standing out from their mainstream media fellows.)

The State Department through its Operations Center quickly copied the "White House Situation Room, the Pentagon, the FBI and the Director of National Intelligence."

What specifically was said in the three e-mails, marked "SBU" for "Sensitive But Unclassified"?

Here's the text of e-mail Number One:

Subject:U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi Under Attack (SBU).
The Regional Security Officer reports the diplomatic mission is under attack. Embassy Tripoli reports approximately 20 armed people fired shots; explosions have been heard as well. Ambassador Stevens, who is currently in Benghazi, and four COM personnel are in the compound safe haven. The 17th of February militia is providing security support.
The operations Center will provide updates as available.

And Number Two:

Subject: Update 1: U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi (SBU)
(SBU) Embassy Tripoli reports the firing at the U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi has stopped and the compound has been cleared. A response team is on site attempting to locate COM personnel.

And next and last:

Subject: Update 2: Ansar Al-Sharia Claims Responsibility for Benghazi Attack (SBU)
(SBU) Embassy Tripoli reports the group claimed responsibility on Facebook and Twitter and has called for an attack on Embassy Tripoli.

The e-mails are time and date stamped respectively at "4:05 PM" "4:54 PM" and "6:07 PM" on September 11, 2012, all Washington time.

For fourteen days after this the Obama Administration insisted this attack was all about an Internet video.

Fox producer Pergram correctly notes that on September 18 -- seven days later -- White House Press Secretary Jay Carney was saying :

"Based on information that we -- our initial information ... we saw no evidence to back up claims by others that this was a preplanned or premeditated attack; that we saw evidence that it was sparked by the reaction to this video." Carney went on to say "that is what we know" based on "concrete evidence, not supposition."

In short, these e-mails make Carney and UN Ambassador Susan Rice, whom Carney was vociferously defending, into bald-face (or is that red-faced?) liars.

Even more troubling, they make Vice President Joe Biden's claim in his debate with Congressman Paul Ryan that "we said exactly what the intelligence community told us" to be another outright untruth. The e-mails from that very intelligence community show specifically that the White House was told almost immediately of Ansar Al-Sharia that "the group claimed responsibility on Facebook and Twitter and has called for an attack on Embassy Tripoli."

The "initial information" (to use Jay Carney's words) pouring into the State Department -- which was then handed on to the White House itself -- had no mention whatsoever of an Internet video and a quite specific reference to the Al-Qaeda terrorist group Ansar al-Sharia.

And Ansar al-Sharia in Libya? Who are they?

According to Mohammad Ali al-Zahawi, the self-styled "Commander of Ansar al-Sharia" his group -- admirers of Al-Qaeda -- is all about doing "battle with the liberals, the secularists and the remnants of Gaddafi." The terms "liberals" and "secularists" of course mean Americans and Westerners. In June the British ambassador to Libya, Dominic Asquith, was attacked as his convoy moved through the city. The British Ambassador survived but two bodyguards were injured.

Why is Ansar al-Sharia fighting this battle? As its name indicates, and in the words of its leader: "Our brave youths will continue their struggle until they impose Sharia."

Impose Sharia.

Now. Let's connect some dots. Facts.

The first two facts:

• The Obama White House, through e-mails from its own State Department, knew for a fact that, in the words of the e-mail, "Ansar Al-Sharia Claims Responsibility for Benghazi Attack (SBU)."

• It knew what Ansar Al-Sharia was all about -- to "impose Sharia," in the words of Ansar Al-Sharia's "Commander" Mohammad Ali al-Zahawi.

And then this third fact.

Remember the story about Obama's Granny Sarah? This one? In which we told you about Walid and Theodore Shoebat's discovery that Granny Sarah, Cousin Musa Obama, and their family were using Western contributions and soliciting others? Through a television interview on Al-Jazeera in which the President's Cousin Musa happily discussed the ways the President's name was being used to fund educations in Sharia for poor kids? Getting gobs of favorable publicity from groups as varied as the International Reporting Project (in which New York Timeseditor Jill Abramson plays a key role), the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Carnegie Corporation, Greenpeace and even the Catholic Relief Services?

Remember this exchange between Cousin Musa and the Al Jazeera interviewer? 

Q. So then you open opportunities for other universities? Do all these scholarships involve studying Arabic and Sharia?
A. Uuu…hhh the majority of course is Sharia schools because I have strong connections and relationships with primarily Sharia institutions.

So the obvious question.

Let's assume for a moment that the reason for this debacle in Benghazi was not incompetence.

For the "intelligence community" (to use Vice President Biden's words from his debate) to be specifically monitoring Facebook and Twitter for Ansar Al-Sharia means the Obama Administration well knew Ansar Al-Sharia was out and about in Benghazi. Yet somehow it didn't see a threat coming on, of all dates, September 11?

What other reason could possibly have caused the U.S. government to act the way it did? To be blind as a bat about the intentions of a radical Islamic group openly dedicated to doing "battle with the liberals, the secularists …" (i.e., Americans and Westerners), all in the cause to "impose Sharia."

This is, after all, a president who has repeatedly gone out of his way to send a signal to Islamic radicals that he would, as he said in his Cairo University address, "consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear."

This is a president who blithely said just the other week at the United Nations that Arab youths were "rejecting the lie that… some religions… do not desire democracy." The lie, of course, is that Sharia -- the very Sharia promoted by his own family with his silent acquiescence as well as by Ansar Al-Sharia in Libya (not to mention the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt) does in fact strenuously reject democracy other than as a means of getting power. Once that power is obtained, free elections vanish and, to borrow from Churchill, the Iron Veil descends.

This is the very same president who brushed off the idea that the Detroit Underwear Bomber was part of some Al Qaeda plot but rather was just an "isolated extremist."

Not to mention that the Obama administration persists to this moment in saying the Fort Hood shootings were nothing more than "work place violence."

With all of that -- and more -- characterizing Obama's approach to Islamic terror, it's no surprise the mainstream media would not report these e-mails.

With multiples of good reasons. Whether incompetence, simple lying, or ideology, none of this is helpful to a far-left hero struggling mightily to get re-elected. Not to mention that the ideology issue is beyond thorny.

Obama has never held a press conference to disavow Granny Sarah -- as he did with the Reverend Jeremiah Wright. Nor has he publicly asked her to stop using the President of the United States as fund-raising bait to raise money for what is, in effect, the exact same objective as Ansar Al-Sharia as expressed by Mohammad Ali al-Zahawi.

That objective?

Creating more Sharia fanatics whose sole belief is about imposing Sharia -- everywhere. For all we know some Granny Obama-funded Sharia acolyte could one day well turn up in yet another attack on Americans just like the attack in Benghazi.

Which is to say that in the world of leftist ideology that Barack Obama is using to run the White House, the State Department, and all the rest of the U.S. government, to consider Ansar Al-Sharia a threat of any kind would be an insult. Divisive. Deliberately egging on what the Obama administration likes to call a "man caused disaster" -- formerly known as Islamic terrorism.

What these leaked State Department e-mails are doing is raising the obvious point about Obama and Benghazi.

If Benghazi is not about incompetence or lying -- it's worse.

It's about a U.S. government that is at its highest levels in some fashion simpatico with a totalitarian ideology.

That ideology is Sharia.

And whether they wish to admit it or not -- these e-mails show exactly what Obama is loath to admit.

Who killed Ambassador Chris Stevens?

Sharia killed Ambassador Chris Stevens.

Americans to face tougher 2013 on rising prices, taxes

(Reuters) - Consumers will have to dig deeper into their pockets next year to pay for costlier healthcare, more expensive grocery bills and higher taxes, an extra drag on the country's already slow-moving economy.

The additional outlays look set to test the resilience of consumers, whose spending accounts for around two-thirds of the U.S. economy.

"We think it's going to be a difficult six to nine months," said Scott Hoyt, senior director of consumer economics for Moody's Analytics. "If anything, conditions are likely to get worse, particularly at the start of the year."

The strength of consumer spending has surprised some economists, given unemployment near 8 percent and anemic wage growth. Consumer spending has cushioned the blow to the United States from slower foreign demand for its goods.

U.S. households have shed about $880 billion in debt since the peak in the first quarter of 2008, according to Federal Reserve data. That has put many consumers on a path back to financial health.

But an expiration of payroll tax cuts in early January and a spike in food prices could wipe 0.8 percentage points off U.S. economic growth next year, according to some economists.

The economy is now expected to expand 2 percent in 2013, down from 2.1 percent in 2012, a Reuters poll showed.

Consumer groups are noting caution on the part of households when it comes to such things as taking on more debt, retirement savings and gasoline prices.

"People are very concerned about what is going to happen next year because they are already seeing price increases that are affecting their budgets," said Bruce McClary, a spokesman for Clear Point, a nationwide credit counseling organization that helps consumers experiencing problems with debt.

"They are also worried about any kind of changes that might be happening with regard to their income tax, that they are going to have less disposable income to work with," he said.

Economists at JPMorgan say expiration in January of a temporary 2 percentage-point cut in the payroll tax would reduce household spending by $125 billion and lower gross domestic product by about 0.6 percentage point next year.

Still, loss of the payroll tax cuts would be only one aspect of the "fiscal cliff," a popular name for automatic across-the-board spending cuts and tax increases that would suck about $600 billion out of the economy next year.

U.S. lawmakers are expected to find a way to soften the blow of most scheduled tax hikes, including income taxes, and spending cuts due to take effect from January 1. But if they don't, the tax increases and spending cuts could result in the most severe belt-tightening in the United States since a tax increase in 1969 to pay for the Vietnam War.

FOOD, HEALTHCARE, EDUCATION

Another area of concern for consumers is food prices. Rises in the prices of corn and soybeans and other field crops as a result of drought this year in the U.S. Midwest are expected to feed through into food prices late this year and in early 2013.

U.S. soybean prices jumped 40 percent over the summer, while wheat shot up about 50 percent. Prices have eased a bit since then, but the increases are expected to filter down to consumers.

"We are starting to see evidence of food prices moving up so that's definitely going to be a drag on disposable incomes," said Hoyt of Moody's Analytics.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture sees food price increases of 3.5 percent to 4.0 percent next year, greater than this year.

Hoyt says that could cut 0.2 percentage point from economic growth over the winter, when food prices could peak.

Reflecting the strain on many budgets, U.S. shoppers plan to spend an average of about $750 on gifts, decorations and other holiday items this season, only 1.2 percent more than a year ago, according to a recent survey published by the National Retail Federation.

That would be the smallest increase since 2008-2009, when holiday sales fell 1.8 percent during the financial meltdown.

"You could argue that we are still at recession levels on a lot of the consumer indicators," said Jeffrey Cleveland, a senior economist at investments manager Payden & Rygel in Los Angeles. "I don't expect the consumer to be a powerhouse."

Another big extra outlay will be in healthcare premiums, which on average are costing employees more than $2,200 in 2012, according to Aon Hewitt, a human resource consulting firm.

Average health care premiums are forecast to jump by 6.3 percent in 2013, according to Aon Hewitt

Over the last five years, employees' share of healthcare costs will have increased more than 50 percent, it said.

On top of everything else, the cost of a college education is being felt more keenly by many Americans.

Tuition costs for the 2012-13 academic year rose again but federal grant aid and tax benefits did not increase in the previous year - the most recent for which data is available - according to a report published on Wednesday by the College Board Advocacy & Policy Center.

The pain of higher living costs is not being felt evenly.

Households with incomes under $75,000, people older than 50 and those with lower levels of education believe their financial positions are getting worse, according to a survey by Bankrate.com, a research firm specialized in consumer finance.

"A lot of low- and middle-income households are mired with a stagnant income at a time when food and energy costs keep moving higher," said Greg McBride, a senior financial analyst at Bankrate.com.

(

Obama Is A Glass House by Mychal Massie

Obama is either unfamiliar with the old adage of people living in glass houses not throwing stones or he is indeed showing the effects of an emotional breakdown brought on by the pressure of Mitt Romney’s dramatic gains in the past month.

There are three things we definitively know about Obama.

One is that he is notoriously thin-skinned. I can attest to that because he personally attempted to intimidate me after I wrote a syndicated article titled “Darth Democrat.” (WND.com; 11/16/04)

We know he is notoriously condescending and sarcastic, and finally there is a wealth of empirical evidence evidencing his pernicious mendacity. One would think that a person who is known for such low-life character traits would take a moment to think about what they were fixating about saying before they said it–but not Obama. His narcissistic hubris demands that he just open his mouth and say whatever is flowing from his bowels to his head (which is positioned squarely in that portion of his anatomy that graces a chair) in an attempt to insult (in this instance) Mitt Romney.

Which is a verbose buildup to say that is exactly what happened when during a campaign rally Tuesday, referencing Romney, he asked, “If you cannot even remember what you said last week” can we trust you to be leader? That isn’t the challenge Obama should be proffering when we look closely at the lies and misdirections he has engaged in from his very first foray into politics.

As I detailed in my 2004 article “Darth Democrat,” Obama is either a congenital and pathological liar or he suffers from a form of dissonance that has stripped him of any concern for truth predicated upon his belief that if he says it people will believe it.

Does Obama remember that he said he would cut the deficit in half in his first term? Does he remember that he bowed at the waist to some of the cruelest dictators know today? Does he remember how he berated the United States in Cairo shortly after he was elected president? Does he remember being caught red-handedly telling Russian President Medvedev to assure Russian Leader Putin that he would have more flexibility in his second term to effect plans harmful to America? Does he remember flippantly insulting a person who asked about high gas prices? Does he remember refusing to approve the Keystone XL Oil Pipeline that would have been a giant step toward our energy independence?

Or perhaps he should be asked if he remembers his lies about his expertise in Constitutional law. Perhaps he should be questioned on his campaign propaganda in 2008 when he claimed we were one America that shouldn’t be divided by race, but that he has fomented race-mongering and class warfare from his first month in office.

Does Obama remember that his own relatives have been documented, on the record, repeatedly saying he hasn’t assisted them with one dime of financial help (even though he is a multi-multi-millionaire) while he is telling us we must ante-up to pay more for those who have less than we do? I could go on, but, suffice it to say, Obama is adroit at hurling insults yet forgets that every charge he tries to label Mitt Romney with he is provably guilty of himself.

He likes to gloat and puff his chest out when he talks about being Commander-in-Chief, but does he remember that there are no acting classes to become a leader? You are either born with the capacity to be same or you are not. With that position established, maybe Obama can point to a former American leader who blamed his predecessor as the reason for his personal failings.

But, as usual, the boy who wants to play president is wrong. The question isn’t can we trust Mitt Romney; the question is can we trust Obama–and why was he trusted in the first place? If Obama weren’t so blinded by the shine of his own image he would understand it’s not in his best interest to put people in the position of having to answer that question.