Obama Administration Attacks Dietary Supplements, Vitamins (Next They’ll Be Telling Us How to Wipe Our Asses!)September 24, 2011
While watching a television commercial for some prescription medication, have you ever wondered why something it states may kill you or cause serious side effects ever was permitted to be marketed to the public?
For decades I have taken a full range of vitamins, minerals and herbal supplements every morning. I don’t get head colds or any unwanted side affects. In my seventh decade, I enjoy exceptional good health. An annual physical check up is always the same. I am fine.
Millions of Americans benefit from a daily regimen of vitamins, minerals, and herbal supplements. Athletes use whey protein powders. Body builders take amino acids. Others augment food products that lack sufficient nutritional value. Their health and wellness is now threatened by the Obama administration’s Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
On the Friday before the Fourth of July weekend, the FDA published a 47-page document, that would ban all nutritional and supplemental ingredients by requiring them to file documentation involving multi-million-dollar testing and the regulations would be retroactive to 1994!
This will destroy the manufacturers of these products because most are small companies that could not afford such costs. It’s not like there is a vast body of information that demonstrates any threat to health from vitamins and minerals. Quite the contrary. There is ample information on their benefits. There are libraries filled with books devoted to this.
Who would benefit from such regulation of the natural supplement industry? Big Pharma. The same pharmaceutical companies that have a long record of putting forth FDA-approved medications that later prove to be lethal are looking to use the regulatory powers of FDA to literally increase levels of illness.
In the same way Obamacare has been demonstrated to not only be unconstitutional, but also a threat to the health of millions—especially senior citizens—this callous administration now threatens to remove from the shelves of stores that sell nutritional supplements, from pharmacies, and from supermarkets and other outlets, the vitamins, minerals, and herbal supplements on which millions depend for wellness.
This constitutes a criminal conspiracy and Congress, which has ceded its law-making authority to the FDA, must hear from everyone in order to stop this assault on everyone’s health.
Frank Murray, the former editor of Better Nutrition, Great Life, and Let’s Live, is the author and co-author of fifty books on health and nutrition. They include Natural Supplements for Diabetes, Health Benefits Derived from Sweet Orange, and 100 Super Supplements for a Longer Life. He is a member of the New York Academy of Sciences.
One of Murray’s books, Sunshine and Vitamin D, notes that “With the hundreds of clinical trials published on Vitamin D in recent years—I read one study with 132 references—it is obvious that the ‘sunshine vitamin’ no longer has to play second fiddle to the other vitamins.” The same can be said for vitamins A, B, C, and E. All have amply demonstrated their value. Add to them, zink, potassium, selenium, and other mineral supplements. All those prostate advertisements are about herbal supplements!
The Obama administration that has made obesity its pet project is also famous for photos of the President eating every kind of fast food. It is rank hypocrisy, but the proposed FDA ban is literally life threatening.
Write, email, and fax your Representative and Senator to ensure that Congress intervenes with the FDA in the same fashion it is struggling to protect us against an out-of-control Environmental Protection Agency. In particular, contact the members of the House Oversight and Government Reform committee.
Your life and the lives of your loved ones literally depend on stopping this attack on real nutrition.
Americans are losing the freedom they take for granted as Big Government intrudes on every personal choice they make. The Obama administration has demonstrated its total indifference to America’s senior citizens’ access to affordable medical care and now all Americans’ ability to access nutritional supplements.
You are being “protected” into an early grave!
© Alan Caruba, 2011
Obama’s Economists: ‘Stimulus’ Has Cost $278,000 Per Job ($666 Billion Total), and Is Now Causing the Economy to Shed JobsSeptember 23, 2011
The “Seventh Quarterly Report” on the economic impact of the “stimulus,” released on Friday, July 1, provides further evidence that President Obama’s economic “stimulus” did very little, if anything, to stimulate the economy, and a whole lot to stimulate the debt.
The report was written by the White House’s Council of Economic Advisors, a group of three economists who were all handpicked by Obama, and it chronicles the alleged success of the “stimulus” in adding or saving jobs.
The council reports that, using “mainstream estimates of economic multipliers for the effects of fiscal stimulus” (which it describes as a “natural way to estimate the effects of” the legislation), the “stimulus” has added or saved just under 2.4 million jobs — whether private or public — at a cost (to date) of $666 billion. That’s a cost to taxpayers of $278,000 per job.
In other words, the government could simply have cut a $100,000 check to everyone whose employment was allegedly made possible by the “stimulus,” and taxpayers would have come out $427 billion ahead.
Furthermore, the council reports that, as of two quarters ago, the “stimulus” had added or saved just under 2.7 million jobs — or 288,000 more than it has now.
In other words, over the past six months, the economy would have added or saved more jobs without the “stimulus” than it has with it.
In comparison to how things would otherwise have been, the “stimulus” has been working in reverse over the past six months, causing the economy to shed jobs.
Why Taxpayers Are Taking A Half Billion Dollar Bath With the 31st Richest Man in America (Thanks, Obama!)September 22, 2011
He runs a family foundation “dedicated to breaking the cycle of poverty through investments in early childhood education, community health, social services, and civic enhancement.” Speaking to the Rotary Club of Tulsa in 2009 about his foundation’s efforts to obtain “stimulus” funds, he said approvingly of the trillion-dollar Obama stimulus package: “There’s never been more money shoved out the government’s door in world history, and there probably never will be again.”
Kaiser is a top Obama donor, having raised somewhere between $50,000 and $100,000 for the Obama 2008 campaign, along with a personal donation of $53,500. He’s the primary investor in a company whose executives and board members kicked in a total of $87,050 to get Barack Obama elected. This kind of campaign loot earned Kaiser a remarkable level of White House access. He’s visited the White House sixteen times since 2009.
Although he’s made a fortune from oil and gas, Kaiser is a deep thinker about “energy independence,” by which he means forcing Americans to use less gasoline. He’s proposed a “freebate” that would grab billions in new taxes from gasoline purchasers, and redistribute the money so that people who don’t buy a lot of gas will get a nice government handout bonus at the end of the year.
Oh, and the company he invested in, that poured so much money into Barack Obama’s campaign coffers? That would be Solyndra. Based on the amount of taxpayer money pumped into Solyndra, and the number of corners cut to get it there, George Kaiser is the most important man in America. It’s a shame we didn’t get to know him better before we all took a bath with him.
— John Hayward, Human Events
Here’s what he said Monday, and how it was wrong.
OBAMA: “Today, I’m releasing a plan that details how to pay for the jobs bill while also paying down our debt over time.”
TRUTH: The national debt would increase every year under his plan.
According to White House figures, the debt held by the public would increase from $10.2 trillion this year to $17.5 trillion in 2021.
OBAMA: “It’s a plan that reduces our debt by more than $4 trillion.”
TRUTH: As noted, the plan doesn’t reduce debt. Assuming that the president misspoke and meant to say the plan would cut projected DEFICITS by $4 trillion over 10 years, that’s also wrong.
First, his plan totals $3.6 trillion in proposed tax increases, spending cuts and interest savings. To get to a figure of more than $4 trillion, he counts the $1.2 trillion in spending cuts already enacted over the summer.
Second, while he counts the $866 billion in added revenue from letting the Bush tax cuts expire for incomes above $200,000 as he proposes, he doesn’t count the cost of extending the Bush tax cuts for incomes below $200,000, as he also proposes.
That would add about $2 trillion to the deficit over 10 years, according to an analysis last year by the Congressional Budget Office, and would cut his claim at least in half.
OBAMA: “This plan cuts $2 in spending for every dollar in new revenues.”
TRUTH: His claim works only if you count the $1.2 trillion already cut earlier this summer. Any way you add up the numbers of only the plan unveiled Monday, the statement is erroneous.
The president is correct only if you count as spending reductions the $1.2 trillion cut earlier, $580 billion in new spending cuts, $1.1 trillion saved from the planned withdrawal of troops from Iraq and Afghanistan, and $430 billion in lower interest costs. That’s $3.3 trillion, or more than twice the $1.5 trillion in tax increases.
He’s wrong if you don’t count the spending cuts already enacted. Then all the other cuts total $2.1 trillion, or about $1.40 in cuts for every $1 in tax increases.
He’s wrong if you also don’t count the interest savings. Then his cuts total $1.7 trillion, or about $1.12 in cuts for every $1 in tax increases.
And he’s wrong if you don’t count the $1.1 trillion saved by withdrawing troops as planned. Then his cuts total $580 billion, or about 39 cents in cuts for every $1 in tax increases.
In record-setting numbers, young adults struggling to find work are shunning long-distance moves to live with Mom and Dad, delaying marriage and buying fewer homes, often raising kids out of wedlock.
They suffer from the highest unemployment since World War II and risk living in poverty more than others – nearly 1 in 5.
New 2010 census data released Thursday show the wrenching impact of a recession that officially ended in mid-2009.
It highlights the missed opportunities and dim prospects for a generation of mostly 20-somethings and 30-somethings coming of age in a prolonged slump with high unemployment.
“We have a monster jobs problem, and young people are the biggest losers,” said Andrew Sum, an economist and director of the Center for Labor Market Studies at Northeastern University.
He noted that for recent college grads now getting by with waitressing, bartending and odd jobs, they will have to compete with new graduates for entry-level career positions when the job market eventually does improve.
Economists forecast 420,000 claims, according to the median estimate in a Bloomberg News survey.
The average number of claims in the past month rose for a fifth straight week, to the highest level since July 16.
An elevated level of dismissals raises the odds U.S. companies may put off plans to increase employment, making it difficult for joblessness to fall below 9 percent.
Citing ongoing weakness in the labor market, Federal Reserve policy makers announced yesterday they would use another unconventional monetary tool to spur economic growth and job gains.
“These numbers are consistent with a job market that is essentially in suspended animation,” said Brian Jones, an economist Societe Generale in New York, who correctly forecast the level of claims.
Five months ago, 83 percent of African Americans held “strongly favorable” views of Obama, but in a new Washington Post-ABC news poll that number has dropped to 58 percent. That drop is similar to slipping support for Obama among all groups.
“There is a certain amount of racial loyalty and party loyalty, but eventually that was going to have to weaken,” said Andra Gillespie, a political scientist at Emory University, who studies African Americans. “It’s understandable given the economy.”
African Americans have historically correlated approval ratings of the president to the unemployment rate, she said.
The slip in the strongly favorable rating continues the decline Obama has seen among all groups, but black voters have been his staunchest supporters. Overall, they still hold a generally favorable view of the president with 86 percent saying they view him at least somewhat favorably.
Gillespie’s view that the decline is tied to the disproportionately high jobless rate faced by African Americans correlates with the drop in their view of Obama’s handling of the economy.
In July, only 54 percent of blacks said they thought Obama’s policies were making the economy better compared with 77 percent the previous year.
Similarly, the White House has been sharply criticized in recent months by black political leaders, who argue that he has not done enough to help blacks.
The unemployment rate for African Americans hit 16 percent this summer, the highest rate since 1984, and the members of the Congressional Black Caucus launched a jobs tour focused on the problem.
I think this was the first and only time he actually told the truth about something. “Energy prices will skyrocket…they will pass those costs onto consumers.” He was either smoking dope that day, or someone caught him in an unguarded moment.
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama will propose $1.5 trillion in new taxes as part of a plan to identify more than $3 trillion in long-term deficit reduction and slow the nation’s escalating national debt.
Obama’s tax plan is aimed predominantly at the wealthy and draws sharp contrasts with congressional Republicans.
It comes just days after House Speaker John Boehner ruled out tax increases to lower deficits. It also comes amid a clamor in his own Democratic Party for Obama to take a tougher stance against Republicans. And while the plan stands little chance of passing Congress, its populist pitch is one that the White House believes the public can support.
The core of the president’s plan totals just more than $2 trillion in deficit reduction over 10 years. It combines the new taxes with $580 billion in cuts to mandatory benefit programs, including $248 billion from Medicare.
The administration also counts savings of $1 trillion over 10 years from the withdrawal of troops from Iraq and Afghanistan.
The deficit reduction plan represents an economic bookend to the $447 billion in tax cuts and new public works spending that Obama has proposed as a short-term measure to stimulate the economy and create jobs. He’s submitting his deficit fighting plan to a special joint committee of Congress that is charged with recommending deficit reductions of up to $1.5 trillion over 10 years.
In a defiant note, administration officials made clear Sunday that Obama would veto any Medicare benefit cuts that aren’t paired with tax increases on upper-income people.
Officials cast Obama’s plan as his vision for deficit reduction, and distinguished it from the negotiations he had with Boehner in July as Obama sought to avoid a government default.
As a result, it includes no changes in Social Security and no increase in the Medicare eligibility age, which the president had been willing to accept this summer.
Moreover, the new tax revenue Obama is seeking is nearly double the $800 billion that Boehner had been willing to consider in July. Republicans were already lining up against the president’s tax proposal before they even knew the magnitude of what he intended to recommend.
“Class warfare may make for really good politics but it makes for rotten economics,” GOP Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, the House Budget Committee chairman, said Sunday in reaction to one Obama tax proposal to impose a minimum tax rate on wealthy filers.