******

Vacation over.

Time to get back to work

Let's see...where did we leave off?

Oh, that's right...

 BENGHAZI     BENGHAZI    BENGHAZI    BENGHAZI     BENGHAZI       BENGHAZI       BENGHAZI    BENGHAZI    BENGHAZI      BENGHAZI      BENGHAZI    BENGHAZI    BENGHAZI     BENGHAZI...

Well, that's it for today.

We'll pick it up tomorrow.

******

********************************************

WHEN IS IT CALLED TREASON?

********************************************

When before in this great country's history has a sitting president presided over a war to the cat calls of the opposing party?
SOME WOULD CALL IT TREASON!

Politics is like driving. 

To go backward, put it in R. 

To go forward, put it in D.

If Democrats proclaim the Earth is round and Republicans insist it is flat, we will shortly see a column in the Washington Post claiming the earth is really a semi-circle.

Forbes Magazine: Obama Outperforms Reagan On Jobs, Growth, And Investing

By Adam Hartung

The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) today issued America’s latest jobs report covering August.  And it’s a disappointment.  The economy created an additional 142,000 jobs last month. After six consecutive months over 200,000, most pundits expected the string to continue, including ADP which just yesterday said 204,000 jobs were created in August.

One month variation does not change a trend
Even though the plus-200,000 monthly string was broken (unless revised upward at a future date,) unemployment did continue to decline and is now reported at only 6.1%.  Jobless claims were just over 300,000; lowest since 2007.  Despite the lower than expected August jobs number, America will create about 2.5 million new jobs in 2014.

And that is great news.

Back in May, 2013 (15 months ago) the Dow was out of its recession doldrums and hitting new highs. I asked readers if Obama could, economically, be the best modern President?  Through discussion of that question, the number one issue raised by readers was whether the stock market was a good economic barometer for judging “best.”  Many complained that the measure they were watching was jobs – and that too many people were still looking for work.

To put this week’s jobs report in economic perspective I reached out to Bob Deitrick, CEO of Polaris Financial Partners and author of Bulls, Bears and the Ballot Box (which I profiled in October, 2012 just before the election) for some explanation.  Since then Polaris’ investor newsletters have consistently been the best predictor of economic performance. Better than all the major investment houses.

This is the best private sector jobs creation performance in American history

Bob Deitrick: ”President Reagan has long been considered the best modern economic President.  So we compared his performance dealing with the oil-induced recession of the 1980s with that of President Obama and his performance during this ‘Great Recession.’ 

“As this unemployment chart shows, President Obama’s job creation kept unemployment from peaking at as high a level as President Reagan, and promoted people into the workforce faster than President Reagan.

“President Obama has achieved a 6.1% unemployment rate in his sixth year, fully one year faster than President Reagan did.  At this point in his presidency, President Reagan was still struggling with 7.1% unemployment, and he did not reach into the mid-low 6% range for another full year.  So, despite today’s number, the Obama administration has still done considerably better at job creating and reducing unemployment than did the Reagan administration.

“We forecast unemployment will fall to around 5.4% by summer, 2015.  A rate President Reagan was unable to achieve during his two terms.”

What about the Labor Participation Rate?
Much has been made about the poor results of the labor participation rate, which has shown more stubborn recalcitrance as this rate remains higher even as jobs have grown.

Deitrick: “The labor participation rate adds in jobless part time workers and those in marginal work situations with those seeking full time work.  This is not a “hidden” unemployment.  It is a measure tracked since 1900 and called ‘U6.’ today by the BLS.

“As this chart shows, the difference between reported unemployment and all unemployment – including those on the fringe of the workforce – has remained pretty constant since 1994.

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics – Databases, Tables and Calculators by Subject

“Labor participation is affected much less by short-term job creation, and much more by long-term demographic trends. As this chart from the BLS shows, as the Baby Boomers entered the workforce and societal acceptance of women working changed, labor participation grew.

“Now that ‘Boomers’ are retiring we are seeing the percentage of those seeking employment decline.  This has nothing to do with job availability, and everything to do with a highly predictable aging demographic.

“What’s now clear is that the Obama administration policies have outperformed the Reagan administration policies for job creation and unemployment reduction.  Even though Reagan had the benefit of a growing Boomer class to ignite economic growth, while Obama has been forced to deal with a retiring workforce developing special needs. During the eight years preceding Obama there was a net reduction in jobs in America.  We now are rapidly moving toward higher, sustainable jobs growth.”

Economic growth, including manufacturing, is driving jobs
When President Obama took office America was gripped in an offshoring boom, started years earlier, pushing jobs to the developing world.  Manufacturing was declining in America, and plants were closing across the nation.

This week the Institute for Supply Management (ISM) released its manufacturing report, and it surprised nearly everyone.  The latest Purchasing Managers Index (PMI) scored 59, two points higher than July and about that much higher than prognosticators expected.  This represents 63 straight months of economic expansion, and 25 consecutive months of manufacturing expansion.

New orders were up 3.3 points to 66.7, with 15 consecutive months of improvement and reaching the highest level since April, 2004 – five years prior to Obama becoming President.  Not surprisingly, this economic growth provided for 14 consecutive months of improvement in the employment index.  Meaning that the “grass roots” economy made its turn for the better just as the DJIA was reaching those highs back in 2013 – demonstrating that index is still the leading indicator for jobs that it has famously always been.

As the last 15 months have proven, jobs and economy are improving, and investors are benefiting
The stock market has converted the long-term growth in jobs and GDP into additional gains for investors.  Recently the S&P has crested 2,000 – reaching new all time highs.  Gains made by investors earlier in the Obama administration have further grown, helping businesses  raise capital and improving the nest eggs of almost all Americans.  And laying the foundation for recent, and prolonged job growth.
Deitrick: ”While most Americans think they are not involved with the stock market, truthfully they are.  Via their 401K, pension plan and employer savings accounts 2/3 of Americans have a clear vested interest in stock performance.

“As this chart shows, over the first 67 months of their presidencies there is a clear “winner” from an investor’s viewpoint. A dollar invested when Reagan assumed the presidency would have yielded a staggering 190% return.  Such returns were unheard of prior to his leadership.

“However, it is undeniable that President Obama has surpassed the previous president.  Investors have gained a remarkable 220% over the last 5.5 years!  This level of investor growth is unprecedented by any administration, and has proven quite beneficial for everyone.

“In 2009, with pension funds underfunded and most private retirement accounts savaged by the financial meltdown and Wall Street losses, Boomers and Seniors were resigned to never retiring.  The nest egg appeared gone, leaving the ‘chickens’ to keep working.  But now that the coffers have been reloaded increasingly people age 55 – 70 are happily discovering they can quit their old jobs and spend time with family, relax, enjoy hobbies or start new at-home businesses from their laptops or tablets.  It is due to a skyrocketing stock market that people can now pursue these dreams and reduce the labor participation rates for ‘better pastures.”

Where myth meets reality
There is another election in just eight weeks.  Statistics will be bandied about.  Monthly data points will be hotly contested.  There will be a lot of rhetoric by candidates on all sides.  But, understanding the prevailing trends is critical.  Recognizing that first the economy, then the stock market and now jobs are all trending upward is important – even as all 3 measures will have short-term disappointments.

There are a lot of reasons voters elect a candidate.  Jobs and the economy are just one category of factors.  But, for those who place a high priority on jobs, economic performance and the markets the data clearly demonstrates which presidential administration has performed best.  And shows a very clear trend one can expect to continue into 2015.

Economically, President Obama’s administration has outperformed President Reagan’s in all commonly watched categories.  Simultaneously the current administration has reduced the deficit, which skyrocketed under Reagan.  Additionally, Obama has reduced federal employment, which grew under Reagan (especially when including military personnel,) and truly delivered a “smaller government.”  Additionally, the current administration has kept inflation low, even during extreme international upheaval, failure of foreign economies (Greece) and a dramatic slowdown in the European economy.

Links:
History says Democrats are better at growing the economy than Republicans
Investor returns have been better during Obama administration than any other presidency
Why Wall Street forecasters have consistently missed the Obama market run-up

Where is Separation of Church and State found in the US Constitution and how does the Supreme Court interpret this clause?

Mandate for the separation of church and state is in the US Constitution is implied in the Constitution's First Amendment "Establishment Clause," where "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..." has been widely interpreted to mean that the government should not involve itself in religion in any way, including providing funds to support religious teaching in public schools, or allowing organized prayer in activities or facilities that receive government funds.

The First Amendment's freedom of religion includes the freedom to refrain from practicing a religion or having someone else's religious rituals inflicted upon a person in a public (non-religious) setting.

Cornell University Annotations on the First Amendment contrasts Justice Joseph Story's 19th-century interpretation of the Establishment Clause, which discusses the attitude toward Christianity, with Justice David Souter's 20th-century interpretation, which takes into account the variety of religious practices (or lack thereof) in the United States today.

Thomas Jefferson firmly believed the Constitution should erect a "wall of separation" between church and state, as he explained in his 1802 letter to the Danbury (Connecticut) Baptists: "Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his god, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their "legislature" should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between church and State.

Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties."

In the case Reynolds v. United States, 98 US 145 (1878), Chief Justice Waite delivered the opinion of the Court, quoting Jefferson's in the context of a Mormon polygamy trial, and concluding: "Coming as this does from an acknowledged leader of the advocates of the measure, it may be accepted almost as an authoritative declaration of the scope and effect of the amendment thus secured.

Congress was deprived of all legislative power over mere opinion, but was left free to reach actions which were in violation of social duties or subversive of good order.

"Justice Story "Probably, at the time of the adoption of the constitution and of the amendment to it, now under consideration, the general, if not the universal, sentiment in America was, that Christianity ought to receive encouragement from the state, so far as was not incompatible with the private rights of conscience, and the freedom of religious worship.

An attempt to level all religions, and to make it a matter of state policy to hold all in utter indifference, would have created universal disapprobation, if not universal indignation."

[Cornell Commentary: "The object, then, of the religion clauses in this view was not to prevent general governmental encouragement of religion, of Christianity, but to prevent religious persecution and to prevent a national establishment."]

Justice Souter "[Justice Story's] interpretation has long since been abandoned by the Court, beginning, at least, with Everson v. Board of Education, in which the Court, without dissent on this point, declared that the Establishment Clause forbids not only practices that "aid one religion" or "prefer one religion over another," but as well those that "aid all religions.""

[Cornell commentary: "Recently, in reliance on published scholarly research and original sources, Court dissenters have recurred to the argument that what the religion clauses, principally the Establishment Clause, prevent is "preferential" governmental promotion of some religions, allowing general governmental promotion of all religion in general.

The Court has not responded, though Justice Souter in a major concurring opinion did undertake to rebut the argument and to restate the Everson position."]

See Related Links to access the full article. Amendment I "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."