Is it possible that we are already in a global recession but just don’t know it yet? And is the U.S. itself — still the epicenter of the world economy — standing on the front edge of another recession?
I sincerely hope I’m wrong. But warning signs are everywhere.
The eurozone economy is flat on its back. Greece may be headed for a political crackup and an exit from the euro and European Union. Deposit runs in Greece and elsewhere are beginning, and a credit freeze throughout the continent is not out of the question. Meanwhile, emerging economies like China, India, and Brazil are slumping.
Here at home, ex-Clinton strategists James Carville and Stan Greenberg sent a memo to President Obama telling him that his campaign message of slow and steady recovery progress is out of touch with Main Street America. They’re right. Of course, Obama’s “private sector is doing just fine” statement is part and parcel of his disconnect from economic reality.
And the reality isn’t good. Whether you’re a Democrat or Republican, take a look at the numbers:
Job growth has been slipping badly for three months. Retail sales and factory orders are down two straight months. Real incomes are flat. Household wealth is way underwater from the housing collapse, dropping nearly 40 percent in the last three measured years. And GDP was an anemic 1.9 percent in the first quarter. Nearly all leading Wall Street economists are marking down their second-quarter estimates to 2 percent or less.
But here’s the key point: 2 percent growth is not a recovery. Many economists would call it a growth recession. When you get that low there’s little margin for error. A shock from Europe, an inventory selloff in the U.S., or almost any unexpected event could push us back into negative territory for an official double-dip recession.
The last saving grace for the U.S.? Business sales and profits are still trending higher, although GDP-measured profits did fall in the first quarter. That needs to be watched carefully.
That said, a recent IBD poll shows that the number of households with at least one person looking for employment is 23 percent. That translates to 30 million people looking for work. That’s not a recovery.
I can think of two major reasons for the latest economic stall — even inside an overall recovery rate that’s only half the normal pace of post-WWII recoveries. First is the deflationary impact of a sharp, nearly 10 percent rise in the exchange value of the dollar relative to the euro. That’s imparting a deflationary influence on the economy, where both import and producer prices have recently turned negative. The good side of commodity deflation is that oil and retail gas prices have fallen considerably; the bad side is that manufacturers may hold back production and that debtors have to climb out of deeper holes.
As someone who always touts the merits of a strong King Dollar, why am I complaining now that we have one? That’s my second reason for the latest economic stall: King Dollar is not being accompanied by lower tax rates.
The original supply-side growth model argued for a strong dollar and lower taxes, where the former keeps prices stable and the latter provides fresh growth incentives. But instead of easier taxes, a huge tax-hike cliff looms. Big problem. Wrong model. Anti-growth.
As the Bush era tax cuts expire at year end, so do the temporary payroll tax cut and the alternative minimum tax patch. By some estimates, over $400 billion in cash will be pulled out of the economy in 2013, along with a rollback of growth-oriented, marginal-tax-rate incentives. It’s hard to quantify, but it’s quite possible that business hiring plans and consumer-spending expectations have been put on hold until folks can figure out future tax policy.
All this is why the tax-cliff problem needs to be solved immediately. If the tax cuts are extended sooner rather than later, the economy might straighten out faster than most folks think. But House Speaker John Boehner told me that while he’s ready to talk to President Obama, the phone isn’t ringing. And while House Republicans are expected to pass a tax-cut extension in July, it won’t go anywhere without White House support.
Unfortunately, the president is still talking about tax hikes on the rich. He should listen to Bill Clinton who argues for a full tax-cut extension to stop recession. If we wait until after the election to address the tax cliff, we will face uncertainty and chaos, bringing us closer to recession.
Isn’t there some way to nip this worst-case outcome in the bud?
Secretary of Defense the Honorable Leon Panetta addresses service members at Camp Lemonnier, Djibouti. (U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Marc I. Lane/Released)
The Pentagon is set to salute gay and lesbian troops by marking June as Gay Pride Month.
The move comes nine months after the Obama administration's repeal of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy that banned gay troops from openly serving in the military.
"We are a nation that welcomes the service of every patriot ... a nation that believes that all men and women are created equal," President Obama said after the repeal.
Defense Department officials are planning the first-ever event to recognize gay troops.
They declined to give details about the event but said Defense Secretary Leon Panetta feels it's important to recognize the service of gays in the armed forces.
The move comes as legislation is being proposed in Congress to protect military chaplains who don't support gay marriage.
"The chaplains are an integral part of our defense and have been for a long time," Rep. Todd Akin, R-Mo., who sponsored the legislation, said. "And honoring the beliefs and the convictions of those people is only reasonable."
"We need to allow people to have those kinds of beliefs without being worried that they're going to get demoted or run over because they believe in something," he said
Survivors of the Fort Hood massacre say they expected the accused shooter, Maj. Nidal Hasan, to “come in and finish the job,” according to exclusive interviews to be broadcast on "Fox Files: The Enemy Within."
“I saw the muzzle of the weapon pointed at me about six feet away,” Pvt. George Stratton III told Fox News in his first TV interview since the Nov. 5, 2009, shooting that killed 13 and injured more than 43 others.
Stratton, who had just turned 18 at the time of the shooting, said the readiness center was turned into a battlefield bathed in blood, as the wounded crawled to the exit doors to save themselves.
“As soon as I got out the first set of doors, I got up to my knees, pushed the other door open and kneed my way out, and I got up to my feet,” he said.
Watch "Fox Files: The Enemy Within" at 10 p.m. ET Friday and 9 p.m. ET Sunday.
Stratton, who needed his family’s permission to enlist at the age of 17, thought he might be safe until he heard a soldier cry out that the shooter was following the wounded.
"He's coming around the corner with the gun, he's shooting and killing people," Stratton said. "I just sat there - felt helpless - felt hopeless waiting for this person to come in and finish the job.”
Staff Sgt. Shawn Manning was shot six times, with one bullet narrowly missing his heart. Manning said he had sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic. Manning paused as he described the shooter.
“Domestic enemy, I mean, that’s what this was," Manning said. "He might have wore the uniform, but he wasn’t a soldier. He didn’t act like a soldier. He tried to kill soldiers. I mean, he was an enemy – plain and simple.”
When it came to Hasan, Manning said, there was a double standard. Hasan wrote emails to radical American cleric Anwar al-Awlaki – seeking advice on reconciling his Muslim faith with serving in the Army. This fact was known to the FBI.
“You could lose your security clearance in the Army for having bad credit and be kicked out of the Army. But you can't lose your security clearance for talking to a member of Al Qaeda, through e-mail. I mean, it doesn't make any sense," Manning said.
Despite calls from some members of Congress, none of the injured or murdered soldiers from the 2009 shooting has been awarded the Purple Heart.
Whoever started this meme of using this scene of Hitler raging and adding new subtitles should be applauded for having a wicked sense of humor. Let's hope that someone gets to do one for our dear leader Mr. Obama in November! Cue the ominous music...Action!
One hot summer day in 2008 I was riding around with a friend waiting for a meeting we were conducting that evening. While we were killing time we heard an interview with then candidate Mitt Romney on a local radio station here in Colorado, just days before he won the state's Republican primary. He made the most sense of any of the candidates I had heard in the lengthy interview, and I concluded that, if we just had to have a Mormon candidate that it probably wouldn't be the end of the world. But then I said to myself, and then to my friend, "but I could never vote for a Mormon."
And I continued to say that on a regular basis all the way until the election of one Barack H. Obama to the illustrious office of the Presidency of the United States in that next November. No doubt like all of you I hoped that, even though he wasn't my choice, that he would at least do a decent job, although there was no reason to think he would, owing to his extreme lack of experience in anything remotely like executive leadership. "Look at the resume, people!" I would say, wryly.
Fast forward three years later to my new life under Mr. Obama as an underemployed Walmart cashier after having been laid off in October of 2008 and having worked five different part time positions before getting my great gig at WallyWorld. I am walking through the aisles of the Home Section and I have this surprising conversation with God. I was praying that he would bring great leadership to our country and turn things around for us.
Then I heard these words, "Cliff, do you remember the last campaign? Remember how you said that if John McCain would really want to win and bring Democrats together with Republicans that he should select Joe Lieberman as his Vice Presidential running mate?"
My response was, "Yes...and...?
"Well, did you once think that people wouldn't vote for Joe Lieberman because of his Jewish faith?"
"No, not at all..."
And then it hit me. I was a religious bigot, plain and simple. I had let my passion for truth as a Christian get in the way of my thinking clearly and objectively about the issues. I was being truly intolerant against the beliefs of others, which is the very definition of bigotry. Seriously! Look it up!
I still have major problems with Mormon theology and what they believe about Jesus, Joseph Smith and a whole host of other things, but I know and have known many Mormons who are good people and true Americans and patriots.
So here it is, my confession of public repentance. I was wrong about what I said about Mormon candidates for office, and I humbly confess that I should have never even thought like that as a Conservative, a Republican, and an American, and especially as a Christian. I believe in an America with a big tent that includes all people, regardless of religion, race, or ideological bent.
I have been looking at the lives of the two men running for the Office of the President of The United States this year and I am convinced that the man who better lives a life that looks like that of Christ from the outside is Mitt Romney. Mr. Obama claims to be a Christian, but has ignored and even snubbed people of faith, or tried to use them for his own political reasonings, quoting from the Scriptures to either shame them or mock them. I believe a true man of faith would not do this.
Ultimately, we all stand before God on our own. He will be the best Judge of whether we were a true believer or not. But at least now I can look my God in the eye and say back to Him, "You desire truth in the inward parts, And in the hidden part You will make me to know wisdom(Psalm 51:6). May He give us all wisdom this year and all those after.
This is a good response to Romney's "Faith In America" speech by commentator and fellow Mormon Glenn Beck, back in his CNN days. He makes the one point that we should all hear: if you had a problem with Romney's religion but you didn't have a problem with, say, Joe Lieberman's religion, what's the difference? I for one, was one of those in 2008 who thought McCain should have chosen Joe Lieberman as his Vice Presidential choice. And at no point did I think that his being a Jewish believer disqualified him to fill the office of Vice President, or President for that matter.
Wayne Grudem believes evangelicals should promote religious liberty by being willing to vote for candidates who have different beliefs.
Interview by Sarah Pulliam [ posted 12/07/2007 ]
After presidential candidate Mitt Romney gave his highly anticipated speech addressing his Mormon faith Thursday, it only strengthened theologian Wayne Grudem's October endorsement. Grudem, a research professor of Bible and theology at Phoenix Seminary, said that the speech was an excellent outline on many ideas relating to freedom of religion and the role of religion in politics. Grudem spoke with Christianity Today about the speech and how others have reacted to his endorsement.
How have other evangelicals responded to your endorsement of Mitt Romney?
Many have said quietly, 'I think you're right, and I agree with you.' Many have said, 'We'll wait and see.' Many have decided to endorse another candidate. I've gotten a few emails from unknown people who just want to argue with specific tenets of Mormonism, and I haven't even answered those because it doesn't seem to me to be relevant. It's surprising to me how many people say, 'I think you're right.' Now others are supporting other candidates, and I'm glad that we have a wide, open primary season.
What do you think the highlights were from the speech?
I thought it was excellent in several ways. If anything, my endorsement of him is even stronger if anything after reading that speech. I thought he rightly outlined ways religious beliefs should and should not be a legitimate question regarding suitability for public office. He said that his Mormon faith gave him moral principles that were common to many Americans, which were important in the whole history of America.
But he also said that he thought questions about different doctrines of his or anybody else's faith were out of bounds, they are inappropriate for someone to ask someone as a candidate for president because that's not relevant for his suitability for office. I thought that was a good distinction.
I think he was also right in describing radical Islamic religion as probably the single greatest threat to America. That's the other extreme of religion trying to use force to impose what he called a theocratic tyranny. That kind of movement would inflict boundless suffering if given the chance. He is going to stand firmly against that. I'm glad for that.
I was very thankful to see his courage in saying that he wouldn't back down or jettison his personal religious faith just for political convenience. It was important to him, and if people reject him then so be it—that took courage.
I thought he was courageous also to say that the state-sponsored religions in Europe did no favor to Europe's churches. He saw the danger of state religion and talked about the empty cathedrals in Europe.
How much should a candidates' faith be taken into consideration?
In America today, the political reality is that no conservative will be elected to the president, without the support of evangelical Christians. If evangelical Christians won't support any non-evangelical, it functions as a religious test for office that the constitution says should not happen.
If as evangelicals we are going to support the principles on which our nation was founded, then we need to defend the principles of religious liberty. That means that non-evangelicals are not only full citizens but eligible for office as well. I would hate to see us come to the point where we would essentially be saying non-evangelicals are welcome to be citizens but we will never ever allow them to become president.
I strongly disagree with Mormonism as a religious system. I think it's inconsistent with teachings of the Bible in a number of ways, but that's not the question in this campaign. The question is who is the most qualified candidate. I think Romney is better qualified—more than anyone else with his Harvard business, Harvard law degree, experience as governor of Massachusetts, experience as head of the Salt Lake City Olympic committee, one of the most successful businessmen in the United States. He's incredibly bright and competent, and I think he stands for the principles that Americans should support.
Anyway, I was very happy with the speech. It made me proud of a country in which a candidate could speak so clearly and openly about the way that religion should and should not influence the political response.
- This is a re-tread article from December, 2007. But I thought it was a strong stand to take from one of my favorite theologians, Wayne Grudem. - Cliff of the Triangle
Watch this speech if you are curious about Romney's views on religion in the public arena, religious freedom, and his own view of faith. Below is the text of the speech if you prefer to just read it. It was delivered back in 2007, but is still a good standard for dialogue on these topics.
December 6, 2007
The following is a transcript (as prepared for delivery) of former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney's speech "Faith in America," delivered Thursday at the George Bush Presidential Library in College Station, Texas. Romney discussed his views on religious liberty, religious tolerance and how faith would inform his presidency. The speech begins with Romney addressing former President George H.W. Bush, who introduced the former governor.
Romney: Thank you, Mr. President, for your kind introduction.
"It is an honor to be here today. This is an inspiring place because of you and the first lady, and because of the film exhibited across the way in the Presidential library. For those who have not seen it, it shows the President as a young pilot, shot down during the Second World War, being rescued from his life-raft by the crew of an American submarine. It is a moving reminder that when America has faced challenge and peril, Americans rise to the occasion, willing to risk their very lives to defend freedom and preserve our nation. We are in your debt. Thank you, Mr. President.
"Mr. President, your generation rose to the occasion, first to defeat Fascism and then to vanquish the Soviet Union. You left us, your children, a free and strong America. It is why we call yours the greatest generation. It is now my generation's turn. How we respond to today's challenges will define our generation. And it will determine what kind of America we will leave our children, and theirs.
"America faces a new generation of challenges. Radical violent Islam seeks to destroy us. An emerging China endeavors to surpass our economic leadership. And we are troubled at home by government overspending, overuse of foreign oil, and the breakdown of the family.
"Over the last year, we have embarked on a national debate on how best to preserve American leadership. Today, I wish to address a topic which I believe is fundamental to America's greatness: our religious liberty. I will also offer perspectives on how my own faith would inform my presidency, if I were elected.
"There are some who may feel that religion is not a matter to be seriously considered in the context of the weighty threats that face us. If so, they are at odds with the nation's founders, for they, when our nation faced its greatest peril, sought the blessings of the Creator. And further, they discovered the essential connection between the survival of a free land and the protection of religious freedom. In John Adams' words: 'We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion... Our constitution was made for a moral and religious people.'
"Freedom requires religion just as religion requires freedom. Freedom opens the windows of the soul so that man can discover his most profound beliefs and commune with God. Freedom and religion endure together, or perish alone.
"Given our grand tradition of religious tolerance and liberty, some wonder whether there are any questions regarding an aspiring candidate's religion that are appropriate. I believe there are. And I will answer them today.
"Almost 50 years ago another candidate from Massachusetts explained that he was an American running for president, not a Catholic running for president. Like him, I am an American running for president. I do not define my candidacy by my religion. A person should not be elected because of his faith nor should he be rejected because of his faith.
"Let me assure you that no authorities of my church, or of any other church for that matter, will ever exert influence on presidential decisions. Their authority is theirs, within the province of church affairs, and it ends where the affairs of the nation begin.
"As governor, I tried to do the right as best I knew it, serving the law and answering to the Constitution. I did not confuse the particular teachings of my church with the obligations of the office and of the Constitution - and of course, I would not do so as president. I will put no doctrine of any church above the plain duties of the office and the sovereign authority of the law.
"As a young man, Lincoln described what he called America's 'political religion' - the commitment to defend the rule of law and the Constitution. When I place my hand on the Bible and take the oath of office, that oath becomes my highest promise to God. If I am fortunate to become your president, I will serve no one religion, no one group, no one cause, and no one interest. A president must serve only the common cause of the people of the United States.
"There are some for whom these commitments are not enough. They would prefer it if I would simply distance myself from my religion, say that it is more a tradition than my personal conviction, or disavow one or another of its precepts. That I will not do. I believe in my Mormon faith and I endeavor to live by it. My faith is the faith of my fathers - I will be true to them and to my beliefs.
"Some believe that such a confession of my faith will sink my candidacy. If they are right, so be it. But I think they underestimate the American people. Americans do not respect believers of convenience.
Americans tire of those who would jettison their beliefs, even to gain the world.
"There is one fundamental question about which I often am asked. What do I believe about Jesus Christ? I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the Savior of mankind. My church's beliefs about Christ may not all be the same as those of other faiths. Each religion has its own unique doctrines and history. These are not bases for criticism but rather a test of our tolerance. Religious tolerance would be a shallow principle indeed if it were reserved only for faiths with which we agree.
"There are some who would have a presidential candidate describe and explain his church's distinctive doctrines. To do so would enable the very religious test the founders prohibited in the Constitution. No candidate should become the spokesman for his faith. For if he becomes president he will need the prayers of the people of all faiths.
"I believe that every faith I have encountered draws its adherents closer to God. And in every faith I have come to know, there are features I wish were in my own: I love the profound ceremony of the Catholic Mass, the approachability of God in the prayers of the Evangelicals, the tenderness of spirit among the Pentecostals, the confident independence of the Lutherans, the ancient traditions of the Jews, unchanged through the ages, and the commitment to frequent prayer of the Muslims. As I travel across the country and see our towns and cities, I am always moved by the many houses of worship with their steeples, all pointing to heaven, reminding us of the source of life's blessings.
"It is important to recognize that while differences in theology exist between the churches in America, we share a common creed of moral convictions. And where the affairs of our nation are concerned, it's usually a sound rule to focus on the latter - on the great moral principles that urge us all on a common course. Whether it was the cause of abolition, or civil rights, or the right to life itself, no movement of conscience can succeed in America that cannot speak to the convictions of religious people.
"We separate church and state affairs in this country, and for good reason. No religion should dictate to the state nor should the state interfere with the free practice of religion. But in recent years, the notion of the separation of church and state has been taken by some well beyond its original meaning. They seek to remove from the public domain any acknowledgment of God. Religion is seen as merely a private affair with no place in public life. It is as if they are intent on establishing a new religion in America - the religion of secularism. They are wrong.
"The founders proscribed the establishment of a state religion, but they did not countenance the elimination of religion from the public square. We are a nation 'Under God' and in God, we do indeed trust.
"We should acknowledge the Creator as did the Founders - in ceremony and word. He should remain on our currency, in our pledge, in the teaching of our history, and during the holiday season, nativity scenes and menorahs should be welcome in our public places. Our greatness would not long endure without judges who respect the foundation of faith upon which our constitution rests. I will take care to separate the affairs of government from any religion, but I will not separate us from 'the God who gave us liberty.'
"Nor would I separate us from our religious heritage. Perhaps the most important question to ask a person of faith who seeks a political office, is this: does he share these American values: the equality of human kind, the obligation to serve one another, and a steadfast commitment to liberty?
"They are not unique to any one denomination. They belong to the great moral inheritance we hold in common. They are the firm ground on which Americans of different faiths meet and stand as a nation, united.
"We believe that every single human being is a child of God - we are all part of the human family. The conviction of the inherent and inalienable worth of every life is still the most revolutionary political proposition ever advanced. John Adams put it that we are 'thrown into the world all equal and alike.'
"The consequence of our common humanity is our responsibility to one another, to our fellow Americans foremost, but also to every child of God. It is an obligation which is fulfilled by Americans every day, here and across the globe, without regard to creed or race or nationality.
"Americans acknowledge that liberty is a gift of God, not an indulgence of government. No people in the history of the world have sacrificed as much for liberty. The lives of hundreds of thousands of America's sons and daughters were laid down during the last century to preserve freedom, for us and for freedom loving people throughout the world. America took nothing from that Century's terrible wars - no land from Germany or Japan or Korea; no treasure; no oath of fealty. America's resolve in the defense of liberty has been tested time and again. It has not been found wanting, nor must it ever be. America must never falter in holding high the banner of freedom.
"These American values, this great moral heritage, is shared and lived in my religion as it is in yours. I was taught in my home to honor God and love my neighbor. I saw my father march with Martin Luther King. I saw my parents provide compassionate care to others, in personal ways to people nearby, and in just as consequential ways in leading national volunteer movements. I am moved by the Lord's words: 'For I was an hungered, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: naked, and ye clothed me...'
"My faith is grounded on these truths. You can witness them in Ann and my marriage and in our family. We are a long way from perfect and we have surely stumbled along the way, but our aspirations, our values, are the self-same as those from the other faiths that stand upon this common foundation. And these convictions will indeed inform my presidency.
"Today's generations of Americans have always known religious liberty. Perhaps we forget the long and arduous path our nation's forbearers took to achieve it. They came here from England to seek freedom of religion. But upon finding it for themselves, they at first denied it to others. Because of their diverse beliefs, Ann Hutchinson was exiled from Massachusetts Bay, a banished Roger Williams founded Rhode Island, and two centuries later, Brigham Young set out for the West. Americans were unable to accommodate their commitment to their own faith with an appreciation for the convictions of others to different faiths. In this, they were very much like those of the European nations they had left.
"It was in Philadelphia that our founding fathers defined a revolutionary vision of liberty, grounded on self evident truths about the equality of all, and the inalienable rights with which each is endowed by his Creator.
"We cherish these sacred rights, and secure them in our Constitutional order. Foremost do we protect religious liberty, not as a matter of policy but as a matter of right. There will be no established church, and we are guaranteed the free exercise of our religion.
"I'm not sure that we fully appreciate the profound implications of our tradition of religious liberty. I have visited many of the magnificent cathedrals in Europe. They are so inspired . so grand . so empty. Raised up over generations, long ago, so many of the cathedrals now stand as the postcard backdrop to societies just too busy or too 'enlightened' to venture inside and kneel in prayer. The establishment of state religions in Europe did no favor to Europe's churches. And though you will find many people of strong faith there, the churches themselves seem to be withering away.
"Infinitely worse is the other extreme, the creed of conversion by conquest: violent Jihad, murder as martyrdom... killing Christians, Jews, and Muslims with equal indifference. These radical Islamists do their preaching not by reason or example, but in the coercion of minds and the shedding of blood. We face no greater danger today than theocratic tyranny, and the boundless suffering these states and groups could inflict if given the chance.
The diversity of our cultural expression, and the vibrancy of our religious dialogue, has kept America in the forefront of civilized nations even as others regard religious freedom as something to be destroyed.
In such a world, we can be deeply thankful that we live in a land where reason and religion are friends and allies in the cause of liberty, joined against the evils and dangers of the day. And you can be certain of this: Any believer in religious freedom, any person who has knelt in prayer to the Almighty, has a friend and ally in me. And so it is for hundreds of millions of our countrymen: We do not insist on a single strain of religion — rather, we welcome our nation's symphony of faith.
Recall the early days of the First Continental Congress in Philadelphia, during the fall of 1774. With Boston occupied by British troops, there were rumors of imminent hostilities and fears of an impending war. In this time of peril, someone suggested that they pray. But there were objections. They were too divided in religious sentiments, what with Episcopalians and Quakers, Anabaptists and Congregationalists, Presbyterians and Catholics.
Then Sam Adams rose, and said he would hear a prayer from anyone of piety and good character, as long as they were a patriot. And so together they prayed, and together they fought, and together, by the grace of God, they founded this great nation.
In that spirit, let us give thanks to the divine author of liberty. And together, let us pray that this land may always be blessed with freedom's holy light.
God bless this great land, the United States of America.
