This is so outrageous.Everyone should read this.

Subject: : Lockheed Martin laying off 123,000     Lockheed Martin is laying off 123,000 workers just weeks before Christmas.   This needs to go far and wide before Early Voting starts.     The President is trying to hold off any announcement until after the election. This will make a significant increase to the questionable 7.8 % Unemployment number.         Lockheed is going to lay off 123,000 defense workers due to Obama's downsizing of the military.  This hit the Drudge report yesterday. This is true!  I checked it on Google         The law requires Lockheed to give 60-day notice to all to-be-fired employees within 60 days. That drop dead date would be November1st. Since this would be devastating for his reelection, Obama haspromised that our government would cover all Lockheed severance packages to fired employees if Lockheed would not release the names and locations of those losing their jobs until after the election! Do you have any idea how many millions that will cost the taxpayer? Thank you Obama!!         This posting is from a defense contract newspaper called The Hill.  You can read the details below:                http://thehill.com/blogs/defcon-hill/industry/259517-graham-says-hell-block- reimbursements-in-layoff-notice-fight <http://thehill.com/blogs/defcon-hill/industry/259517-graham-says-hell-block -reimbursements-in-layoff-notice-fight>            Obama administration tells contractors again: Don’t issue layoff notices By Jeremy Herb - 09/28/12 07:25 PM ET The Obama administration issued new guidance intended for defense contractors Friday afternoon, reiterating the administration’s position that the companies should not be issuing layoff notices over sequestration. The Labor Department issued guidance in July saying it would be “inappropriate” for contractors to issue notices of potential layoffs tied to sequestration cuts. But a few contractors, most notably Lockheed Martin, said they still were considering whether to issue the notices — which would be sent out just days before the November election. But the Friday guidance from the Office of Management and Budget raised the stakes in the dispute, telling contractors that they would be compensated for legal costs if layoffs occur due to contract cancellations under sequestration — but only if the contractors follow the Labor guidance. The guidance said that if plant closings or mass layoffs occur under sequestration, then “employee compensation costs for [Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification] WARN act liability as determined by a court” would be paid for covered by the contracting federal agency.   Senate Republicans, who accused the White House of trying to hide job losses after the first guidance, said Friday that the new OMB statement “puts politics ahead of American workers.” “The Obama Administration is cynically trying to skirt the WARN Act to keep the American people in the dark about this looming national security and fiscal crisis,” Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) said in a statement. “The president should insist that companies act in accordance with the clearly stated law and move forward with the layoff notices.” The fight over WARN Act notices began in June when Lockheed Martin CEO Bob Stevens said his company might send the notices to all 123,000 of its employees. Some companies were hesitant to follow Lockheed, but several others told McCain in letters earlier this month they might send the notices, too, despite the Labor Department guidance. But the new guidance would appear to address one of the chief concerns from the companies — that they could be liable to compensate employees who were laid off if the companies don’t issue the notices. The GOP senators complained, however, that this tactic would push the cost of the layoffs onto taxpayers. A Lockheed Martin spokeswoman told The Hill that the company is still reviewing the documents. More from The Hill: • Democrats lay out second-term wish list for President Obama • Now Romney has to face Bill Clinton, too