GOPMOM ALERT: Coffee, you’ll need lots of coffee.
Even with a February thaw inviting all of us outside today in the Northeast, it is the duty of every American to wade through the nearly 800 page “stimulus” package our elected representatives will be expected to review and vote on tomorrow – at 5:30 pm – if they have the votes – maybe. In the spirit of patriotism we should all be willing to sacrifice a mere 30 hours or so in the interests of saving ourselves from this catastrophe. After all, there is only a 30% chance it won’t work.
Invaluable Rob Nepell has put up an easy-to-use searchable version of the “compromise”/Sellout Amendment text online at Readthestimulus.org.
Michelle Malkin has spending statistics.
Gateway Pundit has great information of how flawed Obama’s theory, and therefore the public perception, of this catastrophe really is.
In his Saturday YouTube Address President Obama placed blame for the current economic crisis on the “tired old theories” of the past eight years.
Obama believes wholeheartedly that only big government spending will save our economy…
Stupid, stupid, stupid. As I’ve said before, if you voted for this imbecile, you should be truly ashamed.
Popularity: 12% [?]
Review this site
“As I’ve said before, if you voted for this imbecile, you should be truly ashamed.”
Nope, hasn’t hit me yet.
And only a 30% it won’t work? With things the way that they are, I like those stats.
“Nope, hasn’t hit me yet.”
It will. When you finally start paying taxes. Of course you’re not there yet – you’re still living in a bubble. Just wait until it’s your turn to pay for all these social programs. I hope your student loans are guaranteed or you may be working sooner than you thought.
Why do you assume I don’t pay taxes? And yes, my student loans were/are guaranteed.
Really, stop worrying. Stop assuming.
Marie, You pay State and Federal Income Tax?
How much?
You don’t have to be specific – just round to the nearest 10k.
I’d say the bigger assumption isn’t that you don’t pay taxes, it’s that you mind paying for social programs. I pay taxes. I’m okay with some of the money going to helping poor people. No joke.
ATG, I was specifically asking Marie because she is a student – I did not pay income taxes until my senior year because I never earned enough.
But please, what is your definition of poor? And how long should people get benefits from social programs? Shouldn’t there be an end date – in terms of “this program will help you achieve blank so that you no longer need blank money from the government every month.”
Even I’m ok with some money going to people facing desperate, temporary circumstances, but it should be state/local money staying local – more oversight. And it should be temporary and there should always be conditions – lots of conditions. Maybe if it was harder to get, the people who truly find themselves the victim of sudden unfortunate circumstances wouldn’t have to fight so hard to get the help they need, there would be enough $ to truly help them and it would serve the purpose of getting them back on their feet – real assistance.
This bill is BS. Why is there $4.1 billion going to ACORN? Why, if our financial situation is so desperate, if we’re on the brink of a disaster we may never recover from (Obama’s words today), is money going to an organization under Federal investigation in a dozen or more states? If they would just get rid of this one line item, I might be able to accept that they honestly believe they are doing a good thing. But the insistence to keep this proves without a doubt this is just payback to entrenched Liberal org’s in an attempt to secure Dem power. You’re a smart guy, is this really a good idea for any nation, anytime? One party control – that has been purchased with the earnings of a generation still in elementary school? Come on. DId you even read this? If this spend thrift Stimulus Bill is necessary, to create jobs and bail-out the people in trouble, why is money going to special interest groups, long-term funding of entitlements and short term contract jobs? Where are the incentives to businesses to hire – the real jobs we need?
You’re being purposefully deceptive in your wording. None of the bill “goes to ACORN,” $4.1 billion of it goes towards activities that could be undertaken by ACORN.
I don’t disagree that the bill isn’t perfect. It’s annoying that Democratic lawmakers wrote in some provisions that have nothing to do with stimulus and are clearly written to cater to special interests. However, I don’t believe those things make up a significant portion of the bill.
Funding of entitlements and short term contract jobs are more matters of philosophy than out and out bad policy. When in a recession, many more people end up poor and unemployed. It’s not as if 5% of America all of a sudden decided – “unemployment benefits sound great! I quit!” There has been serious job loss throughout our economy, and that cannot just be reversed by a little hard work and can-do attitude. Therefore, I don’t think it’s absurd that the economic recovery bill includes money for programs designed to pad this fall.
In terms of short term contract jobs (assuming you mean jobs that are linked to specific tasks and may not end up permanent) the idea is to kick-start the economy. Again, as the President said last weekend, this is the whole point of a stimulus. The hope is that it gets the economy moving again and then that most of those gains prove durable.
With regards to one party control – how did you feel when Karl Rove was vocally trying to build a permanent Republican majority? Did you object to one party control on principle or cheer him on because it was your guys?
I want smart people making good policy that aligns with my political views. I don’t think either party in Congress is capable of that. The best I can hope for is a capable and popular president that is willing to use the bully pulpit to shame Congress into creating good policy. Unfortunately, I don’t see enough of the second part right now.
Are we back to moderating everything? I’m posting comments too quickly?
I don’t know why the comment went to moderation – it moderates me sometimes – try not to laugh. And then it was dinner time – we try not to blog at the table.
I didn’t cheer on Rove – but one party control for the Republicans sounds great to me. Republicans (or better, true conservatives) will leave you alone to live your life as you like, with the occasional tax bill, not regulate every moment, every “right” and every measure – you know, all that “equality”.
But, stealing control of the census is way too obvious. As is funneling Fed dollars to “community organizers” who register only Democrats to vote – you do admit to this. They weren’t in Kentucky – actually, no one is willing to go to Kentucky on your side, apparently. This is a major power grab that should be considered distasteful by everyone, no matter which side of the aisle you happen to be on today – which is key because many people switched sides this time, as they did in 2000 – and they will most likely switch back, soon as the economy crumbles under this boondoggle. Don’t get me wrong, what Rahm and Barack are attempting is criminal and childish, but it won’t work.
And again, why support this bill if there is any unnecessary spending in it? Why, if it’s such an emergency, are we still talking about it a week later? Apparently, it’s not as bad as they say. WHy won’t the Dem’s give up a few of these things so more Republicans will sign on – 3 does not a consensus make.
And I don’t think “smart” is the right word to describe people who we should want in Congress/the White House, especially during tough times. I’d prefer someone proven and accomplished from the private sector to be in charge right now. Oh, Meg Whitman announced she’s going to run for CA governor. Someone like Meg would be perfect – a complete success, knows how to make a dollar. Maybe if you Democrats looked at government as a “money -making” venture, we’d all be better off. ANd yes, I realize the current deficit is laid at the feet of W – we’re at war, it’s different than bankrupting your country to make life temporarily better for a few, right up until it gets sh*##y for everybody.
Now of course Obama and the dolts in Congress will refuse to do nothing – you would think they might pay a bit of attention, though and realize that more Americans are against this bill than for it.
Did you see the latest Gallup poll? “More Americans are against this bill than for it” seems unlikely:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/114202/Obama-Upper-Hand-Stimulus-Fight.aspx
I don’t know how to judge Rahm Emanuel vs. Pelosi etc when it comes to the census. Both highly partisan. Maybe Obama wants to bring it in house to roll back ridiculous gerrymandering?
Every bill has unnecessary spending in it, sadly – doesn’t matter which party is doing the writing. In this case, I hope it’s less than you would normally find; also, things like infrastructure projects for states are in this case related to the goals/intent of the bill.
Good luck finding successful business people who aren’t “smart.”
If we looked at government as a “money-making” venture, can you imagine your taxes?
The goal of the package is not to make life better for the “few” and you know that too. Things like tax cuts for the top income brackets are intended to make life better for the few. A bill intended to stimulate construction jobs and reduce the middle class tax burden is aimed at a much larger audience.
How surprising – public opinion has shifted again? Must be a full moon.
I hardly think the Republicans “own” gerrymandering. Admittedly, both sides do it, but this move is reprehensible, even if it is “transparent”.
If every bill has unnecessary spending, why aren’t you willing to go out on a limb and say it has to stop – especially now that we are in such danger of spiraling out of control. Remember, your party will sink with this bill and the inevitable damage it will cause.
Smart is easy, especially book smart, which is just memorization – turning smart into a positive, measurable result is the hard part.
No, because a money-making enterprise doesn’t last unless it’s customers are happy.
According to Obama, this bill is meant to rescue the people suffering in this recession. I say that is a few – I was out shopping this weekend, the recession has not hit here. There are parts of the country having trouble, but not all. And the parts struggling are the ones who got sucked into the “give a mortgage to everyone, even illegals” scam or the “we’re going to keep up with heavy industry whether we sell a product or not” pig-headedness or those states that refused to see what was happening and curb their own spending. This “regional recession” is not as bad as the media and Obama would have you think. Look at GDP vs. debt, compare rates of loss vs. previous recessions, look at how prosperous in general we are vs at previous recessional times. Obama’s BS that someone “should be able to pay their mortgage even when they lose their job” is true, but not because the government picks up the tab but because they saved for this event. And if they could never afford to do that, they’re in too expensive of a home, which means the Dem policy of giving away mortgages to everyone is, again, at the heart of this recession. Giving away more money to people who just haven’t learned this lesson, whether it be states, community org’s or private citizens, is at the heart of this “make the people so dependent on the government, they’re afraid and incapable of ever taking back the power themselves” campaign that is communism and this current administration’s end game. Lucky for all the sheeple out there, enough of us see this and eventually we will bail out your “assets” – again. Unless we all decide to move away, that is. You’re a heavy bunch to carry.