Guess the whole change thing wasn't just rhetoric

[hork]

Originally Posted by tymy

I'm too busy watching Blago make an arse of himself.

well that show is half-way over, now on to the federal case

[Bill Shaw]

Originally Posted by hork

well that show is half-way over, now on to the federal case

Are you really all that comfortable marginalizing this guy?

I mean, there's not much good to come from that state in the last century in my eyes, so don't get me wrong.

It just odd to watch the Obama circle jerk slow long enough so that crowd can paint him as odd.

Even if he did attempt to "sell" a political opportunity, isn't that really just "brokering"?

What exactly do Power Brokers do otherwise, anyway?

Isn't that what Emmanuel does?

Isn't that what practically every talking head, and their guests do in public AND private?

I am not saying it is right.

What I am saying is- it is odd to watch the ObamaNation gleefully cast him out of the tent.

With 'friends' like you folks, who need enemies?

[hork]

Originally Posted by Bill Shaw

Are you really all that comfortable marginalizing this guy?

I mean, there's not much good to come from that state in the last century in my eyes, so don't get me wrong.

It just odd to watch the Obama circle jerk slow long enough so that crowd can paint him as odd.

Even if he did attempt to "sell" a political opportunity, isn't that really just "brokering"?

What exactly do Power Brokers do otherwise, anyway?

Isn't that what Emmanuel does?

Isn't that what practically every talking head, and their guests do in public AND private?

I am not saying it is right.

What I am saying is- it is odd to watch the ObamaNation gleefully cast him out of the tent.

With 'friends' like you folks, who need enemies?

actually much like i did with palin, i tend to hold executives to a degree of accountability. when one abuses one's power in an elected office by clearing going above and beyond the powers allocated to him/her then you bet i'm gonna call em out. difference between me and a lot of folks is i don't owe any party so much blind loyalty that i'm incapable of seeing scumbags on both sides of the aisle.

[Bill Shaw]

Originally Posted by hork

when one abuses one's power in an elected office by clearing going above and beyond the powers allocated to him/her then you bet i'm gonna call em out.

Who was empowered to name the successor to Obama's seat?

[hork]

Originally Posted by Bill Shaw

Who was empowered to name the successor to Obama's seat?

i'm gonna go out on a limb here (and perhaps i'm wrong) but selling the seat probably isn't a provision within the Illinois Constitution and likely violates several laws (at the very least federal ones) but far be it for me to convince you if you feel he was within his power to sell the seat for personal profit then who am i to say otherwise? i leave it to the legal experts and juries and abide by their decisions.

[Bill Shaw]

Originally Posted by hork

actually much like i did with palin, i tend to hold executives to a degree of accountability. when one abuses one's power in an elected office by clearing going above and beyond the powers allocated to him/her then you bet i'm gonna call em out. difference between me and a lot of folks is i don't owe any party so much blind loyalty that i'm incapable of seeing scumbags on both sides of the aisle.

Originally Posted by hork

i'm gonna go out on a limb here (and perhaps i'm wrong) but selling the seat probably isn't a provision within the Illinois Constitution and likely violates several laws (at the very least federal ones) but far be it for me to convince you if you feel he was within his power to sell the seat for personal profit then who am i to say otherwise? i leave it to the legal experts and juries and abide by their decisions.

Congratulations on accepting things you cannot change.

I must have missed your condemnation when the Clinton regime got shipped to Fannie Maeland- 'til the bubble burst.

We can be certain no phone calls were made to orchestrate that round of personal profiting. It was just a coincidence, and very happy one at that. For them.

And regarding that "calling out".

How exactly are you not in lockstep with the party line?

[P562045]

Well I have several questions about this stimulus package that need to be answered before I would even know if I should support the stimulus package or not.

Please don't try to answer several of these questions especially the last one because I am the only one that can really answer that question.

Hopefully someone can answer the questions about the health care and education part of this stimulus bill. Because if not why should I support something I have very little information about in the first place? Talk about a really good question to ask.

1. Why are we getting so very few details about this stimulus package?
2. When will all of this money be spent by?
3. Will this really stimulate the economy and what does that exactly mean in the first place?
4. What percentage of Americans will get some kind of benefit from this stimulus package?
5. How long will the jobs that are created or saved last?
6. What are the details of the health care part of this stimulus package?
7. What are the details of the education part of this stimulus package?
8. What percentage of this stimulus package will just be spending money just to be spending money?
9. Will there be any bridges to nowhere in this stimulus package?
10. Why do I feel the need to ask any of these questions in the first place?

I think these questions all need to answered before we proceed. But of course many people know my feelings about the congress and their ability to get the job done in an effective way in the first place.

[P562045]

We all have a little trouble even comprehending how much $819,000,000,000.

Now I multiplied $350,000,000 which is the new number on how much we are spending in Iraq each and every day on an unjust war of course; then we have 365.25 days in a year and we will be starting year number seven of this war despite the best efforts by the congress and their promise in 2006 to have the war ended by now and the six year anniversary of the war is this March.

So $350,000,000*365.25 days in a year*Six years is a grand total of $767,025,000,000.

This stimulus package is larger than all of the money we have spent on the war in Iraq so far since March of 2003.

$819,000,000,000
$767,025,000,000

[P562045]

Forgot that extra $10,000,000,000 plus a month for the next sixteen months we will still be occupying Iraq.

So better add another $160,000,000,000 to the war in Iraq total which brings the number to $927,025,000,000.

So this stimulus package is actually less than the total cost of the war in Iraq.

But wait because of the bureaucracy we could easily add an extra ten percent if not more to the stimulus package. Just as an example we spent almost a billion dollars just to send out some checks to people just last year.

Stimulus $819,000,000,000* an extra 10% equals $900,900,000,000.

So all told the war in Iraq will cost us more than this stimulus package but just barely.

$900,900,000,000
$927,025,000,000

[P562045]

Obama admits that "I screwed up".

Story here

This is so refreshing except for the fact that the media totally ignored except for their own purposes that Bush admitted to several things he did wrong as well last month. The one that I can think of right now was wasting all of that jet fuel to get on an aircraft carrier to say "Mission Accomplished".

This is not going as smoothly as Obama wants it to I am sure.

But Obama must just accept the bumps in the road and move on as it appears he wants to because as I keep saying there are many more important problems to deal with. Didn't congress just last year try to make it so former members of congress could not become lobbyist on capital hill for some time period that I am not even remembering how long.

I can't wait for the spin machine to go out of control to make people believe that Obama did not screw up at all.

Things like this must be everybody's fault except for Obama.

This brings up warm memories of the Clinton years as well.

[P562045]

Now I must ask a simple question.

Did federal spending increase dramatically during the Bush the Evil years?

If the answer to this question is yes why does Obama think that his gargantuan spending program that includes infrastructure, health care, and education spending etc. will make the economy any better off than the last year or so of the Bush years.

So I have an article that mentions some things that were a part of the stimulus package and the only reason why they would not still be there would be because of public scrutiny of the spending.

I want to ask another question.

How does $87,000,000 for a design for a new polar icebreaker really going to stimulate the economy?

There are several other examples in this article about how some of the money in the stimulus package will be used. I will let other decide if this money is being spent wisely or not.

Article here

Why is in the thread about change P?

Well if Obama really is about change he would get as much of these things that are unnecessary out of this stimulus bill as possible.

I must go back to the question I asked originally in this post. Was there dramatic spending increases during the Bush the Evil years?

And no one will ever be able to convince me that part of the reason the economy is in such bad shape in the first place is because the congress made some very poor choices when it comes to what we should be spending the people's money on.

And I truly believe that at least a portion of this stimulus package is taking us in the wrong direction we need to heading when it comes to some of the things that money is being spent on in this particular bill.

[P562045]

A very important question to ask would be why is Obama telling us if we do not do what he says we may come to the point that we can not "reverse" this crisis that the congress in part has created in the first place for their own little desires which happens to be much of what is in the so called stimulus package in the first place.

Here are a few select passage from our president from a Washington Post Op-Ed on February 5, 2009.

"And if nothing is done, this recession might linger for years. Our economy will lose 5 million more jobs. Unemployment will approach double digits. Our nation will sink deeper into a crisis that, at some point, we may not be able to reverse."


Are we going to be losing jobs no matter what we do? The answer to this question is yes and it does not matter if we pass this stimulus package as is or major changes are made to it.

The president continues,

"Our dependence on foreign oil still threatens our economy and our security....We've seen the tragic consequences when our bridges crumble and our levees fail."

These are great examples of why this stimulus package must keep as much of this crap as possible. Nothing like a little national security rhetoric for the express purpose of scaring people and Obama wanting a stimulus package no matter what it contains in it. I am trying to remember who invoked this is a security matter to get what they really want and desire. It was Bush the Evil of course. Then a little Katrina rhetoric should be used by our new president as well.

This is coming from someone that keeps telling us we need to move forward and he can lead change we can believe in of course.

"But they [people] have no patience for the same old partisan gridlock that stands in the way of action while our economy continues to slide."

And of course Obama has no part in all of this at all. He is taking the high road and the congress is the one screwing this all up with their partisan bickering. Well that may be true but I hope Obama knows how to veto something if something he does not like something in the bill. But this is much more about Obama getting a victory for himself and has little to do with doing what is right for the country as whole. My little example of a design for a new polar ice breaker in my earlier post comes to mind immediately.

This thing should be went through with a very fine tooth comb and there are a few senators that are doing just that.

But I am sure they will miss many things including things for their own state where one simple question should be asked about each of the items in this bill.

Will this help produce economic growth or not?

If the answer is no to this question then it has no business being in this bill and Obama will get his 80 votes or whatever the number he desires in the senate is.

Then Obama has some idealism that I have lost long ago when it comes to the U.S. Congress and how they conduct their business.

"So we have a choice to make. We can once again let Washington's bad habits stand in the way of progress. Or we can pull together and say that in America, our destiny isn't written for us but by us."

Obama Op-Ed in the Washington Post

Talk about change a person can believe in. Obama throughout this piece does the very thing he pretends to abhor such as using language that would cause party bickering such as the reference to Katrina. I would like to thank the president a lot for this. It shows me Obama is no better than members of congress when it comes to playing to people's genuine fears and politics as usual is alive and well not only in the congress but when it comes to the leader of the executive branch as well.

[P562045]

Another day another brilliant argument by Obama for his Buy Votes for November 2, 2010 Act of 2009.

So now that around 591,000 Americans have lost their job in January alone Obama takes it up himself to use these figures to remark if the senate does not support his stimulus plan that would be "inexcusable and irresponsible" so says Obama.

Let me get this correct. Obama uses people losing their job as an excuse that people should support his and the congress stimulus package is not irresponsible and inexcusable but senate republicans are being irresponsible and inexcusable because they don't support this stimulus package.

It is incredibly rare that I am totally speechless by what a president thinks and makes very public in this particular case but that is exactly what I am by all of this.

Story about Obama's remarks today

Between 591,000 and 626,000 Americans lose their jobs story

[P562045]

How could I forget this is the kind of change we can and should believe in.

[hork]

Originally Posted by P562045

Another day another brilliant argument by Obama for his Buy Votes for November 2, 2010 Act of 2009.

So now that around 591,000 Americans have lost their job in January alone Obama takes it up himself to use these figures to remark if the senate does not support his stimulus plan that would be "inexcusable and irresponsible" so says Obama.

Let me get this correct. Obama uses people losing their job as an excuse that people should support his and the congress stimulus package is not irresponsible and inexcusable but senate republicans are being irresponsible and inexcusable because they don't support this stimulus package.

It is incredibly rare that I am totally speechless by what a president thinks and makes very public in this particular case but that is exactly what I am by all of this.

Story about Obama's remarks today

Between 591,000 and 626,000 Americans lose their jobs story

ok so you've been going on now for about three months about how obama shouldn't bother to jump start the economy, so what you're saying is to hell with those half a million folks and their families. i suppose i can understand that after all they're not my problem either. do you have a point to any of this other than trying so hard to convince us of obama's ulterior motives?