Obama gives speech, Pelosi drinks 20 Red Bulls

One thing I had a problem with during the Obama speech was the fact that he said we would possibly have to give the banks more money for a continued bailout effort. MORE MONEY!?

I thought the $700 BILLION was a final measure and we would be on the great road to recovery. Well, it might not be. We’ll just keep printing money until we reach late 1970s inflation and interest rates. It’s not even debt if we just print money.

Other notes of interest:
I head Mike Gallagher talking about it this morning as well, but I thought Nancy Pelosi was going to explode with giddiness last night. Mike compared her to a pogo stick. That’s about the best analogy. Every time Obama paused, she would bounce up and clap like a madman (or woman).

When Obama made a point about the “deficit we inherited,” he continued on saying we were going to tackle it and reduce it and so forth. The Congressional Democrats were loud with their applause. What was VERY noticeable though were the Republican boos and aggravation about the deficit comment.

Clyburn continues oppression of African-Americans

Earlier, I posted a link about Mark Sanford (South Carolina Gov.) saying he would deny the stimulus funds. Unfortunately for Mr. Sanford, his own state rep, Jim Clyburn, had language written into the stimulus package that if the state executive denied the funds, then they would go to the states’ legislatures. In the same article a quote was attributed to Clyburn saying that the opposition to the stimulus money was a “’slap in the face’ to black Americans, because most represent Southern state with large black populations.”

When Clyburn added the language, he said he was trying to help Black Americans. This statement by Clyburn continues the oppression of African-Americans by the Democrat party. His statement implies that black people are unable to find work or pay bills without government assistance. What about white people that work along side of blacks every day? Does he think they don’t need jobs, too? Or is the stimulus money only going to black people?

Today’s Democrat party continues to pander to the lowest common denominator. By suggesting that by denying the stimulus funds, governors are not helping Black Americans is crazy. The Democrat party is plainly using scare tactics to keep the Black population in its pocket. Democrats continue to scream from the mountains that without them, Blacks have no chance against the “good ‘ol boy” GOP. They continue to be the social and economic crutch they tell Black Americans they need in order to succeed.

When Martin Luther King, Jr. had a dream about being free, do you think he also meant being free of government support and assistance? Clyburn did issue an apology where he didn’t mean to infer that governors denying the stimulus money were racist. Great. But he should also apologize to the white people he represents for not representing them, and to the black people for trying to keep them enslaved in government oppression.

Young Republicans Shine

While Obama and his congressional bosses continue to shove through legislation explain that this pill is the best thing for us, it has given the new faces of the GOP a chance to step forward.

Tonight, in his first starring roll, Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal will be giving the Republican response to Obama’s joint-session speech. I haven’t been able to find any video, but Jindal gave a press gathering in DC today a nice run for their money when they pressed a group of GOP governors in town for their annual conference. He was direct in answering their questions about how much pork was in the stimulus and he questioned how it was going to help the economy in the long term. CNN has a nice bio on him.

South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford made waves recently by publicly saying he would not accept any stimulus funds. He is known as a fiscal hawk, and is worried about the government borrowing so much money to create growth. Of course, as much as we would like to see the Gubernatorial ranks make such a bold stand, provisions exist in the bill for the money to go the state legislation if the governor denies the money – thanks to South Carolina’s own Democratic Rep Jim Clyburn.

Michael Steele, a black conservative from Maryland, was recently voted to Chairman of the Republican National Committee. Steele goes against every stereotype Democrats have labeled Republicans. He’s not white. He’s Catholic.

Of course, there is Sarah Palin. Despite her short time on the national stage, she shot up like a meteor to be a rock star in the Republican party. Besides the problems of geography, the one problem she may have is trying to leave behind the problems of Troopergate and other media created problems. We all know she is pro-choice, anti-gun control, and a fiscal conservative.

I’m sure more will rise, but it is becoming apparent that it will be up to the GOP Governors to become the new voice for conservatives.

The Recession-Proof Government

So when President Obama says we all need to change our lifestyles to reflect the dire economy, this does not seem to apply to him and his Democrat cronies. A CNN investigation (I’m as shocked as you are) found out about a trip that Senator Nancy Pelosi took to Italy on a military charter. There are three major issues with this trip.

The timing of this trip couldn’t be any worse. Instead of giving the American people a debate we deserve on the $800 BILLION stimulus bill, she was trying to get out DC. The final vote was taken Friday afternoon, and she left Monday. One of the (if not the biggest) spending bills in this country’s history and we couldn’t get a real debate on it. She treated this bill like a grenade, just toss it and hope it gets close enough to do some damage.

But she didn’t go by herself. Her delegation also included Reps John Larson (D-CT), George Miller (D-CA), Ed Markey (D-MA), and Anna Eshoo (D-CA). I guess Republicans or anyone not from one of the most liberal states in the Union were not invited.

Another issue is her responsibilities to her constituents. Instead of being available to the citizens she represents for discussions on the stimulus bill, she was on the other side of the world talking to the Italian Prime Minister about the Middle East, global economic issues. Let’s not forget that this is not the first time that Pelosi has taken it upon her self to represent the entire country in an overseas trip. In January of 2007, Pelosi wound up in Iraq to meet with Iraqi leaders. She also wanted to “thank the troops.” The White House needs to realize that there are other people that get paid to do this. They work in the State Department, and also the White House, of course.

Pelosi’s arrogance in thinking that she is the CPM, Chief Policy Maker, is absolutely absurd. Anyone that paid attention to the stimulus debate knows that Obama was just along for the ride while Democratic Senators and House Reps were crafting the legislation. The only thing Obama really participated in was telling the media that without it, the world would end.

While the rest of the country and many businesses are being forced to downsize, and some of us lose our jobs, the Democratic administration keeps chugging along. Pelosi’s Italian Job cost the taxpayer a few grand for the plan charter. No telling what other kind of “expenditures” were charged on the ground. But not just for her, but also her entire entourage. And President Obama is just as guilty. He recently jetted off to Colorado from DC just to sign the stimulus bill. He wanted to highlight “Green Energy” at a museum in Denver. Then he went to Arizona, a state hit hard by the housing melt down, to announce his housing rescue plan. Of course, he could have done this from the White House. Obama even created a new Cabinet position, his Chief Performance Officer.

While the rest of the country’s businesses are cutting costs and laying off employees, the Pelosi/Obama administration continues to spend as though there is no tomorrow.

The Obama Free Money Giveaway

I noticed this little paragraph in a Foxnews.com write-up about the stimulus plan.

The $1,000 child tax credit would be extended to more low-income families that don't make enough money to pay income taxes, and poor families with three or more children will get an expanded Earned Income Tax Credit.

That’s great.

And according to this, middle-class America gets to pick the tab up on that, too.

Millions of workers can expect to see about $13 extra in their weekly paychecks, starting around June, from a new $400 tax credit to be doled out through the rest of the year. Couples would get up to $800. In 2010, the credit would be about $7.70 a week, if it is spread over the entire year.

This makes absolutely no sense. Obama wants to start his pet “middle class task force,” but can only give us a big enough tax cut for less than $10 a week. I’m not even going to see that. But if I wanted to go to work at McDonald’s part-time, I would at least get an extra grand. Maybe more since I have two kids.

If the middle class is the backbone of the economy, doesn’t it make more sense to give us a bigger tax cut than the poor? According to the article, the $1,000 tax cut is going to people who don’t even qualify to pay taxes in the first place. Basically, they are getting another government handout.

I can’t even apologize for sounding mad this time. To give someone who is making about $12,000 a year and extra grand is not going to stimulate anything. They aren’t going to qualify for a car, or a mortgage.

At Least the Mice Aren't Being Foreclosed Upon

Now that the Senate and House have agreed on a version of the stimulus plan, details are finally leaking out about how the $800 billion (so far) will be spent. I for one, can’t wait until the mice start working and contributing to our economy.

Some Porkulus numbers…

“The $500-per-worker credit for lower- and middle-income taxpayers that Obama outlined during his presidential campaign was scaled back to $400 during bargaining by the Democratic-controlled Congress and White House. Couples would receive $800 instead of $1,000. Over two years, that move would pump about $25 billion less into the economy than had been previously planned.

Officials estimated it would mean about $13 a week more in people's paychecks this year when withholding tables are adjusted in late spring. Next year, the measure could yield workers about $8 a week. Critics say that's unlikely to do much to boost consumption.”

Wow, what am I going to do with all that money? Maybe I can buy a combo at Burger King. This is ridiculous. If I got paid every week, that would give me about $670 a year. Spread over a year, that is not going to go very far. I could put that extra $13 into a high yield savings account and at the end of the year I would have an extra $673. But then I wouldn’t be stimulating the economy. And that would be unpatriotic.

And then there is this $70 BILLION nugget…

“But nothing could shake negotiators from insisting on including $70 billion to shelter middle- to upper-income taxpayers from the alternative minimum tax …The Congressional Budget Office
estimates that provision will have relatively little impact on the economy.“

I think it’s time to ask Arlen Specter for his GOP membership card. He supposedly helped keep one of his pet projects in the bill.

“Scaling back the bill to levels lower than either the $838 billion Senate measure or the original $820 billion House-passed measure caused grumbling among liberal Democrats, who described the cutbacks as a concession to the moderates, particularly Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., who are feeling heat from constituents for supporting the bill.

Specter played an active role, however, in making sure $10 billion for the National Institutes of Health, a pet priority, wasn't cut back”

And then there is the money designated for mouse habitat protection. Thanks Nancy!

“Lawmakers and administration officials divulged Wednesday that the $789 billion economic stimulus bill being finalized behind closed doors in Congress includes $30 million for wetlands restoration that the Obama administration intends to spend in the San Francisco Bay Area to protect, among other things, the endangered salt marsh harvest mouse.”

Dems were so quick to attack the Bush White House for releasing news information on Friday so it wouldn't get noticed in the slower weekend feeds. Funny how the stimulus information is coming out on a Friday as well. I guess the public only gets 48 hours to comment as both houses of Congress expect to vote on this Monday.

For Andy

For Andy

Who's Really in Charge?

Is this Obama’s Stimulus plan or the Pelosi-Reid plan?

Kathleen Parker bought up a good point in today’s editorial at Townhall.com.

There was a time last week when Obama looked younger than usual. Not youthful so
much as not fully formed. He seemed out of place in his presidential role. In a
word, he seemed haunted. Had he been visited by the ghosts of Christmas future?

Or had he looked across the table into the eyes of Nancy Pelosi and Harry
Reid and realized that he was not among friends? Obama's lack of authority over
the stimulus package has underscored the value of political experience and
toughness -- and given weakened Republicans the leverage they needed to launch
an aggressive attack.

She brings up a valid argument about Obama being wet behind the ears. Obama never even had to face a re-election for his Senate seat. He ran one time, and then he ran for President. Meanwhile, Democratic generals Reid and Pelosi have been at this for a much longer time and are well schooled in the machinations of DC politics.

Maybe Obama really did have utopian wishes. Who knows? Chances are, Obama had absolutely no say in the stimulus, except to say he wanted no pork in it. Then the behind the scenes wheels began to turn and everyone started to submit their laundry list of wishes, and it became this $800 billion hot air balloon.

It just came on the news that the House and Senate have been able to agree to a new bill. Can’t wait to see the voting break down.

Let's Stimulate the Government

Quick fact check about Porkulus and the un “ear marks.”

For example, the latest version contains $2 billion for a clean-coal power plant with specifications matching one in Mattoon, Ill., $10 million for urban canals, $2 billion for manufacturing advanced batteries for hybrid cars, and $255 million for a polar icebreaker and other "priority procurements" by the Coast Guard.

This from the Wall Street Journal, displays a lot about how the stimulus is being earmarked for federal programs and buildings.

Title VI, Financial Services and General Government, says that
"not less than $6,000,000,000 shall be used for construction, repair, and
alteration of Federal buildings." There's enough money there to name a building
after every Member of Congress.

The Bureau of Land Management gets $325,000,000 to spend fixing federal
land, including "trail repair" and "remediation of abandoned mines or well
sites," no doubt left over from the 19th-century land rush.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are getting $462,000,000 for
"equipment, construction, and renovation of facilities, including necessary
repairs and improvements to leased laboratories."

The National Institute of Standards gets $357,000,000 for the "construction
of research facilities." The Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration gets
$427,000,000 for that. The country is in an economic meltdown and the federal
government is redecorating.

The FBI gets $75,000,000 for "salaries and expenses." Inside the
$6,200,000,000 Weatherization Assistance Program one finds "expenses" of
$500,000,000. How many bureaucrats does it take to "expense" a half-billion
dollars?

The current, Senate-amended version now lists "an additional amount to be
deposited in the Federal Buildings Fund, $9,048,000,000." Of this, "not less
than $6,000,000,000 shall be available for measures necessary to convert GSA
facilities to High-Performance Green Buildings." High performance?

Maybe I'm out of the loop in this Green Energy stuff. I understand that we want to make buildings put off less CO2 and be more energy effecient. But the last time I checked, there is no such thing as a 100% effecient machine - or building for that matter.

Jack Cafferty on Pelosi

Jack Cafferty of CNN offers this brief commentary on how Pelosi is doing being in charge of the Spendocrats.

Highlights:
Credit House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for getting the ball rolling.

Under her leadership, House Democrats excluded Republicans from having any voice in crafting the stimulus package.

Acting like children who hadn't seen Santa Claus for eight years, House Democrats busily loaded up the bill with stuff they had been unable to get for eight years. It was payback time.

Contraception, funding for the arts, restoration of the national mall, stop-smoking programs. All while Americans lose their homes, their jobs, and their savings. It was both childish and disgraceful.

When asked if the lack of Republican support was at least partly her fault, she gave some snotty answer about not being partisan but working for the American people. Right.

The Obama Media Event, Part 1

Highlights of the Obama Press Conference from Monday night.

Q from Chip Reid: Is that a sign that you are moving away, your White House is moving away, from this emphasis on bipartisanship? And what went wrong? Did you underestimate how hard it would be to change the way Washington worked?

Obama: I don't think -- I don't think I underestimated it. I don't think the American people underestimated it. They understand that there have been a lot of bad habits built up here in Washington. And it's going to take time to break down some of those bad habits.

_
So, Republicans are bucking the President because it’s a bad habit to be against an $800 billion dollar spending plan?
_

Obama: But when they start characterizing this as pork without acknowledging that there are no earmarks in this package -- something, again, that was pretty rare over the last eight years -- then you get a feeling that maybe we're playing politics instead of actually trying to solve problems for the American people.
_
The only thing different about Obama and his earmarks is the language used to insert them. An Associated Press story shows how some of the money is being funneled to pet projects.
_

WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Barack Obama's ban on earmarks in the $825 billion economic stimulus bill doesn't mean interest groups, lobbyists and lawmakers won't be able to funnel money to pet projects.

They're just working around it - and perhaps inadvertently making the process more secretive.

The projects run the gamut: a Metrolink station that needs building in Placentia, Calif.; a stretch of beach in Sandy Hook, N.J., that could really use some more sand; a water park in Miami.

There are thousands of projects like those that once would have been gotten money upfront but now are left to scramble for dollars at the back end of the process as "ready to go" jobs eligible for the stimulus plan.

The result, as The Associated Press learned in interviews with more than a dozen lawmakers, lobbyists and state and local officials, is a shadowy lobbying effort that may make it difficult to discern how hundreds of billions in federal money will be parceled out.

"'No earmarks' isn't a game-ender," said Peter Buffa, former mayor of Costa Mesa, Calif. "It just means there's a different way of going about making sure the funding is there."

_
So, now a water park is considered infrastructure. This bill is so loaded with garbage that it looks like it’s not going to create any long term economic growth at all. If the government is going to create jobs through building highways and bridges, then won’t that just make those departments bigger and a bigger tax burden?
_

QUESTION: Thank you, Mr. President. In your opening remarks, you talked about that if your plan works the way you want it to work, it's going to increase consumer spending. But isn't consumer spending, or over-spending, how we got into this mess? And if people get money back into their pockets, do you not want them saving it or paying down debt first, before they start spending money into the economy?


MR. OBAMA: Well, first of all, I don't think it's accurate to say that consumer spending got us into this mess. What got us into this mess initially were banks taking exorbitant, wild risks with other people's monies, based on shaky assets. And because of the enormous leverage, where they had $1 worth of assets and they were betting $30 on that $1, what we had was a crisis in the financial system.
_
If people could afford the houses they were taking out mortgages for, we definetly wouldn’t be in this mess. The only shaky asset I can readily think of is a family with an income of $60,000 a year taking out a $200,000 loan with zero per cent financing. It sounds a lot better to be blaming the banks than citizens for the mess we are in.

Kudos to Chuck Todd from NBC for asking a tough question. Too bad no one else could follow up on it. It’s not a press conference if every question is planned ahead of time.

Slow news weekend

It was a slow news weekend. Pundits are probably waiting with rapt attention as the Obama Show comes on tonight in its primetime glory. Today, His Greatness is in the Midwest aiming to let us all know that it is in our best interest to make sure the stimulus bill passes the Senate.

Obama implored Congress to take action, saying the nation can't afford to wait. "Economists from across the spectrum have warned that if we don't act immediately, millions more jobs will be lost, and national unemployment rates will approach double digits."

When he says “economists from across the spectrum,” is he talking about Paulson, Bernanke, and Geitner?

_________________________________________________________

One thing I noticed in the bill is making auto loan interest a tax deduction. This appears in the Senate version at an $11 billion clip. Although most dealerships and automakers are rolling out every incentive imaginable to get people on the lot, this line of the stimulus actually makes sense.

Most people with good credit are going to get a low rate or zero per cent financing anyway. Persons with slower credit are going to be paying more in interest, and thus dragging down their spendable income for four to six years. Making the interest paid a tax deduction is a great way to (hopefully) give them some money back at tax time and make ownership easier.

We already do it for homes, why not cars, if only temporarily.

Let's Work Together by Getting Out of My Way

During the campaign, Obama was the smooth talker, telling every camera and microphone within a country mile that he was going to be a new kind of leader in Washington, and bring Dems and Republicans together. So this is what he does....

"Don't come to the table with the same tired arguments and worn ideas that helped to create this crisis," the president said at the House Democrats' annual retreat in Williamsburg.

Obama rejected calls for more tax cuts and significant slashing of the bill's more than $800 billion price tag, and said complaints the package was a spending bill rather than a stimulus bill were off base.

"They did not send us here to get bogged down with the same old delay, the same old distractions, the same talking points, the same cable chatter," he said. "They did not vote for the false theories of the past, and they didn't vote for phony arguments and petty politics, and they did not vote for the status quo."

I agree with some of his points, like phony arguments and petty politics. But he must understand, this is a HUGE amount of money that is going to be spent, and at least our elected leaders in the Senate are properly debating the bill. I don't want this debt shoved down my children's throat, much less mine.

I don't like the idea of the stimulus, but I understand that something really needs to be done to correct the economy. But building a bunch of dog parks and frisbee golf courses is not the answer.