’)All this handwringing reminds me so much of the campaign, when in some quarters people were comparing Obama to Michael Dukakis when at that very same point in the race we now know he had it in the bag.
Look, while President Obama is the top Democrat in the nation now, he is also the leader of the entire country – including the Republicans. We partisans might pooh-pooh people disliking partisanship as Broderism, but the truth of the matter is the American people are tired of the fighting over what feels to them like marginal issues that get in the way of things getting done.
Obama is throwing a bone to the GOP, making a very public overture for them to get on the bipartisan train. But his past and current actions make it pretty clear that the train is going to leave as scheduled.
The stimulus will pass. It will be mostly progressive. It will, in the long run, help to get the economy back on track. And the Republicans who line up behind John Boehner and Rush Limbaugh will ultimately fail both in the political and policy arena. After the last few years, people have forgotten what its like to have someone wielding the bully pulpit of the presidency with the vast majority of the American people behind him.
We’ve only just begun.
>> Pelosi Touts New Poll: Stimulus Has ‘Broad Support” Among Americans
Dear GOP
Either fish or get off the pot.
Or piss or cut bait.
Or something.
IOW, stop being dicks.
IOW, stop being dicks.
Obviously, that goes for Democrats as well.
The government confiscating $10,520 from every working American sounds like stimulus to me.
Thanks Barrack.
It will, in the long run, help to get the economy back on track.
You keep using that word: stimulus. I do not think it means what you think it means. Pointing out that this bill, supposedly designed to help the economy immediately but doesn’t plan to spend some of the money until after Obama’s 1st (only?) term ends, isn’t exactly treasonous. Plus, there’s a LOT of pork in there. Bush-sized pork. How exactly does that get us out of the current situation?
As we saw just a few months ago, throwing $350 billion (of a planned $700 billion) at the problem didn’t fix it and it arguably made things worse. What makes you think throwing $850 billion worth of pork against the wall will do the trick?
What makes you think throwing $850 billion worth of pork against the wall will do the trick?
Without knowing all the specifics of the bill, I would simply suggest at the outset that there is a big difference between throwing money into the sinkhole that is the failing credit system and putting it into a wide array of infrastructure projects that will actually create real jobs for real people.
I’m sorry, Farris, but dissent, which used to be considered patriotic, is no longer welcome under the Obama administration. If you’re not onboard with President Hopenchange then you’re just holding up progress.
Or in the words of Duros above, you’re a dick.
p.s. What’s patriotic now, according to VP Biden, is paying taxes.
Pointing out that this bill, supposedly designed to help the economy immediately but doesn’t plan to spend some of the money until after Obama’s 1st (only?) term ends,
How much is “some”? And is the money that’s going to be spent later be spent on the same projects as the money that’s going to get spent right away?
In other words, I think you’re criticizing the plan because it starts some projects right away and then doesn’t leave them unfunded before they’re finished.
What makes you think throwing $850 billion worth of pork against the wall will do the trick?
All of it is pork? Neat rhetorical trick, that. Nevertheless, if you’re really interested in an answer to your question, step this way:
The government confiscating $10,520 from every working American sounds like stimulus to me.
Did you guys go and pass the flat tax while we weren’t looking?
You know what, I for one am getting oversaturated with this economic bullshit to the point where I no longer care. I’m a small fish, I have a good job where I’m pretty indispensable, my IRA has lost half of it’s value in the last 4 months, but I really feel like I’m just going to trust the market that the value will recover by the time I need it and that Obama will do the best he can with the best interests of the people in mind.
The government confiscating $10,520 from every working American sounds like stimulus to me.
Where does it say that?
In other words, I think you’re criticizing the plan because it starts some projects right away and then doesn’t leave them unfunded before they’re finished.
Last week they were complaining because there weren’t enough “shovel ready” projects; now there’s too many?
WTF?
Last week they were complaining because there weren’t enough “shovel ready” projects; now there’s too many?
No, not too many. They’re complaining because the projects won’t be magically finished within 6 months of starting.
What’s patriotic now, according to VP Biden, is paying taxes.
That’s always been patriotic.
And guys, if you have quibbles with the stimulus plan, make them based in actual facts. America’s back to being reality based now, thanks.
And BTW, OW, I think you’re on the money with this post. I’ve been annoyed by all the hollering from our side today about Mr. Obama reaching out to Republicans in Congress.
A little patience folks. Let’s watch as the rest of the tale unfolds.
Ya know, it’s still amazing to me that not one journalist or major blogger on either side or any in between (except for Politico) has ever analyzed the obviously true meaning of the phrase
“loyal but principled opposition.”
Ah!
La Malkin:
As we saw just a few months ago, throwing $350 billion (of a planned $700 billion) at the problem didn’t fix it and it arguably made things worse. What makes you think throwing $850 billion worth of pork against the wall will do the trick?
That’s because the first batch of money went into buying golden parachutes for the people that got us into this mess in the 1st place.
I’m sorry, Farris, but dissent, which used to be considered patriotic, is no longer welcome under the Obama administration. If you’re not onboard with President Hopenchange then you’re just holding up progress.
You reap what you sow, what can I say. Dissent is fine if it’s out of genuine concern for the country, but dissent for the sake of dissent is not. Rush and the rest of the ultra-cons have gone out and said that they will see that Obama fails no matter what.
p.s. What’s patriotic now, according to VP Biden, is paying taxes.
Hey, if you don’t like taxes, you can move back to Saudi Arabia.
The Republican bedwetters–the same chickenhawks who drive the Fear Train–are scared shitless that the stimulus might work. It’s tragi-comic is what it is.
“Pointing out that this bill, supposedly designed to help the economy immediately but doesn’t plan to spend some of the money until after Obama’s 1st (only?) term ends, isn’t exactly treasonous.”
Two points…
1.) How much of that money?
2.) You realize that stimulus will be needed for the next four years, at least.
OK, this is about the 3rd or 4th time now that I have seen our new resident moronic troll Dave bring up this talking point. I will try to spell out the differences between the life of the liberal dissenter under Bush and the conservative dissenter under Bush, in the no doubt vain hope that he will shut his f**ing pie hole.
Poor little Dave is whining that when comments on this blog point out that the blatant falsehoods and bizarre exaggerations he regularly posts are BS and that he is being kind of a dick, that “dissent is no longer patriotic”. No Dave, you are free to dissent all you like, You can still be an American. You’re just also a dick.
Contrast this to the plight of liberals who, considering the complexities of national mideast policy dared to suggest that the glorious Bush plan of bombing everyone to freedom might be ill-advised, were regularly called out as TRAITORS, SADDAM-LOVERS, TERRORIST SUPPORTERS and FIFTH COLUMNISTS — not just by comments on a blog, but some of the loudest, most widespread voices in television, talk radio, and print punditry (not to mention a great many eliminationist wingnut bloggers) for months or years on end.
See the difference, you jagoff?
Oliver, are you questioning Geitner’s patriotism?
Our economy needs the stimulus, but we have to pretty much do the opposite of the Wall Street bail-out. We need oversight, if not outright temporary government ownership (or “stewardship” if you prefer) of the companies that get the hand-outs.
It’s the 7% unemployment number that scares me the most. People don’t work, people don’t spend, businesses die.
A little patience folks. Let’s watch as the rest of the tale unfolds.
John Cole over at Balloon Juice:”I really have started to look at Obama as the human version of the Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, walking around flashing ‘Don’t Panic.’”
Oliver, are you questioning Geitner’s patriotism?
Ha!
No, only his patriotism betwen 2003 and 2005.
Oliver, are you questioning Geitner’s patriotism?
No, we KNOW Geitner’s unpatriotic.
With the mounting job casualties, here’s hoping SCOTUS either finds someone, somewhere, has standing to require BHO’s birth certificate or fixes attention on a criminal indictment before he wins his War on Prosperity.
There’s loyal dissent and there’s blatant political obstructionism. It isn’t hard to figure where the republican congress members are. Just look at their track record for the last two years, and their leadership’s announcement of complete opposition to the stimulus proposal just before Obama sits down with them to work on differences.
I know, why don’t the republicans put forth their own proposal so we can beat them with the label “Bushonomics”.
Obama just needs to peel a few away from the lockstep coalition to get the majority of his agenda through. He should forget the ‘bipartisan’ branding and just get things done. Then republican reactionary obstructionism can be turned into loyal and reasonable opposition on the more objectionable and unreasonable aspects of his plans.
“La Malkin:
Update: Triple-gag alert…”
Malkin? Does she even have a gag-reflex?
Dissent is fine if it’s out of genuine concern for the country, but dissent for the sake of dissent is not.
Yeah….well….Michelle Obama’s ugly!
*runs away*
The Boner will attack any plan that doesn’t give money to mystic tan
With the mounting job casualties, here’s hoping SCOTUS either finds someone, somewhere, has standing to require BHO’s birth certificate or fixes attention on a criminal indictment before he wins his War on Prosperity.
Yeah, you guys keep working on that….
Obama just needs to peel a few away from the lockstep coalition to get the majority of his agenda through. He should forget the ‘bipartisan’ branding and just get things done.
Just rebrand the peeling off as bipartisanship and Big O’s got WIN.
Nobody cares how the dead-enders with Sarah Palin lunchboxes voted, anyways.
1.) How much of that money?
2.) You realize that stimulus will be needed for the next four years, at least.
According to the CBO (as filtered through National Review), 85% of it is going to be spent in future fiscal years. Notwithstanding the merits of each and every project, what’s the harm in going through the normal budget projects for all of these expenditures? No, Obama and the Democrats are saying we have to ram this through NOW! If most of the money were getting spent THIS year, I could understand the call for extreme expedience. But it’s not. So there’s no need.
Damn if this Ted character doesn’t post exactly the same comment on this thread! (If by “comment” you mean “deluded ranting of a paranoid idiot.”)
I’m telling you, Oliver, this dumbass will post something about Obama’s birth certificate on EVERY THREAD if you let him.
‘projects’ == ‘process’
Me fail English? That’s unpossible!
No, Obama and the Democrats are saying we have to ram this through NOW!
Just like Bush, Paulson and Bernake did a couple of months ago?
And are you happy with the results of Bailout Stimulus 1.0? I’m not.
So why do the exact same thing, only with a higher price tag? “Definition of Insanity…” and all that.
According to the CBO (as filtered through National Review), 85% of it is going to be spent in future fiscal years.
See? There’s your problem. You need better sources.
Your source measures from the end of NEXT fiscal year, not this one. When you add the first 2 year’s #s from my source’s analysis, you get close to the same number as your source.
And even if your souce is making the claim that 60% is being spent in the current year (which it isn’t), that’s still 40% being spent in later years. Which means this whole “We gotta pass this NOW!!!” is a bunch of baloney.
So why do the exact same thing, only with a higher price tag? “Definition of Insanity…” and all that.
The difference is that there may actually be some oversight instead of just handing over a blank check to the former head of Lehman Brothers.
The American taxpayer may actually get an invoice this time.
even if your souce is making the claim that 60% is being spent in the current year (which it isn’t), that’s still 40% being spent in later years.
We’re not going to be able to fix this mess in one swoop. But we have to start now. I think that’s what they mean.
We’re not going to be able to fix this mess in one swoop. But we have to start now. I think that’s what they mean.
Then why not break this thing up? Pass the stuff immediately that will have an short-term (i.e. next 2 years) impact, then open up the long-term spending for further debate and discussion.
But they won’t do that. And you know why? Because if they did it that way, Obama and the Democrats can’t ram through all that big spending “wish list” that they’ve been longing for, for so very long.
I mean, c’mon, how many millions were in there for contraceptives? And $50 million for the National Endowment for the Arts? Remind me again how either of these stimulate the economy.
Your source measures from the end of NEXT fiscal year, not this one.
Uh, “my” source is the CBO. “Your” source is the CBO. The only difference is, “your” source is filtered through National Review.
Then why not break this thing up? Pass the stuff immediately that will have an short-term (i.e. next 2 years) impact, then open up the long-term spending for further debate and discussion.
Actually, Dave, that idea is getting support from people on our side of the aisle:
If you’re not sure you want to be on the same side as the BI, you can have a do-over.
Sorry to rain on your little temper tantrum, Rheinhard, but I’m not whining. I just enjoy pointing out how now that the inmates are in charge of the asylum, the same people who used to bitch and moan so loudly about how they were so mistreated for bravely speaking out against the evil Bush regime’s world-wide campaign of killing brown people for profit, are now the first ones to applaud Obama for his “I Won” stance and tell people who are blocking the Messiah’s plans to just “STFU and get out of the way”.
You’re just also a dick.
Yeah, I heard this from Duros yesterday. Because I’m all for blocking the current stimulus bill. Wounds me. Breaks my heart, it does. Crying my eyes out here. Yawn.
Contrast this to the plight of liberals who, considering the complexities of national mideast policy dared to suggest that the glorious Bush plan of bombing everyone to freedom might be ill-advised, were regularly called out as TRAITORS, SADDAM-LOVERS, TERRORIST SUPPORTERS and FIFTH COLUMNISTS — not just by comments on a blog, but some of the loudest, most widespread voices in television, talk radio, and print punditry (not to mention a great many eliminationist wingnut bloggers) for months or years on end.
Damn. You could almost hear the violins playing in the background of that paragraph. That’s a sad, sad story you got there. “The victimhood is strong in you, my young apprentice”. Have you considered turning it into a screenplay? I hear there are a lot of studios looking for tear-jerker anti-conservative projects like this to make so they can bomb at the box office.
Other than people on blogs, who were these “voices in television, talk radio, and print punditry” who were calling people against Bush or Iraq “TRAITORS, SADDAM-LOVERS, TERRORIST SUPPORTERS and FIFTH COLUMNISTS”? If it was so widespread, surely you can provide voluminous examples?
And I loved the “dared to suggest” and “might be ill-advised”. Like all the comments against Bush and Iraq were just calm and rational attempts to say “Whoa, hey, wait a minute… let’s just stop and take another look at what we’re doing here”. Apparently you’ve been living in a cave and missed the widespread screaming about Bush (and the Right) being WAR-MONGERS and RACISTS (for killing “Brown” people), and BUSHITLER’s ILLEGAL WAR, and HALLIBURTON and BLOOD FOR OIL and EEEEVIL REPUBLICANS, ad nauseum. I think there may even have been a parade or a thousand that expressed these sentiments.
Boo hoo, Rheinhard.
What’s next? You gonna dust off the chickenhawk meme (or does ed have that trademarked)?
Actually, Dave, that idea is getting support from people on our side of the aisle:
I know, and I give them a lot of credit for speaking out against what their party is pushing for so strongly. I just wish it was more than a few. Noticeably absent from the list of skeptics are the names “REID, PELOSI and OBAMA. They are the ones trying to push this thing through as quickly as possible. And without them changing their mind, it’s going to happen regardless of anyone’s doubts.
And of course, if it fails to turn the economy around in the next 2 years, the public won’t be happy and the Democrats will be the proud parents of this nearly $1 trillion spending spree. And the public’s “unhappiness” will be nothing compared to the day when the inevitable tax increases kick in to pay for all this. I doubt people will think of it as the “Change” they were “Hoping” for.
The difference is that there may actually be some oversight instead of just handing over a blank check to the former head of Lehman Brothers.
Yeah, we heard a lot about “strict oversight” last Fall too. I didn’t believe it then either.
And before you start with the “Bush and the Repugs were lying, but WE’LL actually do it” canard, keep in mind that the Democrats don’t exactly have a sterling record in this area over the last few years. You may recall when the subject of oversight came up regarding Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac, the Democrats were the ones saying “Oversight? We don’t need any oversight. Everything is JUST fine”.
First of all, Dave, my “stop being a dick” comment is bipartisan. It works for both sides.
I mean, c’mon, how many millions were in there for contraceptives?
That money is for a lot more than contraceptives. It is also for treating and preventing the spread of AIDS, STD like gonorrhea, syphilis and chlamydia, and stopping the spread of Tuberculosis.
Are you against that?
Because if they did it that way, Obama and the Democrats can’t ram through all that big spending “wish list” that they’ve been longing for, for so very long.
What was Ben Bernake’s big hurry with the TARP funds?
Are you against that?
No I’m not. But you failed to answer the question.
How exactly does this stimulate the economy?
I think it’s a great thing. But put it in the second, long-term bill and let people debate the merits of spending money on that vs. infrastructure, health care, education, etc.
What was Ben Bernake’s big hurry with the TARP funds?
Damned if I know. I was against TARP I too. At least the way it was done (i.e. no oversight and not given out for original purpose). And I think Bush and his idiots (Bernanke and Paulson) bungled that one too. I just don’t expect a higher level of competence now that Dems are running the show. Nor would I had McCain won either.
Quaker, we could argue about sources, or we could actually do something about it and split the bill like Rivlen suggests.
Bipartisanship!!
First of all, Dave, my “stop being a dick” comment is bipartisan. It works for both sides.
Doesn’t matter, Duros. Like midderpidge noted above, there’s a big difference between “loyal dissent” and “blatant political obstructionism”. If you’re blocking it to keep the other party from succeeding or just because you can, then yes, you’re a dick. But if you’re blocking it because you’re concerned about the alarming amount of money being spent (requiring huge future tax increases) with no clear idea how this is going to stimulate the economy, then you’re not. I think enough Republicans have pointed out these concerns to qualify for the second category.
The risk, she said, is that “money will be wasted because the investment elements were not carefully crafted.”
You are so correct.
Ms. Rivlin, allow me to introduce you to TARP I.
william says:, January 27, 2009 at 4:06 pm
The government confiscating $10,520 from every working American sounds like stimulus to me.
Now you’re getting upset with the outrageous expenditures of the Republican’ts when they were running the country into the ground from 2000 – 2008?
Thanks Barrack.
Oh – sorry. Thought I had found a Republican’t familiar with the concepts of integrity, honesty, and morality. My bad…
Plus: the irony involved with Putsch fellating Republican’ts whinging about dissent being suppressed now that there’s a Democratic president, when the Republican’ts have been engaging in systematic suppression of dissent by illegally using government resources, is amazing. How do you farging iceholes manage to do it without that empty melon on top of your shoulders exploding from the cognitive dissonance?
Tom,
I gotta ask. Do you get paid or somehow compensated for every “Putsch fellating” or “Republican’t” that you put in your comments? That’s gotta be the case, because you seem to put them in practically every single thing you write. Like it’s some kind of a nervous tic that you’re powerless to do anything about.
Does this happen to you in real life? “Give me two cheeseburgers, large fries – PUTSCH FELLATING REPUBLICAN’T – and a chocolate – REPUBLICAN’T – shake.”
systematic suppression of dissent by illegally using government resources,
Tom, I want a full report on my desk before the end of the day. Cites and Links. Especially the “systematic” part. That is all.
Money to (blow up and then) rebuild infrastructure in Iraq? America, f**k yeah!
Money to rebuild infrasturcture in America? Wasteful government spending!
I just don’t expect a higher level of competence now that Dems are running the show. Nor would I had McCain won either.
Well, at least we agree on something.
farging iceholes
You watched Johnny Dangerously the other night, didn’t you?
You watched Johnny Dangerously the other night, didn’t you?
That’s my second favorite movie-that-almost-no-one-has-seen. First: Evil Roy Slade.
[sings] Stubby index finger…tapping out the code…
Evil Roy Slade.
That just went on my netflix queue.
(Unfortunately, I probably won’t get to it until 2010. It’s a long queue.)
Duros62: “You watched Johnny Dangerously the other night, didn’t you?”
Quaker in a Basement: “That’s my second favorite movie-that-almost-no-one-has-seen.”
I love that movie.
“First: Evil Roy Slade”
Never heard of it.
First: Evil Roy Slade
Excellent choice. Starring the always funny John Astin.
“First: Evil Roy Slade”
“Excellent choice. Starring the always funny John Astin.”
Okay, I have heard of that movie, but I haven’t seen it.
Might pick it up on DVD.
The president’s name is spelled “Barack”. That is all.