During the campaign, Democrats rode in on a promise that if we voted Obama into office, we would have change–but that if we elected McCain, it would be “more of the same:”
The “change we can believe in” has become exactly what Obama swore to us it wouldn’t be: more of the same. After the immensely unpopular Bush bailout was forced on us, the Senate today passed the unbelievable pork-laden Generational Theft Act of 2009 (a.k.a. the “stimulus”). Not finished ruining America yet, Obama and financial wonderboy Tim Geithner unveiled yet ANOTHER bailout–this one to the tune of $2 trillion. You read it right, two TRILLION. As if the first one wasn’t expensive enough–$700 billion–now we’re asking for even more money?
Do you think they’re doing this for our good? Think again. They know full well that the spendulus has pork in it–Chuck Schumer admitted it, and bragged that Americans don’t care:
In economic times like these, we absolutely cannot afford to spend anything on special interests or earmarks. Obama promised change, but we’re getting exactly what Bush started and then some. Can you imagine the outrageous noise we would have heard if Bush had spoken of his bailout in such a nonchalant manner? I want you to close your eyes, picture him in your head, and in his Texan twang, I want you to imagine him saying, “you know, all these folks who are talkin’ about how unfair this bailout thing is, they need to understand somethin’–yes, I know that it’s more expensive than it should be, and we all know it isn’t gonna work exactly how we want it to, but the American people really don’t care. They wanna keep their comforts, and I’m here to make sure they do!”
Oh, my God–the ballyhoo would be deafening. Steve brought up this point in his last post, too, and he was right. If Bush, Cheney, Paulsen or McCain had said anything even remotely like what we’re hearing from Chuckles in the video above, or from Biden (“if we do everything right, there’s still a 30% chance we’ll get it wrong”), or from Reid (who whined about being able to “smell the tourists coming” in the Capitol), Democrats would have gone into apoplectic fits. This is the kind of snooty, elitist B.S. that Obama promised to CHANGE!
Maynard over at Tammy Bruce pointed out something pretty telling: “Back in 1990, the government seized the Mustang Ranch brothel in Nevada for tax evasion and, as required by law, tried to run it. They failed and it closed. Now, we are trusting the economy of our country and $850-plus billion dollars to a pack of nitwits who couldn’t make money running a whorehouse and selling booze…the government can’t run a business, but it can certainly put it on track to be eradicated, and at great expense.” During the Great Depression, FDR introduced the “New Deal” to combat 20% unemployment and an economy in the dregs, and it did absolutely nothing to improve–it wasn’t until we were dragged kicking and screaming into WWII that the men went to war, the women went to work and America realized fully the value of a hard day’s work. We’ve forgotten that lesson by now.
We cannot afford to continue giving people incentives to stay on welfare–the spendulus’ line of credit for eliminating limits on welfare benefits without requiring proof of a genuine effort to find a job is exactly that. We’re not curing the disease here; we’re taking an aspirin and hoping the headache will go away. We’re going to have to face the pain sooner or later, and the more we put it off the worse it’ll be when it finally sets in. Obama is playing the exact same “politics of fear” that he derided the Republicans for during the campaign, and nobody, not one person, has suggested exactly how the new bailout is going to fix our financial crisis. As a result, stocks took another huge plunge today. You won’t hear the press talking about it, though. They’re too busy drooling over Obama to notice how much worse it’s getting.
Something stinks in here…and I think I know what it is:
(Thanks to my buddy Greg for posting that one.)
steveflesher
Philip
Mel Maguire
Mark Ciavola
Comments
Mel- I could not have said it better myself. Thanks for posting. Did you see here where in the porkulus bill there is a healthcare provision?
During June one of my friends turned 60. We had a nice party for him. He invited his liberal friends and they were all Obama fans.
I jokingly warned them Obama was going to be LBJ Part 2 and finish this nation off. George McGovern wanted to do the deed but he was derailed.
Well…it’s looking like what I said last June was no joke. But, I wish it were.
We need a President that will use all means necessary to compel people to make good on their obligation and duty. Sadly we don’t have that.
Jen, I tried to comment on your blog but the word verification isn’t coming up…yeah, I noticed that last night, I was just trying to keep my post a smidge shorter than a novella.
It is irritating that Democrats are using a back door to introduce universal health care through the stimulus. This is how unpopular legislation gets forced on us–by quietly tacking it onto bills that have a better chance of passing.
“After the immensely unpopular Bush bailout was forced on us, the Senate today passed the unbelievable pork-laden Generational Theft Act of 2009 (a.k.a. the “stimulus”)”
I’m sorry, but can you point to one earmark in the jobs bill? That is what pork is – an earmark. Since there are none, I’d advise against tossing out buzz words like pork to convince people to hold the same viewpoint as you.
“Not finished ruining America yet, Obama and financial wonderboy Tim Geithner unveiled yet ANOTHER bailout–this one to the tune of $2 trillion. You read it right, two TRILLION. As if the first one wasn’t expensive enough–$700 billion–now we’re asking for even more money?”
You’re also forgetting the other $2 trillion that the federal reserve doled out last year to banks that miraculously, can’t lend to people…
“Do you think they’re doing this for our good? Think again. They know full well that the spendulus has pork in it”
Again, no it doesn’t.
“Obama promised change, but we’re getting exactly what Bush started and then some”
There’s a pretty glaring difference you’re failing to mention, and it’s that the second half of the TARP program is still part of Bush’s bailout. Obama didn’t author a three page bill ripping us off. The second half of that money was authorized by Congress, so if you want to complain, send it their way.
“if we do everything right, there’s still a 30% chance we’ll get it wrong”
First of all, you don’t know what exactly he was referring to, and second, this is a rehashing of Steve’s earlier post, complaining that Obama said:
“The plan is not perfect,” the president said. “No plan is. I can’t tell you for sure that everything in this plan will work exactly as we hope….“
The problem I have with this particular argument is, you people jumped down his throat when he promising change that you were skeptical of him being able to deliver on, and now that he’s being upfront and honest and saying what needs to be said, he’s a bad guy, or somehow inept? When Bush said this:
“First, the plan is big enough to solve a serious problem. Under our proposal, the federal government would put up to $700 billion taxpayer dollars on the line to purchase troubled assets that are clogging the financial system.
In the short term, this will free up banks to resume the flow of credit to American families and businesses, and this will help our economy grow”
Did you bother to question whether or not it would work? He seemed pretty confident it would, but like every other time he exuded confidence, he wound up failing. Those banks have yet to start lending money like they were supposed to. God forbid they lend us back our own money. My point is, although, yes, we are still stuck with a shitty bailout that no one in their right mind is excited about, but at least now, we can take some solace in the fact that there will be government oversight. We also can rest easy knowing asshole CEOs won’t be coasting to safety on golden parachutes, or allowing them to pay themselves millions of dollars while they’re borrowing our money. Let’s just put it this way: I’m far less frightened at the prospect of a bank bailout under a Democrat than I am at all that money in the hands of those who tanked the economy to begin with.
“the government can’t run a business, but it can certainly put it on track to be eradicated, and at great expense.”
It seems this Maynard character could use a history lesson. During the Great Depression, government took over the banks and ran them until things improved enough to sell them back to the private sector. It seems that helped a great deal…
“During the Great Depression, FDR introduced the “New Deal” to combat 20% unemployment and an economy in the dregs, and it did absolutely nothing to improve–it wasn’t until we were dragged kicking and screaming into WWII that the men went to war, the women went to work and America realized fully the value of a hard day’s work. We’ve forgotten that lesson by now.”
There is so much wrong with that statement. I have a big problem with people who try to rewrite history. The New Deal did absolutely nothing? If by nothing, you mean everything, I agree. When FDR implemented the New Deal, Republicans were kicking and screaming in a way not unlike today’s members of the same party. Once those programs were underway, they almost immediately improved the economy. In fact, unemployment fell from 1933 to 1937. FDR faced a great deal of opposition and, well, belly aching from Republicans about his spending habits. In response, he backed off of a lot of his programs in 1938, and like clockwork, the economy started to slide back into recession, so he reinstated those programs in 1939, where they resumed achieving success. Need proof? The Bureau of Labor Statistics shows the unemployment rate in 1933 at 24.9 percent and falling each year thereafter, to 14.3 percent in 1937. In 1938 (after the reversal of New Deal programs) it rose to 19 percent.
As far as the war, that obviously wasn’t what got is out of the Depression. As a matter of fact, as is illustrated wonderfully in Rex Stout’s book “The Illustrious Dunderheads”, several Republican Senators were on the floor arguing against entering the war, citing as a reason, the economy that was just getting back on track. They argued entering the war would drive the country back into recession. Another reason given by Republicans: Hitler wasn’t such a bag guy (I’m paraphrasing). It’s not so much that we’ve forgotten any lesson, as much as that lesson has been rewritten for us…
“Obama is playing the exact same “politics of fear” that he derided the Republicans for during the campaign, and nobody, not one person, has suggested exactly how the new bailout is going to fix our financial crisis”
Politics of fear? Telling it like is is not the politics of fear. Arranging that anthrax be sent to the only two Senators who had the capability to stop the Patriot ACT, that is the politics of fear. Obama was right when he said doing nothing will be catastrophic. Bush was right when he said it. The only difference is that this isn’t carte blanche to go nuts on the national credit card. And as for not one person telling us how this is going to fix it, I suggest switching to a new source of news. Obama himself said that this jobs bill will create somewhere around three million jobs. I trust I don’t need to spell out what that means for the rest of the economy…
How about this? Instead of attacking this, why not come up with ideas? I hate to burst your bubble, but your party has no ideas that haven’t been a proven failure. The notion of a free market is a nice way of saying to do nothing at all. That clearly isn’t an option. Tax cuts won’t work either. So, what are your suggestions?
“I jokingly warned them Obama was going to be LBJ Part 2 and finish this nation off”
What does that even mean? You know LBJ cut poverty in half and gave blacks the right to vote, right? What’s bad about that?
“What does that even mean? You know LBJ cut poverty in half and gave blacks the right to vote, right? What’s bad about that?”
If LBJ had fulfilled his own vision then we’d be living in the nightmare society Ayn Rand wrote about in Atlas Shrugged. That’s what is bad about what LBJ did.
As for giving blacks the right to vote, they always had that right after Emancipation. LBJ enforced that right. That was a good thing and still is.
“Obama was right when he said doing nothing will be catastrophic. ”
Catastrophic? Obama’s idea of a catastrophy is people who bought houses they can’t afford getting evicted and tossed in the streets. That’s not a catastrophy.
Obama’s dream is to allow these people to remain in their homes on our dime.
“Catastrophic? Obama’s idea of a catastrophy is people who bought houses they can’t afford getting evicted and tossed in the streets. That’s not a catastrophy [sic].”
Really? Let’s see if your definition alters at all when you lose your job and you have to live in your car until it gets repossessed.
“If LBJ had fulfilled his own vision then we’d be living in the nightmare society Ayn Rand wrote about in Atlas Shrugged.”
Ayn Rand was a crazy old bat. I have never heard of such a selfish way of thinking. She did not recognize societies, she thought of us as a collective of individuals, having no effect on one another. Her theories were put to bed decades ago. I can’t even remember the last time someone even mentioned her in a pertinent manner.
“Really? Let’s see if your definition alters at all when you lose your job and you have to live in your car until it gets repossessed.”
Hell would have to freeze first before that ever happened Robert. You see it is very simple. Even a 5th grader can understand it.
I live within my means. I save for the future. I don’t buy things I can afford tomorrow, next week or even next year. If I wager at all, it will be at the 21 tables in Vegas. Even then I won’t double down if the dealer has a seven or better no matter how good I think my luck is.
When I buy something on credit (very rare) I understand what I am signing when I do. I take a 360 degree view of the situation. I don’t buy something on credit and expect something to happen in the future that will make that a wise choice e.g. buy a house with a two year LIBOR lock in and hope housing prices keep going up so I can refinance into a 30 year fixed rate. That’s like playing 21 and not being able to ever know the odds.
The above is not a hard thing to pull off. It’s not hard to live within your means, save for the things you think you want, and pay cash for them when you have enough cash to buy them.
But no…some people have to have it all and they have to have it yesterday not now, not tormorrow, nor next year. They want that $500,000 house they can’t afford on a 30 year fixed rate and damn it they’ll have it too! They’ll gamble at a game where no one knows the odds and cry “help me help me” when the dealer turns up the bust card.
You expect me to call that some kind of personal calamity or disaster? Forget it. I am really sorry some people are in that mess. But I don’t feel morally obligated to bail them out and I certainly don’t want the law to require me to either.
One final thought, throughout this housing boom and bust, I stayed in my apartment and never dove into that mess. In retrospect I did the right thing. Where’s my big government payoff for being right?
Ann Rand and I were lovers.
John, the scenario you used is one I did not ascribe, and one you choose to paint as the norm. It is not. Had you taken the scenario I tossed out, you would most certainly call it a catastrophe. Hell does not have to freeze over for you to lose your job. It is happening to 600,000 people every month, and as much you may fancy yourself as being so, you are not special. It could happen to you. When people lose their only source of income, they regularly wind up homeless. That is a travesty, and most certainly a catastrophe to the victims.
“Hell does not have to freeze over for you to lose your job. It is happening to 600,000 people every month, and as much you may fancy yourself as being so, you are not special. It could happen to you. When people lose their only source of income, they regularly wind up homeless. That is a travesty, and most certainly a catastrophe to the victims.”
He didn’t say hell would have to freeze over for anyone to lose their job.
He said that he had what it took to survive if he did because he’s saved for it.
And yes, this is why small businesses and corporations should have received more tax cuts in this bill. That’s the only thing we could do to improve spending and employment.
And by the way, I’ve been here until midnight every night because hell WOULD have to freeze over before my Polish uncle (on his b-day today) would let us leave before that on a weeknight during tax season.
Being unemployed does not immediately equal being homeless. I’ve been laid off a couple of times–including once by my current employer back in 2001, after which they hired me back–and every time it’s happened, I’ve done what was necessary to keep going. It’s been close a time or two, but the bad economy does not mean one can’t find another job quickly as long as they bust their butts.
“the bad economy does not mean one can’t find another job quickly as long as they bust their butts.”
That’s pretty much exactly what it means. My roommate has been trying to find a job for two months now, applying literally everywhere she could think to, and the only call back she got was a car dealership that pays commission only (in a lot full of cars that no one is buying). She informed me yesterday that she will be putting in a 30 day notice on the 15th. So, in about a month, we’ll both be “homeless”…
“Ann Rand and I were lovers.”
I did not post that.
As for finding new work it sounds like your roommate has it all wrong. If all she is doing is applying for a job and not following up, then she will sit and sit and sit some more. Follow up is necessary. Call the hiring manager and ask to speak to that person. Let that person know you are one of those people in that stack of resumes.
Network with people you know who are employed in your field. Employers prefer the devil they sort of know over the devil they don’t know no matter how good the devil they don’t know looks on paper.
“Hell does not have to freeze over for you to lose your job. ”
I’ve quit two jobs in the last 20 years. I did not end up living in my car that was about to repossessed. Your car can’t go repo when you own it Robert. I own my two cars. I did not end up in either of them because I have something called a savings account. Everyone should have one with 3 months gross salary in reserve. 3 months can go along way when people economize and make that money last.
Another tip for getting hired I didn’t mention that’s worked for me is doing favors of the sexual variety for the hiring manager. Most managers out there today are stressed out of their minds and too tired at night to do anything but sleep so an offer of free gratification many times falls upon receptive ears. Give it a try. You’ll be pleasantly surprised.
An additional method I forgot to mention is one I’ve used from time to time with great effect. Offer the hiring manager sexual favors. Most managers in today’s fast paced environment are so stressed out that they’re simply too tired to seek out companionship. If you’re able to get the manager interested in a little “sumpthin sumpthin”, it will set you apart from the pack and make your chances for getting hired skyrocket.
I’m quite interested in getting home so I can use the much better resources I have there to figure out which one of you liberal airheads keeps posting as John.
Every time you post, even if you don’t give an email address, I GET YOUR ISP, morons!
“An additional method I forgot to mention is one I’ve used from time to time with great effect. Offer the hiring manager sexual favors. Most managers in today’s fast paced environment are so stressed out that they’re simply too tired to seek out companionship. If you’re able to get the manager interested in a little “sumpthin sumpthin”, it will set you apart from the pack and make your chances for getting hired skyrocket.”
I did not write that either. I guess I have fans.
“Ayn Rand was a crazy old bat. ”
Robert
Yes and the Book of the Month Club did a survey. Atlast Shrugged was named as the second most influential book. The Bible was number one.
Not bad for a crazy old bat.
Robert, I recommend you read her non fiction book The Virtue of Selfishness. It’s a great read. It’s a easy read too. It’s quite an eye opener. I keep it on my bookshelf right next to The Fountainhead.
If you did not find her vision of America under socialism frightening then you are a real masochist if you desire to live that way. I don’t.
When I was fresh out of college and on my first job, I bought a new computer for my home. I had a college grad job with college grad pay and I wanted a computer.
On my own time and on my own computer I created a Lotus 1-2-3 spreadsheet to help me track and manage my workflow. I was able to improve my project efficiency by 20%.
My boss took notice of my very efficient output and asked me my secret. I showed her what I created.
She thought the entire company should adopt my spreadsheet system. She asked me to submit my idea as a process improvement.
I submitted it. The higher ups like it. They wanted to adopt it company wide.
Since I developed this on my own time and using my own resources, I wanted a licensing fee of $39.95 per user. Since the company employed over 4,000 users of this system and it could improve efficiency by 20%, the company was getting it for free.
I was told to go pound sand and turn over my spreadsheet for free!!!
I quit on the spot. Give it away?
The whole thing reminded me of Atlas Shrugged. When Francisco D’Anconia’s copper mines were nationalized without compensation he destroyed them.
When my employer attempted to take my creation without compensation I did in effect the same thing.
So the lesson here is screw the other guy. It’s every man or woman for themselves. If the liberal fools can’t handle the harsh reality of life maybe they should consider a bullet to the brain.
“He didn’t say hell would have to freeze over for anyone to lose their job.”
Yes he did. Here’s what I said:
“Really? Let’s see if your definition alters at all when you lose your job and you have to live in your car until it gets repossessed”
Here’s how John responded:
“Hell would have to freeze first before that ever happened Robert.”
“And yes, this is why small businesses and corporations should have received more tax cuts in this bill. That’s the only thing we could do to improve spending and employment.”
Are you kidding me? 40% of this thing is already tax cuts! I don’t think there should be any tax cuts in there. Want to know why it doesn’t work? When taxes go down, particularly on the middle class, yes, it provides a very temporary stimulus, because the middle class by and large spend 100% of their income. But in the long run, it only forces wages to go down to meet that tax cut. For example: let’s say my employer pays me $100,000 a year, and my tax rate is 50% (these are just made up, round numbers, mind you), my take home is $50,000. If the government comes along and cuts my tax rate to 25%, it’s almost like I’m getting a $25,000 a year raise, right? Well, over time my employer is going to drive down my wage so that my take home is equal to that $50,000 a year he knows I am willing to work for. Either that or he’ll fire me, and turn around and hire someone for $75,000, knowing that the bottom line is still going to be $50,000 a year. I suppose it’s smart business to do that, but this is why tax cuts don’t work in the long run. On the flip side, tax cuts for the rich doesn’t do squat to stimulate an economy, because rich people spend only a fraction of the money they have.
“If you did not find her vision of America under socialism frightening then you are a real masochist if you desire to live that way. I don’t.”
Who said anything about living under socialism? You can’t set up an argument just so you can tear it down. By the way, the way you keep talking leads me to believe that you don’t actually know what socialism is. It’s when the government controls the means of production of a nation. Since that hasn’t happened, nor is it anywhere near happening, I suggest you keep your straw men to yourself.
“The whole thing reminded me of Atlas Shrugged. When Francisco D’Anconia’s copper mines were nationalized without compensation he destroyed them.
When my employer attempted to take my creation without compensation I did in effect the same thing.”
While that’s certainly your right to do so, it’s an incredibly childish attitude to have. That whole scorched earth thing doesn’t really do anyone any good.
It would seem one mr. Laurence A. King is the person responsible for posting the BS comments posing as you, John.
“I’ve quit two jobs in the last 20 years. I did not end up living in my car that was about to repossessed. Your car can’t go repo when you own it Robert. I own my two cars. I did not end up in either of them because I have something called a savings account. Everyone should have one with 3 months gross salary in reserve. 3 months can go along way when people economize and make that money last”
That’s great, John. I’m very proud of you. But if you think you are the norm you are wrong. Also, I would think you of all people wouldn’t appreciate someone telling anyone what to do with their money, but if you want to keep playing devil’s advocate, that’s fine with me. What’s not fine with me is the fact that you still fail to see how sometimes, things are out of our control. We lose jobs. We lose homes. We don’t all have the luxury of getting paid a decent enough wage to have a saving account with money in it. Over the last eight years, savings have gone down to an average of negative five percent. Negative, John. And average. So, you managed to do better than most, congratulations. But please refrain from looking down your nose at the downtrodden, because you don’t know everyone’s circumstances. And try as you might, generalizing people as broadly as you do only serves to display your ignorance.
“So the lesson here is screw the other guy. It’s every man or woman for themselves. If the liberal fools can’t handle the harsh reality of life maybe they should consider a bullet to the brain.”
That probably won’t happen, because, as it turns out, suicide rates go up when conservatives are in power, and go down when liberals are in power…
“It would seem one mr. Laurence A. King is the person responsible for posting the BS comments posing as you, John.”
I’m going to find Mr. King and beat him to within an inch of his life.
Robert, you totally took John’s comments out of context.
There are simple ways to stay ahead.
You make X amount while you work.
Your lifestyle should fit X amount.
You don’t spend beyond the X amount of what your money allows and you learn to save.
When you lose your job as could happen to any of us, you take your unemployment benefits and start looking for something RIGHT AWAY.
THEN if you have to dig into your savings to survive, then do it.
He was not talking about losing his job and anyone reading that would have understood what he meant.
Moving ahead, I am tired of trying to explain the tax code to you. You’re in a world that believes that poor people pay high taxes and rich people pay none. So tax the businesses more so they cannot provide work and give EXTRA money to the poor that they don’t already pay as it is.
Well, you’re about to witness what that thinking is going to bring you.
11 of my small business clients are out of business this year. More than a few others have all fired all but 1 or 2 employees.
“Rich people” who own real property, business ventures, and interests are losing all their assets. Assets that they’ve invested millions in through employment they gave to others or money required for licensing, overhead, etc. GONE.
There’s nothing we can do now. So, you’ll be thrilled to know people who pay no income tax and living on welfare will now get the tax cuts that a business could have used to give someone their job back.
Robert, your sources are weak when it comes to tax statistics and your horrible interpretation of the tax law is not going to be enough to undo what this package is going to do for years to come.
We’re swinging so far one way that the damage is going to be irreversible and ONLY the strong (the type John was describing to you) are going to survive.
And for those relying on the government and who will be working government jobs as a result of the stimulus: if they thought Bush’s Patriot Act was intrusive on their private life and choices, they aint seen nothing yet.