Hello:

Here in Seattle, Democratic Congressman Jim McDermott has sought to use taxpayer dollars to polish up the Rainier Club's windowsills. Apparently, the wealthy members of this private club, who pay dues of $191 a month, couldn't come up with the $250,000 it's going to take.

Those poor rich people. Now McDermott wants you and me and the other working stiffs - people who would never be qualified to JOIN the club, to PAY for fixing it.

Then the congressman has the temerity to suggest that this private club for the wealthy is entitled to make a request of him just like the University of Washington is. What is HE smokin??

We should dump 'em all.

excon

Politics: “Poli” a Latin word meaning “many”; and "tics" meaning “bloodsucking creatures"
Robin williams

Congesspeople are a lot like diapers. Both need to be changed often, and for pretty much the same reason. -- Will Rogers

I agree with you 100% on this one, Ex.

I find myself in agreement with you, excon.

Elliot

I could use some polishing on my windowsills and it would cost a heck of a lot less than a quarter million. Where do I apply?

Minneapolis is spending nearly that much to promote tap water to their residents. And you people want to trust the government with your health care?

Baghdad Jim's in a pickle ? Who'da thunk it ! He of course is the traitor who visited Iraq in 2002 before the war at the invite of.. and paid by Saddam's intelligence agency . He also received a donation from Shakir al Khafaji ;an Iraqi-American who was complicit in the 'Oil for Food ' scandal after his field trip... just about the time he became very vocal in his opposition to the war. 2 years later when it became an issue he returned the donation.

$250 grand is kind of small potatoes when speaking about earmarks. Jack Murtha's lunches cost more. But anything that brings him down is OK by me.

McDermott runs a House Ways and Means subcommittee on income security and family support.I have mentioned him before because he is one of the Dems ,along with George Miller who wants to seize everyone's 401 K plan .

He also had to pay a settlement to House Minority Leader John Boehner over $1million for illegally taping a Boehner telephone call with Newt while Newt was under ethics investigations. . McDermott leaked the tape to several media outlets, including the New York Slimes.

New Hampshire stimulus: $8.32 million per job (http://hotair.com/archives/2009/07/13/new-hampshire-stimulus-832-million-per-job/)

Yep, $400 million created 50 jobs, 34 of them full time. And just think, this kind of efficiency is coming to health care...

Glad to see that EC is finally spreading the reputation:D

Nice, the state of Arizona has been threatened by the Obama administration (http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/07/thinly-veiled-threats-white-house-suggests-arizona-republicans-put-up-or-shut-up.html). The day after Sen. Kyl suggested putting a halt on Porkulus, the governor of Arizona received extortion letters from 4 cabinet members.


On This Week with George Stephanopoulos on Sunday, Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz. said of the $787 billion stimulus package, "the reality is it hasn't helped yet. Only about 6.8 percent of the money has actually been spent. What I proposed is, after you complete the contracts that are already committed, the things that are in the pipeline, stop it."

A day later, Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer received letters from Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, Department of Housing and Urban Development Secretary Shaun Donovan and Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar all pointing out the billions headed to Arizona.

Kyl "publicly questioned whether the stimulus is working and stated that he wants to cancel projects that aren't presently underway," LaHood wrote to Brewer, a Republican. "I believe the stimulus has been very effective in creating job opportunities throughout the country. However, if you prefer to forfeit the money we are making available to your state, as Senator Kyl suggests, please let me know."

Kyl and McCain responded:


We were very disappointed to learn of the letters that you and other members of the Cabinet sent to Arizona Governor Jan Brewer about stimulus spending and that you would allow your good offices to be used so obviously for political purposes.

Secretary LaHood’s suggestion that the Administration will “make available” to Arizonans tax dollars that they pay is patently offensive.

We hope this does not characterize your dealings with the Congress in the future.

Unfortunately the most transparent congress ever will do the dirty work (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090716/ap_on_go_co/us_muzzled_republicans) of the most transparent president ever for him anyway. That's it, that's how we work together to fix the country, extort and gag the other side.

Hello Steve:

What you point out, is that the Republicans have NO interest in fixing things... All they want to do is make political grandstands.

Their state either wants the money or it doesn't. If these two jerks represent the state, then they better get to representing their state!!

excon

Ah, so you're thinking like Biden that we need to bankrupt the country in order to keep from bankrupting the country.


“And folks look, AARP knows and the people with me here today know, the president knows, and I know, that the status quo is simply not acceptable,” Biden said at the event on Thursday in Alexandria, Va. “It’s totally unacceptable. And it’s completely unsustainable. Even if we wanted to keep it the way we have it now. It can’t do it financially.”

“We’re going to go bankrupt as a nation,” Biden said.

“Now, people when I say that look at me and say, ‘What are you talking about, Joe? You’re telling me we have to go spend money to keep from going bankrupt?’” Biden said. “The answer is yes, that's what I’m telling you.”

Well, with these trillion dollar deficits I'd say they're doing a pretty good job of bankrupting the nation. Damn those Arizonans that think we shouldn't spend the nation into bankruptcy or be threatened by the administration. What was all that nonsense the last few years about King George the dictator running roughshod over the opposition? What?

You mean it's OK of Democrats are dictators? Not to mention liars... now we're being told the "stimulus" wasn't meant to stimulate (http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/07/should-they-have-called-it-the-stabilization-act.html), it was meant to "stabilize.


Turns out the $787 billion "American Recovery and Reinvestment Act" (AARA) was not designed for full economic recovery, but rather to "stabilize" the downturn. That's the word from White House officials today, who held off-camera briefings with reporters on how the AARA is working so far.

"This legislation was designed to cushion the downturn," said White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs. "That's why we have always talked about this as one function of economic recovery."

When pressed about the change in terminology, Gibbs said he was not trying to temper expectations after the fact. "I can probably find 15 or 20 occasions when I said this in the lead up," Gibbs said, explaining that he had always defined the AARA as part of a "multi-legged stool."

That's not how it was sold to the country in case you've forgotten. This was Obama in January:


That is why I have moved quickly to work with my economic team and leaders of both parties on an American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan that will immediately jumpstart job creation and long-term growth.

How the heck can you give this administration ANY credibility and then claim the GOP doesn't want to fix anything while the Democrats are muzzling them and ramming monstrous legislation through without even reading it?

Ah, so you're thinking like Biden that we need to bankrupt the country in order to keep from bankrupting the country.Hello again, Steve:

Nahhhh. I'm not that smart. All I said is that Kyle and McCain bluffed and got called by Obama. He should be doing MORE of that.

But, in terms of Biden... I don't know. Being a businessman myself, I understand that sometimes you have to "invest" money in order to avoid bankruptcy. Makes perfect sense to me.

Of course, one could call it "wasteful spending" if it didn't achieve the desired objective. But only AFTER the fact.

excon

Hello again, Steve:

Nahhhh. I'm not that smart. All I said is that Kyle and McCain bluffed and got called by Obama. He should be doing MORE of that.

But, in terms of Biden.... I dunno. Being a businessman myself, I understand that sometimes you have to "invest" money in order to avoid bankruptcy. Makes perfect sense to me.

Of course, one could call it "wasteful spending" if it didn't achieve the desired objective. But only AFTER the fact.

Actually, it looks to me more like Kyl and McCain called Obama's bluff. I don't know about you but I "invest" in the hopes of a return on that investment. What this administration is doing is "spending," quite different from investing.

What this administration is doing is "spending," quite different from investing.Hello again, Steve:

You say tomaaaato, and I say tomahhhto.

There's this restaurant here in Seattle called Las Margarita's. They took over a restaurant building that had gone bust EVERY time some new joint opened there. Lots of people stood around and clucked their tongues over the "wasteful spending" that was going on right before their eyes.

Guess what? Their "wasteful spending", became an "investment" that's gone up at least a hundredfold.

Before you pronounce it a failure, I suggest you wait till the fat lady sings...

Don't get me wrong. I too, was a naysayer about that corner property. Similarly, I too have doubts about Obamas "investment/spending"... But, I'm going to wait to see how it plays out.

excon

I suggest you wait till the fat lady sings...

Don't get me wrong. I too, was a naysayers about that corner property. Similarly, I too have doubts about Obamas "investment/spending"... But, I'm gonna wait to see how it plays out.

That's why the rush to ram this health care bill through, the one that only 35% of Americans now support (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/business/healthcare/july_2009/50_oppose_government_health_insurance_company), this 'transparent' congress and administration don't want to wait 'til the fat lady sings about how much it's going to cost. But guess what. Why wait, the fat lady is already singing.

CBO director: Deficit spending unsustainable (http://hotair.com/archives/2009/07/17/cbo-director-deficit-spending-unsustainable/)

You and I both know that Obama and congress damn well know it's unsustainable, but they're going to 'invest' it anyway. Here's a nice investment we're making... Humor In The Workplace (https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=3014e950a92dbb0f7e066f9e088a301f&tab=core&tabmode=list&cck=1&au=&ck=).

Hello again, Steve:

You say tomaaaato, and I say tomahhhto.

There's this restaurant here in Seattle called Las Margarita's. They took over a restaurant building that had gone bust EVERY time some new joint opened there. Lots of people stood around and clucked their tongues over the "wasteful spending" that was going on right before their eyes.

Guess what? Their "wasteful spending", became an "investment" that's gone up at least a hundredfold.

Before you pronounce it a failure, I suggest you wait till the fat lady sings...

Don't get me wrong. I too, was a naysayer about that corner property. Similarly, I too have doubts about Obamas "investment/spending"... But, I'm gonna wait to see how it plays out.

excon

How long will you wait?

The government could continue spending like this for the next 4 years and claim that the improvements they are expecting are just around the corner. When does it become evident that they're full of horse pucks and it really was wasteful spending? When will you be done waiting? How many more trillions need to be spent before we can catagorize it a failure?

Elliot

How long will you wait? When does it become evident that they're full of horse pucks and it really was wasteful spending? Hello El:

Longer than 6 months - specially since the investment is just gearing up.

Hmmm... As a conservative, market forces kind of guy, seems like you'd understand that. But, it somehow escapes you.

excon

Most wise businessmen spend with an idea of a business model and a plan .They are usually using other people's money and give realistic projections on when the investor will get a return on their investment .

I saw no such plan .Instead the sell job was that it had to be that much money and it had to be now. But it would have an immediate impact in jobs created and saved . It was never sold as a 2 year plan . It was shovel ready .

Hello El:

Longer than 6 months - specially since the investment is just gearing up.

Hmmm... As a conservative, market forces kinda guy, seems like you'd understand that. But, it somehow escapes you.

excon

Let's leave aside the point that Obama and Geithner both said that the effect of these investments would be felt immediately. I never believed that, and I doubt anyone else did either. So let's take it as a given that the effect wouldn't be immediate.

I believe in market forces. But what market forces are in play when the money sin't going where the government said it was going to go? The money has been distributed... and isn't being used.

- States are holding on to the money to cover their budget gaps.

- Banks and brokerage houses are holding on to the money to shore up their capitalization.

- The "shovel ready" construction jobs that were supposed to create employment have been diminished and eliminated because the cost and time necessary to get government approval for the jobs is too large for the government to handle (which is an irony in and of itself). Instead the construction will be limited to widening and repaving existing streets, instead of the new construction that would get the economy moving. There's no significant economic jump-start from street widening and repaving.

In short, I would be happy to see the effect of market forces. But there are none in play here. The money being spent cannot have an effect on market forces because it isn't being used properly. This is over a trillion dollars spent for NO EFFECT WHATSOEVER.

Elliot

Most wise businessmen spend with an idea of a business model and a plan .They are ususally using other people's money and give realistic projections on when the investor will get a return on their investment .

I saw no such plan Hello tom:

I did. And, it's not surprising that you didn't. Nonetheless, I know that it takes some time for money to work it's way through the economy, even if the Obamas don't.

In fact, I heard stuff, like it's going to get worse before it gets better. If I would have heard stuff like it's going to have an IMMEDIATE impact (like you seem to have heard), I would have decried it, just like you are today... But, I heard NOTHING like that.

Plus, as a conservative fellow, YOU know it takes a while, and you know the money is just starting to be spent...

So, your opposition doesn't come from an economic point of view... Because the economics haven't been played out to the degree that one could even HAVE an economic point of view about them..

No, your opposition comes from politics, pure and simple, and NOT the long term health of your country. That's not very nice.

excon

No, your opposition comes from politics, pure and simple, and NOT the long term health of your country. That's not very nice.

Did you miss my link where the CBO says it's unsustainable? That's fact, not politics.

Even if I believed the intended goal was to spend it on legitimate infrastructure work (it isn't... much of the bucket list was bs pork ) ,the fact is that all the states are doing with the funding is to prop up their own disastrous state budgets. California as an exampe has gone through all the "stimulus "money and is handing out IOUs . Not a penny went to building a thing. New Jersey illegally diverted the money to pay for the expansion of the New Jersey Turnpike and Garden State Parkway .

There are scores of similar stories even though the Veep is overseeing the use of the stimulus money . So many safeguards were put in place in fact that it is impeading and slowing down the distribution of the money . That is why many states have held onto the funds and are using them for things outside of the mandate of the legislation.


There is just too much money going to too many places to fully account for it. It would've been better to return the money back to the people . It would've already been put to use towards the recovery

There is just too much money going to too many places to fully account for it. Hello again, tom:

I don't disagree with you... But, as much as you don't like to hear it, when it's broken as badly as George W. Bush broke it, you just can't put a bandaid on it and expect results. The dufus virtually handed the Democrats a blank check.

Thems is just the facts.

excon

Hello again, tom:

I don't disagree with you.... But, as much as you don't like to hear it, when it's broken as badly as George W. Bush broke it, you just can't put a bandaid on it and expect results. The dufus virtually handed the Democrats a blank check.

Thems is just the facts.

excon

All right, I'm confused.

Exactly how did Bush "break it"?

How exactly did anything that Bush ever did justify Obama quadrupling of the national debt, quadrupling the budget deficit, nationalization of 10 of the top 12 banks, 2 of the top 3 auto makers, the largest insurance company, the attempt to hamstring industry through cap & trade, the attempt to take control of the national health care system, or the spending of nearly $10 trillion over 10 years that we do not actually possess.

I know you hate Bush really badly. I know that you continue to suffer the effects of BDS 6 months after Bush left office. But why can't you just put the blame for Obama's actions with Obama? This is Obama's presidency, not Bush's. This is the Dem's congress, not Bush's. THEY are the ones passing the laws now. As tempting as it might be to try to lay off the blame for his idiocy on others, this is Obama's baby. He's the one with the filibuster-proof congress. How long are you going to accept "Bush made me do it" as an excuse for Obama's socialism? Bush ain't doing NOTHING now. Hasn't in 6 months. But you just can't let it go...

Elliot

Bush ain't doing NOTHING now. Hasn't in 6 months. But you just can't let it go...

Not to mention the House, which controls the purse strings, has been run by Democrats since the Trojan Horse election of 2006, when they promised to get all this under control and instead engaged in endless witch hunts.

Hello again righty's:

Let me see if I can help you guys along.

If some guy took over Bernie Madoff's fund, as we know someone did, and if he didn't pay back everybody in 6 months, is it HIS fault?? What about in 12 months? What if he can't ever pay everybody back? Is that his fault? What if the fund was broken soooo badly that nobody can fix it?

Is it the new guy's fault?

excon

Hello again righty's:

Lemme see if I can help you guys along.

If some guy took over Bernie Madoff's fund, as we know someone did, and if he didn't pay back everybody in 6 months, is it HIS fault??? What about in 12 months? What if he can't ever pay everybody back? Is that his fault? What if the fund was broken soooo badly that nobody can fix it?

Is it the new guy's fault?

excon

On the other hand, if that same guy who took over Madoff's fund spent all the money that was left in the fund, borrowed more money and spent it as well on stuff that doesn't make more money, never paid a single creditor back, and thus quadrupled the fund's debts from $25 billion to $100 billion in 6 months, with nothing to show for it except a bigger debt, people would kind of wonder what this guy thought he was doing. It is even likely that they would call for that new fund manager to resign. And they CERTAINLY wouldn't blame Madoff, the guy who is in jail and no longer in the picture, for the actions of this new manager.

Nobody is expecting Obama to fix the economy in one day, or six months. (It took Bush about 9-12 months to fix the recession caused by 9-11 with his tax cuts. 18 months, if you are only looking at unemployment figures and no other indicators.) But we ARE expecting him not to DELIBERATELY make things WORSE and quadrupling the debt and budget problems in just 6 months. We are expecting him not to lie about the effects his actions will have on the economy and what would have happened had he not taken action. We are expecting him not to deliberately panic the public so that he can pass his political agenda. We are expecting him to take actions that HELP not HURT the economy.

MOST OF ALL, we are expecting that he stand up and be a man and take responsibility for what HE is doing, rather than trying to place the blame with those who are out of the picture.

But I wouldn't expect you to understand that.

Elliot

Maybe it wasn't broken as badly as some think under Bush.

I believe that without the bail out, stimulus, and porkulus, the failing banks would have gone bankrupt, and others would have picked up the pieces WITHOUT all that spending.

Same thing for the automakers.

We would likely have been past the bottom by now. Instead the bottom still looks a long way down.

Hatred is such a consuming thing. It eats up brain cells at great speed.

Well the government's financial institution of choice ;Goldman Sachs somehow managed to do very well this quarter . Guess what they are planning ? Yup giving out huge corporate bonuses .

Meanwhile the President pegged another GS alumus to go through the revolving door .Robert Hormats ;a vice chairman of Goldman Sachs International,will be nominated to a top economic position at the State Department. GS (Government Sachs ) alumni in prominent positions now include among others ;Hank Paulson ,Bob Rubin, New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine and New York Federal Reserve Bank President William Dudley.