WASHINGTON, Feb 23 (Reuters)

The package boosted the economy by up to 3.5 percent and lowered the unemployment rate by up to 2.1 percent during that period, CBO said. The package is likely to have the greatest impact this year, according to CBO. It is expected to boost GDP by between 1.4 percent and 4 percent and bring down the unemployment rate by between 0.7 percent and 1.8 percent in 2010, higher figures than last year when many of its programs were being set up. The impact is expected to trail off over the next two years.
Direct purchasing of goods and services by the federal government and states have been the most effective provision of the act, CBO said. Among the least effective: a tax credit for first-time homebuyers and a tax cut for the wealthy.

but… but… TYRANNY, SOCIALISM!!!!

LOL. I’m quite sure that all these jobs went to black people, ACORN, and illegal Mexican abortion doctors, so Tea Baggers will still oppose the stimulus.

  • Share/Bookmark

Progressivism is the cancer in America and it is eating our Constitution. And it was designed to eat the Constitution…It must be cut out of the system because they cannot co-exist. And you don’t cure cancer by – well, I’m just going to give you a little bit of cancer. You must eradicate it.

Where did the progressives go; where did they come from? All of a sudden, I’m not a liberal, I’m a progressive…Every time they wake America up to their policies, they have to change their names…They’re running out of names.

Please don’t pretend that there is a difference between progressives and liberals, that’s akin to insisting Hitler only detested Judaism but had nothing against Jews.

How is Beck’s demand for eradication of a large group of Americans different from a genocidal bin Laden fatwa?

Why is a lone, disgruntled engineer with a small airplane who committed a terrorist act in Austin Texas being lauded as a hero by the Tea Party Wing of the GOP?

  • Share/Bookmark

A software engineer named Joe Stack upset with the Internal Revenue Service set fire to his home Thursday and then flew his plane into a multistory office building that houses federal tax employees, authorities said.  Stack, apparently a deranged man with a grudge against the government in general, and the Internal Revenue Service in specific, killed at least three people, including himself.

Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.) not wanting this opportunity to go to waste then rationalizing the actions of a domestic terrorist.

“I don’t know if it’s related but I can just sense not only in my election, but since being here in Washington, people are frustrated. They want transparency. They want their elected officials to be accountable and open and talk about the things affecting their daily lives. So I am not sure if there is a connection, I certainly hope not, but we need to do things better.”

He then added , “No one likes paying taxes obviously.”

So, let me get this straight. An anti-government nut flies an airplane into a building and Scott Brown thinks the incident reminds him of … his own election?  Brown almost seems to say Stack’s actions can be understood if we just appreciate how “frustrated” people are.

This guy is a United States senator? Seriously?

  • Share/Bookmark
YouTube Preview Image

WTF?!?!?!

But, but, spending! Tyranny! Founding Fathers!

He literally stood there and said that projects and job creation should have been the focus of the stimulus, but that’s exactly what the focus of the stimulus project was!

If I recall, Cantor, you wanted the stimulus to be mainly tax cuts, not spending money for jobs. Didn’t Micheal Steel say “Gov doesn’t create jobs, only work”.

Remember that Cantor, like every other GOP member of Congress, voted against the stimulus bill which included money for high speed rail.  The only train Cantor supports is the post-Bush crazy train that is the Republican Party.

  • Share/Bookmark

So said former VP Richard Cheney over the weekend on “This Week” with ABC’s Jonathan Karl. There is not a court in the United States or in the world that does not consider waterboarding torture. The Red Cross certainly does, and it’s the governing body in international law. It is certainly torture according to the UN Convention on Torture and the Geneva Conventions. The British government, America’s closest Western ally, certainly believes it is torture. No legal authority of any type in the US or the world has ever doubted that waterboarding is torture.

So the former vice-president has just confessed to a war crime.

  • Share/Bookmark

Cheat sheet written on the hand….what grade did the rest of us stop doing that? LOL!!!

Cheat Sheet Palin

I wonder how Sarah Barracuda would fare on live C-Span fielding unscripted questions from the Democratic Senators?

That would be must see T.V.

  • Share/Bookmark

I think it sounds like Arkansas Democratic Senator Blanche Lincoln. The Democratic Senate Conference met with President Obama and she came up with this weak ass narrative;

I visited with a constituent yesterday, good Democrat, small business owner, who was extremely frustrated — extremely frustrated because there was a lack of certainty and predictability from his government for him to be able to run his businesses. He’s — he and his father have worked hard, they’ve built three or four different small businesses, and he fears that there’s no one in your administration that understands what it means to go to work on Monday and have to make a payroll on Friday. He wants results. He wants predictability.

And are we willing as Democrats not only to reach out to Republicans but to push back in our own party for people who want extremes, and look for the common ground that’s going to get us the success that we need not only for our constituents but for our country in this global community, in this global economy? Are we willing as Democrats to also push back on our own party and look for that common ground that we need to work with Republicans and to get the answers?

Blanche Lincoln thinks that totally screwing over the President’s agenda is a good political move. Must be why she is at 33% in the polls for re-election versus 56% for her opponent. Lincoln’s approval rating has sunk to just 27%, with 62% of voters in the state disapproving of her, and she only has the support of half of the states Democrats. When the Democrats are in power and you want to keep them in power then you need to keep them popular. Which means you need to ACTUALLY PASS GOOD LEGISLATION that benefits your constituents. Otherwise, voters will see you as part of the problem, not part of the solution, and every punch that you and your fellow conservadems land on Obama that same punch ricochets right back onto your poll numbers and approval rating. They are self-immolating and don’t know why. They think it’s the liberal left hurting them, when in fact they are hurting themselves. If these people studied 1994 they would know this, it’s elementary politics.

Personally I don’t give two shits whether our politicians know what it’s like to go to work on Monday and meet a payroll on Friday. I do give two shits whether they know what it’s like to go to work on Monday and get a paycheck on Friday that doesn’t allow for you to save for your kids education, or allow you to purchase affordable health care insurance, let alone let you save for your future retirement.

Does she and her fellow conservadems think Democrats just lucked out winning blowouts in 2006 and 2008? Could Bush’s low approval ratings have had anything to do with it, ya think? The economy was doing okay in 2006. But Dems swept the election because the Republican president was despised by the antiwar left, and independents had seen enough of their neocon incompetence as well. If the Dems want to avoid the same thing, their best shot is to get Obama’s approval rating above 60%. You do that by passing health care reform, passing real job creation bills, and do something to regulate banks and go after these credit card companies who seem to enjoy raping the American consumer ever month with 22% interest rates.

Perhaps Blanche Lincoln’s current and future bosses at corporate giant Wal-Mart are telling her how to make payroll, because she doesn’t have the experience to comment for herself.

Though she does have the experience of being a backstabber.

  • Share/Bookmark

I am mildly bugged about this. The commercial that Focus On The [right wing] Family paid to have aired during the Super Bowl. The frauds over at CBS actually allowed Tim Tebow to appear in a commercial to pitch pro-life propaganda. CBS….you ought to be ashamed of themselves. It’s the damn Super Bowl! I want to see athletes get their game on. I don’t need to get preached to from someone standing on a holier than thou soap box. And besides, didn’t they tell a a church group who wanted to embrace Gays no to an ad a few years back?

“I know some people won’t agree with it,” said Tebow of the 30-second ad at a press conference in Mobile, Ala., on Sunday, in preparation for next weekend’s Senior Bowl. “But I think they can at least respect that I stand up for what I believe. I’ve always been very convicted of [his views on abortion] because that’s the reason I’m here, because my mom was a very courageous woman.”

You know what Tim…? Your mom’s story doesn’t really add up. She says she had complications in the Philippines during her pregnancy with you, and was told by doctors in the Philippines to get and abortion. Problem is abortion had been outlawed in the Philippines since the 1930’s under all circumstances including rape and incest. Why would doctors tell her to get an abortion when their own advice was illegal and they could have faced 6 years in prison?

You know, I try to be careful with subjects like this… I’m a skeptic, and have become accustomed to opposing sides stretching the truth (and on occasion, outright lying) to push their own agenda, but Tim Tebow and his mom tenderly telling women they are sinners if they do anything other than carry every pregnancy to term during the Super Bowl broadcast is absurd. Brought to you by the exact same people who freaked the hell out when Janet Jackson’s nipple made a half second appearance. You judge which is more offensive and which really matters.

  • Share/Bookmark

The public elected President Obama on the basis of his persistent invocation of bipartisanship or a “new kind of politics,”. While a President getting elected on promises of bipartisanship, or working with “the other side of the isle” is nothing new, it was foreseeable that Obama had a slim to none chance of success. I do not blame or criticize Republicans for sticking to their principles (tax cuts are the universal elixir), misguided though I believe they are, but the more I think about this the more I agree that Martha Coakley’s defeat in Massachusetts should mark the end of Obama’s efforts to create a new, bipartisan climate in Washington.

Consider last spring’s $787 Billion stimulus bill which was heavily weighted toward tax cuts in an effort to win some Republican support. In the end, the bill received not a single Republican vote.
Consider that he nominated a moderate, pro-prosecution Supreme Court justice, Sonia Sotomayor, only to see her tagged as a racist over some rather harmless remarks she made about being a “wise Latina”.
Consider that healthcare reform became bogged down in such a compromise-ridden mess to try an woo Senator Olympia Snow, and appease Senator’s Landrieu, Nelson, and Lincoln. Let’s include the fact that President Obama never truly fought hard for a public option to compete with private insurance companies because those in his inner circle knew it would never get passed.

Obama has done precisely what he condemned while campaigning for the presidency: he has played the old Washington game of compromising on basics to win a few votes. Now the idea was to bring along a few Republican senators thought to hold reasonable views, I get that, but NO Republican support was offered by the other side…none…NADA.

Instead we got calls for this becoming Obama’s “waterloo”. Obama’s attempts to find compromise solutions did not stop Republicans from labelling him as a radical – or their nutty tea-party allies from calling him a “socialist” and citing scripture (Psalm 109:8) calling for his death. He’s being called a radical though he’s doing nothing radical, and yet alienating radicals because he’s doing nothing radical. It’s an old paradox: you can’t chase with the hounds and run with the foxes.

The House should pass the Senate Health care bill and fix it later through reconciliation. Put a “W” in the Win column and move on.

Then he needs to pick another fight….. and then FIGHT, and stop going for these half-assed measures by watering down legislation to get any GOP votes. Maybe he is finally starting with his proposing a tax to recoup some of the billions of dollars in bailout money the bankers received, and has referred to bonus payments as “obscene” at a time when many “continue to face real hardship in this recession.”

The White House and the Democratic Party still have time to change course. Surely Obama knows his strategy of reaching out to Republicans was an utter failure. It’s time to try something new.

I hope he is ready for it.

  • Share/Bookmark

Birther

To help me get this straight I need to look at the timeline…

Nov 2008: –

Hudak put pictures on his lawn portraying Barack Obama as Osama Bin Laden. He defended the pictures and told a local paper that Obama was born in Kenya. From affidavits that he made available: “Obama was not born in the United States but in Kenya”. He also said that Obama has ties to the Muslim faith through an extremist cousin that is from Kenya. “There is a lot more going on here than anyone knows,” Hudak said…

Tri-Town Transcript published this story.

Later in Sept 2009 the Salem News published another story linking Hudak to the birther movement.

Scott Brown runs for Senate –

Bill Hudak is running against Rep. John Tierney (D-Mass.). Hudak campaign spokesman Tyler Harber says that Hudak and Brown are personally close, that they appeared together several times during the campaign and that Hudak put his volunteers to work for Brown in the closing days of the campaign.

“They were text messaging on election day, they were so close,” Harber added.

Jan 19, 2010 –

Scott Brown wins Tuesday’s election.

Came out strong for Hudak the morning after and all but praised (endorsed) him “Bill was with us from the beginning and is (the) representative the people of the 6th district need,” Brown said. “Bill is not beholden to special interests and will help me bring the voice of the people Washington.”

“Bill was with us…Bill is what the people need”…Bill is not beholden…Bill will help me (Scott Brown). tell me oh wise one what does this mean?

Jan 20, 2010 –

Hudak announces endorsement by Scott Brown

Hudak’s spokesperson has clarified that Hudak indeed believes that Obama was born in the United States and feels that his comments were mischaracterized in the original article.

“The birther issue is a non issue for Bill,” said Tyler Harber. “He believes the President of the United States was born in the United States.

There were two sources about Hudak being a birther. The Tri-Town Transcript, which published the original story in November 2008, and in a column by Nelson Benton in the Salem News published September 2009. In both cases Hudak never asked for a correction.

Jan 21, 2010 –

Brown’s campaign will not say whether their candidate has endorsed Bill Hudak.

Hudak’s campaign says Brown gave a private, verbal endorsement to Hudak, and blasted Brown’s staff for reneging.

“Scott Brown gave his endorsement to Bill Hudak and it’s unfortunate that the people Scott Brown surrounds himself with are backing down from a commitment that their boss already made,” said Tyler Harber, a spokesman for Hudak.

Hudak, in an interview with the Salem News, says, “There’s no question that he [Brown] gave me his endorsement,” citing a “private conversation” the two men had. He also says he did not see the press release his own campaign put out touting the alleged endorsement, but that it’s OK with him: “I trust my campaign staff to do what they need to do.”

Brown tells the Boston Globe that Hudak put out a press release touting Brown’s endorsement without his knowledge or permission. “I haven’t spoken to Bill at all,’’ Brown said. “I understand he made a press release of some sort. But I wasn’t aware of it, and we’ve asked him to retract it.”

So now we have a press release filled with direct quotes from both Brown and Hudak, and both men say they were unaware of it before it went out. LOL

Finally.. for 14 months Hudak did not refute his birther beliefs yet Scott Brown and Hudak campaigned together and according to a spokesman “Hudak and Brown are personally close”.

Ten will get you twenty that the re-election campaign of Scott Brown won’t go as smoothly.

Yes, yes, there is a lot more going on here than anyone knows.

  • Share/Bookmark

« Older entries