"At least something was done at this time of historic crisis" - so said the proponents of Smoot-Hawley, too.
The predictably trite shot at the GOP was beneath even your President, Michael. Poor form for you to show even less class than a Chicago politician.
elrod
· 10 months ago
A little touchy, Simon?
SimonDodd
· 10 months ago
Yes, Elrod, when the Liberal Voice's writers - in keeping with most of the left of the blogosphere - representing the House GOP's acting in what they saw as being in the interests of the country and the economy as "put[ting] themselves squarely in opposition to the American economy and the American people," that seems to justify being somewhat irked. Even your President was intellectually honest enough to acknowledge that the motivations on my side of the aisle are sincere even if he disagrees with them - so why can't site that flaunts its soi-disant moderate credentials rise to even that level of civility?
SimonDodd
· 10 months ago
Plus, if there is ever a time to be touchy, the aftermath of a staggeringly expensive partisan white elephant - indeed, boondoggle - would seem to be the moment.
greenschemes
· 10 months ago
- but there is legitimate concern that it won't stimulate the economy nearly enough.
This is from your own post Mr. Strickings and I would agree wholeheartedly.
This bill is smoking mirrors. The scream is that it must be done and done now.......no stop..dont read the bill.....what are you doing? trust us, pass it. What you dare question us? You unpatriotic obstructionist.
Yet when you analyze it. The money is to be apportioned out to september 2010. We have to do it now!!!!!!!!......oh but you cant have the money till next year. However I bet those starving artist get theirs right away.
Green. Nah Barak Obama and the democrats need something to run on in 4 years. It really is nothing more then Green Schemes.
DaGoat
· 10 months ago
Mr Stickings, just because the GOP opposed your party doesn't mean they acted in bad faith as you are suggesting.
This is a flawed bill. The question is if it is so flawed it will not work and I don't think anyone knows the answer to that. I am glad the bill got done and I'm crossing my fingers.
kritt11
· 10 months ago
I would remind all of you that economists were clamoring for quick action and told Obama that a flawed bill was better than none- unfortunately there wasn't the luxury of waiting. Action should have been taken to avoid this mess a long time ago. Obama inherited the crisis from his predecessor who chose to give interviews salvaging his legacy rather than lead the nation. It fell to his Sec of the Treasury- Paulson-who naturally protected corporate bigwigs, the financiers and bankers with little or no oversight as to how the money was spent.
If you are to blame someone for the need for quick, drastic action- lets not forget all of the facts.
AustinRoth
· 10 months ago
So, when Democrats were voting en bloc against various Republican bills, we were told here that this was proof of the partisan, venal nature of the Republicans for putting forth such one-sided legislation, and not providing enough concessions to the Democrats. This was an indication of their being out-of-touch, dogmatic, and un-democratic.
Additionally, we were all supposed to be impressed by the virtue shown by the Brave Democrats for not bowing to Republican ham-handedness, and we were also supposed to sing the glory and praises of whatever few Republicans were brave enough to think of the Country instead of Party.
Now the shoe is on the other foot. The reaction? Why what a surprise. Now resisting the majority is voting AGAINST America (which seems to be a trademarked expression of Michael Stickings, Super-Patriot (D-Idiot)), and Democrats that voted their conscience against the first of the coming series of Five-Year Plans, aka The 2009 Stimulus Bill, are turncoats.
Oh, the hypocrisy of the Left, and Michael in particular, but that is stock-in-trade for both.
DLS
· 10 months ago
We know there would be a subset here (and imitated pathetically outside the States) who would be like trained animals, nodding their heads and smiling. No matter how bad, at least "something was done." Those joining that crowd disservice themselves, definitely.
It would have been cheaper for that "something" to be sappy feel-good ads by the Ad Council.
DLS
· 10 months ago
"economists were clamoring for quick action"
Economically effective action, K. The effects (timely or prompt effects, that is) have been already listed by sources such as Zandi at Moody's. I'd even concede to being outvoted in that I'd like to see some of the money spent on, again, serious, easily grasped things like infrastructure that would be long-term. This could wait until later, coupled with other future-promise things like R&D on alternative energy improvements, for example. (In the meantime, we benefit right away from transmission lines and other things like roads and bridges, so they should take priority in a later "long-term objectives" bill, and ideally I'd like to see some of the money in this bill already be devoted to such things if a big bill we shall have.)
There was no need for idiotic porky projects. This bill is typical Washington stuff and tailored for the Dems to buy votes and even worse, apparently just having fun spending money we are not free to spend on whatever these people currently feel like spending money on!
Obama has big spending and Dem preferences now set as precedents, his likely goal here rather than holding this bill in any truly high regard.
DLS
· 10 months ago
"I am glad the bill got done and I'm crossing my fingers."
Hopefully it won't be too bad for us. That's all we can hope for now. And at least the Dems didn't get _all_ the crazy excess they sought. But you know they'll be back with more, later.
DLS
· 10 months ago
"no stop..dont read the bill.....what are you doing? trust us, pass it. "
As Austin Roth noted, the hypocrisy of so many (including outside the States, imitating the worst play-pen leftism here -- Mike, you need to develop a better self- and nationalistic concept for yourself, of your _own_) is remarkable. How many who screamed not to read the bill, but to pass it, Pass It, PASS IT!!! We Need To Do Something, NOW! objected strongly to the very same thing with the bailout bill. And now are both hypocritical and demonstrating they may be incapable of having learned anything? Why should we trust them, then, at all?
DLS
· 10 months ago
Bail out the banksXXXXX nation now! We can't wait! You have to trust us! We know best!
All Comments
The predictably trite shot at the GOP was beneath even your President, Michael. Poor form for you to show even less class than a Chicago politician.
This is from your own post Mr. Strickings and I would agree wholeheartedly.
This bill is smoking mirrors. The scream is that it must be done and done now.......no stop..dont read the bill.....what are you doing? trust us, pass it. What you dare question us? You unpatriotic obstructionist.
Yet when you analyze it. The money is to be apportioned out to september 2010. We have to do it now!!!!!!!!......oh but you cant have the money till next year. However I bet those starving artist get theirs right away.
Green. Nah Barak Obama and the democrats need something to run on in 4 years. It really is nothing more then Green Schemes.
This is a flawed bill. The question is if it is so flawed it will not work and I don't think anyone knows the answer to that. I am glad the bill got done and I'm crossing my fingers.
If you are to blame someone for the need for quick, drastic action- lets not forget all of the facts.
Additionally, we were all supposed to be impressed by the virtue shown by the Brave Democrats for not bowing to Republican ham-handedness, and we were also supposed to sing the glory and praises of whatever few Republicans were brave enough to think of the Country instead of Party.
Now the shoe is on the other foot. The reaction? Why what a surprise. Now resisting the majority is voting AGAINST America (which seems to be a trademarked expression of Michael Stickings, Super-Patriot (D-Idiot)), and Democrats that voted their conscience against the first of the coming series of Five-Year Plans, aka The 2009 Stimulus Bill, are turncoats.
Oh, the hypocrisy of the Left, and Michael in particular, but that is stock-in-trade for both.
It would have been cheaper for that "something" to be sappy feel-good ads by the Ad Council.
Economically effective action, K. The effects (timely or prompt effects, that is) have been already listed by sources such as Zandi at Moody's. I'd even concede to being outvoted in that I'd like to see some of the money spent on, again, serious, easily grasped things like infrastructure that would be long-term. This could wait until later, coupled with other future-promise things like R&D on alternative energy improvements, for example. (In the meantime, we benefit right away from transmission lines and other things like roads and bridges, so they should take priority in a later "long-term objectives" bill, and ideally I'd like to see some of the money in this bill already be devoted to such things if a big bill we shall have.)
There was no need for idiotic porky projects. This bill is typical Washington stuff and tailored for the Dems to buy votes and even worse, apparently just having fun spending money we are not free to spend on whatever these people currently feel like spending money on!
Obama has big spending and Dem preferences now set as precedents, his likely goal here rather than holding this bill in any truly high regard.
Hopefully it won't be too bad for us. That's all we can hope for now. And at least the Dems didn't get _all_ the crazy excess they sought. But you know they'll be back with more, later.
As Austin Roth noted, the hypocrisy of so many (including outside the States, imitating the worst play-pen leftism here -- Mike, you need to develop a better self- and nationalistic concept for yourself, of your _own_) is remarkable. How many who screamed not to read the bill, but to pass it, Pass It, PASS IT!!! We Need To Do Something, NOW! objected strongly to the very same thing with the bailout bill. And now are both hypocritical and demonstrating they may be incapable of having learned anything? Why should we trust them, then, at all?