Skip to main content

If there's one thing that unites the Republican Party it's that the stimulus bill was a job-killing piece of legislation that was the worst thing in the whole entire world for the economy, right? Or maybe that's just what unites them in public, because in private the Washington Times reports they've been working overtime to get their hands on job-creating stimulus cash.

Sen. Christopher S. Bond regularly railed against President Obama's economic stimulus plan as irresponsible spending that would drive up the national debt. But behind the scenes, the Missouri Republican quietly sought more than $50 million from a federal agency for two projects in his state.

...

In a letter to Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, Mr. Bond noted that one project applying to the USDA for stimulus money would "create jobs and ultimately spur economic opportunities."

Bond isn't alone. Remember Joe "You Lie" Wilson?

Rep. Joe Wilson, South Carolina Republican who became famous after yelling, "You lie," during Mr. Obama's addresses to Congress in September, voted against the stimulus. Nonetheless, Mr. Wilson elbowed his way into the rush for federal stimulus cash in a letter he sent to Mr. Vilsack on behalf of a foundation seeking funding.

"We know their endeavor will provide jobs and investment in one of the poorer sections of the Congressional District," he wrote to Mr. Vilsack in the Aug. 26, 2009, letter.

You see the pattern? Slam the stimulus in public, but in private, ask for stimulus funds to create jobs. For example, Sen. Robert Bennett of Utah:

On Feb. 13, 2009, Sen. Robert F. Bennett, Utah Republican, issued a statement criticizing the stimulus — but two days earlier, he privately forwarded to Mr. Vilsack a list of projects seeking stimulus money.

"I believe the addition of federal funds to these projects would maximize the stimulative effect of these projects on the local economy," he wrote.

And here's even more quotes uncovered by the Washington Times in private letters written by Republican lawmakers seeking stimulus funds from the Agriculture Department:

Sen. Mike Johanns, Nebraska Republican: "The proposed project would create 38 new jobs and bring broadband to eight hospitals, five colleges, 16 libraries and 161 K-12 schools"

Sen. Lamar Alexander, Tennessee Republican: "It is anticipated that the project will create over 200 jobs in the first year and at least another 40 new jobs in the following years."

Rep. John Linder, Georgia Republican: "the employment opportunities created by this program would be quickly utilized"

Kudos to the Washington Times for having done the leg work of filing the FOIA requests to expose these examples of Republican lawmakers talking out of both sides of their mouths, publicly lambasting the stimulus as a job-killing measure, but privately conceding that it actually created jobs. It's hard to imagine a more effective way of demonstrating Republican hypocrisy on the question of whether the stimulus bill creates jobs, and Dems should remind them of it every waking day.

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 08:42 AM PST.

Tags

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  with the Freedom of Information Act (29+ / 0-)

    we should get those letters that Republicans sent requesting stimulus funds and post them on a website.  Let the teabagging nutjobs go nuts on them all summer long.  

    can you say circular firing squad?

    Republicans===the party of the 1% rich people in America. Or in other words..The Party of NO!

    by jalapeno on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 08:43:56 AM PST

    •  My thoughts exactly. (8+ / 0-)

      The Repug's actual words can do more harm to their reputation than anything we can muster.  Remember the criteria for the 9/12 movement?  This would be a mortal sin in their eyes, proving their beloved wing-nut leaders are nothing more than RINO's.

      Ahhh, the IRS Form 1099-C. It's so...so...forgiving!

      by Taxmancometh on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 08:51:00 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  With a Summary Roll of Shame on the splash (7+ / 0-)

      5 Columns

      Name
      Party
      Vote
      Number of Requests
      Total Request $

      When I think back on all the crap I learned in high school, it's a wonder I can think at all.

      by Dan E in Blue Hampshire on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 08:55:04 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  FOIA - one of the great pieces of legislation (5+ / 0-)

      In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice; but in practice, there always is a difference. - Yogi Berra

      by blue aardvark on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 08:58:04 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Do It (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Philpm

      !!!!!!!

    •  Add Frank Wolf to the (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Possiamo

      hypocrit list. He criticized Governor Kaine for being slow in getting the stimulus money out!
      "The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee would like you to know that Wolf did not vote to approve federal stimulus money earlier this year. "When Congressman Frank Wolf had the chance to support recovery funding for Northern Virginia, Wolf and all of his fellow Republicans just said no,'' said Ryan Rudominer, DCCC national press secretary. "But now, Congressman Wolf wants Virginia voters to forget he opposed the very same stimulus funding he now calls 'critical' and 'desperately needed." "

      http://voices.washingtonpost.com/...

    •  Actually a campaign commercial would be better (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      PBen, Hellen, nellgwen

      It would be simple..

      How do we know the stimulus package passed by Senate and House Democrats, unanimously opposed by every Republican Senator and Member of Congress is working?

      Simple - look at all the Republicans lining up to say the stimulus plans is creating jobs for Americans all over the county.

      Then roll quotes where the Republicans are asking for stimulus money, describing how the stimulus effectively creates jobs, and for particular districts and states ending on the relevant Republican.  Zoom in on phrases creates jobs or stimulates growth, etc. and then juxtapose against all the Republican votes against the stimulus, zooming in to the relevant one, as well as any relevant inflammatory statements against the stimulus on the house floor or in the media

      Finish

      Isn't it about time that we all stood together and voted for more leaders like _______ who work to solve our problem rather than hypocritical, grandstanding politicians like ________ who stood in the way of recovery and then turned around to try take credit for the very solution that they fought tooth and nail to destroy?  Don't let __ get away with it this November.  Vote for ______, proud member of the Democratic Party, working for you everyday.

      Reemphasize the quotes in the background against grainy footage of the hypocritical politician in question.

      Just saying.  10 minutes, a little imovie using Ken Burnsian effects, a little dark music, a little photoshop, a nice upbeat, patriotic tune at the end and these commercials write themselves.

  •  How can you tell if a Republican is lying? (18+ / 0-)

    ....their lips move.
    gop party of no

    Whatever the Repuglicans say, the opposite is the truth .

    by MariaWr on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 08:44:41 AM PST

  •  of course it created jobs (11+ / 0-)

    jesus christ. is there really any doubt about that?

    "A lie isn't a side of a story. It's just a lie." The Wire

    by glutz78 on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 08:44:47 AM PST

    •  "Most Americans believe that a dollar of tax cuts (5+ / 0-)

      is better for the economy than a dollar of government spending."

      Yes, apparently there is a huge public doubt about stimulus spending.

      Democrats. The gift that keeps on giving.  /Republicans.

      •  The Assumption (0+ / 0-)

        In order to believe that government spending is more productive than tax cuts, you must first assume that the government knows better than the average person how to manage money. Essentially, a tax cut enables individuals to decide what to do with a greater proportion of their incomes.

        The government couldn't financially manage its way out of a wet paper bag. Most people tend to do much better on their own with managing their finances.

        Let's say you had to choose between two banks to handle your money. The first bank has no assets at all. The CEO of this bank is really good at getting people to believe he's good for all the debt his bank has incurred, and so he's still in business.
        The second bank has a sizable amount of liquid assets. The CEO is somewhat tactless, and he doesn't have a whole lot of friends. But he will tell you the truth about the state of the bank's finances, no matter how unpleasant it might be to hear.

        Which bank are you going to put your money in?

        I'll go with the people over the government any day of the week.

        •  You lie! In your 1st sentence... (0+ / 0-)

          If your argument is so good, then why do you have to lie? One does not have to first assume that the government knows better than the average person how to manage money to believe government spending is more productive than tax cuts. One only has to have a brain. You can believe anything you want but the fact is that a dollar of government spending is ONE DOLLAR SPENT IN THE ECONOMY. But that is not the case with a rich person getting a dollar tax cut; that dollar isn't getting spent unless that rich person SPENDS THEIR LAST DOLLAR. Every non-partisan economist knows that a dollar of spending, no matter who spends it, does more for the economy than the same amount in tax cuts that are not spent. I think you probably know it as well but are too dishonest to admit the truth when it doesn't serve your agenda.

          •  I'm going to try to use my feeble brain (0+ / 0-)

            for a minute.

            The government doesn't make anything. They don't sell anything. All of the money they spend comes from two sources: taxation (taking money from the private sector by force) and borrowing (taking money from the Social Security Administration and foreign governments with a promise to pay it back later with interest).

            With this in mind, a dollar of government spending must have at one time been a dollar in the hands of a private entity, i.e. an individual or a business.If the government hadn't appropriated that person's dollar, he could do what he thought best with it. If he didn't want to spend it, he could save it, presumably in the bank, where it would then be used as capital to lend to other businesses or individuals. If he wanted to spend it, the dollar would go directly into the economy without having to pass through the government to get there.
            The individual immediately realizes the benefits of earning that dollar. With a government spent dollar, the person will, at best, indirectly realize some benefit, though that is far from certain.

            When the government borrows a dollar, that dollar accrues interest. This means that a borrowed dollar spent on the economy is far more expensive than the private individual's dollar. Interest on borrowed money lowers the purchasing power of that money because the interest makes whatever is bought considerably more expensive.  

            Consider the following scenario: Joe Smith goes to Best Buy with his whole paycheck and buys a brand new HP Touchsmart computer. Boom, paycheck gone, but he has that computer. Johnny Chargeit walks in to the same Best Buy, but he buys his HP computer with a credit card. He spends three years paying that computer off. Because of the interest, his computer costs 24 percent more than Joe's even though they bought their computers on the same day.  

            There's no way a government spent dollar could possibly be as beneficial to the economy as one spent by a private individual reaping the rewards of his own labor. If I'm lyin' I'm dyin'

    •  My new Senator Scott Brown said zero jobs. n/t (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      GN1927, Philpm, RhodaA

      Then they came for me - and by that time there was nobody left to speak up.

      by DefendOurConstitution on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 08:49:23 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  why'd your state vote him in?Dem was that bad? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        DefendOurConstitution

        or were the state DEMS just angry at Coakley? from the national press, she was a horrific candidate. But very say Menendez (imcompetent) didn't pick this up earlier. Also why did NO one of stature on the DEM side want to run? I mean this WAS Kennedy's seat? Just a mess.......

        •  It baffles all of us. My take is as follows: (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Hellen
          1. Coakley ran a bad campaign, no question.
          1. Angry/anti-incumbent sentiment was big, and even though Coakley was not an incumbent, she represented the Democratic incumbents.
          1. Massachusetts has never elected a woman governor or senator.  I cannot put my finger on it, but there is a certain sexism in (of all places!) "liberal" MA.

          I think it was a combination of all three.

          As to why no better candidate, this points to a major failure of the MA Dem Party as well as the National party.  Everyone knew for over a year that Kennedy was dying and the best we could muster was Coakley and Capuano (I don't think there were any other serious candidates in the Dem primary)!  I mean, these guys are OK, but they are not anywhere near the stature of Ted Kennedy.  FWIW I voted for Capuano in the primary and for Coakley in special election.  I think Capuano could have beaten Brown for two reasons: not a woman and I am sure his campaign would have been feisty from beginning to end. I still don't know if anger element might have still handed election to Brown.

          I am very curious as to what will happen with Brown.  Either he will be a puppet of Mitch McConnell, in which case his re-election is very much in doubt, or he will be an independent (as he promised)  and make a lot of GOP enemies.  I hope I was wrong and he will be a great senator for my state, but I will not hold my breath.

          Then they came for me - and by that time there was nobody left to speak up.

          by DefendOurConstitution on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 10:25:34 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  The GOP lies about everything (3+ / 0-)

      and turns every positive into a negative.

      Take someone's biggest strength, and turn it into their biggest weakness.  This is classic GOP.

      climate.gov---POTUS' New Science-Based Climate Change Agency

      by GN1927 on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 08:50:32 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Yes, there's great doubt because (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Philpm, Mistral Wind

      the Republicans have been running around claiming it created NO jobs.

      I'm a dyslexic agnostic insomniac. I lie awake at night wondering if there's a dog.

      by rennert on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 08:53:44 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  There talking points of stimulus have been full (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Philpm, Hellen

        of holes. I was disappointed to see how weak we were in pushing back on them.
        The whole concept of $400,000 per job created 1) negates their talking point that no jobs were created 2) discounts the value of the end product. This would be like taking the operating expenses of a company and dividing it by number of workers and saying that's the cost per job and not taking the end product value into account. But I guess if you can't sell a product for profit it has no value to a rethug.

        Their position that the bank bailouts saved jobs. So I guess it's ok to consider jobs saved when pumping money into the financial sector but not in the public sector.

        we need to hammer them over the head with their own inconsistencies and flawed logic.

  •  I expect this to be all over all the network (15+ / 0-)

    news outlets.

    Because I am optimistic to the point of institutional commital.

    "BUSINESS?!? Mankind was my business! Their common welfare was my business!" - Jacob Marley

    by Gentle Giant on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 08:46:07 AM PST

  •  This isn't hypocrisy (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    WillR, skymutt

    Opposing the stimulus and taking the position that "if there is going to be a stimulus (despite my opposition) I'd better get funds for my district" from it are perfectly congruent positions.

    All "stimulus" funds will create "jobs" in the short term, better make sure you're included in that effort. Of course, in the long term those jobs are going to go in reverse when the stimulus is paid back since we borrowed it...

    (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
    Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

    by Sparhawk on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 08:46:18 AM PST

    •  It is hypocrisy when (14+ / 0-)

      the same people clamoring for the money because they believe it will "create jobs" are also going around claiming the stimulus packages created NO jobs and is, in fact, a job killer.

      I wouldn't have a problem with this if the Republicans were simply opposed to  the stimulus for their own reasons while admitting that it also creates jobs in the short term. But that's NOT what they're doing. They're claiming it creates NO jobs. That's blatantly false. And to say so while also clamoring for it because they believe it will create jobs in their district IS hypocritical.

      I'm a dyslexic agnostic insomniac. I lie awake at night wondering if there's a dog.

      by rennert on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 08:50:28 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Did anyone claim that it would create NO jobs? (0+ / 0-)

        I don't recall hearing many (or maybe any) claims that increasing the debt to fund the stimulus would create NO "jobs" (additional hours of paid labor over the lifetime of the stimulus package funding). It's pretty obvious that's not the case - if nothing else, just administering the distribution of the funds takes some effort which results in additional paid labor.  

        Also, I don't recall that "Republicans" (which is a very big group) consistently made such a claim as a group.

        Now I'm not saying NO Republican said this (any more than I would deny that some self identified Progressives called for the assassination of Bush - yet I would not claim that "Progressives called for the assassination of Bush"). But, I'd be interested in cites, with context, that shows a significant number of influential Republicans made such a claim.

        Most of the concerns I recall hearing were along the lines of (without judging each one):

        • Jobs being created were short term jobs so the impact would be temporary.

        • It was impossible to count "jobs saved", so such claims were duplicitous.
        • Projections about the number of jobs created were unrealistic and not supported.
        • The cost (increased debt) per job created was too high and/or could have been better spent on other things.
        • The impact of the additional debt taken on to create short term jobs would depress the economy enough to, over the mid/long term, ultimately increase unemployment and/or the decrease the effective wages of workers.

        Even if a Senator believes that the stimulus will create only short term jobs and will actually cause greater harm than benefit in the long term, it would be stupid and irresponsible of them to fail to seek stimulus funds for their state. Their constituents are going to have to pay for the program  - they have no choice on that. Their constituents might as well get whatever benefit they can from it (a new short term job for a project they hadn't planned on doing and/or Federal instead of local funds to build a project that would have been built soon anyway).

        Note that the stimulus funds were (supposed to) be fixed -- if state A didn't spend them, state B would. So failing to compete for the funds wouldn't necessarily even help the country as a whole. Maybe a project in state A, although not worthy of stimulus funds, is actually a better use of the funds than even less worthy projects in state B.

        A representative failing to seek stimulus funds, regardless of their stance on the wisdom of the stimulus, would make less sense than someone refusing Social Security benefits, even though they had paid into SS all their working life, just because they believed that participation in Social Security should be optional.

    •  If a stimulus is done right ... (7+ / 0-)

      ...this "reversal" need not occur since the idea is that the "multiplier effect" would generate additional private investment, hence jobs, that would not otherwise be created. If there are enough new jobs, then more tax revenue to pay off the borrowed money that funded the stimulus.

      Don't tell me what you believe. Tell me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

      by Meteor Blades on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 08:52:41 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  And if Democrats had any message, it'd be (6+ / 0-)

        something like "Stimulate one job that will produce three."

      •  Re (0+ / 0-)

        I don't really understand this.

        The multiplier effect supposedly says that adding $1 into the economy results in $1+x% in economic gain, right?

        So, removing a dollar from the economy should result in $1-x%-interest. That's the price you pay when you pay back the stimulus money (the debt that you ran up).

        generate additional private investment, hence jobs, that would not otherwise be created.

        These jobs have to do something productive in the private sector in order for this scheme to work and be long-term supportable and productive without government deficit spending. WPA-type jobs don't count for this, nor do ancillary stuff like putting a McDonalds near a stimulus site, nor does unemployment extensions, nor does COBRA assistance, etc. While all these things have value and are necessary, they just dig us into the hole more financially.

        What private sector long-term supportable jobs are we creating here? I just don't see it.

        If there are enough new jobs, then more tax revenue to pay off the borrowed money that funded the stimulus.

        Again, you can't pay taxes with WPA money.

        (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
        Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

        by Sparhawk on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 08:59:48 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  So, when government money was invested ... (5+ / 0-)

          ...in and created jobs to create, say, the Hoover Dam and Tennessee Valley Authority to generate electricity, or to stop soil erosion, no additional long-term jobs were created by these projects? As in jobs that still exist today?

          Don't tell me what you believe. Tell me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

          by Meteor Blades on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 09:09:29 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Which is why a bunch of the stimulus spending on (0+ / 0-)

            things that are necessary (and have helped me weather long term unemployment) like COBRA subsidies and extension of unemployment benefits are valuable.  However, there are questions about how we will pay off the debt incurred over the longer haul because that spending is not directly creating private sector jobs that will generate govt revenue (taxes) down the road.

            And though they are helping people (like me) get over the hump, and in my case helping me get a graduate degree, they are much more difficult to quantify from an economic value standpoint and not as powerful from a political standpoint.

            That is why I advocated a very large ($500B for a national high speed rail project, $250B for a national water and wasterwater project) infrastructure investment a year ago when the stim package was being debated.

            Something along those lines would have been both economically and politically powerful.

            No quarter. No surrender.

            by hegemony57 on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 09:23:15 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Yep. Both the high speed rail project ... (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              hegemony57

              ...a "moonshot" stimulus, if you will, and the water and wastewater project are good ideas. Sadly, unless the President gets a new injection of "political capital" in 2010 (extremely unlikely) or 2012 (anybody's guess), such projects are off the menu.

              Don't tell me what you believe. Tell me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

              by Meteor Blades on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 10:13:09 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

          •  Re (0+ / 0-)

            ...in and created jobs to create, say, the Hoover Dam and Tennessee Valley Authority to generate electricity, or to stop soil erosion, no additional long-term jobs were created by these projects? As in jobs that still exist today?

            Sorry, MB, was at work on break, couldn't respond right away.

            Re the Hoover Dam, net jobs producing electricity were probably lost by that project instead of gained. Why? Because instead of several hundred smaller, more labor-intensive, and less efficient power plants we created a giant one that requires comparatively little maintenance.

            So, less jobs were created. The job creation aspect is that we get more electricity cheaper, which frees up more of our economy to do other non-electricity-producing activities.

            Our entire society is built around jobs-eliminating automation. Why is everyone here (including me) so gung-ho about single-payer? It's so we can fire a million or so useless health insurance employees and replace them with a giant government computer. And so it goes.

            If we want to discuss solutions to the problem of equitably distributing the gains from automation (via welfare or some other system), that's certainly a conversation we can have.

            But jobs-for-jobs-sake is an economic loser to me. What is important about a job is what it produces of value, not whether someone is paid to do it.

            (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
            Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

            by Sparhawk on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 09:06:13 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  You're getting hung up on productive activity (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Brooke In Seattle

          When the people employed in these jobs earn wages, they pump those wages into the economy by consuming goods, goods that need to be produced. That spurs the productive private sector economy, opening up new job opportunities that will theoretically grow and become available for people to transition into when the projects are completed. If you have no faith in this, all you really see in our future is doom as there would be no way to revive the economy.

        •  A few points of disagreement (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Meteor Blades

          Overall, I think one big issue with the stimulus pack was that it was spread too thin... setting aside the Keynesian argument that it should have been bigger -- even the size it was, it tried to be everything to everyone.

          There are two areas of infrastructure that I DO very much will lead directly to private sector jobs.

          First - the broadband expansion... Compared to the overall pack, it was paltry - but it was still a good 4-5 billion.  People forget that we're still in the infancy (or at absolute most early adolescence) of the internet age.   The industrial revolution didn't follow right behind the guys driving railroad spikes, but the transcontinental railroad and extensions off of it very much was a foundational part of it.  

          I don't think the private sector has quite yet figured out exactly where the internet fits into the grand scheme of things - fits and starts with things like Amazon, ebay, yahoo, and the like - but the private sector generally still treats the internet like some odd toy that looks like a lot of fun, but isn't quite sure how to best use it.

          Second - high speed rail expansion.  Set aside whatever jobs may come from laying track and building locomotives (and right now, such locomotives are likely built abroad anyway).  Both the railroad and the national highway system fundamentally changed virtually all brick and mortar businesses... suburban office parks aren't possible without a highway sytem (and mass transit).  

          What high speed rail has a real chance to do is make it possible for many of the smaller cities -- locally here in the Great Lakes region, I'm thinking places like South Bend, Rockford, Peoria, etc that are really, really struggling -- to get back in the game.   Married with things local government can do to attract business -- a highspeed rail network can make it feasible for me to live in Chicago or Peoria but work in either.   I couldn't even consider that under our current transportation system.

          I guess everyone's got their own blog now.

          by zonk on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 09:47:01 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Private sector "gets" the Internet. (0+ / 0-)

            I don't think the private sector has quite yet figured out exactly where the internet fits into the grand scheme of things - fits and starts with things like Amazon, ebay, yahoo, and the like - but the private sector generally still treats the internet like some odd toy that looks like a lot of fun, but isn't quite sure how to best use it.

            I don't agree with this at all. Indeed, I believe the private sector groks the Internet much better than the public sector. Most business of any size utilizes the Internet extensively and makes their goods/services available, both to consumers and businesses (B2B), through it -- they are way ahead of the public sector here. Indeed, the vast majority of the innovation I've seen in the Internet since the early nineties comes from the private sector, the public sector jumps aboard a bit later.

            Obviously, the private sector doesn't have much motivation to deploy truly high speed broadband to places with few customers who are willing to pay for it. This leaves some individuals and very small businesses with limited access especially in rural and poor areas. This isn't a problem for companies of any substantial size -- you can get a T3 line almost anywhere in the country that has any such sized business (rule of thumb, if you can't get a T3 line, you probably can't get enough additional power for your new office building either).

        •  Your demands are too great. (0+ / 0-)

          The scheme was never meant to be long-term supportable.  It was meant to arrest an economic freefall set off by the financial meltdown.  Recessions are characterized by lower wages, lower profit margins and lower interest rates;  this makes them the perfect opportunity for government spending.  

          The multiplier effect states that placing $X into the economy has an impact greater than $X.  

          The US government expects revenues of 15% of GDP this year.  15% is a reasonable guess as to the bite of states and localities.  

          So, let's say that the government releases $1.00 into the economy.  $0.30 get taxed back, $0.70 gets spent.  Of this $0.70 that gets spent, $0.21 gets taxed and $0.49 gets spent.  $1 + 0.70 + 0.49 + ... is a geometric series that evaluates to 1 / (1-0.7), approximately 3.33  The governmental clawback is 0.30 + 0.09 + 0.0027 + ... , which evaluates to 1/(1-0.3) - 1, or about 0.45 cents comes back to the government.

          Your calculations omit public goods, the projects that private enterprise uses without directly paying for them.  For example, a rail bottleneck east of Chicago will be resolved with stimulus money.  

          2009: Year of the Donkey. Let's not screw it up.

          by Yamaneko2 on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 12:06:13 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  Several mathematical quibbles (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Siri
      1. You are paying the debt back with inflated dollars. If you can borrow at less than inflation, like the Federal government, do so.
      1. Those borrowed dollars would otherwise remain on the sidelines. This is not the usual situation where government borrowing reduces capital available for other investment, because when you're up against the zero bound investment is not taking place.

      In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice; but in practice, there always is a difference. - Yogi Berra

      by blue aardvark on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 09:03:04 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Re (0+ / 0-)

        You are paying the debt back with inflated dollars. If you can borrow at less than inflation, like the Federal government, do so.

        So in other words, quasi-theft from our lenders in which we borrow from them and then don't give fair value back in return.

        Those borrowed dollars would otherwise remain on the sidelines. This is not the usual situation where government borrowing reduces capital available for other investment, because when you're up against the zero bound investment is not taking place.

        Are there viable large-scale investments that can be made in the US these days that will pay back in inflation-adjusted terms? I would argue that there is zero investment because there are zero investments that make any kind of sense in our current situation, or investments that can be made are far better off being done elsewhere.

        (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
        Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

        by Sparhawk on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 09:06:47 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Re (0+ / 0-)

          Quasi-theft is only true if they are compelled to lend. During some financial crisis the interest rate on 3-month treasuries goes to zero; people are willing to accept negative interest (counting the transaction fees) in order to lend money to the US government.

          If long-term investments in the United States are not economically viable, then having the government tax / borrow and make those investments, contrary to capitalism, is the best thing that could possibly happen for the citizens of the United States.

          In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice; but in practice, there always is a difference. - Yogi Berra

          by blue aardvark on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 09:30:31 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  This is the kind of thing (9+ / 0-)

    that should top the evening news but will it? Probably not. But it certainly should. You rarely see such blatant hypocrisy served up to the media on a silver platter like this.

    I'm a dyslexic agnostic insomniac. I lie awake at night wondering if there's a dog.

    by rennert on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 08:46:41 AM PST

    •  Why is it hypocrisy? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      eXtina

      "Handing free money away is bad, but as long as you're doing it I might as well get some too" is not a hypocritical position at all.

      (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
      Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

      by Sparhawk on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 08:48:06 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I don't think hypocrisy means what you think (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        GN1927, Philpm, Taxmancometh, Mistral Wind

        it means . . .

      •  You think it's not hypocritical (7+ / 0-)

        for the Republicans to claim the stimulus creates no jobs while also clamoring for it because it will create jobs in their district?

        I'm a dyslexic agnostic insomniac. I lie awake at night wondering if there's a dog.

        by rennert on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 08:51:44 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Bingo. (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Philpm, island in alabama, Siri

          The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest excercises in moral philosophy... the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.

          by lcbo on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 09:00:24 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  It may be (0+ / 0-)

          But it's a lot less hypocritical than this story implies they are being. Like I said, they can just reply with "the government is handing out free money, I told them not to, but what do they expect? Me to simply have this money forcibly taken from my district with nothing to show for it?"

          (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
          Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

          by Sparhawk on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 09:01:56 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  You're conflating two separate points (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Brooke In Seattle, sabishi

            I don't care if they say "I was against the stimulus but as long as it's in effect I want jobs for my district too". That's fine. I have no problem with that, as long as they say it plainly and clearly and people can see what the game is.

            The point is that Republicans are going around claiming the stimulus CREATED NO JOBS. None at all. And they have a large percentage of the American public believing that. I want all these Republican lawmakers who wrote these letters to have to stand in front of a camera and admit that the stimulus is creating jobs. That's all. Whether they are for it or against it... it is creating jobs. That should be an easy thing for them to say because they've already admitted it in these letters.

            All I want is for the media to shine a light on it.

            I'm a dyslexic agnostic insomniac. I lie awake at night wondering if there's a dog.

            by rennert on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 09:33:03 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  The hypocrisy (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Philpm

        is in claiming that no one benefits when they are given free money.

        In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice; but in practice, there always is a difference. - Yogi Berra

        by blue aardvark on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 09:04:23 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  The government? The Obama administration? ... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Philpm, blue aardvark

    ...One would think these guys would be drummed out of the party for conceding such heresy.

    Don't tell me what you believe. Tell me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

    by Meteor Blades on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 08:47:41 AM PST

  •  If we have to depend on the Wash Times (12+ / 0-)

    If we're leaving it to the Washington Times to point out stimulus positives and Republican hypocrisy, WHERE'S OUR "LIBERAL MEDIA" AND WHERE IS ROBERT GIBBS??????????

  •  Geez, I can't wait (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    eeff, Brooke In Seattle, MariaWr

    until Bond is gone and we in Missouri can have a Democrat and a half in the Senate when Robin Carnahan wins the election for his seat.

    There ain't no sanity clause.

    by Philpm on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 08:48:08 AM PST

  •  What's next? Will they admit they have nothing on (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    eeff, GN1927, Philpm, MariaWr, Mistral Wind

    HCR (other than tax cuts and "die quickly")?

    Then they came for me - and by that time there was nobody left to speak up.

    by DefendOurConstitution on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 08:48:35 AM PST

  •  Shaking my head (9+ / 0-)

    Thanks for reporting on this.  The GOP has been getting such a pass, but I don't think that an opposition has acted with this degree of bad faith in modern memory.  Just outrageous.

    climate.gov---POTUS' New Science-Based Climate Change Agency

    by GN1927 on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 08:49:10 AM PST

  •  The clueless Dems won't use this (4+ / 0-)

    Its pretty sad watching the "message" operation of the White House and the Congressional dems.

    There is a path to November that at least minimizes the losses that is bvious and there to follow. But, I am not seeing them aggressively do it.

  •  This is what they do (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Philpm, jck, Siri

    This what the Republicans do now, they lie and hide the truth.  

    http://randomthoughtstd.blogspot.com/

  •  I hate the MSM! (9+ / 0-)

    If you need anymore proof that the MSM is complicit in GOP distortion and distraction, look no further than this. They will not cover this and as usual the public will go on believing every lie the GOP tells (and the Dems refuse to refute). If you're interested in sending this as a news tip here's a media contact list:

    http://www.fair.org/...

    •  Right on! (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Brooke In Seattle, docrocktex

      I cursed several times last night when a few pundits were discussing the underwear bomber. The narrative was that the White House is in political hot water because they read him his rights and the GOP was doing an effective job jabbing the White House on this issue. I was like F#%@ing that's not what should be the topic of discussion. The media should point out the truth, not the perception that is fogged by distortions on the right. The truth is that it's American Law plain and simple that anyone caught on American soil is processed through out civilian justice system. You don't f#^@ing feed a perception that has no validity. You call it out if your a news person.

      •  The problem is none of these people (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Brooke In Seattle

        are "news people", they're all just shills for the GOP and/or big corporations (which I guess is pretty much the same thing). Hardly any of them have real journalism degrees and it shows. They know nothing about the issues and are there merely to stir up controversy. I wish they'd all disappear.

  •  Non-attack attack ads (6+ / 0-)

    Just run ads touting the benefits of the stimulus, and quote these letters. Don't say a word against the Goposaurs - just claim this shows bipartisan agreement that the stimulus was effective in fighting unemployment.

    Either the GOP rolls over and lets the public accept the meme that the stimulus worked, or they explain which time they were lying.

    In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice; but in practice, there always is a difference. - Yogi Berra

    by blue aardvark on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 08:56:09 AM PST

  •  Republicans lie. Water is wet. (0+ / 0-)

    There are still a number of sheep/independents and democrats who still elected Scott Brown either directly or by default by staying home.

    Until we can admit that we like the filibuster and get over it and strive for something better I don't see much hope.

    Doesn't mean we shouldn't keep trying of course.

    The United States Senate has lost its political legitmacy and should be abolished.

    by TKLTKL94 on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 08:56:21 AM PST

  •  Once again, proof positive that nothing (4+ / 0-)

    that comes out of a republican mouth can be trusted, relied on or proven to be true.  These lame ass people need to be exposed daily for their ignorance and partisan politics.

    Republicans: Proud graduates of the Royal School of Self-Interest.

    by winter outhouse on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 08:56:26 AM PST

  •  Further proof that they just don't give a damn (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Philpm, Mistral Wind

    about anything than power. For them, destroying the middle class is a small price to pay.

    •  They see it as a benefit (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jck

      For them, destroying the middle class is a small price to pay.

      "We have here a forecast of the long history of American Politics, the mobilization of lower-class energy by upper-class politicians, for their own purposes"

      by island in alabama on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 09:36:01 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  and you just know (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Philpm, Mistral Wind, Siri
    that they would endlessly laud themselves for all their awesome job creation without once mentioning the stimulus.

    People are upset Obama hasn't solved all the problems yet. C'mon, he's only been in office one year...the man went to Harvard, not Hogwarts. - Wanda Sykes

    by Cedwyn on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 08:57:22 AM PST

  •  GOPypocrites! nt (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Philpm

    Congress-Dems, quit making this be true! "A journey of a 1,000 miles begins with a single capitulation." Wyatt Cenac on The Daily Show, 30 Sep 2009

    by planmeister on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 08:57:39 AM PST

  •  Dems & White House should be all over this. (7+ / 0-)

    Let's see if the Democrats and the White House can jump on this article and beat it like a drum.  I loved it when President Obama told the Republicans to their faces that it was interesting that many of them who criticized the recovery package had no problems going to ribbon cuttings for projects funded by the stimulus.

    I mean why isn't there a list of these folks in congress posted on the DNC website. Inquiring minds would like to know.

    "Now is not a time for partisanship, it's a time for citizenship." President Barack Obama (01/07/10)

    by Ladyhawk on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 08:58:01 AM PST

  •  GOP....Being obnoxious and dense......just (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Philpm

    to be obnoxious and dense.

  •  The bully pulpit (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Philpm

    is the only way to get information like this out. Professor Obama vs the GOP a while back played in the mass media as a draw. If Obama wants to get things accomplished he's going to have to fight.

    I'm hoping their plan is "keep the powder dry" and come out guns blazing but I fear bipartisanship may be his biggest priority and he'll end up looking like a kid who always gives his lunch money up.

    If you didn't like the news today, go out and make some of your own.

    by jgnyc on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 09:00:45 AM PST

  •  Don't mistake pork for progress (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Rich in PA

    Of course it created jobs, there is no way you can spend over $700 billion and not create a few jobs along the way. A couple of jobs and individual lawmakers touting pork projects doesn't mean it was a successful bill

    •  I agree with you (0+ / 0-)

      This was an awful lot of money for not a lot of jobs, even by the most boosterish count.  Maybe the actual stuff that was built, and services that were performed, justifies the inefficiency as a jobs program.  But maybe not.

      Enrich your life with adverbs!

      by Rich in PA on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 09:19:16 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Keep in mind, (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Brooke In Seattle

        about half the stimulus was a direct bribe to conservatives, who ended up not supporting it anyway, in the form of non-stimulative tax cuts.  If you look at the actual stimulus part of the package, the numbers look considerably better - only the ridiculous disfunction of our political system kept it from being better.

        Clearly, I need to find a witty sig line.

        by libdevil on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 09:39:47 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Joe Wilson and Andre Bauer (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Brooke In Seattle, Philpm, filby

    "We know their endeavor will provide jobs and investment in one of the poorer sections of the Congressional District," he (Joe Wilson) wrote to Mr. Vilsack in the Aug. 26, 2009, letter.

    Joe should coordinate with Andre (Marie Antoinette) Bauer on handouts to the poor.  Might cause a breeding problem.  And then, according to right-wing racists rants, the Democrats would have a larger constituency.

  •  There's a germ of a powerful progressive ad here (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Philpm

    Just show video, or voice over the texts of the letters - the public versus the private. Name names, make it clear just how hypocritical and smarmy these guys are. And ask whose interest they are fighting for.

    Do it, Dems!

    The system is broken - let's fix it. It's time for a new American Revolution

    by jpw on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 09:03:02 AM PST

  •  In Missour-ee we don't listen to Bond unless he's (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Philpm, James Robinson

    had a few cocktails and pounds on the podium.  

  •  Traitors to the Cause! Send them to Siberian (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Philpm, James Robinson

    Gulags at once!

    Nobody really knows how the markets will react; the right thing, always, is to pursue policies that look right on the substance. P.K.

    by gereiztkind on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 09:05:06 AM PST

  •  they also privately admit... (5+ / 0-)

    ...that if Obama were a Republican and doing exactly everything he's done, they'd be cheering for every bit of it, admitting he's the best president in years, and calling anyone who disputed it "socialists" and "unAmerican."

    You know it's true...

    "Glenn Beck ends up looking like a fat, stupid child. His face should be wearing a chef's hat on the side of a box of eclairs. " - Doug Stanhope

    by Front Toward Enemy on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 09:06:22 AM PST

    •  Utterly. It's about which "club" one's in. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Front Toward Enemy, Siri

      .
       Not about what's best for the country or what one of these pencil necks actually believe.  O.K., there are some True Believers:  McConnell in the "goodness" of unalloyed avarice, Bachmann in the "goodness" of Crazy.  

      .

      "I have to go now. I feel . . . sticky." Anthony Bourdain

      by BenGoshi on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 09:13:34 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Meh (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Rich in PA

    There's nothing wrong with this to a point.  It is basically a version of the philosophy I had about the Iraq War:  I vehemently opposed it before we invaded, but once we invaded, I wanted us to succeed.  Same thing with the stimulus:  These guys opposed it before it was passed, but once it was passed and the money was made available, they want to put that money to the best available use.  Of course, "best available use" is subjective and usually involves a project in one's own district... but that's politics.

  •  GOP lawmakers... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Philpm, Siri

    Privately admit Earth is round and sky is blue.

    To the WH: "It's your job to f*ck-up power; it's Fox's job to f*ck-up truth.' - Jon Stewart

    by RichM on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 09:07:33 AM PST

  •  Always cheers me up to see Obama gain a few pts (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Philpm

    in the daily trackng poll.  

    Even though I know minor fluctuations are well within the margin of error.   I just like to imagine that the cap between sane Americans and whacko Americans is comfortably wide.  Though Bush's RE-election made that premise hard to maintain with a straight face -- oh well.

    "The extinction of the human race will come from its inability to EMOTIONALLY comprehend the exponential function." -- Edward Teller

    by lgmcp on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 09:07:38 AM PST

  •  The financial gurus (0+ / 0-)

    want the government to fund the cost of building a a space ship that will take passengers to the moon.  It will be owned by private business.  Seats sell for 20 million each rider.

    The private business doesn't want the liability or the expense, just the profits.  This may be what the republicans want the money for. The republicans would fund it at our expense then let their friends make the profits.

    If the government had told them they wanted a percentage of everything the taxpayer paid for and gave to business, then we wouldn't have to worry about taxes.

  •  The Washington Times is still publishing, (0+ / 0-)

    and committing journalism?
    /faints.

    Life is good. Injustice? Not so much.

    by westyny on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 09:11:27 AM PST

  •  The Democrats continue (0+ / 0-)

    to let the Republicans get away with all this lying hypocrisy. Instead of trying to have useless meetings with these frauds Obama should flat out attack them and get things done without them.  

  •  Yes, we can "see it" (0+ / 0-)

    b'cuz goddesses know, President Obama alludes to it in his speeches with his 'photo-op and ribbon-cutting ceremony jokes' often enough. (Points finger and laughs)

    Shouldn't be too hard to compile a photo-documentary.

    "Show up. Pay attention. Tell the truth. And don't be attached to the results." -- Angeles Arrien

    by Sybil Liberty on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 09:12:52 AM PST

  •  The Wall Street Journal admitted similar (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    James Robinson, Siri

    last year.  So, two of the leading RW newspapers admit the stimulus has worked.

    "I'm not a member of an organized political party - I'm a Democrat." Will Rogers

    by newjeffct on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 09:15:52 AM PST

  •  What's up with the Wash. Times? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Rich in PA, James Robinson

    Is this a teabagger move to remove the less ideological? Aren't they supposed to CYA for the Repubs?

    There's a reason Democrats won massively the last two cycles, and it wasn't because people were desperate for "bipartisanship". --kos

    by Debby on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 09:16:41 AM PST

  •  Add Mark Sanford to your list (3+ / 0-)

    since he's apparently had a change of heart:

    If his trip to Washington last week to lobby for South Carolina's share
    of $4 billion in education money is meant to be a down payment on that promise, it's a wise one.

    Sanford famously fought to turn down $700 million in federal stimulus money earmarked for South Carolina last year....

  •  Wow, the Wash Times did some (0+ / 0-)

    reporting.
    Of course it created jobs. All you have to do is look at the "unemployment chart" that BWD had in his post yesterday. NOt only no job creation during the "roaring Bush years" but an acceleration of losses. There was no recovery then and there won't be unless we have more people employed.

  •  Talking Points for the Obama Administration. (0+ / 0-)

    These are just excellent demonstrations of hypocrisy...but who cares?

    Tea Bag voters themselves will welcome stimulus cash, and then they will strongly decry Obama's socialism.

    Axelrod, Gibbs, Emanuel, and Obama himself need to take a look in the mirror. They aren't taking credit for their best work. They aren't even asking for votes.

    They only call it class war when we fight back! ht: buhdydharma

    by ezdidit on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 09:24:34 AM PST

  •  I can't believe I just read (0+ / 0-)

    kudos to the Washington Times

    in a DK front page feature.  What's next, Red State praising an article from the People's World?  I'm so confused!  :)

  •  This is rich (0+ / 0-)

    Great piece.

    Just doesn't get any worse for the GOP. This will be good ammunition in the fall just to throw Republicans for a tizzy in the General Election. Hope we keep uncovering more letters like this.

    "Our sins don't define the whole picture of who we are" Edward M Kennedy

    by r2wildfire on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 09:29:03 AM PST

  •  Haven't you learned, Jed? (0+ / 0-)
    Republicans are the ones who are able to magically divine which federal expenditures are good for the economy (the ones in their districts). That's what makes them Republicans!

    "Does this matter? It matters to the extent that ideas matter, and in the long run they do." Brian Barry, Culture & Equality

    by Niky Ring on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 09:34:34 AM PST

  •  We need this type of data in an ad, promoting the (0+ / 0-)

    stimulas.  These assholes make me sick.

  •  great news...the new "Democratic" economy (0+ / 0-)

    businesses are on board...what is emerging is an economy like the 50's, where yes, the government spends money, and yes, it works.  the spending is paid for by fewer tax cuts for the wealthy and large corporations.  businesses, through reform legislation, act like american businesses should, not like the enemy of the middle class.  my company is on board.  politically, the GOP can try to lower taxes, but it's not going to work until the next bubble is over. what's the point of lowering taxes if this country is moving forward and it's being paid for...? lowering taxes for the sake of idealogy is irrational.  the tea baggers are so far out and crazy that it's nothing but a distraction.  they think it's the 1700's.  there were no corporations and lobbyists in the 1700's.  by "taking this country back", they are in effect giving it to the large corporations. they haven't even thought of that. it's a great time to be a progressive.  

  •  Those letters aren't private (0+ / 0-)

    A letter from a member of Congress to a federal department is not a private letter.  There must be a better way to describe it.

  •  I expect that Democrats (0+ / 0-)

    will fail to call them out on this in any meaningful way. After all, exposing the lies of your opponents is not the bipartisan thing to do. Besides, Republicans might get mad and accuse them of... something.

    And we can't have that.

    "A lie is not the other side of a story; it's just a lie."

    by happy camper on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 10:00:26 AM PST

  •  It is a job-killing piece of legislation (0+ / 0-)

    It might have a small impact in the short term, but the long term debt implications make any short-term effects essentially useless.

    Lilly-livered Republicans caving in for the dough is a great example for why Congress should never have been entrusted with this money in the first place. Taking a principled stand and then quietly scrambling for the cash shows that these people can be bought. We already know there are high-profile Democrats who can be bought, but they at least had the audacity to do it openly.

    Congress is made up of human beings, and since human beings are far from perfect, they shouldn't be trusted with too much power.

    Let's limit the Congress to its enumerated powers. Then we won't have problems like this.

  •  great catch Jed, HOPE that ABC & CNN & NBC & (0+ / 0-)

    CBS - and of course our own Keith and Rachel at MSNBC -  will take the ball and run with it by giving these FOIA documents and their hypocritical Congressional authors lots and lots of public airing

    [might as well also hope for some love from Stewart and Colbert...!]

    We will restore science to its rightful place....We will harness the sun and the winds and the soil .... All this we can do. And all this we will do.

    by puffmeister on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 10:15:31 AM PST

  •  Why the FUCK... (0+ / 0-)

    ... can't one line be added into these stimulus bills, saying that if their Representatives and Senators vote against them, their states can't have any of the money?

    You could pro-rate it. Got 2 Senators (one voting against) and 5 Representatives (4 voting against)? Fine. You can only get 2/7 of whatever your state's share should have been. Or, better yet, if anybody from your state votes against a stimulus bill, your state can't have any of that money at all. Period. Sorry, Charlie. Serves you and/or your ignorant fucking wingnut neighbors right for voting the asshats into office.

    It won't hurt those who voted against the asshats. They're being hurt anyway, and they're not going to be hurt any worse by getting the asshats voted out of office, are they?

    The underpants bomber had to do it that way. ACORN stole his codpiece.

    by SciMathGuy on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 10:18:34 AM PST

  •  Washington Times ?? (0+ / 0-)

    The only surprise is the source.
    I thought the Washington Times was a right-wing rag.
    What are they doing printing this?

    If "con" is the antonym of "pro," what is the antonym of "progress"?

    by Frank Palmer on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 11:03:32 AM PST

  •  The point is that the situation isn't worse (0+ / 0-)

    I think the challenge here is that, a year ago, the Obama administration faced conflicting goals: it had to convince Congress to help bail the United States out of a very serious economic crisis, and it also had to keep investors, employers, etc. calm enough not to provoke a worse implosion.

    So, the Obama administration people had to speak very carefully and could not admit how terrified out of their skulls that they really were.

    A year ago, the Obama administration people were NOT worried about unemployment rising to 10%. They were worried that we would have a full-fledged run on the banks, unemployment over 20%, and maybe the end of the United States as know it.

    Sign of this: a week or two ago, Geithner actually said, flat out, that a bank run had started in late 2008, and he pretty much admitted that he thought the Bush administration had been preparing to deal with the anarchy that would be caused by a collapse of the financial system.

    So, sure, the economy stinks, the budget deficit is terrifying, and unemployment is high. Hyperinflation could already be germinating. But, we can still get money out of our bank accounts, we can buy roughly the sorts of stuff with our money that we could buy a year ago, and we still have elections, schools, airports and all the other fruits of civilization.

    That means that the strategies Geithner, Bernanke, Obama, et al. pursued met their true goal, which was simply to buy us time. The financial Armageddon timebomb is still ticking, but now we have time to figure out how to disarm it, if only the Republicans would get out of No No No mode and start working with Democrats to figure out solutions to our problems.

  •  A boy can dream (0+ / 0-)

    I hope they name a tumor after the GOP. Not that the blue dogs are any better.

  •  2010 Election points for Democrats--spread them! (0+ / 0-)

    Regarding the anger with government poll, our Democratic message should be: ELECT MORE DEMOCRATS, THEN WE CAN GET THINGS DONE!

    Subpoints:
    Republicans block everything.
    They refuse to govern, but add obstacles.

    Don't be cowed by the anger; direct it toward positive action.

    Start now, with the Murtha election. Don't wait because the media will put it in everyone's mind that the Democrats are going to lose seats, and they'll follow that idea.

    You saw the poll from MA; use it and channel that anger!

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site