Liberal Spending Insanity
One year after the “stimulus” passed, we’re a little bit older and $787 billion deeper in debt* and the Democrats want another go-round. Since it didn’t work the first time and there are now fewer Americans employed than there were a year ago while the unemployment rate has climbed even higher than the president told us it would if we didn’t pass that legislation, Democrats want to spend even more of our money.
Didn’t California’s junior Senator tell us that the “stimulus” was all about creating jobs? Didn’t Obama promise us that unemployment wouldn’t top 8% (if his “recovery” act passed?
Seems the Democrats attitude is that if didn’t work the first time, the same thing is bound to work the second time.
Wasn’t it Albert Einstein who defined insanity as “doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results“?
Or maybe the Democratic plan is working. While private sector unemployment is down, “the federal workforce is at all-time high“: ”More than 2.1 million government workers will be on the federal payroll by the end of 2010.” And they’re earning more than their private sector counterparts.
So maybe Democrats just sound insane; they do have a sound strategy (from their political standpoint with all this spending): reward the special interests who favor their party.
*Okay to be fair, we’re not that far in debt yet as only about one-third of the stimulus has been spent. But, do you see any sign the Democrats will try to block the rest of those funds from being dispersed?
20 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
They’re holding onto the remaining two-thirds to spend just before the election, so that a sudden infusion of that much cash will create the illusion of economic growth, but like the initial third, it will quickly evaporate having done no long term good, and indeed, by putting it all on the charge card, will be doing the nation great harm.
Democrats’ strategy is to increase the number of people dependent on the federal government into a permanent majority. Look for an illegal alien amnesty/voter registration bill soon — it’s coming to a congress near you!
Comment by American Elephant — February 10, 2010 @ 11:31 pm - February 10, 2010
Government spending can only create *government* jobs. And in the process, it kills private sector jobs. (Jobs either destroyed outright, or “jobs never created” that would have been.)
Why is that? Because government spending must be financed. 3 basic ways to choose from.
- Taxation: Takes away people’s money to spend on sustainable private sector jobs. (jobs which are economically and financially sustainable, because they do things that people actually want)
- Borrowing: Takes away banks’ and therefore businesses’ money to spend on sustainable private sector jobs.
- Money printing: Takes away the purchasing power of people’s and businesses’ savings, thus their ability to spend on sustainable private sector jobs.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — February 10, 2010 @ 11:39 pm - February 10, 2010
WHEN IS SOMEONE GOING TO CALL THESE PEOPLE OUT??? How long are we going to play this game?? They are stealing from us, and enough with this so called health care bill. I think the republicans need to look into a camera and say what these people are doing to us and ask for our help to stand with them to stop this madness. It is obvious the contempt they have for us, they are attacking us financially and physically how much longer is this going to go on???
Comment by jann — February 11, 2010 @ 12:21 am - February 11, 2010
Saving jobs = hiring more public service union members.
That’s the real agenda behind the Democratic leadership’s “stimulus program”…and it’s aligned with the “bring home the pork” agenda of EVERY member of the House and Senate. Could there ever be a more conflicted set of interests?
But as long as the electorate still maintains “…throw the bums out, except mine”, nothing will change.
Comment by Ted B. (Charging Rhino) — February 11, 2010 @ 12:28 am - February 11, 2010
American Elephant nails it twice:
This is clearly their thinking. But even if they mail direct payments to people along with a bumper sticker that says “I (heart) the Way Obama Stimulates Me” the average person will take the money and vote the bums out.
The Won is going to flood the zone next October with fabulous lies of jobs saved, Munchausen tales of infrastructure mended and improved, and an Alinsky targeting of the enemy within.
The problem is, America has taken the measure of the man and he turns out to be not a President, but he plays one on TV. The continuing campaign with teleprompters at the ready has tanked in the ratings. He can’t buy his way out.
American Elephant is correct that Obama can make the astounding amount of money which is the two-thirds of the stimulus package evaporate. If he spent it wisely tomorrow he could not speed up the recovery enough to save his bacon in November. There is no earthly reason to believe that the corruptocrats have any concept of how to stimulate recovery.
I have shied away from believing that the corruptocrats are actually following a Cloward and Piven strategy. I have preferred the small comfort of thinking they are just nuts and socialist vain. But I am not so sure anymore. Maybe the corruptocrats will loot the system in one final act of scorched earth defiance. If they can’t have it their way, then they will sow the fields with salt and force capitalism to crumble.
(I use the term corruptocrats, because I hold out hope that the few remaining Democrats will try to save their party.)
Comment by heliotrope — February 11, 2010 @ 8:57 am - February 11, 2010
Here’s a Rachel Maddow clip for you guys to watch. I wonder if anyone here has the balls?
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/2/10/835738/-Late-Afternoon-Early-Evening-Open-Thread
If you don’t want to take the time, the video shows a bunch of Republicans trashing the stimulus on the floor of the Congress and in interviews, and then shows those same Republicans praising the stimulus and taking photo ops with their constituents pretending like they’re the ones handing out the checks. She names about 30 Republicans, including much of the leadership.
That’s pretty brazen, even for modern American politics, even for the shameless Republican party. How will you people dismiss this? How can you pretend like voting against stimulus money, but then making sure to attend all of the parties where they’re handing out the stimulus money, is even remotely okay?
Comment by Levi — February 11, 2010 @ 9:39 am - February 11, 2010
Nice attempt to change the subject Levi.
Doesn’t change that the Stimulus did nada, but they want to do it again.
Comment by The_Livewire — February 11, 2010 @ 9:47 am - February 11, 2010
Nice attempt to change the subject Levi.
Doesn’t change that the Stimulus did nada, but they want to do it again.
Watch the video. According to the Republicans – the stimulus is creating jobs.
Comment by Levi — February 11, 2010 @ 9:54 am - February 11, 2010
Levi,
The TEA party is taking notice of all professional politicians.
Could she “name” any Democrats? I carry no brief for duplicitous professional politicians of either party. However, “naming” duplicitous Republicans is a one-sided political game. If she has the goods on these Republicans, unlike the corruptocrats and Murtha, we will hold the Republicans to account. But we will hold all the corruptocrats to account for robbing the pockets of our posterity.
Comment by heliotrope — February 11, 2010 @ 10:30 am - February 11, 2010
Here’s this from the Corner, to allow Levi and Tano to get caught up on their talking points.
Comment by The_Livewire — February 11, 2010 @ 11:19 am - February 11, 2010
This is almost off-topic, but Einstein’s quote reminded me that when you set up a quantum-mechanics experiment, often you are doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
(Nonetheless, government is too big for it to behave in a quantum-mechanics fashion.)
Comment by lil' math geek — February 11, 2010 @ 12:12 pm - February 11, 2010
And we should also remember Maddow’s new greatest hit; people who don’t unquestioningly embrace the “settled science” of anthropogenic global warming are unpatriotic.
Lesbian Girl used to say that questioning anyone’s patriotism was wrong. But now that Lesbian Girl has has to defend her Barack Obama, she’s willing to beclown herself in every respect.
I think this is a great example to the world of how gays and lesbians like Maddow, who use their sexual orientation to explain why they have to lie, cheat, and steal for their Barack Obama, are a bad, BAD thing for the gay community.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — February 11, 2010 @ 2:59 pm - February 11, 2010
The public school district, where I live, is spending $350,000 of porkulus cash on iPods for parents. I guess it’s more important to stimulate Steve Jobs’ wallet rather than educating students.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — February 11, 2010 @ 5:07 pm - February 11, 2010
If Republicans are praising purchasing I-Pods, or funneling money to ACORN or other nutty groups I’m for dumping them along with with every liberal in 2010.
RUBIO in 2010
ROUT THE LIBERALS IN 2010
Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — February 11, 2010 @ 5:24 pm - February 11, 2010
Today I received a mailer from my representative (Corrinne delivers!) telling me how to receive the Earned Income Tax Credit – “Even if [I] don’t owe any taxes”
Waste of a stamp. Here’s hoping this year finds her an opponent, and then unemployed!
Comment by Jax Dancer — February 11, 2010 @ 7:08 pm - February 11, 2010
TGC: the iPod story was updated… the program was suspended. The money was actually coming from a program for “disabled” students (news article contained a correction).
It looks like overtime at the Chinese iPod factory won’t be needed (at least for now).
(Actually, it’s only money in the way that my VISA card is money. We don’t have any actual money to spend.)
Woolcock still said it was a good idea and she plans to get those disabled students iPods next year.
I’ll be darned if I can find the passage in the Constitution that gives gummint he authority to take money from my pocket to pass out iPods.
Comment by SoCalRobert — February 11, 2010 @ 8:27 pm - February 11, 2010
I don’t know about praising the purchase of iPods, but as much as it’s possible to love an inanimate material object, I do love mine! All my music, podcasts, photos, etc. makes the long commute to and fro work go smoother. Best invention in years IMO. It’s one of the very few items I will replace right away when it dies. Of course, I’m still waiting for the damn flying car we were promised…
Comment by John — February 12, 2010 @ 7:58 am - February 12, 2010
Could she “name” any Democrats? I carry no brief for duplicitous professional politicians of either party. However, “naming” duplicitous Republicans is a one-sided political game. If she has the goods on these Republicans, unlike the corruptocrats and Murtha, we will hold the Republicans to account. But we will hold all the corruptocrats to account for robbing the pockets of our posterity.
Why would she need to name Democrats? Democrats voted for the stimulus bill – it kinda makes sense that they’d get to take credit for the increased spending back home. But a Republican that voted against the bill goes and takes credit for it with his constituents? That’s just a new low in shamelessness.
And how will you hold these Republicans accountable for this? Will you start calling them socialists that are destroying America? That’s the reaction I’d expect if any among you had any sense of consistency, but I don’t think that will happen. My guess is you’ll vote for them anyway and continue to think the way they would like you to think – but go ahead and prove me wrong if you can.
Comment by Levi — February 12, 2010 @ 9:43 am - February 12, 2010
And how will you hold these Republicans accountable for this? Will you start calling them socialists that are destroying America?
Two words: Dede Scozzafava.
And what’s funny? You and your leftist ilk, including Lesbian Girl, were whining about how that meant Republicans and conservatives were purging “moderates”, how awful that was, and how the “enlightened” thing to do would be to accomodate people who “disagree” on stimulus spending.
There’s the game for the Alinsky hypocrites like you and Maddow, Levi; you criticize Republicans and conservatives regardless of what they do. It has nothing to do with behavior or standards; it’s merely pure political bigotry and opportunism. Before, it was bad to criticize other Republicans over stimulus spending. Now it’s good. You simply are flip-flopping, contradicting yourself and outright lying in your desperate attempt to attack Republicans.
Conservatives are more than happy to toss out bums regardless of their party affiliation. Indeed, Sarah Palin herself made her name by doing exactly that.
Palin finished a strong second in the 2002 primary for lieutenant governor and was being groomed by the party for higher office when she clashed with state Republican Party chairman Randy Ruederich. They both had seats on the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, appointed by Gov. Frank Murkowski, the Republican she would later depose. She accused Ruederich of misusing the job for political chicanery and eventually resigned in frustration. Ruederich was forced to resign the job as well, though he remains head of the state party.
Palin later took on Murkowski’s attorney general in a conflict-of-interest scandal that forced his resignation.
In 2006, she knocked off Murkowski and then Democratic former Gov. Tony Knowles in a campaign that drew on grass-roots support, relying on neighbors and friends for staff rather than the party and veterans of big-time campaigns.
But what about you and Lesbian Girl, Levi? You’ve openly stated that you don’t care if Obama lies, you don’t care what Obama does, you don’t care about anything other than attacking Republicans and praising Obama Party members. THAT is what heliotrope is pointing out about you and Lesbian Girl; your “principles” have nothing to do with actual principles that would be applied regardless of political affiliation, and are nothing more than rationalizations for blind party devotion regardless of what happens.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — February 12, 2010 @ 12:04 pm - February 12, 2010
Interestingly enough, Instapundit is getting attacked along the same lines — which leads me to believe that Levi, like Lesbian Girl, is nothing more than a talking points repeater for Barack Obama.
Of course, Insty managed to refute that one quite nicely, with the terse rejoinder, “CNN was a lot more interested in having me on back when I was criticizing Republicans for spending”.
Again, though, it’s just the Alinsky game. Lesbian Girl and Levi are trying to hold others to principles when they themselves have none. When you demonstrate that both of them are amoral puppets who criticize Republicans regardless of what they do, it becomes a lot easier to recognize that they are pimples on society who, having decided to show no quarter themselves, should have no quarter shown or given to them.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — February 12, 2010 @ 12:39 pm - February 12, 2010