GayPatriot

Comments

RSS feed for comments on this post.

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: http://www.gaypatriot.net/2009/12/05/nancy-pelosi-blames-bush-for-stimulus-failure/trackback/

  1. And we must also remember that the eight years of G.W. Bush were preceded by 12 years of Reagan and Bush (41) which were preceded by Hoover and Harding and Taft. Just when is Obama going to call in Jimmy Carter and get this thing back on track? Where is Burt Lance when we most need him?

    Comment by heliotrope — December 5, 2009 @ 2:53 pm - December 5, 2009

  2. For such a stupid man, GWB has an amazing ability to pull the strings – even from Dallas!

    I think the oh-so noble, honest, smart, articulate, and erudite libs are just pissed off that an ignoramus like GWB has been having his way with them for years. How does he do it?

    #1: helio – As far as his presidency is concerned, Carter isn’t looking so bad. Sure, he left a mess but it wasn’t anything that couldn’t be cleaned up in a couple of years. The mess being made now may well spell doom.

    Comment by SoCalRobert — December 5, 2009 @ 3:05 pm - December 5, 2009

  3. Brave talk, but I am sure y’all know that Pelosi is correct. All analysts, including the administration, underestimated the extent that the financial crisis would, in combination with the recession, so severely impact employment.

    I am also sure you realize that the is very broad agreement amongst economists that the stimulus has been very successful. The CBO – whose authority y’all have been relying on in the health care debate, has caluclated that the stimulus has added 600K – 1.6 million jobs. ANd played a major role in getting the economy growing again.

    Here is a graph of actual employment.
    LINK

    Find the low point. It corresponds to Obama’s inauguration and the passing of the stimulus a month later.

    I know it tears y’all up to contemplate reality, but the truth is that when the country looks back on 2009, it will be remembered as the year that Obama saved the American economy from a depression (and also saved the automobile industry).

    Comment by Tano — December 5, 2009 @ 3:21 pm - December 5, 2009

  4. Sorry, Tano, wrong again.

    Broad agreement among economists? Hardly. You’re basing your comment on a newspaper headline quickly shown to be at odds with the actual facts.

    So, if the “stimulus” added that many jobs, how come there are 3 million fewer jobs today that there were at the outset of the Obama Administration? And how come when people review the data on recovery.gov, they keep finding more jobs that were neither created nor saved.

    It must really tear you up, Tano, to look at reality through left-wing talking points. I mean to tell us that the stimulus worked when unemployment is two full points above the high point the Administration promised should it pass.

    Wow, Obama, er, Tano, you do have a problem with reality. When the country looks back at 2009, they’ll see it is a year of missed opportunities when the Democrats built on the failed policies of the past.

    I’d think twice if I were you about that comment about the automobile industry being saved. Kind of like saying a man saved his business by forcing his neighbors (at gun point) to cough up the money to cover his losses.

    Comment by B. Daniel Blatt — December 5, 2009 @ 3:40 pm - December 5, 2009

  5. “how come there are 3 million fewer jobs today that there were at the outset of the Obama Administration?”

    Because the recession that went on for most of 2008 deepned severely as a result of the financial crisis late in the year. And the ramifications of that worked their way through the system over the course of 09. There was no lending going on in the commerical sector for most of the year. If you knew anything about economics you would understand how that is a killer for employment. And also, everyone who owns any stock (most everyone by now), has been incredibly poorer as a result of the meltdown, and that, of course, severely depresses consumption, and that, in turn drives down employment.

    But you know all this, I am sure. You dont care whatsoever what the truth is, you think you have a talking point, a way to score some political points, and a way to make people forget the disaster that was Republican rule, and the culpability of the Republicans in all this. To you it is just a political game.

    [No, Tano, it's you who don't care what the truth is.

    If Obama's economists were so smart and knew what was going on, they would have understood how deep the recession was and would have adjusted their economic forecasts accordingly.

    Remember, they're the guys who told us unemployment would have peaked at 9% without the "stimulus." And we're now a full point ahead of that.]

    And one that you are losing.

    [If we're losing, how come all the polls showing Obama's numbers sinking, even on jobs and the economy? Why did he feel compelled to hastily arrange a jobs summit? -Dan]

    Comment by Tano — December 5, 2009 @ 4:17 pm - December 5, 2009

  6. Ah yes, that’s right, the Barack Obama puppet is back claiming he “created jobs”.

    The question is where.

    Here’s a stimulus success story: In Arizona’s 15th congressional district, 30 jobs have been saved or created with just $761,420 in federal stimulus spending. At least that’s what the Web site set up by the Obama administration to track the $787 billion stimulus says.

    There’s one problem, though: There is no 15th congressional district in Arizona; the state has only eight districts.

    Now silly spinning Tano is shrieking that those jobs are real and that anyone who disagrees with his Barack Obama’s statement that Arizona has 15 congressional districts is a liar.

    This is how delusional the stupid, lying Tano is. Tano would literally make a fool out of himself by citing Barack Obama’s lies that have been proven to be false. Tano is so dumb that he is actually saying that Arizona has fifteen congressional districts because Barack Obama said so.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — December 5, 2009 @ 5:14 pm - December 5, 2009

  7. End italics

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — December 5, 2009 @ 5:15 pm - December 5, 2009

  8. There was no lending going on in the commerical sector for most of the year. If you knew anything about economics you would understand how that is a killer for employment.

    Of course there was no lending. Barack Obama and the Obama Party were busy slapping on laws and “regulations” that prevented bankers from making loans.

    Again, Tano is so stupid that he whines about no lending, but supports and endorses Barack Obama and the Obama Party making lending virtually impossible and punishing banks who dare do it.

    That’s because he’s not an intelligent individual. He’s a paid shill for the Obama Party, a puppet with no ability to think for himself and a complete lack of intellect.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — December 5, 2009 @ 5:18 pm - December 5, 2009

  9. Here is a graph of actual employment.

    Actually, the stupid child Tano can’t even read his own talking points.

    That is a graph of payroll employment CHANGES, not actual unemployment. And we should also not forget that the ideological puppet Romer claimed that the unemployment rate would never go over 8% if the “stimulus” was passed.

    She lied. Just like Obama lied, just like Tano lies. And unfortunately for Tano, his skin color argument, that Barack Obama cannot tell a lie because he’s black and black people are always right, is unraveling right before their eyes.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — December 5, 2009 @ 5:22 pm - December 5, 2009

  10. And I suppose that President George W Bush let the crashers in too.

    Comment by PatriotMom — December 5, 2009 @ 6:20 pm - December 5, 2009

  11. Tano – I will concede that blame for the recession is on a lot of hands – GWB included… as well as a lot of stupid, math-deficient Americans who figured that 10-15 precent annual increases in housing prices would go on forever and, believing same, went on an orgy of credit spending. And the best ‘n’ brightest at the banks bought into the same nonsense (or knew damn well that the unborn taxpayers couldn’t object to bailing their sorry butts out).

    And Americans, through their elected “representatives” decided that we would create an environment that favored reliance on hostile goverments (China, OPEC states) and cheap imported labor with the bill now coming due.

    That being said, the “stimulus” is little more than another scam to shovel money into a government out of control. And there is no way that 1.6 million jobs were created (or saved – how does one determined a “saved” job unless it means a public employee whose job was saved by a federal grant). Most states and cities are discovering that the carrying capacity of the tax base was exceeded a long time ago.

    The objection most conservatives have now are no different than the objections we had in the Bush years – and that is that double-digit growth in spending is not sustainable.

    That is really not hard to understand.

    Comment by SoCalRobert — December 5, 2009 @ 7:04 pm - December 5, 2009

  12. if the “stimulus” added that many jobs, how come there are 3 million fewer jobs today that there were at the outset of the Obama Administration?

    Tano is ignorant of the fact that “stimulus” doesn’t create jobs. It destroys them. Unemployment is 10% today (by conservative measures; really more like 17% or 22%) *because* of Obama’s “stimulus” policies.

    There was no lending going on in the commerical sector for most of the year.

    And that is *CAUSED DIRECTLY* by Obama-Greid-Pelosi’s policies. Starting with their $1.5 trillion deficits that suck up all the bank lending in sight; and continuing with their other sick, anti-commonsense and anti-job measures that make it unprofitable and even dangerous for anybody to lend to businesses.

    If you knew anything about economics you would understand how that is a killer for employment.

    Indeed, Tano. Indeed.

    Barack Obama and the Obama Party were busy slapping on laws and “regulations” that prevented bankers from making loans

    And, by issuing multiple trillions in new Treasuries to cover their insane deficits: they were sucking up all the loanable money.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — December 5, 2009 @ 7:30 pm - December 5, 2009

  13. And just when will someone remind Nancy Pelosi AND the voting public that the Democrats have been in control of BOTH houses of congress since 2006? And revenue legislation is exactly that, legislation. It originates in congress not on Pennsylvania Avenue.

    Comment by T — December 5, 2009 @ 7:59 pm - December 5, 2009

  14. “That being said, the “stimulus” is little more than another scam to shovel money into a government out of control. ”

    You were going good for a while there, SoCal, but here you just fall back into the rant mode. No, the non-partisan CBO, whose objectivity has been heralded by the Republicans all autumn, they are the ones whose analysis said that the stimulus created upward of 1.6 million jobs. And the stimulus is obviously not a system to shovel money into government, but rather to shovel money out of government into the hands of companies that build our infrastructure – saving those companies from bankruptcy.

    “The objection most conservatives have … is that double-digit growth in spending is not sustainable.”

    And Obama would agree with you, in normal times. He believes that deficit spending, in a deadly recession such as this one, is necessary, and trumps the normal concern for deficits. In this, he is in agreement with most every economist in the country – including conservative ones. SUre, maybe a Republican president would have tried to weight the bill a bit more toward giving tax breaks to the wealthy, but massive deficit spending geared toward stimulating the economy, would have been carried out by any responsible administration.

    Which is why the arguments that you make fall so flat, except with the fringe groups like the tea party people, or the pure GOP propagandists who value having talking points above having any sort of a coherent policy.

    Comment by Tano — December 5, 2009 @ 9:25 pm - December 5, 2009

  15. “And revenue legislation is exactly that, legislation. It originates in congress not on Pennsylvania Avenue.”

    The Capitol is also on Pennsylvania Avenue (ever hear the phrase “both ends of Pennslyvania Avenue?) – and, if you think that revenue legislation starts in Congress (except in the purely technical sense of where a bill is formally introduced), then you know nothing about how Washington works.

    Comment by Tano — December 5, 2009 @ 9:29 pm - December 5, 2009

  16. All analysts, including the administration, underestimated the extent that the financial crisis would, in combination with the recession, so severely impact employment.

    Shouldn’t that mean that we need new “analysts” and a new administration? Only on the left is FAILURE rewarded with more of the same.

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — December 5, 2009 @ 9:45 pm - December 5, 2009

  17. Tano – since my arguments are mere rants appropriate for little more than a fringe group, this is probably a waste of time.

    The report you refer to says “between 600,000 and 1.6 million jobs” so there’s a lot of uncertainty in that.

    The fact remains that government spending at all levels has been wildly out of control. Spending in Collyfornia has grown at rates far higher than population and inflation would explain (40 percent since Ahnold assumed office).

    San Diego is facing insolvency due to public employee pensions (given the number of cities with unfunded pension liabilities, it seems to me that public pensions are another shoe to drop). The USA Today article quotes Howard Jarvis as saying that if California was a fically prudent as San Diego, there’d be no need for Prop. 13. That was then.

    http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2004-10-24-sandiego-_x.htm

    Comment by SoCalRobert — December 5, 2009 @ 9:45 pm - December 5, 2009

  18. TGC #16 – Tano’s comment is also a falsehood. Not all analysts underestimated the impact that the financial crisis would have on our economy. Some looked at our government’s awful policies (yes SCR, under Bush-Greenspan as well as Obama-Pelosi-Bernanke) and predicted our current problems.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — December 5, 2009 @ 10:02 pm - December 5, 2009

  19. Quote from the video I linked, 1:08:53 – spoken November 2006, yes 2006:

    “We are way out of balance. We’re not going to have a little mild recession. This is a major economic contraction that’s coming.”

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — December 5, 2009 @ 10:37 pm - December 5, 2009

  20. “Shouldn’t that mean that we need new “analysts” and a new administration?”

    No, just new analysts. It was Republican as well as Democratic, and all the private-sector analysts as well who underestimated the effect of the crash.

    Comment by Tano — December 5, 2009 @ 11:23 pm - December 5, 2009

  21. dan, apparently you missed this article in the NY Times earlier this week. not that it will change your mind, but i’ll pass it along anyway…

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/21/business/economy/21stimulus.html?_r=2&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1259092912-RtoLmvJIzy7nvx609EXwUg

    Comment by Chad — December 6, 2009 @ 1:41 am - December 6, 2009

  22. Um, chad, that article isn’t from earlier this week, it’s more than two weeks old, has already been questioned and discredited. I mean, shouldn’t the first clue be where it was published.

    That’s old news, very old news.

    Ok, so you say, the stimulus is working, then where are the jobs? How come economic growth is still well below the level that we normally see after a recession?

    Comment by B. Daniel Blatt — December 6, 2009 @ 3:43 am - December 6, 2009

  23. No, just new analysts. It was Republican as well as Democratic, and all the private-sector analysts as well who underestimated the effect of the crash.

    Oh of course! Chairman Obama’s shit smells like cinnamon rolls, I forgot. It’s everybody else’s fault and not the man who signed his name to massive debt and job destroying slush funds for his buddies.

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — December 6, 2009 @ 3:51 am - December 6, 2009

  24. #15 Tano writes:

    “And revenue legislation is exactly that, legislation. It originates in congress not on Pennsylvania Avenue.”

    The Capitol is also on Pennsylvania Avenue (ever hear the phrase “both ends of Pennslyvania Avenue?) – and, if you think that revenue legislation starts in Congress (except in the purely technical sense of where a bill is formally introduced), then you know nothing about how Washington works.

    Capitol Building Address: 

   
    East Capitol Street, NE and 1st Street, NE 
    
    Washington, DC 20002

    White House Address:
    1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW
    Washington, DC 20006
    (202) 456-1111

    Pennsylvania Avenue terminates at the foot of the Capitol grounds. Hence, the Capitol is at the end of Pennsylvania Avenue, but not ON Pennsylvania Avenue.

    Comment by heliotrope — December 6, 2009 @ 9:39 am - December 6, 2009

  25. I understand Kodak is laying off again on 12/15/2009. My neighbor works for Kodak, so this has been confirmed. This is the second layoff this year for this company. I suspect there will be others. Hey, but you have a Merry Christmas Policy Failure lovers.

    Comment by Steven E. Kalbach — December 6, 2009 @ 11:54 am - December 6, 2009

  26. I found this funny: Our Hero

    Comment by Steven E. Kalbach — December 6, 2009 @ 1:24 pm - December 6, 2009

  27. questioned and discredited? lets look at how althouse”discredits the nytimes: she links it to “climategate”. so althouse tenuously links the stimulus studies to a completely unrelated controversy, and you find that convincing? wow. what a triumph of ideology over reason. just because you disagree with it doesn’t mean it’s wrong.

    Comment by Chad — December 6, 2009 @ 2:54 pm - December 6, 2009

  28. Yes, “questioned and discredited”, chad, just like your Barack Obama’s claim that he “created jobs” in congressional districts that don’t exist and which in other cases were exaggerated by enormous proportions.

    But of course, as a good Obama shill, just like those “economists” quoted, and just like your fellow paid propagandist Tano, you will sit there and tell us that those jobs exist, that those congressional districts are really there, that giving a person a pay increase counts as a job “created or saved”, and that all of us are racists for not agreeing.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — December 6, 2009 @ 7:42 pm - December 6, 2009

  29. I had a job every year that George Bush was President but unemployed under almost all of Obama’s administration.

    Comment by Casualty of Hope and Change — December 6, 2009 @ 8:31 pm - December 6, 2009

  30. At least Pelosi is finally admitting that the Stimulus is a failure. I never thought I’d ever live to see the day.

    Comment by Sharp Right Turn — December 7, 2009 @ 6:45 am - December 7, 2009

  31. Now now, NDT, lets give chad the benefit of the doubt.

    It could be that posters like Chad and Tano aren’t just Obama cheerleaders. I mean lets look at the evidence.

    Tano doesn’t understand Honduras.

    Tano thinks that insurance companies physically prevent you from accessing non-covered care like Gandalf at the Bridge of Kazad Dum.

    He thinks that rather than giving hope to our allies (Poland, Georiga, Israel, et al) The previous administration’s policy alienated them.

    Tano doesn’t even show understanding of basic history.

    Oh wait, never mind. No one could be that consistently wrong.

    Comment by The_Livewire — December 7, 2009 @ 7:23 am - December 7, 2009

  32. Tano thinks that insurance companies physically prevent you from accessing non-covered care like Gandalf at the Bridge of Kazad Dum.

    Heh :-)

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — December 7, 2009 @ 10:07 am - December 7, 2009

  33. Hopefully the unemployment claims will increase by 1 after the November elections. (that being one Nancy Pelosi)

    Comment by LiberalsEqualCrap — January 14, 2010 @ 9:29 am - January 14, 2010

Leave a comment

Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

**Note: Your first comment is held for moderation. Avoid profanity, avoid personal attacks on fellow commenters, and avoid complaining about personal attacks (even on you). Feel free to disagree with anyone, but focus on their ideas; give us the information that you think they overlooked.**


Live preview of comment

Close this window.

0.169 Powered by Wordpress