I thought rich people earned every cent of it and should never be ashamed of their wealth in any way, Merc? Doesn't that apply to Congressmen too?

I knew most of them were rich, just not that rich. Funny how many laws they make don't effect them.

I thought you were pissed that they kept making laws that only affected the richest people's income?

But Clod its been clearly demonstrated that congresspeople don't pay taxes anyway.

No, not at all. I am against progressive taxation of any kind but that is all we have at the moment for the federal government.

Ex-Louisiana Democratic Congressman Sentenced to 13 Years

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/14/us...fferson&st=cse

Damm. Look at all those jobs created!

http://www.stimuluswatch.org/2.0/

I just picked a couple to laugh at
Rational design of innovative catalytic technologies for biomass derivative utilization
Cost $17,500,000 Location Newark DE Jobs created 4

Cops Hiring Recovery Program (CHRP)
Cost $3,543,888 Location Wilmington DE Jobs created 0

At least Biden got some money into his home state

I also find it rather interesting that if you search by "Most expensive", of those costing over a BILLION not one has a positive rating. ?????

Click on the details and see how many have not been started. It really is pretty remarkable that the government can't or will not move the money any faster. In fact it is fast becoming a joke.

I think they are being cagey with the money to avoid an inflationary effect. Might be the smartest thing they do, given the ease with which fiat-money can inflate.

Even hard specie can inflate like a sonuvagun; look at sixteenth-century Spain and the flood of Americas gold that poured into it. Prices got bid up so high that it became more economical to do anything at all anywhere else but Spain. Gold flowed into Spain and then flowed right back out as the rest of Europe found profit in servicing Spain. Lacking internal investment or development, when the bubble collapsed, Spain devolved into a backwater.

And no one seems to think this is out of line?

http://www.billingsgazette.com/news/...cc4c002e0.html

And the beat goes on...

Rules for Congress Curb but Don’t End Junkets

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/07/us...s/07trips.html


CHECK out this Graphic!

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2.../us/TRIPS.html

Sure it's out of line, but it's what I would expect from a pig like Steele. He's just throwing mud and hoping it will stick.

Nothing wrong with recommending a friend or even a lover for a job they are qualified for. The ultimate decision to hire wouldn't have been his, and he wouldn't have been supervising her. I've recommended friends for jobs. Wouldn't you?

So long he wasn't the "decider" then I see no problem in recommending qualified people for a job. Most high level jobs are filled through personal aquaintances and their networks IMO.

Are there no standards for getting people jobs that you are romantically involved with? I do believe there are such rules in government. Anyone who was in the running might be able to file a lawsuit to say there was significant bias in the hiring. It just opens up a number of possibilities for putting the process under a microscope. This is much different than "recommending" a friend for a job.

It just seems to have an appearance of impropriety and that is not a good thing when talking about elected officials getting government jobs for people they are romantically involved with.

Based on my reading of your article, this is exactly the opposite of an impropriety. Did you read the article? She was working in his office for him. He fell in love with her. Because he wanted to avoid the appearance of impropriety in his office, they thought it would be best if she didn't work for him any more. So he recommended her for another job for which she was qualified. The US Attorney job would have taken her back to the state where she had formerly been a highly regarded state prosecutor. The same type of work she had done so well before, but in a different court system.

It all wound up being moot though, because she found an even better job without his help.

The thing this demonstrates is that the Republicans here are just throwing mud and hoping some will stick. There is nothing to investigate. The facts are all known, and they make Baucus look pretty good and Steele look like a pig.

I guess I read a few of the articles and they ran together. I did not read that, "Because he wanted to avoid the appearance of impropriety in his office, they thought it would be best if she didn't work for him any more." But you know that when someone with his power calls up the other guy and says, "hey I have a great person I think you should consider for a job", it appears that favors are being done and preferential treatment is being given for back door deals. If I was one of the other 2 people being considered for the job I would make a huge deal out of it.

Well, the "other guy" here is the POTUS, so the power of a senator isn't really that impressive.

If you were one of the other 2 guys being recommended by the Senator to the POTUS, would you really make a stink about it? Seriously? You have a Senator going to bat for you with the POTUS, and you are going to complain? Once your name starts circulating at that level, you would be foolish to rock the boat.

My comment of "Because he wanted to avoid the appearance of impropriety in his office, they thought it would be best if she didn't work for him any more." came from this in the article article you linked.

Well it still smells fishy. And that statement was issued him, I would say something like that too if people started to ask questions. I think they call it cover your ass. I suspect he is being protected.

And here is another example of something similar that happened not to long ago.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...644974798.html

Demoncratic Government Forclosure Repayment Help a complete failure. How much did that cost us?

What are you saying? Big business is buying political clout? Shock!

No, just that anyone who thinks this Congress is looking out for them or the little guy has been fooled.

Insurance companies among others are going to make billions off this deal.

Of course they are, Merc. I don't think anyone here is under that assumption. The typical dwellar is much smarter than the average bear, ya know.

This is what else it paid for.

http://www.washingtonwatch.com/blog/...er-u-s-family/

Pork report. See where your tax dollars went:

http://mccain.senate.gov/public/inde...a-73a0841cefe0

Washingotonwatch.com....a libertarian mouthpiece....now there is an unbiased source.

:rotflol:

At least it notes on its own site that it is not really credible:

The figures on WashingtonWatch.com reveal the relative size and significance of proposals, but they are not perfect predictions and they do not tell you everything you should know. Please keep in mind that:

* WashingtonWatch.com does not report the many benefits that may be provided by government regulation and spending, made possible by taxation. Proposals that “cost” the average American may benefit you, your community, your loved ones, or your employer.

* The dollar amounts on WashingtonWatch.com do not reflect the “incidence” of taxes, spending, or regulation...

* .....Adding up all the proposals tracked by WashingtonWatch.com would produce a number that is essentially meaningless.

In summary, the information on WashingtonWatch.com is not the last word on government spending, taxation, and regulation....

$9,500 per family? Uh.....FAILED....essentially meaningless.

The tin foil hat brigade (and its mercenaries) at work!

The 2005 record is not in jeopardy......13,997 projects for a total of $27.3 billion!

Senate sends $1.1T pork-laden bill to Obama

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...bill-to-obama/

http://www.hedweb.com/animimag/pig.jpg

“We’re gonna ban all earmarks” President Obama

http://bellalu0.wordpress.com/2009/1...spending-bill/

A closer look at 100 projects funded by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, nothing to do with 2005.

Where are all the millions of jobs promised by Obama, Reid, and Pelosi funded by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act? It was a total failure in that respect. If it wasn't why are they talking about another stimulus bill aimed specifically at jobs? Why the meeting at the White House to specifically address jobs?

Feb 2009:

"But it does mark the beginning of the end - the beginning of what we need to do to create jobs for Americans scrambling in the wake of layoffs; to provide relief for families worried they won't be able to pay next month's bills; and to set our economy on a firmer foundation.", President Obama.

http://money.cnn.com/2009/02/17/news...cess/index.htm

"The goal at the heart of this plan is to create jobs. Not just any jobs, but jobs doing the work America needs done: repairing our infrastructure, modernizing our schools and hospitals, and promoting the clean, alternative energy sources that will help us finally declare independence from foreign oil," President Obama said Friday morning.

http://money.cnn.com/2009/02/13/news...ulus/index.htm


Reid Feb 2009:

“the main direction is tax cuts, people are really needful of money. About 58% of it is job creating.”

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/op...-39287787.html

Pelosi Interview Feb 2009:

http://www.mediaresearch.org/cyberal...yb20090212.asp

3.5 million jobs? really?

Where are they?

Both the CBO and GAO studies showed between 650,000 and 1,500,000 million jobs created or saved in the first nine months. Given that a large part of the recovery money has yet to be obligated (by intent), the projections for the anticipated life of the program (18 months to 2 years) exceed 2.5 million.

Its not a perfect program and there is abuse and faulty record keeping, but nearly all economists have agreed the program has helped the economy from falling off the cliff. They only differ on how great the impact has been.

Of course, we know you only accept CBO figures when it supports your agenda and disparage it when it doesnt.....and you have called the program a failure even before it has reached its halfway point.

Your economic plan was so much better....let everything fail and unemployment explode, the strong will survive, and the economy will correct itself.

For one who cares about the little people and the unemployed, that sounds, not only heartless, but irresponsible as well.

Or mayvbe WashingtonWatch, your reliable source on budget impacts, has the answers.

:biglaugha

Which is why the numbers are pure fantasy and propaganda by the White House. They are filled with fraud, waste, and abuse. Including pet projects and pure pork for Demoncratic Senators who jumped on the money train. Kabuke Theather.

Concerning job creation it has been a complete failure. That is what I am addressing.:eyebrow: Where are the jobs they promised us.

Which plan was that? :lol:

Those are your words not mine. :rolleyes:

Despite reports with problems with the data that would suggest no more than 10% error:

Fact check:
Or one only need to read about the numerous Republican governors and members of Congress who opposed the recovery act but waived the checks at events back home while claiming they (not the stimulus checks) created jobs.

Senate majority leader McConnell...took credit for the construction site at Blue Grass Army Depot in Madison County, Kentucky -- a project that was funded in large part by the Recovery Act.

House majority whip Cantor ...who has repeatedly claimed that the stimulus is "failing" to create jobs....appeared at a job fair in Midlothian, VA, to demonstrate how he is working on "long-term solutions that will put...Virginia workers back on the path to financial stability." But scores of jobs advertised at the jobs fair were created by the stimulus, and Chesterfield County, where the fair was being held, will receive more than $38 million in stimulus funding over the next two years.

Gov. Bobby Jindal said if he was still a member of Congress he would've voted against the stimulus, calling it the "stimulus that has not stimulated." Yet the very next day, he appeared with constituents in Louisiana to present a jumbo-sized check of federal grant money authorized under the Recovery Act to residents of Vernon Parish. He later toured the state in a "Louisiana Working" tour, handing out millions of dollars of stimulus money while simultaneously attacking "Washington Spending."

The list is endless.

The massive fantasy and widespread fraud exists only in your non-partisan (:eek:) mind and on "reliable, objective, non-partisan" (double :eek:) or more appropriately called "tin foil hatter" sites like WashigtonWatch.

Just asking here - you two go ahead and sling mud at each other all you want.... Who owns/runs factcheck?

Oh and this jobs created/saved is a bunch of crap - there is no way to eally account for jobs "saved".

How many Americans still have jobs? They've all been saved. Ummmmmm.

Right. :headshake

Fact Check in a project of the Annenburg Foundation, but the facts are from the CBO report.

In fact, there is a fairly easy way to project jobs saved....particularly in the public sector. It results from budgets not being cut as a result of a temporary infusion of federal money to replace the temporary lost tax revenue.

So you think the recovery program has been a failure, like Merc?

Or will you straddle the fence, like you always do?

:lol:

Chinks in the armor exposed.

Fact. Obama, Pelosi, and Reid sold the "recovery" wad shot as a program that would create "millions" of jobs. Bull shit. More smoke and mirrors to get votes and support for pork spending.

The American public is being sold a pile of shit, lies, and falsehoods by the Demoncratically controlled Congress in an effort to obtain power.

Nothing new here.

IIRC they are a left leaning organization. However, getting the info from those who are trying to convince us that they made the right decision is still more than difficult. Large grain of salt. I remember very clearly when the promises of "jobs created" became "created or saved" It was a brilliant redesignation.
and when that money is gone? Then what?
I dunno - Merc can certainly speak for himself. For me, Its too early to tell. There is still a lot of money that hasn't been spent. It is still in the pipeline. There was a lot of waste and pork, but thats not uncommon.
So far though, I'm not really all that impressed. I have friends in different business sectors who got stimulus money and their input has confirmed my initial skepticism.

I heard today that "Stimulus II" is being drafted and some state Govt's are already looking into ways to spend the money. This should be fun.

You mean will I blindly follow one or the other? no thanks. I did that long enough. I severed those ties. I refuse to bury my head up the ass of either party, like some people. You, however, don't have that luxury since you are part of the Democratic party.

The data is not from Fact Check, but from the non-partrisan CBO...nice try.

I agree that Obama over-promised but that doesnt take away from the success of the program to-date. Most economists agree that the recovery funds have made a difference.

The intent has always been temporary...until the economy, including state and local tax bases, recover.


Sure the pork is highlighted and is wasteful...but dont confuse pork with earmarks. Most earmarks serve a vialble and useful public purpose....sending federal tax dollars back to local communities.


Your posts would suggest otherwise, but that is just my opinion and you certainly can disagree.

Interpretation of the data .. . sigh

<faints>
just not anywhere near the job creation that we were sold. So they changed that to created or saved. cough/bullshit/cough
"Meet the new boss, same as the old boss."
This one just has a different sales pitch.

The tax bases that are dwindling, you mean? What about Stimulus II thats floating around?
Well you know what they say about opinions . . .

Shove it up your ass.

no, they say everyone has one - you were close though. Don't get discouraged.

:eek:

Vacation Fun on the public dime.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1260...nDepthCarousel

Besides rooms for sleeping, the 12 members of the House of Representatives rented their hotel's fireplace-equipped presidential suite and two adjacent rooms. The hotel cleared out the beds and in their place set up a bar, a snack room and office space. The three extra rooms -- stocked with liquor, Coors beer, chips and salsa, sandwiches, Mrs. Fields cookies and York Peppermint Patties -- cost a total of about $1,500 a night. They were rented for five nights.

Our political masters have no class. We need to elect better scumbags.

The taxpayer should not be paying for their wives.

My parents traveled all over the world on business. The company paid for him and my father paid for her. I see nothing in that part thats unusual.

Well we didn't have much diplomacy then either. Now that we travel all over the world to kiss ass and make deals there is a lil travel expense.
<shrug>

Exactly.

Yes, but if we didn't, the lobbyists would gain influence by buying them hookers.;)

The Republickins are no better if they can't produce a plan, but they have pretty much been locked out of the process.

Fixed it for ya.:right:

No you didn't. They have been pretty much shut out of the process. That is what happens when you win the majority. You control the process. Another reason why our system is screwed up. Republickins did the same thing when they had the majority to the Demoncrats. Both parties suck. And the Dems have done nothing but reinforce the notion that they are not one bit different than the Repbs, they just whore a little differently and serve a different group of business interests.

Data Shows that the Stimulus Package Was a Waste of Money
December 19, 2009

http://www.usnews.com/blogs/peter-ro...-of-money.html

Why didn't you post the damn chart & let people look at it for themselves?
http://admin.usnews.com/dbimages/mas...ysandmeans.jpg

Initially I don't like what I'm seeing. But that chart doesn't say whether there were jobs created or not - just the net gain/loss overall. Heck it could have created 50,000 jobs at company X, but if they shut down a plan and let go of 75,000 other jobs . . . net is -25,000.

Because I thought it would be a bit over the top so I posted the link and people can look at it that way.

Oh an I forgot its only December '09 not '10 so they still have a whole year. . . & stimulus III thats being floated.

Worry sets in among those up for re-election.

Finley: Democrats worried about a backlash

and this says it all.
http://detnews.com/article/20091220/...out-a-backlash

They should be worried, most people are unhappy with it as it stands.
The whole idea had pluses and minuses, when taken as a whole worked out to a plus for Americans. But by the time the far right fear mongers, the fat cat lobbyists, and Religious Fundamentalists finished their mangling, they've removed enough pluses, to make the package look like a bad idea.

We can only hope with this bill as a base, it can be tweaked in the future, to be a good thing for America. But with a congress bought and paid for by special interests, and a body of voters without interest, I doubt it.:(