A case study:

Despite all the spin the Stimulus did NOT create jobs in numbers of any consequence. The Dems are crowing now about the unemployment rate drop to below 9% but that will likely go up after Christmas when seasonal employees end their run. It is also worthy to note that if the same number of people were looking for jobs today as were in 2007 the unemployment rate would be 11%.

Don’t worry, Debbie Washer Woman Schultz says unemployment is not increasing.

You can make any claim if you manipulate the numbers your way…

Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

A new report from Barack Obama’s own Council of Economic Advisors shows that the stimulus failed to stimulate, that each job created or “saved” cost taxpayers $278,000, and that we would have been better off without the stimulus.

What a surprise? The Stimulus was a failure, just as I had said it would be. To spend 278 thousand dollars per job created or allegedly saved is absolutely criminal. To top it off, the trend of adding jobs appears to be going in the wrong direction. The Stimulus failed to stimulate and now it is having a harmful effect on the economy. Interpretation of the report indicates that we would have done better without the Stimulus.

Perhaps this is because the Stimulus was not meant to actually stimulate. The report they wrote says it was and Obama and his toadies said it was but the reality of the situation is that a lot of taxpayer money, money we do not have, was appropriated for the sole purpose of paying off Democrat constituencies. The labor unions, the Obama supporters, the Democrat controlled cities that can’t make it on their own, all took our money as part of a huge payoff and redistribution scheme.

All sides agree on these incriminating numbers — and now they also appear to agree on this important point: The economy would now be generating job growth at a faster rate if the Democrats hadn’t passed the “stimulus.” Weekly Standard

Debbie Wasserman Schultz said the Democrats own the economy and she is absolutely correct. The Democrats took a bad situation (caused mostly by their failed policies) and made it much worse. We have hit rock bottom and are now starting to dig.

This is what happens when we elect a man with NO experience whatsoever. Never had a productive job, never had to make payroll and lived his life off the taxpayer. He got taxpayer money for his education, for his community rabble rousing and for his jobs in politics. Oh sure, he received money through graft and corruption as well as the books he wrote about his life (as if he actually had anything to write about) but he never ran anything meaningful.

He was and remains out of his league and he continues to drive us further toward government control of everything.

He is well on his way with the failed Stimulus and the 5 TRILLION dollars of debt he has accumulated.

It is more meaningful when his own people point it out.

Maybe they want to avoid the pitchforks and torches…

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

The worst Congress to ever be seated in this country is finally on its way out and I say “good riddance.” I know there are many out there, particularly the liberal/progressive types who need government intervention, who will argue that this was not the worst Congress. This is because their measure of success is how many laws were passed. The more laws passed, the more successful the Congress.

This, of course, is complete nonsense. The 111^th Congress gave us a number of 2000 plus page bills that were not read by any member of the Congress. We were told that we would have to pass them to see what was in them or that no one knows how they are going to work, but they are good legislation. To top it off, the legislation passed was opposed by a large majority in this country, a majority that was ignored by the Congress. The members who are supposed to represent us ignored our wishes and passed their agenda.

This is one of the major reasons Democrats lost so many seats in the November election. Their side will tell you that it was insignificant or meant nothing or was not because of any one thing but the reality is, they lost because they did not listen and people did not like what they were doing. They were taken out of power because they were out of control.

And they did not learn from the election either. In a lame duck session they passed legislation that Americans opposed. They passed legislation that should have received more scrutiny and they gave the go ahead on a treaty that weakens America.

They did not learn.

Yes even now they seem to think that the loss was a fluke and that the public does not know what is good for it. But the burning question remains, if these agenda items were so good for America, why did the Democrat leaders have to bribe so many people to pass the legislation? Why did they have to give away billions in taxpayer dollars to get their own party members on board? I know the popular myth contends that Republicans were the party of “No” and they held everything up but this is a LIE told by progressives in an attempt to hide the fact that they have big enough majorities in Congress to pass what they wanted but were unable to do so.

So, once again, if the legislation was so wonderful, why did they need all the bribes and back room deals? If it was so wonderful then why did it NOT pass when Democrats had a big enough majority to pass anything they wanted?

If all this legislation was so wonderful then why did the Congress have to hold midnight votes? Why did they have to stay in session over the holidays to get things done? Harry Reid used the same tactics two years in a row, threaten to keep them through the Christmas holiday so they will vote for anything to get out of DC. It is absolutely piss poor leadership and Reid is not the only piss poor leader. Nancy Pelosi is one as well.

Those who bow down to her will tell you how much she accomplished and how wonderful she is. This is a lie. She could not get things done with a majority and blamed Republicans for her own party’s inabilities. She had to force her people with threats and that is no way to lead. She was such a poor leader that she lost more House Seats than any Speaker in nearly a century.

Remember, if what they did was so wonderful then they would not have had to bribe people to get it passed. If what they did was so great we would know what was in the legislation and they would not have to lie about the contents (if they had any real idea what was in the things to begin with) and if what they were doing was so great they would not have lost a historic number of seats in the midterm elections.

The liberal/progressives must have been absolutely terrible because after only two years they have been replaced with Republicans and the public is not any more thrilled with them at this point. It is bad news and you know you screwed up when you are replaced by the very party that was thrown out in disgust because of its inability to control spending and its loss of principles.

When you are replaced by people who are hated as much as you just to keep you from running amok and having free reign then you know you truly suck.

The 111^th Congress is the worst that has ever been seated. It took a nation in debt and bankrupted it and it passed tons of nanny-state laws to gain more control over our lives.

It did this because a certain part of the leadership thinks that it must rule over people too stupid or inept to care for themselves.

But it also had success because there are certain parts of society that either believes that government must run their lives, that they are unable to run their own without government intervention, or that they are entitled to the fruits of another person’s labor (a message that the nanny-state government has driven home for decades).

And as much as the 111^th Congress was a failure, the other failures in this society are the people who actually think that this Congress did good things and who feel good about the forced redistribution of wealth.

We can vote out a bad Congress but, unlike Survivor, we cannot vote the failures among us out of the tribe.

Perhaps they can make a New Year’s Resolution to become self sufficient and stop expecting the government to take care of them.

As for the rest of us, we should resolve to cut the funding from the beast in any legal way possible…

A funny aside: Most progressives have no problem with the nanny-state until the nanny state interferes with what they like. This guy is all for government intrusion into our lives but is upset when it intrudes into football. It is an understatement to say this guy has a warped sense of what is important. For what its worth, I don’t think government should be involved in our lives and I don’t think it should interfere with a game that is supposed to be played regardless of weather…

I also think it is funny that the Pennsylvania Governor commented by calling the canceling of the game a joke; “It’s an absolute joke,” Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell, a big Eagles fan, told Fox. “I was looking forward to this. It would have been a real experience. This is what football is all about.”

It is funny because if Rendell even went to the game he would sit in a luxury box and not be exposed to the elements. He is right that the cancellation was a joke but what real experience would it be for a guy who would be pampered at the stadium? Ah yes, a true progressive. I am the king and will be treated as such while the peons get “a real experience.”

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

And why are teacher’s, firefighter’s and police officer’s salaries a federal concern?

The stimulus bill signed into law last February was a 787 billion dollar boondoggle. The total package, with interest on borrowed money, will put the thing over 1 TRILLION dollars. The unfortunate thing is that we got very little for our money and the things it was spent on are NOT things that will stimulate the economy and a lot of them are things states are responsible for.

Obama is pleading with Democrats to pass another 50 BILLION dollars of “emergency” funds to prevent teachers, firefighters and police officers from being laid off.

President Obama urged reluctant lawmakers Saturday to quickly approve nearly $50 billion in emergency aid to state and local governments, saying the money is needed to avoid “massive layoffs of teachers, police and firefighters” and to support the still-fragile economic recovery. Washington Post

The first thing we should realize is that the federal government is not responsible for teachers, firefighters or police officers unless they work for the federal government. The states AND ONLY THE STATES are responsible for the people in these professions who work in the individual states. It is not the responsibility of taxpayers from Maryland to pay for the teachers, firefighters or police officers in Michigan or any other state. Each state is responsible and using federal tax dollars to pay for these things taxes Americans twice for the same thing.

People are taxed by their states to pay for these services and then their federal tax dollars are used to pay for the same services, often because of mismanagement at the state level.

It is up to the states to decide if they can afford to pay for the same level of services or if they will have to be scaled back. The states need to decide whether or not to raise taxes to pay for these things. It is not the responsibility of the federal government and our tax dollars should not be paying it.

This is Obama pushing our tax dollars to the people in the unions. Obama has the support of the teachers and many of the law enforcement and firefighting unions (whether the individual members support him or not) and he wants to ensure he has their votes so he will pay for them with OUR money.

Obama already signed one stimulus into law and that stimulus provided for teachers and for law enforcement.

• $4 billion for state and local law enforcement agencies
• $44.5 billion in aid to local school districts to prevent layoffs and cutbacks, with flexibility to use the funds for school modernization and repair (State Equalization Fund)

Wikipedia

Read the Wiki article and see how much money the stimulus funneled to things that will not, in any way shape or form, stimulate the economy. The total education package was over 90 BILLION dollars.

Obama spent 48.5 BILLION dollars for teachers and law enforcement and now he wants 50 BILLION dollars more. If the stimulus worked as sold then these entities would not need additional money, if we were to accept that the federal government should be paying for them at all.

The stimulus is not stimulating and it is a failure. Obama wants more money to throw at his supporters in the unions at the expense of the taxpayers and our national sovereignty. How much more debt will we accrue before we are totally owned by another country?

It is not the job of the federal government to pay for the salaries of people working for the individual states. The states are solely responsible for these salaries and if they cannot afford them then they need to make the same tough decisions that plenty of private companies have made and lay off employees.

Obama is trying to use OUR money to pay off the unions and to pander for their votes. We should not be paying for these things and it is criminal that we paid for them with the first stimulus.

Let us not keep making the same mistakes by continuing to throw good money after bad on an economic folly.

Never surrender, never submit.

Barack Obama is putting pressure on Congress to pass a 30 BILLION dollar package designed to jump start job creation. Obama’s administration has lost millions of jobs (net) despite the bogus “saved job” category used to deceive people into thinking that taxpayer money has saved jobs and without it unemployment would be higher.

President Obama Friday repeated his call for Congress to pass a $30 billion package to foster hiring and help tackle painfully high levels of unemployment.

“I’m hopeful the House will pass these measures next week and that the Senate will follow as soon as possible—with support from both Democrats and Republicans,” Obama said in remarks delivered in the White House Rose Garden. CNBC

Obama passed a 787 BILLION dollar stimulus package that was supposed to keep unemployment below 8% and was supposed to jump start job creation. Obama said the number one goal of his economic plan was to create 3 million jobs in the next two years (MSNBC 16 Jan 2009).

The stimulus was touted as a job creator and was needed to keep unemployment from rising. Unemployment has been stagnate at just under 10% for most of the time since the stimulus was passed.

When things kept going bad the regime told us that things were worse than they thought or that no one knew how bad it was. We were then told that this was a slow process and that the stimulus needed time to work. But we are not on the track that was spelled out in his economic report. We are well behind what they predicted.

When this has been pointed out the Obama apologists tell us that the stimulus will take time and was never intended to work quickly (despite the initial claims and the report). The Obama regime told us that it would take at least until the end of 2010 before we saw improving jobs results.

Well which is it?

In either case, Obama’s request for more money to stimulate jobs is an indication that the stimulus is a failure.

If it was supposed to work more quickly, as was initially reported, then the 30 billion dollar request is an admission that it did not work as sold.

If it was anticipated that the job growth would be slower and that we would not see results until the end of 2010 at the earliest then why ask for more money now? Let’s wait to see if it works as stated when the time frame was revamped before we throw more money into the black hole.

The fact that Obama is asking for more money now is an indication that he does not believe that his stimulus will work. He knows that things will not get better as a result of his plans and he wants to appear as if he is doing all that he can because it is an election year and he knows that his party stands to get trounced.

The request for this money to stimulate jobs is an admission by Obama that his stimulus did not work as planned and that he does not expect it to work as planned.

It is a political move to throw good money (if the US actually has any good money) after bad during an election year.

The stimulus is a very expensive failure.

How many times will Obama go to the well before people begin to see this?

Related:
Retail Sales Slump

Never surrender, never submit.

The country elected an inexperienced Socialist to the White House and it is evident each and every day that this was a mistake. Obama is unable to accept responsibility for anything and points fingers outward all the time. Ironically, he was the one who criticized the companies involved in the oil spill for pointing fingers.

Obama’s favorite target is George Bush. When something goes wrong Obama is quick to point out that Bush did it and it is all his fault. Obama ignores his own fault and rewrites history every chance he gets. His latest take is that the Republicans were responsible for the economic problems despite the best effort of Democrats to keep the ship right. This smacks in the face of reality since it was Republicans who warned about problems with the financial sector and Democrats who said that things were fundamentally sound and that there were no problems.

Barney Frank is now rewriting history by saying he never called for home ownership for all and just wanted people to be able to rent homes. This is a blatant lie. He called for mortgages to be given to low income families. Mortgages, for the challenged, are what people take out when they buy a home, not rent one.

Obama is working on his plan for the upcoming election and that plan is to blame it all on Bush. Obama will try to pin the problems the country has faced over the last nearly two years on Bush even though he [Obama] had fool proof majorities in the House and Senate and failed to get much done. His party is responsible for the high unemployment and though he will try to spin that, the reality is unemployment is much higher than under Bush and is higher than Obama said it would be when the Democrats passed the now failed stimulus package.

Obama tried to pin things on Bush in Virginia and New Jersey and he lost both governors. He tried this tack with Massachusetts and lost a Senate seat held by Democrats for nearly five decades.

Obama got away with blaming Bush for problems right after he took office but at some point people have to look at things and decide that they are now Obama’s issues. That point has been crossed and people are no longer buying the blame Bush mentality. Well, except for the rabid base that thinks Bush is responsible for all the bad in the world.

The sane among us know differently. When the election rolls around the Democrats will have had control of Congress for nearly four years and the White House for nearly two. The Democrats were in charge when things went south and they took complete control and drove things deeper into the abyss. Their years of pandering to people and redistributive policies have caused problems for the economy and our society as a whole.

But Obama will ignore all of this and blame it all on Bush.

What do you expect from a man who claims that his regime thwarted several terrorist attacks when the reality is the attackers were too inept to detonate their devices. The only thing that saved people was blind luck. That is what happens when the most transparent regime fails to provide intelligence information in accordance with the law.

And luck is not proper mission planning.

Not to worry, he can blame that on Bush as well…

Source:
Politico

Never surrender, never submit.

The government and its moron minions discuss the “too big to fail” meme as if it is true. The reality is, without failure you are not living. Failure, while bad, is a part of life and is experienced by everyone. No one is too big to fail:

Imagine that…

Never surrender, never submit.

Obama the Great is giving his State of the Union Address and in it he just said that his plan to stimulate the economy and create jobs will involve giving tax credits to small businesses and ELIMINATING the capital gains tax on small businesses. He also talked of corporate tax breaks.

This is nearly the exact thing Rush Limbaugh TOLD Obama needed to be done. On January 26^th of last year, six days after the coronation, Limbaugh proposed the Obama-Limbaugh Bipartisan Stimulus Plan of 2009. In it he said that his part of the plan would include tax cuts:

These tax cuts will consist primarily of capital gains tax cuts and corporate tax rate cuts.

Limbaugh said that the way to stimulate the economy and create jobs was to cut the capital gains tax and the corporate tax. This was poo pooed by the left who claim that tax cuts do not achieve the stated goals and that only spending will work. Obama opted for the spending and unemployment is now at 10% and his Stimulus has been a bust.

Tonight Obama embraced the wisdom of Rush Limbaugh. He did not go for it in total because he only wants to cut small business capital gains on investments and Limbaugh called for a capital gains tax cut on individual capital gains as well. But this is a start.

By making this proposal, Barack Obama has admitted that the liberal ideology is wrong. He has admitted that liberal tax and spend policies do not work. He has admitted that liberalism and its ways is a complete hoax.

And he has admitted that Limbaugh was right.

He has embraced the conservative principle of tax cuts to stimulate. He has taken the advice of the man he tried to demonize only a few short months ago.

Rush Limbaugh was right and Obama was wrong. Obama as much as admitted that.

Make no mistake. Obama is trying to appeal to an electorate (particularly Independents) that is fed up with the way he is running things. He is trying to stop the bleeding from the wounds of the Brown victory in Massachusetts. He is taking this approach to try and win in November.

But he has thrown his party and its ideology under the bus. When things get better the country will see that liberalism is a failed exercise in futility.

And they will see that Limbaugh was right all along.

In April of this year the world was hit with a flu virus and it spread rapidly. The Swine flu (H1N1 variant) struck late in the year and was fairly mild. Concern over the virus reemerging during flu season and being even stronger led to rapid production of a swine flu vaccine. The private industry that developed the vaccine and got it to market quickly is to be commended. The efficacy and safety of the vaccine are a different issue (last time there was a rush the vaccine killed more people than the flu) and the decision to get it is one that should be made between a patient and a doctor. Suffice it to say that the private industry responded quickly.

Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius told us that there was plenty of vaccine, the government is distributing it, and that everyone who wants it will be able to get it. Sounds good so far.

The problem is, government is involved in getting it out and ensuring that everyone who wants it, gets it. There are now regional shortages of the vaccine and there is concern that it will not be available in time to be effective. There is a possibility that by the time some are vaccinated (or have the opportunity to be vaccinated) they will have gotten the flu or the threat will have passed.

Remember, the government is in charge of this. The same people who want to take over the health care system and run every aspect of it are not able to distribute a flu vaccine.

Someone on TV (I can’t remember who) said that he believes that Sebelius has the safety of our children in mind but it is not at the top of her list. The person said it might be number two but her number one thought is “Please don’t let this be our Katrina.”

That is probably accurate. The government is showing that it is not very efficient at the small task of distributing vaccine (it is small compared to running health care) but it expects us to believe it will be able to run all of health care. The Obama administration wants this to go well so that it can crow like a rooster about how well it did and that the government is capable of handling our health care. The reality is that the administration is failing in the mission it took on.

It is true that there are shortages of the seasonal flu vaccine each year but then again no one tells us that there is enough for every man, woman, or child who wants it. In the case if H1N1, the government assured us there is enough for everyone

We have already seen plans for a state government to ration care in the event of a severe flu outbreak. Those plans call for those in certain categories (like those with terminal cancer) to be denied care. That is how government run health care works everywhere it is tried.

The vaccine distribution is strike two in government’s latest attempt to demonstrate it can handle health care (it struck out with Medicare a long time ago).

In baseball, three strikes and you are out. Let us hope that the third strike of government is not demonstrated by failure after it passes a complete health care overhaul. Because then we will be the ones who lose.

Oppose the government takeover of our health care. It will add to the deficit, it will not cover everyone (which they said they would do) and it will lead to poor service and rationing.

Then again, if their ineptitude leads to a huge number of deaths they will be able to save some money.

ObaMao wants complete control and the health care takeover is one big way in which he will do it.

Wake up America.

Related Articles:
Suozzi lashes out at Feds, state over flu vaccine shortages
Swine Flu Vaccine: Enough to Go Around?
Swine Flu Vaccine: Too Little, Too Late?
H1N1 Running Rampant Amid Shortage of Vaccine
U.S. Faces Swine Flu Vaccine Shortage

Remember, they said we have enough. So, how are there shortages?

UPDATE: Illinois is denying the vaccine to the elderly who are not in the government’s target group. Vaccines canceled in parts of Illinois. [Thanks to Mike Radigan]

Joe Biden was on Meet the Press where he said this about the failing stimulus:

Biden tells “Meet the Press” that “everyone guessed wrong” on the impact of the stimulus, economy was worse off than anyone thought.

Isn’t it nice to know the supposed leaders are guessing about how things will be? I know that much of what happens is based upon predictions and supporters are quick to point that out (since a prediction is an educated guess). They seem to have problems with reconciling the issue of what Obama said would happen with the Stimulus and what would happen without. While I realize jobs lag in any recovery, it was not I who said I would create or “save” so many jobs by certain points in time by spending nearly a trillion dollars.

Seems to me if you are going to spend that much money you really ought to have better people making the predictions. Obama predicted we would be at a certain place at a certain time and we are not there. Biden ducked that issue; “[Biden] Backs away from the estimate that the funds could create or save 3.5 million jobs, instead promises 600,000 by the end of the summer.”

Here is a video that shows this with training aids, for those who learn better that way:

Please feel free to comment (a penny for your thoughts…)

Source:
Time
Big Dog Salute to Stop the ACLU