Congressional Budget Office: Present Stimulus Package Is Not A Good Bill

As much as I hate to sound like a broken record, it's hard to ignore some things that I truly believe in my heart and the common sense in my head, especially when they both tell me something is not a very good idea. But I am not alone in the world, just out of the loop of influence.

One guy that is not out of that loop is the Director of the Congressional Budget Office, Douglas Elmendorf. In the Director's blog on the CBO webite, he states what is becoming painfully obvious to most intelligent people, who also happen to possess the slightest measure of common sense. And he has attempted to communicate this (SEE: Pdf letter) to the ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee. Unfortunately for all of us that stand to suffer the full impact of reckless legislation, this ranking member is not presently in the majority party.

For those unfamiliar with Mr. Elmendorf, you can read his resume here (also in pdf form). Those that support this stimulus package lock, stock, and barrel may be ready to jump conclusions about his qualifications, but it is important for them to understand that he is not a right-wing hack. He comes from the Brookings Institution, which is anything but partisan and his appointment had the blessings of a Democratic majority Congress.

Elmendorf doesn't doubt that the current stimulus package will provide a slight boost in the economy for the short-term, which is to say in the next two years. The range he provides is between 1.2 million and 3.6 million jobs. Keeping in mind that this package is now estimated to be at around $800 billion, we can easily use a calculator to do the math. Using his estimate, this means Congress will be spending between $220,000 and $660,000 per job, most of which will pay nowhere near either amount.

So where is the money going? Special interests that Democrats have an unhealthy affinity for, I suspect. More importantly, from where will it come? More government loans, probably from foreign sources that have already loaned us more than we needed to borrow.

To answer both questions in-depth would require a separate post for each. But the outcome of this whole scheme is what people need to hear, because it is apparent they do not care about the questions (or their answers) to begin with. They didn't ask Obama or the Dems how they were going to pay for their grandiose promises during the election, they don't seem to care much now.

Mr. Elmendorf says it will reduce output starting in 2011 and beyond, when these loans will need to start to be repaid. To put it in simpler terms, it will buy us another recession in 2012, coincidentally when the President will be up for reelection. If you are a critical thinker like me, this causes you to ponder some things like whether this is the master plan -- keep the people believing they need him to save them from the same impending doom he says we all are facing, at the present time.

It really doesn't take a calculus whiz to figure this out, just someone that can do basic general math. If you are spending more than you take in, you will need to borrow money. If you borrow that money, you will need to pay it back or risk losing your credit rating. If you have more cash flowing out than in, you either have to find a way to bring more cash in or stop the excess flow of cash out. In other words, you need to increase revenue or decrease expenses.

Never once does it occur to Congress that maybe too much money is flowing out of Washington. But starting in 2011, the independent CBO believes it will really start to flow. In the meantime, there's no need to bring this up. Those that hold power right now, simply do not want to hear it.

One fine example of this is a recent interview with David Obey (D-WI), the Chairman of the House Appropriations Committee. He helped write the bill and doesn't like being asked about the waste in this bill.

U.S. Rep. David Obey (D-WI), the chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, helped write the bill and says he doesn't like being asked about earmarks.

"We simply made a decision, which took about three seconds, not to have earmarks in the bill," he says. "And with all due respect, that's the least important question facing us on putting together this package."

Leaving out the earmarks does mean Congress will have less control over how the money is spent. But, Obey says, "So what? This is an emergency. We've got to simply find a way to get this done as fast as possible and as well as possible, and that's what we're doing."

That doesn't mean Congress will be responsible if the money is spent badly, he says.

"The person who spends the money badly will be responsible. We are simply trying to build as many protections in as possible," Obey says. "We have more oversight built into this package than any package in the history of man. If money is spent badly, we want to know about it so we can hold accountable the people who made that choice. And guess what? Regardless of what we do, there will be some stupid decisions made."

Sounds like this is worse than if it were full of earmarks, because at least there would be some accountability as how the money will be spent. But in this case, Congress can absolve itself of any responsibility if the money is wasted by the recipients. This is something we have already seen from last year's bailout and despite the knowledge of those mistakes, Rep. Obey is saying he doesn't give a damn how your tax dollars are spent.

The House wrote it and wants the Senate to pass it as they crafted it. As we can see right now, the Senate wants to screw it up in their way. By the time it gets to Obama, he will more than pleased to sign it, either way it would arrive. This tells me they are spendaholics who care nothing about money that you earn and must give to them. They spend it like drunken sailors, with no thought about the long-term consequences. They only care about the here and now, which means they must pay off their supporters, while they have this chance.

You see, I suspect they know their time in power is limited. Even Joe Biden knows there will be a backlash, when the outcome of this sausage fry is more plainly known.

So get ready America, your short term fix is coming, but your children and grandchildren are in for some hard times ahead. I hope you think about it, when that time comes. I hope all of you that voted for this bunch of greedy, idiotic bastards can get your short-term thrill now, because you have demonstrated that you have no knowledge of anything and even less compassion for those that must follow your selfish actions.

If you do not fall into this category of egocentricity, I highly suggest you flood your Senator's e-mail box and phone lines with voices of displeasure. Especially those you know will be up for reelection next year, all these jerks will ever fear or understand is losing their power.

Another Blast From The Past

It's day four for me without a cigarette and Congress is full of dumbasses, so this is pretty much how I feel this week.

Not much of an Ozzy fan, but I did like this one and it fits right now. Here is Crazy Train:



Speaking of crazy, here is Seal with his song, Crazy:



Pink Floyd and the always relaxing Breathe:



Enjoy

Election Over. Bipartisanship Dead.

After years of GOP rule, the Democrats are now in a position to run over the opposition without much resistance. As we see in the stimulus package story, they are bound and determined to run this thing as close to a trillion dollars (without going over) as they possibly can. And in the process, they are trying to push the faces of the GOP into the mud, while they do it.

Nancy Pelosi, the idiot Speaker who cannot count a census, is chief among the bullies. This article pretty much outlines the spirit of Democrats everywhere.

In a statement sure to rile Republicans, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi Friday dismissed calls for bipartisanship as “process” arguments extraneous to passing a stimulus bill — and warned Senate Democrats against slashing proposed increases to education spending.

Of course, it was Pelosi, who went on a crusade back in 2004 for House minority rights. Remember this story?

House Democrats' anger at heavy-handed Republican tactics reached a new level yesterday, with the chamber's top Democrat asking the House speaker to embrace a "Bill of Rights" for the minority, regardless which party it is.

In keeping with the general atmosphere of the House these days, aides to Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) said he will not respond to the two-page proposal from Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.).

For decades, the party in power has used House parliamentary rules to limit the minority party's ability to amend bills and shape debates. But Democrats -- in the minority for 10 years after four decades of control -- say Republicans have gone to unreasonable lengths in recent years. GOP leaders dispute this, but congressional scholars and even some rank-and-file Republicans agree in whole or in part.

Pelosi's document, which she vows to honor if Democrats regain the majority, says: "Too often, incivility and the heavy hand of the majority" have silenced Democrats and choked off "thoughtful debate." She called on the majority to let the minority offer meaningful amendments and substitutes to important bills; to limit roll-call votes to the normal 15 minutes rather than keeping them open to round up needed votes; and to let all appointees to House-Senate conference committees participate in meetings and decisions.

The emphasis added is from me, but let's trouble shoot this a second.

If you are a Democrat (particularly a younger one), you may be tempted to present the argument that the GOP didn't respond to Pelosi's request back then; subsequently, all bets off now that the Dems are in control. After all, it was they who won, right? You may say that the Dems are giving the GOP a dose of their own medicine.

But if you are younger or suffer from selective memory loss, you may need to be reminded of the 30 year reign of terror the Dems had over the House. Just think back or pick up a book about the Carl Albert, Tip O'Neill, and Jim Wright eras. The Democrats had no trouble shooting down any productive ideas from Republicans during that era and cutting them out of any meaningful role in the system.

But the larger question I'd like to raise is, if it's unfair when one side does wrong, why is is fair when the other side does it? Seems to me that Pelosi would remember how she felt during all those years she felt like a nobody, with no rights to have any meaningful input. Now she wants to turn the tables on those that made her feel that way.

Nancy the Mindless Hypocrite is now vacationing in a upper class resort, warning people in the Senate not to tamper with her work and to ignore the calls for a spirit of bipartisanship, in a bill that is designed to help us all avoid catastrophic results from a tanking economy. Poor people are starving everywhere, just waiting for relief.

But if you will excuse her for a moment, she has an appointment for a seaweed body wrap. She has to stay young looking, you know. She will be back feeding the hungry, after that, her cucumber facial, and her nails appointment.

Buried Polls

Remember polls? We were saturated with them for an entire year and part of another.

In fact we had so many of them the entire time GWB was in office, they came out of our noses. The media used them as an effort to embarrass him and his administration, skewing the results in any way they could to do it. Even if they were slightly favorable towards him, they were cast in the worst possible light..

Well, believe it or not, Gallup is still taking polls. It's what they do best, and they have a new one out about the proposed stimulus package.

Here are the results they report:

38% Pass it, as is.

37% Pass it, with major changes.

17% Reject it.

8% No opinion.

This means 54% of the respondents were against it, as it is currently proposed. If this had been a GWB proposal with a GOP Congress, we'd be hearing this from the media ad nauseum. But, it's not GWB. It's BHO and he is still in a honeymoon phase with his loving and supportive bride, the media.

No folks, we still have polls. The media just isn't receptive to featuring them as a lead-in right now. I wonder how they will react, when they turn south against the Obama administration.

The Mindless Madame Speaker Speaks

So many times it's hard to decide what to post. Sometimes there isn't anything of any value. Other times there are a multitude of things to choose from and choosing is quite difficult. But every now and then, something is just too god to pass up. This short clip of Nancy Pelosi stating that every month 500 million Americans lose their jobs is a classic:



Honestly now Democrats, how much longer are you going to tolerate this airhead to lead the United States House of Representatives?

There are gaffes and there are gaffes, but this woman doesn't appear to have one damned bit of intelligence. There are smart people with whom I thoroughly disagree. But to have an idiot, whom I thoroughly disagree with is utterly painful to watch.

She has to be a royal embarrassment for anyone that calls themselves a Democrat.


Addendum: Let's just see if the media makes her look like a brainless idiot, like they would if it were Sarah Palin. I mean fair's fair here. Pelosi is supposed to be a skilled and experienced politician, Sarah was new to the national scene.

I have watched Pelosi quite a bit lately and I have to say, she has a hard time sounding moderately intelligent on her good days.

Remember, this is the same Nancy Pelosi, who in one politically expedient moment, said this:

Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process.

Then, in another bright shining display of mindless chatter decides to say:

The president led us into the Iraq war on the basis of unproven assertions without evidence; he embraced a radical doctrine of pre-emptive war unprecedented in our history; and he failed to build a true international coalition.

We rest our case.

Recommended Reading

Here are some things to consider in your daily reading rounds.


AC talks about the new US Senator from NY. What a difference a few days and a title change make.


Mustang raises some interesting questions about the state of the economy and other things that may or may not signal America's decline.


AICS has Obama's two week report card. Of course when you are critical of the President, you run the risk of attracting a mean-spirited and ignorant troll that cannot carry on an intelligent argument. And he did.


Finally, Z has posed some interesting questions that will help us all understand our place on the planet and the universe. Be sure to check them out.

Team Obama Playing Defense, After Daschle Withdraws

Bill Richardson's pay for play allegations, Timothy Geithner's failure to pay his taxes, Hillary Clinton's husband's foundation accepting foreign cash. Just when you think it was safe to go back in the water, here comes more.

Today, after much pressure and a critical piece in the NY Times, Tom Daschle has decided to throw in the towel. But before Daschle's exit, another Obama appointee pulled out. Nancy Killefer who was to be the first performance chief, a post created by the Obama administration, had tax problems of her own.

Despite this developing pattern of incompetence, Team O is defending their performance in both the selection process and failure to adhere to its own promises, not to employ lobbyists in the administration.

Despite the tax problems faced by high-level nominees, and the exceptions made to the no-lobbyists pledge, President Barack Obama's spokesman is defending the administration's ethical standards.

Robert Gibbs told reporters Tuesday, "The bar that we set is the highest that any administration in the country has ever set."

Change is a misnomer in this case, and hope is fading fast. The new administration is not delivering very well in these first days, and the anger is beginning to brew. Between the shady appointments and the audacity of Congress to pork up Obama's stimulus plan with wasteful liberal spending, we may see a downward turn in poll numbers sooner than I ever expected.

In due time, I think you will find a shift in confidence from those that were duped into believing this man could do the many things he said he could. These were they, that thought the nation needed to go in a different direction. PYY and its readers were never fooled, and we said so many times in the days leading up to the election.

But hey, what do WE know?



Addendum:

Advance Indiana has details on this story.

It is easy to project yourself as a clean politician after making your debut in South Side Chicago with buddies like Rahm Emanuel. US president Obama has appointed more than 17 lobbyists after talking big on anti-lobbyist Governance and rooting corruption out of the American Government.

Seventeen!!!

As AI points out in his post, this isn't being carried by the US mainstream media. One had to search the India Times, to locate this gem.

Michael Phelps: Flying High

Here comes Mikey.

Michael Phelps.

Mike worked hard training to achieve a goal and the objective was met. This has to be a story for the ages, right there. No need to go any further. Stop.

But no, we are not stopping there.

It seems that Michael was photographed smoking pot from a bong and now the world is agog. Some have assumed a holier-than-thou, he should be held accountable by losing the $100 million in contracts, etc., etc., etc. Many of these people were never 23, they never made a mistake. Just ask them. Others may be so under the influence, they still haven't heard the news story, even yet. They are not sure what day it is.

With this scenario in mind, this is your lucky day. PYY readers will get two rants in one post:

The drug laws in the U.S. are antiquated and hypocritical. Let's just (for this argument) take marijuana and alcohol, for instance. Both are drugs, no? Both create euphoria, right? One is legal, the other is not. Makes sense, right?

Wrong.

The history of alcohol in the U.S. should teach us the lessons we need to know about this. Prohibition is the era, in particular.

Remember how alcohol distribution went underground and created the opportunity for the growth of organized crime? Well, take a look around now. Marijuana is one of the modern day mob enterprises. Knowing this to be the case, what sense does it make to create these opportunities today?

We know that demand is there, we know that supply is there. We know that the war on drugs has not worked.

If for no other reason in the world, look at the fiscal end of it. Money is getting dumped into this and has had little effect (if any) on the demand or the supply. The vast majority of the war on drugs has been on supply. This to to say, it has been spent on enforcement of the laws, by making criminals out of these people. I am sorry folks, but it just isn't working. Why keep beating a dead horse?

How about this? How about we legalize marijuana? Alcohol destroys many lives, wrecks homes, kills people. Far more so, than marijuana. So I am not accepting this particular argument, which many will be tempted to counterpoint with me.

Allow pot to be sold in liquors stores with the same laws as the liquor industry. Then, tax the hell out of it. Stop tying up jail space and police officers wasting time arresting people like Waldo (who likes to smoke a joint on the weekends in the privacy in his own home).

The exceptions to this should be driving under the influence and providing it to minors. If someone is caught doing either, throw the book at them.

Now, I promised two rants. I want to make good on that promise.

This one is directed at Michael and others athletes/celebrities that require physical health, drive, and dedication to perform their jobs. Knowing how Mike had all of these contracts lined up, knowing how he could be financially secure for life, what kind of an idiot cannot show the self discipline it takes to make that kind of money? Like the NBA stars that get busted at the beginning of training camp doing stupid stuff (SEE: Indiana Pacers, before this year), why is it that they cannot behave themselves long enough to perform their craft to the best of their ability?

As for Michael specifically, despite my liberality in the drug laws debate, I think you should leave that crap alone. You need to keep your body as healthy as you can, for as long as you can. That's the talent you have been given, that's the talent you should use to the best of your ability. You started out with nothing, your mom busted her backside to help you get where you are now. Don't blow it for a few moments of socialization and escape.

And the same goes to others.

If you want to be a doctor, leave that stuff alone. Do not compromise your ability to think clearly, so you can learn what you need to learn. And later, you can use what you learn without distractions. Teachers, lawyers, businessmen and women, whatever, it will not make you any more successful by doing it.

If it affects your ability to exercise good judgments, it cannot be a good thing.

No one is going to care if you screw your own lives up without affecting them. But they will, if you screw up their lives in the process.

Think about it.

Monday AM QB

This is the last installment of this opinionated feature, until next season. Naturally, depression has already set in, knowing there will be no more football until then.

Pittsburgh 27 - Arizona 23

The keys to this game were, as follows.

1. Penalties - Arizona shot themselves in the foot with some silly ones, usually holding. The Cards were penalized 106 yards to the Steelers' 56. Both sides were commiting them, but I thought the Steelers got away with more than the Cards.

2. Turnovers - Arizona had one lost fumble to none, for Pittsburgh. The biggest TO was the 100 yard interception return by Harrison. He showed why he is the defensive player of the game on that one. That (in my opinion) was the difference in the game, despite the fact the Cards came back in the 4th. On the 2-yd line ready to score before the half, and whammo. The Steelers sucked the life out and turned the momentum around in an instant. Big, big play right there.

3. The Refs - I thought there were numerous questionable "no calls" that went in the Steelers' favor. I agreed with Madden that Harrison should have been tossed for that cheap shot late in the game. But since he was the defensive player of the year, he wasn't. In the interception return, he showed why he was the man. In this play, he showed why he was the punk.

Nothing wrong with playing hard and hitting hard, but I thought the refs calls were setting the Steelers up to allow them free reign to play their style of game, better. Pittsburgh sensed it and tried to intimidate Arizona at every possible opportunity.

But in the end, the Cardinals had their chance to seal this with another great defensive stand. They didn't do it. I am sure Steelerville is happy and will be as obnoxious as they ever were at workplaces around the nation today. But from a neutral fan of the game, they got the breaks in this one.

Until September, this is NFL bloviater LASunsett, out.

FEMA Fails Kentucky Ice Storm Victims

Hear that?

That's the sound of crickets chirping. Four days after the big snow and ice storm hit the nation's midsection, we hear no noise but the sound of our little chirping friends. No lead stories in national newscasts, no conspiracy theories, no nothing.

By this time in the aftermath of Katrina, we had every Democratic hack, every race baiting bastard on the face of the earth calling Bush every name in the book, all because of FEMA's poor response. And a poor response, it was (as was that of the state of Louisiana and the City of New Orleans). These BS artists had black people everywhere whipped into an angry frenzy, with accusations of racism and overt plots to kill blacks, in and by the White House.

But today, the media will be talking about the Super Bowl. The bigoted and racist Louis Farrakhan is nowhere to be found, probably planning his next "hate-whitey" speech. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are both absent from soundbiteland. And the current White House is probably getting ready to host a SB party for staffers.

I am not the only one to notice this. Here some others:

Fore Left (Hat Tip to AC for getting me started on this rant. If you read this blog and not his, ask yourself, why not?)

Jammie Wearing Fool

The Jawa Report

American Thinker

Ed Driscoll

The Discerning Texan

The Vocal Minority

You get the idea. Unless you are a Democratic hack or race baiter, this should irritate the hell out of you. If you want to be guided by principles, you cannot pick and choose demographics to apply them.