Let's Face It, This Stimulus Package Is One Hell Of A GIGANTIC

[Beetwasher]

Victory for the President!

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2009/02/a_win_is_a_win.php

"A month ago, Obama economists Romer and Bernstein released job-creation projections that "assumed a package just slightly over the $775 billion currently under discussion." Lo and behold, the final bill comes in at $789 billion. It reportedly includes Obama's proposed tax cuts, comprising almost exactly the same proportion of the overall package. For the past month, media attention has focused on all the changes to the package, and on the controversies it has engendered. Obama has been criticized for failing to forge a bipartisan consensus, for not safeguarding his priorities, and for not taking a sufficiently aggressive role in the negotiations on the Hill. So it's worth stepping back to take note of the fact that the final package looks remarkably like what Obama has wanted all along. In fact, it's closer to that original proposal than to either the House or Senate versions of the bill. Remarkable."

Indeed. Remarkable.

Seems like Obama kinda maybe sorta knows what the fuck he's doing.

[babylonsister]

1. It sure is. For all those people who thought he wouldn't get anything

done, I hope they've been comforted. :D

[damonm]

3. No fear. There will be those...

who will bitch on GPs.
I'm not one of 'em, tho.
GOBAMA!

[Beetwasher]

4. And We're What? 3 Weeks In???

Unprecedented and more impressive than I could have imagined.

[liberalmuse]

11. According to my Uncle...

he was going to invest, but after watching two weeks of the incompetent Obama administration, he's holding off, as he fears there may be an "economic downturn". I really do think that Republicans reside in a far different reality than everyone else. :eyes:

[musicblind]

29. He can't actually believe that.

He is probably just refusing to invest in hopes of hurting the economy and making Obama look bad :(

[bdamomma]

116. Obama does not play, he is focused and determined.

[AtomicKitten]

63. His political jujitsu is strong, grasshopper. n/t

[skooooo]

92. The force is with him. nt

[FrenchieCat]

2. So he does......

so he does.

He talks about those who think he was "too" nice in how he has dealt with Republicans here.....at about 5:30 minutes into part II of his Nightline Appearance last night: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EA5uzfuXYgY

[firedupdem]

7. Great video, what Crist said about the voice of the people being

heard ought to really sting the obstructionist rethug party!

[Cha]

39. I saw that interview last night.. I

loved it when Terry Moran said "Honeymoon over?" and Obama set him straight and said, "Not with the American People"(The ones who count).

[Tigermoose]

5. Yes he does.

Gobama and the Democrats!

[scheming daemons]

6. Politically, it is a victory... but it is also a sad thing...

It's a tragedy that the President *HAD* to do this, due to the mismanagement of our previous administration.


It's the first step to recovery, but it is nothing to celebrate. There are many long days ahead.

[Beetwasher]

8. Dammit!

Can't I celebrate a little? We can feel good that SOMETHING is being done and that we've got O in our corner lookin' out.

[scheming daemons]

9. Of course! My point is that it is tragic that it came to this...

[Beetwasher]

I Know

Just pulling your leg!

[poverlay]

13. I definitely think you should celebrate it. Obama had to know long before 1/20 in sitting down with

Rahm that he wasn't going to get "bipartisanship". They must've said "Ok, here's how we get what we want and make the repugs look so shitty in the process that they'll have a much better chance at getting 'pug help in the future." that or those 'pugs are going to start losing their seats mighty quick. I think Obama looks mighty good right now.

[liberal N proud]

10. He will see it as a huge victory for the people

Analyst will call the victory his but he will remain focused on the American people. Night and day from the previous thief who inhabited the White House.

I can't stop reflecting on the stark difference between this administration and the bu$h regime.

[MercutioATC]

12. Let's hope the political victory makes up for the economic damage it will do.

When inflation rises into the teens (and higher) and we're paying $6/loaf for bread, this "gigantic victory" may seem pyrrhic.

[Beetwasher]

15. That's The Stupidest Thing I've Ever Heard

And you have absolutely no evidence to even back up such idiotic claims or predictions.

Maybe we should have done nothing. :eyes: Economic damage? As opposed to the grand economy we're currently experiencieng?

Pathetic sniping.

[MercutioATC]

18. Right, because huge deficit spending has no effect on a currency's value.

I'm not suggesting complete inaction, but a stimulus bill should be limited to programs that give us the most bang for the buck. This bill is bloated with spending that doesn't do that...and we're going to have to pay later for every dollar spent now.

[Beetwasher]

20. Really? And What Exactly Are Those Programs?

Let's see your data, professor. Let's see that bloat. I expect it to be many billions of bloat that comprise a significant percentage.

[MercutioATC]

33. Infrastructure and health insurance reform to start.

Infrastructure:

We need to spend $1.6T in the next five years on infrastructure anyway. If we don't fund a big part of it with this bill, we'll have to come up with the money later.

Health Insurance Reform:

Spending money to provide access to health care to all Americans through a federal program would both save on unreimbursed medical costs at emergency departments and take health insurance (including legacy costs) off of the books of, for example, the auto industry. It has to happen anyway, and we can use this savings as a stimulus to industry instead of just handing them bailout money.


Sure, other things...like funding for the arts...have a limited stimulative value. Programs such as alternative energy research have a long-term payoff, but not much bang for the buck in the short term. Neither, IMO, belong in a bill meant to address an immediate economic crisis.

Infrastructure spending and health insurance reform are both projects that need to be addressed now. hey would both create economic stimulus AND give us something tangible in return for our investment...in the short term.

[Beetwasher]

34. Way To Avoid The Question

Professor, I ask again WHERE'S THE BLOAT IN THIS BILL?

There's a LOT of infrastructure spending in this bill, so, WTF are you talking about? And I'm sure there's more to come. So, you ADMIT spending is GOOD, what happened to your inflation idiocy?

Health insurance reform will be coming too. That's left for a different bill.

So IOW, you have NOTHING TO BACK UP YOUR IDIOTIC CLAIMS THAT THIS WILL LEAD TO OUT OF CONTROL INFLATION or that THIS bill is BLOATED.

Figures. But keep up your idiotic sniping anyway. :eyes:

[MercutioATC]

49. 12% of the bill is infrastructure spending.

That's not "a LOT".


I'll try to explain this simply.

We have defined, non-negotiable needs that require spending...like infrastructure. ($1.6T)

We also have decided that we need short-term stimulus to jump-start the economy. ($800B)

That's a total of $2.4T.

Every dollar of the stimulus money that we use to fund our existing needs reduces that total financial outlay. Reducing the total financial outlay minimizes incurred debt. Minimizing incurred debt reduces inflationary pressure.


The "bloat" is anything that doesn't provide both an immediate economic stimulus and an immediate tangible benefit.

Handing out rubber chickens would officially "stimulate the economy". That doesn't make it a responsible plan.

[Beetwasher]

51. So, IOW, YOU HAVE NOTHING

Except YOUR baseless assertions. Got it.

So you think it should have been bigger? But I thought huge deficit spending would lead to out of control inflation? :eyes:

"When inflation rises into the teens (and higher) and we're paying $6/loaf for bread,..."

"Deficit spending devalues our currency...
Adding another trillion dollars to our debt WILL increase inflationary pressure. "


I guess the last 8 years of out of control deficit spending w/ no job creation means we're paying $6 for a loaf of bread and inflation is in the teens NOW,huh? Right? Pathetic.

[sandnsea]

56. Here

Now please explain to me what you are deducting to come up with your ridiculous claim.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2009/02/01/GR2009020100154.html

And don't forget, social service providers have real jobs, and if we don't provide money to states to help pay them, they'll just end up in the unemployment line too.

[Beetwasher]

59. Too Many Facts Get In The Way Of Bloviating About Imaginary "Bloat"

It's much easier for him throw out baseless nonsensical assertions and back it up w/ nothing but bullshit.

[MercutioATC]

60. My, you ARE a hostile little man.

While I don't draw the line as strictly as they do, the WSJ had an article on this:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123310466514522309.html?mod=loomia&loomia_si=t0:a16:g2:r4:c0.0916906:b0


Again, I'm not refuting the overall value of some of these programs, just their place in an emergency bill meant to provide immediate economic stimulus.

[Name removed]

64. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MercutioATC]

68. Well, the WSJ article lists the "bloat"...I'll type out some of it for you...

Child care subsidies, funding for the arts, alternative energy research, digital TV converter box subsidies, education, OMB, carbon-capture projects, etc.

Wanna increase education funding? Great! Write an education bill.

Alternative energy research is definitely a worthwhile project, but it's NOT going to provide the economic stimulus that this bill was supposed to address.


...and all this when we actually need every dime and more of that $800B on projects that are both necessary and better able to provide immediate stimulus...and I believe that's going to come back to bite us in the ass.

[Beetwasher]

73. LOL

Everything you listed creates jobs, Einstein.

You want a separae bill for ed (hiring teachers/jobs-duh). but want to cram health insurance reform into this bill?

BTW-WSJ Op Eds are not legitimate sources of info. So before I would even accept the premise that those things are in the bill I would need A legit source.

What a clown. You realize by regurgitating repub propoganda and backing it up with WSJ op eds you've essentially outed yrself. :rofl:

[MercutioATC]

76. Handing out rubber chickens would create jobs.

That doesn't make it a viable stimulus.

[Beetwasher]

78. Did you get that from a WSJ OP Ed Too?

:rofl:

You realize that by coming here and regurgitating Repub propoganda and backing it up with op eds from the Wsj you've essentially outer yrself.

[MercutioATC]

81. "Outed" myself? I have a lot more time here than you...

If I was a closet Republican, they probably would have caught me by now :eyes:

That said, I don't live in your black-and-white world. I can disagree with the Republicans' plans while still pointing out the perceived flaws in the Dem plan. I invite discussion, but you seem more interested in name-calling and taking sides than dialog.

[Beetwasher]

82. Uh Huh

Got another WSJ Op Ed? How about regurgitating some more Repub propoganda? :eyes:

[Beetwasher]

90. Oh

BTW I've been here longer than you. Yet another stunningly bullshit assertion from you. :rofl:

[MercutioATC]

94. You're correct. I just have more posts than you.

The point remains. I don't seem to have "outed" myself in over 5 years and 22,000 posts.

[Beetwasher]

98. So What? Thats no point

I guess no ones ever flown under the RADAR before, huh, ATC?

[PerpetuallyDazed]

112. Along those same lines...

Keynes said that "The government should pay people to dig holes in the ground and then fill them up."

[Political Heretic]

103. Child care subsidies are not bloat

You are under the mistaken impression that these elements, most of which are critically needed, "pushed out" spending on other things. But I see no evidence to suggest that. Instead, a democratic president and congress managed to push through some important funding on the back of a bill that there was tremendous pressure to pass.

This whole write a separate bill stuff doesn't make any rational sense. How about, pass the bills we need with the funding we need any way you can.

There's only one thing on that list that we don't need and thats digital TV converter subsidies. I'm thrilled to have everything else.

[Beetwasher]

104. You're Confusing Him With Rationality

BTW all those items of so called bloat come from a WSJ op ed. And the cost of the converters (even if its actually in the package) are so miniscule as to be completely meaningless and could hardly be considered bloat.

[Political Heretic]

105. That's true. I've seen the dollar for dollar break down of the bill the Senate passed.

I haven't seen that for the House Senate Compromise yet, but from what I read so far, the compromise is actually pretty awesome - lots of tax cuts taken out, more spending put back in.

[MercutioATC]

106. That's the problem with Washington politics, though.

Stuff that has no business in a given bill gets stuck in just to get it passed. Much of our legislation has never had to stand on its own merit. DUers complain when Republicans do it, yet they rejoice when Dems do it.

Whomever is doing it, it's a lousy way to make laws.


This is an emergency stimulus bill. If it's not directly related to providing near-term economic stimulus...and damn good at doing it...it has no place in this bill, IMO.

[Beetwasher]

108. Says the jeenyus who would like to add health insurance reform

to an emergency stimulus package. Because as we all know that certainly would never delay the passage of this urgently needed legislation. I mean its not like that would be a controversial issue or anything.

Clown.

[MercutioATC]

109. I'm refraining from replying directly to your posts.

I'd appreciate if you'd do the same.

If you can't be civil, I have no desire to discuss this with you further.

[Beetwasher]

110. Well then!

You're doing as good a job at refraining as you are at defending your idiotic positions!

I'll continue to respond to whatever posts I feel like. You can feel free to run away like a coward who is unable to adequately defend his idiotic and inconsistent positions.

[Terran]

91. Um

Infrastructure:

We need to spend $1.6T in the next five years on infrastructure anyway. If we don't fund a big part of it with this bill, we'll have to come up with the money later.

This bill only covers the next three years, by the way. :eyes:

[MercutioATC]

95. Your point?

Regardless of the time period covered by this bill, we still need to spend $1.6T on infrastructure over the next five years.

[northernlights]

113. and exactly who is going to deliver that health care?

I'm at a point where I want to laugh when people start ranting on about how we need immediate universal single payer health care.

Who the fuck do you think is going to deliver it?

Look what's going on in the health forum. Look at Massachusetts, with its 95% coverage.

Not enough doctors, nurses, lab techs to deliver. Nurses unable to take a 5 minute break to pee, with too many patients, working 12 hour shifts, no replacements if someone calls in sick, forced to sleepover at the hospital or lose their jobs ahead of storms. And long waiting lists to get into school, which costs a mortgage-sized loan to get through.

Fortunately, Maine is putting a roughly equal chunk of spending into *education* as infrastructure.

It's not that univerisal single payer isn't critically important. It's that first you have to train the health care professionals so there is somebody available to deliver.

[sandnsea]

16. Why in the world would that happen? n/t

[MercutioATC]

22. See above. Deficit spending devalues our currency...

Adding another trillion dollars to our debt WILL increase inflationary pressure.

[Beetwasher]

23. And Creates Jobs

As the VAST majority of the spending does.

I guess you're one of those New Deal deniers as well?

[sandnsea]

27. Sensible investment

always adds value. Funny how the free traders always look at business investment completely differently than community investment, even though they have to have communities in order for their businesses to function.

:crazy:

[MercutioATC]

35. I agree. SENSIBLE investment.

In this case, investment that will give us immediate tangible benefits and economic stimulus.

This is a stimulus bill, not a "let's fund everything we think is a good idea" bill. We have limited resources and a defined purpose for this legislation. Let's stay on task.

[Beetwasher]

37. Again, What Parts Of This Bill Are "let's fund everything we think is a good idea"

Point it out, specifically, or admit you're full of shit.

You're the one who just posted that you think it would be a "good idea" to address healthcare in THIS bill. :eyes:

Talk about "let's fund everything we think is a good idea"?

This was NOT the time to address health care. That's coming.

[MercutioATC]

62. Health insurance reform would provide an immediate stimulus...

...unlike oh, say, increased funding for the National Endowment of the Arts or global warming research.

[Beetwasher]

66. Really? How So?

Health insurance can be reformed IMMEDIATELY? Really? How jeenyus? Health insurance reform is, rightfully, left to a separate initiative.

"...unlike oh, say, increased funding for the National Endowment of the Arts or global warming research."

And that's HOW much of the bill? These programs you claim are in the bill (please show me evidence of that) which probably make up MINISCULE percentages are somehow bloating it?

Pathetic.

[MercutioATC]

75. Are you drunk? Perhaps just naturally rude?

Maybe you take personal offense because you wrote the bill?

What's with the "jeenyus" and attitude when encountering a differing opinion?


Regardless, health insurance reform could be done in a matter of months by expanding the Federal Health Care Benefits Program to cover all Americans. It's an existing plan, so there's no need to start from scratch. Its appeal as a stimulus lies in the fact that health care benefits of present and retired workers takes a large toll on industry's bottom line. Minimizing this expense would automatically ease financial pressure on industry, allowing them to hold steady or increase employment...and in the end, recovery is all about job preservation and creation.

[Beetwasher]

79. Bwahaahahahhaha

Sure, got a WSJ op ed to back up that idiotic claim?

This coming from the guy that thinks funding for education, which of course means jobs for teachers, has no place in this bill.

Clown.

[northernlights]

118. AND WHO IS GOING TO DELIVER THE HEALTH CARE?

Universal Insurance CANNOT be created in a matter of months.

It takes YEARS of training, and for most people a loan the size of a mortgage, to learn to be a doctor, a nurse, a lab tech.

Look at the near-universal healthcare (95% opted in) in Massachusetts. Doctors working 7 day weeks. Nurses working 12 hour shifts,without even a 5 minute break to pee, too high of nurse/patient ratios, no replacements when one dares to be sick, and more.

And in the meantime, long waiting lists to get into school. Assuming I am accepted this fall into the lab tech program at my university, it will have taken me 4 years to get through a 2 year program that I'd planned to complete in 3 years. Why? Waiting lists. My chemistry lab partner gave up on MLT and went into straight biology when she learned she was 18th on the waiting list for the small MLT program. The nursing program waiting list is huge by comparison (as is the program).

And this is all assuming I get in. On the one hand, I have a 4.0 average. On the other, I *don't* have a family member working at an area hospital, so won't be at the top of the list.

So I fail to see how education grants -- which will maintain or increase faculty AND retrain displaced workers NOW for needed jobs in the near future -- is bloat.

Whereas, waving a magic wand and creating Universal Health Care now -- without the doctors, nurses, or technicians to deliver it -- is not bloat.

Please explain.

[sandnsea]

42. Schools, transit, energy, highways,

ARE sensible investments. One of the reasons we were ready to gear up for WWII and reconstruction after, was because of all that wasteful WPA spending. Republicans are in complete denial about business use of public infrastructure.

[northernlights]

117. if only that were true

since we're up against a DEFLATIONARY SPIRAL, we could use a little inflationary pressure to slow it down, if not stop it.

But seriously, my understanding of inflation is that it is too many dollars chasing too few goods.

We have the opposite situation here. No money, inventory stacked up, and businesses going down the tubes.

And the way I see it, all those fraudulent loans, fraudulent derivative swaps, etc. created a few trillions of dollars of funny money. And when the fraud came undone, the trillions of dollars vaporized.

So the gov creating a couple trillion -- and putting into the hands of people who will spend it on things they need (versus giving it to the wealthy to feed their gambling addiction) -- will help stop the deflationary cycle, get inventory off of shelves, and get the economy moving again.

But it won't create inflationary pressure because it's really just replacing the "funny money" manufactured during the * years with real money -- and putting that into the right hands.

[scheming daemons]

17. We're actually in a deflationary spiral right now.... a little inflation is good right now

[Beetwasher]

19. Don't Let Facts Get In The Way Of Idiotic Sniping

n/t

[MercutioATC]

61. The problem is that inflation builds momentum.

This isn't creating "a little" inflation, it's building inertia for a large inflationary push...and that's not a good thing.

[Beetwasher]

67. According to YOU

Meanwhile, the last 8 years of idiotic deficit spending has not done what you claim it should. Oh, and the danger according to just about everyone is DEFLATION.

[MercutioATC]

71. Have you checked the value of the U.S. Dollar lately?

The current deflationary pressure is being caused (mostly) by a tight money supply. Once it loosens, we have already set the stage for a brisk rise in inflation.

Don't believe me? Just wait a year or so...or talk to any college economics student.

[Beetwasher]

74. Tell It To All The Award Winning Economists

Who disagree. The danger is deflation or stagflation, jeenyus.

[MercutioATC]

77. You just don't get the fact that the economy is dynamic, do you?

The CURRENT problem is deflation...caused by the tightening of the money supply. Ease that tightening, and the deflationary pressure goes away. Meanwhile, we've been stacking the deck for rampant inflation. Pop the cork and up it goes.

If you'd like to show me all of the award-winning economists who disagree, feel free.

[Beetwasher]

80. Back Up YR bullshit professor Krugman

Maybe with another WSJ Op ed. :rofl:

[MercutioATC]

83. Ok, now you're just not making any sense.

It's an established fact that tightening credit is a cause of deflation.

It's an established fact that we have tightening credit and deflation is a worry.

AND

It's an established fact that printing excess money and increasing debt is a cause of inflation.

It's an established fact that we've both printed excess money and increased debt.

THEREFORE

If we continue to print excess money and assume more debt while loosening credit markets like we're trying to, we WILL experience inflation.


That's Economics 101...no expert citations needed.

[Beetwasher]

85. So Why Are You The Only Jeenyus Around

So worried about inflation?

Maybe another WSJ op ed can clear up the confusion.

[MercutioATC]

86. Why do you seem to be the only person who's not?

It's no secret. There's been plenty of talk about it for months...especially since the huge bailouts started last year.

You might want to read the WSJ every once in a while. It's slightly more financially informative than WaPo...

[Beetwasher]

89. Well should be easy for you

to put up then.

Ahh yes, the WSJ op ed page. Universally reknowned for its fair and accurate portrayal of Democratic policies.

Clown.

[MercutioATC]

93. The International Herald Tribune?

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/03/20/business/rtrcol21.php

Forbes, maybe?

http://www.forbes.com/2008/11/26/fidelity-gold-newmont-pf-ii-in_jd_1126gurusow_inl.html

[Beetwasher]

97. Oh. My. Goodnes!!!!!! ROFL!!!!!!!

These are relevant to the current stimulus package??????

This is your supprting evidence that the stimulus will lead to out of control inflation???? An article that's a year old and one that's about gold prices??????

Wow. The terms clown and pathetic Are insufficient for you.

[MercutioATC]

99. If you don't see that the fundamentals are the same, you never will.

Keep cheerleading. When those pompoms wind up in an unintended orifice, don't say that you didn't have the information.

The lack of cognitive thought here never ceases to amaze me.

Since you're unwilling to respond to my posts with anything resembling constructive dialog, I don't see the point of continuing this discussion.

I guess the next few years will reveal how it all pans out...

[Beetwasher]

101. Last Refuge Of A Shill

"I guess the next few years will reveal how it all pans out..." and "you just don't get it..."

Indeed. When you got nothing else, push your bullshit into the future and claim you're the only jeenyus who gets what everyone else seems to be missing. After all, even Bush claims historians will vindicate him. You're in good company! :rofl:

[Occam Bandage]

26. I'm more worried about deflation at the moment. Some inflation would help, actually. nt

[phleshdef]

96. The vast majority of economists disagree with you.

[Political Heretic]

102. The opinion of Paul Krugman comes with credentials, and I trust it over yours.

:shrug:

[MercutioATC]

107. Fair enough.

Since none of us has a crystal ball, we'll see how it works out.

I'm much less optimistic than you.

[damonm]

14. The Stim package has been detected in space...

[ElboRuum]

21. heeheehee...

Love that pic.

[HOLOS]

24. He is Moving at Jet (Mach) Speed...ZOOOMMM...

[ejpoeta]

25. don't tell the msm.... they are peddling the meme that he had to

go to the public because he was losing the bill. and then they said that the three swing senators had ALL the power. blah blah blah.

[grantcart]

28. also filled with great ironies

he has boxed the republicans in Washington into a very narrow canyon and cut them off from their own Governors, Mayors and Business leaders.

[scheming daemons]

30. ...and stapled their hides to Limbaugh and Hannity

[Cha]

100. An extra

perk:rofl:

[MadBadger]

31. The Makeup of 65-35 is a big victory considering the senate package

Also, they took the money away from the tax credits.

[bridgit]

32. U2's lyric in Bullet The Blue Sky seems so quaint & antique these days "Suit and tie comes up to me

"His face red like a rose on a thorn bush
Like all the colors of a royal flush
And he's peelin' off those dollar bills
(Slappin' 'em down)
One *Trillion*, two *Trillion*."

Aw, the memories but yeah...Obama is turning it around and learning quickly. My sense is that it will go down even harder for republcians the next time around

[Thrill]

36. THIS PACKAGE IS A LIBERAL's DREAM

We have Huge Amounts of money for Healthcare, Boatload for Education, Alternative Energy, Big on Infrastructure, and MIDDLE CLASS TAX CUTS.

This is the whole agenda of the party. wow just wow. Would we love more money in all of them? yes. But if you can't see this huge victory, I don't know what to say

[ClarkUSA]

38. Damned right... and where are all those fools who insist Obama is a pandering centrist now?

[Thrill]

41. AND the 'Buy American' is still in there

[ClarkUSA]

44. He's keeping his liberal promises to the American manufacturing industry and the unions.

[Hekate]

46. Oh they're here, never fear. Nothing will change their minds, either.

:rofl:

[ClarkUSA]

54. True. They're cowardly assholes who only come out to create divisions or push their own delusions.

[sandnsea]

45. Huge Victory, Agreed.

Especially if we got more spending in exchange for those dumb house and car tax cuts.

[Hekate]

40. That's what I thought at the Dem-led press conference with the 3 moderate Repubs...

Holy cow, he got what he wanted.

This is only the FIRST go-round. Education, public schools, women's health -- those WILL come back soon. How about in your next 3 weeks in office, Mr. President? :D

Hekate

[Beetwasher]

43. We Still Have The Regular Spending And Appropriations Bills Too

Which will be packed w/ MORE stimulus items. Everyone needs to remember that. Those bills are opportunities for MORE stimulus.

Man. THREE FUCKING WEEKS IN!!!!!!!!!!!! Holy. Fucking. Shit. Amazing.

[sandnsea]

48. We got a lot in education

We can get women's health in the health care bill when he cuts those Bush tax cuts.

[johan helge]

47. Krugman: The stimulus should have been at least 50 % larger

Krugman (http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/02/07/what-the-centrists-have-wrought/): "So the original $800 billion plan was too small, especially because a substantial share consisted of tax cuts that probably would have added little to demand. The plan should have been at least 50% larger."

So is this stimulus "what Obama has wanted all along"? I hope he wanted a larger one.

[Hekate]

50. Hekate to Krugman: Chill. This is only the first bill. Check again in another 3 weeks. nt

[ClarkUSA]

55. ClarkUSA to Hekate...

:rofl: :thumbsup:

[Thrill]

52. I'm sure he would of liked it bigger. But He actually wanted to get it passed

[Beetwasher]

53. I Would Have Liked It Bigger Too, HOWEVER

People need to remember, we STILL have regular spending and appropriations bills that are coming up. Those are OPPORTUNITIES FOR MORE STIMULUS.

[ClarkUSA]

57. Exactly.

Thanks for the reality check that many at DU desperately need.

[sandnsea]

58. It cuts the taxes he said were stupid

It adds more spending - and Krugman still knows better. What a pompous ass.

[BeyondGeography]

65. The Krugtards are good at snatching defeat from the jaws of political victory

[anonymous171]

69. THEY CAN PASS OTHER BILLS FOR GOD'S SAKE! nt

[depakid]

70. and a major loser for the states

and quite probably for the party in 2010.....

[Hekate]

72. The Congressional Repubs are standing in the way of aid to the states, & governors know it...

That includes Republican governors. The party this is going to be a "major loser" for is the Republican Party, and it couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of people.

Hekate

[depakid]

84. Problem is that the people who are going to be adversely affected don't know that

all they'll see is that the stimulus isn't working, as their states drastically cut back.

They'll blame the party in control (which they should- because with this much popularity and political capital, there was no good reason to sell us out).

[Hekate]

87. Dem organizations are already running tv ads in Repub districts hit hard by the economy...

... including AFSCME. I don't think the message is going to be lost.

Hekate

[leftstreet]

88. People thought they voted the Repubs OUT

Bush out.
Obama in.

Sorry, but the Dems will take the blame if the states crash.

[Hekate]

111. You can't fool all of the people all of the time, as Abe Lincoln once said. The more obstructionist

... that Congressional Repubs are about passing meaningful legislation -- and the more President Obama and the rest of the Dems tell the truth about the origins of this mess -- the more vulnerable the Repubs will be in 2010. Believe it.

Hekate

[Dinger]

114. I Wish I Could Be More Happy About It

But as a teacher, I am less than thrilled about the BILLIONS of dollars cut from the House version. Sorry.

[bdamomma]

115. it is better than nothing and I just wish they would just vote on it.

and move with the job at hand. the repigs are continuing to show everyone they are slipping off the cliff, if they keep obstructing this President.

[marshall]

119. And only three Republicans will be able to take any credit for it

The rest of the asses voted against it, and they can stand in the shadows next year when it's a resounding success and the economy is on the rebound.