« Bone-strengthening drugs help some | Main | Sunnyside Park »

February 22, 2009

Stimulated to outrage

Recent events have provided so many reasons for outrage that it is necessary to be selective. Here are my top candidates:

The 97 percent of Democrats in Congress who voted for the largest single expenditure in the history of the world without reading the entire bill.

President Obama for the gall to claim the stimulus bill contained no pork, although it contains post-election paybacks to his cronies such as the $2 billion for groups like ACORN.

Obama (again) for claiming the stimulus bill would somehow allow us to spend our way out of a recession, when such tactics have never worked before. Henry Morgenthau, Treasury secretary to Franklin Delano Roosevelt and key architect of the New Deal confessed: “We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work … I say after eight years of this administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started … And an enormous debt to boot!”

Contents of the stimulus bill that are just coming to light, such as the $1.1 billion to create a health-care effectiveness board, a certain precursor to health-care rationing. I call that bureaucrat job stimulus!

Glenn Gordon
Liberty

President Obama has revealed his big plan to rescue the people in bad mortgages, and I don’t like it one bit. It is expensive and does nothing to help the economy. It creates not one job. It sells not one house. It does reward people for making bad choices and banks for following bad business practices.

While we may feel for those who have lost jobs or suffered illnesses and thereby have fallen behind in their payments, that’s life. Bad things happen to us all the time. We can’t expect Uncle Sam to rescue us from our unfortunate circumstances.

What this program should do is encourage the banks to rewrite the mortgages with lower interest rates and longer loan terms. It should encourage people to buy homes, giving tax credits of at least $15,000 spread over three years.

If the Economic Recovery Act is as good as Obama claims, then it will create 3.6 million jobs and there will be buyers for the foreclosed and new houses.

Earl D. Bishop
Independence

Comments

Casady

Once again, while I am not terribly pleased with the stimulus package and the bailouts, I see government intervention as a necessity at this point and I ask our RATIONAL conservative friends out here (Kate, Eng, Sammy, pcmw if you are out there) what other options do we have at this point? So far, I've seen a lot of futile and bickering by the uninformed wing nuts on both sides but not much in the way of alternatives from you guys who represent the intelligent side of those opposed to the measure.

Casady

Once again, while I am not terribly pleased with the stimulus package and the bailouts, I see government intervention as a necessity at this point and I ask our RATIONAL conservative friends out here (Kate, Eng, Sammy, pcmw if you are out there) what other options do we have at this point? So far, I've seen a lot of futile and bickering by the uninformed wing nuts on both sides but not much in the way of alternatives from you guys who represent the intelligent side of those opposed to the measure.

Kate

Engineer, a cynical person might check several places, including liberal websites, and not find the pictures. A cynical person might then suspect such pictures do not exist. Then, remembering all the times this person alluded to information that was “unavailable” or sneered “look it up yourself,” a cynical person might begin to question all statements not linked. A cynical person, mind you . . .

Engineer

Pub 17
" blown up and lightened for detail". Is that as longer description for "photo shopped"?

Engineer

Pub 17
Once again, what lies? Or were you referring to your statement that I did?

Kate

Something’s not right here:

“Much better and wider-angle pictures are posted (find them yourself, loser) and show, blown up and lightened for detail, at most, generously counted, sixty to seventy people at the rally.”

But from the linked story, “Overland Park police estimated the crowd on a cold and windy Saturday morning at 200 to 300 people.”

I’m not sure how the “better and wider-angle pictures” missed 130 to 230 people, but it reflects poorly on disposable cameras. And that “unlinked source” must be plenty hacked off at the one-hour shop for messing up the developing.

solomon

LIBERAL?@!-Pub

.....I thought you'd like that....

Engineer

Pub 17
Just what "lies"? You can't name a single one. There may be things with which you do not agree, but that doesn't make them lies.

Pub 17

Engineer, you've now joined the ranks of the right-wing kooks who endlessly perpetuate lies. These are the people who lost the election for you. I'm sorry you feel you have to go this way.

Engineer

The Star is a Newspaper? Newspapers PRINT things. The Star did not print anything about the protest rally. I do not know the numbers but would bet the printed version reaches far more people than the on-line one. Jim and others keep extolling the virtues of this awful bill so far as infrastructure is concerned. The bill devotes approximately 6% of its funding to infrastructure according to The Star. But that's alright. Those infrastructure projects tend to employ skilled white construction workers and, according to adviser Robert Reich, that isn't who we want to help. Giving funds to Acorn and like organizations, now, that’s where it, or at least the dough for votes, needs to go. That way there will be lots more money to stir up more action to apply for more grants from government. That's stimulus for you, baby. The kind this bill provides, anyway.

Pub 17

LIBERAL?@!

solomon

Could it have been the liberal use of the word "moonbat" in his submission?

Pub 17

Maybe you missed this: Arminius was whining over on Midwest Voices that he applied to be one of the Voices and got turned down. Gee.

solomon

Jim,

I don't think Roger is Arminius, although he does seem to have a crush on him. Our friend Arminius is more hateful in his posts while ol' Rog is just insulting.

Jim

My guess is that Roger is Arminius.

Pub 17

Solomon--
No, Roger doesn't resemble anybody here, but he resembles jenniferm over on Midwest Voices. They're the only two people, Arminius intermittently makes a third, who post on the two blogs who actively encourage abuse: not just, "Take your best shot," but, "Beat me, whip me, make me write bad checks." After a while it's like the guy in Little Shop of Horrors who wants the dentist to hurt him real, real bad. Ik.

solomon

Jim,

That Roger is quite a piece of work. Does Roger remind you of someone who used to post here under a different name?

Jim

Roger,

Quit making things up.

"1. You argue there's no pork in the bill. This is wrong, and you lose."

Again, where did I ever say that??? You can't just create my position out of thin air and hang it around my neck. I never made that contention. Either show us all where I said there was no pork or admit you're lying. Put up or shut up.


"2. You argue there is pork in the bill. You are agreeing with Arminius, and you lose."

You obviously haven't been paying attention. We've been arguing about whether or not Schumer "admitted" there was pork in the bill. Arminius dishonestly says that he did, a contention that is obviously not true when you examine his comments.


"In fact, you seem to be arguing without a point. Arguing just to argue. "

That perfectly describes your attempts at argument, actually. Just disagreeing with no point or factual position. This is best illustrated by the fact that you feel the need to make stuff up in order to meet satisfy your obsession with "winning."


Casady

Hey Sammy:

I do agree with you about bailing out irresponsible borrowers. It pains me to do so but as someone who respects your opinion on financial matters, I am curious as to what you think is a viable alternative. There are lots of blowhards out here today who choose to ignore the real issues in an effort to stick to a partisan position but no one is addressing alternatives. Should we just foreclose on everyone who is behind in their payments and see how that ripples through the financial markets? I have a feeling that won't be pretty. As for the package, there is a fair amount of tax relief here and investment in infrastructure. Calling all of the earmarks pork is akin to calling all DOD money to Lockheed pork for building defense systems. Some of these expenditures are pretty necessary and although there is a quite a bit that will not effect the economy in the short run, the fact that it goes to basic R&D should prove beneficial in the long run. As for the tax relief, I would personally rather see more go toward certain areas of the private sector for capital formation purposes. As I pointed out last week, stimulus checks didn;t do much good under Bush and they probably won't do much good here.

Casady

Hey Sammy:

I do agree with you about bailing out irresponsible borrowers. It pains me to do so but as someone who respects your opinion on financial matters, I am curious as to what you think is a viable alternative. There are lots of blowhards out here today who choose to ignore the real issues in an effort to stick to a partisan position but no one is addressing alternatives. Should we just foreclose on everyone who is behind in their payments and see how that ripples through the financial markets? I have a feeling that won't be pretty. As for the package, there is a fair amount of tax relief here and investment in infrastructure. Calling all of the earmarks pork is akin to calling all DOD money to Lockheed pork for building defense systems. Some of these expenditures are pretty necessary and although there is a quite a bit that will not effect the economy in the short run, the fact that it goes to basic R&D should prove beneficial in the long run. As for the tax relief, I would personally rather see more go toward certain areas of the private sector for capital formation purposes. As I pointed out last week, stimulus checks didn;t do much good under Bush and they probably won't do much good here.

 
About KansasCity.com | About the Real Cities Network | Terms of Use & Privacy Statement | About Knight Ridder | Copyright