By Caitlin Taylor

Feb 13, 2009 9:21am

Stimulus Bill On-line, Critics Say It Contains Pork

The House Rules Committee posted the text of the Stimulus bill last night (see HERE  and HERE.)

The Washington Post’s Dan Eggen and Ellen Nakashima note that the bill "is not free of spending that benefits specific communities, industries or groups, despite vows by President Obama that the legislation would be kept clear of pet projects."

Not one of the items in the bill are "traditional earmarks — funding for a project inserted by a lawmaker bypassing the normal budgeting process — according to the White House and Democratic leaders…But many Republicans, anti-tax advocates and other critics argue that the final version of the bill is still larded with wasteful spending and dubious initiatives that will do little to create jobs or spur financial markets. The legislation’s sheer size and complexity set off a lobbying spectacle over the past few weeks, as diverse interests including pharmaceutical companies, cement firms and manufacturers of energy-saving light bulbs converged on Washington to elbow for their share."

Please note: The President in January offered his definition of earmarks — "the process by which individual members insert pet projects without review" — and this bill does not appear to contain them under his definition.

- jpt

User Comments

Jake any luck with those certificates yet. By the way his counsel is trying to block his records from Occidental College to be released. Jake where is the openness and transperency he promised. Don’t you believe it’s pretty simple to put an end to all of this and say here it is. I remember Bush’s first go around the media focused for a month on his military record. Jake I know you see right thru this administration. Come on man what are you waiting for.
A high-powered team of Los Angeles attorneys representing President Obama in his effort to keep his birth certificate, college records and passport documents concealed from the public has suggested there should be “monetary sanctions” against a lawyer whose clients have brought a complaint alleging Obama doesn’t qualify for the Oval Office under the Constitution’s demand for a “natural born” citizen in that post.

Posted by: bdaman | February 13, 2009, 9:35 am 9:35 am

This is where the inherent difference in ideology between Democrats and Republicans comes in. Dems think spending on jobs is acceptable, the GOP believes any government spending outside the military is pork that must be replaced with tax cuts.

Posted by: matt | February 13, 2009, 9:36 am 9:36 am

Jake when you applied at ABC did they ask you where did you go to school. Did they look at your grades. What else did they ask you in your interview. They made the right decision in hiring you, but what did they base that on. Surely not just your charm.

Posted by: bdaman | February 13, 2009, 9:39 am 9:39 am

the bill “is not free of spending that benefits specific communities, industries or groups, despite vows by President Obama that the legislation would be kept clear of pet projects.”
***************************************
Oh so the stimulus package is supossed exclude certain industries, and communities? So if one works for so and so or live in such and such community, too bad, is that it?
Why do you keep harping and giving voice to such rubbish? Is your reporting, and the GOP whinning, free of special interest in certain idustries or communities? No; I hardly think so.
I am sick of this stuff and all the whinning of the GOP. If they had been so patriotic, so correct, so principled, the last 8 years we would not be in this mess.
Anyone who thinks that those who got us into this mess are qualified to get us out of this mess is as insane as the GOP is.

Posted by: Thinking | February 13, 2009, 9:41 am 9:41 am

People can differ on whether spending on a particular project is worthwhile or not. Of course, Repubs. call spending which creates jobs while improving our health care, educational system, green transition and transportation infrastructure “pork”. Any money allocated by the federal gtovernment which does not flow through tax cuts or special incentives to big corporate interests and fatcats is “pork” by their definition. The GOP had their 8 years of near total control of our government and they showed what they would do with near total control. And they daxx near ruined our country.

Posted by: hopesprings52 | February 13, 2009, 9:42 am 9:42 am

This bill and no other is perfect….stop the bull. There must have been a lot of “pork” spent somewhere in the past 8 years. So much “pig” it called the financial system to collapse! Go figure. Who do these Republicans think they’re fooling, we know exactly what they’re doing. Ban to Obstruct! Just obstruct. “We are becoming more and more exposed to what we really represent”. Not in 2010. No more.

Posted by: sngeorgia | February 13, 2009, 9:49 am 9:49 am

How they try to hide
Lax housing regulation
Got us in this mess.
======================

Posted by: kim | February 13, 2009, 9:53 am 9:53 am

Nobody has been given the 48 hours to review the bill (let alone 5 days that President Obama promised). It is over 1000 pages long and they won’t even have a chance to read through it all before they vote on it. If it is such a great bill, it will survive scrutiny for a few days. A few days are not going to make or break the economy.
Most economists and the CBO feel that the measures in this bill will make matters worse than doing nothing at all.
Everify is not in the bill which means any jobs created could go to illegals.
This bill starts off socialized healthcare. That should be a separate issue voted on at a different time.
This bill moves the Census Bureau to the White House.
I could go on and on why this bill should not be passed today.

Posted by: GetEconomyGoing | February 13, 2009, 9:53 am 9:53 am

Kim, you said “There must have been a lot of “pork” spent somewhere in the past 8 years. So much “pig” it called the financial system to collapse!”
Two wrongs don’t make a right. That bailout shouldn’t have happened either.

Posted by: Stopspendingourtaxes | February 13, 2009, 9:56 am 9:56 am

Thirty million dollars for
A Mighty sick Mouse.
=====================

Posted by: kim | February 13, 2009, 10:00 am 10:00 am

Pork to who – the Repubs? To the rest of us American taxpaying citizens, the economic recovery plan contains help – help with our infrastructure, creating jobs and improving our education and standard of living. Isn’t that what the money we pay for taxes is supposed to do, or is it just to fight Wars?

Posted by: geecee | February 13, 2009, 10:01 am 10:01 am

“is not free of spending that benefits specific communities, industries or groups”
Heaven forfend! Can’t have that! Can’t have spending in the US that benefits communities, industries and groups in areas of the US! How un-American! Lets build more schools in Iraq instead. I’m sure the Republicans won’t call that “pork”.

Posted by: Lisa | February 13, 2009, 10:02 am 10:02 am

Stop spending our tax!
The format here is wonky
And has you mixed up.
======================

Posted by: kim | February 13, 2009, 10:05 am 10:05 am

“This bill starts off socialized healthcare”
Oh no, the scary words that the insurance industry has come up with. You probably don’t know anything about actual socialism.
try telling a veteran that their health care, which is free, is socialism. I dare you.

Posted by: Reason | February 13, 2009, 10:06 am 10:06 am

PORK Pelosi/Harry”we surrender” Reid/ and “doh” bama have a vendetta against the taxpayer.. to spend all they can till they are thrown out of office
Timmy TurboTax Geither’s”no plan” has cost billions in the market already.

Posted by: DOH-bama Cabinet of Corruption | February 13, 2009, 10:06 am 10:06 am

The Dems just might get a few House Republicans on board with this bill. They have obviously been watching the polls…

Posted by: matt | February 13, 2009, 10:06 am 10:06 am

Shocking, novel thought.
Leave the money where it is.
Why redistribute it?
=================

Posted by: kim | February 13, 2009, 10:08 am 10:08 am

Does anyone else have a problem with the fact that Democrats are about to spend nearly one trillion of OUR dollars, yet they are going to legislate rationed healthcare even for those of us who pay for private insurance?
And I want to know: Are they going to exempt themselves from putting their medical records online and have Congress tell THEIR doctors what type of care is appropriate?
I wish Jake would ask this at the next press conference.

Posted by: Peach | February 13, 2009, 10:09 am 10:09 am

An earmark by any other name…..
If it walks like a pig and oinks like a pig, it’s pork….
Depends on what your definition of “earmark” is…..

Posted by: Bridget | February 13, 2009, 10:13 am 10:13 am

Pelosi says: hurry up and pass the bill, I am going on an 8 day trip to Rome
Democrat senator says, no time to read the final bill before being voted on
THIEVES IN CONGRESS

Posted by: DOH-bama Cabinet of Corruption | February 13, 2009, 10:13 am 10:13 am

This bill has as much chance of doing harm as good….so good grief take some time to weed out the chaff. Get rid of dubious initiatives. The sheer dollar amount of bill can sink our dollar value if it fails to stimulate.

Posted by: BonVoyage | February 13, 2009, 10:13 am 10:13 am

The President in January offered his definition of earmarks — “the process by which individual members insert pet projects without review” — and this bill does not appear to contain them under his definition.
———————-
Ahhh, the CHANGE we’ve been waiting for: the definition of earmarks.

Posted by: mad | February 13, 2009, 10:14 am 10:14 am

You know I read what is contained in the bill and I do not see anything that is Pork – I see jobs and tax breaks for the average American and opportunities to get grants or loans for schooling, I see engergy conservation and good things for future engery useage and transportation upgrades and aid to our ailing infrastructure. None of this is pork in any way shape or form. The critics are just sore losers because they refused to participate in any meaningful way so they sit back and criticize. How very childish of them! Grow up neocons – your spoiled childish pranks are getting very old and tiresome.

Posted by: eyeonyou | February 13, 2009, 10:21 am 10:21 am

Pelosi says
************************************
I am just going to take a guess that you have just arrived at work and are now takeing a little pork time to make your comments.

Posted by: Thinking | February 13, 2009, 10:21 am 10:21 am

eyeonyou Really you read 1400 + pages wow. Where can I go to read it.

Posted by: bdaman | February 13, 2009, 10:23 am 10:23 am

The GOP had their 8 years of near total control of our government and they showed what they would do with near total control. “says Hope”.
Hope, show me the names of any democrat who voted no for no child left behind or medicare drugs for seniors. Show me a democrat who voted no to fund Katrina relief, show me a democrat who turned down money for homeland security and show me the names of any democrat who wanted to rein in fannie and freddie hint; there are none but plenty who said there was no problems. Finally show me a time where a 800 page bill was published at night and a vote called for it on the same day.
200,000 grand for each job created in this bill , a choo choo train for Harry Reid and a mouse marsh for Nancys district and a few tax cheats to complement a staff full of punks.
Nice change.

Posted by: david | February 13, 2009, 10:24 am 10:24 am

This is ridiculous in the extreme, high-speed rail projects is pork?
Shipyards? New technologies as lithium ion batteries is pork? TSA uniforms?
All these “pork” projects guarantee jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs, and more jobs.
Even when you accept these provisions as alleged “pork”, they still total only a little more than 12 billion.
That is a total of 1,534%
Far less than the 70 Billion in AMT tax which targets only the Republican PAC contributors, a Corporate Welfare Queens Project.

Posted by: Willem van Oranje | February 13, 2009, 10:26 am 10:26 am

david, All you have to ask the kool aid drinkers is, Name one thing The O has done right. Then show them the twenty he’s done wrong vs The ONE, The O, The incredible. The Answer to all our prsyers.

Posted by: bdaman | February 13, 2009, 10:28 am 10:28 am

eyeonyou Really you read 1400 + pages wow. Where can I go to read it.
**************************************
My guess is that you didn’t even read this column as there are links posted herein to the Package.
And I also guess you didn’t read it, so you negative attitude about it is just repeats from someone else?

Posted by: Thinking | February 13, 2009, 10:29 am 10:29 am

Thinking, And you read the package? you went here and here. Wow

Posted by: bdaman | February 13, 2009, 10:31 am 10:31 am

Jake any luck with those certificates yet. By the way his counsel is trying to block his records from Occidental College to be released. Jake where is the openness and transperency he promised. Don’t you believe it’s pretty simple to put an end to all of this and say here it is. I remember Bush’s first go around the media focused for a month on his military record. Jake I know you see right thru this administration. Come on man what are you waiting for.
A high-powered team of Los Angeles attorneys representing President Obama in his effort to keep his birth certificate, college records and passport documents concealed from the public has suggested there should be “monetary sanctions” against a lawyer whose clients have brought a complaint alleging Obama doesn’t qualify for the Oval Office under the Constitution’s demand for a “natural born” citizen in that post.

Posted by: bdaman | February 13, 2009, 10:33 am 10:33 am

(SNIP)”…try telling a veteran that their health care, which is free, is socialism. I dare you….”
Posted by: Reason | Feb 13, 2009 10:06:00 AM
Yo, Reason. You’re talking to a Veteran. And I pay for my Health care…I have a co-pay for Primary Care visits, an even higher co-pay for specialist and a co-pay for prescriptions. And let’s not forget the deductable and co-pay for hospital admissions. Military treatment facilities, you ask? Can’t go there…I’m a Veteran, remember? Only active duty. VA Hospital, you say? Can’t go there, because of my retirement income and my VA disability -too much income.
Know what you are talking about before you spout off,

Posted by: A Veteran | February 13, 2009, 10:33 am 10:33 am

Take it from an Obama voter, me. This bill is chock full of pork. The largest pork bill in the history of this nation.
I feel like I was duped into all of this hope and change. Seems nothing has changed except the letter in parenthesis from (R) to (D).
This is a pork bill and that is fact. Calling it something other than that just proves you’re a political hack and you’d go along with any plan and follow blindly right off the cliff.
3 weeks in and I wished we could have a “do over”. I wouldn’t vote the same.

Posted by: Buyer's Remorse | February 13, 2009, 10:33 am 10:33 am

Here we go lets atart the stuff about Pres Obama isn’t a real make that REAL American and how we are being fooled becasue Jake Tapper needs to expose Obama for what he really is. Dang I wish so much no one in America was this stupid. How could you grow up here and still have all this hate and meaness in your heart?
This is the best and freest place on the planet and we have so much here why would you want to spoil even one day in this country being like you are?
I hope President Obama can somehow get thru these few weeks and still move his ideas forward he is smart and can easily do better than the last bunch we had in power. Please try to stay on task my fellow Americans in spite of this type of hateful talk.

Posted by: Bonnie Kimberly | February 13, 2009, 10:33 am 10:33 am

Jake when you applied at ABC did they ask you where did you go to school. Did they look at your grades. What else did they ask you in your interview. They made the right decision in hiring you, but what did they base that on. Surely not just your charm.

Posted by: bdaman | February 13, 2009, 10:35 am 10:35 am

Bonnie Kimberly, Jake believes in Transperency, Gibbs said he and the president believe in it too. Show me the money

Posted by: bdaman | February 13, 2009, 10:36 am 10:36 am

The Republican definition of pork is anything that benefits another constiuent’s (especially Democrat’s)voters and not their own. They are very willing to accept government spending in their district or state but someone else’s and god forbid it should benefit the nation as a whole. Enough of this crap….pass the damn bill and get on with the recovery from a recession brought upon us by the previous Republican administration!

Posted by: indy_voter | February 13, 2009, 10:37 am 10:37 am

A Veteran….wouldn’t you like it to better for you in the country you went to war for? I am sick at heart that you have to jump thru any hoop to get anything you need. But think this thru you will not get what you need if we do not do something about medical coverage for all Americans, even ones not in your polictical party.Pain and suffering not know Dems from Republicans.

Posted by: Bonnie Kimberly | February 13, 2009, 10:38 am 10:38 am

This is the best and freest place on the planet
It was until 60mil people alot of them first time voters drank the kool aid.
How do you feel about giving the palastinians $20.3 million dollars and a free ticket to ride to the U.S. of A
$20.3mil, that could create some jobs. that could feed starving children right here, the best and freest place on the planet

Posted by: bdaman | February 13, 2009, 10:41 am 10:41 am

bdaman ….. what does that mean? The GOP is all about money not so much about those of us without it…and I have even less than I did and can’t retire because of the LAST EIGHT YEARS. This is truth and not something Rush Limbaugh put in my head.

Posted by: Bonnie Kimberly | February 13, 2009, 10:41 am 10:41 am

For the Koolaid drinkers who are saying there isn’t any pork in the bill:
Even Democrat Senator Schumer said there was pork but that people don’t care.

Posted by: Peach | February 13, 2009, 10:42 am 10:42 am

“we are being fooled becasue Jake Tapper needs to expose Obama for what he really is.”
Why blame Jake Tapper for reporting news you obviously don’t want to know about? Reporting news about Obama doesn’t mean “hatred and meanness”as you say.

Posted by: Sigmonde | February 13, 2009, 10:43 am 10:43 am

Anyone else notice how much the market has tanked since Obama took office? You’d think he could buy a clue, but since he can’t even vet his own cabinet and has ended up with so many tax cheats, apparently he can’t figure out anything.

Posted by: Ron | February 13, 2009, 10:44 am 10:44 am

“Ravenous Porkers”, gourging themselves at the money trough. Having been denied their pet projects for 8 years. Hurry get it passed before the economy improves on its own, then we will be starving again.

Posted by: BonVoyage | February 13, 2009, 10:45 am 10:45 am

Again with the Rush Limbaugh come backs do you guys really believe alll this stuff? I listened for eight long years to fear and hate and now I listen to fear and hate you guys are not happy with a two party system you want a one party GOP system and it isn’t going to happen. What by the way is wrong with first time voters….Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh think you need to pass a test to vote, is that a thing you’ll get behind? No one votes unless you say they should…NICE.

Posted by: Bonnie Kimberly | February 13, 2009, 10:45 am 10:45 am

This is a decent bill, and we should pass it. The neocon nay sayers hre are just babies whinning and crying and carrying on to cast disparaging remarks to those they hate – the American people. Personally, I’m more than tired of your sick always critical of anything the Democrats do rhetoric. so just SHUT UP!!!

Posted by: eyeonyou | February 13, 2009, 10:48 am 10:48 am

Bonnie Kimberly let me put it another way. Approximately 10-12 middle eastern men attempt to make it in the United States each MONTH thru Mexico. Question how did they get to Mexico only to find out they want to come here. The 20.3 mil could of been spent to shore up the border. Did we really, I’m sorry OBAMA need to spend $20.3 million dollars for that. I think not. As for your veteran remark, I would rather be in PAIN.

Posted by: bdaman | February 13, 2009, 10:48 am 10:48 am

Anyone else notice how much the market has tanked since Obama took office? You’d think he could buy a clue, but since he can’t even vet his own cabinet and has ended up with so many tax cheats, apparently he can’t figure out anything.
When you treat the financial crisis like Global Warming would you have any confidence. If we don’t act now it will be irreversible. It will be catastrophic. More doom and gloom what happen to hope and change.

Posted by: bdaman | February 13, 2009, 10:51 am 10:51 am

“Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh think you need to pass a test to vote, is that a thing you’ll get behind?”
Voters should be tested to see if they are alive or dead. Those who are dead should not be able to vote.

Posted by: Sigmonde | February 13, 2009, 10:53 am 10:53 am

Even FDR’s Treasury Secretary said, 8 years into the Depression, that throwing money at it the way they did did not work and made it worse.
Google the words: FDR Treasury Secretary said money didn’t work.
But there are some posters who won’t let the truth get in the way of their agenda.

Posted by: Peach | February 13, 2009, 10:56 am 10:56 am

The entire stimulus package should be scrapped, with Congress(all of them) admitting that this was a travesty. A true stimulus package could be put together with each item carefully scrutinized for pork that will actually stimulate the economy not feed the pigs. They could try coming up with something that will not turn us into a debtor nation or a socialist/fascist nation.

Posted by: Carrot | February 13, 2009, 10:59 am 10:59 am

eyeonyou Look at the democratic controlled California, Oh wait Arnold is a republican so blame him. California is the WORLDS 8th biggest economy, So goes California so goes the U.S.A. Move to California I’m sure you’ll see LOTS of people moving in the other direction.

Posted by: bdaman | February 13, 2009, 11:01 am 11:01 am

I wish folks would stop playing semantic games. The president pledges proudly there are no “earmarks” in the bill, knowing the low opinion most have of earmarks. But of course there are no earmarks. That is not the same as no pork, no wasteful spending, no pet projects/groups rewarded for their political loyalty or financial support of a particular politician or group of politicians. There is TONS of that in the bill. And the president knows it. Schumer knows it, admits it on the floor of the senate, and has the nerve to say the american people do not care.
Of course, he has a point. Don’t see the pork? Just see useful projects? Well, we will have to agree to disagree. My major concern is that projects that may indeed be worthy and valuable are being pushed through via the stimulus bill rather than go through normal channels, with the scrutiny and debate on the specifics that a normal piece of legislation can be afforded. And once the funding has been granted, even though the idea behind the stimulus bill is SUPPOSED to be targeted, temporary increased spending to stimulate the economy, it will be well-nigh impossible to get it back down in the future. Already we see that, when during the negotiations, moderates suggested cuts to the proposed amounts for stuff, Pelosi and company started shrieking about “cutting funding” as if existing money was being taken away. I’m talking about things like the increase in Pell Grants (my personal hobby-horse as an educator, I admit) and the school construction funding. This is extra-ordinary, supposedly one-time, beyond the regular budget funding for special needs, not ongoing funding of normal operations.When people start demagoging about money for police officers and school children in this way, I worry about where this is headed. Next year, if this increased level of funding of such things is not continued, might Pelosi and company not talk about evil, unpatriotic people who are cutting funding for these things? It’s maddening.

Posted by: moderate | February 13, 2009, 11:04 am 11:04 am

Buyer’s Remorse, I am so sorry that you drank the kool aid. Can you tell the rest of the kool aid drinkers what you used to detoxify your body. Mass quanities need to be distributed to the tune of 60 million less 1

Posted by: bdaman | February 13, 2009, 11:05 am 11:05 am

Even Democrat Senator Lautenberg (sp?) was complaining yesterday they had not been given the chance to read the bill.
Now it’s been announced that the bill was distributed last night at 11:00 p.m. It’s over 1,000 pages!
This isn’t a representative government. It’s insanity and all being pushed by Pelosi who wants to leave at 6:00 p.m. for an 8 day European trip.

Posted by: peach | February 13, 2009, 11:08 am 11:08 am

My My how time flies Got to put on the uniform to go and protect our freedoms. Have a Nice day.

Posted by: bdaman | February 13, 2009, 11:08 am 11:08 am

Even the bipartisan Congressional Budget Office says a lot of the bill is pork and won’t stimulate the economy. And more and more economists are attacking it every day.
We can see how Wall Street is reacting – they hate the bill.
And could we stop calling it these Orwellian names. It’s the anti-stimulus bill.

Posted by: Ralph | February 13, 2009, 11:09 am 11:09 am

Re Buyer’s Remorse: Even one of the 9/11 victim’s family members, a mother, was on all the talk shows the second week or so of Obama’s presidency and said she regretted voting for the guy.

Posted by: Peach | February 13, 2009, 11:13 am 11:13 am

The Congressional Research Service, the public policy research arm of the U.S. Congress defines earmarks:
“Provisions associated with legislation (appropriations or general legislation) that specify certain congressional spending priorities or in revenue bills that apply to a very limited number of individuals or entities. Earmarks may appear in either the legislative text or report language (committee reports accompanying reported bills and joint explanatory statement accompanying a conference report).”
Earmarks don’t stop being earmarks because the President redines them for the moment.

Posted by: mad | February 13, 2009, 11:14 am 11:14 am

Mad – Great post!
Thanks for injecting some facts into the discussion.

Posted by: Peach | February 13, 2009, 11:18 am 11:18 am

US consumer confidence polls out today: Fall sharply.
Mr Hope and Change — buy a clue. Wall Street isn’t confident of your ability to lead. American consumers aren’t confident of your ability to lead. Your own party has lost confidence in you. The UK papers have been a hoot to read and they’ve largely lost confidence.

Posted by: Patty | February 13, 2009, 11:22 am 11:22 am

Yes, I see Reuters is reporting that consumer confidence has plummeted. Apparently people have caught onto the con named Obama.
Add that to Obama’s plummeting poll numbers and we’re looking at the rockiest start to a presidency I’ve ever seen.

Posted by: Peach | February 13, 2009, 11:25 am 11:25 am

No earmarks? Right. Let’s call it Wagyu beef instead.

Posted by: Sarah E | February 13, 2009, 11:48 am 11:48 am

Commenter “mad” has made excellent points.
On a personal note, I am completely distressed about the condition of our country due to the stimulus bill that is nothing but perpetual indebtedness. It lifts nothing up and drags everything down.
In only 3 weeks, the Pied Piper – President Obama – has led us to the abyss of Socialism.

Posted by: midcal | February 13, 2009, 11:51 am 11:51 am

Gee Obama,
Most of who aren’t high realize you can’t spend your way out of debt.

Posted by: James Villa | February 13, 2009, 11:53 am 11:53 am

“Take it from an Obama voter, me.”
Methinks thou dost protest too much. I’m not buying it, “Buyer’s Remorse”. Oldest trick in the message board book.

Posted by: Lisa | February 13, 2009, 11:54 am 11:54 am

When even John McCain, who seems to live for accolades from Democrats and reaching across the aisle, calls the Porkulous Bill an abomination, we know it’s bad.

Posted by: Ron | February 13, 2009, 11:55 am 11:55 am

“Most of who aren’t high realize you can’t spend your way out of debt.”
Are you an economist? I think not. The main problem now is not debt, it’s decreased demand.

Posted by: Lisa | February 13, 2009, 11:56 am 11:56 am

Lisa, perhaps you didn’t hear one of the 9/11 victim’s mothers say that she was a lifelong Democrat and voted for Obama but given his position on stopping the trials and closing Gitmo, she’s sorry she supported him.
Obama campaigned on:
no lobbyists (his cabinet is filled with them)
no backroom deals (the Dems closed out the Republicans in the House 2 days ago)
more transparency (how is it transparency when you try to ram legislation through that will force all Americans into having medical decisions made by the feds)
Said we all had to sacrifice and could no longer heat our homes at 72 degrees but David Axelrod was quoted in the NYT saying Obama likes it warm and you could grow orchids in the White House it’s so hot
said he’d call out those who injected pork or earmarks into bills (the porkulous bill is loaded with them)
said he’d put all legislation on the WH web site for 5 days before he signed any bill (promptly signed 2 bills — Lily Ledbetter and SCHIP — without putting them on the web site)
lectured repeatedly about needing more bipartisanship (but immediately went into a roomful of Republicans and attacked Rush Limbaugh and Fox News)
And you think that it’s not possible that some posters are legitimately sorry they voted for the poseur? ROFL

Posted by: Rhonda | February 13, 2009, 12:00 pm 12:00 pm

Lisa – apparently you don’t realize that even FDR’s Treasury Secretary said that trying to spend their way out of the Depression didn’t work and in fact made things worse.
Google the words: “FDR Treasury Secretary said money didn’t work”

Posted by: Peach | February 13, 2009, 12:01 pm 12:01 pm

For the kool aid drinkers — even today’s Washington Post says that despite promises, there’s pork in the (anti) stimulus bill.

Posted by: Peach | February 13, 2009, 12:03 pm 12:03 pm

Those of you who think we can just spend our way out of this crisis with a huge taxpayer stimulus, give some examples where spending has resulted in curing a recessive economy.

Posted by: Sigmonde | February 13, 2009, 12:04 pm 12:04 pm

Sigmonde – you’re absolutely correct.
It didn’t work with the Japanese. It didn’t work in the depression. If spending stimulated an economy, the USSR would still be in business. Instead, they spent themselves into oblivion trying to outspend Reagan on the arms race.

Posted by: Peach | February 13, 2009, 12:05 pm 12:05 pm

UNDERSTANDING ECONOMICS IN ONE EZ LESSON
A young hoodlum, say, heaves a brick through the window of a baker’s shop. The shopkeeper runs out furious, but the boy is gone. A crowd gathers, and begins to stare with quiet satisfaction at the gaping hole in the window and the shattered glass over the bread and pies. After a while the crowd feels the need for philosophic reflection. And several of its members are almost certain to remind each other or the baker that, after all, the misfortune has its bright side. It will make business for some glazier. As they begin to think of this they elaborate upon it. How much does a new plate glass window cost? Two hundred and fifty dollars? That will be quite a sun. After all, if windows were never broken, what would happen to the glass business? Then, of course, the thing is endless. The glazier will have $250 more to spend with other merchants, and these in turn will have $250 more to spend with still other merchants, and so ad infinitum. The smashed window will go on providing money and employment in ever-widening circles. The logical conclusion from all this would be, if the crowd drew it, that the little hoodlum who threw the brick, far from being a public menace, was a public benefactor.
Now let us take another look. The crowd is at least right in its first conclusion. This little act of vandalism will in the first instance mean more business for some glazier. The glazier will be no more unhappy to learn of the incident than an undertaker to learn of a death. But the shopkeeper will be out $250 that he was planning to spend for a new suit. Because he has had to replace the window, he will have to go without the suit (or some equivalent need or luxury). Instead of having a window and $250 he now has merely a window. Or, as he was planning to buy the suit that very afternoon, instead of having both a window and a suit he must be content with the window and no suit. If we think of him as part of the community, the community has lost a new suit that might otherwise have come into being, and is just that much poorer.
The glazier’s gain of business, in short, is merely the tailor’s loss of business. No new “employment” has been added. The people in the crowd were thinking only of two parties to the transaction, the baker and the glazier. They had forgotten the potential third party involved, the tailor. They forgot him precisely because he will not now enter the scene. They will see the new window in the next day or two. They will never see the extra suit, precisely because it will never be made. They see only what is immediately visible to the eye.*

Posted by: Sigmonde | February 13, 2009, 12:10 pm 12:10 pm

So the largest spending bill of our lifetimes is being voted on without our Congressmen reading it. How does that make you all feel?
The bill was finally released last night at 11:00. The bill was finally released in PDF formating which means you can’t keyword search it. Lots of people can’t easily use PDF downloads.
This is a scam.
Don’t we have a watchdog media?
I’m trying to imagine what the media would be saying if Republicans did this. Imagine Trent Lott saying we have to vote by 6:00 so I can go on an 8 day tour of Europe.

Posted by: Peach | February 13, 2009, 12:11 pm 12:11 pm

Where are the investigative reporters on this matter? It’s a scandal.
The feds are going to force our medical records online but they were hysterical when Obama’s passport information was illegally released by people who hacked online.

Posted by: Rhonda | February 13, 2009, 12:14 pm 12:14 pm

Does anyone know:
Will Congress exempt themselves from the healthcare provisions in this bill?

Posted by: Rhonda | February 13, 2009, 12:15 pm 12:15 pm

The feds are going to force our medical records online “rhonda”
Thats Googles influence on the white house.
Anyone hear that the lobbyist had the bill before members of congress?
Hope-change.

Posted by: david | February 13, 2009, 12:31 pm 12:31 pm

“The bill was finally released last night at 11:00. The bill was finally released in PDF formating which means you can’t keyword search it. Lots of people can’t easily use PDF downloads.”
“Our” representatives ought to go try to download that pdf on dialup, for example. (Did all the Congressional and “Obama” organization websites suddenly er CRASH, or what?)
Uh … and wasn’t one of The One’s non-op “promises” that NO legislation would be passed without time for discussion?
Slipping in the “Lily Ledbetter” bill and pretending it provided for “equal pay” was ONE thing, but rushing THIS piece of crap into being is DEFINITELY dictatorial.

Posted by: Human Intelligence | February 13, 2009, 12:41 pm 12:41 pm

Gee Obama,
Most of who aren’t high realize you can’t spend your way out of debt.
========================================
If you spend money on frivolous items then no you cannot spend your way out of debt. But if you spend money on things that will return more than you spent than you can “spend your way out of debt”. That is called investment. Too many folks do not know the difference and view all spending by the government as a bad investment. That is a very short sighted view that offers no future for this country.

Posted by: indy_voter | February 13, 2009, 12:53 pm 12:53 pm

Sigmonde: epic fail. New labor and employment *is* created with the brick. It didn’t exist before.
After the brick, the glazier has work and now HE has the potential to commission a suit from the tailor = two jobs.
Before the brick, only the baker had potential to commission a suit = one job
But your analogy is flawed even more because your premisse only exist in a fixed moneysupply economy. Stimulus is deficit spending, also called investing.

Posted by: Willem van Oranje | February 13, 2009, 12:55 pm 12:55 pm

For the Congress to bypass actually READING the legislation — and allowing CONSTITUENTS to read it so that they can communicate with “their” representatives in Congress BEFORE the representatives vote — is dictatorship.
That this unseemly, illegal rush is to make it possible for The Puppet to SIGN pig-in-a-poke Porkulus on Presidents Day — another flim-flam propaganda prop — is ludicrous …
… as is the fact that many “liberal” organizations who know better — it’s the “Obama” way, “organizaing” the so-called people online to demand blind obedience to His administration, such as it is — are pressuring the public to agitate FOR passing the legislation.
It’s a head-scratcher.
SOMEbody in the Congress better lead a rebellion, before somebody OUTSIDE Congress does.

Posted by: Human Intelligence | February 13, 2009, 1:04 pm 1:04 pm

We, America, demonstrated the highest level of selfishness in November when we put an inexperienced man in charge of the most powerful position in the world. We wanted to be the first generation to break the racial barrier, and vote for the first African-American man as President. We are now paying for that inexperienced candidate…I voted on experience and intelligence regarding economic matters. The person, I believe who had a chance to lead us out of our present troubles..Alan Keyes…Unfortunely Mr. Keyes was not afforded the same respect as McCain and Obama, not included in debates..Now we can only look forward to 2010 Congressional elections…

Posted by: Parallax View | February 13, 2009, 1:11 pm 1:11 pm

Kansas has a current unemployment rate of less than 5%. Why should they receive any stimulus from taxpayer funds?

Posted by: Sigmonde | February 13, 2009, 1:36 pm 1:36 pm

“The feds are going to force our medical records online”
Yes online medical records where one’s doctor has access mean fewer mistakes or duplications especially with people who see several doctors or have to take many medications.
They are not going to be online on Thomas.gov.
“but they were hysterical when Obama’s passport information was illegally released by people who hacked online.”
The State Dept employees who were unauthorized to access Obama, McCain and Hillary Clinton passport files (among several dozens other celebrities) and did so anyway were fired, went to trial, pled guilty and will serve a little bit of jail time.
The records were not hacked online.
All the right wing has are scare tactics.
And because some many dittoheads are gullible, the tactics work on them.

Posted by: Ryan C | February 13, 2009, 1:39 pm 1:39 pm

“I voted on experience and intelligence regarding economic matters.”
Admirable.
“The person, I believe who had a chance to lead us out of our present troubles..Alan Keyes”
This statement does not jibe with the above statement.

Posted by: Ryan C | February 13, 2009, 1:45 pm 1:45 pm

“The bill was finally released last night at 11:00. The bill was finally released in PDF formating which means you can’t keyword search it. Lots of people can’t easily use PDF downloads.”
Gee you mean you might have to actually read the bill instead of skimming it and posting false information like Betsey of the Hudson Institute?

Posted by: Ryan C | February 13, 2009, 1:47 pm 1:47 pm

“Sigmonde: epic fail. ”
The story is the fallacy of the Broken Window, authored by Frederic Bastiat in 1850, and is well known to economists worldwide.

Posted by: Sigmonde | February 13, 2009, 1:48 pm 1:48 pm

Only a few billion for ACORN after they helped get Obama elected?
And after they worked so hard to sign up dogs, cats, goldfish and Disney characters.

Posted by: sammy | February 13, 2009, 2:05 pm 2:05 pm

Actually Ryan C..Mr. Keyes is very intelligent on foreign and domestic matters…Back up your assertion that he is not…BTW I am an independent. a TRUE independent who looks at not liberal vs conservative but experience and track records…

Posted by: Parallax View | February 13, 2009, 2:05 pm 2:05 pm

Just one example of how the government can NOT manage ANYTHING!
The Digital TV conversion…..
House version…..
DIGITAL-TO-ANALOG CONVERTER BOX PROGRAM
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, and in addition to amounts otherwise provided in any other Act, for costs associated with the Digital-to-Analog Converter Box Program, $650,000,000, to be available until September 30, 2009: Provided, That these funds shall be
available for coupons and related activities, including but not limited to education, consumer support and outreach, as deemed appropriate and necessary to ensure a timely conversion of analog to digital television.
SENATE version….
DIGITAL-TO-ANALOG CONVERTER BOX PROGRAM
For an amount for ‘‘Digital-to-Analog Converter Box Program’’, $650,000,000, for additional coupons and related activities under the program implemented under section 3005 of the Digital Television Transition and Public Safety Act of 2005, to remain available until September 30, 2010: Provided, That of the amounts provided under this heading, $90,000,000 may be for education and out reach, including grants to organizations for programs to
educate vulnerable populations, including senior citizens, minority communities, people with disabilities, low-income individuals, and people living in rural areas, about the
transition and to provide one-on-one assistance to vulnerable populations, including help with converter box installation: Provided further, That the amounts provided in the
previous proviso may be transferred to the Federal Communications Commission (Commission) if deemed necessary and appropriate by the Secretary of Commerce in consultation with the Commission, and only if the Committees on Appropriations of the House and the Senate are notified not less than 5 days in advance of transfer of such funds: Provided further, That $2,000,000 of funds provided under this heading shall be transferred to ‘‘Department of Commerce, Office of Inspector General’’ for audits and oversight of funds provided under this heading.
Final version….
??????
650 Million dollars more for a program that was supposed to be 100% up & running NEXT WEEK!!!
approx 1.3 BILLION spent on it already and with incredible success…
As of 4 PM on Wednesday, The Govt had mailed out 47.9 Million coupons out of 52.4 Million requested coupons. Of the 47.9 million already mailed out, 15 million have EXPIRED!!!! 31% of them have EXPIRED!!!! What a complete joke!
So, with all the efforts to get the word out over the past year-plus, we are now holding the complete turn-on date back and spending 650 Million more!

Posted by: Mike_C | February 13, 2009, 2:16 pm 2:16 pm

Willem van Oranje, true but everyone seems to think the baker is hoarding that $250. The baker may not have $250! So, to pay for said new window the price of bread goes from .50 to .75. Now “we” all get to pay more for bread! Oh, and some of us may not be able to afford the price of the new bread so “they” go hungry. Yeah! That’s progress.

Posted by: rap | February 13, 2009, 2:18 pm 2:18 pm

Even FDR’s Treasury Secretary admitted that throwing money at the depression didn’t help and made it worse.
I know Ryan C will have a hissy fit and deny it, but ya’ll can google the words:
FDR Treasury Secretary said money didn’t work

Posted by: peach | February 13, 2009, 2:20 pm 2:20 pm

SOMEbody in the Congress better lead a rebellion, before somebody OUTSIDE Congress does.
========================================
Perhaps the South should secede from the Union again? How about another civil war? Honestly, some of the comments here border on the hysterical.

Posted by: indy_voter | February 13, 2009, 2:21 pm 2:21 pm

So Obama’s promise to give 95% of American a tax cut was a lie. Naturally.
What he’s doing is giving workers a $13/week cut in the social security tax they pay and next year only an $8/week cut.
#1 – 95% of American’s don’t work. There are seniors, college kids, etc. So that 95% break isn’t true.
#2. It makes zero sense given that Social Security is nearly broke.

Posted by: peach | February 13, 2009, 2:22 pm 2:22 pm

“The feds are going to force our medical records online”
Yes online medical records where one’s doctor has access mean fewer mistakes or duplications especially with people who see several doctors or have to take many medications.
Ryan,
Comapre & contrast …. This with the stupidity of the SCHIP program allowing only a social security number (valid or invalid) to get access to that programs benefits!
We think we can provide and manage a system to keep every American’s health records in one place & updated. Yet we will provide access to heathcare for people who can just provide 123-45-6789 !

Posted by: Mike_C | February 13, 2009, 2:22 pm 2:22 pm

Willem van oranje…..
Being an “historian” as you claim to be, is the following true or false?
“FDR’s Treasury secretary and close friend, Henry Morganthau, conceded this fact to Congressional Democrats in May 1939: “We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work.”

Posted by: Sigmonde | February 13, 2009, 2:27 pm 2:27 pm

“Actually Ryan C..Mr. Keyes is very intelligent on foreign and domestic matters…Back up your assertion that he is not…”
His joining with birthers shows an incredible lack of intelligence.
He’s a joke.
“BTW I am an independent. a TRUE independent who looks at not liberal vs conservative but experience and track records…”
So why as an independent do you wish for a hard core right wing religious ideologue?
I realize that its embarrassing to admit one is a right winger but really the whole I am independent but I read nothing but conservative media and support the most right wing candidates doesn’t quite fly.

Posted by: Ryan C | February 13, 2009, 2:29 pm 2:29 pm

“What he’s doing is giving workers a $13/week cut in the social security tax they pay and next year only an $8/week cut.”
Think positive. You can use that 13 or 8 bucks to help pay your income taxes.

Posted by: Sigmonde | February 13, 2009, 2:29 pm 2:29 pm

Obama said the stimulus should be targeted and temporary.
But the new healthcare provisions are permanent and cost more than the combined budgets of the Air Force, Army, Marines, and Navy.
The feds will let doctors know when they think too much money is being spent on our healthcare and doctors and hospitals who refuse to listen to the feds will be fined.
Just check out the article: Ruin your health with the Obama stimulus plan by
Betsy McCaughey.

Posted by: peach | February 13, 2009, 2:29 pm 2:29 pm

Sigmonde – Exactly correct regarding FDR’s Treasury Secretary’s quote.

Posted by: peach | February 13, 2009, 2:30 pm 2:30 pm

We’ve seen so much hacking and illegally releasing personal information by federal employees, it makes no sense putting our medical records online.
Can you imagine how much federal employees are going to be paid/bribed to release the medical records of, say, Harry Reid? Heck, his mental health treatments alone will make fascinating reading.

Posted by: peach | February 13, 2009, 2:33 pm 2:33 pm

“FDR’s Treasury secretary and close friend, Henry Morganthau, conceded this fact to Congressional Democrats in May 1939: “We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work.”
Its appears every wingnut has been sent this quote.
I have traced it to a right wing nut book on FDR that came out lat last year but I can’t find his original sourcing.
And while Morgenthau and Roosevelt did not always see eye to eye, I’m not taking some wingnut’s word for it on this quote.

Posted by: Ryan C | February 13, 2009, 2:43 pm 2:43 pm

My personal favorite…Pelosi..500 million will lose their jobs, EACH MONTH, if the bill is not passed…UH Nan only 300 million in the country…partially explains why I am not getting my California refund…California politicians LOVE to spend money they don’t have. I am pleading to all follow Californians, not on medicad or sec. 8 housing, VOTE Pelosi out as well as our current Sacramento legislature who vote for increase entitlement spending

Posted by: Parallax View | February 13, 2009, 2:43 pm 2:43 pm

Not one Republican voted for the stimulus.
Thank goodness for their bravery even with threatening radio spot ads from Americans United for Change and AFSCME.

Posted by: glasater | February 13, 2009, 2:44 pm 2:44 pm

“We’ve seen so much hacking and illegally releasing personal information by federal employees, it makes no sense putting our medical records online.”
Medical records are online now with private companies as we speak.
Having medical records online leads to less medication and doctor errors.
Also with online records one can assess unauthorized access vs a paper record.
Right wing fear tactics will not work.

Posted by: Ryan C | February 13, 2009, 2:48 pm 2:48 pm

“I’m beginning to think you are an expert on writing platitudes.”
Google gave me a couple of hundred thousand hits on the quote.
All right wing posts/or sites.
Its a talking point with no original sourcing and given the right wing author’s propensity to make things up or misrepresent them, I would like an original source.

Posted by: Ryan C | February 13, 2009, 2:51 pm 2:51 pm

Oh, ryan c – still providing the entertainment, I see. That quote by FDR’s Treasury Secretary is located in many places, but keep pretending it isn’t. LOL

Posted by: peach | February 13, 2009, 2:51 pm 2:51 pm

“Just check out the article: Ruin your health with the Obama stimulus plan by
Betsy McCaughey.”
You mean the bought and paid for by Pharma lady who was shown to be LYING in her bloomberg editorial?
You know the lie I showed you yesterday that you continue to repeat.

Posted by: Ryan C | February 13, 2009, 2:52 pm 2:52 pm

“Google gave me a couple of hundred thousand hits on the quote. ”
Ok, sure…we believe you.

Posted by: Sigmonde | February 13, 2009, 2:54 pm 2:54 pm

I notice that Jake has reported on what Obama says earmarks are. It’s always interesting to see the left change the definition of things.
Oh, and Ryan – historians have been writing about FDR’s Treasury Secretary for years, but apparently history books aren’t your thing.

Posted by: peach | February 13, 2009, 2:54 pm 2:54 pm

“Oh, ryan c – still providing the entertainment, I see. That quote by FDR’s Treasury Secretary is located in many places, but keep pretending it isn’t. LOL”
Its the same quote sourced to one claim, the book by Burton.
I can’t find the original source on it.
But the right wingers have been spam posting it everywhere.

Posted by: Ryan C | February 13, 2009, 2:55 pm 2:55 pm

Ryan C..I believe you would agree that our current economic and foreign issues take priority …….and follow me…
Social issues are a luxury of a healthy economy and safe and secure Nation..
And again, I am not a conservative nor a liberal. I am a realist…

Posted by: Parallax View | February 13, 2009, 2:56 pm 2:56 pm

Oh, and I’ll note for other posters – Betsy’s article gave the PDF link as well as page numbers to verify her reporting.
The former Lt. Governor of NY did a great job in that article and even some Congressional Democrats said they didn’t know about the healthcare provisions in the bill and said they would not approve of that and would work to get it taken out. Fox News interviewed a couple of the Congressional Democrats and, like so many Republican Congressmen, they had no idea it was actually in the bill.

Posted by: peach | February 13, 2009, 2:57 pm 2:57 pm

I find it interesting that all you Rush Limbaugh fans are under the impression Obama is losing support, people who voted for him are now regretting it, etc, etc.
Every opinion poll I’ve seen has Obama’s job approval ratings in the 60s or higher. Given that he received something like 53% of the vote in November, that means roughly 10% MORE people approve of what he’s doing than voted for him.
Mathematics is fun.

Posted by: Lisa | February 13, 2009, 2:59 pm 2:59 pm

Ryan C – I can see how distressing it is to you that FDR’s Treasury Secretary said that throwing money at the depression didn’t work and made it work. Too bad you can’t change the facts to fit your iddy biddy agenda.

Posted by: peach | February 13, 2009, 2:59 pm 2:59 pm

Bush and now Obama think it’s in our nations best interest to leverage our independence with Chinese investors.
So Bush could topple Saddam and now the Pelosi, Reid, Obama pipe dream.
No fiscal responsibility in either party.

Posted by: James Villa | February 13, 2009, 3:00 pm 3:00 pm

Lisa, -
Thank you so much for proving my point about Obama’s plummeting poll numbers. Yes, you are correct – he’s in the low 60% approval right now. Two weeks ago it was 83-85% approval. I’d call that plummeting but maybe like Clinton it’s all in the meaning of the word “is”.

Posted by: peach | February 13, 2009, 3:01 pm 3:01 pm

“Why don’t you show us how that article by Betsey is a lie?”
Well let’s see she claimed the bill created a new bureaucracy the National Coordinator of Health Information Technology when that has been in existence for 4 years now.
Then she outright lies about its purpose
“will monitor treatments to make sure your doctor is doing what the federal government deems appropriate and cost effective. The goal is to reduce costs and “guide” your doctor’s decisions (442, 446). ”
The relevant and referenced passage
(3) reduces health care costs resulting from inefficiency, medical errors, inappropriate care, duplicative care, and incomplete information;
(4) provides appropriate information to help guide medical decisions at the time and place of care;
All the pathetic right wing has are fear tactics supported by outright lies.

Posted by: Ryan C | February 13, 2009, 3:06 pm 3:06 pm

Oh, and Lisa -
It’s not just Obama plummeting poll numbers.
Today Reuters released a consumer confidence poll and confidence is down considerably since Obama took office. It was the headline and can be found just about anywhere you would care to look.
Now, why you would mention Rush Limbaugh with regard to these poll numbers is interesting and says more about you than anything else. He doesn’t conduct polls to the best of my knowledge and most of us can read the media reports about the polling done by Rasmussen, etc. It has nothing to do with Rush but keep playing that bogey man card; it’s so easy to see through it.

Posted by: peach | February 13, 2009, 3:08 pm 3:08 pm

“Yes, you are correct – he’s in the low 60% approval right now. Two weeks ago it was 83-85% approval. ”
The 80% number was approval of how he was handling the transition.
Job approval numbers started when he took office. And the numbers are about the same as they were two weeks ago.
Gallup & Rasmussen do daily polls with 3 day rolling avgs
For today
Gallup: 66%
Rasmussen: 60%
One off polls that are less that a week old include
CNN: 76%
PEW: 64%
CNN is a likely outlier.

Posted by: Ryan C | February 13, 2009, 3:12 pm 3:12 pm

“You still haven’t shown how she lied about any of it, but thanks for showing the relevant page numbers to the original bill. ”
She lied about what the bill said.
I demonstrated that.
But given your apparent pathological dishonesty, I don’t expect for you to buy it.

Posted by: Ryan C | February 13, 2009, 3:13 pm 3:13 pm

Here is Betsey’s excellent article which talks about how healthcare will be rationed, especially for the elderly.
It will be interesting to see if Democrats exempt themselves from the provisions in the bill.

Posted by: peach | February 13, 2009, 3:14 pm 3:14 pm

Get used to a lower standard of living and an uncertain future.
They are the result of globalization and unchecked government growth.

Posted by: James Villa | February 13, 2009, 3:14 pm 3:14 pm

“Ryan C..I believe you would agree that our current economic and foreign issues take priority …….and follow me…”
So how does Keyes position of Israel Uber Alles and his non existent background in economics help in either field?

Posted by: Ryan C | February 13, 2009, 3:15 pm 3:15 pm

Ryan dear, you said Betsey lied. You haven’t shown how she lied. She talked about a new bureaucracy, the National Coordinator of Health Information Technology. It is quite new and has never really been up and running to do much. It was mostly a department that tracked what the states were doing.
But this new program gives the relatively new bureaucracy new duties and control over our lives and the lives of our doctors and hospitals.
Still waiting for you to prove what she lied about….tap, tap, tap.
No hurry – I know you need your talking points from somewhere.

Posted by: peach | February 13, 2009, 3:16 pm 3:16 pm

“Here is Betsey’s excellent article which talks about how healthcare will be rationed, especially for the elderly.”
Also feel free to take a gander at Media Matters which shows how the bought and paid for opinion of Betsy was brought to you by the same folks who did the lying Helen and Louise ads during HillaryCare.
You can also see how she quotes the bill out of context and outright lies about elements contained within.

Posted by: Ryan C | February 13, 2009, 3:17 pm 3:17 pm

James Villa – you are correct.
Obama has pretty much said we must get used to a lower standard of living.
Last year he said we could no longer drive our SUV’s or heat or homes at 72 degrees. He said “that’s not leadership, that’s not going to happen”.
Of course, then he got in the White House and the NYT quoted David Axelrod as saying that Obama keeps the WH so hot you could grow orchids in there. So he can be warm but the rest of us, well, we’re just peons.

Posted by: peach | February 13, 2009, 3:17 pm 3:17 pm

“Ryan dear, you said Betsey lied. You haven’t shown how she lied. She talked about a new bureaucracy, the National Coordinator of Health Information Technology. It is quite new and has never really been up and running to do much.”
Its over 4 years old.
It is not new and its certainly not newly created by the bill which is how she describes it.
She is lying.

Posted by: Ryan C | February 13, 2009, 3:18 pm 3:18 pm

Ryan dear – ahem, I don’t know how to break it to you, but one could go to the PDF file online and read the actual pages Betsey quoted from. Now, that was before the bill was changed and added to, but lots and lots of people went to that pdf file and verified what she wrote.
Including her employer, Bloomberg, other reporters, other news outlets, some congressmen who were then interviewed about it, and some readers, including me.
But keep pretending. It’s rather touching to see such devotion to an agenda.

Posted by: peach | February 13, 2009, 3:19 pm 3:19 pm

“Still waiting for you to prove what she lied about….tap, tap, tap.”
I already did. That you reject reality is your problem.
“No hurry – I know you need your talking points from somewhere.”
Talking points…roflmao…you mean how this article went from Betsy to Drudge to Rush to Foxnews and back to Rush again.
When the original article was made up!

Posted by: Ryan C | February 13, 2009, 3:20 pm 3:20 pm

“Ryan dear – ahem, I don’t know how to break it to you, but one could go to the PDF file online and read the actual pages Betsey quoted from.”
I posted the relevant section from the page she referenced
It said nothing as she described it.
She lied.
“Including her employer, Bloomberg, other reporters, other news outlets, some congressmen who were then interviewed about it, and some readers, including me.”
If you verified it you would be quoting the bill vs Betsy.
I imagine you’re not even quoting Betsy but Rush.

Posted by: Ryan C | February 13, 2009, 3:22 pm 3:22 pm

Of course, lying is nothing new to Obama.
He said while campaigning that:
1) He couldn’t employ lobbyists. His cabinet is filled with them.
2) He said he would have a transparent administration. Yes, so transparent he threw in a steal nationalized healthcare plan that rations care for our elderly. So transparent the Democrats locked the Republicans out of a committee hearing room 2 days ago and so transparent the bill wasn’t available to be read until 11:00 last night.
3) He said during his inauguration there would be no backroom deals. See #2 above.
4) So Congressmen, who had to vote on the bill today, didn’t have it until 11:00 last night, but lobbyists sure had their hands on it. Even Democrats were complaining about this one.
5) Obama says we all have to sacrifice and can’t heat our homes at 72 degrees but keeps the WH at greenhouse temperatures.
6) Hires tax cheats although he said we had to get the corruption out of politics.
7) Said we had to be more bipartisan and immediately went into a room filled with Republicans and attacked Rush Limbaugh and Fox News. classy /sarcasm

Posted by: peach | February 13, 2009, 3:23 pm 3:23 pm

I don’t care for Rush the lap dog Limbaugh and don’t need his advice.
Both parties policies along with globalization are the reason this country is losing it’s sovernity.
The continued leveraging of our debt with Chinese money will guarantee it.

Posted by: James Villa | February 13, 2009, 3:28 pm 3:28 pm

Gosh there’s an article out now quoting a DEMOCRAT who says not one member of Congress has read the bill.
Thanks for ramming something down our throats that none of the idiots in Congress has read.
If Obama had a brain in his head he’d tell them all to do their darned jobs and send it back to Committee.

Posted by: peach | February 13, 2009, 3:32 pm 3:32 pm

Should these states with low unemployment tares receive stimulus money from taxpayers?
Bureau Labor Jan 2009
1 WYOMING 3.4
2 NORTH DAKOTA 3.5
3 SOUTH DAKOTA 3.9
4 NEBRASKA 4.0
5 UTAH 4.3
6 IOWA 4.6
6 NEW HAMPSHIRE 4.6
8 NEW MEXICO 4.9
8 OKLAHOMA 4.9
8 WEST VIRGINIA 4.9
11 KANSAS 5.2
12 MONTANA 5.4
12 VIRGINIA 5.4

Posted by: Sigmonde | February 13, 2009, 3:36 pm 3:36 pm

Obama said he wouldn’t sign any legislation without putting it on the WH web site for review and comment for 5 days.
“He broke that promise within the first week in office when he signed the Lily Ledbetter legislation and given that he intends to sign this new legislation on the (anti) stimulus next week, I can see he intends to break that promise yet again.”
The Ledbetter legislation was debated and passed then vetoed by Bush.

Posted by: Ryan C | February 13, 2009, 3:38 pm 3:38 pm

“Should these states with low unemployment tares receive stimulus money from taxpayers?”
That would depend.
While statewide unemployment may be low there may be areas within the state with higher unemployment.

Posted by: Ryan C | February 13, 2009, 3:41 pm 3:41 pm

“Gosh there’s an article out now quoting a DEMOCRAT who says not one member of Congress has read the bill.”
Anybody pretending to represent OTHERS who “voted” for something without knowing what he/she voted for should be arrested, removed from office, and locked in a dungeon somewhere.
Congress voted for the Patriot Act the very SAME way. If we have a dictatorship, why spend all the money and aggravation to provide the marginally-decorative window-dressing of several hundred Congress-persons?

Posted by: Human Intelligence | February 13, 2009, 3:42 pm 3:42 pm

7 Democrats voted against the Porkulous Bill.
What a failure for Obama.
Even though it will ultimately pass, he sure wasn’t able to garner much support for it. Only about 35% of Americans support the bill. Not one House Republican voted for it. LOL

Posted by: peach | February 13, 2009, 3:43 pm 3:43 pm

Human Intelligence – I agree with you 100%.
This is the largest spending bill we’ve ever seen in this country and a democrat congressman is guaranteeing that not one member actually read the thing.
I well believe it because I’ve seen several legislators interviewed on various channels and they are clueless about what’s in there.
And when asked why it makes sense to spend so much money and put our country into debt, not one of them has a good answer.

Posted by: peach | February 13, 2009, 3:44 pm 3:44 pm

“Gosh there’s an article out now quoting a DEMOCRAT who says not one member of Congress has read the bill.”
————————————-
I do not know too many people that could read and comprehend 1000 pages of legislation in under 24 hours!
Who ever manages to get the links to work first, let me know if we are still spending 650 million more on the Digital TV conversion that the government has already screwed up.

Posted by: Mike_C | February 13, 2009, 3:45 pm 3:45 pm

Ryan C – are you really unaware that Obama signed the Lily Ledbetter legislation his first week in office? Really?
Wow.

Posted by: peach | February 13, 2009, 3:45 pm 3:45 pm

Ryan, dear -
Here’s something from the Huffington Post – that should meet with even your approval.
They talk about how Oabma signed the Lily Ledbetter legislation in his first week in office.

Posted by: peach | February 13, 2009, 3:46 pm 3:46 pm

Ryan C -
Obama signed the Lily Ledbetter legislation his first week in office. He didn’t put it on the WH web site for 5 days which was a campaign promise he made.
Now, I know you’ll call me a liar again.
For posters who are interested in the truth, google these words:
Lily Ledbetter+Obama

Posted by: peach | February 13, 2009, 3:48 pm 3:48 pm

“Ryan C – are you really unaware that Obama signed the Lily Ledbetter legislation his first week in office? Really?”
Are you really unaware that the bill was first proposed two years ago?
That it was blocked last year on procedure by Senate Republicans and a threatened veto by Bush.

Posted by: Ryan C | February 13, 2009, 3:48 pm 3:48 pm

Mike C – Exactly.
Giving Democrats control of our healthcare and even more of our money is insanity. These people can’t manage their own money.
There’s a relatively famous story that’s old now and I think I remember the details.
The Senate used to use our tax dollars to run the Senate dining room. The food was awful and expensive and every year cost more and more tax dollars to support.
So legislation was passed to give the running of the restaurant to a private contractor. In the first year he improved the food and made a profit.

Posted by: peach | February 13, 2009, 3:51 pm 3:51 pm

Ryan C -
Try to keep up.
We aren’t talking about what the R’s did with the Lily Ledbetter legislation.
We’re talking about the fact that Obama promised to put all bills on the WH web site before he signed them for 5 days for viewing and comment.
He broke that promise his first week in office when he signed the Lily Ledbetter legislation.
But keep pretending I didn’t give you a link to a Huffington Post article about it.

Posted by: peach | February 13, 2009, 3:53 pm 3:53 pm

Ryan…It’s OK for you to make a mistake once in a while. Don’t be so defensive. People will think you are thin skinned.

Posted by: Sigmonde | February 13, 2009, 3:57 pm 3:57 pm

Gosh it was interesting reading that Huffington Post article. Even the left was upset that Obama broke his promise not to put the legislation on the WH web site and that it only took him a few days to break his campaign promise.

Posted by: Paul | February 13, 2009, 4:00 pm 4:00 pm

This is on the WH web site:
One significant addition to WhiteHouse.gov reflects a campaign promise from the President: we will publish all non-emergency legislation to the website for five days, and allow the public to review and comment before the President signs it.
Maybe the president considered the Lily Ledbetter legislation to be an emergency.
If so, heaven help us in a true emergency.

Posted by: Peach | February 13, 2009, 4:02 pm 4:02 pm

“Ryan C – are you saying the legislation wasn’t changed by Democrats from the legislation that was under consideration during Bush’s term? Really?”
Democrats wrote both Ledbetter and SCHIP.
The SCHIP bill that was intro’d and signed was the same one that was passed and vetoed by Bush twice.
The Ledbetter bill intro’d was the same as the one debated for two years.

Posted by: Ryan C | February 13, 2009, 4:13 pm 4:13 pm

Peach, thanks for posting that Huffington Post article. The left is furious that Obama broke his promise to post legislation on the web. You know you’ve made a huge mistake when even Gibbs admitted they goofed.

Posted by: Frank | February 13, 2009, 4:17 pm 4:17 pm

“Gosh it was interesting reading that Huffington Post article. Even the left was upset that Obama broke his promise not to put the legislation on the WH web site and that it only took him a few days to break his campaign promise.”
The article has Obama’s remarks and a brief Ap summary with weblinks to various leftie bloggers. None said a word about the 5 days.
Why because this bill has been up for discussion for quite some time now even on Obama’s WH blog.
The comments section has some obvious right wingers.
The lesson as always? Right wingers lie.

Posted by: Ryan C | February 13, 2009, 4:19 pm 4:19 pm

“Peach, thanks for posting that Huffington Post article. The left is furious that Obama broke his promise to post legislation on the web”
How funny.

Posted by: Ryan C | February 13, 2009, 4:20 pm 4:20 pm

Not to inject too many facts into Ryan’s little head, but here’s the deal:
The congressional record shows that the law was passed in the senat eon 1/22/09. Passed in the House on 1/27. Signed by the President on 1/29. So there were only 2 days between the final passage and the signature.
That’s NOT what the president promised. But keep spinning Ryan. You’re earning your keep.

Posted by: Peach | February 13, 2009, 4:30 pm 4:30 pm

Has the media fallen down laughing yet whenever Obama lies and says there is no pork in this bill?

Posted by: Sue | February 13, 2009, 4:41 pm 4:41 pm

Is the Senate now rushing to vote on Porkulus TODAY, in order to be able to joining the House, later, in pleading supernatural sabotage by “Friday the 13th” when it all goes bad?
I absolutely pray the Senate balks.

Posted by: Human Intelligence | February 13, 2009, 4:55 pm 4:55 pm

“The congressional record shows that the law was passed in the senat eon 1/22/09. Passed in the House on 1/27. Signed by the President on 1/29. So there were only 2 days between the final passage and the signature.”
The House Bill passed 1/9/2009.
The Senate Bill passed 1/22/09.
The WH posted a link to the bill on their Blog on Jan 25th.
The House passed the Senate bill 1/27/09.
Obama signed it 1/29/09.
“That’s NOT what the president promised.”
Considered that you lied about what was promised not sure how you can complain about it.
You will complain of course but that is another issue.

Posted by: Ryan C | February 13, 2009, 5:11 pm 5:11 pm

“Yes, you are correct – he’s in the low 60% approval right now. Two weeks ago it was 83-85% approval.”
Are you kidding, peach? There was only one poll, taken shortly before the inauguration, that had his approval in the 80s. That was a definite outlier and since he wasn’t even President yet, there wasn’t much to “approve” or “disapprove”.
There are no “plummeting” poll numbers. His numbers have been consistently in the 60s or above since the inauguration. Considering the dire economic situation we’re in and also considering some of the cabinet snafus, that’s pretty darn good. Like I said, he was elected with 53% of the vote. There’s been a GAIN of support since then, not “plummeting” poll numbers.

Posted by: Lisa | February 13, 2009, 5:47 pm 5:47 pm

“Not one House Republican voted for it. LOL”
And yet it will pass, peach, and President Obama will sign it into law. Who’s LOLing now?

Posted by: Lisa | February 13, 2009, 5:50 pm 5:50 pm

“Not one House Republican voted for it. LOL”
Democrats own it. Don’t blame anyone else when it fails to deliver.

Posted by: Sigmonde | February 13, 2009, 6:22 pm 6:22 pm

Would any of you sign a 1,000 page contract without reading it first? Then how could any Representative vote FOR and how can any Senator vote FOR this spending bill WITHOUT FIRST READING the entire document?

Posted by: James Danley | February 13, 2009, 6:32 pm 6:32 pm

“Don’t blame anyone else when it fails to deliver.”
And don’t forget who to give credit to when it DOES deliver.
I have no problems with the Democrats “owning” it. It’s what happens when you’re a grownup and actually take responsibility for doing something instead of sitting in the corner sucking your thumb.

Posted by: Lisa | February 13, 2009, 6:34 pm 6:34 pm

“Democrats own it. Don’t blame anyone else when it fails to deliver.”
Obama has already stated this is on him.
Which is a refreshing change.

Posted by: Ryan C | February 13, 2009, 6:43 pm 6:43 pm

It’s interesting that there were more Democrats voting against the spending bill than there were Republicans voting for it.

Posted by: Sigmonde | February 13, 2009, 7:29 pm 7:29 pm

Peach, google “Lily Ledbetter and Bush” for the history of the bill. no one thinks you are a liar just not informed.

Posted by: Paul Wall | February 13, 2009, 7:54 pm 7:54 pm

I believe this stimulus package is the biggest farse I have ever seen. Absolutley no thought was given to anything in it. NOONE read the final bill before it was voted on. All I heard was “It doesn’t really matter what is in the bill, as long as it is big, and we act fast”. Now, I will give anyone the benefit of the dought, including the president, but that remark is about the DUMBEST, UNEDUCATED thing I have heard in my entire life. The people that voted for this bill and the president, do not have a clue.

Posted by: Jerry | February 14, 2009, 10:40 am 10:40 am

Hmmm. It sounds like Obama was telling the truth, no earmarks.
The stimulus bill is a tournequet needed to stem the bleeding.
As far as anyone still talking about Obama’s birth certificate, you’re divorced from reality. The main proponant of the fake certificate theory had to admit that his handwriting experts verified that signatures were valid.
At least talk about something real.

Posted by: Linda | February 17, 2009, 7:32 am 7:32 am

How do you like Obama now?

Posted by: Steve F | March 2, 2009, 10:35 am 10:35 am

Leave a Reply

Do you have more information about this topic? If so, please click here to contact the editors of ABC News.