Today’s Qs for O’s WH – 5/27/2009

Good questions, Jake.

Hey, Jake… Nice line of questioning about same sex marriage! I could practically “see” the surprise and confusion on Gibbs’ face! Keep asking the tough questions…

Ouch Jake, lube him up first next time. Nice job, I even winced a little on that one.

KR:”"Of course, I guess, paying back ACORN several million dollars so they can “help” with the census wouldn’t be considered “waste” by Gibbs or Obama.”
I think it was several Billion with a B. That’s some serious census work.”
Why not make it Trillion, with a T, as long as you’re fabricating numbers without any basis in actual reality?

“Why not make it Trillion, with a T, as long as you’re fabricating numbers without any basis in actual reality?”
ZING!

“Why not make it Trillion, with a T, as long as you’re fabricating numbers without any basis in actual reality?”
I’m sorry, 5.2 Billion was the number that went to what some dubbed as “liberal activist groups”, many of which are affiliates of ACORN, or ACORN aquires funds from. You are certainly correct that there isn’t a direct link, but based on past evidence of ACORN aquiring government monies, I’m sure they will get their share.

And since the only number we know is 5.2 Billion to groups that work with ACORN, or ACORN requires fund from, we’ll never know how much they actually get. Maybe we should demand from ACORN how much taxpayer money they get and what they are doing with it? Kinda, you know… like banks and auto makers? Should be completely transparent yes?

Thank you Jake for asking questions and expecting answers, not just ramblings or a simple “passing the buck”. I am consistently enlightened into the current administration’s ideals through both the answers and non-answers you are giving each time you ask a question. I would like to see the American people made more aware of these side-steps when reporting on the network.

“And since the only number we know is 5.2 Billion to groups that work with ACORN, or ACORN requires fund from”
Still passing off this debunked right wing talking point?
For the past two weeks, Republicans have been raising a new charge against a familiar enemy, claiming that the Democrats’ stimulus bill includes as much as $5.2 billion in “goodies” for the Association of Community Organization for Reform Now (ACORN). Last fall, Republicans accused ACORN of “massive voter fraud,” a claim which we said was exaggerated. The group has since become a favorite target of Republicans, so it understandably raises a few hackles when House Republican leader John Boehner’s Web site proclaims that the bill provides “a taxpayer-funded bonanza” for ACORN. And Republican Sen. David Vitter goes even further, telling Newsmax TV that the provisions amount to “a political payoff.” Also, the National Republican Trust PAC has taken up the issue in fundraising pitches. But these claims are wildly exaggerated and rely upon faulty logic.
Let’s start with the (very few) claims that critics get right. The House version of the stimulus bill does indeed include about $1 billion in funding for the Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) program and another $4.2 billion ($2.2 billion in the Senate’s version) in funding for the Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP). Neither program is new: CDBG has been around since President Ford (a Republican) signed it into law in 1974, while the NSP was authorized in 2008 as part of the Housing and Economic Recovery Act signed into law by President Bush.

“you are in a distinct majority arguing for essentially staying the course on economic policy.”
Yes, perhaps I am…

So Ryan, you know exactly how much government funding has found its way to ACORN? You cite CDBG but what about NSP?
I have no idea, as I stated before, how much of that 5.2 Billion is making it’s way to ACORN AND ITS AFFILIATES. ACORN has a network of what, 100 organizations? When your an organization as convoluted as ACORN, who can actually track that? Kind of reminds me of mafia tactics, spreading out operations over many organizations to funnel funds to one entity. I’m not saying ACORN is mafia, don’t take a lead into that, what I’m asking is this, can anyone prove, without a doubt, exactly how much government funds make it into the hands of ACORN and its affiliates, who endorsed Obama in the campaign. If 1.6 million is it, then cool with me (actually not cool, government shouldnt be funding this stuff), but I haven’t seen anything that says it stops there. Does ACORN produce a balance sheet with donors and government funds? If those donors are recipiants of government funds? Trust me, I work in government and I know how government funds go through filters to get to certain organizations. It’s intentional.

tjp612:”The “stimulus” package was nothing more than an vehicle to execute a pent-up liberal wishlist.”
JHW539: “In REALITY, almost 10% of the stimulus went towards reducing the Alternative Minimum Tax, a perennial Republican favorite issue”
tjp612: “Wow! 10%! What a zinger!”
Not really, just another in a long list of actual facts, easily verifiable and based on reality, demonstrating the right wing’s consistent tendency to lie and grossly exaggerate. I suppose now you want to say that other than those 70 billion dollars, the stimulus was all a liberal wish list (well other than the Isakson amendment, but hey that was cut down from the original $36 billion he proposed, so lets ignore that right? And…).

“demonstrating the right wing’s consistent tendency to lie and grossly exaggerate.”
Where is the lie?
Explain (in your view) how the “stimulus”, as constructed, actually stimulates the economy. And before you respond with “road & bridge construction projects” you may want to check those appropriations first (hint: it is a very small percentage).

KR: “When your an organization as convoluted as ACORN, who can actually track that?”
Rush, O’Riely, and/or Hannity’s well paid research team for starters. The NRCC is also definitely quite engaged on that. And last, but certainly not the least, are a couple hundred Republican Congressmen and women from solid red districts with a combined thousands in staff whose job is quite literally to track that.
It is odd how you are implying that Republicans are inept and incompetent at basic bookkeeping and somehow think that is a compelling argument to believe your – clearly fabricated – numbers.

“It is odd how you are implying that Republicans are inept and incompetent at basic bookkeeping and somehow think that is a compelling argument to believe your – clearly fabricated – numbers”
I believe all politicians about has far as I can throw them, doesn’t matter the party. And all politicians are competent in one thing only, doing what it takes to get votes and stay in power. Anyone who thinks that any politician truely cares is filling themselves full of BS. They only care about how their actions look to voters, and thats universal. So spare me the republican this or democrat that because its all a game they want you to play.
And all I know is 5.6 Billion going to “stuff”. Government organizations and programs that, by default, must secure some kind of influence on a voter base. Whether its ACORN or Santa Clause doesn’t make a difference, its buying votes and irresponsible government. ACORN is just a shiny object to focus on.

20 May 2009 // Washington, D.C. – Today, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) released a comprehensive list of members of Congress under investigation. Currently, there are 16 members — 12 House members and four Senators.
12 House members: 8 Dem. (3.1%), 4 Rep. (2.2%)
4 Senators: 4 Dem. (6.8%), 0 Rep. (0%)
Total: 12 Dem. (3.8%), 4 Rep. (1.8%)
Does this imply that Democrats are twice as likely to be unethical (and in some cases, criminal) than Republicans? Just thinking…

JHW539: “In REALITY, almost 10% of the stimulus went towards reducing the Alternative Minimum Tax, a perennial Republican favorite issue”
———————————
That’s keen insight but ignores the reality that by putting the AMT patch in the stimulus bill it does not have to be paid for under paygo rules.

It would be nice if the administration, who pushed the stimulus package and is out even today praising themselves over it, had more information at its fingertips about the success of it.
Today, President Obama used the 150,000 jobs created or saved number again.
But it is funny to hear Gibbs say the press had made it clear only 75-80% of it would be spent in two years. President Obama regularly knocks the press for obscuring his message.

MayBee:”Why is the AMT fix being described as a Republican favorite issue?”
It was added to the stimulus bill by Republican Senator Chuck Grassley (who then voted against the bill – shows the value of compromising with the current crop of Republicans). Republicans are on record as being overwhelmingly for it; it’s a bit ‘fairness’ issue for them.
In general, Democrats are not all fired up to make sure those earning $70k+ with big families are protected from an extra percent or two of tax. But they included the AMT – which NO ONE thinks is stimulus spending, and which would have otherwise slipped into the standard budget bill like any other year – only to court Republican votes.
“I think there are a lot of Republicans that like the AMT [patch] and have voted overwhelmingly for it unpaid-for in the past,” Hoyer said.

“You cite CDBG but what about NSP?”
Also from factCheck
“NSP’s mission is more limited: Its funds are used to purchase foreclosed or abandoned homes, redevelop and then resell them, with the aim of stabilizing home prices. Boehner and Vitter claimed to smell a rat in the stimulus package’s language that allows nonprofit entities to compete directly for NSP funds. When the NSP was created last year, only state and local governments were eligible to participate in the program. The new language in the stimulus bill, Republicans argue, is a way to funnel money to ACORN.
We make no judgments about the wisdom of allowing nonprofits to compete with state and local governments for NSP funds. Is this a “payoff” or “goodies” for liberal allies, or for ACORN specifically? Actually, both programs hand out grants only on a competitive basis. ACORN – and any other nonprofit entity – would be eligible to compete for NSP funds (as it already does for CDBG funds), but the key words here are “eligible” and “compete.”
Competition would likely be stiff. In 2008, NSP’s first year, states handed out funds to a total of 308 grantees. The NSP rules would require ACORN to show that it would spend the money to renovate and resell foreclosed homes more efficiently than other applicants.
Moreover, ACORN is already indirectly eligible for NSP money; current law permits state and local governments to subcontract work, and ACORN would be eligible to compete for funds at the local level. However, ACORN didn’t get any NSP money last year and says it doesn’t plan to apply for NSP money in the future.”
The only real numbers are these:
ACORN has received almost $1.6 million (not billion) in CDBG grants over a four-year span.
Gee I wonder why the GOP are so focused on demonizing a group devoted to minority outreach and voter registration.

Foghorn Leghorn:”I can make a firm pledge. Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase.”
Your point? I did specify “in general” and I thought it was clear that my more substantive evidence was citing the person who added the AMT cut to the stimulus (a Republican), and to a lessor degree the quote of Hoyer justifying it to Democrats by it’s value in attracting Republicans.

jhw- I’m asking why you describe it as an “annual” *Republican* priority. Telling me Grassley put it in the stimulus doesn’t explain that assertion.
They pass a fix about every year- whether it’s Republicans or Democrats in charge. The Dem Senate passed a fix in 2007, only to go against the House’s stated goal (at the time) to not add to the national debt.
Putting the fix in the stimulus plan this year circumvents that, as someone else mentioned.
Charles Rangel is trying to find a way to fix the AMT. He’s certainly no Republican.

Rangel could be a Republican by calling a simple news conference.. Michael Steele would probably make him an offer that few could refuse…

@ jhw,
Care to take a crack at this?
Explain (in your view) how the “stimulus”, as constructed, actually stimulates the economy. And before you respond with “road & bridge construction projects” you may want to check those appropriations first (hint: it is a very small percentage).

tjp612:”Care to take a crack at this?
Explain (in your view) how the “stimulus”, as constructed, actually stimulates the economy.”
No. If you haven’t understood the myriad of explanations, ranging from pretty graphics in USAToday to Nobel prize winners in newspaper columns or recorded seminars, then I’m not arrogant enough to think I can get through to you.
Why don’t you just post some over simplified little story about a swimming pool, or splitting a bar tab, pat yourself on the back, and let the grownups keep America the strongest, most prosperous and frankly still the best country mankind has ever seen.

jhw539, can’t wait to hear how you rate this admin in 2 years, that is if anyone can afford the internet. you seem to be very smart. I don’t understand your blind approval for this admin. Yes, I’ve stated that befor and you denied it but I don’t think I have ever read one post from you that doesn’t have an explanation for everything Obama and his party does. Come on, make my day and tell me one thing you don’t agree with him on. Bet you can’t.

The original principle of the constitution was to secure the rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of property. So far, we have almost 2 strikes against us.

notanobamafan:”Come on, make my day and tell me one thing you don’t agree with him on. Bet you can’t. ”
I don’t agree with his continued overuse of the State Secrets Privilege legal defense. His bailout of banks was too timid; he should have socialized them all. And putting the AMT into the stimulus to pander to Republicans was a dangerous dilution of an important bill for no reason – politics 101, if Republicans are not going to support the bill regardless of concessions made to them, they lose their place at the table.
I am also not impressed by his ‘no taxes for those making under $250k’ pledge.
Taxes need to go up across the board – the “millionaire” bracket needs to come back and everyone needs to pay some amount to the national income tax. Obama should be out there regularly putting out the facts that tax rates in the US are low – lower than other first world nations, and unsustainably low if we want to maintain anything like our current position atop the first world.
His anti-trade rhetoric in the election was foolish, but he has wisely backed off of that so I’ll give him a pass.
I don’t agree with him on lots of points, but at the moment it is a choice between OK (Obama) and a party that honest seems to consider intelligence a bad thing.

jhw539 “No, I don’t agree with that. Housing can be bad for the labor market, tying people down to a place without jobs when they should move out. See Detroit – the jobs are probably never coming back but people are still huddled in far too great of numbers there. ”
jhw- Do you think a house at its market value, if labor is generally over-valued, do you think an individual willing to put in their own labor, can they make a profit at that?

“Gee I wonder why the GOP are so focused on demonizing a group devoted to minority outreach and voter registration.”
In my town, whites are a minority. I don’t see ACORN beating down my door. (Live in south Texas). And that organization for voter outreach endorses a candidate… which… would make it illegal to receive government funds would it not? Since they endorse a Democrat, wouldn’t it logical that they target Democrat voters if endorsing a Democrat candidate, and recieve government funds of any kind? It’s not even shakey, its downright wrong.

As long as these discussions can be held openly, there’s a chance to reverse these trends.

The only resolution I can see is a parallel non-taxable currency based on poor quality dry feed corn, so that honor can more easily calculate the costs of government funds.