Archive for the ‘Reid’ Category

Obama, Congress: Not One Candidate Worthy of “Special Olympics”

March 20, 2009

People I’ve met at the Special Olympics display drive, determination, and focus.  They see the big picture, believe in the fellowship of mankind and are overjoyed and thankful for their gifts.

The President of the United States, who promised a new kind of government, a new era of post racial, post partisan, pork free government of transparency and equality brought forth some kind of dementia of his own on national TV last night.

He demeaned the Special Olympics and the athletes who work so hard to get there.

Barack: stick to the teleprompter.  Tell Biden, too.

So now, after just 60 days of this president, his administration and this congress, we have a rush job stimulus to nowhere; a witch hunt over $165 million while several trillion dollars are frittered away.  We have a verbal war with Rush Limbaugh, no real bipartisanship, $1 billion in spending an hour for 50 days, and a world economy adrift.

Drifing downward.

And the hope?  The promise?  It’s to spend more.  With this congress deciding how.

Yesterday the president appeared on a late night comedy show which wasn’t funny, filled out his basketball bracket, which insulted at least one team, and today his wife will plant vegetables, apparently aware that the recent action by the Fed will mean inflation and veggies nobody can afford to buy.

It’s much more inspirational to watch the Special Olympics than this president and his team.

Let’s not even name names: nobody in this presidency and congress looks able enough to make the Special Olympic team….They are an insult to Special Olympians…..

With the world economy on life support, Obama and this congress seem worthy only of pulling the plug….

Related:
Read more abouth Geithner, your diminishing wealth, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd….

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/03/
20/obamas-worse-joke-and-insult-to
-american-taxpayers-intelligence/

Obama on Leno, Special Olympics Crack, White House in “Damage Control Mode”

Obama and Leno Discuss Congress, AIG: “It Kind of Scared Me”

Economic Recovery? “These guys are eating my lunch”

Lawmaking by Stampede Made the Stimulus, Now We’ll Tax ‘Bonuses’ the Simulus Allowed?
.
Obama On Geithner Sounds Like “Brownie, you’re doing a heck of a job”
.
Pelosi, Rangel rushing to tax AIG and other bonuses 90%; This caused a revolution once…

AIG Bonus Snafu: Boomeranging Into the Faces of Democrats?

“Dodd The Dodge” — Senator Weasels Away The Truth; And Not Artfully

Obama the centrist, pragmatic problem-solver is gone: now liberal spendathon, no accountability

Obama, Pelosi: Anything to Win

Lawmaking by Stampede Made the Stimulus, Now We’ll Tax ‘Bonuses’ the Stimulus Allowed?

Duke Coach Slam Dunks Obama: Go Fix the Economy

Expect Obama To Trash Bipartisan Pledge and Railroad His Budget Through Congress “Rubber Stamp”

March 18, 2009

Even with a huge majority of Democrats in the House and an ample edge in the Senate, Barack Obama is expected to take no chances on anything stopping his spending train.

The legislative and deliberation shortcut is called “budget reconciliation”…..

By using this trick,Obama can be assured he’ll get his hands on a lot more money than he might if he went through normal congressional procedure….

President Obama urged more speed just yesterday for his next budget: a $3.6 trillion beheamouth.  “Budget reconciliation” would allow him to get exactly what he wants.  So watch this develop: AIG is a distraction.  The AIG bonuses ate less than 0.1 % of the AIG bailout…..

That doesn’t include all the health care money Obama wants by a long shot:
Health care overhaul may cost another $1.5 trillion or more

Obama’s budget doesn’t yet fully address the climate change measures he wants: Cha-ching:
 Obama climate plan could cost $2 trillion

The stimulus — which no “lawmaker” has admitted to reading before it was passed, was a lesson in why we need congress to deliberate and not rubber stamp spending bills.

But the president naturally wants more spending, less deliberation and more rubber stamping — which will get him his goals and reelection….

By John E. Carey
Peace and Freedom

Obama’s Real Problem: He Still Wants Toxic Acid Bank Bailout $750B, Budget of $3.6 Trillion, and More

*********************

By Lori Montgomery
The Washington Post

Senior members of the Obama administration are pressing lawmakers to use a shortcut to drive the president’s signature initiatives on health care and energy through Congress without Republican votes, a move that many lawmakers say would fly in the face of President Obama’s pledge to restore bipartisanship to Washington.

Republicans are howling about the proposal to expand health coverage and tax greenhouse gas emissions without their input, warning that it could irrevocably damage relations with the new president.

“That would be the Chicago approach to governing: Strong-arm it through,” said  Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), who briefly considered joining the Obama administration as commerce secretary. “You’re talking about the exact opposite of bipartisan. You’re talking about running over the minority, putting them in cement and throwing them in the Chicago River.”

The shortcut, known as “budget reconciliation,” would allow Obama’s health and energy proposals to be rolled into a bill that cannot be filibustered, meaning Democrats could push it through the Senate with 51 votes, instead of the usual 60. Presidents Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton both used the tactic to win deficit-reduction packages, while George W. Bush used it to push through his signature tax cuts.

Administration officials say they have not made a final decision about whether to use the maneuver. But White House budget director Peter R. Orszag said yesterday that it is “premature to be taking it off the table.” Meanwhile, key administration officials, including White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, are pushing for reconciliation instructions in the budget proposal that Democrats are scheduled to unveil next week, congressional sources said.

Read the rest:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-d
yn/content/article/2009/03/17/AR
2009031703798.html?hpid=topnews

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/03
/18/hey-how-about-spending-anot
her-2-trillion/

Obama Needs To Blitz Congress To Get His Entire Agenda Approved

March 14, 2009

President Obama must be irked. The media and other Obama allies like Warren Buffett are on his case for the first time, insisting he’s in too big a hurry to enact his entire domestic agenda. Obama should slow down, they say. He should prioritize. He should focus on reviving the economy and nothing else, and leave other issues–health care, energy, education–for later. The president has spurned this advice.

by Fred Barnes
Weekly Standard

Obama is right. His agenda is grandiose, but his strategy for achieving it makes sense. Since he has a fair chance of getting nearly everything he wants, why not go for it now? The president and his aides believe any new administration in similar circumstances would do the same. Right again. Proceeding prudently, taking up issues one at a time, would reduce the odds of success. For a new president, later is harder.

The White House strategy has dictated the Republican strategy: slow-walk the process. No one understands this better than Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell. He’s joined the chorus urging Obama to pull back. There’s “ample time” later, he said last week, to deal with issues “that have no relation whatsoever” to rejuvenating the economy.

The president, contrary to his reputation as the smartest guy in town, doesn’t seem to realize how important his own strategy really is. He acts as though he’s not subject to the normal rules of politics and thus, for him, success is inevitable. It’s not. The rules do apply and have, in fact, begun to affect him adversely. He needs to make haste.
Obama has two great political assets: his popularity and the large Democratic majorities in the Senate and House. The more popular a president and the bigger his party’s majorities, the better his prospects for winning approval of his agenda. Seems obvious, doesn’t it? The best example: Lyndon Johnson in 1965, when his Great Society programs became the law of the land. (They still are.)

Like earlier presidents, Obama is slipping in popularity, as measured by job approval, as his first year progresses. At 63 percent approval, he’s roughly where George W. Bush was at this point in his presidency in 2001, but behind JFK, Eisenhower, Carter, LBJ, and Nixon. Pollster Scott Rasmussen has noted a sharp rise in those who “strongly disapprove” of Obama’s performance and a dip in those who “strongly approve.”

Read the rest:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Conte
nt/Public/Articles/000/000/016/2
70rbpzy.asp

Mortgage relief stalls on Hill

March 14, 2009

Disagreement among Senate Democrats over how many struggling homeowners should qualify for court-ordered mortgage relief has stalled a key part of President Obama‘s foreclosure prevention plan on Capitol Hill.

Behind the scenes, top Democrats are offering banks and credit unions sweeteners to drop their opposition to the plan, hoping that even tepid support from lenders might win a few vital votes from skeptical Democrats and Republicans. The bill would give judges new power to lower the interest rate and principal on a primary home loan as part of a bankruptcy settlement.

The measure passed the House last week – but only after a small revolt by moderates forced Democrats to narrow who might qualify.

They made sure the help was restricted to people who couldn’t afford their mortgages without a court-ordered rewrite to lower their monthly payments, and those who had already tried to work out more affordable terms with their mortgage company.

The House bill also lets bankruptcy judges consider whether a homeowner has already been offered a deal by the lender that matched the guidelines Mr. Obama recently laid out in his housing rescue plan – one with monthly payments amounting to no more than 31 percent of the owner’s income.

Lenders cheered the changes as an improvement but were still opposed to the final bill. They have long argued that the measure would impose steep and unpredictable costs that would be passed on to homeowners as higher interest rates. A multimillion-dollar industry lobbying effort helped kill the measure last year.

Seeking to avoid a similar fate this time, Sen. Richard J. Durbin, Illinois Democrat, is drafting an even narrower alternative.

One option essentially would prohibit anyone who could get a reasonable deal with the lender from seeking mortgage relief in bankruptcy, according to top Democratic aides and lobbyists familiar with the discussions. They spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to disclose the negotiations.

Sen. Evan Bayh, Indiana Democrat, is working on a rival plan that would allow still fewer homeowners to qualify for home loan rewrites imposed by a bankruptcy judge. Mr. Bayh and Republican Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania are discussing a measure that would be limited to subprime mortgages.

Mr. Bayh said the House bill would ultimately increase the cost of lending. “We have to work to strike a better balance and take into account some of the long-term concerns about driving up the costs of mortgages,” he said.

Mr. Durbin, Sen. Charles E. Schumer of New York and other senior Democrats are shopping for a deal with industry figures that could win the support of key centrists in their party, plus a few Republicans.

Mr. Schumer has floated the idea of attaching a legislative gift that credit unions have long coveted – killing a decade-old limit on the amount they can lend to businesses – in exchange for their support, according to people close to the talks.

Currently, just 12.25 percent of a credit union’s lending can go to businesses. Efforts to lift the cap have run into fatal opposition from the banking industry, which doesn’t want the added competition.

Backing from credit unions could bring critical votes to the bankruptcy measure, because they are spread throughout the country and can activate a powerful grass-roots network on Capitol Hill.

So far, however, credit unions aren’t biting.

Democrats had hoped to move the measure through the Senate this week, but short of the 60 votes that would be needed to advance it past procedural hurdles, they held off. Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, recited a March to-do list Thursday that omitted the housing measure.

The delay has emboldened critics to redouble their efforts to kill the bill – or at least try to exact a steep price for supporting it.

Sen. Bob Corker, Tennessee Republican, said the measure is losing steam as moderate Democrats express concerns and Mr. Obama fleshes out his broader homeowner rescue plan with many other options for working out burdensome mortgages. “The momentum has swung against it now,” he said.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009
/mar/14/mortgage-relief-stalls-as-senators-
examine-options/

Obama: Unity on Agenda Eludes Democrat Party Leaders

March 10, 2009

Democratic leaders in Congress did not expect much Republican support as they pressed President Obama’s ambitious legislative agenda. But the pushback they are receiving from some of their own has come as an unwelcome surprise. 

By Shailagh Murray
Washington Post

As the Senate inches closer to approving a $410 billion spending bill, the internal revolt has served as a warning to party leaders pursuing Obama’s far-reaching plans for health-care, energy and education reform.

Those goals, spelled out in Obama’s 2010 budget blueprint, continue to enjoy broad Democratic support. But as the ideas develop into detailed legislation, they will transform from abstract objectives into a tangle of difficult trade-offs. Crop subsidies, the student loan program and Medicare radiology rules are all currently niche concerns, but any one could become the next crisis for party leaders, with the potential to derail a major agenda item. One major proposal, to limit itemized deductions for wealthy taxpayers, has already raised doubts among prominent Democrats in both chambers.

Some issues that inflamed Democrats in previous years have yet to even register, including the proposal in Obama’s budget plan to “means-test” the Medicare drug benefit as a way to pay for health-care reform. Doling out entitlement benefits based on income has long been anathema to most Democrats.

Read the rest:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con
tent/article/2009/03/09/AR200903090301
9.html?hpid=topnews

Obama Doesn’t Understand What Many Americans Are Thinking

March 8, 2009

“First of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself—nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance. In every dark hour of our national life a leadership of frankness and vigor has met with that understanding and support of the people themselves which is essential to victory. I am convinced that you will again give that support to leadership in these critical days.”

Words from Barack Obama?  Hardly.  Those are words from Franklin Roosevelt’s first inaugural address.

See:
http://historymatters.gmu.e
du/d/5057/

I am disappointed in my president, our president.

He has changed some really great rhetoric like FDR’s “the only thing we have to fear is fear itself” into this:

“I don’t think that people should be fearful about our future.  I don’t think that people should suddenly mistrust all of our financial institutions.”

“I don’t think” indicates an Obama-centric view of the financial turmoil of Americans — not a “people centric” view.

And by guessing at what Americans really do fear, “financial institution,” Obama is saying it is these evil “financial institutions” that many of us do fear.

Well, maybe in Obama World and Obama’s White House, people fear financial institutions because they have no understanding of capitalism, business, the stock market and the American dream.

I am afraid that President Obama has no clue….That’s my fear.  And I resent Him telling me what I think.

I believe generally that “the only thing we have to fear is fear itself” and I also believe in JFK’s famous challenge: “Ask not, what your country can do for you.  Ask what you can do for your country.”

I also believe in Ronald Reagan’s exoration: “Government is not the solution.  Government is the problem.”

I am afraid now because President Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and a lot of other well meaning folks think the government is the solution.

America’s founders wrote down the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the other parts of our national fabric because they were living in fear of a far off all knowing and uncaring English Government.

And their spirit lives today in the saying, “I’m from the government and I’m here to help.”  Many of us fear such naive, ignorant hubris.

I am starting to fear Washington.  Obama’s Washington.  A far off, all knowing and uncaring government about five miles from my house, which is surrounded by other foreclosed houses.

I really do fear that Obama and many Democrat’s don’t get it.

Just last week, on Tuesday, President Obama, while speaking about the economy and the stock market, mentioned the “profit to earnings ratio.”

And I thought he went to Harvard.  There is no “profit earnings ratio.”  There is a “price to earnings ratio” or PE.  Investors care more about their return on the dollar, reflected in the price they paid and the earnings that resulted.

Tom Petruno wrote in the Los Angeles Times on March 7, “He didn’t get the lingo right, assuming he meant to say ‘price-to-earnings ratios,’ a measure of stock prices relative to earnings per share. That flub caused snickering among market pros.”

See:
Obama, Socialism, Fear, Lack of Confidence: Tanking Stocks, Skyrocketing Debt, Recovery Doomed This Year

I was even more disappointed when the president repeated this ignorant flub in a New York Times interview late in the week.  That meant to me that nobody in the White House was smart enough to straighten out the president by holding a little school call on him.  Or maybe they just don’t know; and don’t read.  They certainly don’t listen.

But they’re thinking about curing all my education and health care problems, undoutedly….

So Obama’s lack of stock market lingo doesn’t mean to me that he slept through high school: it means he has no idea what drives capitalism because he was reading socialist doctrine instead of paying attention to America, as he himself indicates in his books.  Maybe he never invested in anything but himself.

*****

What is wrong with America?  Everything, in Obama World:

“Look, I wish I had the luxury of just dealing with a modest recession or just dealing with health care or just dealing with energy or just dealing with Iraq or just dealing with Afghanistan,” Obama said. “I don’t have that luxury, and I don’t think the American people do, either.”

Related:
From CNN:
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/POLITIC
S/03/07/obama.interview/index.html

Related:
 NYT Interviews Obama; No Economic Recovery This Year
.
NYT: After March 6 Economic News, “2009 is Probably a Lost Cause”

Related:
Obama: Crisis is time of ‘great opportunity’

 President Pelosi?

 Obama, Socialism, Fear, Lack of Confidence: Tanking Stocks, Skyrocketing Debt, Recovery Doomed This Year
.
Can Democracy Fail With Obama’s Socialist Help?

*****

It seems to us that the attacks on Rush Limbaugh fromTeam Obama are an effort to tell Americans what to think and what not to think.  This kind of arrogance often manifests itself in unusal ways: Limbaugh’s radio show ratings doubled.

So I really do fear that President Obama and his guys don’t get it….

Democratic Attacks On Limbaugh Boost His Ratings — But He’s Not The Problem

********

I fear that the president doesn’t understand that many of us don’t want to pay more taxes, however they are hidden or veiled and whatever thay are for, many of us DO MIND paying for por, even though Chick Schumer thinks we don’t, and many of DO want to further understanding of the good news/bad news behind such huge spending on health care and other Obama projects.  And I certainly DO WANT to understand how all this government debt will degrade American growth and quality of life in the future.  I don’t like sending money for oil to Saudi Arabia and I don’t like sending debt/interst payments to China eaither….

****************

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama offered his domestic-policy proposals as a “break from a troubled past.” But the economic outlook now is more troubled than it was even in January, despite Obama’s bold rhetoric and commitment of more trillions of dollars.

And while his personal popularity remains high, some economists and lawmakers are beginning to question whether Obama’s agenda of increased government activism is helping, or hurting, by sowing uncertainty among businesses, investors and consumers that could prolong the recession.

Although the administration likes to say it “inherited” the recession and trillion-dollar deficits, the economic wreckage has worsened on Obama’s still-young watch.

Every day, the economy is becoming more and more an Obama economy.

More than 4 million jobs have been lost since the recession began in December 2007 — roughly half in the past three months.

Stocks have tumbled to levels not seen since 1997. They are down more than 50 percent from their 2007 highs and 20 percent since Obama’s inauguration.

The president’s suggestion that it was a good time for investors with “a long-term perspective” to buy stocks may have been intended to help lift battered markets. But a big sell-off followed.

Presidents usually don’t talk about the stock market. But the dynamics are different now.

A higher percentage of people have more direct exposure to stocks — including through 401(k) and other retirement plans — than ever.

So a tumbling stock market is adding to the national angst as households see the value of their investments and homes plunge as job losses keep rising.

Some once mighty companies such as General Motors and Citigroup are little more than penny stocks.

Many health care stocks are down because of fears of new government restrictions and mandates as part a health care overhaul. Private student loan providers were pounded because of the increased government lending role proposed by Obama. Industries that use oil and other carbon-based fuels are being shunned, apparently in part because of Obama’s proposal for fees on greenhouse-gas polluters.

Makers of heavy road-building and other construction equipment have taken a hit, partly because of expectations of fewer public works jobs here and globally than first anticipated.

“We’ve got a lot of scared investors and business people. I think the uncertainty is a real killer here,” said Chris Edwards, director of fiscal policy for the libertarian Cato Institute.

Some Democrats, worried over where Obama is headed, are suggesting he has yet to match his call for “bold action and big ideas” with deeds.

In particular, they point to bumpy efforts to fix the financial system under Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner.

Obama may have contributed to the national anxiety by first warning of “catastrophe” if his stimulus plan was not passed and in setting high expectations for Geithner. Instead, Geithner’s public performance has been halting and he’s been challenged by lawmakers of both parties.

Republicans and even some top Democrats, including Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, have questioned the wisdom of Obama’s proposal to limit tax deductions for higher-income people on mortgage interest and charitable contributions.

Charities have strongly protested, saying times already are tough enough for them. The administration suggests it might back off that one.

Even White House claims that its policies will “create” or “save” 3.5 million jobs have been questioned by Democratic supporters.

“You created a situation where you cannot be wrong,” the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, Montana Democrat Max Baucus, told Geithner last week.

“If the economy loses 2 million jobs over the next few years, you can say yes, but it would’ve lost 5.5 million jobs. If we create a million jobs, you can say, well, it would have lost 2.5 million jobs,” Baucus said. “You’ve given yourself complete leverage where you cannot be wrong, because you can take any scenario and make yourself look correct.”

Republicans assert that Obama’s proposals, including the “cap and trade” fees on polluters to combat global warming, would raise taxes during a recession that could touch everyone. “Herbert Hoover tried it, and we all know where that led,” says House Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio.

The administration argues its tax increases for the households earning over $250,000 a year and fees on carbon polluters contained in its budget won’t kick in until 2011-2012, when it forecasts the economy will have fully recovered.

But even those assumptions are challenged as too rosy by many private forecasters and some Democratic lawmakers.

Many deficit hawks also worry that the trillions of federal dollars being doled out by the administration, Congress and the Federal Reserve could sow the seeds of inflation down the road, whether the measures succeed in taming the recession or not. The money includes Obama’s $3.6 trillion budget and the $837 billion stimulus package he signed last month.

Polls show that Obama’s personal approval ratings, generally holding in the high 60s, remain greater than support for his specific policies.

“He still has a fair amount of political capital, so the public is willing to cut him some slack and go along with him for a while,” said pollster Andrew Kohut, director of the Pew Research Center. “But the public will have to get some sense that the kinds of things he’s proposing are going to work, or are showing some signs that they are working.”

Allan Sinai, chief global economist for Decision Economics, a Boston-area consulting firm, said the complexity and enormity of the crisis make it hard to solve.

“There’s no way to get it all right, regardless of which president is making policy,” Sinai said. “The problem is the sickness got too far. The actions taken, medicine applied, were mainly the wrong actions. So it’s just worse, and it gets harder to deal with. At this stage, there is no easy answer, no easy way out. It’s a question of how we fumble through.”

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/03/07/tea-part
y-on-taxpayer-revolts-in-green-bay-lafayette-olat
he-and-harrisburg/

Harry Reid: Good News, Bad News

March 7, 2009
One of the most powerful men in the United States, Harry Reid is also a frequent subject for debate.  His rail project to protitution and vice is a case in point.  The Republicans’ biggest nightmare is also sometimes the Democrats’ biggest nightmare….

*******

The majority leader may be the most powerful Democrat in the U.S. Senate and in Nevada history. But his clout has made him a top target for Republicans nationwide.

By Mark Z. Barabak
Los Angeles Times
March 7, 2009
Reporting from Carson City, Nev. — When Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid came home recently to address the Nevada Legislature, a small but vocal band of Republican protesters gathered at the state Capitol. They waved signs, razzed Democrats and marched outside.

But the group fell silent when asked the chances of ousting Reid at the polls next year. “It’s going to be tough,” demonstrator Carol Howell, 65, finally said.

Reid the rest:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld
/nation/la-na-reid7-2009mar07,0,41403
96.story?track=rss

Harry Reid
.
Harry Reid of Nevada, the top Senate Democrat, often talks of his clout in D.C. But across the country, conservative groups have formed with the express purpose of denying the Senate leader a fifth term. Photo: AP Lauren Burke

With Big Issues Ahead, Democrats Stumble

March 7, 2009

The Republican-led blockade of overdue spending bills in the Senate is providing Congressional Democrats a quick and humbling lesson in the limits of their new power.
.
By Carl Hulse
The New York Times
.
Despite significant electoral gains in both the House and the Senate, the Democrats have been stymied by Republicans and a few Democratic defectors in what began as a fairly routine push to enact the leftover measures, needed to finance spending in the current fiscal year and tethered together into one $410 billion catchall bill.

As a result, Congress had to pass an emergency five-day stopgap on Friday to prevent an embarrassing shutdown of the government in the opening weeks of the Obama administration.

The failure left Democrats fretting about how they would perform when dealing with more contentious and complex legislation sought by President Obama on health care, energy, taxes and education.

“What does this mean for the Obama agenda?” said the chairwoman of the House Rules Committee, Representative Louise M. Slaughter, Democrat of New York. “We need to get this straightened out.”

Republicans and others said some Democrats were clearly experiencing sticker shock over the combined costs of the new Democratic agenda, with the $410 billion measure coming on the heels of the $787 billion economic stimulus and just ahead of the $3.6 trillion budget for 2010 and money this year for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

“Right now Democratic leaders look like they are getting dizzy from all the dollars they think they have to throw around,” said Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona, a principal foe of the joined spending bills.

Read the rest:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/07
/us/politics/07spend-.html?_r=1

Nancy Pelosi and her team engineered the stimul bill.  Now it is said they will create the health care reform measure: causing worry for many on the Hill…

In this Feb. 23, 2009 file photo, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, ...
In this Feb. 23, 2009 file photo, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. speaks during a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington. Pelosi didn’t lose her temper but she unleashed a bit of sarcasm this week when someone suggested, yet again, that she’s a thorn in President Barack Obama’s side. ‘Let me get this straight,’ the California Democrat said archly, to a group of liberal bloggers who had asked her about unattributed reports that the White House thought the $787 billion stimulus bill might have won a few House Republicans’ votes if Pelosi had not moved it so quickly.(AP Photo/Susan Walsh, File)

Pelosi, Reid “Failed;” Honest Democrat Their Worst Nightmare

February 9, 2009

Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, no friends of the truth, have now to face one of their own Democrats calling them “Failed” on bipartisanship and the stimulus.

Heath Shuler (D-N.C.) who introduced President Barack Obama at the National Prayer Breakfast on Thursday made the observation today.

Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair (2nd R) speaks at the ... 

Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair (2nd R) speaks at the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington, February 5, 2009. From L-R are: first lady Michelle Obama, U.S. President Barack Obama, Blair and U.S. Rep. Heath Shuler (D-NC).REUTERS/Larry Downing

****************By Glenn Thrush, Politico

Rep. Heath Shuler (D-N.C) has further ingratiated himself with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi — not — by declaring that Pelosi and Harry Reid “failed” the bipartisanship test on stimulus.

“In order for us to get the confidence of America, it has to be done in a bipartisan way,” Shuler said in Raleigh following an economic forum, according to the AP.

“We have to have everyone — Democrats and Republicans standing on the stage with the administration — saying, ‘We got something done that was efficient, stimulative and timely.'”

Here’s the kicker: “I truly feel that’s where maybe House leadership and Senate leadership have really failed.”

Shuler, rumored to be mulling a ’10 Senate run, was one of 11 House Democrats to vote “no” on the stimulus and was already deep in Pelosi’s doghouse. Now he’ll have to build a Harry Reid wing.

Related:
Bling Fling Stimulus and Obama Faces Questions With: Answers?

Stimulus: Democrats Exhibit Zero Convicing Arguments, Spokesmen

February 8, 2009

“This isn’t about my personality. This isn’t about anybody’s personality.”
.
So said Larry Summers on Fox News Sunday.

While it was clear he didn’t have the personality to be an effective spokesman for Barack Obama on anything, he also seemed unable to explain why this stimulus is so absolutely necessary. 
In this photo provided by FOX News, Larry Summers, chairman of the White House National Economic Council, appears on ‘Fox News Sunday’ in Washington, Sunday, Feb. 8, 2009. (AP Photo/FOX News Sunday, Freddie Lee)

In this photo provided by FOX News, Larry Summers, chairman ...

After the statement, “without this stimulus we’ll have economic catastrophe,” please someone tell us what is so good about this stimulus?

Last Thursday afternoon I would have said Barack Obama was his own best spokesman to “sell” this stimulus to the American people.

But on Thursday night he went to a spa in Williamsburg, Virginia and gave an ugly, partisan attack on Republicans; not a bipartisan urge for American to unite in times of economic crisis.

And nobody on the Democrat side has given anything close to a line by line defense of this stimulus.

And this has hurt Barack Obama and his presidency much more than the flawed vetting process that brought us tax scofflaws like Tom Daschle.

“It shrinks his presidency,” said former Republican Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich Friday at the American Enterprise Institute. “I thought last night’s speech in Williamsburg actually was a lot more like Carter and a long way from Reagan.”

Historian Gingrich said Friday, “Reagan would never have allowed himself that level of partisanship and that kind of aggressiveness in that kind of setting.  So you could either have a strategy that says, ‘I’m going to go over and I’m going to be bipartisan and I’m going to prove it and here’s how I’m going to it. In which he case he wouldn’t have gone down last night. He would, in fact, have invited Pelosi and Boehner and he would have invited Reid and McConnell down to the White House to collectively hammer out the bipartisan compromise. That’s one strategy. Or there’s the strategy … that’s perfectly reasonable, that says, ‘I won, we won and we’re running over you but we’re going to deliver. … What he’s doing now is Carter-ism because he’s trying to live out both strategies and you gotta figure out which morning it is by which strategy he’s using today. And what that will do is totally clutter who he is.”

On Sunday, Gingrich recommended that the president leave his campaign-style anger at home during his stimulus sales trip this week.

Gingrich wasn’t the only one critical of the president on leadership last week.  Republican Senator Lindsey Graham said the preident was AWOL (Absent Without Official Leave) on the stimulus — and yesterday that earned him a rebuke in the senate that sounded a lot like gay bashing.

If the president has lost his ability to “sell” the stimulus; who can do the job?

Nancy Pelosi?  She’s largely seen as an over the top partisan Democrat — and the single person most responsible for the waste (read pork) in the stimulus.

Governors and mayors?  They just want the money and care nothing about the down-side of debt, inflation and the rest.

Harry Reid?  He has largely stayed out of any national leadership role on this, preferring, apparently, to manage the president’s agenda in the senate.

Larry Summers?  I saw him on the Sunday morning talk shows and thought he was a very lame spokesperson.

Didn’t pay his taxes Geithner?  He seems to be laying low.  He’s working on TARP II “Son Of Tarp.”

So with about 50% of the nation’s voters now turning against the stimulus, President Obama will continue his “Catastrophe Cavalcade” outside Washington and on the road this week.

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said Obama would travel to Elkhart, Indiana, on Monday for a town hall meeting on the stimulus bill before holding a White House news conference on Monday night.

Elkhart is where many American recreational vehicles are made — and in hard economic times many people just won’t buy a new RV.

Obama will be in Fort Myers, Florida this Tuesday — in an area with the nation’s highest foreclosure rate.

Meanwhile, the less photogenic Republican leaders, it seemed to me, made a lot of sense and a lot of good points.

Republican Senator Jeff Sessions said it would cost some $40 billion a year just to service the additional debt that resulted from the spending portions of the bill.

“How big is $40 billion? That’s the annual road budget, the annual highway budget for the United States of America. That’s a lot of money,” Sessions said.

If this stimulus is so great, and the House and the Senate are both dominated by articulate Democrats, how come Democrats can’t make better arguments and put forward better spokesmen for this stimulus?

Related:
Obama Economic Chief: House, Senate Stimulus Chasm Still Means Trouble

Stimulus? Senator Unleashes “Gay Insult” During Debate Tongue-Lashing

Obama, Dems Go To a Spa After Tough First Weeks But No Stimulus

 Senator Critical Of President for Not Leading on Stimulus; Calls Effort “Crazy,” Bill “Monstrosity”

Michelle Malkin:
http://michellemalkin.com/2009/02/07/burnin
g-the-midnight-oil-the-sellout-amendment-is-here/

http://imthenimrod.wordpress.com/2009/02/0
8/barack-obama-stubborn-arrogance/

http://www.righttruth.typepad.com/

What did the Senate cut from the stimulus?
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/0
7/stimulus.cuts/index.html

 Pelosi Calls Bipartisanship Unnecessary

Transcript:
Larry Summers on Fox News Sunday
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,29
33,489742,00.html