PDA

View Full Version : The Fierce Urgency of Pork



ELVIS
02-06-2009, 02:00 PM
By Charles Krauthammer (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/05/AR2009020502766_pf.html)

February 6, 2009


"A failure to act, and act now, will turn crisis into a catastrophe."

President Obama, Feb. 4.

http://img166.imageshack.us/img166/2048/obamaclintonbrendansmiaaa6.jpg

Catastrophe, mind you. So much for the president who in his inaugural address two weeks earlier declared "we have chosen hope over fear." Until, that is, you need fear to pass a bill.

And so much for the promise to banish the money changers and influence peddlers from the temple. An ostentatious executive order banning lobbyists was immediately followed by the nomination of at least a dozen current or former lobbyists to high position. Followed by a Treasury secretary who allegedly couldn't understand the payroll tax provisions in his 1040. Followed by Tom Daschle, who had to fall on his sword according to the new Washington rule that no Cabinet can have more than one tax delinquent.

The Daschle affair was more serious because his offense involved more than taxes. As Michael Kinsley once observed, in Washington the real scandal isn't what's illegal, but what's legal. Not paying taxes is one thing. But what made this case intolerable was the perfectly legal dealings that amassed Daschle $5.2 million in just two years.

He'd been getting $1 million per year from a law firm. But he's not a lawyer, nor a registered lobbyist. You don't get paid this kind of money to instruct partners on the Senate markup process. You get it for picking up the phone and peddling influence.

At least Tim Geithner, the tax-challenged Treasury secretary, had been working for years as a humble international civil servant earning non-stratospheric wages. Daschle, who had made another cool million a year (plus chauffeur and Caddy) for unspecified services to a pal's private equity firm, represented everything Obama said he'd come to Washington to upend.

And yet more damaging to Obama's image than all the hypocrisies in the appointment process is his signature bill: the stimulus package. He inexplicably delegated the writing to Nancy Pelosi and the barons of the House. The product, which inevitably carries Obama's name, was not just bad, not just flawed, but a legislative abomination.

It's not just pages and pages of special-interest tax breaks, giveaways and protections, one of which would set off a ruinous Smoot-Hawley trade war. It's not just the waste, such as the $88.6 million for new construction for Milwaukee Public Schools, which, reports the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, have shrinking enrollment, 15 vacant schools and, quite logically, no plans for new construction.

It's the essential fraud of rushing through a bill in which the normal rules (committee hearings, finding revenue to pay for the programs) are suspended on the grounds that a national emergency requires an immediate job-creating stimulus -- and then throwing into it hundreds of billions that have nothing to do with stimulus, that Congress's own budget office says won't be spent until 2011 and beyond, and that are little more than the back-scratching, special-interest, lobby-driven parochialism that Obama came to Washington to abolish. He said.

Not just to abolish but to create something new -- a new politics where the moneyed pork-barreling and corrupt logrolling of the past would give way to a bottom-up, grass-roots participatory democracy. That is what made Obama so dazzling and new. Turns out the "fierce urgency of now" includes $150 million for livestock (and honeybee and farm-raised fish) insurance.

The Age of Obama begins with perhaps the greatest frenzy of old-politics influence peddling ever seen in Washington. By the time the stimulus bill reached the Senate, reports the Wall Street Journal, pharmaceutical and high-tech companies were lobbying furiously for a new plan to repatriate overseas profits that would yield major tax savings. California wine growers and Florida citrus producers were fighting to change a single phrase in one provision. Substituting "planted" for "ready to market" would mean a windfall garnered from a new "bonus depreciation" incentive.

After Obama's miraculous 2008 presidential campaign, it was clear that at some point the magical mystery tour would have to end. The nation would rub its eyes and begin to emerge from its reverie. The hallucinatory Obama would give way to the mere mortal. The great ethical transformations promised would be seen as a fairy tale that all presidents tell -- and that this president told better than anyone.

I thought the awakening would take six months. It took two and a half weeks.


CryingMAO!


:elvis:

FORD
02-06-2009, 02:06 PM
Why does a PNAC stooge like Cunthammer even get access to the media anymore?

Oh yeah.... silly question. :rolleyes:

ELVIS
02-06-2009, 02:23 PM
Nevermind him being right, right ??

FORD
02-06-2009, 02:31 PM
Oh yeah, he's extremely right. :rolleyes:

GAR
02-06-2009, 03:15 PM
I keep seeing Boy on TV saying that "We need to act now."

Funny how similar a pitch that is to TV sales such as Ginsu Steak knives, Shamwow and other "..act now, and we'll also receive" pitch statement benefits.

Funny how if the money was in the bank yesterday, nobody'd touch it for a year anyhow.

Funny how last years' 300 million is mostly unspent after what, 6 months in the kitty?

Funny man this Boy Obama is! But I'm not laughing.

LoungeMachine
02-06-2009, 03:26 PM
Nevermind him being right, right ??

Where was all this right-wing tool hand wringing 2001-2006 when you guys PORKED us into this mess?

Did Chimpy Veto one single bill?

Was there a ban on earmarks?

You guys crack me up.

:gulp:

sadaist
02-06-2009, 03:36 PM
Where was all this right-wing tool hand wringing 2001-2006 when you guys PORKED us into this mess?

Did Chimpy Veto one single bill?

Was there a ban on earmarks?

You guys crack me up.

:gulp:

So the argument is that it's ok to fuck the taxpayer since the precedent has already been set?

GAR
02-06-2009, 03:39 PM
I said "300 million" where I should have said "billion" with a B.

Unlike Boy, who is currently speaking in the "trillion" with a T.

LoungeMachine
02-06-2009, 03:40 PM
So the argument is that it's ok to fuck the taxpayer since the precedent has already been set?

I never made an argument.

I simply pointed out the hypocrisy with these right-wing tools in here screaming and crying now, yet never said BOO for 6 years while the RePukes spent money like drunken sailors on payday.

I thought my post was pretty clear.

:gulp:

LoungeMachine
02-06-2009, 03:41 PM
I said "300 million" where I should have said "billion" with a B.

Unlike Boy, who is currently speaking in the "trillion" with a T.

You should "copy-write" that.

:gulp:

Guitar Shark
02-06-2009, 04:04 PM
This pulled pork sandwich is simply delicious.

ELVIS
02-06-2009, 04:47 PM
I'm not right-wing, you LoungeLizard fag...

Nickdfresh
02-06-2009, 04:52 PM
I'm not right-wing, you LoungeLizard fag...

No, you're just a dope that never, ever questioned the huge deficit spending by a Republican, ever...

ELVIS
02-06-2009, 04:59 PM
Yes I have. You're just selective in your memory...

Guitar Shark
02-06-2009, 05:00 PM
I'm not right-wing, you LoungeLizard fag...

Dude, c'mon. :D Yes you are.

ELVIS
02-06-2009, 05:03 PM
I'm independent but I lean to the right for sure...

That doesn't make me right wing...

And why, because I appose Obaahaahaahaahaahaahahaahaahaahahaahahahaahhahma ??

ELVIS
02-06-2009, 05:15 PM
[ur=http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/feb/04/cbo-obama-stimulus-harmful-over-long-haul/]lStephen Dinan[/url]

February 4, 2009

http://media.washingtontimes.com/media/img/photos/2009/02/05/Obama45_r350x200.jpg?0babd24c675f3097b9d1ff106ec86 53055db7939

President Barack Obama speaks to the House Democratic Issues Conference on Thursday in Williamsburg. Associated Press

President Obama's economic recovery package will actually hurt the economy more in the long run than if he were to do nothing, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said Wednesday.

CBO, the official scorekeepers for legislation, said the House and Senate bills will help in the short term but result in so much government debt that within a few years they would crowd out private investment, actually leading to a lower Gross Domestic Product over the next 10 years than if the government had done nothing.

CBO estimates that by 2019 the Senate legislation would reduce GDP by 0.1 percent to 0.3 percent on net. [The House bill] would have similar long-run effects, CBO said in a letter to Sen. Judd Gregg, New Hampshire Republican, who was tapped by Mr. Obama on Tuesday to be Commerce Secretary.

The House last week passed a bill totaling about $820 billion while the Senate is working on a proposal reaching about $900 billion in spending increases and tax cuts.

But Republicans and some moderate Democrats have balked at the size of the bill and at some of the spending items included in it, arguing they won't produce immediate jobs, which is the stated goal of the bill.

The budget office had previously estimated service the debt due to the new spending could add hundreds of millions of dollars to the cost of the bill -- forcing the crowd-out.

CBOs basic assumption is that, in the long run, each dollar of additional debt crowds out about a third of a dollars worth of private domestic capital, CBO said in its letter.

CBO said there is no crowding out in the short term, so the plan would succeed in boosting growth in 2009 and 2010.

The agency projected the Senate bill would produce between 1.4 percent and 4.1 percent higher growth in 2009 than if there was no action. For 2010, the plan would boost growth by 1.2 percent to 3.6 percent.

CBO did project the bill would create jobs, though by 2011 the effects would be minuscule.



:elvis:

Nickdfresh
02-06-2009, 05:34 PM
Idiot, how many fucking threads are you going to start on the same topic? quite starting dupe threads...

ELVIS
02-06-2009, 05:40 PM
Idiot...

LoungeMachine
02-06-2009, 06:01 PM
I'm not right-wing, you LoungeLizard fag...

:lol: :lol:

:lmao::lmao::eek::jesuslol::smiley-lol::stop:

LoungeMachine
02-06-2009, 06:05 PM
It's never fails to crack me up you NeoCon Shitbags all claim to be "independent"

Yet always vote RePuke, always bash the left, and always ignore the right's foibles.

At least us Liberals are proud to be called Liberals.



Go clean a bed pan

:gulp:

LoungeMachine
02-06-2009, 06:06 PM
Yes I have. You're just selective in your memory...

Really?

Show us one post where you slammed the RePuke spending of the previous administration.

:gulp:

ELVIS
02-07-2009, 12:47 AM
At least us Liberals are proud to be called Liberals.




For what ??

FORD
02-07-2009, 12:56 AM
An "independent" wouldn't quote Charles Cuntheimer and the Moonie Times in the same thread. But a raving neocon would.

ELVIS
02-07-2009, 01:05 AM
Oh c'mon...

hideyoursheep
02-07-2009, 02:18 PM
By Charles Krauthammer


'Nuff said....not even gonna bother.

:meinsmiley: