Obama: We Got All Stimulus $$ Back...CBO: $24B in Losses!

OOOPS, Obama Did It Again...Made You Believe He'll Lie to the End...and He will...On the stimulus:

President Barack Obama said on Thursday that “we got back every dime we used to rescue the financial system." According to the Congressional Budget Office, however, the government will lose about $24 billion on the bailout. “We got back every dime we used to rescue the financial system, but we also passed a historic law to end taxpayer-funded Wall Street bailouts for good,” Obama said in Miami Thursday. The Congressional Budget Office--based on figures from Obama’s own Office of Management and Budget---gives a different assessment. “The cost to the federal government of the TARP’s transactions (also referred to as the subsidy cost), including grants for mortgage programs that have not yet been made, will amount to $24 billion,” said the CBO report, which was released on the same day Obama spoke. CBO said that the cost of TARP “stems largely from assistance to American International Group (AIG), aid to the automotive industry, and grant programs aimed at avoiding home mortgage foreclosures,” noting that the losses will be so large they will eclipse the financial gains the government will realize from bailing out other large financial institutions. In fact, CBO reported that as of now $65 billion in TARP funds remain outstanding.

Darn, the turnover time on lies to truth is getting to be less than a day....For Benghazi, it was a week, and for this latest economic gem, less than a few hours.

Obama's Spending: Rex Nutting Of MarketWatch Thinks You Are As Ignorant As He Is

Rex Nutting is an ignorant fool who is using data already shown to be false in trying to say that Obama hasn't spent that much. From the Drivelarticle:

Of all the falsehoods told about President Barack Obama, the biggest whopper is the one about his reckless spending spree. As would-be president Mitt Romney tells it: “I will lead us out of this debt and spending inferno.” Almost everyone believes that Obama has presided over a massive increase in federal spending, an “inferno” of spending that threatens our jobs, our businesses and our children’s future. Even Democrats seem to think it’s true. Government spending under Obama, including his signature stimulus bill, is rising at a 1.4% annualized pace — slower than at any time in nearly 60 years.

He even has a chart. Basically, his argument is that since the stimulus and omnibus bill are on the 2009 budget and the 09 budget was approved in 08, therefore, it is all Bush's spending. What this putz isn't telling you is that Congress uses baseline spending....from James Pethokoukis.:

As the chart indicates, Nutting arrives at that 1.4% number by assigning 2009—when spending surged nearly 20%—to George W. Bush: “The 2009 fiscal year, which Republicans count as part of Obama’s legacy, began four months before Obama moved into the White House. The major spending decisions in the 2009 fiscal year were made by George W. Bush and the previous Congress. Like a relief pitcher who comes into the game with the bases loaded, Obama came in with a budget in place that called for spending to increase by hundreds of billions of dollars in response to the worst economic and financial calamity in generations.”

Let me complete the metaphor for Nutting: “Then as those runners scored, Obama kept putting more on base.”

Obama chose not to reverse that elevated level of spending; thus he, along with congressional Democrats, are responsible for it. Only by establishing 2009 as the new baseline, something Republican budget hawks like Paul Ryan feared would happen, does Obama come off looking like a tightwad. Obama has turned a one-off surge in spending due to the Great Recession into his permanent New Normal through 2016 and beyond.

So, I would add to the argument this way: If Bush is responsible for stimulus and omnibus and as well as the GM bailout, then Barack Obama is responsible for nothing. He isn't responsible for, as he and Biden are going around the country trumpeting: 1. saving GM 2.stopping the recession in late 2009 3. saving jobs

So, therefore, if this is true, then Obama REALLY has nothing to campaign on. However, it is not true, just as the notions of 1-3 are not true either.

The stimulus, omnibus, and auto bailouts were authorized after the 2009 budget was ratified, estabilishing a new baseline, as James P. talks about above. This new baseline, every year then, is the new normal. So, spending is elevated every year as a result of this procedure. Let me share with you James P's chart that makes more sense than the ramblings of Nutting:


Basically, they are saying it is Bush's fault even though he had nothing to do with the spending, but he was either a lame duck or out of office when it was authorized. Nutting is banking on the American public being as ignorant about how Congress and the budget works as he is. He even got nailed on a radio program by a caller.

Bottom line:
In fiscal year 2009, Barack Obama spent a total of $1.065 trillion that Nutting at MarketWatch and Pelosi produced charts saying that Bush spent. Bush didn't spend it. Bush didn't spend the stimulus bill. He didn't authorize it, ask for it. It was not even in his mind, but because it happened in 2009, it was lopped on to the 2009 budget that Bush did not sign, as it turns out. So they assign this to Bush-era spending. They're saying that Obama spending cannot be calculated until October of 2009, when the new fiscal year starts. No spending before that could possibly be Obama's, that's what they're saying, and of course they're not right about it.

Here are the totals: $825 billion on his first stimulus; $200 billion on a second round of TARP spending. More on that just a second. Forty billion spent on a new child health care bill, S-CHIP. Now, there's other incremental, incidental spending that Obama was doing left and right, throwing money all over the place. Solyndra was getting money, if you recall, all this green energy were getting so-called low-interest loans. Obama was printing money, borrowing it, throwing it around as fast as he could. But those are the big-ticket items: $825 billion for Porkulus; $200 billion additional TARP spending; $40 billion S-CHIP. Grand total, $1.065 trillion that Obama spent that these people are counting as Bush money.

Now, the really deceitful thing that Mr. Nutting and the others are doing is saying that they are counting Obama's stimulus in their tally of his spending. In the text of the story they say they're counting the stimulus. And, they are. They are counting Porkulus 2, $140 billion, which happened after October in 2009. They're not counting the $825 billion big-ticket Porkulus. So in the text of the story, they claim they're counting the stimulus, and it's really deceitful, because what they're counting is Porkulus 2, which is $140 billion. So casual readers of the Nutting story -- it's a Web story at MarketWatch -- casual readers think, "Oh, wow, even with Obama's stimulus he still spent less than Reagan and Bush?" But again, they're only counting that $140 billion second stimulus. They're not counting the first $825 billion stimulus.

Now, more on this TARP business. What actually happened there was, Obama as president-elect before the inauguration, Obama told Bush, or asked, to release the rest of the discretionary TARP money so that Obama could use it for economic recovery as soon as he took office. And Bush did. Bush expanded the discretionary amount of TARP, and that was around $200 billion or 300 billion. So you can add $200 billion to this, and you're just under $1.1 trillion of Obama spending that's not counted as Obama spending. Now, specifically that second round of TARP that Obama asked for as president-elect, not inaugurated yet, was for the auto bailout to buy General Motors and Chrysler and give them to the unions. And that was $200 billion.

So once again, they are playing fast and loose with the numbers.

I am not the only one and neither is James Pethokoukis who are showing how much Dems and the media are being dishonest by flouting this tripe.

There is a reason that the Democrats have not offered a budget in three years. And this is an excellent time, with this bogus report from Rex Nutting and the media picking this up, to point this out. The Democrats have refused to offer a new budget ever since 2009, because they want to lock all of Obama's spending into the budget and into the baseline. Continuing resolutions keep current funding levels at the same level. Thus, Obama's spending becomes the new norm, raising spending even more.

Why would the media cover this obviously bogus story? They want Obama reelected. Why do you think there hasn't been a whisper of the biggest religious lawsuit in history, where Notre Dame University and several archdioceses and other Catholic and Protestant groups have sued Obama over religious freedom?

Rex Nutting and his ilk are not just ignorant. They are biased liars. I was able to cobble this together in about 20 minutes. I was able to find plenty of refutation in about 10. They just go with what helps Obama. But, if you look at it, if this is all Bush's spending, then Obama genuinely has nothing at all to run on. Of course, we know he has nothing to run on anyway, except used unicorn farts.

No, Nothing to See Here: Solyndra Raided by FBI, Once Touted by Obama

Gee, wonder if it has anything to do with misplaced stimulus money? What did Obama know and when did he know it? Check this out:

FBI agents executed search warrants on Thursday at the headquarters of California solar firm Solyndra, which received a $535 million loan from the federal government before filing for bankruptcy last week.

Agents executed multiple search warrants at the company's headquarters in Fremont as part of an investigation with the Department of Energy's Office of Inspector General, according to FBI spokesman Peter Lee. Lee said he could not provide details about the investigation.

Solyndra is a solar-panel manufacturer once touted by President Barack Obama as a beneficiary of his administration's economic policies. It announced last week that it was laying off 1,100 workers and filing for bankruptcy.

The company was held up as the model for government investment in green technology. In addition to the $535 million loan guarantee, it received visits from the president and other state and federal officials.

Hey, anybody know what happened to that 535 million? Anyone? From PJM:

A beleaguered Solyndra spokesman took a wild guess at what the FBI might be looking for:

Solyndra spokesman Dave Miller said the search came as a surprise, but he emphasized the company is “fully cooperating” with federal officials. He said he did not know the purpose of the search, but he speculated it could have something to do with the $535 million in loan guarantees the Department of Energy awarded to Solyndra.

Ya think?

While the “Anybody seen $535 million around here?” quote in the headline is of course a joke, Business Insider adds some key context to the raid:

The Obama administration’s relationship with the company has come under scrutiny since the bankruptcy was abruptly announced last week. The Daily Caller reported that between March 12, 2009, and April 14, 2011, “Solyndra officials and investors made no fewer than 20 trips to the West Wing.”

Solargate?

King Louis the XVI Obama Laughs at Debacle of Stimulus

Heeheehee.....Isn't it funny that I had no clue what I was talking about when I promised the stimulus would keep unemployment down to 8%? http://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gif Isn't it hilarious that so many Americans are out of work and we rich elite leftists continue to sit in judgement? ehheheheheehhe. That is pretty much what this video and related text story have to say from Fox Nation:

One of the Council's recommendations to President Obama was to streamline the federal permit process for construction and infrastructure projects. It was explained to Obama that the permitting process can delay projects for "months to years ... and in many cases even cause projects to be abandoned ... I'm sure that when you implemented the Recovery Act your staff briefed you on many of these challenges." At this point, Obama smiled and interjected, "Shovel-ready was not as ... uh .. shovel-ready as we expected." The Council, led by GE's Jeffrey Immelt, erupted in laughter.

The Obama administration promised the Recovery Act ("the stimulus") would prevent the jobless rate from going over 8%. It now stands at 9.1%.

Also, from USA Today:

While meeting with his Jobs and Competitiveness Council today in Durham, N.C., President Obama cracked wise about one of his administration's early catchphrases.

Remember "shovel-ready projects."

Those were construction projects in the 2009 stimulus bill that were supposed to get moving right away -- but jobs council members told Obama today that some got held up because of elaborate government regulations and permitting procedures.

"Shovel-ready was not as shovel-ready as we expected," Obama said.
http://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gif
In both the jobs council meeting and in his speech later to employees at a Durham lighting company, Obama said regulatory change is a major part of his new jobs push.

"How do we deal with making sure our regulations make sense, so that we start eliminating ones that don't work, aren't making consumers better off or aren't improving our quality of life?" Obama told the employees.

Oh, you mean increasing the reach of organizations like the EPA to the point where they bankrupt energy companies with coal fire plants? Like you are doing to Ohio companies, Mr. President? See related WMD post here.

Well, Speaker of the House John Boehner's office did not think Obama's little joke was funny:

Republicans said Obama's "shovel-ready" comment is more proof of the shortcomings on his economic policies.

"He's a couple of years behind the rest of America," said Brendan Buck, a spokesman for House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio. "But it's refreshing that the president himself is now acknowledging the failure of his stimulus program."

Muslim Sues Teacher....For Discussing Ham

Coming soon to a school in the United States, probably in Michigan:

Consider the case of the student at the Menéndez Tolosa school in Cadiz who recently asked his geography teacher to stop discussing ham in class because it was disrespectful to him as a Muslim. It should be noted that the teacher, José Reyes Fernández, was not mocking the Koran’s prohibition against eating ham. What was so offensive to the student was Fernández’s use of the Granada town of Trevélez as an example of a cold mountain climate conducive to the curings of hams.

Fernández’s explanation to the student that he did not consider his pupils’ religious beliefs when creating his lesson plans apparently did not pass muster. The student’s parents immediately filed a complaint against the teacher with the National Police for psychological ill-treatment due to xenophobia and racism.

Fernández is a well-respected teacher with 20 years of experience and no history of problems with students. In a note to the media, he wrote that the incident has damaged “his honor [and] image.” Fortunately, it appears that the complaint will not also hurt his professional career: a local prosectuor on Tuesday announced plans to archive the case.

Gee, not taking any one person's views into account sounds fair to me, but what do I know? You think this is ridiculous, look at these examples from the same story:

In 2007, the “pressure of a select few” caused a UK school to take political correctness to a whole new level when it changed the name of its production of the “Three Little Pigs” to the “Three Little Puppies.” And earlier this year, French police banned “a street party whose organizers planned to serve alcoholic cocktails and pork sausages in a heavily Muslim neighborhood of Paris.” Robert Spencer of JihadWatch correctly noted at the time that the planned event was a provocation, but doubted that cops would have acted similarly “if a Muslim group in France had announced that it was going to do something in a non-Muslim area that many non-Muslims found offensive.”

You know, liberal stupidity is going to politically correct us right into sharia law someday.

GUEST COLUMN: "Banning Earmarks – A Small But Important Step to Budget Sanity" by Rep. Jean Schmidt

By Rep. Jean Schmidt

Over the last several years we have heard a lot about Congressional earmarks in the federal budget. According to Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW), the practice of Congressional earmarking began in earnest in the 1980s.  Generally speaking, the practice of Congress providing funding to specific projects or entities has been growing ever since.  CAGW estimated that the annual appropriations bills passed by Congress in 1991 contained around 546 earmarks costing approximately $3.1 billion.  By 2010, the non-partisan Congressional Research Service estimated that there were some 11,320 earmarks worth $32 billion – 1.5% of all appropriations – passed by Congress.  By any measure, the practice of earmarking has certainly gotten out of control.

No matter the origins or merits of earmarking, American taxpayers have had their fill of it.  They are tired of seeing their tax dollars spent on the latest government boondoggle – a new bridge to nowhere, a seemingly silly research project or to feather somebody’s own nest.  And, as Congress fights “to bring home the bacon,” projects of national significance, such as the Brent Spence Bridge, sit idly for lack of funding.

Last year, Republicans in the House of Representatives voted to discontinue the practice of earmarking.  I was proud to support that moratorium and when we convened earlier this month, I was proud to join a majority of other Republicans in continuing the moratorium.

As many people know, saying no is harder than saying yes. Disappointing people isn’t fun, but the country is facing a serious financial struggle to keep its expenses in line with its income.  Under the Obama Administration’s guidance, non-defense, discretionary spending has increased some 84%.  Our national debt totals more than $13 trillion and making a dent in that will require some very difficult choices.  It seems absurd that funding for the Appalachian Fruit Laboratory would be considered in the same debate as extending the life of the Social Security Trust Fund as we go about the necessary prioritization of federal funding.  While eliminating earmarks will not solve the budget problems, allowing them to continue certainly can’t help.
 
Unfortunately, like other old habits, this one dies hard.  A Senate proposal to end the practice for three years failed last week.  The Senate’s inability to deal with this issue at the moment is disappointing, but it’s not the end of the debate.

Reform does not always happen as fast as we would like, but the actions of the new majority in the U.S. House show that we are heading in the right direction. It is my hope that members of the U.S. Senate will soon join us in restoring the public’s trust in the budget process.

OH-09: Iott Signs No Pork Pledge

Release:

Rich Iott, candidate for Ohio's 9th Congressional District, has signed the No Pork Pledge sponsored by Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW).

CAGW, which advocates the elimination of waste and inefficiency in government through nonpartisan public education programs and lobbying activities, in July named incumbent Rep. Marcy Kaptur their 'Porker of the Month' for "gaming the House Democrats' prohibition on awarding earmarks to for-profit companies and wasting taxpayers' money."

Upon notice of the award, Iott said:

"Politicians like Marcy Kaptur, who've been in Washington so long that they actually think this sort of wasteful spending is a good thing, have brought our county to the edge of bankruptcy with a debt approaching $14 trillion. Now is the time to acknowledge that earmarks need to stop and that her so-called 'legislative priorities' are not the priorities of the taxpayers she's supposed to represent.

"Ohio's 9th Congressional District needs a businessman who understands that "eviscerating earmark reform and wasting taxpayers' money" (as the CAGW called it) is not the way to create economic growth in the district, the state or the nation.

"When I'm elected, I promise to end 'pay-to-play' corruption, and bring some real-world, common sense business experience to Capitol Hill."

In following through on that promise, Iott signed the No Pork Pledge which reads:

I, Rich Iott, pledge to the constituents of the 9th Congressional district of the state of Ohio and to the American people that I will not request any pork-barrel earmark, which is defined as meeting one of the following criteria:

Requested by only one chamber of Congress

Not specifically authorized

Not competitively awarded

Not requested by the President

Greatly exceeds the President's budget request or the previous year's funding

Not the subject of congressional hearings

Serves only a local or special interest

"When career politicians each try to get their own piece of the pie, it is the taxpayers who are left with an empty plate - and the bill. While I don't need to sign a pledge to remember that my obligation is not to spend taxpayer money on pork, I'm happy to put my commitment in writing so the voters can hold me accountable," Rich Iott said.

Not So Fast, Mr. Portman: Energy Issues

Yesterday, I posted Rob Portman's commercial attacking Cap and Tax. However, looking around the web, one wonders if Rob's plan is really any better or if it, too, is more wishful thinking that will bear disastrous results. To wit:

t the end of the ad, Portman claims that he has a better way to protect the environment, and he asks the viewer to check it out on his Web site. I obliged. His plan relies on “support” — read: subsidies and other government interventions — for things that he likes — corn ethanol, nuclear power, natural gas, coal.

Some of these things might become an essential part of weaning the country off fossil fuels. Or not.[...]

On his Web site, Portman criticizes “command-and-control” regulation from Washington. He mentions refraining from choosing winners and losers in the energy debate. He says he doesn’t want Washington “to stifle the ingenuity of American enterprise and our market system through government interference.” But inefficient government interference is his plan.

What could he be talking about? Rob is a "rock solid" conservative, right? Uh...well...decide for yourself. From Rob's website:

5. Promote Ohio Bio-Fuels. Ohio is also a leading producer of bio-fuels, particularly corn-based ethanol, which is blended with regular gasoline to reduce vehicle emissions. Research and new technologies are making home-grown bio-fuels more cost effective and should be encouraged. The federal EPA should increase the ethanol content in the standard blend from 10 percent to 15 percent for newer vehicles whose engines are equipped to handle higher ethanol concentrations. This small change would substantially raise the demand for this renewable fuel, which means more production, more jobs for ethanol producing states like Ohio, and make us less dependent on foreign oil. Ohio farmers and bio-fuel plants like the Poet Bio-refining plant Rob visited in Marion will benefit from a renewed commitment to Ohio bio-fuels.

6. Bring Alternative-Fueled Vehicles into the Mainstream. Rob is the owner of a hybrid vehicle – a Ford Escape he purchased in 2006 – and has a strong interest in the technology. Driven by increased consumer demand, manufacturers are now designing “plug-in” hybrid vehicles that supplement gasoline power with electric power from the grid. Availability of these vehicles will be increasingly important as our cleaner energy production markets (solar, wind, hydroelectric, nuclear and clean coal) mature. If we can generate electricity more cleanly, manage it efficiently through the use of smart grids, and use it to power our cars and trucks, then we will have created a sustainable, clean-energy lifecycle. As fuel cell research in Ohio and elsewhere matures, this is another exciting, potential fuel source. The federal government should continue to partner with the private sector to develop the battery and other technologies that make these vehicles possible, ensure manufacturers have access to capital to bring these vehicles to market, and help encourage plug-in hybrids. Along with natural gas vehicles, bio-fuels, and an increased supply of domestically-produced oil, these hybrid and electric vehicles will help lead us to energy independence.

7. Use Ohio’s Manufacturing and Technology Advantage. Ohio’s skilled workforce is a national asset that will help move our economy closer to energy diversity and independence. Unfortunately, Cap and Trade punishes Ohio’s manufacturers when, in fact, they are part of the answer to developing cleaner energy solutions. Ohio’s manufacturing and technological expertise is at the forefront in energy development, research, and production in traditional energy areas and in promoting advanced alternative energy technologies. Ohio is also home to a robust energy manufacturing sector that is at the forefront in solar cell and wind turbine production and has the capacity to be a leader in the manufacture of hybrid and electric vehicles. Government policies that incentivize innovation and entrepreneurship in the energy sector will benefit states like Ohio that have made strategic investments in human capital and advanced-manufacturing infrastructure.

8. Promote Conservation and Efficiency. The cleanest energy of all is the energy we don’t use. Reducing our energy consumption leads to a cleaner environment, and gives rise to entire new industries, technologies, and jobs in energy auditing, insulation, lighting, HVAC, and appliance refits. Improving energy efficiency in buildings and homes could stimulate job growth, eliminate approximately 30% of U.S. crude oil imports, and may be the best short-term opportunity to reduce energy consumption. Conservation should also be encouraged, including supporting ongoing efforts to restore and protect natural habitats across the globe. Deforestation is considered the second-largest source of CO2 emissions behind coal-fired electric plants. Legislation Rob authored, the Tropical Forest Conservation Act, has resulted in the protection of over 60 millions acres of forests worldwide.

OK, so what are my problems with this stuff? First, why do we need incentives for development of alternative energy? Isn't that government command and control? Not to mention that his incentives idea for alternative energy is supporting horribly inefficient forms of energy that just make us more beholden to foreign oil. No, what we need to do is get cheap energy through more exploration, and also invest in nuclear. Some might say it is too expensive or risky, but I think we can go with it because the long term efficiency and benefits are there. However, Rob also goes off the reservation quite a ways with this notion of twisting people's arms to buy cars that they don't want. Of course, this isn't surprising when you remember he supported cash for clunkers.

Then, of course, there are the subsidies to farmers for ethanol. Look, I know lots of people who grow corn. Fine. However, realize that we are not increasing efficiency. It takes more energy to make/process ethanol than it uses.

I like Rob. I think he is better than Lee Fisher. However, his whole DC insider pride and these ideas about energy should give one pause before blindly buying his shtick.

Boehner Has Some Questions and Porkulus Updates

Check out this video from the Right Knight of Congress, great American, and Ohio's very own, John Boehner:


Also, check out this report regarding the Dems and their every increasing flipflops regarding the stimulus:

Washington (Jul 5)

Washington Democrats plowed hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars into a ‘stimulus’ program with promises it would create jobs ‘immediately’ and keep unemployment below eight percent. Nearly 18 months later, more than 3 million private sector jobs have been lost and unemployment is at 9.5 percent. Over the same period, more than 400,000 new government jobs have been created. More government, fewer jobs: this isn’t the picture of recovery, it’s just another Washington program that overspends and underdelivers. The impact of Democrats’ ‘stimulus’ failures is felt in every promise broken, every job lost, every small business “sidelined,” and every new dollar of debt piled on our kids and grandkids. Out of touch, out of ideas, and out of money – that’s what you’re getting from Democrats in Washington right now. Republicans are offering better solutions to cut spending now and provide the fiscal discipline economists say is needed to put people back to work.

At this point, Democrats are just plain lost: how else to reconcile fretting over the ‘stimulus’ “winding down” just weeks after senior White House officials said this would be its “most active” season yet?

Leader Boehner is right. We were told that this summer of 2010 would be when the floodgates would open....I barely see a leaky faucet. Just another broken Dem promise.

OK, So We Are Smart@$$e$, Does that Make Barry and Joe Dumb@$$e$?

I mean, you can't make this up. Check out the video at this link. Then read on. Here is what Obama said in Racine, WI:

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Every economist who's looked at it had said that the recovery did its job. It put a brake on the collapse of the economy, we avoided a Great Depression. We are now growing again.

Uh...Barry, what about these guys:

In latest quarterly survey by the National Association for Business Economics, the index that measures employment showed job growth for the first time in two years -- but a majority of respondents felt the fiscal stimulus had no impact. NABE conducted the study by polling 68 of its members who work in economic roles at private-sector firms. About 73% of those surveyed said employment at their company is neither higher nor lower as a result of the $787 billion Recovery Act, which the White House's Council of Economic Advisers says is on track to create or save 3.5 million jobs by the end of the year.

That sentiment is shared for the recently passed $17.7 billion jobs bill that calls for tax breaks for businesses that hire and additional infrastructure spending. More than two-thirds of those polled believe the measure won't affect payrolls, while 30% expect it to boost hiring "moderately."

Or what about these people?

OK, but moving on...the Annointed one had this to say:

PRESIDENT OBAMA: The problem is, number one, it's hard to argue sometimes, things would have been a lot worse, right? You know, so people kind of say, yeah, but unemployment's still at 9.6. Yes, but it's not 12 or 13 or 15.

Wow, Barry, that's great. At least it isn't 10-0 percent. You know, that is about like saying, hey, we had to cut off half your leg, but at least it wasn't 3/4, or 7/8, or the whole thing. Give me a break!And Barry, the unemployment in Racine is like 14.4. Talk about a self absorbed oblivious jackhole! And of course, if the stimulus is working, what about this news:

Initial claims for state unemployment benefits increased 13,000 to 472,000, the Labor Department said, above market expectations for 452,000.

In a separate report, the Institute for Supply Management said its barometer of manufacturing activity slipped to 56.2 in June from 59.7 the prior month, with growth in the employment index moderating slightly.

While layoffs have slowed sharply from early last year, businesses remain skeptical of the strength of the recovery and are holding back on hiring, keeping claims for unemployment benefits at uncomfortably lofty levels.

High unemployment is a sore point for President Barack Obama, whose approval ratings have plummeted, and it could cost his fellow Democrats dearly at the polls in November.

More than 8 million Americans lost their jobs during the recession, but employment growth has been so tepid that it could take years for many of them to find work again.

But wait, who was it that said that if we passed stimulus unemployment would not go above 8%? Oh yeah, you and Joe Biden. Now, Barry, this discrepancy is a, to quote VP BiteMe, is a "big f'n deal." Minority Leader Boehner had this to say:

The president's in a town today with 14 percent unemployment and telling the people of Racine, Wisconsin, that the stimulus bill has created jobs, they just haven't seen them yet. Now, the president and his administration must be the only people on earth who think that the stimulus and more government spending is going to help our economy.It is a report. And really, it outlines that all the spending has not resulted in new jobs in America. The president promised when he signed the bill that unemployment wouldn't exceed 8 percent. But now it's nearly 10 percent. And if you look at African-American unemployment, it's at 16-and-a-half percent. If you look at Hispanic unemployment, it's 12-and-a-half percent. It hasn't created jobs. All the leaders around the world at the G-20 summit made it clear that we have to begin to reduce the debt in the world, not continue to add more debt.

You can find Boehner's Stuck on Stimulus Report here.
Boehner is no dumb@$$. Here are some gems from his report:

Last week, Vice President Joe Biden turned his back on a small business owner who asked about
having his taxes lowered. The Vice President then proceeded to call the man a “smartass” and went back to
defending his administration’s ‘stimulus’ spending policies.
This is the kind of Washington-knows-best arrogance that Americans are so fed up with. More than
that, though, it’s a reflection of the Washington-first, Washington-last economic policies that have failed to put
people back to work while pushing our nation to the brink of a fiscal crisis.
It’s time for a return to first principles, to common sense. If you want to boost the economy and
support private-sector job creation, you don’t go on a binge of taxing, spending and borrowing; you rein in
spending, keep taxes low, and give small businesses the certainty they need to get back on their feet.
This is the approach Republicans are fighting for, and have fought for since President Obama took
office. It’s supported by the American people, hundreds of economists, and even the leaders of most of the G-
20 nations, who’ve learned the hard way that massive government spending, seizing and borrowing is not an
effective remedy for their countries’ economic ills.
President Barack Obama and Washington Democrats have been slow to get the message. While the
rest of the world seems dialed in on the need to rein in spending and impose fiscal discipline, Washington
Democrats are still stuck on ‘stimulus.’
Rather than face facts and make tough choices, Washington Democrats have chosen to cling cluelessly
to their discredited ‘stimulus’ philosophy. To keep their spending spree going, Democrats have flat-out
canceled the federal budget for the first time in modern history at a time when a fiscal blueprint has never
been more badly needed.
Things reached a new low last weekend when, instead of pressing the United States Congress to do its
job and pass a budget, the president traveled to Toronto, where he practically begged our allies and trading
partners to spend more of their taxpayers’ money on government-run ‘stimulus’ programs. Just as it has been
with the American people, President Obama could not make the sale.

And that is just the FOREWORD!

President Obama has failed and lied or been oblivious to reality. Unemployment has not gotten better. In fact, Joe Biden said we won't get some of those job numbers back. There's real hope and change, all right!

So, either JoeBiteMe and Barry are dumb@$$e$, or they are pompous, self absorbed liars who will say and do anything to further control you.
Either way, it is not good for our country.

Right Knight of Congress and His Economic Round Table Smack Down Obama

John Boehner, Matt's Congressman, Great American, and House (for now)Minority Leader presented a letter today to the annoying one Barry Obama in which over 100 economists basically said, "uh, Mr. President....your economic policy blows." Here is the story:

House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) brought along a statement signed by 100 economists underscoring GOP policies to a meeting with President Barack Obama Thursday morning.

Boehner presented Obama with a letter from himself, accompanied by a statement signed by more than 100 American economists calling for immediate action to rein in federal spending to boost the economy and create more private sector jobs.

In his letter to the president, Boehner said that “failing to pass such legislation — and failing to pass a budget in the House this year for first time since at least 1974 — means squandering an opportunity to begin to provide the discipline economists say is needed.”

The top House Republican joined with his Senate counterpart, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.), as well as Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) to discuss coming legislative priorities with the preisdent.

Boehner noted that though he and Republican Whip Eric Cantor (R-Va.) have written to the president “on several occasions this year” to request House votes on the administration's spending cut legislation, noting that none of those proposals have passed.

The statement worried that too many of the jobs created in May were temporary government jobs, calling these figures “a source of disappointment and alarm.”

The economists claimed to be “disturbed” by reports that for “the first time in modern history” the U.S. House of Representatives could fail to propose a budget this year, mirroring a GOP talking point in recent weeks as well.

And from Boehner's office:

Today I gave the President a statement signed by more than 100 economists urging both parties to cut spending now to boost private sector job creation. The need is clear. The May jobs report showed only 41,000 new private-sector jobs. The national debt is now more than $13 trillion. Congress’ failure to pass a budget means we’re missing an opportunity to cut spending and provide the fiscal discipline that economists say is needed to create jobs and grow the economy.

"If the president won’t push his own party in Congress to produce a budget and cut spending, then who’s in charge? This is a failure of leadership – the kind of leadership the president promised to provide. Every American family knows that in tough times, a budget is even more important — not less important. It’s time for the President to lead and the Congress to stop the out-of-control spending right now.”

You can read the text of the letter and signatories here.
Economist Statement
Text of letter:

Dear Mr. President,

Enclosed please find a statement signed by more than 100 American economists urging that bipartisan action be taken immediately to rein in federal spending in order to boost our economy and create much-needed private-sector jobs.

Republicans have offered and continue to offer ideas on ways to immediately eliminate hundreds of billions of dollars in unnecessary spending by the federal government. In addition, Republican Whip Eric Cantor (R-VA) and I have written to you on several occasions recently to say we stand ready to work with you in a good faith manner to force immediate votes in the House on spending cut legislation you send to Congress using the rescissions authority you already have as president. But to date, such legislation has been neither passed by the Democratic leadership nor offered by the administration.

Failing to pass such legislation – and failing to pass a budget in the House this year for first time since at least 1974 – means squandering an opportunity to begin to provide the discipline economists say is needed.

Republicans stand ready to work with you to take immediate action to rein in federal spending so we can begin to boost private sector job creation and end the legacy of debt being passed on to our children and grandchildren.

Respectfully,

John Boehner (R-OH)
House Republican Leader

June 10, 2010

ECONOMISTS TO PRESIDENT OBAMA: REIN IN SPENDING NOW TO CREATE AMERICAN JOBS

The jobs report released last Friday by the U.S. Department of Labor was a source of disappointment and alarm. Of the 431,000 new jobs in May, 95% were temporary government jobs created by the Census Bureau. Only 41,000 private-sector jobs were generated, and the civilian labor force shrank by 322,000. In addition, 46% of those out of work have been jobless for six months or longer – the first time in history that such a dire statistic has been recorded for the American economy. Efforts to spark private-sector job creation through government ‘stimulus’ spending have been unsuccessful. Small businesses face an array of new challenges imposed on them by the federal government, including the threat of tax hikes and the newly-enacted health law, which will discourage hiring, increase the deficit, and raise health care costs, according to the chief actuary of the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services.

As economists deeply concerned about our nation's future, we urge a change in direction. To support real economic growth and provide the spark needed to support creation of private-sector jobs, immediate action is needed to rein in federal spending, prevent job-killing tax hikes through the expiration of current tax rates, and reverse the harmful effects of the health care law on small businesses, the engine of job creation in our economy.

We are disturbed by reports that rather than taking such action, Congress will not even propose a budget this year – the first time in modern history that the U.S. House of Representatives has failed to even pass a budget. Such a failure will mark a massive missed opportunity to help our economy grow and create private-sector jobs. Failing to restrict spending growth will further balloon the national debt, impede economic growth, and threaten our nation's long-term economic health.

This issue cannot simply be deferred to a presidential commission. As last week's jobs report illustrates, action is needed now to begin to slow government spending and support the creation of new private-sector jobs. For the sake of millions of Americans who remain out of work – and future generations of Americans, who will carry the debt burden we are accumulating today – we respectfully urge that the leaders of both parties take action immediately to eliminate unnecessary federal spending, prevent tax hikes, stop regulatory threats to job creation, and enact reforms to put our nation back on a true path to prosperity.

Not even putting out a budget? Sounds like a wink and a nod and trust us....NAW BABY NAW.

Biden: We Spent Porkulus Money on Ideas, not Creating Jobs

Well, we finally get the truth from the befuddled tongue of Vice President and resident idiot Joe Biden. Here is what he said about the so called Stimulus money aka Porkulus recently:

Biden said he and Melody Barnes, White House Domestic Policy Council director, have talked at length about ways to “generate new ideas about how to deal with future employment needs,” Biden said. “We have new ideas about how to spend government money wisely.”

He said that there was “virtually no fraud” associated with the spending so far of the billions allocated for the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. The government, according to recovery.gov, has distributed just over one half of the $787 billion.

“I might add, I’m very proud to say, that’s there’s been virtually no – knock on wood – virtually no fraud associated with the $787 billion program overall,” Biden said as he banged his fist on the table and against his head.

We spent 787 billion dollars on ideas? Nice. But that is not what Obama said to begin with. This was supposed to be about creating jobs. But, Biden says we have ideas now. And what is this about no fraud, or rather virtually no fraud?

What about this story?

Or this one?

Or this one?

And Joe, these are ideas to spend government money wisely? OK, first of all, it is not the government's money...it is the people's money....but check these out.

The Obama administration....spending and surrendering our way to oblivion, one day at a time.

OMG! If Stimulus Employment Projections So Far Off, What About Healthcare Spending Projections?

The White House has said that Obamacare will be deficit neutral. There have been various projections for the spending of money for the various bills in Congress under the blanket of Obamacare. However, one has to greatly question the validity or sanity of believing such numbers, given their horrendous estimates of what would happen with the stimulus in terms of employment vs. what might have happened without it. Jake Tapper nailed Press Schlubertary Bobby Gibbs on it:

TAPPER: In January, Dr. Romer, representing your incoming administration, put out a paper talking about the need for the stimulus package. And in it, she anticipated unemployment rates without the stimulus package basically where they are right now. In other words, it was a -- I don't want to call it a rosy scenario, but it was a more optimistic projection than what turned out to be. Are you guys...

GIBBS: What was the -- I don't -- I...

TAPPER: She predicted that the unemployment rate was, right now, would be what it actually is if the stimulus package didn't pass.

GIBBS: Right.

TAPPER: So my question is knowing that, being able to look at what the projections were in January and see that they're actually there -- slightly more optimistic than reality has proven...

GIBBS: Well...

TAPPER: Do you think...

GIBBS: Go ahead.

TAPPER: Well, do you think that there needs to be more action taken on stimulating the economy now that the rubber has met the road, so to speak?

GIBBS: Well, I think, to some degree, that curve, at least in the short term, the scenarios might well as easily matched each other based on the notion that when those figures were made, I think, in many ways, for a December meeting that the transition had to lay out a plan for developing that recovery, I think the bill did not get signed into law until -- if I remember -- the 12th or so of February.

I think, obviously, it's going to take some time to get that spending into the bloodstream of the American economy. That having been said, I think -- as you saw the president yesterday give people a progress report on the ability to get that money into the economy quickly, to do it in a way that was ahead of schedule and under budget, particularly, in highway and road projects, which are not terms you generally see within a few words of a highway project.

But I think the president is encouraged that the spending and the recovery plan are kicking in. Dr. Romer said this morning and I said yesterday that we're likely to see many more months of hundreds of thousands of jobs lost. I don't think -- I don't think anybody's under the illusion that, particularly, as it relates to the employment statistics or the employment market, that we're going to see an instantaneous turn around.

But the president and Dr. Romer and the entire economic team are pleased that we've taken steps to address the downturn in demand, to do that in a way that they believe will save or create three and a half million jobs and move from recession to recovery. I think the president expanded on that today by discussing, again, what he believes has to be done in order to lay a strong foundation for continued long-term economic growth, which is the goal.

TAPPER: If I could just do a follow-up on something you just said that the president said yesterday when announcing the 2,000th project as part of the transportation stimulus dollars. How many of those have actually started? I recognize it's 2,000 projects have been approved. But how many have actually started?

GIBBS: I can certainly look for a number. I think what we highlighted was the fact that you've got bids that are coming in. You've got the acceptance of a bid. But I can get exact numbers in terms of how much ground has actually been broken.

Remember, we all heard that we cannot debate the stimulus, we cannot discuss or refine. We must act now so we can keep 8% unemployment. Their chart said that unemployment would not go above 8% if we passed the stimulus. Well, maybe they labelled the chart backwards because we are more in a position for their forecasts of no stimulus. And all Gibbs and Team Big Lie can say is "wait for it, wait for it." Come on now. Gibbs's verbal diarrhea leads us to some key conclusions:
1) By their own estimation, the stimulus isn’t working as planned: The administration’s own estimates said that if the stimulus would pass, the unemployment rate would never rise above 8%. Its peak would be around 7.9% around the end of the year. Well…It’s at over 10 to 17 percent already, and slated to rise even more....
2) By their own estimation, the stimulus might be making things worse: The administration’s report showed that the unemployment rate would be about 8.1% right now if we had done NOTHING. So, it’s either that the stimulus plan is actually making things worse, or the economy is significantly worse than they thought.
3) What does this do to their estimates?: If their economic prognosis was this far off, this soon, what does this do to their deficit estimates 6 or 8 years out? They already were very ugly, but doesn’t this make them far worse?

Now, they do admit that there are high levels of uncertainty in their estimates–but this is the scenario that they’ve planned for. It’s early proof that the charges of “rosy scenarios” were correct.



Now who’s ready for their universal healthcare estimates?

VIDEO: Turner Stops By the Tea Party Rally Against Pelosi Health Care Reform Bill

Mike Turner greeting people at the Washington, DC Tea Party Rally against the Pelosi Health Care Reform Bill...



...I wonder if the Congressman took any questions about pork? Thankfully, the Congressman is with us on this health care bill, but this crowd opposes wasteful government spending too!

Let Them Eat Cake Update: Congress Buys 3 Luxury Jets for Their Own Use

Funny, I thought everyone had to live within their own means. I thought we needed to not be so extravagant. I mean, Tom Daschle and Rahm Emmanuel's brother and Obama's other healthcare guy said we spend too much on medical tech, so I thought we should all live cheaper. Remember when Congress badgered the CEOs of corporations for coming to Washington in their private jets? Well, I guess the rules, just like Obamacare, does not apply to them. Check this out:

Last year, lawmakers excoriated the CEOs of the Big Three automakers for traveling to Washington, D.C., by private jet to attend a hearing about a possible bailout of their companies.

But apparently Congress is not philosophically averse to private air travel: At the end of July, the House approved nearly $200 million for the Air Force to buy three elite Gulfstream jets for ferrying top government officials and Members of Congress.

Make sure to bring this up to your members of Congress during those town halls, if they don't order the police to open fire on you or arrest you for daring to ask them questions or tell them they are wrong.

For more information, check out the Corner as well as the Examiner.

Obama Lied and the Economy Died Update: More Americans Realize Barry Was Wrong...

Aww, snap! Barry going to have to be goin with a new riff, because more Americans are now realizing the stimulus was wrong according to Rasmussen:

Confidence in the $787-billion economic stimulus plan proposed by President Obama and passed by Congress in February continues to fall.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that only 25% of U.S. voters now say the stimulus plan has helped the economy. That’s a six-point drop from a month ago.

Thirty-one percent (31%) say the stimulus actually hurt the economy, little changed from a month ago.

Gee, so what does that hold for Stimulus 2: Obama Boogaloo?

Government officials are predicting it will go higher, prompting talk of a second stimulus plan.

But 60% of voters oppose the passage of a second economic stimulus plan this year, while 27% think it’s a good idea.

Forty-five percent (45%) of Americans say the rest of the new government spending authorized in the first stimulus plan should now be canceled. Thirty-six percent (36%) disagree, and 20% are not sure.

Uh, oh....I guess Nancy Pelosi better start worrying about all that help she had added in for her rat relatives in SanFran....

However, while voters are opposed to another spending stimulus plan, 51% favor an across-the-board tax cut for all Americans.

WHAT?!?!?! Tax cuts! Gosh, who was the guy who gave us tax cuts? Oh yeah, GWB. Not BHusseinO. Gee, I guess buyer's remorse comes on quickly now, especially when you are dealing with an incompetent, maniacal, self loving egomaniac who wants to control every aspect of American life! BOO-HOO, OUCH!

Obama Lied and the Economy Died Update 2: Stimulus Not Getting Any Rise

Maybe Obama needs some viagra? Well, I mean the Obama economy, because the stimulus isn't working and it isn't going to. It is anti-free market. It is anti-logic. And after singing the praises of the antichrist killer of freedom and jobs One, news organizations now are feeling heat to actually cover the real news and not just the stuff they manufacture or get from the rainbow farts of unicorns. From Time Magazine, of all places (is Barry on the cover again this week?):

The $787 billion stimulus plan is turning out to be far less stimulating than its architects expected.

Back in early January, when Barack Obama was still President-elect, two of his chief economic advisers — leading proponents of a stimulus bill — predicted that the passage of a large economic-aid package would boost the economy and keep the unemployment rate below 8%. It hasn't quite worked out that way. Last month, the jobless rate in the U.S. hit 9.5%, the highest level it has reached since 1983.

BLASPHEMY! How dare you speak ill of the antichrist communist fascist killer of the republic Chosen One! Don't you know he is all about hope and change based on the change of the need for hope of the change filled with hope? How dare you attack him with like, the truth and stuff? What do you want?

I just wish the guy could learn how to tell the truth. I just wish he and his cadre of fascist statist ignorant unicorn fart sniffers could use logic, real numbers, and reality instead of feel good anticipation and enthusiasm to create reports and policy.

We are paying the price for people's wrongheaded notions in a report. But wait, where does that road paved with good intentions lead? Rut-roh.

Boehner: Dems May Scramble, but Can they Defend Wasteful Porkulus?

From Matt's Congressman, Minority Leader, and a Great American, John Boehner:

uly 10, 2009 | House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) | Permalink

Vice President Joe Biden traveled to Ohio yesterday in the Washington Democrats’ latest attempt to defend their trillion-dollar “stimulus” spending plan that isn’t working. But like the rest of the nation, Ohio knows that the Administration’s promises that unemployment would stay below eight percent and jobs would be created “immediately” by the “stimulus” have fallen completely flat. Nationwide, the unemployment rate has risen to 9.5 percent, and in Ohio, it’s more than 10 percent, leaving families and small businesses in Ohio and across the nation to ask, “Where are the jobs?” That’s a question House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) asked as well after the Vice President’s visit. The Washington Post reports:

“Boehner told reporters that Obama’s policies will ‘destroy jobs rather than create jobs.’”

“‘Our nation’s economy has taken a beating,’ he said. ‘The answer isn’t more taxes, more spending, more mandates, and more borrowing from China, the Middle East, our kids, and grandkids.’”

“In an earlier statement…the House leader said the administration’s effort ‘clearly isn’t working.’ He added, ‘The people of Ohio -- like people all over America -- have a right to know: Where are the jobs?’”

Boehner also warned that the agenda Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) is pushing through Congress this summer is going to make matters even worse for small businesses. Democrats’ top two priorities – a new national energy tax that will hit small businesses and families, and a government takeover of health care that includes a new small business tax and oppressive government mandates on employers – will further cripple small businesses and stifle job creation instead of helping the economy recover.

For Americans wondering where the jobs are, it’s worthwhile to take a closer look at five significant flaws with the Democrats’ trillion-dollar “stimulus” spending bill:

HELPING GOVERNMENT – NOT SMALL BUSINESSES:

The most significant flaw of the “stimulus” is its entire premise. Government spending – the core of the Democrats’ plan – is not the foundation of job creation in America. Small businesses are. House Republicans offered a plan to let them and families keep more of what they earn, but Democrats ignored it, took a go-it-alone approach, and passed their trillion-dollar big government plan anyway. Specifically, the “stimulus” plan:

* Dedicates $95 billion to 33 new programs; and
* Expands 73 existing programs, at a cost of $92 billion.

To maintain these inflated funding levels in future years, non-defense discretionary budgets will have to increase by at least 42 percent every single year.

PROMISES MADE, PROMISES NOT KEPT:

When Democrats passed the trillion-dollar “stimulus,” they promised unemployment would not rise above eight percent and that it would create jobs immediately. Five months later, unemployment has spiked to 9.5 percent, with President Obama admitting that he expects it to reach 10 percent later this year. Making it all the more puzzling that the President told ABC News that when it comes to the economy, “there’s nothing that we would have done differently.” But with the economy still struggling, they’ve changed their tune, with Vice President Biden now saying, “It’s supposed to take 18 months.” So which is it?

TAXPAYER DOLLARS WASTED AT EVERY TURN:

The President claimed that the stimulus “contains an unprecedented level of transparency and accountability” and went on to say that there was, “[n]ot a single pet project. Not a single earmark.” But Vice President admitted just over a month that “Some people are being scammed already.” Here are a few examples:

* Funding for Speaker Pelosi’s salt marsh mouse in the San Francisco area;
* $18 million to redesign a five-month old “stimulus” website;
* Money for an Airport for No One in Rep. John Murtha’s (D-PA) district; and
* Funds for a bridge in Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey’s (D-WI) district that carries about 260 cars per day, many to a place called “Rusty’s Backwater Saloon.”

RACKING UP MASSIVE AND UNPRECEDENTED DEBT:

The massive “stimulus,” which costs much more than $1 trillion with interest payments, is adding to our staggering and dangerous debt. In fact, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) released jaw-dropping deficit numbers that: “The federal budget deficit was $1.1 trillion for the first nine months of fiscal year 2009, CBO estimates, more than $800 billion greater than the deficit recorded through June 2008.” And who will pay the price for this rising debt? Our children and grandchildren, of course.

STIMULUS FUNDS HAVE NOT GONE OUT QUICKLY, REACHED THE HARDEST HIT AREAS:

McClatchy News reports that, “Only about a tenth of the money has been spent so far, and only about half of it will have been spent by October 2010.” And according to USA Today, a “report ... by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) ... says many states aren’t meeting some goals and requirements of the economic recovery program. Some states, for example, are not sending transportation funding to the most economically distressed areas, and they are using education funds to prevent layoffs rather than fund innovative new programs, the report says.” The Associated Press concurs, noting, “[T]he GAO said about half the money set aside for road and bridge repairs is being used to repave highways, rather than building new infrastructure. And state officials aren’t steering the money toward counties that need jobs the most, auditors found.”

Voinovich on Non-Stimulus Spending Bill

Quote:

“Five months ago Democrats passed a stimulus bill, which President Obama signed into law, that was supposed to be a jolt in the arm for the American economy. Five months later, unemployment has grown and American taxpayers have little to show for almost $800 billion in spending. As I indicated when I voted against the bill, the stimulus was sorely lacking in real stimulative spending.

“I thought it should have focused more on highways and infrastructure – investments that would have put people to work and continued to provide benefits well after the economy turned around. Now, the administration is again ignoring shovel-ready, job-creating projects by backing off from a reauthorization of the surface transportation bill and proposing an extension of current funding levels until March 2011. Support for a robust new highway bill is exactly the type of simulative investment we should be making.

“As the administration works to revise their ‘misread’ expectations, I will continue to fight to put federal dollars where they can most benefit Ohioans during these challenging economic times.”

Pelosi: One Rodent Using OUR Money to Save Another

Nancy Pelosi has the face of a dead rat, and that is being polite. This rat, this rodent, this anti-American bigoted, sexist twit who is now the Speaker of the House, she is using your money to save a mouse. Yes, folks, once again, we are seeing mismanagement of public funds on an awesome scale, and once again, a Democrat is at the helm. From the Washington Times:

The tiny mouse that became a hotly disputed symbol of wasteful spending in the congressional debate over the $787 billion economic stimulus bill has returned to pester House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

The Obama administration quietly announced last week that as much as $16.1 million from the stimulus program is going to save the San Francisco Bay area habitat of, among other things, the endangered salt marsh harvest mouse.

That has revived Republican criticism that the pet project was an "invisible earmark" in the massive spending bill for Mrs. Pelosi, whose San Francisco district abuts the bay, and epitomizes the failure of stimulus spending to help an economy still shedding jobs.

"Lo and behold, the government has announced that the mouse is getting its money after all," House Minority Leader John A. Boehner said while standing beside a poster of the furry varmint. "Speaker Pelosi must be so proud."

The Ohio Republican continued, "So let's get this straight: The stimulus isn't creating jobs for American workers, but it is making sure American harvest mice have nice comfortable homes in the midst of the recession."

Now Mr. Boehner, Nancy is just trying to help line her own nest for when she returns to her own habitat and species.