Friday, 15 May 2009

FROM ACORN DOES A MIGHTY HOAX GROW

Ken Berwitz

Just how corrupt is ACORN, the combination voter fraud machine/cash cow of Barack Obama and his fellow Democrats?

Well, read this investigative piece by Chelsea Schilling of www.worldnetdaily.com and see for yourself:

Another ACORN scandal in a funeral home?
Group operating out of small building donated $33 million to Obama campaign


Posted: May 14, 2009
11:30 pm Eastern

By Chelsea Schilling
 2009 WorldNetDaily

Fox News' Glenn Beck may have uncovered another twist to a series of ACORN's alleged scandals when he revealed on his show that the group's main affiliate is operating out of a former New Orleans funeral home and bringing in millions of taxpayer dollars.

The Service Employees International Union's New Orleans headquarters location that also houses ACORN is supposed to be home to more than 270 related corporations and non-profits.

"Does that former funeral home look big enough to you to house 270 organizations?" Beck asked. "The owner of the building is a company whose partners are oh my gosh! Wade and Dale Rathke."

Wade Rathke, a New Orleans resident, is founder of ACORN and also founder and chief organizer of Service Employees International Union, which donated $33 million to President Obama's campaign last year.The online OpenSecrets.org estimates Obama's entire campaign spending at about $640 million.

According to the New York Times, he failed to notify police in 2000 when he learned that his brother Dale, ACORN's chief financial officer, had embezzled $948,600 from Citizens Consulting Inc., the ACORN affiliate that handles its financial affairs.

Beck said Wade and Dale are listed as president or partner in dozens of companies based in the New Orleans building.

"[T]he big question remains unanswered: Millions of dollars flow into that building every year," Beck said. "Where does it go?"

He said ACORN received as much as $10 million in federal grants last year. But it could get up to $8 billion more after the House passed Rep. Barney Frank's amendment allowing organizations indicted for voter fraud or related crimes to receive taxpayer dollars today.

Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., urged Congress to block ACORN's access to federal housing funds.

"ACORN, as you know, is no stranger to the spotlight," Bachmann said outside the Capitol. "Yet no matter how many times prosecutors investigate and even indict ACORN and their employees, they emerge unblemished as far as the federal government is concerned from having access to federal tax dollars."

Bachmann told Fox News that ACORN has received at least $53 million in tax dollars since 1994. Frank's amendment passed by a vote of 245-176, largely upon party lines.

"I am disappointed that Congress decided to side with ACORN today over the taxpayers," Bachmann said. "It is not only legitimate for Congress to decide the threshold for accessing taxpayer funds; it is incumbent upon us to do so. And, for far too long, Congress has cavalierly distributed taxpayer money. This is a shameful abdication of our fiduciary duties."

Frank's amendment moved on to the House floor earlier this month just as seven Pennsylvania ACORN volunteers were charged with voter registration fraud, including forgery and falsification of records.

Nevada officials also charged ACORN with 39 felony counts related to voter registrations for requiring its Las Vegas employees to register at least 20 new voters every day or be fired.

Nevada Secretary of State Ross Miller told Beck that when law enforcement personnel executed a warrant, they found thousands of documents and e-mails and a company directive ordering employees to meet the quota or lose their jobs.

ACORN released a statement denying the allegations.

"Our policy all along has been to pay workers at an hourly rate and not pay employees based on any bonus or any incentive program," it said. "It is unfortunate that the secretary of state cannot distinguish the victim from the villain."

Just as word of the Nevada charges was surfacing, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., released a May 4 statement read on CNN's "Lou Dobbs Tonight." It said: "Based on my review of the information regarding the complaints against ACORN, I have concluded that a hearing on this matter appears unwarranted at this time."

According to the Clark County Elections Department, 28,000 of 91,000 new voters registered by Las Vegas ACORN workers are duplicates.

ACORN spokesman Scott Levenson told Glenn Beck that it was an isolated incident.

"We had a bad employee," he said.

But Anita MonCrief, former ACORN employee, said, "The employees were being thrown under the bus. [Staff members] stood on the backs of the poor in order to make money for their organization."

During a press conference on Capitol Hill today, Moncrief said, "As a Democrat I don't have any representatives out there who are willing to stand up to ACORN and this really disappoints me and I hope they will follow her [Bachmann's] lead and realize that funding corruption is not the way to go."

Marcel Reid is Washington, D.C.'s ACORN chair and member of a group of whistleblowers known as the "ACORN 8." The group has been calling for an immediate suspension of all federal state and local funding until an independent audit and congressional hearing has been completed.

Reid told Beck that ACORN actively looks to hire people from prison for $9 an hour, and those people sometimes registered names such as "Mickey Mouse" to meet mandated quotas. In such cases, ACORN still gets paid.

As WND reported, Matthew Vadum, a senior editor for the Capital Research Center, released a report in November titled "ACORN: Who Funds the Weather Underground's Little Brother?" documenting the troubled past of ACORN.

The organization for which Obama at one point trained activists and to which he directed grants while aboard the management of the Woods Fund has established a reputation for doing pretty much as it pleases, the report said.

"In 1995, ACORN sued the state of California seeking an exemption from the law that requires that it pay its own employees a minimum wage. ACORN, which argued that keeping its employees in poverty helps to boost their zeal to help the poor, lost," according to the report.

ACORN became an issue in the 2008 presidential race because of Obama's ties to the group as well as its own admission that more than 400,000 of the 1.3 million voter registrations it claimed to have collected were not valid.

Obama tried to disassociate himself from the group.

"The only involvement I've had with ACORN was I represented them alongside the U.S. Justice Department in making Illinois implement a motor voter law that helped people get registered at DMVs," Obama declared in one of the presidential debates.

"Now, with respect to ACORN, ACORN is a community organization. Apparently what they've done is they were paying people to go out and register folks, and apparently some of the people who were out there didn't really register people, they just filled out a bunch of names," Obama said.

But Obama's 1995 suit on behalf of ACORN, in which the state of Illinois was compelled to implement the federal "motor-voter" bill, was just a sampling of Obama's association.

Among other involvements, Obama trained ACORN activists and while working on the board of the Woods Fund, channeled millions of dollars to ACORN.

Beck recently decried a lack of willingness on the part of the mainstream media to expose ACORN's alleged misuse of federal tax dollars.

"There don't seem to be enough journalists apparently that want to be the Woodward and Bernstein of today," Beck said with suspicion. "Nobody in the media is following this story. Why? I wonder."

How badly does this stink?  And, as Beck wonders, why is it not a major story in our wonderful "neutral" media?

But you already know the answer, don't you?


NANCY PELOSI AND EMILY LITELLA

Ken Berwitz

About the last thing Democrats need right now is Nancy Pelosi.  What they need is Emily Litella.

You may remember Emily Litella from Saturday Night Live.  She was played to the hilt by the wonderful, gone-too-young, Gilda Radner.  In each Emily Litella segment she would rail about an issue, make accusations, commit herself fully to a position -- and then be advised that she had everything all wrong.  Her last words, were always  "......never mind".

Today we have a true spectacle in progress, with Nancy Pelosi as the key player.  It involves the real, or exaggerated or imagined, "torture" we put some number of enemy combatants through to get information which might protect the USA from terrorists who want to kill us.

Let's review what has happened, so we can understand why Democrats need Litella more than Pelosi.

In September of 2001 we sustained the single most catastrophic attack on our shores since the Revolutionary War.   The people who perpetrated it were still at large and proudly telling us that 9/11 was just the beginning.   We buried thousands of dead, our country had been thoroughly terrorized, our economy was in an utter shambles because of the attack, and we were dispirited and demoralized.

But in 2002 we had two high-level captures, who almost certainly knew information that would bear on subsequent attacks.  We had khalid sheikh mohammed, the "mastermind" of 9/11, and abu zubaydah, a close associate of osama bin laden - the "man" who put mohammed up to the attack and bankrolled him. 

We needed that information and we needed it immediately. Untold numbers of innocent lives were at stake.

So what did we do beyond politely asking?  We waterboarded them.  And, by doing so, we apparently got invaluable information from at least mohammed, maybe zubaydah too. 

How many times did we waterboard them?  Very few, just as the Bush administration said.  Specifically, we waterboarded khalid sheikh mohammed 5 times and abu zubaydah 8 - 10 times.  I know you have read that we waterboarded mohammed 183 times and zubaydah 83 times.  But it is a lie.  More on that a bit further on.

Now we move to the last couple of years.  We have not successfully been attacked since 9/11/2001.  It certainly wasn't for lack of trying -- attempts had been made (the most notable was that 10 or so planes flying from London were going to be blown up when they reached the USA) but every one had been uncovered and foiled.

Enough time had elapsed for many of our people, sadly and pathetically enough, to con themselves into thinking the threat was pretty much over.  Hey, no attacks for years, so why be worried about this?  Ironically, the success in preventing attacks, was making people complacent about them. 

Since the Bush administration continued to be entirely vigilant about terrorist threats, there was an opening for partisan politics that Democrats could drive an 18-wheeler through.  They could attack the Bush people for the harshness of their interrogations and the unfair treatment afforded enemy combatants we captured and were detaining at Guantanamo.

But would they?  They certainly didn't after 9/11 - this country was genuinely united then.  But, years later, would they possibly attack the actions which well may have saved us from subsequent attacks?

The answer?  Yes.  Enthusiastically. 

So for the past several years we have been treated to an unending series of attacks on the Bush administration over interrogation techniques and treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo.  A few - very few - abuses at Guantanamo were exaggerated into a program of systemetized "torture", and the waterboarding of mohammed and zubaydah became a metaphor for the depravity of Bush, Cheney, Rove, etc.

Now let's move to the present.  Barack Obama is the new President and Democrats have a near-stranglehold on both houses of congress.  As partisan politics goes, this is Christmas, New Years, and a birthday party all rolled up in one.  A clear field to do anything and everything.

So President Obama, who had previously said he was not going to go after the Bush admnistration on interrogation techniques or alleged abuses at Guantanamo, suddenly decided to act a bit differently.

Using his toady of an Attorney General, eric holder, Mr. Obama decided to declassify and release a few selected documents, to "prove" how brutally mohammed and zubaydah were tortured by those terrible monsters of the Bush regime.

The documents were heavily redacted, so a lot of their verbiage cannot be read.  We were told this was because of security concerns. 

One of the documents seemed to say, very clearly, that khalid sheikh mohammed was waterboarded 183 times and abu zubaydah was waterboarded 83 times.   Even worse, all of mohammed's waterboarding was supposedly administered in one month's time, which means he got the business an average of 6 times a day.

Our wonderful "neutral" media went wild.  Their condemnations flew faster than the speed of light.  Bush and his henchmen were torturers.  Criminals.  Put them all in jail - Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rove, the whole bunch of them (but no mention of Colin Powell, who was Secretary of State then.  I'm sure the fact that he supported Obama is just coincidental to this). 

But there was a problem.  A very big one.  The Red Cross report, in which both mohammed and zubaydah gave their first-hand accounts of the waterboarding (on page 10).  mohammed specifically states it occurred just 5 times and zubaydah specifically states it occurred just 8 - 10 times, not 83.

The only plausible explanation for this is that the declassified document with the 183 and 83 numbers did not say those numbers referred to individual acts of waterboarding.  The accusers themselves didn't make those claims or anywhere near them.

In other words, the Obama and holder knowingly put out a document that, via selective redacting of its contents, gave the false impression that mohammed and zubaydah were waterboarded dramatically more than they actually were. 

(I am still waiting for our wonderful "neutral" media to go after Obama and holder on the blatant fraud they perpetrated, since this pair made complete fools of them.  But they haven't so far, and that probably means they won't. 

The only reasons  I can think of  are 1) they are burying the truth in the hope that their readers/viewers won't find out completely Obama/holder made fools of them or 2) they wanted those numbers to be right so that they could use them to go after Bush, Cheney et al, so the truth went right out the window. 

Illustratively, The New York Times re-used the phony waterboarding claim in its lead editorial just this past week.  The Times has fallen so low in journalistic ethics that if it could boost its credibility by hiring Baghdad Bob.)

Anyway, the release of these documents and the gleeful use of those phony numbers, was a declaration of war against not just Bush but all Republicans.  They either had to fight back or look as though they admitted being brutal torturers, compared to the humanitarians of the Democratic Party.  So, not at all surprisingly, they fought back. 

The single best strategy?  To establish that Democrats were as ok with the interrogation techniques as Republicans were.  If that were the case, Democrats would come across as lying hypocrites for claiming otherwise, because they were no different than the Republicans they accused.

Enter Nancy Pelosi.

Nancy Pelosi, currently Speaker of the House, is a reliably hard-left congresswoman from San Francisco.  This makes her a hero to mainstream media;  a protected species.  'Accordingly, almost nothing she had done wrong wrong, no matter how incompetent or dishonest, has gotten significant media attention.  

But, in defending themselves against the Democratic onslaught, Republicans realized that Pelosi, as a member of the intelligence committee after 9/11, was in on the briefings about our interrogation of mohammed, zubaydah and others.  And she wasn't the only Democrat, not by a long shot.

Uh oh.

Now there was a problem.  A big fat one.  If people who knew about the waterboarding were criminals, and Nancy Pelosi knew about the waterboarding, then Nancy Pelosi was.....I sort of assume you can finish that one without my help.

This would have been a very good time to drop the issue like a hot potato, wouldn't you say?  But Pelosi couldn't drop it.  Not if it was an undeniable fact that she was briefed about it.

So Nancy Pelosi did what I would fully expect her to do in a situation like this.  She started lying. 

So far we have gotten about 6,287 different versions of what she knew and when she knew it.  As one version is blown away by facts, she comes up with a different version.  And since the only way to revise it is to come up with a new version that is even more full of crap, she has gotten to the point where even her supporters/accomplices in the mainstream media can't figure out a way to get her off the hook.

Worse still, now that they are forced to actually take a serious look at who was briefed on our interrogations instead of just seconding the attacks against Republicans and moving on, they are finding that many other Democrats - maybe dozens - were just as aware of the interrogation techniques as Pelosi was.

Bottom line:  This started as a standard partisan witch hunt by Democrats against a demonized ex-President and his administration.  But look at it now.  It is literally blowing up in their faces.

The single best thing that could happen to Pelosi and her pals would be to say "....never mind" and walk off stage.  But the time they could have done so is long past.

Where is Emily Litella when you need her? 

free` Excellent piece Ken, here is an audio interview with Newt Gingrich that goes perfectly with this post. abcnews.go.com/video/playerIndex?id=7595688 (05/15/09)


MICHELLE MALKIN ON THE STIMULESS PACKAGE

Ken Berwitz

That title is no mistake.  I've decided to call it the stimuless package because since it was implemented there are less retail sales and less people employed.  Thus, the stimuless package.

In the previous blog I showed you Byron York's take on the BS being pumped out by Obama and his people to con you into thinking this catastrophe is working.  Here is Michelle Malkin's commentary.  The bold print is sometime's Michelle's, sometimes mine:

Washington cant meet the Cheerios Standard

By Michelle Malkin    May 15, 2009 09:07 AM

 

I think its time we applied the same advertising standards to Washingtons legislative products that the feds apply to breakfast foods. The Food and Drug Administration rapped General Mills this week for making misleading claims about the benefits of Cheerios. The food manufacturer says the whole-grain Os are clinically proven to lower cholesterol. The FDA demanded packaging changes to ensure truth-in-labeling.

 

 Well, how about the bogus marketing of the fiscal stimulus? President Obama and the Democrats promoted the trillion-dollar package as job creation salvation. The White House claims 150,000 jobs have been created or saved. But since February, the nation has lost more than 1.3 million jobs. The current 8.9 percent unemployment rate in the wake of stimulus passage is worse than the 8.8 percent unemployment figure Obamas economists darkly predicted if Congress didnt immediately adopt their recovery plan. (See Innocent Bystanders.)

 

 The stimulus was supposed to provide aid to the countrys neediest areas. Its not. The Associated Press reported after reviewing 5,500 planned transportation projects that states are planning to spend 50 percent more per person in areas with the lowest unemployment than in communities with the highest.

 

President Obama promised that Americans would be able to track every dime of the stimulus at one, handy clearinghouse website. They wont. The Recovery.gov site data wont be fully available until next spring halfway through the program.

 

 Washington told us the stimulus projects were shovel-ready and would provide immediate relief. Theyre not. The New York Times notes that the program has paid out less than 6 percent of the money, largely in the form of social service payments to states.

 

 Democrat leaders baldly claimed that There are no earmarks in the bill. But untold tens of millions of dollars are headed to pet projects such as skateboard parks, tennis and basketball court renovation, the National Zoo, the $11 million Bridge to Microsoft, and Pennsylvania King of Pork Rep. John Murthas ghost airport to nowhere.

 

 More falsely-labeled products in the Capitol Hill pantry: How about the Toxic Assets Relief Program? The trillion-dollar-plus banking bailout morphed from a toxic assets purchase plan to a capital injection plan, back to a toxic assets purchase plan, to a life insurance company bailout, to an auto supplier bailout, and may now be used to bail out the state of California. Supporters of that maneuver argue that TARP should be extended to every cash-strapped state and local government to guarantee their debts against default.

 

How about Social Security? Theres nothing secure about it. While Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid scoffed during the Bush years that the so-called Security crisis exists in only one place the minds of the Republicans, the insolvency problem festered. Now, the Obama administration reports that both Social (In)security and Medicare are hurtling toward bankruptcy far sooner than previously estimated. The trust funds exist only in the minds of the deluded.

 

 And just this week, Congress collaborated with the White House to conjure up a misleading description of President Obamas $108 billion bailout of the International Monetary Fund. Theyre advertising the expenditure as a line of credit with the hope to get the money back, according to the Wall Street Journal. So the White House argued that the budgetary impact should be calculated at zero. Thats right. Capitol Hill is officially claiming that $108 billion = zero.

 

If Beltway spending plans were breakfast cereals, theyd be yanked from grocery stores in a heartbeat. Their promises and premises are as full of holes as a box of persecuted Cheerios.


NOBODY ASKED ME, BUT...

Ken Berwitz

With a tip of the hat to the late, great Jimmy Cannon, the writer who used to periodically do this in his newspaper column, here is a "Nobody Asked Me, But..." blog

Nobody asked me, but....

-If GM and Chrysler couldn't survive with the bailout billions, why did we give the billions to them?  Why didn't we just let them go bankrupt and reorganize, just like they inevitably would have had to do anyway?  Who got those billions and why?

-The Curse of the Jade Scorpion, which is on the cable movie channels this month, is not one of Woody Allen's best movies.  But it is one of his most enjoyable.  And that wonderful, classic version of "Sophisticated Lady" at the end, keeps me there through the screen credits.

-A few weeks ago we went to Fortunoff''s "going out of business" sale to buy a new mattress and box spring set, because the store advertised 60% off, and an additional 10% on top of it.  When we got there the sets ranged from $4,000 to $7,000 each!  You can get a first-class quality set for a fraction of that amount almost everywhere else, without any special discount.  As we walked out, I told my wife that if ever there was a bull-excrement "sale", this was it.  But I used a shorter form of excrement.

-The more I see and hear of Nancy Pelosi, the more I realize what an empty shell she is.  Without the protected-species status of mainstream media, she'd be dead meat.

-Although Hillary Clinton is a lot smarter than Pelosi, they share four major areas of similarity:  lack of  competence, dishonesty, willingness to play dirty and possession of unbelievably big egos.

-Can Evan Longoria be this good?

-Maybe Pete Seeger and Professor Irwin Corey can tour together.  They're both nonagenarians (Seeger was just 90, Corey is a few months shy of 95) and both are communist sympathizers (Seeger claims to have been a communist since the age of 6 and Corey was blacklisted in the 50's for, among other things, his support of the American Communist Party).

-My local post office has a sign touting its next-day delivery.  It shows a very attractive young Oriental lady, and the words, "Overnight.  Not Overpriced".  Is it just me, or does that have a (presumably) unintended connotation of some kind?

-Jeff Jacoby, who writes a terrific column for the hanging-by-a-thread Boston Globe, has a great solution to the daylight savings idiocy of changing our clocks every six months.  He suggests that we split the difference - i.e. set a time halfway between the two different settings - and just keep it there.  Why not?

-My wife wants me to lose weight.  So far it isn't happening because I eat too much.  But I find it very easy to rationalize my eating habits anyway.  Maybe that's why I have to lose weight in the first place.

-Why would anyone pay for pornography when so much of it is free on the internet?

-The Allendale (NJ) Bar and Grill (known locals as the ABG) is really excellent.  Tasty food, good sized portions, very friendly staff, quick in and out, and very fair prices.  Ditto for Kinchley's, which is, I think, in Upper Saddle River.  (Hey, no wonder I need to lose weight).

-My dear friend and co-author Barry Sinrod has been sending me material from a Jewish peace-activist group called Brit Tzedek v'Shalom, which has an office not too far from my business in downtown Chicago.  It promises President Obama that "we have your back" while singing his praises for promoting a two-state solution between Israel and Palestinian Arabs.  As I've mentioned many times in this blog, every President in recent memory has touted the idea of a two-state solution - and political polls in Israel show that Israelis would love one as well.  The problem is that Palestinian Arabs do not want a two-state solution, they want Israel.  Every square inch of it.  It's nice to want something that is currently unattainable, like world peace, an end to hunger and a two-state solution.  But wanting something and getting it are two very different things. 

-Both of my local gas stations are 15 - 20 cents higher than the main road, just a couple of miles away.  Why?

-If I wore a hat it would be off to the staff of NJ State Senator Joseph M. Kyrillos, Jr. and Mr. Kyrillos himself.  They are pleasant and responsive - which is more than I can say of for the offices of a State Senator from one of their neighboring districts.

-The Magic Bullet makes great smoothies, and you can drink them right out of the container you make them in.  Having been burned in the past, I'm no big fan of "as seen on TV" stuff.  But this is a real winner.

-Swine flu was supposed to be pretty much over.  But several schools in New York City are closed because of an outbreak.  It isn't over yet.

-I don't remember a year when I was less interested in the NBA playoffs.  Looking at a bunch of oversized, overpaid men running around in their underwear with enough tattoos to moonlight on the Barnum & Bailey circuit just isn't doing it for me.

-To my mother:  Happy birthday!!!!!


THE STIMULUS PACKAGE: REALITY CHECK

Ken Berwitz

A plain and simple statement of reality:  The breathtaking debt that Barack Obama and his Democratic cohorts have burdened us with isn't doing any stimulating.

Here is Byron York of The Washington Examiner to lay out the facts.  The bold print is mine:

Biden's rosy report can't hide stimulus problems

By: Byron York
Chief Political Correspondent
05/15/09 1:38 AM EDT

This week, the White House released its first quarterly report on the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, better known as the $787 billion stimulus bill. Reaction on Capitol Hill was swift: Republicans think it's a joke, while Democrats don't want to talk about it.

The report was unveiled not by President Obama but by Vice President Joe Biden, who said it "shows early progress providing immediate financial relief for American families and jump-starting billions of dollars in job-creating projects."

 

In a press release, Biden claimed the stimulus has so far "created or saved" 150,000 jobs, and that "over 3,000 transportation construction projects have been funded in 52 states and territories."

 

You don't have to look too hard to find problems with Biden's work. First, nobody seems to know precisely where the figure of 150,000 jobs comes from.

 

When President Obama used it in a speech on April 29, the website FactCheck.org pretty much demolished the claim.

 

Previewing the Biden report on May 11, a "senior administration official" held a conference-call briefing with reporters and seemed unprepared when asked where the created-or-saved jobs actually are. "In terms of exactly where and in what sectors, that's not something I have numbers on," the official said, "because, precisely, we don't yet have any of the reporting."

 

As far as the 3,000 transportation construction projects are concerned, there are certainly some under way, but nobody seems able to confirm a number so large. "I'll buy lunch for the first person who can get a list of those transportation projects," one Senate Republican aide told me. "That's absolutely not true."

 

The real news about the stimulus is buried inside the Biden report. It says that as of May 5, $88 billion has been "obligated" for spending. "Obligated" is federalese for money that has been committed but not yet spent. A much smaller number, $28.5 billion, has actually been shoved out the door -- that is, $28.5 billion out of the stimulus total of $787 billion has so far been spent.

 

And where did it go? More than 95 percent has ended up in just two places: the Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Labor. The Human Services money was poured into a program called FMAP, or the Federal Medical Assistance Program, where it was given to the states to help pay their Medicaid bills. The Labor money has gone for extended unemployment insurance benefits.

 

The report also shows that Health and Human Services will distribute by far the biggest chunk of stimulus money over the next year. The money has gone to HHS because it is the easiest place to spend lots of cash fast. But all that Medicaid and social services money, much of which will be used by state governments to cover their own spending excesses, is considered among the least stimulative parts of the stimulus bill.

 

The rest of the report is a series of anecdotes, which Biden calls "Reports From the Field." Some of the stories are well-worn. The Chicago window factory that has often figured in Obama-Biden discussions and photo-ops -- it's under new ownership and reportedly planning to rehire some laid-off workers. A Delaware company that makes traffic lights is said to be rehiring three laid-off employees. A South Carolina county is going to receive job-retraining money.

 

The stimulus is generating other anecdotes, too. Recently WBAL-TV in Baltimore reported that a local man, 83 years old, received a $250 Social Security stimulus check. The only problem was, it wasn't for him -- it was for his mother, who died on Memorial Day, 1967. WBAL said Social Security officials "blame the error on the strict mid-June deadline of mailing out all of the checks, which didn't leave officials much time to clean up all of their records." Would anyone be surprised if we see stories like this on local newscasts around the country?

 

At one point in the report, Biden boasts that the government has made commitments for $1.1 billion in stimulus spending every day since the $787 billion bill was signed into law in February. At that pace, it will take the administration nearly two years to come up with concrete plans to spend all the money -- and longer still to actually get it out the door.

 

And even then, we still might be trying to find out where it all went.

I wonder how much longer it will be before some of the people currently under Saint Barack's spell become unmesmerized enough to realize that they, and the rest of us, have been had?  When do they realize that Barack Obama and the Democratic Party have put us in an impossibly deep fiscal hole with no appreciable benefits to show for it, other than the ones they fantasize out of thin air?

This is what you get when you elect a man who is unqualified to be President and is in way over his head.  This is what you get when you give the unqualified, overmatched President a huge majority in both houses of congress.

We did this to ourselves.  We therefore deserve it.  Will we wake up for the next national elections in 2010?

I can only hope.....


Buy Our Book Here!


Return to Current Blog
We're Hopelessly Partisan

hopelesslypartisan.com, is a web site which is dedicated to honest, blunt, debate on the issues of our time.


About Us



Privacy Notice: In conjunction with the ads on this site, third parties may be placing and reading cookies on your browser, or using web beacons to collect information.


At “Hopelessly Partisan” we discuss all issues, big and small. In here, nothing is sacred and nothing is out of bounds.

So settle back, preferably after laughing your way through a copy of “The Hopelessly Partisan Guide To American Politics”, and let the battle begin. In this blog, your opinion counts every bit as much as anyone else's, maybe even more.

And to show that my willingness to provide all sides of the issues is sincere, here are links to a variety of web sites, from the left, the middle (more or less) and the right. Read them and either smile in agreement or gnash your teeth in anger!!