GOP unifies against any more stimulus spending

[Justin]

GOP unifies against any more stimulus spending

GOP unifies against any more stimulus spending - Yahoo! News

WASHINGTON – Republicans lined up Sunday in opposition to a second economic stimulus package, a rare demonstration of unity from an out-of-power political party in search of a rallying cry against President Barack Obama.

Republicans called Obama's $787 billion spending plan a "flop" and said it hasn't fulfilled its hype. They criticized the White House for increasing the federal deficit and doing little to combat an unemployment rate that hit 9.5 percent in June.

"The reality is it hasn't helped yet," said Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz. "Only about 6.8 percent of the money has actually been spent. What I proposed is, after you complete the contracts that are already committed, the things that are in the pipeline, stop it."

Obama urged patience with his spending program, which administration officials acknowledge was designed with incorrect or incomplete economic data.

"The stimulus package is working exactly as we had anticipated," Obama told CNN in an interview from Ghana that aired on Sunday.

"We always anticipated that a big chunk of that money then would be spent not only in the second half of the year, but also next year. This was designed to be a two-year plan and not a six-month plan," he said.

Republicans, though, were not willing to sit by idly.

"I do think it is fair to say that the stimulus is a flop," said Rep. Eric Cantor, R-Va. "The goal that was set when we passed it was unemployment wouldn't rise past 8.5 percent, and what we see now is businesses just aren't hiring. Even the best projections have us losing 750,000 more jobs this year."

Congress passed Obama's economic stimulus plan over the objection of out-of-power Republican lawmakers. Since then, GOP aides on Capitol Hill and officials alike have seized on the spending's shortcomings and unfilled promises.

"A lot of it has been spent on ridiculous projects," said Sen. John McCain, the Arizona Republican who was his party's presidential nominee last year.

Obama's allies defended the spending they helped usher into law.

"It's a two-year plan and we're four months into it," said Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill.

Some, including billionaire Warren Buffett, have called for a second round of spending to steady the economy. Obama and his allies have said it's too early to make that decision; his critics, though, pledged to redouble their opposition to any second spending bill.

"I think that would be the biggest mistake we could ever make," McCain said.

Kyl and Durbin appeared on ABC's "This Week." Cantor spoke with "Fox News Sunday." McCain was interviewed on NBC's "Meet the Press."

[Alpha]

CNN Political Ticker: All politics, all the time Blog Archive - McCain: Obama was wrong on stimulus either then or now « - Blogs from CNN.com

President Barack Obama can't have it both ways on his economic stimulus package, the man he defeated in last year's election said Sunday.

Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona, told the NBC program "Meet the Press" that Obama either got it wrong when he predicted the benefits of his $787 billion economic stimulus package in February, or he's wrong now in saying the stimulus is working as intended.

"He's either not leveling now or he wasn't leveling at the time they passed the stimulus package," McCain said.

He cited predictions by Obama earlier this year that the spending plan would hold unemployment to 8.5 percent or less, noting the figure is now at 9.5 percent and likely to continue rising.

McCain also complained that the stimulus plan has failed to deliver the job creation Obama pledged.

"What they promised us would be the result of the stimulus in the short-term has turned out not to be true," he said.

On the same program, Democratic Sen. Charles Schumer of New York responded it was too soon to pronounce judgment on the stimulus plan.

"This is not a four-month plan — this is a two-year plan," Schumer said, noting that many Republicans also misread the situation earlier in the year because they opposed any stimulus package.

"It was very hard to read the economy. It was a whole new world," Schumer said of the economic crisis that started in the second half of 2008.

He praised Obama's "long-range perspective" on the economy, saying the measures in place will work as more of the stimulus money is allocated for projects around the country.

"I'm beginning to see in the last month … a lot of construction going on that I didn't see three months ago," Schumer said.

McCain is correct. Obama stated that the point of passing his spending bill was to prevent unemployment from reaching 8.5% or above. With the unemployment rate now at 9.5% and still climbing, for Obama to claim that the program is "working exactly as we had anticipated" raises the question of whether he was lying to get the bill passed to begin with or whether he is lying now to avoid responsibility for the failure of one of the largest discretionary spending bills in US history.

[Justin]

The idea that it was intended to really stimulate the economy is and always has been a joke. The fact that people bought it is what's so sad.

[Antiphon]

Originally Posted by Justin

The idea that it was intended to really stimulate the economy is and always has been a joke. The fact that people bought it is what's so sad.

and the alternative was...........?????????

[Yorkist]

Originally Posted by Justin

The idea that it was intended to really stimulate the economy is and always has been a joke. The fact that people bought it is what's so sad.

So what was it intended to do?

[Alpha]

Originally Posted by Yorkist

So what was it intended to do?

Pay off the base. Cities, unions, ect.

[Yorkist]

Originally Posted by Alpha

Pay off the base. Cities, unions, ect.

Oh please. Unless you have some evidence?

[Underhill]

Originally Posted by Yorkist

So what was it intended to do?

Our entire economy is based in consumer confidence. Nobody talks about it, but the reality is for the economy to turn around the people have to be confident enough to start spending.

The stimulus was designed as much to boost public sentiment as anything else.

We had 2 outcomes that I could have seen happening. The more optimistic first, was that the good feelings many Americans had after the election, coupled with the stimulus and some positive spin would boost consumer confidence. It almost looked like this might have worked, but I think this has flopped.

The second depressing option is that the economy will continue in free fall until the public (like they did at the end of the depression) thinks it can't get any worse and starts working their way out of the hole. If this is where we end up, it could mean a continued fall for at least another 2-3 years and a much slower recovery.

Of course republicans know this. This is why they are claiming the stimulus is a flop. Because saying it is, with a big enough microphone, will virtually guarantee it is a failure.

[Tom Joad]

More America-hating baloney from Justin and Alpha.

No surprises there.

Originally Posted by Justin

More America-hating baloney from Tom Joad.

No surprises there.

http://www.politicsandcurrentaffairs...reply&p=710722

[Justin]

Lol...youre carrying a grudge over me calling you out when you spout off your tinfoil hat "the corporations are out to get us" nonsense? Go out to your your front porch and have a beer, TJ.

[potter]

Perhaps I could take the GOP "outrage"seriously if they had done the same when their own man was in power. However their silence while George doubled the national debt with his deficit spending emphasizes just how hollow and partisan this gesture is.

Obama still has what...about 5 trillion to go before he matches Bush's deficit spending?

[Tom Joad]

Originally Posted by Justin

Go out to your your front porch and have a beer, TJ.

I think I'll stay inside in the AC and have one.

How many more years till you're old enough?

Nine?

[ninjalooter1701]

Originally Posted by Justin

The idea that it was intended to really stimulate the economy is and always has been a joke. The fact that people bought it is what's so sad.

Move that phrase back a few years, and make it about the Iraq War...

[Justin]

and the alternative was...........?????????

Take our medicine, even if it tastes bad.

[Justin]

Our entire economy is based in consumer confidence. Nobody talks about it, but the reality is for the economy to turn around the people have to be confident enough to start spending.

The stimulus was designed as much to boost public sentiment as anything else.

That's why the stimulus was so dangerous. A sound economy is not based on consumption, but production. A nation can only consume more than the value of what it produces for so long before the house of cards comes tumbling down. The answer is to let the house fall down and start from scratch using brick and mortar. Instead, through the "stimulus" as well as the Federal governments other programs, we're building up the house of cards even higher using an even weaker base. The next time it falls apart is going to be even more disastrous for middle America.

[Justin]

Perhaps I could take the GOP "outrage"seriously if they had done the same when their own man was in power. However their silence while George doubled the national debt with his deficit spending emphasizes just how hollow and partisan this gesture is.

Very true. Republicans' supposed "outrage" over Obama's spending rings hallow.

Obama still has what...about 5 trillion to go before he matches Bush's deficit spending?

SOURCE
President Bush presided over a $2.5 trillion increase in the public debt through 2008. Setting aside 2009 (for which Presidents Bush and Obama share responsibility for an additional $2.6 trillion in public debt), President Obama’s budget would add $4.9 trillion in public debt from the beginning of 2010 through 2016.

[ninjalooter1701]

The difference in those two debts...Bush's money left the country and is over building Iraq. Obama's money is staying here.

[Underhill]

Originally Posted by ninjalooter1701

The difference in those two debts...Bush's money left the country and is over building Iraq. Obama's money is staying here.

Not only that, Bush had a strong economy. Borrowing during hard times makes sense. Borrowing when the economy is thriving is foolish.

[Underhill]

Originally Posted by Justin

Take our medicine, even if it tastes bad.

I suspect if you knew how bad, your tune may have been different. Personally, I would rather avoid another depression. And I think that is exactly where we would be without the stimulus.

[Justin]

The difference in those two debts...Bush's money left the country and is over building Iraq. Obama's money is staying here.

Does it?
More than $1 Trillion of the money spent this fiscal year has been borrowed. Where do you think the interest on that borrowed money goes to? How much do you think of the Federal budget is appropriated to servicing our debt? And how much does Obama want to increase our debt over his term as President?