Strings: The Efficacy of the "Stimulus."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs

 

Earth to LeBuick: Your denial of something doesn't make it untrue.

From US News & World Report (by the way...that's not a "right-wing" publication): SOURCE

and...

Now...here's where you post that I'm making this stuff up.

 

Ok RBell, I can see you guys refuse to actually read what I'm saying. You are still posting the GOP interpretations of what CAN be done with the bill's money but not posting something that is actually in the Bill.

The neighborhood electric vehicle is another twisting of facts, the bill does have credits for buying hybrids and electric vehicles. It was the GOP that suggested one of these neighborhood electric vehicle would qualify because they are green. If that what you want to buy then yes, you can have a tax credit but don't pretend like the tax credit was exclusively to encourage people to buy neighborhood electric vehicle.

The you list Little League facility in Cidra, Puerto Rico. Can you show me those words specifically in the bill? No... Those words are not in the bill. The money is going to Puerto Rico and that was a project listed on the mayors list. Will the mayor use the money for that? I doubt it since it has hit the media and because it would have to be listed on the public site for all to see. The point is this, the stimulus bill doesn't list Little League facility in Cidra, Puerto Rico on any of its pages, if the mayor Cidra, Puerto Rico uses some of the money for a project like that is something entirely different. We are talking about what is actually listed in the bill and not what dishonest politician will do with every dime.

A good one I heard today was Gov Jindal saying "how can the government buying electric cars going to put people to work. Does he know how stupid that sounds? Who does he think will make those cars? Non-workers?

No one is saying this is a perfect bill. There are portions of it I strongly disagree with. What I see in it is our president doing his best to do something as opposed to standing back and criticizing the efforts of those willing to step up and try...

 

Right... They held meetings in the committee's and sub committee's. Isn't that how Baptist do it, hold a meeting but never produce anything?

Again I say, in 2004 the Republican's were majority in both houses of congress. However, none of this legislation being discussed was ever brought before the floor for a vote. Are you saying we should give them credit for holding hearings and proposing legislation but not seeing it through? Is that what you call debunked? If that is so my friend, I thin you're wrong. That is not debunked...

 

These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis. The more people exaggerate a threat of safety and soundness, the more people conjure up the possibility of serious financial losses to the Treasury, which I do not see. I think we see entities that are fundamentally sound financially and withstand some of the disaster scenarios. And even if there were a problem, the federal government does not bail them out."~Demo Rep. Barney Frank


Demo Rep. Maxine Waters added, "We do not have a crisis at Freddie Mac and particularly Fannie Mae under the outstanding leadership of Frank Raines." (That's the same Frank Raines who directed enormous campaign contributions to Barack Obama.)

It is no small irony that Frank is now chairman of the House Financial Services Committee and Waters is Chairwoman of its Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity.

If fact, economists uniformly agree that the current crisis of confidence in the market reached critical mass when the federal government stepped in to bail out these two massive corporations -- and it's been a hard, fast ride down ever since.


http://patriotpost.us/

 

Republican's were still the majority in both houses to include the white house. Like the Democrats did with this stimulus bill, why didn't they force something through?

 

Instead of changing the subject lets get back to what I originally responded to. You said the Repubs were ostriches in the sand. When in fact it was the libbies. As I have shown and debunked.

 

LeBuick, do you have kids?

Would you go into debt to improve your lifestyle, if you knew your kids would have to pay for it?

If so, then I guess we have our answer...:tear:

 

3-page warning: This thread will be closed no sooner than 1:00 p.m. ET by one of the moderators.
LE

 

That was the answer, you are blaming the libs when the Republican's were in charge and would have been the party to do something. Like the libs just did with this stimulus, they could have put something through. They were the ones with their heads in the sand, sleep at the wheel or did too little too late.

 

Your question is painting with too broad of a brush. You are asking a general question regarding specific and more complex issues. Like Obama said to McCain during the campaign, you're trying to use a hatchet where a surgical scalpel is needed.

If there was a risk that I would not have the substance or means to provide for my child today so they would be here in the future then yes, I would have to make that tough decision. Would I do it for lavish wasteful living, no?

What we have today are people in risk of sleeping on the streets, traditionally middle class families are turning to food stamps, food banks and depending on unemployment benefits to meet todays needs. Not meeting the needs of today might mean their child won't be here tomorrow. It would be nice if I could leave my child a fortune but sometimes those cards aren't in the deck.

 

I have a relative out of work and do you know what the needs are in this home? (And, I would suggest this reflects many of these needy middle class families that you speak of) Yes, there is the need for food and shelter but in addition there are two cell phones, high def satelite television, high speed internet, etc. Yep, we need to meet these needs.

 

Obviously they are recently unemployed and have yet to come to reality about what that means. The day will come that those luxuries will be turned off because they won't have the means to keep them in service. I pray that doesn't happen but you and I both know it will the longer they remain unemployed.

If they end up on the streets, I would prefer it be because they squandered what we gave as opposed to we didn't give. Giving is our Christian obligation...

 

Closed per prior warning. LE