Day: January 29, 2009

House Votes Along Party Lines

The bill passed by a vote of 244 to 188, with no Republican support and 11 Democrats voting against it. Members of both parties said that despite Obama’s overtures to Republicans – including a trip this week to Capitol Hill to woo members in person – the congressional leadership of both parties approached the stimulus legislation with the same unrelenting partisan tactics Obama attacked during his campaign and inaugural address.

Yesterday’s vote to approve the package of $275 billion in individual and business tax cuts and $544 billion in new spending – too much spending, according to the Republican minority – showed that Obama could get his way on major issues without the type of cross-party support he had hoped to get on a bill he has described as crucial to the country’s economic recovery.

All of Obama’s good will tour was for naught all the kind words from the Repubs in the House was for naught….they were gonna vote against it from the start because they were told to by their leadership.  The era of the OBama bi-partisanshipo lasted about 8 days.  Now the battle in the Senate will begin and it will not be as easy as it was in the House.

Repubs Stumbling For A Leader

Holy Moly!  Looks like the GOP has a spokesman, at least for now and that voice is coming out of your closest radio……and it sounds a lot like Rush!  Actually it is kinda sad that the best the GOP can do is Rush.

The GOP in Washington has issued a memo telling its members to vote no on the stimulus plan and that was before they met with the pres who was there to hear their concerns.  Sounds like the bi-partisanship is all but dead, huh?

Congressional Republicans face the tough task of opposing an economic stimulus plan proposed by President Obama – without opposing Obama himself.

So expect the GOP to heap plenty of blame on the congressional Democrats who authored the legislation while shielding the popular new president from any of the mud slung at his allies.

It helps that most Republicans genuinely dislike the initial draft offered by Democrats in the House, an $825 billion combination of spending and tax cuts that seeks to boost funding for programs long ignored by President Bush.

House Republican Leader John A. Boehner (Ohio) complains that the plan “spends too much and spends it too late,” citing a preliminary readout by the Congressional Budget Office that shows very little money will be spent in the first six or so months after enactment.  “Spends it too late”?  See these guys are hypocrites they do not want to spend ANY money at any time and now they are bitch that it should have been spent earlier.  They have NO clue how to fix the situation, but they will oppose a democratic approach at any cost, including the total destruction of the very fabric of American society.

But you know these GOP guys are not leaders, they are just front men.  A leader would be offering viable alternatives instead of trotting out the dusty crap of the past, tax cuts and the like.

She Is BAAAAAAAAAAAACK!

For us bloggers there are some people that just keep giving us material day after day….whether you are left or right there are those who you just cannot turn away when their name is mentioned—–bless their hearts!

Just when you thought it was safe to watch the news…….Joe the Plumber had shot his wad……..Blago had shoved his foot in his mouth one too many times……the Caroline  story has just about made everyone projectile vomit their breakfast across the kitchen…..what more could there be to make it worse?  Dammit!  You just had to ask that question?

SHE’S BAAAAAAACK!

SARAH PAC is up and running.  A PAC?  Oh it is not an exploratory PAC for Sarah, but rather one for raising money for Repubs running in 2010 and 2012.  Believe it or not.  Me?  I believe that not.

The website states:

Dedicated to building America’s future, supporting fresh ideas and candidates who share our vision for reform and innovation.

Let us look at that.  Innovation: n–a process of introducing new methods.  Did anyone see the introduction of new methods or ideas by Palin or McCain in the last election?  If so, please share with the rest of us.  Fresh ideas?  That pretty much goes with the innovation lie–there are no fresh ideas in the GOP, just a regurgitation of  tired old mantras from the past that they cannot let go of and look for new ones.

Hell, she cannot even come up with a new idea for raising money…she is using Obama’s scheme of small donations, so even there  there is no innovation.

To Nationalize Or Not To Nationalize

That is the question.  Banks that is.  I have been having a socialism conversation recently with a few of my readers and I thought I would do a bit of research to see what was what.

This from James Saft of Rueters:

Nationalisation of weak banks in Britain and the United States may be preferable to current plans for insurance and soft “bad banks” schemes which risk being swamped by future losses as assets, especially real estate, continue to crater.

An insurance programme, getting banks to identify their riskiest assets to the government which will insure them for a fee, is one of the main planks of a UK plan to bail out banks unveiled this week.

Both Citigroup and Bank of America have already received loss protection arrangements from the government. The betting is now that the United States will opt for some sort of a “bad bank” aggregator which will buy up doubtful assets from banks, with the emphasis on keeping as many as possible operating as publicly traded entities which, once shorn of their bad debts, would be viable and would lend.

With that said I feel that we may have already done so.  Why do I say that?

Easy answer.

Before I give that answer I want to point out that the solution was originally started by a Republican administration so let us not put all the blame on the Dems, okay?

Now, the answer.  If an institution cannot exist without taxpayer money, then that institution has been nationalized.  The major banks have received a massive taxpayer infusion– we now own them–Nationalization 101.

Will we make money off the deal?  Someone will, but not the taxpayer.

The Democratic Light Of The Middle East

How many times have you heard that Israel is the democratic ideal of the Middle East?  Bush threw that around like so much fecal matter at a wall.  Yes they have elections and yes the popular vote wins out, well sort of, it is a parliamentary system which means that alliances between parties must be forged so that a majority can be formed.

But wait!  Now for the rest of the story.  (Paul Harvey would be proud)

The Central Elections Committee (CEC)  banned the Arab parties United Arab List-Ta’al and Balad from running in next month’s parliamentary elections amid accusations of racism from Arab MKs. Both parties intend to challenge the decision in the Supreme Court.

Now would a true beacon of democracy ban a political foe from the electoral process?  Especially a party that is a minority and has little chance of winning an election.

I will concede the fact that Israel is the closest thing there is to a democracy there is in the Middle East but please stop call it a beacon of democray.  By calling it so you are diminishing all democracies and all those fighting for democracy.  I am sure that there can be some justification found by the Israelis for this move, but it does not sit well with those who champion democracy.