Just in case any of you out there ever thought that Obama and his Democrats actually cared about America – from Breitbart:
In their explosive new book Debacle: Obama’s War on Jobs and Growth and What We Can Do Now to Regain Our Future, Grover Norquist and John Lott, Jr. uncover a startling fact: heavily Democratic states with lower poverty rates, lower unemployment rates, lower bankruptcy rates, and lower foreclosure rates received most of President Barack Obama’s $825 billion Stimulus.
Put another way, Stimulus money went to precisely the states that needed it the least but were more politically connected to the Democratic Party….
You think that any Democrat leader out there believes that the money of the American people should be fairly distributed among those who need it most? Oh, come on – if that were the case, the local Catholic Charities here in Las Vegas would have plenty of food to feed the homeless. But, where is the upside in that for our Democrat wheeler-dealers? Who gets paid when a bum gets fed? For crying out loud, next you’ll be wanting to spend some “shovel ready” money to actually fix up distressed neighborhoods rather than having it spent on some more Solyndras!
There is a vile odor about the United States these days – something has gone horribly wrong. Not just with Obama, of course – he’s just the tail-end-Charlie of a long, hideous string of events. The capstone of a oozing pile of lies, swindles, hatreds and fears which have been used to extract power and wealth from the American people and transfer it to leeches and tin-plated tyrants. And don’t get me wrong, here – there are plenty who claim to be Republican who are very much part of the problem. But it is the left and its captive Democrat party which had led the way to degradation and which has nearly wrecked this nation.
We’ve really got to work hard for the rest of the year, folks – if you think things have been bad since 2009, just wait until a re-elected Obama gets to be flexible about things in 2013.
Blogs For Victory 
Come on here Mark, have a heart. It takes a lot of money to register the dead to vote. It takes even more money to register and make sure the illeagals vote. Gotta buy smokes and beer and make sure the donkwagon is gassed up.
Time for another round of golf my freinds. FORE!!!
dont forget PARTAYYYYYYYYY and vacation.
Mark,
It appears Glenn Hubbard, one of Romney’s economic advisers, agrees with you. It’s going to make for an interesting contrast during the campaign.
Spook,
I’d have to get down to a nitty-gritty definition with Hubbard on what constitutes “effective” stimulus – if he means “actually create wealth”, then he’s off base…if he means “could help lower and middle class people get by”, then he’s right…there was plenty Obama could have done with that trillion dollars but, instead, he just spread it around his cronies. I’ve no actual problem with public works projects to alleviate unemployment – but let no one ever think that public works projects create net wealth: they can’t – by definition, the resources used to do public works are resources which are seized from the private economy. Its a trade off, though: better to at least have the construction firm worker’s working – and making things useful to the whole of society – than to have them idle. And there is a long-term benefit in new and upgraded infrastructure.
Curiously enough, I think I’m just about the only conservative who favors the various high speed rail programs – though I’d do it differently than our liberals would, with all their shoveling of cash not at the companies who can do the job but, rather, at companies which donated the right way the last election cycle. Our rail system does move most of our goods and it is antiquated – the idea of high speed passenger rail is probably only of limited utility (only in certain stretches would be repay doing – DC to NYC; LA to Las Vegas; LA to San Francisco; corridors like that) but if we could improve our rail system so that our goods are moving 20 or 30% faster than now it would greatly facilitate wealth creation…and could lead to a partial switch on Panama-bound traffic to US ports for transcontinental shipment (sorry, Panama – but I no longer care for what that Canal does…shouldn’t have talked Jimmy C. in to giving it up to you…if it was still a US Canal, I’d be solicitous of it’s future). That is the kind of stimulus I’d like to have seen done. Another type of useful stimulus would be means of increasing US merchant tonnage (ie, build ships in the US which are faster and cheaper to operate than the ships currently being used – do a generational leap in ocean transport and essentially force everyone to use US-flag vessels…government ponies up to design the ship and build the first few as US Navy supply ships and then essentially give the design away to anyone who will build the ships in US shipyards…). Anyways, that is my idea of stimulus which would be effective.
I’d have to get down to a nitty-gritty definition with Hubbard on what constitutes “effective” stimulus – if he means “actually create wealth”, then he’s off base
I can’t look inside his mind, but I think you’d be hard-pressed to find anyone, certainly any Conservative who believes government stimulus spending can create wealth. The purpose of a “stimulus” should be to “stimulate” or jump-start the economy in the absence of infrastructure spending in the private sector. We’ll never really know whether or not it would have worked as even Obama jokingly admitted that the shovel-ready projects weren’t as shovel-ready as they had thought. I would submit that there never were any shovel-ready projects, and the entire stimulus was designed to be, just as your post says, a Democrat slush fund.
One wonders why Oblabla is using the Social Security reserves to pay the $8 Billion 2012 Medicare Advantage bill to prevent Seniors from finding out how much he’s cost them before the election when he has his Stimulus Slush Fund.