The Sweet Song of Bipartisanship

Good. Someone has to say no to this steaming pile of elephant shit. When this travesty inevitably does nothing for the economy we'll know where to place the blame for the mountains of new debt.

Well, Brad, as an obvious economics genius, what do you propose should be done instead?

Nothing?

brad, my standard response to people who say what you noted is to demand they produce evidence that they opposed the iraq war on the grounds it wasn't funded and would expand the deficit.

otherwise, stfu: that's the price of admission to an adult discussion.

this pretty much mimics the house vote on the clinton tax hike in '93, so it's not like it's anything new, and, in fact, these clowns probably think 2010 will be 1994 all over again and a new contract with america will sweep them to victory!

I love how numb-nuts like Brad are suddenly concerned about debt, but were silent when W and the Repukes turned record surpluses into record deficits (while destroying everything).

It remains to be seen, but there is, perhaps, a silver lining here.

One can hope that Obama, having seen the obduracy of the GOP, so soon into his candidacy, and on such clearly specious grounds, will now say good bye to the whole notion of bothering to work with them and will simply reply with a great big "screw you" to every suggestion they offer up over the next eight years.

Maynard, that's not a silver lining, that's a whopping big overcoat he can use from now on, if he chooses to. "Where were you guys when we tried to fix the economy? Nowhere. So why should I listen to you now?"

I doubt if he will, though. He doesn't appear to be as nasty as I am.

This vote will serve President Obama well, regardless of the merits of the bill. The discipline of the Republicans is stunning and will not go unnoticed by the general public. It is a perilous strategy for the Republicans, especially those from poorer states. Their great obedience might end up hurting them in 2010. Few of the economy's losers are going to embrace Supply Side or Shock economics as a solution to their problems.

Good. Now amend the bill to remove all of their tax cuts.

I second the poster that called out Jake Tapper. I read his blog regularly and he is a complete wanker, tool, douche bag, or any other colorful word to describe a total jerk. Besides this post--another example was the cocktail party that the President had tonight. Tapper throws in that--"it should be noted" that the President doesn't drink much...how would he know? Are they suddenly friends, or is he just regurgitating that elitist garbage from the campaign season?

Getting back to the real point of this post--why must the Repubs be obstructionist to vote against this bill? yes, yes, I know that they were total jerks when they were in the majority and NEVER tried to compromise, but still--don't some of their arguments have merit?

I'm leery about this whole thing. The price tag on this bill makes me want to cry---I am extremely nervous that this thing is going to pass, there won't be enough accountability for where the money is going, and we will be in the same position two years from now but with double the deficit.

On the other hand, going with the "let's do nothing" crowd is too much to take. Can we really afford to continue to do nothing about education, energy, and infrastructure?

Moses, smell the roses. These are dark times.

"HE AND HIS TEAM HAVE NEVER REALLY DONE ANY OF THIS SHIT BEFORE! - Econobuzz

I watched Chris Matthews tonight and listened to quite a bit of criticism of the bill, particularly from Jim Kramer, the crazy CNBC guy. Whether he's worth listening to I don't know. He said the money was nowhere near enough, particularly when compared to what other countries like China are doing. Also, not enough infrastructure improvement in the bill. I don't have a clue.

Let's just own the bill, put in what we want and say, "screw you." elections should have consequences.

Amen.

http://www.usnews.com/blogs/capital-commerce/2009/1/28/obama-adviser-sti...

Obama Adviser: Stimulus Plan is 'Totally Impractical'

Brian, you half-witted clod (see, I'm working on being nice to you), having a bunch of mindless jerks all voting against the good of the nation is a bad thing. Even if it includes 11 other jerks voting against the best interests of the nation. Bi-partisan is only a good thing if one side isn't made up of half-witted fuckheads intent on running the nation into the ground (as they did when they were the majority and which lost them that majority).

Paul Krugman points to this essay from Robert (Robert Waldmann) at http://angrybear.blogspot.com/2009/01/background-on-fresh-water-and-salt... that describes how and why our there are two groups of macroeconomists, who almost literally speak different languages, from different assumptions, and each think the other crazy.

In this case it's the Fresh Water / Great Lakes vs. the Salt Water economists.

Waldmann's essay is pretty funny, and actually very informative.

His essay may suffer a bit much from a bias believing that ourside/salt-water economists are right, and more rational, more open to outreach and a conversation and just better people all in all, or it could be that the salt-water economists really are right and all the rest.

We so often see so many claims (in your posts and the comments and all around the blogosphere) that we're so cool and the rightwing are almost hitlerian in nature that I am put off by that sort of claim.

When he wrote for Salon we thought he was great.

I used to cross paths with him all the time on the old TableTalk, with scores of other folks, in '98-99.

At the Washington City Paper, and at Salon, he was on the outside, looking in, and had the likes of Joe Conason and Murray Waas breathing down his neck. The moment he got on Gore's campaign plane -- or left on the tarmac by it -- he was on the inside looking out, and had the likes of Kate Seelye breathing down his neck.

My guess: somewhere between his Salon work on the impeachment and his book on the 2000 race, Tapper had a a checkbook-driven epiphany, as it became clear that that funny internet magazine-thingy wasn't going to get anyone a house on the Vineyard.

There's a green-room version of Legionnaires' disease, and Tapper caught it.

Obama and the Dems deserve to be all alone on a limb on this one. If you call debt, pork, spending, and waste "stimulus and investment," you'll fool some of the people all of the time.

luther, my rule on this is very simple: the day you can demonstrate that you opposed the war in iraq on the grounds that it was debt-funded, wasteful, and full of pork, we'll care about what else you have to say.

otherwise, stfu.

From today's Rasmussen Report:

Forty-two percent (42%) of the nation's likely voters now support the president's plan, roughly one-third of which is tax cuts with the rest new government spending. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that 39% are opposed to it and 19% are undecided. Liberal voters overwhelmingly support the plan while conservatives are strongly opposed.

Last week, support for the President's plan was at 45% and opposition at 34%."

Excellent, the longer the Obamination stimulus plan is debated, the more the public opposition to it will grow. By the time it gets to the One's desk, if it ever gets there, he may have to pocket veto it. lol

Republicans pretending to worry about the deficit has been a con game ever since Reagan. And I'm talking to you, Luther. The US debt went up $2 trillion under Reagan, another trillion under Bush I, another $6 trillion under Bush II.