American Politics during the Obama Presidency

On Monday, Obama made the following statement while speaking at a "Jobs Council"

"[i]Shovel-ready was not as 'shovel-ready' as we expected.[/i]"

Gee, who knew that there was no such thing as a "[i]shovel-ready[/i]" project?

Only everyone involved in the public works industry, that's who.

I knew the day Obama announced his stimulas plan that he couldn't possibly actually spend billions of dollars on public works projects on any timetable that would create jobs today or in the immediate future. It's elementary: Public works programs don't get to "shovel-ready" status until well after the funding has been secured. Prior to the funding, you do the preliminary planing, the engineering and cost estimating, then you get public approval, and then you secure the funding. After the funding has been secured, you then do the final engineering, the final environmental impact studies, the land acquisition, and the contract bidding process, all of which typically takes many months and usually years, assuming that nothing holds up the process (like environmentalists contesting the findings of your impact studies, or property owners protesting their assessments, or archaeologists finding an old arrowhead in the project's path, etc.).

Fortunately, less than 6% of the stimulus plan was budgeted for these non-existent "shovel-ready" projects, although they certainly sold it as a much higher percentage.

Unfortunately, these "shovel-ready" expenditures represented the only portion of the Stimulus Plan that had any possibility of resulting in tangible assets, the remainder having been pissed away temporarily maintaining bloated state and local government payrolls with little to show today for the billions spent.

Anyway, this is yet another example of Obama's appalling lack of executive management experience.

Jackson

[QUOTE=Jackson; 418057]On Monday, Obama made the following statement while speaking at a "Jobs Council"

"[i]Shovel-ready was not as 'shovel-ready' as we expected. [/i]"[/quote]Obama and his cronie-capitalists in the room started laughing. There is nearly 20% unemployment and underemployment and these a-holes are laughing at Obama's failed policy? I guess they are laughing because they don't feel any of the pain the Obama has wrought upon this nation. Perhaps they are laughing because they too knew back when it was passed that the 'stimulus' was designed to be payoffs to stimulate more democrat loyalty.

[quote=]Gee, who knew that there was no such thing as a "[i]shovel-ready[/i]" project?

Only everyone involved in the public works industry, that's who. [/quote]As well as everyone who wrote the bill and voted for it.

[quote=]I knew the day Obama announced his stimulas plan that he couldn't possibly actually spend billions of dollars on public works projects on any timetable that would create jobs today or in the immediate future. It's elementary: Public works programs don't get to "shovel-ready" status until well after the funding has been secured. First, you do preliminary planing, engineering and cost estimating, then you get public approval, then you secure the funding. After the funding has been secured, you then do the final engineering, the final environmental impact studies, the land acquisition, and the contract bidding process, all of which typically takes many months and usually years, assuming that nothing holds up the process (like environmentalists contesting the findings of your impact studies, or property owners protesting their assessments, or archaeologists finding an old arrowhead in the project's path, etc.).

Fortunately, less than 6% of the stimulus plan was budgeted for these non-existent "shovel-ready" projects, although they certainly sold it as a much higher percentage.

Unfortunately, these "shovel-ready" expenditures represented the only portion of the Stimulus Plan that had any possibility of resulting in tangible assets, the remainder having been pissed away temporarily maintaining bloated state and local government payrolls with little to show today for the billions spent. [/quote]Yes, it is unfortunate that most of the rest went to the states to payoff unions as well as other charitable giving to leftist groups and causes.

[quote=]Anyway, this is yet another example of Obama's appalling lack of executive management experience.[/quote]Even with two and a half years of on-the-job training, he is still the least knowledgeable and least experienced person in the room, no matter which room it happens to be.

Unfortunately our liberal / progressive friends have confused the terms humanity with hubris. If I can take one dollar from an individual for 'humanity' then they believe they can take it all. For the current definition of said humanity / hubris see ObamaCare.

Do a little research on the Great Depression. Most folks in this country were not looking for 2 years of unemployment checks, welfare, food stamps et al, no they were looking for WORK. Today far too many of our unemployed are looking for the Federal Tit not Work.

By the way Calvin Coolidge was the first of the Progressives to become president.


As an addendum to this post please review the current problems in Greece and Spain:

The people have been on the public tit for so long they can not envision it running dry. So what do they do, they riot.

Greece’s sovereign debt interest rate is 18%+ when they can find someone to buy it. There is no money left unless they can get the EU to loan it to them and their people are rioting because they don’t care if there is no money they still want the nanny state to take care of them.

To quote one protester in Spain “I think it is important to be here protesting against the spending cuts, because to cut social spending with the excuse of the crisis is a big farce.”

The European style of social governance is collapsing around their collective heads but these people are totally detached from fiscal reality. The remaining EU countries who underwent social spending and other cutbacks early while Obama kept telling them to spend are now not so keen on helping out their EU partners unable to curb their own debt.

We are not far behind and Obama / Democrats want to continue to drag us down this road.

Doppelganger: I have to disagree regarding "Silent Cal". If anything, he was the antithesis of the modern day "Progressive" neo-Marxist. I think Teddy Roosevelt was the first "Progressive" President, even though he served under the banner of the GOP, he later founded the Progressive Party.

Coolidge was a small government conservative, who cut taxes and spending, which pulled the USA out of the post WWI depression and sparked the roaring 20s. Quite the opposite of Wilson and TR.

A personal observation, and related to this topic. I have a close associate who, during the presidential campaign of 2008, attended a speech given by the current CINC. My friend actually shook his hand and exchanged a couple of pleasantries. Prior to this event, this guy was quite rational, and capable of critical analysis over that which he read, heard, etc. I guess the medicine is really strong when you actually touch that man, because after that event, my friend became a character straight out of Jonestown, circa 1977. Completely brainwashed, and incapable of thinking for himself, instead preferring to be spoonfed his liberal (Marxist) talking points, which he would regurgitate at any opportunity he thought he had. It is really spooky what happened to him.

My dos centavos,

BF.

[QUOTE=Doppelganger; 418059]Unfortunately our liberal / progressive friends have confused the terms humanity with hubris. If I can take one dollar from an individual for 'humanity' then they believe they can take it all. For the current definition of said humanity / hubris see ObamaCare.

Do a little research on the Great Depression. Most folks in this country were not looking for 2 years of unemployment checks, welfare, food stamps et al, no they were looking for WORK. Today far too many of our unemployed are looking for the Federal Tit not Work.

By the way Calvin Coolidge was the first of the Progressives to become president.

As an addendum to this post please review the current problems in Greece and Spain:

The people have been on the public tit for so long they can not envision it running dry. So what do they do, they riot.

Greece's sovereign debt interest rate is 18%+ when they can find someone to buy it. There is no money left unless they can get the EU to loan it to them and their people are rioting because they don't care if there is no money they still want the nanny state to take care of them.

To quote one protester in Spain 'I think it is important to be here protesting against the spending cuts, because to cut social spending with the excuse of the crisis is a big farce. '

The European style of social governance is collapsing around their collective heads but these people are totally detached from fiscal reality. The remaining EU countries who underwent social spending and other cutbacks early while Obama kept telling them to spend are now not so keen on helping out their EU partners unable to curb their own debt.

We are not far behind and Obama / Democrats want to continue to drag us down this road. [/QUOTE]

June 15 POLL: People Still Blame Bush More Than Obama For The Economic Mess

[url]http://www.businessinsider.com/people-still-blame-bush-more-than-obama-for-the-economy-2011-6[/url]

Solely or mainly responsible: Obama 34% Bush 47%

Of course, the real blame lies in two core conservative philosophies that reigned under Bush - tax cuts for the wealthy and free-market deregulation. Look what we have to show for it.

Bush gets off way too easy in this poll.

Esten: The Bush tax cuts were for EVERYONE who paid taxes (not for the bottom 50% of the wage earners who pay nothing, yet are a parasite upon the Republic). I was on the low end of the tax bracket at the time, and appreciated the extra $ in my pocket at the time. The main deregulation that led to the meltdown in 2008 was the repeal of Glass-Stegal via the Grahmm-Leach-Bliley act of 1999. Signed by. Guess who? Ding, ding, ding. We have a winner."William Jefferson Clinton". I bet Bobby Rubin at Treasury was holding his signing hand as he passed it into law. Oh. And I forgot one thing. The Community Reinvestment Act signed into law by? Jimmah Carter. Man these neo-Marxist libs just love wrecking the pursuit of happiness.

Lack of oversight and enforcement of existing regulation (SEC porn surfing). (thanks Barney Frank.) and poor Federal Reserve policy (Thanks Alan and Ben. LOVE you guys!) , led to interest rates being held artificially below market for a long time from 2001-2007. Hey, it was free money. If you had a pulse, you could get a Jumbo mortgage. It would all end very badly. Because at the end of the day "There is no such thing as a free lunch." gratuitous maybe, but free. No. Someone is paying.

Seems to me you drank Rachel and Keith's Koolaid.

BF.

[QUOTE=Esten; 418064]June 15 POLL: People Still Blame Bush More Than Obama For The Economic Mess.

[url]http://www.businessinsider.com/people-still-blame-bush-more-than-obama-for-the-economy-2011-6[/url]

Solely or mainly responsible: Obama 34% Bush 47%

Of course, the real blame lies in two core conservative philosophies that reigned under Bush. Tax cuts for the wealthy and free-market deregulation. Look what we have to show for it.

Bush gets off way too easy in this poll. [/QUOTE]

Due to temporary lodgings, the only American news channel I will be getting for the next few months will be Fox News & Bloomberg.

Fox News' domination was mystifying to me, but after watching Weiner and the mother child killer 20 hrs out of 24, I can understand why. In between, you have Prosecutor O'Reilly who actually doesn't allow his guest to talk till the last 20 seconds, Pastor / Professor Beck who is rewriting history, and good old boy Hannity who tries very hard to be a heavyweight. Juan Williams suffers the role of the fool, caught in a tsunami but beaming always at the end. Probably, because he has a job. The News Panel shows are much better. The women reporter from News Radio is quite foxy and is the type to talk dirty when you are drilling her.

All of them are laughing their way to the bank. Nothing wrong with that, it is free market and capitalism at it's best. I am very grateful that I have France 24, the only other English language news channel I have. By the way, I barely watch CNN or BBC even when I had them. I do miss CNBC. Most of all, I do enjoy the International Tribune, Los Angeles Times and of course, the Bangkok Post and the Strait Times.

[QUOTE=Black Shirt;418066]Fox News' domination was mystifying to me, but after watching Weiner and the mother child killer 20 hrs out of 24, I can understand why. In between, you have Prosecutor O'Reilly who actually doesn't allow his guest to talk till the last 20 seconds, Pastor / Professor Beck who is rewriting history, and good old boy Hannity who tries very hard to be a heavyweight. Juan Williams suffers the role of the fool, caught in a tsunami but beaming always at the end. Probably, because he has a job. The News Panel shows are much better. The women reporter from News Radio is quite foxy and is the type to talk dirty when you are drilling her.[/QUOTE]I don't watch Fox News except when traveling, so I'm no expert. But, from my perspective, I think that's a pretty apt description, especially of Beck. There is a certain element of faith healer / snake charmer about him. I instinctively check to make sure I still have my wallet whenever I see him on the air.

I would never suggest that Fox News is a middle of the road news outlet. What gets me, however, is when its detractors claim that the other news outlets like MSNBC, CNN, CBS or CNBC are fair, balanced or middle of the road. That's the real joke. The other day I was having dinner with a couple of friends who happen to be gay. They could not get their heads around the idea that I thought NPR was left of center. To both of them (they're extremely liberal Hollywood types) NPR is the epitome of fair and balanced. As to Juan Williams' firing, they both agreed with it 100% because 'you just can't say what he said on the air. '

That, I think, is the difference. Conservatives can admit that Fox is right wing. Liberals frequently cannot fathom how anyone can suggest that their favorite news outlets are left leaning. A good example of this is Obama, who tries to ban Fox as not being a "real" news outlet, suggesting that he thinks the others are fair and balanced. At least the other networks were quick to condemn him since even they understand that this is a crock of sh*t.

By the way, I believe you may be the only person on the planet who [i]misses[/i] The Los Angeles Times. Most folks just tolerate it. At least you're the first I've heard suggest that it puts out quality anything. I live here and tried to like it for years before giving up in disgust. You should send your post to Sam Zell. He'll take it as vindication for his recent purchase. Who needs billions when you've got adoring fans?

Rupert Murdoch identified an underserved segment of the American news market, and it turned out to be half the country.

Because he doesn't own the other half.

[QUOTE=Jackson;418070]Rupert Murdoch identified an underserved segment of the American news market, and it turned out to be half the country.[/QUOTE]

Stan,

The LA Times was part of my daily diet until I started roaming the world a few years back. Since the Chandler family sold the paper, and with the downturn in print news, the Times has since suffered many cutbacks. It is now a shadow of what once was. But in it's prime, it had an excellent front page, accurate reporting and diverse articles that reflected it's multi-cultural readership. Every year, it has ganered a fair share of the reporting awards. Whilst the editorials were liberal, I never felt I was being set-up as when I was reading the NY Times. In addition, the sports, entertainment and living (food) sections were outstanding. Now, I scan it online for US and local news.

Subscription was high at one time because it was very reasonable, even if all they read was the sports page. At the work place, you would find the several copies of the paper laying around but no sports page. Were you one of those guys? It is going to be quite a different world when the papers go out of the print business. But at least, your fingers will be clean when you put the lox & bagel sandwich in your mouth!

[QUOTE=WorldTravel69;418071]Because he doesn't own the other half.[/QUOTE]Hey WorldTravel69,

Have you been drinking and posting again?

Your statement doesn't make ay sense.

Rupert Murdoch owns one cable news channel. That's not half of all cable news channels.

Also, I'm not aware that he has aspirations to "own the other half" aka CNN, CNBC, MSNBC, etc.

Or perhaps you are suggesting that Rupert Murdoch owns half of the people in the country and that he's converted them into conservatives, and that he has designs to somehow "buy" the other half of the country's population and convert them also?

Please advise.

Thanks,

Jackson

Looks like David Koch has upped his funding of internet trolls.

Sorry BlueFalcon, we have a higher caliber of discussion here. You're clearly not ready to debate with the Big Boys. Go back to Fox News or HotAir of whereever you came from and have them send over someone more qualified.

He Owns many Newspapers, Radio stations, and TV Stations.

He Fucked the Union Workers in California, And and in a Few Other States. I am sorry I do not know all of them, I am not on top of all the Right Wing worker killing politicians.

As You Are.

I am trying to keep my working Union pension alive.

It is Too Bad You Did Not Have Too Work hard for a Living!!

It Must Feel great To have born With a Silver Spoon In Your Mouth?



[QUOTE=Jackson; 418073]Hey WorldTravel69,

Have you been drinking and posting again?

Your statement doesn't make ay sense.

Rupert Murdoch owns one cable news channel. That's not half of all cable news channels.

Also, I'm not aware that he has aspirations to "own the other half" aka CNN, CNBC, MSNBC, etc.

Or perhaps you are suggesting that Rupert Murdoch owns half of the people in the country and that he's converted them into conservatives, and that he has designs to somehow "buy" the other half of the country's population and convert them also?

Please advise.

Thanks,

Jackson[/QUOTE]

WT,

You are wrong on so many levels.

[QUOTE=WorldTravel69;418075]He Owns many Newspapers, Radio stations, and TV Stations.[/quote]The discussion was about the success of FOX News in reaching an otherwise un-served conservative audience, not about how many other media outlets one of it's owners may also own.

[QUOTE=WorldTravel69;418075]He Fucked the Union Workers in California, And and in a Few Other States.[/quote]Really? How? I'd like to know, because when a union member says things like that, what they usually mean is that the employer stopped dancing to the union's tune.

[QUOTE=WorldTravel69;418075]I am sorry I do not know all of them, I am not on top of all the Right Wing worker killing politicians.[/quote]Please name a single [i]"Right Wing worker killing politician"[/i], because I don't know any, although I certainly know lots of "[b][i]Left Wing [u]job[/u] [u]killing[/u] politicians[/i][/b]".

[QUOTE=WorldTravel69;418075]I am trying to keep my working Union pension alive.[/quote]How exactly is Rupert Murdoch trying to kill your pension?

[QUOTE=WorldTravel69; 418075]It is Too Bad You Did Not Have Too Work hard for a Living!

It Must Feel great To have born With a Silver Spoon In Your Mouth?[/QUOTE]I don't know who you are talking about. I was born poor, and everything I've got I worked for and earned, and along the way I've NEVER asked for or received a single check for overtime, a single contribution to my health care or my future pension, or even so much as a single paid holiday, so you can stick that silver spoon up your ass.

Thanks,

Jackson