YellowLinesandArmadillos

Nice and yet it is one of the warmest winters on record in Bucharest. It is climate change and the average earth temperature have risen, not fallen despite your so called facts. Extreme weather is happening more often... but you go on spewing that lie it not being the result of global warming.

No, just stating really what happened... Can't say it was intentional though, more like leading a horse to water and then thirst took over.

And everyone laughed when McCain proposed that doing so would be a solution to the mortgage crisis... I have been saying this all along, if you are going to spend that kind of money, start with the source, not the symptoms.

But the wealthy and the powerful can take away freedom just as fast if not faster than the government and there is less recourse. I prefer the struggle, back and forth.... checks and balances if you will... Example, Wall Street Crooks over leveraging wealth so it is "disappearing like a fart in the wind." But you go on crying too about the government because it is your right, just as it is the right of every working man to cry about corporate scoundrels. Pot Meet Kettle!

It does take a village to make an idiot and it seems like we have quite a village here.... cause this post is quite idiotic.

True, but they were hired as part of contracts and these folks did not receive government benefits... any!

Ah, nice cookie cutter description of numbers Darin yourself...., but I admire the effort. Federal Employees were cut under Clinton, your numbers prove it, but you can't take that part. Outlays increased OK, but Government employees didn't. Contracts let did increase, largely because of the transportation bill, but it was not because of bureaucratic hires, these so called employees were the result of those companies hiring people to fullfill the contracts they were paid to do, but they were not government employees receiving government benefits. Also those increase in outlays were at less of a rate than under Reagan or Bush 1 and was part of a move to contract out led by Republicans and Clinton.... Pissed off the Unions to no end. Bush II continued this trend of contracting out and I could probably find the numbers again, but he did so at an exponentially increasing rate while restoring and exceeding the number federal employees cut during the Clinton administration. The last part is and interesting postulate. The government being a hindrance is not always a bad thing... some time it is and it is not as clean cut as you would have it, is because government in US context is often an arbiter of how business allocates resources or doesn't allocate them. Sometimes they are mutually beneficial and sometimes they are not. We can all find things to gripe about, but the other things we couldn't afford to do without if the government did not insure those resources were provided. Of course, if you live in a cave in AK by yourself, maybe I can understand the perspective, but that not how the 360 million people in the lower 48 have to relate to each other.

Interesting, now here is the actual CBO estimate in plain English http://cboblog.cbo.gov/?p=204 and the Inouye sub http://cboblog.cbo.gov/?p=205 and the more sophisticated one for you number crunchers: http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/99xx/doc9977/hr1senate.pdf and the Inouye substitue http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/96xx/doc9619/Gregg.pdf

It is a victory for the moderates in both parties. The Wingnuts on both sides got slapped, especially in the House... The right wing nuts became irrelevant because they would come to the table and the lefties had their irrelevant pork removed. This is a good thing for America.

Mitt speaking in tongues again and smiling.... ah, he left Massachusetts in such a great state of affairs... Mitt is all leather and no baseball... give it a rest, but he sounds credible so lets believe him!

It is kind of tough when all the other side wants to talk about is tired old Capitol Gains tax breaks.... not exactly stimulative. The House GOP was great at pork barrel project when in the majority and the House has always been that way. The line item veto and competition with Clinton over who was the biggest trimmer of government programs was the only way it worked before. Sounds like Obama is trying to work with Senate moderates because the House is still a partisan mess and will be as long as Pelosi and Boehner are leading both sides. P.S. Boehner is tan salon grumpy cigarette smoking hack as much as Pelosi is a shrill whining nut. They deserve each other... scary thought... but they do.

She is too busy buy expensive Gala dresses in NYC

I happen to agree with your assessment, though I am not sure it should apply to the spouse of a prospective nominee whose business is a separate entity. On the others, the clearance process should have been better front loaded and it will be now, especially on taxes!

Whatever, I seem to remember Bush running into similar trouble, but for arguments sake, I guess he didn't have as high a standard from the get go and the Messiah did promise change... Bush chose Cheney as VP and immediately lowered the ethical bar.

Making fun of my scattered writing are you?... thanks... you try after dealing with two year old and a four old all day while working on website updates..... My brain is fried and I didn't even have a good drugs.... Still feel hung over... off to play hockey and clear what there is left of my mind!!! Friend!

As a photographer I have to agree with the AP. As a Member of the PPA this is our stance! http://www.ppa.com/copyright-advocacy/

Anything that creates a job or requires spending on a project for purpose for the public good should be considered stimulative. Also, the President's requirement on salary requirements on the TARP have to be considered a plus too. It means that the money can be used to short a bank or financial institutions balance sheet or preserve a dividend payout to stock holders which I would assume is stimulative.

Link to Senate Finance Committee Bill http://www.finance.senate.gov/sitepages/le...tment%20Act.pdf

The articles assumption is that people will spend their money and it is true in a bull market, but in the bear we are currently in. The problem is that the economist doesn't account for systemic consumer debt and lack of confidence... The effect is much less noticeable as in the Bush Tax Cut.

If he had gotten the nomination or even the VP slot, I think Obama might have lost or a least had a much tougher challenge. The man knows how to talk econ and business and sound good doing it even if you don't understand a lick of what he is saying.

LOL, not the only reason, but one of them... The other is exponential increase in women in the labor force too and population growth through legal immigration. P.S. In this economy, a lot of the illegals are going back to wence the came. http://www.opednews.com/articles/Illegal-i...080908-158.html http://www.catholic.org/international/inte...ry.php?id=31100

Agreed there is a small proportion of pork in the Bill, less than 1% and it is stupid to open up yourself politically to the ideological issue in an economic deal. That being said, refurbishing restrooms is stimulative.... It takes someone to do the work and that means a job and a salary for someone in the construction industry, one of the hardest hit of all sectors. Go ask Joe the Plumber.

Wrong... There is so much debt people are carrying, only 20% of the last tax rebate went into spending. That is no more stimulating then the TARP. Unless it is a tax credit v. a tax cut it shouldn't be considered stimulating the economy. Project spending is stimulating, it causes spending. The Republican's have it wrong... tax cuts won't do much good for the economy when everyone is scared to spend... and are at risk to losing their jobs. We are looking at 10% unemployment by the end of the year according to some economist talking heads on CNBC and CNN this morning. That can't be good, especially considering the exponential growth in the labor force since the early 1980s.

It was her husband's business not her's and you Republicans are doing everyone a disservice with these ad-hominid attacks. So, he has cleared it up as it relates to his business and it is not uncommon to have tax disputes. It is what it is. We go through this every time with nominees of both parties. It does beg for tax code simplification in some form or another. We can debate that too. But is so nice to see Repugnicans crowing, gives them reason to vent all that angst.

Or the Messiah, either way we have someone to blame