This Week in Political Hypocrisy - The Stimulus

Discussion in 'Politics' started by B_VinylBoy, Aug 10, 2011.

  1. B_VinylBoy

    B_VinylBoy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Messages:
    10,516
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston, MA / New York, NY
    It's about that time to focus on yet another glaring hypocrisy in Politics that will probably be ignored by the general consensus who are just so fed up and angry about everything that they couldn't even be bothered about the specifics. With the economy tinkering on a double dip recession, the obvious answer to our problem on our shores is to create jobs. One of the current administration's major attempts to try and bring jobs to citizens was the dreaded Stimulus program.

    Yep... THAT stimulus program.
    The one that so much of the opposition claimed was "wasteful spending". The one that the opposition claimed wouldn't create jobs, but actually kill them in the process.

    Even when a list was provided on the internet showing just how many people who claimed to be against the Stimulus program for those reasons were secretly sending in letters requesting for stimulus money for programs to try and create jobs, the soundbites kept on coming and the phony outrage continued to fester.

    Today, thanks to an interesting story we can add yet one more high profile name to the growing list of hypocrites. Perhaps one of the most outspoken people against the stimulus and is now a candidate running for the Republican nomination for President. Ladies & gentlemen, introducing MICHELLE BACHMANN. - Political Animal - How about a Bachmann-inspired stimulus?

    Seems as if she's sent in several requests to Obama requesting stimulus money for programs in her district that she states would create jobs. Meanwhile she was on television and at parTEAs ranting and raving about how it's going to kill jobs at the same time. Really?


    Again, I'm sure people who are just so fed up with the way our nation is right now won't give a damn. And the staunch parTEA people won't give two shits either. But just in case others may be interested in seeing what's been really happening over these last few years, where all of the posturing and politicking from the opposition has never been about spending, "smaller government" or adhering to the Constitution, but a strategic plan to deny a Democrat a second term under any circumstances, perhaps this thread and the linked story within may interest you.
     
  2. dandelion

    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2009
    Messages:
    7,897
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    600
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    UK
    Verified:
    Photo
    In Edinburgh there is a scheme to build a tramway. It is ridiculously over budget, has closed down the centre of the city for years and still no trams. Yesterday someone was interviewing an SNP councillor, who were the one group opposing the scheme. The councillor was asked why his party had been involved in planning the scheme if they opposed it. The thing is, even if you think something is a bad idea it may still be a good idea to try to make the best of it.
     
  3. D_Percy_Prettywillie

    D_Percy_Prettywillie Account Disabled

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2011
    Messages:
    765
    Likes Received:
    3
    The fact that the Senate Minority Leader, Mitch McConnell declared that the primary, the primary goal of the GOP was to deny Barack Obama a second term in office speaks volumes... magnitudes about what the formerly loyal opposition in this country is actually up to in terms of legislative intent. They've put their cards on the table- so long as their base supports it and it is in direct opposition to the White House, they've no qualms about fighting for it right up to and (potentially) beyond the point that their contention causes the collapse of what Americans have come to know as their way of life.

    That Standard and Poor's cited Congressional inability to come to table ready to discuss tax increases (democrats call that revenue enhancements) as one of the primary reasons the nations credit status was downgraded is just one in a long line of indicators that the people holding this nation hostage are out of touch with reality.

    For further examples, just quote the text of their speeches!

    On the House floor on Earth Day, April 22, 2009, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) argued that Carbon Dioxide isn't harmful because it fucking comes from nature.

    "Carbon Dioxide is portrayed as harmful. But there isn't even one study that can be produced that shows that carbon dioxide is a harmful gas."

    We don't need straw men or clever arguments to beat these idiots. We don't need PHD's or Nobel Prize winning economists- we need the ever so infinitesimal amount of common sense and the ability to rationalize between absolute lunacy and scientific fact. I may have given up on this Congress as being effective and efficient but I am a long way away from giving up on the American public- we can see through this bullshit when we're so inclined and that time is now.



    JSz
     
    #3 D_Percy_Prettywillie, Aug 11, 2011
    Last edited: Aug 11, 2011
  4. dandelion

    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2009
    Messages:
    7,897
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    600
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    UK
    Verified:
    Photo
    Well its true the reoublicans are not helping. But is there any consensus in the US on what is the correct course? Or does the political stalemate represent confusion within the country?
     
  5. OhWiseOne

    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    4,493
    Albums:
    10
    Likes Received:
    133
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Florida
    Verified:
    Photo
    I will just say all politicians are hypocrites. They don't give a flying flip about the country or it's citizens, only that they get re-elected.
    A week? Try....years....decades...of hypocrisy.
     
  6. tbrguy

    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2011
    Messages:
    1,143
    Albums:
    4
    Likes Received:
    20
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    The North of England
    Verified:
    Photo
    Mockery, try mockery.

    The Daily Show used to be on over here and I thought that was pretty even handed in its send ups of contemporary issues and news items.

    And Colbert.

    Vote "Monster Raving Loony Party"; we have such a party, really.

    What about Michael Moore? Vote for him, that would make the establishment take notice.

    Your trouble is - money! It just costs too much for any independent voice to get elected.

    You need to reform your election process.

    Ooops, too late; the guys with the money already own the process, not much chance of that happening any time soon then.
     
  7. NumberTwentySix

    NumberTwentySix New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2010
    Messages:
    207
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Lewis Black has it exactly right when he calls them respectively "the party of no ideas" and "the party of bad ideas". The problem is that it is always easier to point out the flaws in someone else's plan than it is to point out the strong points in your own. I see continued gridlock and discomfort in our future. Possibly a (polite) revolution.
     
  8. Calboner

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Messages:
    9,026
    Albums:
    5
    Likes Received:
    2,465
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    USA
    I think Bill Maher characterized the state of affairs more aptly on his television show on June 28, 2009 (my transcription, from a video that is no longer on line):

    We don't have a left and a right party in this country anymore. We have a center-right party and a crazy party. And over the last thirty-odd years, Democrats have moved to the right, and the right has moved to a mental hospital. So what we have is one perfectly good party for hedge-fund managers, credit-card companies, banks, defense contractors, big agriculture, and the pharmaceutical lobby—that's the Democrats; and they sit across the aisle from a small group of religious lunatics, flat-earthers, and Civil-War reenactors who mostly communicate by AM radio and call themselves the Republicans, and who actually worry that Obama is a socialist.
     
  9. NumberTwentySix

    NumberTwentySix New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2010
    Messages:
    207
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    I would agree with Mr. Maher that we have one party, but he mis-characterizes it along the spectrum of right and left. We have a statist party. When the democrats are trying to get elected, they tell voters they want to make the state bigger, and then they do it. When republicans are trying to get elected, they tell voters they want to make the state smaller, then they make it bigger too. The right-left dichotomy is a leftover from last century. Now there is only the party of more. Republicans talk a good game, but never actually cut. Democrats are at least honest enough to admit they don't want to. A pox on both their houses. Fuck their Great Society and their Patriot Act alike.
     
  10. cruztbone

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2004
    Messages:
    1,291
    Likes Received:
    2
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Capitola CA USA
    I am not happy with congress, but they are controlled by both parties. i am proud of Obama and his endless energy and enthusiasm to repair this nation despite endless smears and threats against him. He is our best hope, as NO ONE ELSE out there can match him for his hard work, optimism and willingness to work with TEA PARTY TURDS. By the way, younger bloggers on this thread, if you read the constitution and read some US history over the last 150 years or so, you will soon see all the best presidents recognized this as necessary. so sorry, under 30 group, but you cant get want you want just because you think you deserve it now and want it now. Fuck your whiny attitude about Obama . think nothing has improved? just type in "Obama achievements as president" and go to any one of the websites on the first page, especially Blue Oregon, and click on it to see what he has done in just 2 and one half years in office. GET A CLUE !!!
     
  11. snakembl14

    snakembl14 New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2009
    Messages:
    49
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    GB, WI
    I was against the stimulus but after it passed...would have taken some too.

    Don't think that makes me a hypocrite

    I don't think unemployment benefits should be near as long as they are (what is it now, like 17 years?), but if I was put in that position you can bet your ass I'd collect. Why? Because its there, others are collecting it, and I've paid in while I did have a job.
     
  12. B_VinylBoy

    B_VinylBoy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Messages:
    10,516
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston, MA / New York, NY
    That is a prime example of being a hypocrite.
    Why should a politician be on camera and on record telling the nation that something is going to harm the economy and destroy jobs, then request money from that supposedly job killing thing in private because it will create them? You say one thing, and do the exact opposite in hopes nobody notices. Or worse, you do it and then pose in front of a huge check in your district in an attempt to take the credit (and hoping that they didn't pay attention to your rant just a few days ago that screamed about it not working).

    More like 12 months, with extensions if you qualify. Especially if you've worked for years (if not decades) for one company and suddenly found yourself without a job out of no fault of your own.

    That's the whole point of UI. It's there for people who paid into the system to utilize when they need it. However, none of these politicians "paid" into the Stimulus. It was money proposed by the Government to try and revive the economy, and they could have stuck to their so-called principles and rejected funding if they so believed that it was going to kill jobs. They campaigned so hard against it, the end result was a severely dwindled down bill that most economic experts agree didn't go far enough to help out the economy. What makes it worse (and also more evidence of hypocrisy) is that the naysayers who now blame the President for the bill falling short of expectations ignore the fact that they were the ones responsible for dismantling it... while hoping nobody was paying attention.

    Just like the debt ceiling issue, the Stimulus suffered a similar fate. We have a specific group of politicians in Congress who don't know how to stop grandstanding and start governing. Instead of doing what they know is going to work, they remain stuck in perpetual attack mode because denying a Democratic president a second term is more important to them than doing their job properly. So yeah... the word for these people is hypocrite and it deserves to stick.
     
    #12 B_VinylBoy, Aug 11, 2011
    Last edited: Aug 11, 2011
  13. snakembl14

    snakembl14 New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2009
    Messages:
    49
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    GB, WI
    I was against the healthcare bill...damn it now I have to reject/cancel my coverage. Do you have health insurance? Yes, but I don't want to use it.

    I thought Democrats controlled the chambers when the stimulus was passed??
     
    #13 snakembl14, Aug 11, 2011
    Last edited: Aug 11, 2011
  14. B_VinylBoy

    B_VinylBoy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Messages:
    10,516
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston, MA / New York, NY
    They did. However, there is a special rule in the Senate where the minority party can filibuster if they object to the passing of a bill. Surely you didn't forget all of that, considering that the previous Congress had more filibusters than any other Congress in the history of our country. Intentionally obstructing the progress or passing of many bills, to the point where a party that is in the majority couldn't just be ahead by one (which is usually the norm), but achieve at least sixty votes or a "super majority" (which rarely happens).

    Details, my friend... details!
     
  15. AllHazzardi

    AllHazzardi Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2004
    Messages:
    339
    Albums:
    8
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Palm Springs, California
    I think what is, is, what isn't, isn't.

    What IS the goal of every republican when democrats are in office? Try to beat the democrats. What IS the goal of every democrat when republicans are office? Try to beat the republicans.

    That's actually the way our system here intentionally works- like trying to build two perfectly even matched sides to make a never-ending tug-of-war which pins the flag to the center-line. The center-line is the thing we're trying to locate.

    I think of our political system like a +1/-1 charge valance negotiation. EG, if you assign liberal as negatives(not that they are negative, but they represent liberal usage of charge for gain; eg, tax and spend) and Conservative as positives(adding more resistance to the system by taking longer to make spending decisions and seeking cheaper alternatives), then the whole goal becomes to "figure out what 0 is"- and in this case, 0 represents the common ground idealogy, whatever that might be.

    All that is before you is temporary; when that "one" ideal which is perfectly on track is revealed, the world is shocked three times over. Shocked at the age of the carrier, shocked at the lifestyle of the carrier, and shocked at themselves for not figuring it out on their own.

    To understand my personal view, Equality, Freedom, Pursuit of Happiness. Equality of Freedoms allows all to Pursue Happiness instead of fight for the former two. Linguistically speaking, EF=PH, both are labiodental or bilabial fricatives. Mathematically speaking, E*F = P*H, energy(potential) * Force(direction) = Pressure(potential with no direction) * Horizontal(P*H = Linear motion, in form H refers to a balance on a centerpiece which declares up/down, eg, an origin). To me all this is perfectly interlinked, so if you don't see where I'm coming from, you will with enough time.

    As this applies to politics and economics and other world systems, what I'm really saying is if you can eliminate the difference in "Ability to do and make choices" then "Happiness" becomes the target, which is a non-finite driving force towards a common goal. Solve the E and F, calculate the rest. RESPONSIBILITY to do and make choices is key in this concept. So before an idea like this can take over, people must learn lessons about what THEIR choices actually result in long enough out.

    The basic butterfly effect implied in this system is Forgetting your Keys and calling yourself stupid for it can put some person half a world away into remission of brain cancer. To me, it's not about if one butterfly can make a tornado- it's more like, can a giant flock of bats blot out the sunlight? Can enough butterflies swirling around make a twister? Can an earthquake at the right moment send a suicide leaper falling on its ass on the building, rather than jumping off the edge? In my understanding, all of these questions are irrevocably yes. In short, anything can be anything else, do anything else, or control something else, so long as the proper "filters" on its "outputs" are installed.



    Bringing all this together, what I'm pointing out is that the two aparties are fighting for dominance when they should just be figuring out what their job is. It's the conservative mindset to examine for cost, it's the liberal mindset to examine for effect. Between the dynamic of the two sides, you have social goal improvements measured vs monetary cost efficiency and economic improvements vs social cost efficiency. Instead of the "swing states" being full of D and R, it should be I's, because they won't vote in favor of something just because the team made it. Arguably, most of the winners of swing states are in fact Independents or non-democrat-specificity non-republican-specificity which aligned with D or R just to get into office.



    At it's simplest, all I'm implying is the old world common sense phrase; A place for everything, everything in its place.

    Nothing goes "wrong" per se, it only goes "wrong" relative to your misconceptions about what "right" really is.
     
    #15 AllHazzardi, Aug 12, 2011
    Last edited: Aug 12, 2011
Draft saved Draft deleted