Stupidity

ATTENTION GOP DONORS: YOUR PARTY THINKS YOU’RE STUPID, EASILY MANIPULATED

Posted on by Democrashield

Politico obtained an RNC fundraising presentation that shows what party leaders really think of their donors:

The Republican National Committee plans to raise money this election cycle through an aggressive campaign capitalizing on “fear” of President Barack Obama and a promise to “save the country from trending toward socialism.”

The strategy was detailed in a confidential party fundraising presentation, obtained by POLITICO, which also outlines how “ego-driven” wealthy donors can be tapped with offers of access and “tchochkes.”

The presentation was delivered by RNC Finance Director Rob Bickhart to top donors and fundraisers at a party retreat in Boca Grande, Florida on February 18, a source at the gathering said.

In neat PowerPoint pages, it lifts the curtain on the often-cynical terms of political marketing, displaying an air of disdain for the party’s donors that is usually confined to the barroom conversations of political operatives.

[…]

“What can you sell when you do not have the White House, the House, or the Senate…?” it asks.

The answer: “Save the country from trending toward Socialism!”

[…]

One page, headed “The Evil Empire,” pictures Obama as the Joker from Batman, while House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leaders Harry Reid are depicted as Cruella DeVille and Scooby Doo, respectively.

[…]

The most unusual section of the presentation is a set of six slides headed “RNC Marketing 101.” The presentation divides fundraising into two traditional categories, direct marketing and major donors, and lays out the details of how to approach each group.

The small donors who are the targets of direct marketing are described under the heading “Visceral Giving.” Their motivations are listed as “fear;” “Extreme negative feelings toward existing Administration;” and “Reactionary.”

Major donors, by contrast, are treated in a column headed “Calculated Giving.” Their motivations include: “Peer to Peer Pressure”; “access”; and “Ego-Driven.”

[Emphasis mine]

So if you’re a small donor to the GOP, congrats: they think you’re petty, fearful and reactionary.

And if you’re a big donor to the GOP, congrats: they think you’re easily manipulated and egotistical.

That’s what the folks currently running the Republican Party think of their own donors.

But I think the best part of this story is how Politico obtained the presentation:

The 72-page document was provided to POLITICO by a Democrat, who said a hard copy had been left in the hotel hosting the $2,500-a-head retreat, the Gasparilla Inn & Club.

That’s right–the RNC put together this long, detailed, insulting presentation outlining their entire fundraising strategy for 2010 and someone just left it at the hotel, where it was discovered and handed over to the press.

This is what you’re paying for, Republican donors: to be insulted by people so incompetent that they leave a major campaign document sitting around in hotel.

I’d be asking for a refund if I were you.

All You Need To Know About CPAC 2010 (UPDATED)

Posted on by Democrashield

FL-SEN GOP candidate Marco Rubio makes a joke about President Obama’s teleprompter while reading his speech off of a sheet of paper.

UPDATE: And Sen. Jim DeMint complains about ‘the federal government.’

You know, a United States Senator complaining about the size and influence of the federal government is a bit like a Wall Street CEO complaining about the size and influence of big banks.

If DeMint wants to shrink the federal government he should start by resigning.

James O’Keefe Arrest Update

Posted on by Democrashield

We have an update this morning on the arrest of conservative activist James O’Keefe–apparently O’Keefe & co. weren’t trying to wiretap Sen. Landrieu’s phones.  the Times-Picayune is reporting that they’re being charged with ‘entering federal property under false pretenses with the intent of committing a felony.’

Still, a crime is a crime and a felony is a felony.  But I expect that the right will complain about the allegations of wiretapping in order to draw attention away from the fact that O’Keefe and his friends quite possibly broke a number of federal laws.

The question is, though, if they weren’t trying to wiretap the Senator’s phones what exactly were they doing?

MSNBC’s First Read brings us this:

A law enforcement official says the four men arrested for attempting to tamper with the phones in the New Orleans office of Sen. Mary Landrieu (D) were not trying to intercept or wiretap the calls.

Instead, the official says, the men, led by conservative videomaker James O’Keefe, wanted to see how her local office staff would respond if the phones were inoperative. They were apparently motivated, the official says, by criticism that when Sen. Landrieu became a big player in the health care debate, people in Louisiana were having a hard time getting through on the phones to register their views.

That is, the official says, what led the four men to pull this stunt — to see how the local staffers would react if the phones went out. Would the staff just laugh it off, or would they express great concern that local folks couldn’t get through?

[All emphasis mine]

So, James O’Keefe & co. quite possibly violated a number of federal laws so they could…break Sen. Landrieu’s phones to see what would happen.

Well, I certainly hope it was worth it…

And this is the guy who’s supposed to be the future of conservative journalism? Are you kidding?

UPDATE: And now some on the right are trying to brush this off as a prank.

Uh, no. ‘Entering federal property under false pretenses with the intent of committing a felony‘ is not a prank–felonies aren’t pranks.

And you know that if a group of progressives had done the same thing to a Republican Senator no conservative would accept ‘it was a prank’ as a defense.

The right’s golden boy caught quite possibly breaking federal laws (and for a pretty stupid reason to boot). Maybe they should stop trying to spin this away and just own up to the fact that James O’Keefe isn’t exactly the sterling anti-corruption crusader they made him out to be.

Stupid Republican Tricks: Climate Change Edition

Posted on by Democrashield

We go through this every year.

Every winter, conservatives try to present every really cold day and every snowfall as proof that climate change isn’t real.

Climate change doesn’t mean we’re no longer going to have seasons or that it isn’t going to get cold in winter. The fact that cold weather still occurs in winter doesn’t prove climate change wrong because there’s a difference between climate and weather.

NASA explains:

The difference between weather and climate is a measure of time. Weather is what conditions of the atmosphere are over a short period of time, and climate is how the atmosphere “behaves” over relatively long periods of time.

When we talk about climate change, we talk about changes in long-term averages of daily weather.

[…]

In most places, weather can change from minute-to-minute, hour-to-hour, day-to-day, and season-to-season. Climate, however, is the average of weather over time and space.

[Emphasis mine]

Conservatives want us to believe they know better than all of the climatologists and other scientists whose research proves climate change is occurring, yet they can’t seem to grasp the basic, fundamental difference between weather and climate.

What a joke.

Party Of No Ideas: Healthcare Edition

Posted on by Democrashield

The Party of No Ideas strikes again:

House Republicans presented a four-page outline of their health care reform plan Wednesday but said they didn’t know yet how much it would cost, how they would pay for it and how many of the nearly 50 million Americans without insurance would be covered by it.

Was it written in crayon, too? Or was it scrawled on a series of cocktail napkins?

And you mean to tell me that we’re supposed to take these guys seriously and make concessions to them? Give me a break–all the GOP knows about health care are the Frank Luntz talking points they’ve been spoon-fed.

Palinomics 101

Posted on by Democrashield

Here’s a fun headline from The Huffington Post:

Palin: Obama Wants To “Control The People” With Bailout Money

According to the Governor of Alaska, the government is spending money on people in order to control them.

Of course, in Alaska every citizen gets an annual $1,000 check from the government courtesy of the Alaska Permanent Fund, which is fed by the state’s oil tax revenues.

So, according to Sarah Palin, it’s bad when the government spends money to create jobs, but it’s good when the government just cuts you a big fat check. And sending your citizens big fat checks courtesy of the government is somehow consistent with the Republican economic philosophy.

Sarah Palin 2012! Because consistency is for losers!

GOP “Class” & “Dignity”

Posted on by Democrashield

I almost missed this little gem from RNC Chair Michael Steele’s speech yesterday:

While promising a more aggressive approach, Steele also insisted that Republicans will show “class” in countering Obama.

“We are going to take this president on with dignity. This will be a very sharp and marked contrast to the shabby and classless way that the Democrats and the far left spoke of President Bush.”

Ladies and gentlemen, courtesy of last month’s tax day tea parties, here’s the GOP’s “class” and “dignity”:

CLASS1

CLASS2

CLASS4

CLASS7

CLASS8

CLASS9

CLASS3

CLASS5

CLASS6

I eagerly await either Michael Steele’s explanation of how this constitutes class and dignity, or his full-throated denunciation of the tea party protests in the name of class and dignity.

Of course, in the interest of living, I won’t hold my breath.

Torture Apologists (UPDATED X2)

Posted on by Democrashield

In order to defend the indefensible, conservatives are turning to their old standby: lying.

Right now, some of them are claiming that, because the United States waterboarded Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, a terrorist attack on L.A.’s Library Tower was thwarted.

Well, except for the fact that Bush administration documents claim that particular plot was thwarted in 2002, and KSM wasn’t apprehended by the United States until 2003.

So, we waterboarded KSM 183 times and what did we get? Useless intelligence on a terror plot that we had already thwarted.

Totally worth it, right?

UPDATE: And for those conservatives out there who say waterboarding isn’t torture–Christopher Hitchens had himself waterboarded, and he says it is. Until I see any of you guys strapped down with former Special Forces members pouring water down your throat, I’m going to trust his word over yours.

UPDATE II: Also, this:

One of the worst consequences of the use of these harsh techniques was that it reintroduced the so-called Chinese wall between the C.I.A. and F.B.I., similar to the communications obstacles that prevented us from working together to stop the 9/11 attacks. Because the bureau would not employ these problematic techniques, our agents who knew the most about the terrorists could have no part in the investigation. An F.B.I. colleague of mine who knew more about Khalid Shaikh Mohammed than anyone in the government was not allowed to speak to him.

[Emphasis added]

So, instead of preventing another 9/11, torture may actually be contributing to the next 9/11.

Heckuva job and all that.

Voice Of Reason

Posted on by Democrashield

Ladies and Gentlemen, Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood, quite possibly the only sane Republican left in America:

LaHood, one of the few Republican members of the Obama administration, scoffed at the recent talking points emanating from the congressional leaders of his own party. His voice rising at times with emotion, the transportation czar tackled first the notion that the president was a socialist in disguise.

“I don’t agree with it,” LaHood said. “If you go out and interview these people working on this road in Maryland… these people are thrilled. They are thrilled that they are working in March on a good paying job building roads, which is what they were trained to do. That’s going to be happening all over America. So the idea that this is socialism — it is not socialism, it is economic development. It is going to provide an economic engine around communities all over American for jobs; good paying jobs; and help people pay their bills. I don’t call that socialism…”

[Emphasis mine]

Of course, I’m sure Secretary LaHood knows as well I do that the Republicans don’t actually believe most of the things they say, but they have to try to score political points somehow, right?

‘It’s All Barack Obama’s Fault!’

Posted on by Democrashield

Back during the ‘90’s, when our economy was growing like never before, Republicans attributed that economic growth to Reagan, not Clinton–according to them, the performance of the economy had nothing to do with the occupant of the White House at the time, even several years into his administration.

Similarly, when George Bush took office and a recession began soon after, Republicans claimed the bad economy had nothing to do with Bush—they claimed that he had “inherited” the “Clinton recession” (even though the recession began months after Bush took office). Again, conservatives claimed that the economy had nothing to do with the guy in the White House, even a substantial amount of time into his Presidency.

But now, in the Grand Old Hypocrite fashion, less than two months into his presidency, conservatives are saying that Barack Obama owns the economy. According to them, every economic problem is Obama’s, George Bush had nothing to do with it, and Obama’s failure to fix in 8 weeks days what the Republicans took 8 years to destroy proves that Obama is a poor president.

(Hell, some conservatives are even looking at the decline of the economy since Election Day, as if Barack Obama was responsible for how the economy performed months before he even took office.)

I just don’t get how some on the right can be so shameless. To assert—contrary to reality itself—that good economies are always created by Republicans and bad economies are always created by Democrats, regardless of who is in the White House or what policies they have implemented, just doesn’t make any sense. Conservatives have elevated blame-shifting and buck-passing to an art form in their latest machinations to avoid taking blame for the ruinous economy they created.

Tinfoil Hattery

Posted on by Democrashield

Here’s the stupidest thing you’ll read today: House Minority Leader John Boehner says that Rush Limbaugh is in the news right now because of…the Democrats!

That’s right. According to the most powerful Republican in the House of Representatives:

Rush Limbaugh saying he hopes President Obama fails? Democrats’ fault.

Rush Limbaugh being selected as the keynote speaker for CPAC? Democrats’ fault.

Michael Steele criticizing Rush Limbaugh? Democrats’ fault.

Rush Limbaugh attacking Michael Steele? Democrats’ fault.

Michael Steele’s apology to Rush Limbaugh? Democrats’ fault.

Rush Limbaugh challenging President Obama to a debate? Democrats’ fault.

Whatever wacky thing Rush Limbaugh does next? I’m sure that will be the Democrats’ fault, too.

Actually, John, Rush Limbaugh is a big deal right now because of you. You, Michael Steele and Mitch McConnell are such poor leaders that you’ve left a power vacuum in your party, a vacuum that attention-hungry, money-hungry Limbaugh is more than happy to fill.

If one of you actually stepped up and led the Republican Party (maybe you could start by putting Limbaugh in his place) then Limbaugh wouldn’t be able to do what he’s doing. But, as usual, you and your fellow Republicans are happy to live in a fantasyland where your failures are all everyone else’s fault.

It’s a sad, sad day for the Republican Party when nobody has the guts to stand up to an unelected entertainer, someone who is a half-step above being a shock jock.

Stupid Republican Tricks: Stock Market Edition

Posted on by Democrashield

Here are some rules from Conservativeland when it comes to economic policy and the stock market:

  • The stock market reacts to the news coming out of Washington and nothing else.  If the market is going down, it’s because the entire financial sector disapproves of Washington’s economic policies.
  • Subsequently, the President of the United States is singlehandedly responsible for the performance of the stock market. There is a direct correlation between the President’s speeches/actions on any given day and how the stock market performs on that day.
  • The stock market is the only worthwhile measure of economic success. No other factor (the unemployment rate, inflation, GDP growth/loss, etc.) is even worth measuring or considering.

Now that a Democrat is in the White House, those are the rules governing how Republicans talk about the economy.  Kinda ridiculous when you actually sit down and spell them out, aren’t they?

Tea Partay (UPDATED)

Posted on by Democrashield

Today is the day of the glorious hip-GOP tea partay. Change is coming, America, and these guys are going to bring it:

So, what are these protests going to accomplish besides making a bunch of out-of-power Republicans feel better about being hugely unpopular?

…yeah, that’s what I figured.

UPDATE: And in case anyone actually believes the Tea Partays are some kind of spontaneous taxpayer revolt, here are the folks who are organizing and bankrolling them (according to the Tea Partay’s very own website, newamericanteaparty.com):

the American Spectator, the Heartland Institute, Americans for Tax Reform, the National Taxpayers Union, Americans for Prosperity, FreedomWorks, the Institute for Liberty, the Coalition for a Conservative Majority and the Young Conservatives Coalition.

So this is a joint effort between the who’s who of the conservative movement and a who’s who of right-wing bloggers.

In other words, conservative activists are protesting a Democratically-proposed bill that was passed by a Democratic Congress and signed into law by a Democratic President. And this is notable/surprising/newsworthy…how?

Oh right, it isn’t.  Progressives opposed Bush and conservatives oppose Obama; this isn’t some kind of groundbreaking, revolutionary movement; it’s politics as usual.  Even worse for conservatives, it’s the same kind of navel-gazing gimmickry that helped put them in the minority in the first place.

Someone needs to teach these guys history. The Boston Tea Party actually accomplished something; these Tea Partays are just down-on-their-luck conservatives trying to pretend they’re still relevant.

Biting The Hand That Feeds You

Posted on by Democrashield

Gail Collins:

Louisiana has gotten $130 billion in post-Katrina aid. How is it that the stars of the Republican austerity movement come from the states that suck up the most federal money? Taxpayers in New York send way more to Washington than they get back so more can go to places like Alaska and Louisiana. Which is fine, as long as we don’t have to hear their governors bragging about how the folks who elected them want to keep their tax money to themselves. Of course they do! That’s because they’re living off ours.

Here are the top ten states that receive the most federal tax money per every dollar they pay, color-coded by how they voted in the 2008 Presidential election:

  1. New Mexico
  2. Mississippi
  3. Alaska
  4. Louisiana
  5. West Virginia
  6. North Dakota
  7. Alabama
  8. South Dakota
  9. Kentucky
  10. Virginia

Here are the top ten states that receive the least federal tax money per every dollar they pay, color-coded by how they voted in the 2008 Presidential election:

  1. New Jersey
  2. Nevada
  3. Connecticut
  4. New Hampshire
  5. Minnesota
  6. Illinois
  7. Delaware
  8. California
  9. New York
  10. Colorado

[Source]

So, if we actually listened to Republicans and cut federal taxes, the Republican-voting red states  would be hurt the most.  Turns out that the GOP’s grandstanding on taxes is nothing more than hot air–they have no problem railing against high taxes while simultaneously taking tax dollars hand-over-fist from blue states.

Rich Guy Populism Not Very Popular

Posted on by Democrashield

So, it turns out that the American people trust politicians more than businessmen when it comes to handling the economy:

53 percent of those questioned said they have confidence in Republicans in Congress making the right calls regarding the economy. About 66 percent said they have confidence Democrats, who control Congress, will make the right economic decisions. And 75 percent said they think President Barack Obama will make the right moves when it comes dealing with the recession.

[…]

But Wall Street investors? Bankers and financial executives? Auto company executives? No more than 30 percent have confidence in them.

[Emphasis mine]

And then there’s this:

Washington Post-ABC News

On another economic issue, would you support or oppose the federal government using 75 billion dollars to provide refinancing assistance to homeowners to help them avoid foreclosure on their mortgages?

[2/22]  64% SUPPORT / 35% OPPOSE

So the American people trust politicians more than business leaders and they support the President’s plan to provide assistance to American families facing foreclosure and eviction?

But Politico told me that America was a nation of Rick Santellis! You mean most Americans aren’t wealthy stock traders who prefer that the federal government spend billions to prop up banks and Wall Street instead of helping working Americans avoid eviction?

I guess the American people actually want their government to fix this economic crisis instead of, say, dumping shrink-wrapped pallets of cash at the New York Stock Exchange.  So can we all stop pretending that Rick Santelli and his Brooks Brothers Mob speak for anyone but the wealthy and well-connected and go back to figuring out how we’re going to save America from further conservative economic ruination?

Political Marketing 101 (UPDATED X2)

Posted on by Democrashield

Ladies and Gentlemen, RNC Chairman Michael Steele:

The RNC’s first black chairman will “surprise everyone” when updating the party’s image using the Internet and advertisements on radio, on television and in print, he told The Washington Times.

I wonder if Steele knows that that political advertising on the internet, radio and television isn’t a new concept. Is he really hoping that putting out a bunch of ads saying the Republican Party isn’t as bad as you think it is will surprise anyone, let alone everyone? I’d be more surprised if the Republican Party didn’t advertise.

“There was underlying concerns we had become too regionalized and the party needed to reach beyond our comfort” zones, he said, citing defeats in such states as Virginia and North Carolina. “We need messengers to really capture that region – young, Hispanic, black, a cross section …

Look, people aren’t stupid–they can figure out if your party’s policies are good or bad for them. Finding minorities to read GOP talking points and/or run for political office won’t in and of itself win the Republican party minority voters, mostly because those voters know that the GOP’s policies are still bad for them.

And Steele should know that people vote on a lot more than just their race. I mean, he was defeated in his run for Senate despite being an African-American in a state with a sizable African-American population. You actually have to work to make people’s lives better in order to earn their support–having the same skin color or ethnic background doesn’t cut it, and it’s pretty insulting to assume that those are all minority voters look at.

We want to convey that the modern-day GOP looks like the conservative party that stands on principles. But we want to apply them to urban-surburban hip-hop settings.”

Asked if this venture will be cutting-edge, Steele replied, “I don’t do ‘cutting-edge.’ That’s what Democrats are doing. We’re going beyond cutting-edge.”

First off, “urban” and “suburban” are completely different culturally–you can’t lump them together with a hyphen. More to the point, people tend to have a host of political concerns that have very little to do with what kind of setting they live in.

Second, I can’t think of anything less hip-hop than the Republican Party. I think certified public accountants and and corporate tax attorneys are more hip-hop than the GOP.

More importantly, does anyone realize that the Republican Party has, essentially, a walking gimmick as their chairman? Talking about making your party more “urban-suburban” and “hip-hop” aren’t going to fix anything; they’re band-aids that only paper over the GOP’s real problem: terrible ideas that very few people support anymore.

The problem isn’t the GOP’s advertising, it’s what that advertising is trying to sell. You can have the slickest ads and most well-crafted image in the world, but your sales will still be terrible if your product is garbage. Personally, I wonder how much time the GOP is going to waste focusing on the superficial garbage before they realize that it’s their product itself that needs to change.

UPDATE: Eric Kleefeld hits the nail on the head:

This sort of sounds like a middle-aged man talking to his kids, trying to his utter best to sound as if he’s cool.

UPDATE II: Behold the hip-hop GOP:

Nah, I take that back; that video’s still cooler than the hip-GOP will ever be.

The Wisdom Of Dan Boren (?-OK)

Posted on by Democrashield

Dan Boren, Oklahoma Democrat in Congress, mulls over the economic stimulus package:

Boren said Obama “missed an opportunity” for the stimulus bill to be bipartisan.

“It was a good thing for the president to meet with Republicans. The previous administration never met with Democratic members of Congress.

“The problem is that it became a Democrat [sic] bill and not an American bill,” Boren continued, “because he didn’t use any of the Republican ideas.”

First off, I’m not even going to touch the fact that Boren draws a distinction between “Democrat” and “American.”

Second, one-third of the entire economic stimulus package is devoted solely to tax cuts–the same tax cuts Republicans were demanding be included.  Boren’s complaint that “[Obama] didn’t use any of the Republican ideas” is just absurd, since a third of the whole bill is based entirely on their ideas.  And that’s not even mentioning the various expenditures Republicans objected to, resulting in Obama removing them from the package.

The President met personally with Congressional Republicans.  He listened to their ideas.  He based one-third of the entire stimulus bill on those ideas. And he removed a host of expenditures Republicans objected to, all in an effort to make the bill more appealing to them. Yet, in the end, only 3 out of 219 Congressional Republicans voted for the stimulus package.

But, according to Dan Boren, Obama was being partisan, not the Republicans. How absurd is that?

If we replaced Dan Boren with a Republican, would anyone notice? I don’t think they would. Hell, maybe Boren should fulfill his bipartisan fantasies by just switching sides already–then he can become a burden on the Republican Party.

The Things Republicans Say, Part 2

Posted on by Democrashield

If this keeps up I’m going to have to start a series:

U.S. Rep. Steve Austria said he supports a scaled-down federal economic-stimulus proposal, but the Beavercreek Republican told The Dispatch editorial board that the huge influx of money into the economy could have a negative effect.

“When (President Franklin) Roosevelt did this, he put our country into a Great Depression,” Austria said. “He tried to borrow and spend, he tried to use the Keynesian approach, and our country ended up in a Great Depression. That’s just history.”

Most historians date the beginning of the Great Depression at or shortly after the stock-market crash of 1929; Roosevelt took office in 1933.

[Emphasis mine]

Normally I’d say that Minority Leader John Boehner should go talk some sense into Rep. Austria, but I’m not all that sure that Boehner isn’t taking advice from him, especially considering how House Republicans handled the economic stimulus package.

The 7.5% Doctrine (UPDATED)

Posted on by Democrashield

Senator Tom Coburn has put out a new list of what he calls “Wasteful and Non-Stimulative Spending” in the recently-passed economic stimulus package.

If you do the math, you find that Coburn’s list amounts to just over $62 billion, or just 7.5% of the $838 billion stimulus package passed by the Senate. I have to admit, opposing a bill because you dislike 7.5% of it is better than opposing a bill because you dislike 2% of it, which was the previous GOP standard. I have to give Coburn some credit for finding more things to hate in the stimulus package.

But here’s my problem–nowhere does Coburn explain why these expenditures are wasteful and non-stimulative. It’s just a list of expenditures with no analysis or explanation whatsoever, I guess he subjected them to the patented Republican “I don’t like it and therefore it’s not stimulate” economic analysis, but some of this list is rediculous on it’s face.

Some of the programs Coburn opposes will, irrefutably, create jobs. For instance, he highlights $2 billion toward building a zero-emissions power plant, even though people will have to be hired to actually do the work of building that plant, thus creating jobs. The same goes for the $1 billion expenditure for building NOAA offices that Coburn opposes.

Similarly, Coburn criticizes putting $2 billion toward manufacturing hybrid car batteries, even though the expansion of that sector means more people will have to be hired to to keep up with the extra demand. Coburn also opposes a $1.2 billion expenditure for creating, as he puts it, “summer jobs for youth [sic]”. Come on, it says right there on your website that the $1.2 billion is specifically designed to create jobs for young workers; how is that not stimulative? How doesn’t that create jobs and grow our economy? What sense does this list make?

Look, that’s the same tactic the GOP has been using against the stimulus package all along: they cherry pick relatively-minor expenditures that sound funny to them and use those expenditures to bludgeon the bill as as “pork” and “wasteful”. Of course, at no point do any of them actually stop to figure out whether these programs would actually create jobs and help the economy, which you think would be kind of important to know.

That’s because, to the GOP, this isn’t about the economy–it’s about politics. They want to hurt the Democrats by crippling a Democratic economic recovery initiative. They’re dreaming up stupid-on-their-faces talking points and putting them out there, hoping all the while that nobody realizes that there’s no economics behind their complaints.

“I don’t like it, therefore it’s not stimulus” has become the gold standard of Republican economics. And they wonder why they keep losing elections…

UPDATE: And then there’s this:

In the late morning he [Obama] will visit a construction site in Springfield, Virginia with Governor Tim Kaine to highlight the jobs that will be created by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and his commitment to making sure the American people know how their tax dollars will be spent.

And later in the afternoon, state transportation officials “from nearly every state,” will meet with Transportation Secretary LaHood and White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel to discuss  their “infrastructure needs … as well as the projects that are ready to go,” in anticipation of the passage of the stimulus bill.

Vice President Biden will do his part, traveling to Pennsylvania, where he will tour a bridge slated for repair if Pennsylvania receives money under the economic stimulus bill. He will then travel to Harrisburg, where he will deliver remarks on the importance of investing in infrastructure “in order to build a 21st century economy.”

No matter what the GOP says, the economic stimulus package is designed to create jobs and will create jobs.  Some of the programs might sound silly to some Republicans in Congress, but that doesn’t change the fact that they will grow our economy and put people back to work.

The Things Republicans Say

Posted on by Democrashield

Missouri State Rep. Bryan Stevenson (R), talking about the pro-choice Freedom of Choice Act:

What we are dealing with today is the greatest power grab by the federal government since the war of northern aggression

I wonder what Michael Steele has to say about that…

The Obama-backed stimulus, [Steele] said, “is just a wish list from a lot of people who have been on the sidelines for years.. to get a little bling, bling.”

Okay, actually, I don’t.

Michael Steele Brings The Fail

Posted on by Democrashield

Recently, newly-minted RNC Chair Michael Steele sat down with George Stephanopoulos and tried to argue against the economic stimulus package. How did it go? Well, see for yourself:

STEELE: You’ve got to look at what’s going to create sustainable jobs. What this administration is talking about is making work. It is creating work.

STEPHANOPOULOS: But that’s a job.

STEELE: No, it’s not a job. A job is something that — that a business owner creates. It’s going to be long term. What he’s creating…

STEPHANOPOULOS: So a job doesn’t count if it’s a government job?

(CROSSTALK)

STEELE: Hold on. No, let me — let me — let me finish. That is a contract. It ends at a certain point, George. You know that. These road projects that we’re talking about have an end point.

As a small-business owner, I’m looking to grow my business, expand my business. I want to reach further. I want to be international. I want to be national. It’s a whole different perspective on how you create a job versus how you create work. And I’m — either way, the bottom line is…

STEPHANOPOULOS: I guess I don’t really understand that distinction.

STEELE: Well, the difference — the distinction is this. If a government — if you’ve got a government contract that is a fixed period of time, it goes away. The work may go away. That’s — there’s no guarantee that that — that there’s going to be more work when you’re done in that job.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Yes, but we’ve seen millions and millions of jobs going away in the private sector just in the last year.

STEELE: But they come — yes, they — and they come back, though, George. That’s the point. When they go — they’ve gone away before, and they come back.

[Emphasis mine]

First, Steele draws a distinction between “work” and “jobs,” as if there are millions of people who are being paid to do nothing, in anticipation that there will be work for them to do in the future. It’s pretty simple—more work means more jobs.

For instance, if a construction company has 50 employees but receives contract for a job that will require 100 employees, they will hire 50 more people; thus more work creates more jobs, and that’s the type of scenario this stimulus package is designed to create nationwide.

Second, Steele acts like the jobs created by the stimulus package don’t count because they’re not indefinite. By that standard, though, whose job does count? Tens of millions—if not hundreds of millions—of workers across the country could be fired or laid off at any time. Do those jobs not count, either, just because they’re indefinite?

Plus, the jobs created by the stimulus are designed to be temporary—we can’t have millions of people earning government salaries for the rest of their lives, after all. The point of the stimulus is to spur economic growth so that, when those temporary jobs end, there will be other newly-created jobs those workers can move into. The point of the economic stimulus package is, after all, to stimulate the economy, yet Steele pretends a nearly-$1 trillion investment in the economy won’t have any effect on economic growth.

Third, Steele claims that we shouldn’t even worry about losing jobs because “they come back.” Well, the reason why the job we lose “come back” at the end of a recession is because, when we enter a recession and start bleeding jobs, the government steps in and does something about it. In fact, we have a host of monetary and economic policies we can implement in order to create jobs again, one of those being economic stimulus packages like this one. Again, Steele is assuming that the economy exists in a vacuum and that the federal government doesn’t affect it, which is patently absurd.

In light of this, maybe Steele shouldn‘t have scrapped the RNC’s plans to develop a policy think tank–it’s going to be a long couple of years for him if this gibberish is the best he can come up with.

America To GOP: Obama Is Right, Obstructionism Is Wrong, Pass The Stimulus!

Posted on by Democrashield

A new Gallup poll shatters the Republican talking point that the economic stimulus package is unpopular and that Obama has hurt himself by supporting it:

poll1

poll3

So two-thirds of the American people approve of how Obama is handling the stimulus package, while nearly 60% disapprove of how the GOP has handled it. Who would have thought that working to get something done is more popular than obstructionism?

A full 80% of the American people believe the stimulus package is important, with 51% saying it’s critically important; that aligns with a February 4th CBS News Poll showing the stimulus package with 51% approval and 39% disapproval, as well as a February 4th USA Today/Gallup poll showing that 52% favor it and 38% oppose it.

Pollster has Obama’s job approval at 61.7% and disapproval at 25.5%; they show his favorability at 69.1% and his unfavorability at just 24%.

The American people support the economic stimulus package, they support President Obama, but they vehemently oppose the right’s culture of obstruction.

20,000

Posted on by Democrashield

The unemployment rate has jumped to 7.6%. America lost 598,000 jobs in January alone. 98% of American cities saw their unemployment increase in December. Needless to say, our economy is in trouble.

There is a job creation bill in Congress that would create anywhere from 1.2 to 3.9 million new jobs over the next few years. Yet, the Republicans are holding that bill up because they disagree with just 2% of it. That’s right–apparently supporting 98% of a piece of legislation isn’t enough to get Republicans to vote for it.

And what’s the GOP’s latest talking point in the debate over the stimulus bill? “Why the hurry?” That’s right–our economy is crumbling all around us but the GOP is content to sit back, kick up their heels and drag this process out for as long as they want.

According to January’s job loss figures, we’re losing nearly 20,000 jobs a day. Every day the GOP drags their feet, every day they waste on gimmicks like making charts explaining how high a pile of $1 trillion dollars goes or stuffing more tax cuts into the stimulus bill or pimping their own plan (which happens to be devoid of actual economic stimulus), America loses 20,000 more jobs.

Today, while the GOP withheld their votes in the hopes of getting more pro-corporate goodies into the bill, 20,000 Americans lost their jobs. And since it’s a Friday, Congress won’t be able to consider the bill until Monday, ensuring 40,000 Americans will lose their jobs over the weekend. And even if the Senate manages to pass the bill on Monday, that will be after another 20,000 lost jobs before this bill becomes law.

What’s the hurry? How about the tens of thousands of Americans losing their jobs every day? Is that a big enough problem to get the GOP to act, or have they just stopped caring at this point? Maybe we should have Republican Senators and Congressman go explain to the newly-unemployed people in their districts why it was necessary to sacrifice their jobs for the sake of a capital gains tax cut or a corporate income rate tax cut. That should win them a lot of votes come 2010.

Republicans fiddle while the economy burns. How many more jobs do we have to lose before they budge?

Sense And Sensibility

Posted on by Democrashield

This morning, we learned that America’s unemployment rate has jumped to 7.6%, the highest it’s been in 17 years.  As it stands, we’ve lost roughly 3.6 million jobs since this recession started.

There is a job creation bill languishing in the Senate as you read this.  Why hasn’t it been passed? Why haven’t we already begun putting Americans back to work?

Well, because the Republicans are holding it up.  They only have a problem with 2% of the job creation bill, but apparently that’s enough to shoot it down and kill millions of potential jobs.  Whatever happened to bipartisanship and compromise?

Plus, the GOP’s rhetoric on the stimulus shows they know next to nothing about economics, which is why we’re in this mess to begin with–why do you think the Republicans lost the past two elections? Because they spent 8 years running a prosperous economy into the ground.

Steven Pearlstein says it better than I ever could:

As long as we’re about to spend gazillions to stimulate the economy, I’d like to suggest we throw in another $53.5 million for a cause dear to all business journalists: economic literacy. And what better place to start than right here in Washington.

My modest proposal is that lawmakers be authorized to hire personal economic trainers over the coming year to sit by their sides as they fashion the government’s response to the economic crisis and prevent them from uttering the kind of nonsense that has characterized the debate over the stimulus bill during the last two weeks.

[…]

Let’s review some of the more silly arguments about the stimulus bill, starting with the notion that “only” 75 percent of the money can be spent in the next two years, and the rest is therefore “wasted.”

As any economist will tell you, the economy tends to be forward-looking and emotional. So if businesses and households can see immediate benefits from a program while knowing that a bit more stimulus is on the way, they are likely to feel more confident that the recovery will be sustained. That confidence, in turn, will make them more likely to take the risk of buying big-ticket items now and investing in stocks or future ventures.

Moreover, much of the money that can’t be spent right away is for capital improvements such as building and maintaining schools, roads, bridges and sewer systems, or replacing equipment — stuff we’d have to do eventually. So another way to think of this kind of spending is that we’ve simply moved it up to a time, to a point when doing it has important economic benefits and when the price will be less.

Equally specious is the oft-heard complaint that even some of the immediate spending is not stimulative.

“This is not a stimulus plan, it’s a spending plan,” Nebraska’s freshman senator, Mike Johanns (R), said Wednesday in a maiden floor speech full of budget-balancing orthodoxy that would have made Herbert Hoover proud. The stimulus bill, he declared, “won’t create the promised jobs. It won’t activate our economy.”

Johanns was too busy yesterday to explain this radical departure from standard theory and practice. Where does the senator think the $800 billion will go? Down a rabbit hole? Even if the entire sum were to be stolen by federal employees and spent entirely on fast cars, fancy homes, gambling junkets and fancy clothes, it would still be an $800 billion increase in the demand for goods and services — a pretty good working definition for economic stimulus.

[…]

What really irks so many Republicans, of course, is that all the stimulus money isn’t being used to cut individual and business taxes, their cure-all for economic ailments, even though all the credible evidence is that tax cuts are only about half as stimulative as direct government spending.

[…]

Personal economic trainers would confirm all this. Until they’re on board, however, here’s a little crib sheet on stimulus economics:

Spending is stimulus, no matter what it’s for and who does it. The best spending is that which creates jobs and economic activity now, has big payoffs later and disappears from future budgets.

[Emphasis mine]

Democrats are trying to invest in America and Republicans are fiddling while the economy burns.  That’s really all there is to it.