(Fox News) As President Obama prepares to rev up his re-election drive with his third State of the Union address Tuesday night, he and his aides have already begun framing the fall contest as a “choice” election, not a simple up-or-down referendum on his own job performance in the Oval Office.

In so doing, the president borrows a page from an unlikely playbook: that of the man he has spent the last five years disparaging, George W. Bush.

It was President Bush, in his 2004 matchup against John Kerry, who perfected the “choice” strategy. Buffeted by mounting opposition to the Iraq war, the incumbent argued that the alternative to a second Bush term – that being the Democratic senator from Massachusetts – was so dangerous that voters should put aside any misgivings they might have about the president.

Well, it is very interesting that Obama would reach back and attempt to run in this manner, but, digging deep, President Bush actually had a record to run on, besides painting Kerry as dangerous. Bush dealt with a lingering economic downturn when he first came in to office, then a big downturn post-9/11, and turned both around. He lowered taxes for all (unfortunately, his tax plans removed a large amount of workers from paying federal taxes.) He saw historic lows in the unemployment rate. He reached across the aisle to get Ted Kennedy’s “No Child Left Behind” passed. He responded to 9/11 by taking out the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan, freeing tens of millions from an oppressive Muslim fundamentalist regime. He took out Saddam Hussein and his brutal regime, freeing tens of millions of people. He provided enormous relief for AIDS patients domestically and around the world. Expanded Health Savings Accounts (which Obamacare now restricts). He pushed his “Healthy Forests Initiative”. No attacks on American soil post 9/11. Got Libya to renounce their terroristic ways and give up their WMD programs. And the list goes on and on. Not all of it good, but, a solid list of accomplishments.

What does Obama have to stand on? An unpopular ObamaCare bill which is raising costs, high unemployment, historic deficits, $5 trillion in new debt, low consumer confidence, stopping the Keystone XL pipeline (of which Canada is not waiting to see who wins in 2012 before turning to China to sell the oil), giving billions to Brazil so they can develop deepwater oil fields, of which Brazil is now going to sell to China, people giving up on the workforce, and wasting almost a trillion dollars on his Stimulus. His idiotic policies have unfortunately turned people away from investing in alternative energy sources due to his malfeasance, and the way he has pushed electric vehicles has made them a joke, setting them back by decades. His EPA is on the wrong track and failing to protect and engage on real environmental issues. He has failed to reign in the TSA under his watch. He has pissed off our allies around the world, and pandered to our enemies (and failed there, too).

And let’s not forget the historic and unprecedented number of golf days, vacation days, and campaign events.

But, let’s give him his due: he did authorize the mission that took out Osama Bin Laden, which I still maintain was a gutsy call. He has ramped up military actions against Islamists, and expanded them into other countries. He did ramp up deportations for awhile, and go after the companies that hire them. And, um, well, ah, …… well, he keeps burger shops near the White House in business!

Crossed at Pirate’s Cove. Follow me on Twitter @WilliamTeach.

If there was a single unifying argument that defined Obamaism from his earliest days in politics to his Presidential campaign, it was the idea of post-partisanship. He was proposing himself as a transformative figure, the man who would spring the lock. In an essay published in The Atlantic, Andrew Sullivan, a self-proclaimed conservative, reflected on Obama’s heady appeal: “Unlike any of the other candidates, he could take America—finally—past the debilitating, self-perpetuating family quarrel of the Baby Boom generation that has long engulfed all of us.”

First, if you’re quoting Andrew Sullivan as an actual conservative, get out the chest high hip waders. Second, Obama was always good at talking the talk, but, could never walk the walk, because he himself was intensely partisan to the far end of the progressive spectrum. There is nothing wrong with that, people have their own set of beliefs. It’s when one acts on beliefs, forcing them on people, that the problems start. And James Pethokoukis at The American Enterprise finds 11 stunning revelations from a confidential Larry Summers memo to Obama in December 2008 that was a key source for the New Yorker article. Here are a few of them (the bold is James’ writing, the italic is Larry Summers own writing

The stimulus was about implementing the Obama agenda. The short-run economic imperative was to identify as many campaign promises or high priority items that would spend out quickly and be inherently temporary. … The stimulus package is a key tool for advancing clean energy goals and fulfilling a number of campaign commitments.

Team Obama knows these deficits are dangerous (although it has offered no long-term plan to deal with them). Closing the gap between what the campaign proposed and the estimates of the campaign offsets would require scaling back proposals by about $100 billion annually or adding new offsets totaling the same. Even this, however, would leave an average deficit over the next decade that would be worse than any post-World War II decade. This would be entirely unsustainable and could cause serious economic problems in the both the short run and the long run.

The financial crisis wasn’t just Wall Street’s fault. A significant cause of the current crisis lies in the failure of regulators to exercise vigorously the authority they already have.

The first one is the most significant, which highlights what we all inherently know, that the point of the stimulus was to give payback to campaign contributors and elected Democrats, as well as pushing Obama’s far left progressive agenda without regard for realities. Solyndra is the perfect example.

Oh, and then we see the “death panels” crop up even back then

IPAB was there at the very beginning. There are two possibilities for making tough decisions on the long-run budget, which could be done either separately or together: creating an executive-branch “health board” (which focuses on one part of the issue) and a Congressionally chartered commission (which could focus more broadly).

From the beginning, Team Obama wanted to implement the panel of 15 unelected and unresponsive bureaucrats to make decisions on our personal health care.

Doug Ross writes “The revelations in this document alone should be enough to bring down the Obama administration. The level of dishonesty laced throughout the Obama White House is both shocking and repellent.” Let’s add some fuel to that fire, looking at the very first paragraph in the Larry Summers memo

In the absence of fiscal stimulus the economy is projected to lose 3 to 4 million jobs in 2009. Together with the jobs we have already lost and population growth, we will be 7 million jobs short of full employment. The unemployment rate is projected to rise above 9 percent and not projected to start falling until 2011.

That is Summers saying what would happen without the Stimulus, which is mostly what happened with the Stimulus. Except, with the Stimulus, jobs loss was greater, and the unemployment rate didn’t start to fall until late in 2011, partly due to people dropping out of the job market, essentially giving up.

Summers also concluded that a core package more than $300 billion was not “feasible to design sensible proposals along these
lines that go much beyond this total size.” And then they go on to propose hundreds of billions more.

There are all sorts of interesting tidbits in both Pethokoukis’ article along with the Summers meme, which provided a blueprint for spending obscene amounts of taxpayer money for political payback and pushing Obama’s extremist political agenda, which wasn’t even in the same landmass as his supposed “post-partisan” coming together speeches. Read them both.

Crossed at Pirate’s Cove. Follow me on Twitter @WilliamTeach.

Top White House officials are warning liberal and labor leaders to brace themselves for President Obama’s budget proposal.

Gene Sperling, director of the National Economic Council, sought in meetings last week to lift the left’s gloom about Washington’s crackdown on spending by promising that the president this year will focus on job creation rather than deficit cutting.

Obama staffers sought to present their budget plan as a glass half full. According to sources familiar with the briefings, they promised that the president will focus on jobs and the economy, instead of deficit-cutting, which dominated last year’s debate on Capitol Hill.

Unfortunately, every time Obama focuses on the economy and job, they both go downhill. Because the guy still has no clue how either work.

Senior administration officials fear a backlash from the left and are trying to prepare their allies to expect a disappointing budget, sources say.

So, the Left is going to be upset by reduced government spending? This should show up in a Republican commercial about “spending other people’s money”. I bet if they had to more of their own paychecks, for the 41% of Democrats who actually pay federal taxes, they’d be in favor of reducing the Central Government spending.

Back to jobs. SCOAMF’s election website, via their silly #attackwatch, links to a Talking Points Memo article which whines about Romney saying Obama has no jobs plan

Mitt Romney levels plenty of attacks at President Obama, but his claim in Monday night’s South Carolina debate that the White House “doesn’t have a jobs plan” is so blatantly misleading it really deserves a moment here.

President Obama has been pushing a bill called the American Jobs Act for months, a $447 billion package that includes billions in tax cuts, funding to prevent teacher layoffs, and investments in education and transportation infrastructure. You may remember it from the time he called a rare joint session of Congress in September to announce the legislation or from the many times the Senate debated its individual components throughout the rest of the year. By all indicators, it will play a central role in his re-election campaign. Disagree with it if you will, but it’s factually inaccurate to say he doesn’t have a plan.

Is Obama still pushing that diarrhea of a plan, which includes the same measures that failed in the Stimulus, and only save jobs in the public sector, along with helping out union jobs, mostly in the public sector? Giving people education, particularly college education, doesn’t actually create jobs, and creates depression among those who get their sheepskin in social studies and realize that they are only qualified to work as a burger flipper, if there are any burger flipper jobs around.

And, yeah, it should play a central role in his defeat campaign: the eventual GOP nominee should highlight that Obama’s plan would fail just like the Stimulus.

Crossed at Pirate’s Cove. Follow me on Twitter @WilliamTeach.

Wall Street is disdained in the court of public opinion — detested by the tea party on the right and the Occupy movement on the left. The public blames financial plutocrats for America’s economic plight more than either President Barack Obama or former President George W. Bush. Less than a quarter of all Americans, according to Gallup, have confidence in the banks, which vie for the lowest spot with Big Business and Congress.

But these angry voters are unlikely to get satisfaction in next year’s presidential election. In fact, things are looking up for the financial elite — which donated more to Washington politicians than almost any other sector of the economy over the past two decades. Wall Street can look forward to a bank-friendly administration if Obama is reelected — and perhaps even better conditions if either of the two leading GOP contenders, Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney, wins the White House.

Despite his occasional remarks that decry “fat cat”’ bankers, Obama has effectively serviced the financial bigwigs. Bank prosecutions have declined markedly under Obama — to levels not seen for more than 25 years. Obama has even tried to derail aggressive bank prosecutions pursued by state attorneys general, most of them liberal Democrats.

Got that, Occupiers? Obama hearts Wall Street. He voted for TARP as a Senator, then gave a ton of money and bailouts to these same “fat cats” while mostly ignoring Main Street when he became (NM)President. His Stimulus packages were political payback for the big wigs who supported his campaign.

Even while trying to exploit the Occupy Wall Street movement for political purposes, Obama still leads in financial sector donations, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. He has secured more cash from the financial elite, at this point, than all the GOP candidates combined. He has even raised twice as much as they have from Bain Capital, the venture firm co-founded by Romney. Why not give up on the white working class when you can sew up the Harvard and Wharton business school constituency?

When are you going to move your protest to a park near the White House, as well as near the individual Obama 2012 campaign headquarters in States?

We know the Occupiers won’t. They are simply an organ of the Left, out there with the same old gripes, with some sexual assault thrown in. 99% of them will be out in the streets advocating for the re-election of Obama. 99% of them will vote the straight Democrat ticket in November 2012, and cheer if Obama is re-elected. And, if a Republican wins, 99% of them will suddenly appear in front of the White House to protest, something they won’t do to Obama.

(Raw Story) About 20 unemployed and underemployed D.C. residents occupied the office of Republican Sen. Mitch McConnell (KY) on Thursday, pledging to remain until the senator met with them about the Rebuild America Act.

An organizer for the group Our D.C., James Adams, told Raw Story that they had entered McConnell’s office around 10:30 am and vowed not to leave until they meet with him.

Legislative aides offered to meet with the protesters, but the group has made it clear they only wanted to meet with the senator face-to-face.

That was Thursday. So far, it seems as if McConnell hasn’t met with them yet. Oh, and the police came by, and the idiots decided they would rather leave than be arrested. Broken vow.

The Occutards proclaim they are against bailouts, but, they aren’t: they just want bailouts for certain groups. Like themselves. Free money. Interestingly, many of those Big Banks and others they are whining about give LOTS of money to Democrats. Who then turn around and hook those Big Banks and financial institutions and others up with taxpayer funds. Who controlled the Legislative Branch when all the bailouts occurred? That’s right, Democrats. Bush may have signed off on some of them (and Conservatives were very unhappy about it), but Democrats had to pass them first.

It’s obvious that the Occupy movement is about hardcore progressivism, and all their pet peeves, not about any sort of true outrage over what has occurred in Washington with the bailouts over the past few years.

Elswehere, one Zuccotti Park Occutard threw a fit at a local McDonald’s when they refused to give him free food. Fisikah Bezabeh ripped a credit card reader off the counter and threw it at the employees. Yes, arrested for criminal mischief. Just a typical supporter of Barack and Nancy.

And hardcore Iranian Islamists profess solidarity with the Occupiers.

(Politico) The widely anticipated defeat of the Democrats’ Rebuild America Jobs Act, which would have provided $60 billion for transportation infrastructure projects, marked the third blow to President Barack Obama’s jobs agenda. His sweeping $447 billion jobs package was blocked by all Republicans and two Democrats last month, while a smaller piece of that legislation — $35 billion to pay the salaries of teachers, cops and firefighters — suffered the same fate.

Senate Democrats on Thursday came up nine votes short of the 60 needed to advance their infrastructure bill past a key procedural hurdle. The vote was 51-49, with all Republicans and two members of the Democratic caucus — Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) and Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) — voting no.

Obama, who has infuriated some Democrats on Capitol Hill for attacking a “do-nothing” Congress, aimed his fire this time squarely at Republicans. He said it “makes no sense” for the entire 47-member GOP caucus to block three of his jobs proposals, especially when polls show an overwhelming number of Americans back infrastructure spending.

“The American people deserve to know why their Republican representatives in Washington refuse to put some of the workers hit hardest by the economic downturn back on the job rebuilding America,” Obama said in a statement. “They deserve an explanation as to why Republicans refuse to step up to the plate and do what’s necessary to create jobs and grow the economy right now.”

Orrin Hatch (RINO-Utah), who offered a competing transportation bill which was killed by Senate Democrats on Thursday, as well, had this to say

“It is not about creating jobs. And it is not about engineering a more efficient and fair tax code. No, this is the same tune, different song — a bill for more spending, financed with new taxes,” Hatch said. “It remains baffling to me that this is all that the other side has to offer.”

That’s a nice way of responding to President Petulant. Obama thinks that everyone who is unemployed is either a teacher, cop, fireman, or blue collar road paving professional. Those “shovel ready” jobs were not as readily available as he thought after the Democrats passed their Stimulus in 2009. What makes him think they will be around now? He doesn’t care about the spending: he wants his tax increases, which make his unhinged liberal base happy. Obama’s “jobs” bill is simply fodder for his perpetual campaign.

Many of those same road workers were put back to work: then, the money from the Stimulus ran out, the economy was still a dinosaur poop sized mess, States still had no money, so, they were laid off, and back on unemployment. These short term gimmicky tricks do not work. That’s the explanation for why his jobs bill is being shot down.

This president doesn’t seem to care one whit about the American People: it’s all about himself. No matter what criticisms one may have about George W. Bush or Bill Clinton, at least they cared (especially under desks. Yeah, cheap shot. Note: I voted for Clinton in 1996). There was a visible connection. Even when they might have cared less, at least they faked it well. Bush 41, Reagan, Carter, Ford, even Nixon (read his biographies) cared about the American People. Obama seems to care only about himself, that everything is about himself, and all you people should thank Him. January 20, 2013, can’t get here soon enough.

Crossed at Pirate’s Cove. Follow me on Twitter @WilliamTeach. Please sign the drill now petition.

When does a columnist write something so utterly absurd that his credibility is forever damaged? I am not sure how to answer that in general terms, but I think at least one journalist answered the question for his own, now thoroughly destroyed veracity. Jonathan Alter of Bloomberg has written one of the most ridiculous, least reality-based assessments yet of the short White House tenure of Barack Obama.

Alter put on his strongest rose-colored glasses and penned an uproarious piece headlined, “The Obama Miracle, a White House Free of Scandal.”

In his Bloomberg piece Alter claimed that Obama is “honest” and falsely asserted that his White House has been “free of scandal.” In fact, some of the incidents that Alter himself notes, and immediately dismisses, carry at least a whiff of scandal — if not untruthfulness.

Naturally, Alter ignores far more than he reports on Obama scandals but he also misses the biggest reason why Obama seems to him to have a scandal free presidency. The Media refuses to call anything Obama does a scandal!

After all, if you have a guy that wantonly lies, that double deals, that hides facts, that also allows subordinates to lie and that fellow is allowed to just get away with it without repercussion from journalists, I guess that makes for a “scandal free” guy, eh?

Alter’s first attempt to give succor to Obama’s failing presidency comes with a baseless swipe at “the whole” Republican Party.

The sight of Texas Governor Rick Perry tumbling out of the clown car recently as a “birther” (or at least a birther- enabler) is a sign of weakness, not just for the Perry campaign but for the whole Republican effort to tarnish the president’s character.

This is a false premise. It assumes that “the whole” Republican Party is using birtherism to “tarnish the president’s character.” This is a flat out untruth. Only a small portion of the center right polity in America has any interest in Obama’s birth certificate. Alter’s attempt to make the whole of the GOP into birthers is simply baseless.

Next, Alter dismisses the Solyndra scandal as meaningless. I guess if you don’t think it’s a touch scandalous when you have millions upon millions of tax dollars going into the pockets of buddies who turn around and go bankrupt almost immediately, well, what can you say to that?

Next Alter dismisses both Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner’s tax evasion and Obama’s firing of Ag. Dept. official Shirley Sherrod without knowing what she really did. Then Alter makes the silly claim that Obama’s stimulus spending was free of any waste or abuse — the latter claim is laughable on its face. Have you ever heard of a government spending program that had no waste at all?

Just this week, for instance, it was discovered that so-called stimulus money went to fund federal healthy eating advertisements instead of actually going to stimulate the economy as Obama claimed it was for.

Is that not waste or fraud?

Alter then admits that we might be missing some scandals because of failure of the Old Media to uncover them. While Alter does seem to acknowledge that the Old Media might be ignoring real scandals — ones he is unaware of — he absurdly ascribes that failure to newsroom budget cuts and the demise of the Office of Independent Counsel (a ready source of scandal for lazy reporters past). He doesn’t even bother wondering if it might be reporter’s ideology that prevents the reportage of Obama scandals.

Like the biased left-winger he is, he also blames Fox News for apparently inventing partisan political commentary. I guess he’s never seen ABC, CBS, NBC, The New York Times, or MSNBC, for that matter.

There ends Alter’s “analysis.” We are left wondering why Alter didn’t mention the fact that Obama’s close personal friend and Attorney General Eric Holder is stonewalling Congress over Obama’s arming of Mexican narco-terrorists with his Operation Fast and Furious, a program that has so far killed at least two American officials and hundreds of Mexicans. As long as we are on Eric Holder, why doesn’t Alter think it is a scandal that Obama decided not to prosecute the criminals of the New Black Panthers for voter intimidation when they stood in front of polling places in 2008 brandishing weapons at white voters?

One also wonders how Obama can be considered “honest” when he said if you like your doctor, you could keep him when his plan clearly means to eliminate everyone’s private insurance policies? How can Obama still be “honest” when he said he wanted to end private insurance, then claimed he never said it? Why is Obama not dishonest for pretending he wants to make energy costs affordable when he fully intended to make the cost of electricity “necessarily skyrocket“?

We are also left wondering why Alter missed Obama’s recent lie that he’s fulfilled “60% of his campaign promises,” when even a left-wing newspaper says it’s closer to 39%. Then there is his lie that he wouldn’t hire lobbyists for his administration when he’s hired dozens of them.

But I guess it’s hard for Alter to hear of scandals when he is standing there with his fingers in his ears screaming “la, la, la, la” at the top of his lungs. But his fawning, slavish devotion to Obama the “honest” President “free of scandal” is not much different than the fawning from the rest of his Old Media comrades.

(The Hill) Democrats on the congressional supercommittee this week presented Republicans with a plan to cut the deficit that included billions of dollars in stimulus spending, aides told The Hill.

In a private meeting of the deficit panel Tuesday, Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.), chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, presented a proposal backed by a majority of Democrats on the panel that includes more than a trillion dollars in tax increases. The revenue would partially cover stimulus spending for the economy, aides said.

Apparently, the Democrats forgot the purpose of the Supercommittee, which is to decrease the deficit by a paltry $1.2 trillion….kinda weird to write that, but, when the deficit is over $15 trillion (really more like well over $100 trillion with the unfunded liabilities and mandates), $1.2 trillion over 10 years is chump change. But, Buacus and the Dems think that this should be a “jobs” bill. No matter how many times they repeat that word, they do not know what it really means, and they aren’t capable of doing it if it doesn’t include the unions or is a government job. Hey, maybe they could ask Nancy Pelosi, who does a great job of employing non-union workers at her business ventures.

Notice that the included stimulus would not even be truly paid for by all the tax increases included. And you can guarantee that any tax increases would hit now, along with the spending, while any reductions would be backloaded years down the road, and never take affect.

It’s easy to see that the primary purpose of the Democrats is to raise taxes, and the tax increases will not just hit “the rich” and people who create jobs, they will hit everyone. This is the Democrats version of trickle up poverty, and they want all the money to fund the federal government to be awarded to people who donate to their re-election campaigns and to throw around to their core voter blocks. They wouldn’t know a cut if it reached up and slapped them in the face. The whole process is doomed to failure, but, it was doomed to fail when it was determined that the supercommittee would attempt to reduce the deficit by a measly $1.2 trillion over 10 years.

Democrats have said from the beginning that the supercommittee should produce a “jobs plan” that includes “investments” to help the economy.

We’ve seen how well their “investments” have worked so far. They failed the private sector, they’ve wasted money beyond belief (money we owe to China), they ramped up government hiring, and now those same public sector workers are being laid off because local, state, and federal agencies cannot afford to keep them on. The economy is a mess. And Democrats want to do it again. Dare I say “morons”?

Crossed at Pirate’s Cove. Follow me on Twitter @WilliamTeach. Please sign the drill now petition.

Think life is not as good as it used to be, at least in terms of your wallet? You’d be right about that. The standard of living for Americans has fallen longer and more steeply over the past three years than at any time since the US government began recording it five decades ago.

Bottom line: The average individual now has $1,315 less in disposable income than he or she did three years ago at the onset of the Great Recession – even though the recession ended, technically speaking, in mid-2009. That means less money to spend at the spa or the movies, less for vacations, new carpeting for the house, or dinner at a restaurant.

Who was in charge of the government during that time? Except for taking over the House 10 months ago, it has been all Democrats. Their horrible policies have kept the economy from regaining any strength.

What has led to the most dramatic drop in the US standard of living since at least 1960? One factor is stagnant incomes: Real median income is down 9.8 percent since the start of the recession through this June, according to Sentier Research in Annapolis, Md., citing census bureau data. Another is falling net worth – think about the value of your home and, if you have one, your retirement portfolio. A third is rising consumer prices, with inflation eroding people’s buying power by 3.25 percent since mid-2008.

Unless you work for the government, where your income has soared. Remember the days when being a government employee was a thankless task where you would not get rich? No more. But, if you are a typical private sector worker, or a senior citizen, you are basically screwed. Obama and the Democrats continue to pursue the same failed Keynesian economic policies that took America to this point. The original Stimulus, almost one trillion dollars, failed to do anything for the middle class. The follow up legislation did nothing. The Obamacare boondoggle has hurt more than helped. And Obama is running around pushing his newest “jobs” bill which will hire/retain hundreds of thousands of, yup! government workers in the form of teachers and first responders. Oh, there’ll be a few temporary jobs for those of you who know how to patch pavement and re-re-paint bridges. Then you’re back on unemployment yet again.

Crossed at Pirate’s Cove. Follow me on Twitter @WilliamTeach. Please sign the drill now petition.

(Politico) President Barack Obama called House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) Thursday to congratulate him for passing three trade agreements — but ended up getting an earful on the jobs debate.

According to an unusually detailed account released by the speaker’s office, Boehner “respectfully challenged” the president for saying Thursday that he has not yet seen a jobs plan from Republicans.

“I want to make sure you have all the facts,” Boehner told Obama, the account of the 10-minute call said.

Obama had been running his mouth during the press conference with South Korean President Lee Myung-bak

……“I haven’t yet seen” a GOP plan that would create jobs in the near term.

“And so, eventually, I’m hoping that they actually put forward some proposals that indicate that they feel that sense of urgency about people — needing to put people back to work right now,” Obama said.

The speaker, who last spoke with the president three weeks ago, reminded Obama that the House GOP released a jobs plan in May and that his leadership team has spoken with Obama and his staff about the plan “on numerous occasions.”

Well, in Obama’s defense, it’s kinda hard to remember all those little details when campaign rhetoric and thoughts of November 2012 bounce around in his head.

In reality, we haven’t seen a real world jobs plan from Obama and/or Democrats as of yet. The Stimulus was simply a way to dump money into pet causes of Democrats, such as the teacher’s union, and all their followup plans are the same. We even have a new metric: “jobs supported.” Jobs saved/created was so old school.

Crossed at Pirate’s Cove. Follow me on Twitter @WilliamTeach. Please sign the drill now petition.