DU Poll — State of the Union Speech — What Did You Think?

Published on February 24th, 2009

Note: This was actually an address to a joint session of Congress NOT a State of the Union Speech as everyone is reporting it. We’re reporting it that way too although we know better.

Read the speech here.

88 users responded in " DU Poll — State of the Union Speech — What Did You Think? "

Subscribe to this post comment rss or trackback url

# 1 comhcinc said, on February 24th, 2009 at 7:03 pm

i can’t stand all the sucking up to the president (any president) so i will just read the thing tomorrow.

# 2 . said, on February 24th, 2009 at 7:21 pm

Didn’t watch, don’t care. What he does is more important that what he says he’s going to do.

# 3 faxon said, on February 24th, 2009 at 7:41 pm

I flipped by it (it was everywhere), and saw the three stooges. Nancy, Joey, and O-ey. Could not stand even ten seconds of these assholes.

# 4 McCullough said, on February 24th, 2009 at 7:41 pm

I heard more promises…I love promises. Who’s keeping track?

# 5 LDA said, on February 24th, 2009 at 7:41 pm

Are you sure it was a State of the Union address? I thought that was only after the first year.

# 6 BigBoyBC said, on February 24th, 2009 at 7:49 pm

When is he going to get a clue, that the campign is OVER!!!

# 7 Carcarius said, on February 24th, 2009 at 8:05 pm

I watched it and it was funny to see Pelosi getting up to applaud just about every time Obama said something and see poor ‘ole Biden have to get up to clap too. He looked like he was going to slap Pelosi down for making him get up every 30 seconds.

# 8 Somebody_Else said, on February 24th, 2009 at 8:07 pm

I thought it was good. Its not technically a State of the Union address, but who cares.

# 9 bobbo said, on February 24th, 2009 at 8:19 pm

Speeches are just that. Not as much fluff as you often hear, but some. Still, when the opposition offers the continuing repuglican crap a la Jindal, one can only say “Bravo!”

# 10 Guess Who said, on February 24th, 2009 at 8:30 pm

This mother fucking bastard has already broken ALL of his campaign promises. What he says doesn’t mean SHIT. We are all FUCKED.

# 11 bobbo said, on February 24th, 2009 at 8:35 pm

#10–I’ll guess you are that offspring of any mother fucking bastard who eats shit for a lifetime thinking it is ice cream. Happily, only you are fucked, no matter who is in office.

# 12 TooManyPuppies said, on February 24th, 2009 at 8:37 pm

Too much standing and applause, complete disrespect, to any president or speaker. Like a class of preschoolers. In the future they need to herd the people in, sit them down, and strap them in so they don’t interrupt. If they do, shoot them. get the Army in there with some sharpshooters or something. Seriously, get some people in there with guns.

Needless to say, I changed the channel before the president even walked into the room. Just way too much bullshit going on.

# 13 Joe The Plumber said, on February 24th, 2009 at 8:58 pm

For 90% of American who still have their jobs, the speech doesn’t amount to anything– at least not yet.

And #10 & #11, curse words are so passe. so please.

# 14 AlanB said, on February 24th, 2009 at 9:20 pm

MSNBC ran a real-time graph during the speech comparing the Obama voters and McCain voters satisfaction of the talking points. What was interesting is the McCain voters (largely repubs I would think) rated Obama’s remarks higher then the Obama voters.

Go figure.

# 15 Glidedon said, on February 24th, 2009 at 9:25 pm

More commie B.S.

# 16 Alfred1 said, on February 24th, 2009 at 10:14 pm

It was good he took Clinton’s advice, and spoke hopefully of the future…

As for the rest of his words…they are “just words” … just as one tells their girl friend (wife) what she wants to hear, so also Obama’s tells us…

Lets be clear…I don’t say he lied, on the contrary, his words accomplish precisely what they are spoken to do…that is, give his followers what they want to hear… the literal meaning of the words…is irrelevant

An analogy: “Yes dear, you look fabulous in that dress.”

No one expects truth in these situations…she hears what she wants…he “has her” when speaking the words…that’s all that matters.

Obama speaks what his followers want to hear, and he does that “well”. They don’t care if he doesn’t do as promised…what matters, he said he would do it, well.

# 17 Uncle Patso said, on February 24th, 2009 at 10:18 pm

The thought that kept running through my mind during the speech and my main impression afterwards:

It’s nice to have a grown-up in charge.

# 18 Cephus said, on February 24th, 2009 at 10:21 pm

There was a lot of feel good, magical rainbow stuff that I just don’t see how he’s going to actually accomplish. He can make all the promises he wants, it doesn’t mean jack until he actually does it.

# 19 Alfred1 said, on February 24th, 2009 at 10:23 pm

Did anyone notice Pelosi’s eye and facial movements? Was she high…ecstatic, or just looney?

# 20 Alfred1 said, on February 24th, 2009 at 10:24 pm

Did anyone notice Pelosi’s eye and facial movements? Was she high…ecstatic, or just loony?

She was distracting…I kept wondering if she would begin speaking in tongues

# 21 zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz said, on February 24th, 2009 at 10:25 pm

#18 you can say that about everybody.

I think we will be back on track around june – september.

# 22 Ah_Yea said, on February 24th, 2009 at 11:48 pm

Reminded me of FDR’s fireside chats.

Of course, the proof is in the pudding, but it doesn’t hurt to have a feel-good now and again.

# 23 Jim said, on February 24th, 2009 at 11:55 pm

Um, ok guys, he’s being #1 cheerleader because we are in a fucking pickle right now and wants to get everyone on the same track.

Did you expect him to wave a wand and sprout wings to fly over the nation and restore it to glory?

I swear, he could have said exactly whatever the hell it is you think he should have and you all would STILL bitch that he was pandering to you.

GROW UP.

# 24 Floating With The House said, on February 25th, 2009 at 1:03 am

Yea, Pelosi is up in the clouds now feeling drunk on power. She said right after the inaugaration that a 10 lb anvil was lifted off her head when she watched daddy Bush leave for good. Now that there is nothing to hold her down, watch her float higher than the real estate bubble, and then one day, pop goes the bubble. When people go up in the clouds with their ideals, they set themselves and others up for huge failures.

# 25 Lou said, on February 25th, 2009 at 1:13 am

Lots of good ideas with no funding.
Must be the new math.

# 26 Dajestar said, on February 25th, 2009 at 1:41 am

“the nation that invented the automobile cannot walk away from it.”

I thought that it was Karl Benz from Germany?

“In 1885 German mechanical engineer, Karl Benz designed and built the world’s first practical automobile to be powered by an internal-combustion engine. On January 29, 1886, Benz received the first patent (DRP No. 37435) for a gas-fueled car.”

# 27 M0les said, on February 25th, 2009 at 2:54 am

I think: I don’t care.

# 28 HMeyers said, on February 25th, 2009 at 2:58 am

Like most people, I’m not too interested in the talk.

I’d like to see the action. Things take time and I’m patient.

It would be nice to see some movement sooner rather than later.

I think historically it takes about 6 months before any president gets a real chance to get the first couple of pieces of legislation they want through Congress.

The economy hit the skids around October 2008 -/+ a couple of months, Obama gets to deal with the economy in sort of the way Bush got to deal with 9/11.

# 29 bobbo said, on February 25th, 2009 at 3:09 am

#27–HMyers==you make a nice analogy there. Bush and Obama both reacting to “an event” not of their choosing that they both wish had not happened.

Lets hope that Obama doesn’t f&ck it up with a solution that is worse than the problem like BushtheRetard did. The Iraq invasion was pretty much the wrong thing, and obviously so, right off the bat==too expensive.

Its not as clear to me, but if Obama doesn’t do something pretty creative, I think his initial response, even if right, will be too expensive? Too bad its not as easy as BushtheRetards challenge was.

WAR—not the first response.

# 30 Olo Baggins of Bywater said, on February 25th, 2009 at 4:08 am

I liked his tone, his manner, and the fact that he told the audience that he heard the complaints about fixing banks. I don’t think the healthcare thing was good, depending on what that really means.

The banking regulations part hit home for me, I’ve been saying all along that needs addressed in a big way.

The Jindal response was condescending. I wasn’t impressed, but he seems like a good guy. Same old same old repub bullshit, which got us into this mess in the first place.

# 31 HMeyers said, on February 25th, 2009 at 4:09 am

@ Bobbo

Obviously we both agree that that both presidents were dealt cards not of their choosing, I don’t agree with this statement:

“The Iraq invasion was pretty much the wrong thing”

My question to you … why do you believe the Iraq invasion was “wrong”?

I think the Iraqi people are already a lot better off and 10 years from now it will be undebatably obvious they are way better off.

Saddam was an especially remarkable dictator that was strangling the people of Iraq, only Kim Jong Il is worse (in non-African nations).

Iran is far more liberal and democratic than Saddam Hussein’s Iraq.

Saddam was just a brutal thug and I think any claim that the people of Iraq deserved that guy or should have had to live under him is some form of anti-Arab racism.

# 32 bobbo said, on February 25th, 2009 at 4:17 am

#30–HMyers==you certainly are mixing up a number of related but essentially different issues.

But at the time, the UN inspectors had access to the entire country and were finding and destroying weapons continuously. There was a US led UN air cap over the Northern half of the country protecting the Kurds mostly after we left the Marsh Kurds in the south to be slaughtered by Hussein after we encouraged them to revolt then stood by and did nothing. An embargo with some effect was in place. We had the worlds support.

In short, Sadam was contained.

Now==even if one wants to argue invading Iraq was “the right” thing to do, we can’t afford it and the invasion took our eyes of Afghanistan where the war had not been won. Kinda like Hitler invading Russia and starting a two front war. We’ve lost our diplomatic standing in the world over this unilateral invasion, just as we should have.

Politically, economically==just the wrong thing to do. And it was all foreseeable as several fired Generals attempted to warn at the time.

The USA should be COMPETENT at what it does, not stumble thru these issues from start to muddled finish.

# 33 derspankster said, on February 25th, 2009 at 4:41 am

I was extremely interested in the speech and thought it was excellent. I guess you’re either on the bus or off the bus. I choose to be on the bus. I don’t have a better plan, do any of you naysayers? There’s been more action out of this administration in 6 weeks than we got out of Bush in 8 years. (With the exception of starting wars and killing hundreds of thousands of people)

# 34 Dallas said, on February 25th, 2009 at 4:45 am

Note the country is going the worst economic times in recent history and observe above sour or apathetic response to the ’state of the union’ address.

You are the losers dragging down the country. Shame on you. I suspect some that claim to ‘didn’t watch and didn’t care’ are just lying partisans.

Even I listened to the GOP response from American Idol loser, Sanjaya. Glad he found a place to work. I thought it was good.

# 35 contempt said, on February 25th, 2009 at 4:47 am

The one thing about Obama is that no matter what he says, believe the opposite and you are golden. The Obamanation hasn’t told the truth yet so with that kind of consistency at least we know where the truth is hiding.

# 36 RTaylor said, on February 25th, 2009 at 4:58 am

This was suppose to be a pep talk to the nation. People are scared, and have a right to be. An economy has a life of it’s own. In the long run government has a minimal effect. Historically intervention has probably done more damage that good. Banks has got to lend and consumers has to spend. Spend within their means that is. The surplus housing market has to dry up and prices stabilize. That will take time, probably a few years. I think the government should have bought all these foreclosed unsold houses and raze them.

# 37 jbenson2 said, on February 25th, 2009 at 5:01 am

And the big winner category was:

“Who cares. That was tonight?” coming in with a strong 41.73% of the voters.

# 38 HMeyers said, on February 25th, 2009 at 5:35 am

@ 31 Bobbo

“In short, Saddam was contained.”

Again, you are making the argument that is OK that he was suppressing his people.

I think that is a very selfish Western-centric point of view that is very typical of white people deciding that it is ok for other races of people to live with oppression.

I mean, we went to Kosovo in the 1990s to stop genocide.

I think Iraq was the right thing to do, but we did it for all the wrong reasons and some of it was handled poorly.

I agree the logic was all wrong (no WMD, no imminent threat) and the handling in the middle was downright terrible.

And in a LOL irony, 100 years from now I bet it will be the only thing anyone remembers about GW Bush and there might even be some statue erected in his honor in Iraq.

# 39 bobbo said, on February 25th, 2009 at 5:52 am

#37–HMyers==human rights victims call out much louder in several other areas of the world. Its not the role of “any” country black/white/yellow/brown to invade countries based on what they like and don’t like==in fact, its a violation of international law.

What good does it do to invade and occupy a country for the “justice” involved if the invading country goes bankrupt doing it?

No==the FIRST duty of any country is to protect its own interests. Bush did not do that.

I think “the odds are” when we pull out enough troops and stop paying all sides not to fight us that a civil war will break out in Iraq pitting the various factions against one another with gobs of outside interests fighting their own wars of proxy.

I’m all for the USA being part of international coalitions fighting for justice===thats not what Iraq #2 involved so your rhetoric is beyond partisan, its twisted and unsupportable.

But yea==who knew what an empty threat Sadam was militarily? I suspect much the same exists with Iran as well until they get the Nuke==as is Pakistan without the Nuke.

I would take Irans Nuclear capability out. Easy, cheap, fast to bomb a few facilities. I would not invade them.

A statute of Bush==what??? To throw shoes at maybe.

# 40 Mac Guy said, on February 25th, 2009 at 6:07 am

This was not the State of the Union. C’mon, guys.

I, too, hated seeing Pelosi pop up like a jack-in-the-box with poor impulse control. Think she’s trying to steal a little spotlight?

# 41 Shubee said, on February 25th, 2009 at 6:22 am

That was a truly wonderful speech. The only problem is that the vision of a glistening future will fail. It has to. This is the end of the world.

# 42 Rabble Rouser said, on February 25th, 2009 at 6:32 am

I liked the speech, but what was with the infomercial afterward?
It seems that they took “Vince,” the ShamWow guy, tanned him, put a suit on him, and gave him a different name to sell their same old garbage that we have been hearing since the days of Reagan!

# 43 HMeyers said, on February 25th, 2009 at 6:59 am

@Bobbo

I agree with what you said. I also feel that in this otherwise mindless world I get a laugh out of the right thing happening for the wrong reason. We invaded Iraq solely because Saddam tried to have Bush 41 killed in mid-1990s, everything else was just the show.

“involved if the invading country goes bankrupt doing it?”

I want the USA to go bankrupt so the faster we get to that bridge so we can overcome it the better.

I think the USA is a great country and in order to solve the problems we have, we have to reach a point where things must be fixed.

We like to rack up the debt and the imports. The best way to truly correct the country is to be in a position where it can’t continue.

And after the problem is solved, everyone will feel so much better and be so much more optimistic.

Confronting problems is a sign of strength, avoiding them is a sign of weakness.

Does the media really talk about the problem?

No.

I am disappointed at how gutless the media is.

I mean, the impending banking crisis was obvious 4-5 years ago. Why the hell does the media sit on it’s hands about import/export situation? Or Social Security obligations?

We have a dysfunctional political environment where left vs. right name calling and shitmongering is considered political debate and “I hate Bush” or “Obama is just talk” is considered deep political thought.

We have a dysfunctional media that does not do actual reporting and would not impress Woodward and Bernstein in the slightest.

Why live in the calm before the storm when the real living only comes with the storm itself?

Bring on the storm!

# 44 Bob said, on February 25th, 2009 at 7:06 am

Reminded me of the old black and white movies I see on the History channel of Hitler preaching to his supporters.

He really could have saved us all a bunch of time by just saying, “Guys I plan to use this crises to make government bigger, and more powerful. By doing this more than half the people will be reliant on the federal government, which will insure democrats will never be out of power again.”

At least it would have been honest.

# 45 Sinn Fein said, on February 25th, 2009 at 7:12 am

OBAMA IS A WMB – WEAPON OF MASS BOREDOM.If anybody in the world tries to give us trouble, we can launch our WMB and his speeches will ZZZZZZZZZZZZZ them into submission.

# 46 bobbo said, on February 25th, 2009 at 7:27 am

#42–HMyers==well we basically agree on these few issues. I have spent some time on sail and motor boats. I much prefer calm waters. No reason to put things into extremis to motivate yourself, acting rationally for one’s own long term interest should be the goal.

Seems to me you are caricaturing the Repuglican position that the government most often is the problem? Doing things poorly is a reason to correct those actions, not an excuse or political philosophy.

I think we should require competency in all of our elected officials==which is why we should VOTE ALL INCUMBENTS OUT OF OFFICE!!!!

# 47 Olo Baggins of Bywater said, on February 25th, 2009 at 7:32 am

Let history be our guide. Obama mentioned this topic in my link, and HMeyers you said the media doesn’t pay enough attention to real issues. Maybe not, but at least one pundit does:
http://cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/25/zelizer.wall.street/

As for social security, the answer is amazingly simple. Creep the retirement age up one or two years and the entire fake “crisis” vanishes. Back when the program was created people didn’t live much beyond 65. Today, IMO, we need to stay working longer because a 30-year retirement on the government dole seems too damn long. The problem is that our politicians are too chicken to implement the obvious, sensible, easy answer.

# 48 Paddy-O said, on February 25th, 2009 at 7:37 am

Typical speech from a pol (of any stripe). Didn’t say anything not already said. No solid info. Yawn.

# 49 Cephus said, on February 25th, 2009 at 7:54 am

Of course there was no solid info, I don’t think they have any real clue how they’re going to do half of those things. Obama could have gotten up there and promised every American family a million dollars and a goose that lays golden eggs, none of that matters until he manages to get it done. That’s why I think most speeches are worthless. Either put up or shut up, yammering on about it doesn’t get the job done.

# 50 Olo Baggins of Bywater said, on February 25th, 2009 at 8:03 am

You miss the point. This was cheerleading. It was intended to be cheerleading, as was every other SotU speech ever given.

# 51 Ralph said, on February 25th, 2009 at 8:04 am

Great Speech.

Obama just drew the line that differentiates the campaign with his government. What was said four months ago was just political fluff. Now, he is on record as saying, “This is MY agenda”. That is what he will be held accountable for.

As a funny aside, When I grabbed the mail today there was a glossy brochure from our Republican Senator touting how the Stimulus will help us. As much as I think Mr. Luger is a great guy, this is funny. He voted against the package.

# 52 Mr. Fusion said, on February 25th, 2009 at 8:09 am

#48, cephus,

Of course there was no solid info, I don’t think they have any real clue how they’re going to do half of those things.

Bullshit. If he had outlined his programs in detail you, and the rest of the Republican speed bumps to recovery, would have been complaining about too much info and the length of his speech.

I think Jindal was way too boring. I’m sure I could see some strings hanging from the ceiling to work his mouth.

# 53 Paddy-O said, on February 25th, 2009 at 8:09 am

9 Olo Baggins of Bywater said, “You miss the point. This was cheerleading. It was intended to be cheerleading, as was every other SotU speech ever given.”

Ah yes, pablum for the sheeple.

# 54 Billy Bob said, on February 25th, 2009 at 8:28 am

Until he gets serious about throwing the Wall Street criminals in jail, it’s all more No Banker Left Behind rationalization of the banksters looting of the Treasury.

# 55 smittybc said, on February 25th, 2009 at 8:54 am

The problem with the speech of course is that he convincingly promises to do things that simply cannot be done (something Obama is very good at), because the costs are so massively high. We would need massive economic growth just to keep up with the spending, and that growth (if it even comes) will be hobbled by tax increases coming next year.

The problem with the Left is that they attempt to build their agenda on serial fantasies, fantasies which ignore the real benefits of things such as private sector growth and risk/reward incentives, and instead embraces low productivity, public sector jobs, and vaporware energy solutions. We are living in this fantasy land in CA with massive tax increases on the most productive among us, meanwhile CA based Intel gets on with life regardless of the politicians and invests 7 billion in states outside of CA. The house of cards will eventually collapse, it always does.

The president’s talk was well phrased and beautifully delivered, and sadly deeply disconnected from the realities of economic growth.

# 56 qsabe said, on February 25th, 2009 at 9:15 am

Refreshing after 8 years of a lying sack of excrement. He can do, but it has only been a month and already the idiots here are complaining he hasn’t yet fixed what it took your hero 8 years to destroy.

Hows he going to pay for it. Allowing the tax cuts your idiots gave to their rich buddies to expire is a great start.

# 57 stopher2475 said, on February 25th, 2009 at 9:18 am

“I think the Iraqi people are already a lot better off and 10 years from now it will be undebatably obvious they are way better off.”

There’s at least a half million dead people that might disagree with you.

# 58 Tim said, on February 25th, 2009 at 9:44 am

Nope. Not a state of the union speach. Just a speech addressing congress televized like it was a state of the union.

# 59 Paddy-O said, on February 25th, 2009 at 10:00 am

For some perspective:

“First, Obama’s 63 percent approval level is about the same as the average of all presidents (62 percent) going back to 1968 during their first month in office. Barack Obama’s “disapproval,” at 24 percent, however, is slightly higher than the average of the other presidents (16%).”

# 60 Olo Baggins of Bywater said, on February 25th, 2009 at 10:06 am

Tim, the difference was……what?

smittybc, every SotU is like that. All of them. The Repub response for this one, however, made me want to puke.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=X27UIt0RuMw

Jindal/Palin 2012!

# 61 Uncle Patso said, on February 25th, 2009 at 10:27 am

# 42 HMeyers said, in part:

“I want the USA to go bankrupt so the faster we get to that bridge so we can overcome it the better.”

Are you nuts? Or on drugs? To paraphrase Larry Niven, people DIE in bankruptcies. Do you want us all living in mud huts with dirt floors? Brother, I once spent some time living in a mud hut (okay, a two-room adobe house) with a dirt floor, during a winter that hit 20 below and let me tell you: I DIDN’T LIKE IT! (If adobe weren’t such good insulation, I probably would have frozen to death.) I don’t think you would like it either.

He further added:
“I think the USA is a great country and in order to solve the problems we have, we have to reach a point where things must be fixed.”

Believe me, brother, we’re there NOW.

- – - – -

# 54 smittybc said, in part:

“We would need massive economic growth just to keep up with the spending, and that growth (if it even comes) will be hobbled by tax increases coming next year.”

As Rachel Maddow pointed out, those whose income >= $250K/yr. “will go back to the tax rates they had during Clinton’s administration, when they did very well.” (Remember “irrational exuberance?”)

# 62 MikeN said, on February 25th, 2009 at 11:08 am

I’d like him to explain how not investing in alternative energy caused this crisis.

# 63 Mr. Fusion said, on February 25th, 2009 at 11:27 am

#55, smitty,

Weren’t you part of that 22% who approved of the job Bush was doing?

Get out of the way so a real American can fix the country.

# 64 Mr. Fusion said, on February 25th, 2009 at 11:31 am

#62, Lyin’ Mike,

First, Obama didn’t blame alternative energy for the mess.

Second, those billions of dollars that went to the oil companies and foreign oil Kingdoms helped a lot of people lose their jobs. Spending those dollars here will help, not hurt, the US.

# 65 Paddy-O said, on February 25th, 2009 at 11:35 am

# 64 Mr. Fusion said, “Second, those billions of dollars that went to the oil companies”

The money is still going to go to the oil companies, so it doesn’t make any difference.

All that has changed is that the gov is going to take from our pocketbooks and give to someone else after taking a hefty “handling fee”. We the people, still have to buy gas…

No net positive effect on the economy.

# 66 smittybc said, on February 25th, 2009 at 11:44 am

#61
Yes but you can only raise taxes that way when federal spending as a % of GDP is on the way down. That’s not the situation we are in now.
http://www.investors.com/images/editimg/issues022509.gif

The Clinton era is not comparable and was a golden era because 1) The threat of great power war was non-existent (which lowered risk for foreign direct investment around the globe), 2) Tech introduced massive gains in US worker productivity. It was the one-two punch of true globalization and worker productivity that created “irrational exuberance” for the US economy. Sadly Maddow is not a particularly good thinker. Why people listen to her is beyond me.

We now have a balance sheet recession, but unlike Japan we do not have a strong global market that we can sell into, and write down our balance sheets. You need to find a way to get balance sheets back in order, so everyone can write down debt, in a way that will not destroy global markets. There’s nothing in the stimulus that addresses any of the problems that we now face. It’s like calling the fire department while your house is burning and having them say “We’re on our way now, and will pick you up to go golfing.”

# 67 Mr Diesel said, on February 25th, 2009 at 11:49 am

“There is no pork in this bill” – Obomba (lying again)

Let’s see where all his “no Pork” bill sent its money to…..

$185,000 for coral reef research and preservation in Maui County, Hawaii

$55,000 in meteorological equipment for Pierce College in Woodland Hills, Calif.

$9.9 million for science enhancement at historically black colleges in South Carolina.

In addition to the basic operations of government, the new budget includes 775 pages of earmarks, funding programs that include local museums, colleges and infrastructure projects.

Among the earmarked projects in the bill are $764,000 for the Lake George Watershed Protection Initiative in New York, requested by Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, New York
Democrat;

$9.9 million for South Carolina’s historically black colleges and universities, requested by House Majority Whip James E. Clyburn, South Carolina Democrat;

$1.1 million requested by Senate Republican Conference Chairman Lamar Alexander and Sen. Bob Corker, both of Tennessee, for water treatment plant improvements in Tennessee’s Unicoi County, as well as $300,000 for a sewer extension project in another county.

Examples of Earmarks in the Omnibus

$713,625 Woody Biomass at SUNY-ESF. Walsh and Schumer sponsors

$951,500 Sustainable Las Vegas. Berkeley and Reid sponsors.

$24,000 A+ for Abstinence. Specter is sponsor.

$300,000 Montana World Trade Center. Rehberg sponsor.

$950,000 Myrtle Beach International Trade and Convention Center. Graham sponsor.

$200,000 Oil Region Alliance. Peterson sponsor.

$190,000 Buffalo Bill Historical Center, Cody, WY for digitizing and editing the Cody collection. Barbara Cubin is the sponsor

$143,000 Las Vegas Natural History Museum, Las Vegas, NV, to expand natural history education programs. Sponsored by Harry Reid

$238,000 for the Polynesian Voyaging Society, Honolulu, HI, for educational programs. Sen. Daniel Inouye is the sponsor.

$381,000 for Jazz at Lincoln Center, New York, NY for music education programs. Jerrold Nadler is the sponsor.

Rep. Jerry Lewis of California, the top Republican on the House Appropriations Committee, would spend $3.8 million on a Needles, Calif., highway.

Sen. Thad Cochran of Mississippi, the top Republican on Senate Appropriations, backs earmarks including a $950,000 nature education center in Moss Point, Miss. He defends earmarks.

# 68 Paddy-O said, on February 25th, 2009 at 11:57 am

#67 Hey! That is stuff that if not funded would hasten the collapse of the economy…

# 69 Mr. Fusion said, on February 25th, 2009 at 12:04 pm

#67, Diesel,

Most of those I would not consider “pork”.

To me, “pork” is building a $40 million road that goes nowhere but was built after they canceled the accompanying bridge that was to go nowhere.

To me, “pork” is granting huge multi million dollar no-bid contracts without oversight, complaint, or completion.

To me, “pork” is building monuments to oneself. Those that want a “World Trade Center” in Montana or a “Shrimp Museum” in Beloxi Mississippi would count as “pork”.

# 70 Guyver said, on February 25th, 2009 at 12:38 pm

http://www.stimuluswatch.org

# 71 Guyver said, on February 25th, 2009 at 12:39 pm

Damn…. didn’t think I needed to use TinyURL for that URL.

http://tinyurl.com/d5zzj3

# 72 Alex said, on February 25th, 2009 at 1:10 pm

A response to Mr. Diesel (#67):

“Let’s see where all his “no Pork” bill sent its money to…..”

Yes! Let us.

“$185,000 for coral reef research and preservation in Maui County, Hawaii”

-Will employ researchers and scientists, which will in turn need to buy gas, pay for transportation, housing, food, infrastructure.
-pay for scientific equipment that needs to be manufactured (hopefully, they’ll buy American)

“$55,000 in meteorological equipment for Pierce College in Woodland Hills, Calif.”

-Meteorological equipment that needs to be manufactured, transported, installed, and maintained. You need people employed to do all of that.

“$9.9 million for science enhancement at historically black colleges in South Carolina.”

-I assume this means building research laboratories, funding studies, etc. This employs people to build the labs, buildings, equipment. then there’s the equipment that needs to be manufactured, bought, shipped. Then there’s the collateral jobs – infrastructure, food, housing – that come with supporting other people.

All that seems like growth to me. I could be wrong.

“the new budget includes 775 pages of earmarks, funding programs that include local museums, colleges and infrastructure projects.”

-All of which employ people, support people, and local businesses that support the museums, colleges, and generic ‘infrastructure projects’. Not to mention the collateral jobs I keep harping on about.

“$764,000 for the Lake George Watershed Protection Initiative in New York, requested by Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, New York
Democrat;”

-I have no idea what this is, but it does sound like a pet project. I’ll concede it’s likelier than not to be pork.

“$9.9 million for South Carolina’s historically black colleges and universities, requested by House Majority Whip James E. Clyburn, South Carolina Democrat;”

Didn’t we just talk about this?

“$1.1 million requested by Senate Republican Conference Chairman Lamar Alexander and Sen. Bob Corker, both of Tennessee, for water treatment plant improvements in Tennessee’s Unicoi County, as well as $300,000 for a sewer extension project in another county.”

-All of which will require labor, and further maintenance, creating new jobs.
-Those jobs mean other collateral jobs that support those jobs. Got a speeding ticket driving home from your new work fixing the sewage systems? Well you just fulfilled the duties of a police officer, clerk, and possibly a lawyer and a judge too.

Then he goes on to list a bunch of construction and education projects which, again, require labor jobs or teaching jobs to actually complete as well as the collateral jobs that support those laborers. (You think sandwich carts just appear out of nowhere and are staffed by robots?)

Pork are useless pet projects that don’t lead anywhere and don’t produce anything. Supporting education, infrastructure, sewage systems… all of this is necessary, and beneficial to a community that is currently hemorrhaging thousands of jobs per month.

The wetlands thing… yeah that sounds like a pet project. Might need to hire a couple park rangers for that, but I don’t see it as stimulating. But I would hardly call the rest of your examples “pork.”

# 73 Paddy-O said, on February 25th, 2009 at 1:14 pm

#72 Taking $ from taxpayers, shaving some off the top for gov’t expenses & then paying people dig holes and refill them, no matter the buying of shovels and gas to get to the site, do nothing to improve the economy.

# 74 Thomas said, on February 25th, 2009 at 2:09 pm

#39
> What good does it do to invade
> and occupy a country for the “justice”
> involved if the invading country
> goes bankrupt doing it?

You mean like France helping us during the Revolution and subsequently going bankrupt? It apparently did France quite a bit of good in the long run.

#61
Clearly you are not claiming that the rich did better *because* of higher taxes during the Clinton administration. They rich did better during that period because the economy boomed (thank you Internet). Higher taxes for the rich probably won’t hurt the current economy any more than it already has but do not expect it to help either.

Regarding Obama’s speech, I liked what he had to say but am reserving judgment until I see the actual implementation of those solutions. On most of the general topics, both sides agree that something needs to be done. It is the actual implementation on which they disagree.

# 75 Mr Diesel said, on February 25th, 2009 at 3:53 pm

Bullshit people. I’m tired of both sides spending money that isn’t theirs for pet projects all over the country. I hope to live long enough to see the day when the uprising happens.

Sadly I don’t think that day will ever come because there are just too many stupid people that think Congress can spend all our money on every little thing.

# 76 Alex said, on February 25th, 2009 at 4:09 pm

#73 Paddy -

Then how *do* you grow an economy if not by creating jobs that create other jobs needed to maintain those jobs?

# 77 Paddy-O said, on February 25th, 2009 at 4:14 pm

#76 Jobs are created by the private sector and involve people WILLING spending money on products. NOT by the gov’t robbing people to pay people to dig holes and refill them. FDR tried it for 8 years and it all came to nothing.

Fix our fiat currency economy and and the corrupt bankers (financiers) so they aren’t sucking up $ as parasites and the private sector does the rest.

# 78 Montanaguy said, on February 25th, 2009 at 6:29 pm

Hello, we’re the federal government and we’re here to take your money and then help you recover with multiple, inefficent, poorly executed programs.

# 79 soundwash said, on February 25th, 2009 at 7:06 pm

what an f’n joke. -who had the button to pelosi’s chair?

i think the best part was near the end when Biden started giveing Pelosi (who looked like she took a few tabs of PermaGrin) dirty looks because she would stay the F in her chair..

i counted 26 standing ovations *in the last 20min or so alone..(starting from about
9:35-40pm)

-just about nullifies the significance the standing “O” for life..throw it in the garbage with the noble prize..means nothing now.

as for the Messiah..someone needs to tell him the campaign [mode] is over..he said NOTHING, and done NOTHING to warrant such praise.

interesting note: notice how “small” he looked
on the tv screen? -this definitely was not a hollywood-oprah-cabal production number like most all his previous “appearances” -or was it?

this guy will amount to nothing more than one big long, highly produced, subliminal “government is cool” [and knows best] commercial.

pity the brainwashed masses that wake up only after they notice it’s fools gold starting to flake off their gilded lead cages.

-s

# 80 Guy Fawkes said, on February 25th, 2009 at 7:06 pm

If you want the economy to grow repeal Sarbanes-Oxley!!

Pelosi is a druggie. During one of bush’s speeches she was constantly licking her lips and smacking like she had cotton mouth. I don’t know what she was on last night but I hope her f’ing legs are good and sore today! What a clown! She was just embarrassing.
What about the beginning, do these idiots think they are coming into a football stadium? Goons!

No real problems with his speech, same ol’ shit mostly. Blah-de-blah-de-blah!

All these congressmen and senators having him sign their programs, childish and moronic. How many are on e-bay by now?

Hi! I’m Mr. Jindal and welcome to my neighborhood! I’m going to change sweaters and read you a story about how we f’ed up the country, make you think we are going to change but really aren’t and screw you in the a-hole again! Won’t YOU be my neighbor?

# 81 Guess Who said, on February 25th, 2009 at 8:11 pm

#11 boobo

What do you think about this?

It’s time for a real Patriot Act that brings out the patriot in all of us. We propose universal civilian service for every young American. Under this plan, All Americans between the ages of eighteen and twenty-five will be asked to serve their country by going through three months of basic training, civil defense preparation and community service.

Here’s how it would work. Young people will know that between the ages of eighteen and twenty-five, the nation will enlist them for three months of civilian service. They’ll be asked to report for three months of basic civil defense training in their state or community, where they will learn what to do in the event of biochemical, nuclear or conventional attack; how to assist others in an evacuation; how to respond when a levee breaks or we’re hit by a natural disaster. These young people will be available to address their communities’ most pressing needs.

http://tinyurl.com/59vqxs

You are property of the Obama Nation
http://dodd.senate.gov/?q=node/4796

O’Bastard has broken his promises,
http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE51O3TB20090225?sp=true

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0209/19303.html

What is pathetic POS, you fail to hold Obama to the same standards as Bush. The Left Right paradigm is an illusion which you’ve apparently purchased.

# 82 Mr. Fusion said, on February 25th, 2009 at 8:31 pm

#77, Cow-Paddy, Ignorant Shit Talking Sociopath, Retired Mall Rent-A-Cop, Pretend Constitutional Scholar, Fake California Labor Law Expert, Pseudo Military Historian, Phony Climate Scientist, and Real Troll Extraordinare,

Jobs are created by the private sector and involve people WILLING spending money on products. NOT by the gov’t robbing people to pay people to dig holes and refill them. FDR tried it for 8 years and it all came to nothing.

It seems you aren’t much of an economist. Where is it written that ONLY the private sector can create jobs? I guess that all those policemen, teachers, military, food inspectors, IRS agents and whomever else are really unemployed.

Where are these holes FDR paid people to dig? Oopps, I missed that episode of Rush.

# 83 Brian said, on February 25th, 2009 at 10:25 pm

People in this country have become so addicted to radical talk radio (both from the left and the right) that they are unable to think for themselves anymore, and will simply vomit the talking points they heard from whomever they listen to.

There is no civilized debate anymore, there is nothing more than the repeated screamings of talking points over and over, with nobody ever interested in possibly changing their mind or opinion for fear of being ‘wrong’ or ‘weak’ in their original stances. It’s near impossible to engage someone with an opposing viewpoint on nearly anything nowadays (sports, politics, religion) without one side or the other devolving into a bubbling mass of shit.

It’s unfortunate that things have turned out this way, but when you have people on talk radio so profanely ripping one side or the other, and essentially telling their listeners that if they think differently, they’re somehow bad people, then you end up where we are today.

Too bad.

This really seems to have happened in the last decade, and especially seems to have fostered in the right wing (though lefties are just as guilty). Folks like Rush and O’Reilly are particularly nasty and confrontational with those who don’t share their viewpoints, and got drunk with power with 8 years of unfettered Republican leadership.

Now, the tables have turned, and these same folks are now slamming the Pres on everything (after years of saying how criticism of President Bush was off limits), and you have folks on the left every bit as frothy in their defense of Obama as they were in their attacks on Bush.

I just wish people could once again engage in civilized debate, actually learn enough about the topics being debated to hold a conversation that is deeper than ‘Obama sucks!’ or ‘Pelosi is a druggie!’ Those types of comments scream ignorance, as obviously Pelosi is not a druggie and Obama is way too new at his job to have anything resembling a fair assessment at this point.

It’s comical to see people so adamantly defending people who, if they saw on the street, wouldn’t even give them the time of day. Just admit your government, whether its Repubs or Dems, only want your money and couldn’t possibly care less about you and you’ll feel much better.

# 84 Hmeyers said, on February 25th, 2009 at 11:10 pm

Nice points, Brian.

# 85 soundwash said, on February 25th, 2009 at 11:40 pm

#67 Mr Diesel:

great post..to put your words into a cvouple of great cartoon..
http://nypost.com/postopinion/ramirez/2009/02/02112009.jpg

http://nypost.com/postopinion/ramirez/2009/02/02102009.jpg

for humour to work, it has to be rooted in truth.

—
and for the freeloaders in the forum, we have

http://obamafreemoney.org/Obama_Other_Grants.html

get yer grants before Soros does..

-s

# 86 Paddy-O said, on February 26th, 2009 at 6:02 am

# 82 Mr. Fusion said, “Where is it written that ONLY the private sector can create jobs?”

It was written when FDR failed after 8 years of stimulus spending to create jobs and end the depression.

However, Omama seems to want to do the same thing but expects a different result. Insanity, by definition…

# 87 bobbo said, on February 26th, 2009 at 6:13 am

Zero==yea, its not at all like “cut taxes” no matter what the subject is. Its almost like trickle down economics wasn’t piss in your ears?

# 88 Alex said, on February 26th, 2009 at 9:33 am

#77 Paddy-

“Fix our fiat currency economy and and the corrupt bankers (financiers) so they aren’t sucking up $ as parasites and the private sector does the rest.”

Ignoring the fiat currency issue, which is debatable both ways I think…

You do realize your second point (corrupt bankers) is essentially saying:

1) “We need to fix the fundamental nature of humanity (such as to eliminate corruption)”

and…

2) These corrupt bankers exist specifically because the free market private sector is specifically created to *grow* these corrupt bankers.

I heard a great analogy today which I’ll paraphrase. If we accept the free market laws of economics as, in fact, laws and not just theories/wishful thinking, then economics essentially becomes a natural act. And so allowing the free market to decimate the economic landscape is not unlike simply sitting back with your arms crossed while the rivers flood and destroy everything and everyone around you simply because you happen to live on a hill and building a dam would take too much time and money.

Now this kind of social darwinism as a philosophy is fine if you accept it, but call it what it is. I for one think we as a species and a society can and in fact should go beyond Darwinian concepts of survival of the fittest.

Leave Your Reply Below...

Comment Moderation is Active, so if your comment doesn't
show up immediately, please don't submit it again.

Special Deals 4U

25% off eHarmony subscription with code EHTECH
12-percent discount forever with code TECH
10-percent discount and free month using TECH10
10-percent or 30 dollars off weekly car rental!
Get 10-percent discount on car rental!
Get 10% off rental cars!
Get 10% off Dollar rentals!
Discounts on domain names!