The impact of the stimulus is perhaps already being felt: “Following Congressional passage of the economic stimulus bill, consumer confidence has fallen to another record low.”
Letting Congressional Democrats have their way on the stimulus has its drawbacks: “The approach has already sparked criticism even from some Democrats that Mr. Obama isn’t forceful enough in leading the government. Republicans charge that his coziness with Democratic leaders has come at the expense of bipartisanship.” Oh, and you also get junky legislation.
In you think the Speaker of the House has been getting unfair criticism , this is worth a read. Defending the “Buy American” provision in the stimulus, she declared: “We’re looking out for their interest as we look to grow the U.S. economy. I don’t think that’s protectionism. I think that’s what any country would do for its workers.” It’s not protectionism, it’s just protecting our workers, you see.
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is threatening to start laying off 20,000 state workers unless another Republican state senator can be found to vote for the massive tax hike. Wait. Why is that a threat – shouldn’t they be doing that before they even discuss tax hikes?
Of all the things for conservatives to be worried about, I don’t think Michael Steele’s press releases should rank very high. His avalanche of media ,including his weekly video address, his House GOP retreat speech, his Chris Wallace interview and his appearance on This Week, suggest he’s among the better spokesmen for Republicans and fiscal conservatives.
This is a startling development: “[T]he Justice Department has removed the prosecution team that won the corruption conviction of former Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) from any further litigation in the case, according to a new court filing.” The DOJ lawyers had been held in contempt for failure to comply with a court deadline to turn over relevant material. If Stevens’s conviction is overturned, where does he go to get his senate seat back?
With the Obama administration nixing the car czar and hinting that they are going to be shoveling more money to GM, don’t expect too much to come of the GM-UAW negotiations.
As one observer put it: “A panel not czar means there will be more White House influence on what’s being done . . . The UAW will have more protections in rewriting their collective agreement.” Indeed they will.
Eugene Robinson must be kidding when he asks to ”explain to me how even Washington could do a worse job with these two companies than Detroit is doing.” Sigh. You see, Washington gets no demerits for having already spent $20B of the taxpayers’ money. And as for the core of his question: Yes, virtually every business that the government has tried to operate — from trucking to the airlines to Amtrak to mail delivery — has been a bust. (Even the New York Times and Obama agree.)
Most of the nineteen categories of rejected absentee ballots won’t be counted in the Minnesota senate post-election proceedings. Unlike some observers, however, I am not so certain the remaining ballots (approximately 3500) being considered will necessarily benefit Coleman.
The Washington Post editors want preconditions on any presidential visit with Hosni Mubarak. I think it was the other presidential candidate who believed in preconditions. Obama was the one who would meet with anyone, anytime. But Obama also believed in transparency and bipartisanship, so perhaps this too will change.
Jack Kelly writes: “Candidate Obama promised a new openness in government. But the biggest spending bill ever was drafted behind closed doors. Candidate Obama pledged to weaken the influence of lobbyists. But lobbyists received copies of the “stimulus” bill before lawmakers did. Candidate Obama pledged a bipartisan approach to government. But not a single Republican in the House, and only three in the Senate, voted for it. Mr. Obama is fond of the appearance of bipartisanship. He nominated three Republicans to his Cabinet. He’s dined with conservative columnists, and invited several GOP lawmakers to watch the Super Bowl with him. . . If he were more concerned about the substance of bipartisanship, he’d have insisted upon a stimulus package more Republicans could support, and he wouldn’t now be looking for his third nominee for Secretary of Commerce.”