The nation was urged by Barack Obama to create trillions of dollars of indebtedness (for the current and generations to come) as the recently implemented “Stimulus” (otherwise known to most of us as PORKULUS) because, so we were urged, there was this huge crises — the Emergency Monster — on our horizon.
The Emergency Monster would be satiated, so the selling plan went, if only we fed it Stimulus. That was Barack Obama’s message: feed the Emergency Monster, or, if we didn’t, the Emergency Monster would consume the United States of America.
So the Democratic majority in Congress — who were sure they could see this Emergency Monster even if we the Ordinary People could not, though the Democrats who saw this Monster couldn’t ever, specifically, describe it — so the Democratic majority in Congress supported feeding the noncorporeal, unshaped Emergency Monster with Stimulus and urged the dismissal of concerns about just what the liabilities were (and are) as to what the Stimulus-food involved: debt for our nation in the trillions.
But the Democrats, with Barack Obama reading the sales pitch time and time again before the public, declined to address the liabilities of the Stimulus-feed — their message, instead, has been to focus on the Emergency Monster, get the Stimulus stuffed with trillions of dollars of debt, just feed the Monster and don’t worry about the debt in the stuffing.
So, the Stimulus-feed, stuffed with debt, was what was important, not the stuffing. So the American public was told. The implication, of course, was (and continues to be) that trillions of dollars of additional debt was/is so far beyond any individual’s comprehension that it was/is uncomprehensible as to the liabilities, then, placed upon future generations: just forget the liabilities, look the other way, don’t think about the future, just feed the Monster.
Now that the non-corporeal Emergency Monster has been fed, it is eeking out like offshoots from a very large tuber that not only was that often-invisible Emergency Monster only somewhat satiated with Stimulus-stuffed-with-debt, it’s eeking out that the Emergency Monster is becoming partly visible: what is being revealed is that Stimulus was written by exceptionally Leftwing Liberals, inspired by vanity and self-seeking; found there are political-groups affiliated with the Democratic Party who were and are looming large over our nation, who demanded Stimulus-feed (and received it).
Our only hope as individual voters is that representatives in Congress will exercise some modicum of responsibility to the voters — that, there’ll be a few lights on of reason and maturity such that we can, at least, hope that someone there will not display sorry aspects, self-indulgences and/or mental problems that could likely prevent them acting sanely and wisely in their decisions.
But, no. Witness the ongoing travesty — about which and why I do question the mental reliability of the California trio of Boxer, Feinstein and Pelosi — in the following report about one of the recent pitiful tantrums had in Congress by Barbara Boxer:
Vanity road signs that promote the Stimulus feed itself, paid for (“shovel ready,” Barack Obama calls Stimulus-feed to affiliated-political-groups) by Stimulus-feed: DNC Menus, in other words, plastered on public highways by way of the Stimulus-feed, promoting the DNC politically, vanity DNC Menus.
I have long since abandoned all hope that the current group of Democrats in the Senate and House from California will ever act responsibly with and about the American public — the track records in statements and legislative behaviors by Senators Dianne Feinstein, Barbara Boxer and Representative Nancy Pelosi speak for themselves and what they reveal for decades now on each of their behalf is irresponsibility to such a degree as to suggest mental (certainly ethical) disturbance. That means I do conclude that those three lack competence and whatever the cause/s may be remains to be seen but the impact remains important, and that is that they are irresponsible in Congress far beyond any measure I deem tolerable from any member in Congress. In the case of Pelosi and Boxer, particularly, I do doubt their mental competence.
READ THIS ARTICLE:
“MILLIONS GO TO SIGNS FLAGGING STIMULUS PROJECTS”
Read this article, focus on Boxer’s irrational statements and decide for yourself if the Stimulus-feed for the Emergency Monster should include vanity signs (costing the American taxpayers millions for those signs) that promote Democrats and their delights in themselves, on public roadways, adding more insult to the greedy, utterly inconsiderate abuse of public funds:
They’re spending hundreds of billions of dollars to stimulate the economy, so Senate Democrats said Wednesday they might as well spend millions putting up signs to highlight where the money is being spent.
The road signs, which let motorists know the paving and construction projects they see are being paid for by the $787 billion economic stimulus program, have popped up across the country. In a 52-45 vote, the Senate decided the signs should stay.
“Why on earth would you want to hide from the American people the fact that the recovery package we passed is putting people to work?” asked Sen. Barbara Boxer, California Democrat, who took the lead in defending the expenditure. She said stimulus spending is beginning to improve the economy and charged that Republicans and Democrats who voted to strip out the funds are angry about that success.
“It’s my sense that there’s a frustration by the people who voted ‘no’ on the economic recovery act, the stimulus bill, there’s a frustration that it’s working. They predicted gloom and doom,” Mrs. Boxer said.
But Sen. Judd Gregg, the New Hampshire Republican who tried to excise the funds, called his amendment a no-brainer. He said it’s common sense to get rid of tens of millions of dollars in spending.
“These are self-congratulatory signs; they’re political signs. They’re so that lawmakers can pat themselves on the back,” he said. “But these signs cost money. Actually, when you add them all up, they cost a lot of money.”
Some localities have objected to the signs, arguing that they would rather spend the money on more projects. But Mr. Gregg said one community in New Hampshire was told no sign, no money for their original project.
“We do enough self-congratulating around here. They shouldn’t make the taxpayers pay for it,” he said.
Also Wednesday, senators voted against allowing states to determine their own transportation funding priorities, such as repairing deficient bridges. A day earlier, the Senate voted against an effort by Sen. John McCain, Arizona Republican, to drop all of the pork-barrel earmark projects from the $67.7 billion transportation and housing spending bill and use the $1.7 billion slated for earmarks to modernize the nation’s air traffic control system instead.
But many of the major fights are still happening on the stimulus bill, which passed Congress in February on near-party line votes.
Since then, Republicans have tried repeatedly to alter the stimulus bill, in ways both large and small.
Mr. Gregg acknowledged that this effort was as much a message as a cost-saving move. His amendment to the annual transportation spending bill would have banned putting up physical signs to tout stimulus transportation projects.
Five Democrats — Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas, Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire and Charles E. Schumer of New York — voted with all 40 Republicans to try to strip the money, but their support was not enough.
Mrs. Boxer called the effort “anti-jobs” and said the signs are an example of government transparency.
She also pointed to an episode earlier this decade when Republicans controlled the White House and Congress and sent out letters telling taxpayers that their tax cut checks were part of President Bush’s 2003 tax cut package. She said that effort cost $33 million.
“Where was Sen. Gregg and his friends on the Republican side?” she said.
The stimulus bill included nearly $50 billion for the Transportation Department. So far, $28.3 billion has been obligated, but only $2.6 billion has been paid out for projects.
Mr. Gregg said the cost of signs ranges from $400 per sign in his state, New Hampshire, to $3,000 for signs in New Jersey.
Some localities have embraced the signs by touting their own messages. In Mississippi, for example, the name of Gov. Haley Barbour, a Republican, appears prominently on stimulus road project signs, along with the names of the state’s transportation commissioners.
If any legislator wants to impress upon any taxpayer and/or citizen just what a great job that legislator thinks they’re doing, let them be respectful enough and at least to contact the taxpayers directly and individually: a letter to voters, thanking them for their taxes and perhaps their votes, a humble reminder that lists how the taxes were spent.
But using Stimulus money (that feed for the so-called Emergency Monster) to self-congratulate and publicize a political party’s (in this case, the Democratic National Party’s) idea of how great they are, is disgusting usery of public funds, public resources, public tolerance for decency in government and speaks very, very badly of the absurd disconnect by Senator Barbara Boxer, particularly, who, obviously, is breezily dismissive of millions of American taxpayers and voters who did not support the Stimulus spending (and debt). In Boxer’s mind, this “expenditure” (millions of dollars) is not an issue, but her need to denigrate Americans by the millions is. Compounding that illness by Boxer is that she is utterly lacking in humility as to the nature of all this money she is breezily tossing around, and lacking, especially, in appreciation for how to appropriately use that money.
Coming soon, exploration on just who wrote the Stimulus legislation and who the Emergency Monster actually is: hint, it’s mostly Democratic Party greed and feed (think SEIU for starters).