Stimulate Me

Reuters has this interesting report on the actual success of the stimulus, widely panned from the right to the professional left.

The massive stimulus package boosted real GDP by up to 4.5 percent in the second quarter of 2010 and put up to 3.3 million people to work, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said on Tuesday.

However, economists don't believe it.

The massive stimulus package boosted real GDP by up to 4.5 percent in the second quarter of 2010 and put up to 3.3 million people to work, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said on Tuesday.

But the CBO reports that the stimulus had a stabilizing effect on halting the slide of the economy over the depression cliff. I call that a success, and it saved and created quite a few jobs. Would a new stimulus do the same, probably, for a while. But the problems in our economy run deep into structural problems and how long can we keep it propped up with borrowed money? It is now a political non starter, a new similar sized stimulus, so the natural contraction will begin and there will be much pain. This can be alleviated quite a bit by keeping the safety net funded and the states solvent with federal dollars, but to keep throwing gasoline on a fire long in coming, and arguably necessary for long term economic stability, there would have to be political appetite with the public and politicians, and that just isn't there.

The massive package of tax cuts, construction spending and enhanced safety-net benefits was passed in February 2009 in the midst of the deepest recession since the 1930s.

It raised employment by between 1.4 million and 3.3 million jobs during the second quarter of this year, CBO estimated.

Measured another way, CBO said the stimulus increased the number of full-time equivalent jobs by up to 4.8 million, as part-time workers shifted to full-time work or employers offered more overtime work.

CBO said the package, officially known as the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, would cost $814 billion, down from its previous estimate of $862 billion. The lower figure was thanks largely to health-care subsidies that cost less than anticipated. CBO initially estimated the bill would worsen budget deficits by $787 billion.

My head is spinning

Listening to religious wingut radio makes my head spin. Apparently, religious liberty only extends to Christians. While Jews are not mentioned (that would be political suicide), today's menu consisted of an interpretation of Islam. While the broadcasters were careful to couch their musings in the Constitution -- freedom of religion -- there was some discussion over whether Islam qualifies as a religion. Good punt! We can crucify (pun intended) Islam by deciding that Islam is not a religion. Therefore, we can prove how American we are, how we bless the Constitution, and still ensure that America remains a Christian nation.

Back to the Jews. As the wingnuts were going on and on about how only through Jesus will we reach salvation, and Islam clearly doesn't fall in line, there was no mention that Jews are more aligned with Islam than Christianity. We, too, don't acknowledge Jesus. Go figure. Yet, somehow being American, and believing in religious freedom, means being Christian because our Constitution affords Christianity a prominant place in our distribution of rights because the Constitution promotes freedom of religious, which if you are a true American that would mean a belief in Christianity.

I have a headache. Not even copious amounts of wine can get passed all of this rhetoric. No one mentioned that the Saudis own 7% of Fox News. BUT, there was a lot of talk about how we should investigate the Saudi funding of the projected community center in NY.

I did understand that free markets extend to Christian businesses and community centers, but apparently the free market does not extend to Muslims interests. Except Fox News.


So to sum up, freedom of religion is a valued American ideal, as long as the religion is Christianity. Not Islam, and never, ever mention the Jews. Free markets extend to Christian enterprises, and not to Muslims, and never, ever mention the Jews.

So now I know what it takes to be pro-American in these times.

Sarah really pisses me off

Ms. Sarah twitted that "the 9/11 mosque=act of fitna, 'equivalent to bldg. Serbian Orthodox church@ Srebenica killing fields where Muslims were slaugthered."

Again, the twit shows she has no idea what she is talking about. As somehow who was there, who helped prepare the tents for the survivors in Tuzla, and who helped dig the drainage ditches, her twit really, really pisses me off. She doesn't even realize how offensive her post was. The killing fields in Srebenica were part of a government led decision to overtake the enclave, not a decision by a group of religious leaders to create a center dedicated to reconciliation. That she cannot tell the difference is mind numbing. To exploit Srebenica for her own personal political ambitions also is mind numbing. She is clueless. If the Serbian Orthodox Church wanted to create a center to help Muslim and Serbs move beyond the horrific tragedy that Srebenica represents, I would be the first to support the endeavor. If the Muslim community in NY wants to build a center dedicated to reconciliation, which I believe they want to do, I am all for it.

Ms. Sarah doesn't realize the difference between a government supported decision to eradicate a community, and a religious group, who lost members of their own community in 9/11, wanting to create something that gives back to the community. To exploit Srebenica is beyond disgusting. It once again shows her ignorance of things sacred.

The Avett Brothers - Laundry Room

Zombie Orange Person Alert

Hump Day Doggie Blogging

Charlie on a hike in the Gila Forest

Mystic Blogging From John Cole

Mr. Cole brings a breathless post linking to a Dan Frooomkin article claiming he has evidence we will be doing in Afghanistan in 2014, pretty much what we are doing now. Fighting a full on ground war with the Taliban. How does Froomkin know this.

There are increasingly clear signs that President Obama's vow to start withdrawing American troops less than a year from now will be fulfilled through a technicality if at all, and that the real timeline for significant troop withdrawal -- barring a change in course -- now extends at least to 2014, if not far beyond

Well, this is how

One signal was Vice President Joe Biden's offhand remark  to ABC News earlier this month that the promised summer withdrawal "could be as few as a couple thousand troops" although "it could be more."

This from the administration's most prominent opponent of escalation, a man who had earlier said you could "bet on" a "whole lot of people moving out" in July 2011.

Sounds fishy from a guy that makes a living, at least in part, from saying weird things and giving everyone a chuckle at old motor mouth Joe. But even if he was spot on, and nobody knows for sure, his remark leaves out the key question "what will those troops be doing then". Or, will they still be pounding a full on ground war with the Taliban, or more in advisory rolls, or like the Iraq model where small teams of US soldiers embedded with the Iraqi Army as sort of shadow commanders for OTJ training. We don't know yet. And for the record, Obama never said we were pulling out of Afghanistan for ever. He said we would begin drawing down our forced gradually and turning the ground fighting over tho the Afghan Army. Which of course is the responsible course of action, as opposed to progressives screaming to pack up and leave tomorrow. And even the best case scenario, Obama didn't say we were leaving completely with no military force in country. Only that our mission will change to more of a support role, and anti terrorist operations..

Froomkin goes on to cite some other readings from his chicken entrails into remarks by Richard Holbrook and Hillary Clinton, claiming obscure and ominous admissions of ill intent that Obama is snookering America and doesn't really mean his announced date to start withdrawing. It is pure conjecture he is scribbling at Huff to feed the red meat to folks like Cole and the rest of the netroot anti war crowd.

Here is what Froomkin didn't tell you. If Obama significantly waffles on his policy to begin disengaging from Afghan, he will suffer at polls of a country that has markedly turned against this war and wants us to start ending it. At least ending reports of dead GI's coming home in body bags. That is what they care about, they don't care that we remain there in some capacity, and likely want us to keep chasing Al Quaida and OBL, but they want the quagmire with the Taliban to cease, at least with our involvement.