American Jobs Act is a scam and here is the proof.

Here are the words of a ridiculously biased editorial found as an editorial in yesterday's New York Times. There is no name attached to the article, which means, of course, that this was written by one of the New York Times editors and not a "guest" editorialist. It is an "official" opinion of the Times, trying desperately to pass the blame for the Senate's defeat of Obama's Stimulus II.

Editorial text ( found here) and our comments follow:

1. From the text: It was all predicted, but the unanimous decision by Senate Republicans on Tuesday to filibuster and thus kill President Obama’s jobs bill was still a breathtaking act of economic vandalism. There are 14 million people out of work, wages are falling, poverty is rising, and a second recession may be blowing in, but not a single Republican would even allow debate on a sound plan to cut middle-class taxes and increase public-works spending. . . . .

I want the reader to understand just how stupid this last sentence is. What is a "filibuster?" Anyone on the Left know? Well, it is the CONTINUATION OF DEBATE. It takes 60 votes in the Senate to end debate/discussion on any particular bill. The Senate is not in "filibuster" until that vote is taken, and it was, yesterday. The vote to end discussion " . . . . on a sound plan to cut middle-class taxes and increase public-works spending" ended with a 50 to 48 vote to continue discussion. The Senate could always take another vote on the matter, today or next week or whenever. Instead, Hapless Harry Reid threw up his hands and walked away from the bill. The recent Senate vote did precisely the opposite to what the Times article claims.

2. From the text: The bill the Republicans shot down is not a panacea, but independent economists say it would have a significant and swift effect on the current stagnation. Macroeconomic Advisers, whose forecasts are often used by the Federal Reserve, said it could raise economic growth by 1.25 percentage points and create 1.3 million jobs in 2012. . . . . .

Look, it is "macroeconomics" that has gotten us in the trouble we are in. Using this bunch of advisers does not advance the sensibilities of the "American Jobs Acts" at all.

But more than this, the notion that Stimulus II would bring "swift effect on the current stagnation." is fallacious on its face. We have been down this road before, back in the days of Stimulus I and Obama's "shovel ready jobs." Years after that fiasco, he laughs and jokes about the fact that "those shovel ready jobs were not as shovel ready as we had thought." Yesterday, I heard this economic genius, Barack Obama, mention "roads and bridges" needing repair. Does anyone know just how long it will take to fire up new construction on such projects? All we have here, is more "shovel ready" crap. And if these projects cannot be ready for construction for three or four years into the future, as is the case, the projects of 2012 are so far off as to make the Times analysis nothing more than a lie.

3. From the text: The Republicans offer no actual economic plans, only tired slogans about cutting regulations and spending, and ending health care reform. . . . .

So why are these mental geniuses calling the above, "slogans?" Paul Ryan and the House of Representatives have scored and passed a 6.6 trillion plan cutting spending and placing a moratorium on further regulations, a bill that was sent to the house months ago without any reciprocal discussion from that body; a bill tabled by one man, one dictatorial legislative impostor, the Hapless Harry Reid. That is a fact. But the Radicalized Left will continue this lie and its parrot-minions will continue to drink the poison and squawk the talk.

Understand that $50 billion is set aside in this bill for new construction. All the work envisioned is years into the future. All the labor will be done by union labor. The common man, 93% of the work force, will not be benefited by this bill.

Finally and not mentioned in the editorial, is the $38 billion set aside "to put teachers back to work." You should know this: the first stimulus did not prevent the lay off of hundreds of teachers in my home state, California. I coach in a small district in the Central Valley. Since (read "after") Stimulus I, the district has closed both of its elementary schools and moved all the children to the middle school campus. The middle school kids were sent to the high school facility. Other school districts in this state have sent hundreds, if not thousands, of teachers packing. There is no tangible evidence that the stimulus did anything but refresh the coffers of the union's retirement and benefits packages. This new stimulus? That 35 billion dollar aside will wind up in union coffers as well. The bill is nothing but another Obama union financing scam.