At no time has the Stimulus bill accounted for more than 875,000 jobs

If you click on Recovery.gov, you will see a "jobs created total" in the right hand corner. Today, that number is 550, 621. Of the 2 million jobs Obama claims to have created, only half a million remain current jobs.

I give one example that I believe is typical to the Obama stimulus "plan."

In Nevada, $490,000 of stimulus money was paid out for the purchase of trees and the creation of 2 jobs.

Take a look at the original totals for the $787 Stimulus (facts come from Recovery.gov). In addition to the original total, nearly 200 billion addition dollars have been added to the original amount. Add in interest on this sum and you have somewhere over $1.3 trillion dollars.

Category	Funds Paid Out	Total Recovery Act Funds	% Funds Paid Out
Tax Benefits	$259.9B	$288B	90%
Contracts, Grants, Loans	$222.1B	$275B	81%
Entitlements	$187.4B	$224B	84%

Original Stimulus Total.............$787B

Looking at the original intent of the stimulus legislation, we see that just $222 billion has been spent for the creation of jobs and 42% of that money was borrowed AND 50% of the total was lost to waste, fraud and administrative costs at the Federal, State, county and municipal levels.

In short, the stimulus was a stark failure and for monetary reasons we can actually document.

Obama's tax increases amount to only 8% of his spending proposals. Geeeeeesh

Here is a little test for the Reader: take this headline and tell me what the total dollar amount is:
Obama sets record: $4,247,000,000,000 debt in just 945 days... Hint: we are talking about "trillions." This is what Obama has spent in little more than two and half years.

That is more than 4 billion per day or 3 million every single minute.

You should take this information down and make use of it every time someone in politics tells you how much money they are going to "cut" from the "budget."

Note: I put "cut" in quotes because a decrease in spending is not a cut. I put "budget" in quotes because we haven't had a stinking budget in more than two years, under Obama and his Democrat Party Rule !!

Understand that when someone says, "We are going to cut 80 BILLION dollars," they are only talking about 20 days of deficit spending.

When Obama talks about raising a trillion dollars in taxing the "rich," he is talking about a trillion dollars over a ten year period of time, or a 100 billion per year. Understand that current Obama spending is 14.5 times the 100 billion total. While "100 billion" is nothing to sneeze at, it does not begin to solve the deficit problem. He is proposing taxation that covers somewhere around 6 to 8 percent of his annual deficit. In other words, he is proposing "next to nothing," percentage wise; that is the fact and some of you do not get it.

Looking at the above facts, we see that Obama is playing games with the American voter.

The FACTS give reason for why folks such as myself are against "taxing the rich." Again, the reason is this: taxing the rich does almost nothing to solve our deficit problems. The only way you effectively deal with the problem is to cut spending. The real problem with this is the additional fact that Democrats do not understand the statement, "We have no money." They actually believe that the money supply is endless because, I suppose, we can print money.

In summary, the Novice Economist proposes tax increases totaling 8% of his annual debt and Democrats do not understand this mathematical reality. If we are going to go with Obama's tax proposal, we fall 92% short of balancing the annual budget.

The TEA Party is right to oppose increased taxation because that proposal does almost nothing to solve the problem.

One last point: if we consider the total annual spending bill of around $3.8 trillion, Obama's tax proposal is 2% of his total proposal.

Conclusion: this whole debate over "taxing the rich" is nothing more than a sad, sad, joke on the American people.

New Gallup "approval" numbers: a record low of 38%, down for last week's record law of 40%. (an article)

Obama is running out of time and his numbers are not good - across the board.

m

Rasmussen Reports	8/20 - 8/22	1500 LV	44	56	-12
Gallup	8/19 - 8/21	1500 A	40	53	-13
Democracy Corps (D)	8/6 - 8/10	1000 LV	45	50	-5
Washington Post	8/9 - 8/9	601 A	44	46	-2
FOX News	8/7 - 8/9	904 RV	42	48	-6
Reuters/Ipsos	8/4 - 8/8	1055 A	45	52	-7
CNN/Opinion Research	8/5 - 8/7	1008 A	44	54	-10
McClatchy/Marist	8/2 - 8/4	807 RV	44	46	-2

Five Thirty-Eight ............8/22 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42.2 - 10.5

To be honest, I want to use this set of comparisons to make the point as to the bias of the various polling companies . . . . . . but I really cannot using these numbers. I do believe that Five Thirty-Eight (a Washington Post project) is the most biased of those listed and, yet, it has Obama's approval numbers among the lowest of the above entities.

But forget "approval" numbers. Really, I think the election will be about his numbers as relates to specific issues. For example, his "approval" numbers for his dealings with the economy is at 26%. In fact, nearly all of the major categories under Obama's purview have him in the 20 percentile bracket. It is his specific job performance(s) that is at stake, and he knows that he is in big trouble in this department.

The really big news in all this is the fact that Obama is running out of time to deal with the economy. Understand that by the time we get to April of next year, people, voters, will be making up their mind in a final sense as to what they are going to do. Obama does not have a "year and a half," but only 8 months. If not before April and certainly afterwards, the rhetorical wars will be well under way. Six months from that time, we will have one of the most significant elections in history.

Here is a review of the latest polls.

Liberals put diet ahead of happiness ------ for six year olds !!!!

Want to send your 6 year old girl (especially) into a weight obsessed set of eating disorders? Buy this stinking book and use it to convince her that "fat" is ugly, that her life will greatly improve when she is finally skinny. The 14 year old champion in this book, is pudgy and unpopular until she sees the need for a diet.

In the end, the new Maggie becomes the champion of the soccer team because she is no longer overweight.

Understand that if the liberals have their way, or should I say "have their weigh," pressure will be on the child, herself, to lose weight and the message to the larger elementary community will be "fat is ugly." Talk about increasing a bullying problem !!! If these kids are taught this crap in school, life for the overweight child is, indeed, going to get ugly.

Kids do not have the where with all to handle the pressure of a skinny society and that is the point of this post.

Why is Palin waiting to get in the race? We have the answer, and "man, is it a good one !!"

Here is a headline that gives us a little hope as to the Governor's intentions: Palin event switches sites to handle crowd. Can you believe it? After all this time, a Palin waiting in the wings, taking the risk of losing her popular momentum, a serious risk, by the way, she has to change venues to accommodate the crowds.

Why is she in Iowa ? She is not in Montana or Colorado. No, she is in Iowa, standing as close to the political horse race as she can get without "getting in." And why is she waiting so long to get into the race? According to Karl Rove, she has until mid-October. If she knows this, and why wouldn't she, what might be her strategy?

I have said from the very beginning of the Palin Presence, that her political instincts are great - far above average. Obama, by contrast, has the political strategy of a horse in heat.

Mid-October is nearly two months from now. Plenty of time for a Paul Ryan or a Mitch Daniels or a Chris Cristy to get in the race. Plenty of time for those currently in the race, to stumble and fail. Romney has that problem with RomneyCare and the fact that he is a Mormon. I do not hold that against him at all, but some will. The two factors may spell his demise.

Bachmann and Perry are great, but both are a little too busy sticking their feet into their mouths. Will they do themselves in, before mid-October ? Palin has already been through the fire. She has already been "vetted" by the goons on the Left. They found nothing; no scandal, no serious faults, no serious verbal screw-ups, nothing. She is as pure as the driven snow !! And she knows exactly how she will handle the press.

Those of us who are her fans know that she can handle herself well in a debate. Look what she did with a "can I call you Joe" Biden - an absolute rookie on the national stage (Palin) holding her own against a seasoned and well spoken opponent. You can bet that the arrogant Barack Obama is afraid of her, as is the press. THAT is why they have wasted so much time trying to destroy her.

Her recent interviews (the past several days, this week) on FoxNews have served her well. And, think about this: as long as she is undeclared, she remains an adviser on FoxNews. Free air time is a blessing, in this case, and a great political strategy.

If she waits until October to declare, she will come into the race as the "last man standing," simply because she waited !! If you do not see this as a brilliant strategy, an absolutely brilliant maneuver, well, you are spending too much time cutting the grass . . . . . or smoking it.

Prediction: if someone like a Paul Ryan gets in the race, I believe Sarah Palin will "stand down." But if the current crop shows weakness, I believe she will get in the race.

Can she win? Oh, you betcha -- that is, if we all stop asking that damn question !!!

S & P slaps Obama with a downgrade and our resident Chicago Thug strikes back with a DOJ investigation. Make no mistake, this is all about revenge.

Obama to reveal "all new" economic plan !! Anyone believe that ?

In our headline is a claim coming from the President. We have to wait until September to find out his "new" plan, but, of course, we are finding out bits of the plan as the Administration leaks details to community.

More "stimulus." A change in the patent law. Money for infrastructure.

The above is what we know of the plan, to date. Anything new in the above? Of course not. Understand this: Obama is incapable of coming up with anything new as regards national economics. But not just Obama. The current crop of Democrat leadership is equally incapable.

We hasten to add that "new" should not be the driving force in an economic plan. New jobless claims remain at 1.6 million per month; been there for two and half years. New monthly sales figures for home sales are down 3.1% over last month. New numbers for Bank of America stock is at $6.97 and may go lower. If you do not believe that B of A will be allowed to "go under," this stock could be the best buy of your lifetime.

So much for "new."

Let's look at some of Obama's previous "new" plans.

ObamaCare: as long ago as May of 2010, we were being told that new health care bill would cost $1 trillion after promises that just the opposite would be the case. The "new" cost analysis came just two months after the bill became law. That estimate has been revised to $1.445.
Understand that gamesmanship has been used by the Administration to keep the cost of ObamaCare lower that its actual 10 year cost. The bill passed into law in early 2010 but it's major cost factors will not go into effect until 2014, by design of the crooks who crammed this bill down our throats. In the second ten year period, the first full decade of ObamaCare, many expect ObamaCare to cost the taxpayer 3 trillion dollars or more. The regulations for this monstrosity will not be completed for three more years. Employers know their health care cost will rise because of this "reform" bill. Due to the fact that it will not be fully written for three more years, employers are afraid to hire. The "uncertainty" the Administration acknowledges exists in the business community is due to the hundreds of pages of regulations yet to be written, not with Wall Street, as the Democrat pundits suggests.

The February 17, 2009 Stimulus: Counting interest and three increases in jobless benefit payments, this $787 billion dollar bill actually cost the American people $1 trillion dollars. Only 3.5% of the original amount, $787 billion, went to the creation of jobs and most of those were temporary. The effect of that bill is over. Its time has come and gone. Obama has even joked about "shovel ready jobs" that wound up being only a figment of his unadvised imagination. The final conclusion as to the stimulus is that it was a terrible failure. Why? Well, I do not know all the reasons, but part of the truth is the fact that some of the money was attached to existing projects with the Administration, then, making claim to the "creation" of jobs. In California, highway projects in my region, projects that had begun prior to Obama's presidency, suddenly were posted with new signage giving credit to stimulus funding. In those cases, Obama deserved no credit whatsoever, but posted signage and took the credit, anyway. Flimflam and nothing more.

Dodd/Frank: the new financial regulation bill, signed into law in July of 2010, promised to end the danger of a Wall Street collapse. It was a 2000 page bill and, again, it will not be fully written until 2013. Bankers and investor have no idea as to the final impact of the legislation. To date, more than 600 regulations have been written. It is more than unfortunate that none of the regulations will have anything to do with Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac. What needs to be stressed, here, is the fact that unwritten legislation is part of the reason why business is holding back on hiring and investment.

At a time when fiscal responsibility and legislative prudence were in demand, Obama decided to force his personal agenda upon America. We are paying the price because of the ignorant administration of his office.

If the above is an example of what we might expect with the up and coming "new" economic campaign, we are all in serious trouble. Most recessions resolve themselves within 18 months. When Bush 43 took office, our economy was on a down turn. 12 million of the 20 million jobs "created" under the Clinton Administration vanished from the scene in the Dot Com collapse.

Obama, indeed, inherited a recession, but so did George W Bush. The difference between the two are the policies of the Obama Administration. Don't get your hopes up as you wait for Obama to surprise us all with his "new" ideas.

Revised 9:08 pm, same day

My question is this: Do the Obamas need to vacation in Martha's Vieyard and do they need to fly there in his and her's private jets? (no article)