What about the promise?

what about the promise?

I believe on the campaign trail, Obama pledged to veto earmarks. That means he will have to veto the stimulus package or go back on his campaign promise.

Watching Obama address the Democratic retreat last week, he said some things that were very reassuring and some were not.  On one hand he said they need to work with Republicans and on the other he reminded them that the Democrats won the election.  Which is it?

Obama also mentioned that there were earmarks in the stimulus bill, but apparently forgot he promised to veto earmarks. Or was he just saying that to get elected?  :)

How does spending $335 million on STD prevention stimulate the economy except by putting money in the pockets of his campaign contributors?

$600 million + for digital tv transition is stimulating the economy how?

How many people could have help saving their home with that much money?

How many children could be fed and clothed with that money?

How many past due utility bills could be paid with that money?

How many people could get assistance in obtaining reliable transportation with that much money?

How does Congress sleep at nite when they are just using this for payola?

There is very little in there for real stimulus and a great deal for boondoggles.

The Republicans had an opportunity to show they have changed but have shown that they are still not able to come up with innovative ideas that are not politics as usual.  They have no chance to get any legislation passed but they do have an opportunity to regain some credibilty if they are willing to get back to basics.

The Democrats have the real opportunity to show that they are the party of the people but are falling into the trap that the controlling usually falls into of arrogance and disdain for the voters.  It's all about reelection and the money they need to get there.


Comments 37 comments

Stimulus Check 7 years ago

I haven't figured out the STD part either. It really seems like there are parts of this where Obama is using this Stimulus package to sneak some of the things he wanted todo and get done while in office under the table.

I guess thats why they are calling it a "Package" You don't know what you are going to get.

logic,commonsense 7 years ago Author

I think "suprise" package when we find out all that is truly in it! And I'm guessing not a good suprise.

Whitney05 profile image

Whitney05 7 years ago from Georgia

I heard today that if the government had given consumers the money that they forked out for banks and businesses, everyone would have gotten about $60,000. I think the guy said something about even right now, everyone could still get about $20,000. I'm not sure where the figures came from, but I thought it was pretty interesting... Although, it's really not about the stimulus package, but your hub reminded me of that conversation earlier today, which started with the stimulus package and ended with those figures.

logic,commonsense 7 years ago Author

I have dealt with the govenrment thru an oraganization I belong to. They take about 50% to "administrate" the funds. So we would only get $10,000. LOL

AEvans profile image

AEvans 7 years ago from SomeWhere Out There

I just wish they would have helped the people instead of the banks. :)

cindyvine profile image

cindyvine 7 years ago from Kyiv, Ukraine

whats an earmark?

logic,commonsense 7 years ago Author

AEvans-they had to pay off the campaign contributors

cindy-an earmark is a request for funds for a special project requested by a constituent. Usually someone who has donated money to your campaign.

blondepoet profile image

blondepoet 7 years ago from australia

God that really sucks big time.

logic,commonsense 7 years ago Author

Yeah it does. The problem is they all do it, even the ones who preach against it.

nicomp profile image

nicomp 7 years ago from Ohio, USA

You nailed it. During the campaign Obama said what his base wanted to hear. Logical people knew he was lying through his cigarette but enough people drank the kool-aid to get him elected.

logic,commonsense 7 years ago Author


It was pretty much inevitable. People wanted to believe in pie in the sky and he was serving up dessert with topping.

Madame X 7 years ago

Obama's election was a boomerang effect. Everyone was "told" to hate Bush so hard that Obama became a shoo-in. How does a one-year senate rookie with no political machine beat Hillary Clinton? I'm extremely interested in anyone who has the answer to that one.

logic,commonsense 7 years ago Author

They wanted to feel good about themselves for voting for a black person that the media sold them a bill of goods on. I don't get why it is a great thing to vote for a person because they are black, or a woman or Latina but you are racist and a facist if you vote for a white person because they are white or male?

Why don't we vote for the best qualified regardless of what they look like? Why don't we vote for the person with the most integrity instead of the person who is the best bull sh***er?

Why can't we find a candidate that is willing to do what is right instead of what is popular? And why are most voters unable to tell the difference?

Moonchild60 profile image

Moonchild60 7 years ago

According to my husband and some financial experts that were on those obscure shows no one ever watches but intellectuals, the banks absolutely positively needed to be saved and the government didn't do it happily. They knew they had no choice. We would have slid into a huge depression and then they weren't sure where we could have possibly gone from there to save ourselves down the road. The government and those in the money seats knew damn well they had no choice but to save the banks to keep the USA's economy from crumbling to the ground, but that didn't mean they liked doing it. They waited until the last minute to do it for this reason. They kept hoping there was another way, sadly, there was not.

logic,commonsense 7 years ago Author

That is what they said about the car companies, but Ford did not need the bailout and they are thriving. Cash for clunkers did more for GM and Chrysler than all the money they received prior to that program. Give the money back to the people who paid it in and all the government stimulus money will be used much more effectively.

lxxy profile image

lxxy 7 years ago from Beneath, Between, Beyond

Ahhh, another person pointing out Obama's gung-ho-come-puppet approach to politics.

When there's only one ruling party, split amongst two polar opposites--can you expect anything less?

logic,commonsense 7 years ago Author

I expect those elected to public office to actually serve the public good and if they do not, then I expect the electorate to replace them as soon as possible!

That is why we need to replace most of them.

kj8 profile image

kj8 7 years ago from Australia

I know this is a fairly old topic - but here in Australia - the citizens all got $900 per child and adult to stimulate our economy and we kept our economy strong by spending the money however we wanted.

logic,commonsense 7 years ago Author

That is a great idea, we would have been a lot further ahead if our government had done something similar.

Instead they printed more money in order to pay off the special interests that got the current majority elected.

AEvans profile image

AEvans 7 years ago from SomeWhere Out There

There are so many that could have used the money in this Country everyone should have gotten something instead of all of the banks and we could have saved our home instead of a corporate bank telling us it was best to re-finance and in the end our 10 years of ownership became null and void. I enjoyed this hub! :)

logic,commonsense 7 years ago Author

Thanks AE, we have just seen the tip of the iceberg of the waste.

Sorry to hear about your home. There are things Congress could have done to really help people, instead to the scam they perpetuated on us all.

AEvans profile image

AEvans 7 years ago from SomeWhere Out There

They certainly did and they are still scamming people and homes are still being taken from Americans. Where are all of the jobs? They are still outside the U.S. and that just irks me.:(

Average American profile image

Average American 7 years ago from Las Vegas, Nevada

Stimulus as defined by me= placing back into circulation more money to aid the people in paying their bills and aiding companies in making their payroll and growing their companies.

With that understanding, would not tax cuts directly to the people and employers perform the same act?

The difference is that the current administration wants to pick and choose who gets help and who does not. But they have little concern as to who will have to one day pay for it all. That would be you and I.

logic,commonsense 7 years ago Author

Right on AA!

Thanks for coming by!

Xonica profile image

Xonica 6 years ago from Scotland

nicomp got it right saying you nailed it. Indeed. Nicely written too!

logic,commonsense 6 years ago Author

Thanks for the comments Xonica! Just call em as I see em!

Lecie 6 years ago

i'm on disability and thanks to the part of his health bill that did pass i'm already having to pay co-pays on some of my medicines. i can barely afford to eat as it is. if the co-pays go up higher when the rest of his bill passes i will have to choose between food and medicine. he says it's because the gov. should not be paying for health care and that the insurance companies are responsible for that. well i have news for him. it's gov. money i get every month and now with the co-pays it's gov. money paying for my medicine. this makes no sense to me.

logic,commonsense 6 years ago Author

He really doesn't care about the details or who gets hurt. It is all about him feeling good about himself because he did something for us poor helpless idiots who can not do or think for ourselves!

getmyback 6 years ago

wow, thanks, great write, thought provoking and remained interesting, thank you

logic,commonsense 6 years ago Author

Thanks for the comments gmb! My goal is just that, provoke thought and hopefully that will translate in to action!

delilah tomson 6 years ago

You hit it right on the nose! Like I always say, most presidential candidates will promise you the moon--just to get a vote. Once voted, everything that was promised kinda went out the door. All I can say is this.. at least the democrats are trying to do something about America's Healthcare, and I only wish that the republicans would stop ALL the pickering and complaining and do something about it. No offense to anyone. By the way, I voted Republican every year and last year, too.

donotfear profile image

donotfear 6 years ago from The Boondocks

Looks like it's left a big 'black hole'....let's hope we don't get 'sucked in'.

logic,commonsense 6 years ago Author

delilah,I guess i believe we should vote for the individual instead of the party. There are good and bad in both. Most of all we need to let them know that we care about issues and they damn sure better listen!

dnf, we are clutching on to the rim, waiting for help to arrive!

mega1 profile image

mega1 6 years ago

I have no opinion on politics. It's all too frustrating and I would always be wrong. I was just looking for clues as to why you have no picture up! Oh well, I guess I really don't need to know. sigh.

logic,commonsense 6 years ago Author

You are never wrong as long as you are honest about what you believe.

Just being a tease!

kathy little wolf profile image

kathy little wolf 6 years ago from Dusty Trails, Arkansas

don't know a lot about politics...but its my opinion, which means nothing at the end of the day...is we are ALL SCREWED!!

job well done on this write!!!

logic,commonsense 6 years ago Author

Your opinion means a lot anytime! We are screwed for now, but we can change things come November.

Thanks for the kind words and for stopping by, kathy!

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.

    Click to Rate This Article