Democrats are launching a radio ad campaign against 28 congressional Republicans who have obstructed President Obama's stimulus package, and the children's health bill.
Targets include 8th District haircut, Dave Reichert, as always seen as a liberal Republican who's vulnerable in 2010.
In the dry-spell after the long feed at the 2008 election trough, it's a much-needed stimulus package for stations dining on the bread & water of what's left of the retail advertising.
The ads start Wednesday and will be up for a week.
The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee's, "Put Families First," campaign makes sure voters know who voted against the House bills.
An example: "Do you know Congressman Dave Reichert voted to bail out big banks, but opposed tax breaks for 95 percent of American workers? Times are tough. Tell Dave to put families first."
THANK GOD THEY HAVE OBSTRUCTED IT! - have you read any of the pork laden POS?
So aare they going to do the same thing to the Democrats (who's number keep rising) who are against the bill as well?
What a joke, just like left wingers to go off half cocked not even knowing what they are fighting about.
Posted by: Brian | February 03, 2009 at 04:45 PM
Yeah...let's start vetting voting records, shall we...on various issues and see who voted how.
Posted by: Duffman | February 03, 2009 at 04:58 PM
are they going to launch a radio campaign against gov. gregoire for cutting health care for kids as well?
I won't hold my breath.
Posted by: .... | February 03, 2009 at 07:18 PM
Have YOU read any of it, Bri? HMm? What pork? Be specific, if you can. Very little pork according to what I've read.
So, let's see your list.
(Anybody wanna guess that we won't hear from Brian for a while...)
Posted by: joanie | February 03, 2009 at 09:59 PM
Very little pork ??
That is because you are a bleeding heart and your definition of pork does not seem to mesh with the real world of finance. David Brooks explained why this is pork well in his editorial in the NYT last Friday. Why should ACORN get $5 billion ? Why should we "buy American" - do we want to start a trade war with the rest of the world - as happened during the Great Depression ? That's a fact and am surprised that a student of history, like the President purports to be doesn't see that.
If Pres. Obama believes he needs to pass this by the middle of the month, he has "do-something" disease, which has already been exemplified by his 8 or 9 executive orders - some OK and some not so good. He claims there is a hurry to pass it, yet only 15% of the money in the House Bill would be spent this year and a third of it would not be spent until after 2012. Anyone want to explain that ?
It would behoove the President to take more time and make it a better and more fiscally responsible bill, unlike the $700 Billion bailout orchestrated by Paulson was - same scenario- we need to pass it now ! and two months later, he wasn't sure if that was the right thing to do. A compromise between the Republicans and Democrat versions would be a significant improvement over the crap-laden bill passed by the House thanks to the Pelosi-led Dimocrats.
As for the subject of this article - go ahead and vet Reichert's record- I was glad he voted against it - a bad bill now is worse than a halfway decent bill in another month and a half is simply because it will do less irreparable harm.
Posted by: KS | February 03, 2009 at 10:22 PM
One example (and I don't get how it is an example) is all you can come up with? You should have saved the bandwidth, KLueless.
As for "buy Amerian" - since when is that pork? If you want an American economy, you better buy something that's made here.
Posted by: joanie | February 03, 2009 at 10:36 PM
ALL MEDIA EDITORIALIZE - OBAMA'S AMATEURISM LEADS WORLD TO BRINK OF TRADE WAR; TRADE WARS LEAD TO SHOOTING WARS
Obama's lack of experience has his head reeling and eyes tearing with dizzying confusion as his administration continues to limp from one misstep to another, sending the American train, now engineered by amateurs, into the ditch.
Wall Street Journal
World Will Wish for Bush after Obama Wrecks Global Economy
The irony is that all those folks outside the U.S. who saw him as their man who would end American arrogance toward the rest of the world may end up wishing for the trade policies of the guy they didn’t like.
Christian Science Monitor
Obama Cedes Moral Authority
If "Buy American" is not expunged from the recovery package, President Obama will cede his moral authority to lead the world away from mutually destructive trade policies.
The Atlantic
Obama Flaunts International Law
These measures are possibly illegal in international law, flatly contradict a commitment that the US made at the G20 summit in November, and (most important) are likely to hurt the economy more than help it.
The Economist
Obama Set to Violate International Law
Such naked protectionism may violate international trade rules.
Motley Fool
Democrats Set to Screw the Pooch
Usher out the Replublicans who have screwed things up so badly for the past eight years and usher in the Democrats who will screw things up their own way.
Posted by: 2 Weeks in and The Train is Going into the Ditch | February 04, 2009 at 12:34 AM
OBAMA ON DEFENSE: "we gunna send cheerleaders to da Afghans -- naws, Hil'ry ain't goin' guys ... duhhhh, i expert in the defense, duhhh ... i'm tired, me no brain today"
NEW OBAMA DEFENSE PRIORITY: RECRUIT CHEERLEADING SQUADS TO DEPLOY TO AFGHANISTAN
http://blog.wired.com/defense/2009/02/army-recruiting.html
Posted by: 2 Weeks in and The Train is Going into the Ditch | February 04, 2009 at 12:55 AM
Bush was over-scrutinized when he first took office. It was all "Chinese capture spy plane, threaten to bury the U.S. ... will Bush start a war with China?"
They are daring Obama to screw up because that's good theater. Journalists aren't supposed to make the news, but damnit, they're trying.
Posted by: AuthenticAndrew | February 04, 2009 at 02:39 AM
Joanie
Sorry but I tend to side with the Polisi-flubbed-it crowd on this. Barack also deserves some blame for the porkish flavor of the house bill..
I see two problem with the house bill.
1. Obama made a critical, Clinton-like, argument that these dollars were to be investments rather than expenditures. Unfortunately, much of the House bill is spent on current needs ... assuring that teachers are not fired, extending COBRE, extending unemployment, and decreasing, for ashort time the social security tax. These all make sense but they are tradtitional safety net measures not investments.
A truly silly example was the effort by Peolosi to reform Bush era law on birth control. This actually cost little or nothing BUT it looked like special interest legislation and any argument that this was a high priority of insuring future productivity was contrived.
Bottom line, Pelosi hurt the effort by making the investment idea look like an excuse to do what had to be done anyway.
2. The bill provides very little finding that can be recognized as investments. Almost no money is set for R&D, reforms of the investment tax credit are missing, there is nothing identifiable as VC, etc.
In part this is the result of a concatenation of two incompatible ideas .. investment and emergency. Look here in the PNW. We can almost hear the creaping rust in our transportation system. Boeing may end up leaving simply because they can not move anything from Everett to the Columbia, the UW is teetering on a leveraged edge not appropriate for a state school, our college level facilities are shrinking, etc. BUT, very little of this can be fixed by spending any amount of money over the next 24 months.
What I believe BHO needs to do is to educate the public as to the need for investment and separate that need form the serious but short term needs of a failed Bush economy. The investment part should not be a teo year package. To work it needs to be a long term plan that actually does improve our infrastructure and doers give the private sector the long term vision to reinvest in US.
cross posted to SJ
Posted by: SeattleJew | February 04, 2009 at 06:01 AM
ms joanie:
'As for "buy Amerian" - since when is that pork? If you want an American economy, you better buy something that's made here.'
Your statement is completely bogus and demonstrates what little you know of international economics. Even POTUS Obama is learning a bit about Econ 101 !
You buy where you get the best value for the best price - period! Did you not listen to the Phd discussing this on your favorite - Dave Ross Show the other day.
Posted by: Duffman | February 04, 2009 at 06:30 AM
traditional safety net measures vs. investments?
How is education not an investment? Health care not an investment? Education and health care are vital to economic success.
I agree completely with your last comment: he needs to educate the public and he needs to spend more money. Do you read Krugman? He's almost apoplectic at the minimalist nature of the Obama plan.
If you sacrifice health care and education, you are losing in the long run. People need to feel secure in their care and children must be educated. THose are clearly investments in fixing this problem for the long term. But he needs to do much, much more and entertain the desires of the right much much less.
Posted by: joanie | February 04, 2009 at 07:59 AM
Well, duff, you continue to BLoviate without details or facts. Have a good day.
Posted by: joanie | February 04, 2009 at 08:00 AM
And Andrew, quit responding to people who post bogus quotes without linking.
Posted by: joanie | February 04, 2009 at 08:02 AM
Typical retort of someone who goes 'Gulp' OMG...he's right. Enjoy your day and try to enlighten yourself.
Posted by: Duffman | February 04, 2009 at 08:02 AM
What part of this article from YOUR Newspaper don't you get??
Posted by: Duffman | February 04, 2009 at 08:18 AM
NOT my newspaper. Why do you ASSume so much duff?
Posted by: joanie | February 04, 2009 at 08:29 AM
Health & Human Svcs Secy:
Tom Daschle, Performance Czar:Nancy Killefer...Hmmmmmm, let's see now a couple of positions looking to be filled and Blago looking for a job (on Letterman last nite).Posted by: Duffman | February 04, 2009 at 09:02 AM
What President Obama needs to do is apologize for his Partys failure of the last two years. If the Libs would have kept thier eye on the economy instead of searching for ways to impeach Bush and withdraw from Iraq and then raise the Federal Minimum Wage which they were warned would put people out of thier jobs, we would not be in this mess in the first place.
Posted by: Nevets | February 04, 2009 at 09:32 AM
As for education, yes we should wisely invest in it. We wouldn't want our future leaders making idiotic statements like this.
How do Californians keep electing this woman into office. She is an embarassment to the nation. She has to go.
Posted by: Nevets | February 04, 2009 at 09:36 AM
Historical words the dims have never heard!
'The budget should be balanced, the Treasury should be refilled, public debt should be reduced, the arrogance of officialdom should be tempered and controlled, and the assistance to foreign lands should be curtailed, lest Rome become bankrupt. People must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance.' Cicero ~ 55 BC
Posted by: Habu | February 04, 2009 at 09:39 AM
Our side won, you guys need to lie back and enjoy it!
Posted by: Coiler | February 04, 2009 at 10:32 AM
Is 'your side' America?
Posted by: Duffman | February 04, 2009 at 11:20 AM
Your side did win and the people in KY are very aware of YOUR sides failure to provide timely FEMA assistance in their time of need. As a result, many are dead and suffering.
Zero promised no more Katrina's. Ice storms dont count?
Posted by: Habu | February 04, 2009 at 11:28 AM
Yes. Keep up the obstruction. Call this pork for what it is. A spending, give away program.
Posted by: Bill | February 04, 2009 at 12:08 PM
Duffman, you would rather buy some cheap shit from China than to promote a manufacturing business that hires Americans, who then, in turn, purchase goods from neighborhood stores, keeping a local economy strong and vibrant? I guess you have on your Republican socks today.
I heard a guy on the way home who works for a company that imports parts for a manufacturing company here in the US. He said that as long as they can buy this one part they need from France, the plant owner is ready to expand the operation significantly and hire MANY American workers. I dont consider it "protectionism" when we make jobs for our own citizens rather than send work to other countries just so they dont have to pay a living wage, and we get cheap crap back to sell in the stores. We are the world's biggest importer, and that is not going to change just because we put people to work here.
Obama's bill allows us to get raw materials from elsewhere and turn them into goods we can sell, while giving Americans a job. The thousands of people who have or will have lost their jobs just this week are desparately looking for any work they can find. I think we should help them find it.
Posted by: sparky | February 04, 2009 at 04:16 PM
Duffman, you would rather buy some cheap shit from China than to promote a manufacturing business that hires Americans, who then, in turn, purchase goods from neighborhood stores, keeping a local economy strong and vibrant? I guess you have on your Republican socks today.
I heard a guy on the way home who works for a company that imports parts for a manufacturing company here in the US. He said that as long as they can buy this one part they need from France, the plant owner is ready to expand the operation significantly and hire MANY American workers. I dont consider it "protectionism" when we make jobs for our own citizens rather than send work to other countries just so they dont have to pay a living wage, and we get cheap crap back to sell in the stores. We are the world's biggest importer, and that is not going to change just because we put people to work here.
Obama's bill allows us to get raw materials from elsewhere and turn them into goods we can sell, while giving Americans a job. The thousands of people who have or will have lost their jobs just this week are desparately looking for any work they can find. I think we should help them find it.
Posted by: sparky | February 04, 2009 at 04:19 PM
Come on Sparky.
The only thing you said in that whole post that I disagree with is the Duffy/socks thing.
I am big on buy American and the principals of smaller government.
Libs by Volvo's, Subaru's, Saabs, and various other rice burners.
Posted by: chucks | February 04, 2009 at 04:30 PM
"The thousands of people who have or will have lost their jobs just this week are desparately looking for any work they can find. I think we should help them find it."
May I suggest you train them as auditors to review dim tax returns. A full career is indicated.
Posted by: Habu | February 04, 2009 at 04:31 PM
yes that is true, not to mention Grassley, who is the ranking member of the Senate Finance committee, who had his own pecadillos with the FEC over some disbursements...and who was that guy who was 4 years behind on paying taxes on his house...John,,somebody named John,,,John McCain,,,anyone hear of him? Time Magazine reported that Sen. McCain commonly spends several thousands of dollars shooting craps at casinos. Yet for the past two years, he has failed to report any gambling gains or losses on his tax return. You're required to file a Form W-G if you win more than $600 at any one time. Oh well.
I would be happy if corporations owned by both parties would pay taxes, but I doubt that will happen..
Posted by: sparky | February 04, 2009 at 04:51 PM
chucks, you are a Fine American!! Even if you do wear Republican socks!!
Posted by: sparky | February 04, 2009 at 05:59 PM
Pat Buttcanon drives a Mercedes.
Posted by: Coiler | February 04, 2009 at 06:22 PM
McCain-who is he? Obviously-not a winner!
Posted by: Habu | February 04, 2009 at 06:41 PM
CAreful, Habu. If we did that, imagine all the unemployed Republicans we'd have...
Amazing how quickly conservatives forget the last eight years. One would think conservative politicians just came riding in . . . kind of like playing the movie backwards, isn't it?
Posted by: joanie | February 04, 2009 at 06:54 PM
Jew, what do you think about these words from Barney Frank:
"FRANK: I regret Senator DeMint saying that this is the American way. Let's -- let's just agree that we're all Americans here, Jim, and that nobody's got the American way versus presumably the non-American way.
And as far as spending versus tax cuts, I think we need to fix some highways and bridges. I never saw a tax cut fix a bridge. I never saw a tax cut give us more public transportation. The fact is, we need a mix.
We need -- and I think we've suffered from an extremism in this country in the past of relying only on private-sector activity and having too little government. It's possible to have too much government, no question. But it's possible to have too little. And some parts of this stimulus -- extending unemployment benefits, helping with food stamps -- you know, we have two purposes here. One is to stimulate the overall economy. The other is to go to the aid of some people who, through no fault of their own, have been damaged. You can't just look at the aggregates. [...]
FRANK: The largest spending bill in history is going to turn out to be the war in Iraq. And one of the things, if we're going to talk about spending, I don't -- I have a problem when we leave out that extraordinarily expensive, damaging war in Iraq, which has caused much more harm than good, in my judgment.
And I don't understand why, from some of my conservative friends, building a road, building a school, helping somebody get health care, that's -- that's wasteful spending, but that war in Iraq, which is going to cost us over $1 trillion before we're through -- yes, I wish we hadn't have done that. We'd have been in a lot better shape fiscally. [...]
FRANK: I also disagree that we're taking money, quote, "out of the economy" if we improve public transportation, if we improve highways. That's your concept. You're taking money out of the economy if you make sure a bridge doesn't fall down."
A lot to read, but he echoes my thoughts about the stimulus package. It just needs to be bigger and people have to understand that people who have been hurt through no fault of their own need help. And bankruptcies are often (usually?) the result of uninsured medical events.
I was running late this morning and I didn't really give your post proper attention. It is the EJAcation of the public that is so crucial.
Posted by: joanie for jew | February 04, 2009 at 07:10 PM
Yes, it's refreshing to see a president take responsibility and owning up to mistakes. Bush would only say he made mistakes but wouldn't name them.
Posted by: Coiler | February 04, 2009 at 07:14 PM
I won't post another long one but here's another good post from My DD advocating for government spending over tax cuts.
FOr the first article, you have to scroll down a bit.
Finally, Dean Baker was discussing the economy with Rob Reagan and with some temerity, Reagan asked Baker when the economy really started this slide. Baker gamely said "under Reagan" and went on to explain how Ronald Reagan's policies started us on this spiral to the bottom.
Ron let out a gasp of relief and said he was glad that question was out of the way.
He's sure an honest guy.
Posted by: joanie | February 04, 2009 at 07:17 PM
Happy hour over Joanie?
Zero is at the helm now.
Sounds like Panetta may join the "may have beens".
Change you can believe in.
Yep. Sure enough!!!! Uh huh.
Posted by: Habu | February 04, 2009 at 07:21 PM
Ph(Joanie) - from your posts I conclude that you are economically challenged. Barney Frank is the last person in Congress I'd want to heed the counsel of - he is one of the big reasons that we are in this situation, but that doesn't stop you.
One thing Frank is good at is denying guilt, being a bullshit artist and playing the victim card. Too bad more conservatives don't practice that more adeptly.
I know you too well - you'll try your patented revisionist spin and misinformation to try and convince the jury of public opinion that you are right and anyone who is contrary to you is wrong - whether its after you've had a snootful or not. The devil is in the details and you have sympathy for the devil.
The signing of the SCHIP program into law minimizes the fact that it covers illegal alien kids also. That is a sizable chunk and once again, the Dimocrats and the Rethuglicans that voted for this are inconsistent and seem to be influenced by Marxists like Chavez, Castro and Soros and the open borders - F U America crowd.
Posted by: KS | February 04, 2009 at 07:44 PM
"Amazing how quickly conservatives forget the last eight years."
I remember them pretty well Joanie. Especially two years ago when unemployment was at 4%. Gee, that was right before the Libs took control and look what has happened. 3 million people unemployed. Yeah, looks like the Libs are for the people. Unemployed people that is. And how does Pelosi thank them, by handing out free condoms.
Posted by: Nevets | February 04, 2009 at 11:58 PM
Funny how you Libs didnt like bridges during the election, but after winning the White House thats all you want to build.
Posted by: Nevets | February 05, 2009 at 12:00 AM
After President Obamas cap on CEO salaries. Maybe Gregoire should take a page out of that playbook and cap the Mariners salaries when they have seasons like last year. Not sure it would go over alright with the ballplayers, but it just might get that extra 10% needed to have a winner at Safeco.
Posted by: Nevets | February 05, 2009 at 12:10 AM
Sparks – Don’t forget that Republican icon last fall that failed to pay back taxes but fessed up when caught by the press. That lavish spokesman for the American middle class which by the way is becoming an endangered species…..Joe the Plumber.
Posted by: rozskat | February 05, 2009 at 07:05 AM
Steven – good idea about the Mariners and it should be expanded to the Seahawks as well. The M’s with a 61-101 record and the Hawks 4-12. Ugh, it isn’t a good time to be a Seattle sports fan. I don’t see much improvement with the M’s this year. I may resort to sitting back again to the cheap seats.
I will make a deal with the M’s. I will go ahead and strike out and make errors in the field for one percent of what they were paying Richie Sexson. Let’s see, $150,000 a year is good enough for me!
Posted by: rozskat | February 05, 2009 at 07:14 AM