Michaell Bachman (R) sets standard for lying

[Conan71]

The extension to 12/31/09 was about $40 billion of the $330 billion.

Edited to add: Sorry, I misread your question earlier and presumed you meant "what part of that was for the unemployment extension."

In answer to the question you actually asked, the explanation I've seen is that the demand destruction in the month or two after the bill was mostly drafted and when it passed greatly exceeded pretty much everybody's expectations. Multiple studies have indicated that the stimulus produced about a 3% improvement in the UE numbers over what they would have been without it. In a demand-constrained environment, tax cuts don't do a lot of good, so it's reasonable to say that Obama's biggest mistake was doing the politically more popular thing and throwing in hundreds of billions in tax cuts instead of putting that money toward more direct forms of stimulating employment.

When people are scared sh**less of what the economy is going to do, they save money instead of spending it, which of course leads to further demand reductions and more bad economic news, eventually culminating in a deflationary spiral. Hence my contention that tax cuts weren't the right tool for the job at that particular moment in time.

I'm so skeptical of studies like this, sort of like the ever-changing math for "jobs saved and created".

Your point though is spot-on as far as tax cuts and demand reductions.  You could cut tax rates by 1/2 and it still won't create jobs if demand for consumer and industrial goods doesn't go up to justify beefing up sales, production and administrative staff.  I will be curious to see if a GOP overhaul of Congress will inspire more confidence and get more private dollars moving again.  Corporate America views Democrats and their policies as not being friendly to big business.  Whether there's a shred of reality in that, we can debate for weeks on end.  All that matters is that if that is the paradigm which makes them feel unsure about the economy and it's keeping them from hiring, it's a problem.

[Townsend]

Michele Bachmann's Historical Blunder

A blunder of historical fact - not proportions - tainted Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann’s first visit to New Hampshire this weekend. Speaking to students and conservative activists in Manchester, the Tea Party activist encouraged the Granite state to be proud of its role in the Revolutionary War.

“You’re the state where the shot was heard ‘round the world at Lexington and Concord,” Bachmann said at an event organized by the Republican Liberty Caucus of New Hampshire.

The shot that started the America’s war for independence was, of course, fired in Massachusetts.

Soon after the gaffe, Bachmann, who is seriously exploring a 2012 presidential bid, responded on her Facebook page saying, “So I misplaced the battles Concord and Lexington by saying they were in New Hampshire. It was my mistake, Massachusetts is where they happened. New Hampshire is where they are still proud of it!”

In true Bachmann fashion she did not miss the opportunity to take a punch at President Obama. “That will be the last time I borrow President Obama's teleprompter!” she posted a few hours later.

The event’s organizer said “no one in the audience was troubled” by Bachmann’s American history mix-up.

“It was an obvious slip and was not an indication of her intelligence,” Republican Liberty Caucus Chairman Andrew Hemingway said in an email. "My group left enthused and excited about the upcoming primary season. She motivated and inspired the audience. More than I have seen from the other potential candidates."

This is not the first botched reference to US history in Bachmann’s bag of blunders. In a January speech the Tea Party activist invoked her love of the Founding Fathers who “worked tirelessly until slavery was no more in the United States.”

Many of the founders, including George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, were, in fact, slave owners. And as every middle school history teacher will tell you, the founding fathers virtually ignored the issue of slavery. It was not until the mid 1800s that slavery became a contentious issue in American politics.

This all comes from the Congresswoman who organized Constitution classes for her fellow members of the House. "We're going to practice every week, if you will, our craft, which is studying and learning the Declaration, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights," Bachmann said in an interview with Lou Dobbs in December. She said the classes were intended to  help members of Congress “wrap our minds around this magnificent document.”

Bachmann’s tour of early primary states continues to Iowa later this month where she will speak at the Network of Iowa Christian Home Educators on March 23 and attend Steve King's Conservative Principles Conference on the 26th.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2011/03/michele-bachmanns-historical-blunder.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

[Hoss]

Michele Bachmann's Historical Blunder

http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2011/03/michele-bachmanns-historical-blunder.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

She and Sarah Palin should tour the country...

[Conan71]

I think you meant:

[Hoss]

I think you meant:

Interchangeable.  Either could work.

[Conan71]

Interchangeable.  Either could work.

Lisa Kudrow and Mira Sorvino actually resemble intelligent life

[heironymouspasparagus]

Compared to Palin and Bachmann, they ARE intelligent life.

Besides being a liar, Bachmann is an idiot.  Much Exactly in the vein of Palin.

[Ed W]

Michelle Bachman is a good example of one of our rules regarding management:

"Facts, however interesting, are irrelevant."

[heironymouspasparagus]

Lamentations and condemnations of stimulus that actually did do something to help the economy.

As opposed to the $1.3 trillion that was spent to give the big insurance companies and banks their bonuses for the year.  Which took place while the unemployment rate was going down up from 5% or so to 9% plus.  Oh, but that was Bush, so all is forgiven forgotten.

[Conan71]

As opposed to the $1.3 trillion that was spent to give the big insurance companies and banks their bonuses for the year.  Which took place while the unemployment rate was going down up from 5% or so to 9% plus.  Oh, but that was Bush, so all is forgiven forgotten.

Again, I'm sure it's Bush, Rove, Murdoch, Cheney right?

Funny part is, most of the financial and insurance types are bundlers for Obama.

[heironymouspasparagus]

You can't hide that one, though.  It was Bush who did the BIG bailout for insurance, banks, and incidently GM and Chrysler, too. 

The last worked, though, especially after Obama raised the ante.  Surprised me.

[Conan71]

You can't hide that one, though.  It was Bush who did the BIG bailout for insurance, banks, and incidently GM and Chrysler, too. 

The last worked, though, especially after Obama raised the ante.  Surprised me.

President Bush authorized $17 billion in loans for Chrysler and GM.  The true "bailout" occurred under President Obama's watch.

[heironymouspasparagus]

Yep, he kicked it up to $50+ billion neighborhood.  That's what I was getting at when mentioning Obama raised the ante.  We might actually make money on that deal, though.  As much as I was against it, it seems to be better than the average.

[Conan71]

Yep, he kicked it up to $50+ billion neighborhood.  That's what I was getting at when mentioning Obama raised the ante.  We might actually make money on that deal, though.  As much as I was against it, it seems to be better than the average.

In reality, I don't think much or any of the "bailouts" will result in a net loss to taxpayers.

[Red Arrow]

In reality, I don't think much or any of the "bailouts" will result in a net loss to taxpayers.

I guess we (taxpayers) can't be unlucky all the time.