• But in the end, do the benefits outweigh the risks?  If he has admitted some of this will not work out as planned, then why not scrap it, temporarily extend unemployment, temporarily increase food stamps & go back to the drawing board, instead of risking trillions of dollars.  I believe it is stubbornness & some wanting to get their way, damning all the consequences.  The only problem with that is WE are stuck paying the consequences.  I didn't like the 1st stimulus package & I don't like this one either, too risky & the outcome looks bleak.

    February 10, 2009 at 9:22 p.m.

  • VBB
    Sure these stops have political meaning but did you criticize Bush for using a friendly venue to drive his message home? Like the military…. I think not.
    The bill will pass regardless and arm twisting is what the bully pulpit is all about and a great political strategy. I do not see anything cynical about his trips. It is not without risk. An angry taxpayer could ask him a loaded question that will be on every 6:00 news show in the nation.
    In his speech last night, the president told the nation some of this plan will not work as they have planned and it is not a substitute for good fiscal policies in the upcoming months. Relief is exactly what some will get with extended unemployment benefits etc.

    February 10, 2009 at 10:29 a.m.

  • He is going to Ft. Meyer Florida & it happens to have the HIGHEST foreclosure rate in the country.  Hmmmmm........
    The election is history, he is president.  These stops do nothing but help him get re-elected.  But that is beside the point, as soon as I heard where he was going (both places) it struck me as a form of arm twisting on Congress to do something as these people are hurting worse than the average communities & he is promising them relief IF this bill goes through.  To me it's blackmail/extortion, on an emotional level.

    February 10, 2009 at 10:13 a.m.

  • VBB
    I would be inclined to agree with you if President Obama would have landed there, gave his speech and took off without fielding any questions. He did NOT pre-screen the audience from a county that did not vote for him. He will give a similar town hall meeting today in the highly conservative district of Ft. Meyers, Flordia.
    He is not staying in a bubble and just receiving filtered news…He is taking his show on the road getting input from the people. Last night’s press conference was the earliest on record for a new president.
    Politically he did not have to go to Indiana or Florida..His approval rating is very high and by most polls people trust him on the economy..(That can change)…The senate will pass the stimulus package and send it over to conference..If anything he went on the road two weeks too late because he let the GOP nitpick the bill to their advantage without any recourse from the WH.

    February 10, 2009 at 9:02 a.m.

  • victorianbybirth,
    Obama was elected on emotion and style rather than substance, so why should we expect him to change his strategy now that he is  in the White House?
    I am still waiting for Obama to say something substantive.

    February 10, 2009 at 8:24 a.m.

  • It bothers me that he chose this town, with the highest unemployment rate, to make this push for support.  I can't find the right term for what he is attempting to do but it is wrong.  He is wanting to play off of peoples knee jerk emotions & sympathy for these people whose town will either get 900+ million dollars or zip,nada, zilch.  It's a form of emotional blackmail, if you will.

    February 9, 2009 at 10:48 p.m.

  • We do know what this type of spending will do to the economy.  Just look back to the Great Depression.  FDR's New Deal actually prolonged the depression by an estimated 7 years.  Does anyone think making the same mistake twice is a sign of intelligence?  It astounds me.

    February 9, 2009 at 7:53 p.m.

  • I agree Rollinstone but in this case I was trying to show where a position that has support will still need to be brought home by the president’s speech tonight. He needs to be convincing.
    I only mentioned polls in my first paragraph so it was not the emphasis of what I was trying to convey. Maybe I should have left that out but polls are tools most politicians use, wheather they admit it or not.
    Polls are just tools not a substitute for a democracy, republic or anything else….I said that polls on the stimulus are useless…Now after the speech, they might have some merit because then it will be about trust.

    February 9, 2009 at 6:38 p.m.

  • I don't understand why you even mention polls.  I'm sure that almost everyone polled is very enthusiastic about a government give away. If a 100% of the people wanted the stimulus it still does not mean it is the right thing to do.  We did not elect our representatives and senators to do what is popular but to do what they believe is right, they need to stand on their principles, that's why they were elected.  I hate polls this is not suppose to be a democracy.  It was designed to be a republican form of government not a government run by polls. 

    February 9, 2009 at 6:18 p.m.

  • Hello TrulyTwisted
    I agree it is dangerous but IMO; it is a weapon of last resort because doing nothing is the other option.
    The bill was changed considerably in the senate and it will undergo more changes in the conference committee to strip out the original goodies.
    More layoffs are in the future unless we act because the “demand” of the supply & demand equation is not moving…The 7.6% unemployment is not because of deadbeats…No jobs to go to nationally.
    We shall see but I respect your opinion.

    February 9, 2009 at 6:12 p.m.

  • I agree with you, Mike.
    Nobody knows for sure what this bill will do. That's why it is so dangerous and idiotic to even consider it.
    I do know that any fool with any sense can see that most of this bill is designed to provide more social services and make the growing number of lazy Americans even more dependent on government.
    There is zero incentive in this bill for these deadbeats to get off their butts and become productive citizens.

    February 9, 2009 at 5:59 p.m.

  • As I posted on this particular blog unless those who were polled have read and understand the 778 pages ; the polls are of no significance..A reason the president is making a nationwide speech tonight.....I heard the CBO report this morning on  MSNBC's "Good morning Joe"
    I still say no one knows what this bill will do.

    February 9, 2009 at 4:36 p.m.

  • From Rassmusen...
    President Obama is quickly learning that being president is harder than just talking about it.
    Support for the economic recovery plan that he was pushing hard by week’s end is falling. For the first time, a plurality of voters nationwide oppose the $800-billion-plus plan presently working its way through Congress. Release of the Rasmussen Reports survey with that finding sent shivers through Capitol Hill and encouraged efforts by Senate moderates to cut $100 billion or more, much of it new spending, out of the plan. 
    Support for the economic recovery plan working its way through Congress has fallen again this week. For the first time, a plurality of voters nationwide oppose the $800-billion-plus plan.
    The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 37% favor the legislation, 43% are opposed, and 20% are not sure.
    Two weeks ago, 45% supported the plan. Last week, 42% supported it.
    Opposition has grown from 34% two weeks ago to 39% last week and 43% today.
    Sixty-four percent (64%) of Democrats still support the plan. That figure is down from 74% a week ago. Just 13% of Republicans and 27% of those not affiliated with either major party agree.
    Seventy-two percent (72%) of Republicans oppose the plan along with 50% of unaffiliated voters and 16% of Democrats.
    Related survey data shows that half the nation’s voters say the plan that finally emerges from Congress may end up doing more harm than good.
    Read the rest of the report here...
    From WashTimes...
    President Obama's economic recovery package will actually hurt the economy more in the long run than if he were to do nothing, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said Wednesday.
    CBO, the official scorekeepers for legislation, said the House and Senate bills will help in the short term but result in so much government debt that within a few years they would crowd out private investment, actually leading to a lower Gross Domestic Product over the next 10 years than if the government had done nothing.
    CBO estimates that by 2019 the Senate legislation would reduce GDP by 0.1 percent to 0.3 percent on net. [The House bill] would have similar long-run effects, CBO said in a letter to Sen. Judd Gregg, New Hampshire Republican, who was tapped by Mr. Obama on Tuesday to be Commerce Secretary.
    Read the rest here...

    February 9, 2009 at 4:24 p.m.