Addicted to Fox

Despite what people say about Fox News -- I think they are the best place to hear an interview of any Democrat because Fox is more likely to ask those harder questions instead of throwing those 'soft balls' that seem to be coming from even such greats as Barbara Walters.

So this morning they had an interview about the 'Spendulus' package (c'mon, even one of Obama's aides called it that instead of a 'stimulus' package)....
***********************************************
First a quick poll number (and you know how I hate these things)
"If the bill isn't passed quickly we will be faced with an economic catastrophe ... "
Agree 44%
Disagree 41%
source: rasmussen reports, via Fox News concluded Feb 6-7, 2009 error= +/- 3%, 1000 likely voters

Okay, so how did the other 15% answer? that's a pretty large number to not have accounted for ... hmmm ... could there have been a third alternative that we don't know about? Or are they just people like me who refuse to give out certain information (like income, age, etc for security reasons)

But more interesting, is that Obama says that this bill must pass to avoid a 'catastrophe' .... so because he is less than 44% supported by the voters - does this mean the 'shine is coming off the apple'??
***************************
Okay to the Interview with Carolyn Maloney (D-NY, Vice Chair Economic Committee).

First the thing started with Pelosi belly aching that the Senate has cut out a bunch of the pork of the bill -- oh boo hoo.

Apparently Barney Frank says that now they have an agreement on the Senate bill, he is going to put all the stuff that the Senate cut out -- BACK in which will, hopefully, kill the bill again (I say hopefully, because its a bad bill that is being shoved thru). Even one of the three Republicans that switched sides on the bill, after the cuts, said she (Sen. Collins) would vote against it if all that crap goes back in.

So to the point-blank question as to whether the Dems are going to slip the spending back in .... Sen Maloney tried to ducked the question by bring up 'economists' who agree with the administration.

But the reporter nailed her and said right out that she didn't answer his question ....

So she gave a bunch of double speak about proceding according to 'regular order' which will make it a compromised bill between house and senate -- still not answering the question.

So here's what she says about the bill:

*Must get recovery bill to president
*Plan would save up to 4 million jobs
*will cut taxes for middle class [after they redefine and lower what 'middle class' means]

****************************************
Even Newsweek has come out to say that the bill would make us all 'socialists now' .... here's what Sen. Maloney had to say about it .... because it was pointed out that most of the bill has very little to do with immediate stimulus and that over 60% of it won't even happen for at least a year .....

She believes that the spending is what generates the jobs ... someone needs to explain to her that its consumer spending that creates jobs for the general population, not government unioned jobs.

She did goof up and mentioned that only 7% of the bill will go for making inferstructure jobs ... when pointed out that it was only 7%, she ignored the figure completey and just plowed on thru her talking point.

She also said that they need to give money to those on food stamps and unemployment because you know they will spend the money. Well if that's the case -- why not just hand out a bunch of those debit card things to people (without the stupid 90 day limits on them, like you did the DTV cards which arrived expired and then won't replace).

Economists say that the house version of the bill will hurt the economy in the long run -- she tried to blame the Bush administration.
************************************
Now they are panicking because Nissan is cutting jobs for the first time in 9 yrs (Oh No!!!) ... can we say over reaction??