Gotta Love Mindlessness

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Vice President Joe Biden said Congress should pass the $450-billion American Jobs Act even if the economy were growing at 8 percent and unemployment were as low as 3 percent.

“Look, we should be doing all of this stuff even if we were growing by 8 percent, even if there was a 3 percent unemployment rate in America,” Biden said at an event on Thursday to promote the legislation. “We need better roads, we need better bridges, we need safer streets.”

So even if we were growing we’d need to do exactly the same thing we are doing now!

Wow! the liberal instinct is mindless.

May 2010: Biden- “We have new ideas about how to spend government money wisely.”

“I might add, I’m very proud to say, that’s there’s been virtually no – knock on wood – virtually no fraud associated with the $787 billion program overall,”

You can always count on Uncle Joe… 🙂

“We want to make it clear to the American people, notwithstanding the fact that the economy is growing and even if the economy were raging at 6 or 8 percent a quarter and the growth of the GDP, that’s not the measure we’re going to use when our term ends as to whether or not we think we were successful,”

Sound familiar? (Look at the quote at the top then wonder more about mindlessness of liberalism).

Take-home pay, adjusted for prices, fell 0.3 percent in August, the third decrease in five months, and personal income dropped for the first time in two years, the Commerce Department reported last week. The declines followed news from the Census Bureau that median household income <http://topics.bloomberg.com/household-income/> in 2010 fell to $49,445, the lowest in more than a decade, and the poverty rate jumped to 15.1 percent, a 17-year high. 

Muhtar Kent, Coke’s chief executive, said “in many respects” it was easier doing business in China, which he likened to a well-managed company. “You have a one-stop shop in terms of the Chinese foreign investment agency and local governments are fighting for investment with each other,” he told the Financial Times.

Mr Kent also pointed to Brazil as an example of an emerging economy that is making itself attractive to investment in ways that the US once did.

“They’re learning very fast, these countries,” he said. “In the west, we’re forgetting what really worked 20 years ago. In China and other markets around the world, you see the kind of attention to detail about how business works and how business creates employment.”

Kent also took on Washington head on.

“When a country is in trouble, you can’t have a polarized political process,” he said. “There’s too much comfort. We need more needles to stick in politicians.” (NPR)

FYI: Since this was NPR, all the commentators trashed Coke instead of noticing what he actually said. More mindless liberal attacks.

So when Communist China is more business-friendly than the US, do you think we have a problem?

Nope. It’s all Wall Street’s fault!

Or the Banks, Like Bank of America and their Debit-Card Fees. Problem is, The Dodd-Frank Bill passed by the Democrats CAUSED the problem by restricting fees Banks can charge for transactions so they came up with another one!

But don’t expect the liberals to understand the causal relationship.

The liberals just want you run Bank of America into the ground instead. (Not noticing that other banks are also subject to Dodd-Frank so they will be forced to do it also). That will improve the jobs situation!

I guess they are no longer “too big to fail”. 🙂

And the Fact that Sen. Durbin is so mad at Bank of America for blaming him it proves he did it. But it was for “right” reasons and “for your benefit”.

Enjoy.

“That is an illegitimate charge in a country that has life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness in its founding documents,” Nancy Pelosi says about Republican use of “class warfare.”

Gotta love Nancy. Really, you have to, or else! 🙂

Keith Olbermann, host of “Countdown” on Current TV: “Figuratively, where does it (Occupy Wall Street) go from here, do you think? Based upon your experience and what you’ve seen in your three trips down there.”

<Millionaire> Michael Moore: “I think that, not only is this going to continue, these cities that you mentioned. This is what is so wonderful about this. There really isn’t anything driving this other than what Wall Street has done and what those who are in charge of our economy have done. They weren’t just happy enough with multi-billions, they wanted tens of hundreds of billions, maybe even trillions, so –“

Olbermann: “Kleptomania.”

Moore: “They’re kleptomaniacs, is what they are. They’re out of control. I think there is some sort of sociopathic illness and they know what us to life in a kleptocracy. Where the kleptomaniacs run the show. This is going to spread. I said this last week, I said it two weeks ago when I first spoke with you. And the mainstream media was trying to pooh-pooh this, ‘oh it’s just a feud down there, don’t worry.’ Well what happened Saturday, not just here, but as you said in Boston, LA, in Chicago and elsewhere.”

Moore calls on President Obama to give another speech and to call upon his Justice Department to investigate the bankers and give them a perp walk.

But the same people in the Justice Department ,behind Fast & Furious, nothing about this real problem. They want to abolish the ATF instead, that way they can bury all bodies…gotta love mindless partisanship.

Really, you have to love it…or else. Just ask a liberal.

Occupy Wall Street and the tea party
Can you spot the difference??
MEDICARE
Remember that ObamaCare was going to cut $500 Billion and then double counted it as savings but if you try and reform it the Democrat Fear Patrols go ballistic.
Well…
Medicare is subsidizing drug abuse by thousands of beneficiaries who shop around for doctors and fill prescriptions for huge quantities of painkillers and other narcotics far exceeding what any patient could safely use, Congressional investigators say in a new report.

“Our analysis found that about 170,000 Medicare beneficiaries received prescriptions from five or more medical practitioners” for 14 types of drugs that are frequently abused, said Gregory D. Kutz, director of forensic audits and special investigations at the accounting office.

The medications were obtained through Part D of Medicare (Signed By President Bush-by the way but don’t tell the Democrats), which provides coverage for prescription drugs. The drugs most commonly abused by Medicare beneficiaries included powerful prescription painkillers like oxycodones and hydrocodone products. Oxycodones include OxyContin and Percocet.

In one case described in the report, a Medicare beneficiary in Georgia received a 150-day supply of oxycodone in just 27 days by obtaining seven prescriptions from four doctors. Over the course of a year, the woman received prescriptions for a total of 3,655 oxycodone pills (a 1,679-day supply) from 58 different prescribers, and she filled them at more than 40 pharmacies.

In another case, a California man received prescriptions for a total of 1,397 fentanyl patches and pills (a 1,758-day supply) from 21 different prescribers in a year. In a third case, a Texas beneficiary received prescriptions for a total of 4,574 hydrocodone pills (a 994-day supply) from 25 different doctors. (NY Times)

But if you want to reform Medicare you just want Seniors to die! (according to the Left).

But at least Drug Addicts are on the government dole funded by taxpayers. We fund the biggest drug addicts of all already–Congress!
And the Mindless Zombies continue ever onward…Must Spend! Must Control!…
Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler


Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel


Jobs & Debt Anyone?

Our Biden Momemt of the Week: “If I hear one more Republican tell me about balancing the budget, I am going to strangle them.”

He quickly added: “To the press, that’s a figure of speech.”

Yeah, that’s an evil thought isn’t it Joe.  Perish the Thought… 🙂

************************************

Another great Moment: The debate between Richard “I lied about being in Vietnam” Blumenthal(D) and Linda McMahon.

When asked about how you create a job, he rambled on for over a minute and end up with praising government.

She did it in 19 seconds. 🙂

http://video.foxnews.com/v/4359817/how-do-you-create-a-job/

By the way, it is expected by many economist that when the Unemployment figures come out on Friday that the rate will GO UP!

3 Trillion Dollars of Debt and nothing but Keynesian socialism to show for it! 🙂

Don’t worry, be Happy.

Hope and Change is still alive!. It’s a zombie corpse coming relentlessly to eat your brains, but it’s still alive!

Yes He can!!!

The Democrats have no idea how to create a job without a massive government bureaucracy run by them, which is probably why they ignore it so much.

WASHINGTON — Recovery.gov promised transparency on how the government spends every dollar of stimulus money, but there’s $162 million the website doesn’t disclose.

Recipients of 352 federal stimulus contracts, grants and loans have failed to report how they spent the money, the status of their projects or how many jobs were funded, according to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).

Despite orders from the White House to crack down, enforcement is spotty.

Gee, now that’s not transparent. 🙂

**********************************

From a Russian Webpage on “Global Warming”

Forecasters say this winter could be the coldest Europe has seen in the last 1,000 years.

The change is reportedly connected with the speed of the Gulf Stream, which has shrunk in half in just the last couple of years. Polish scientists say that it means the stream will not be able to compensate for the cold from the Arctic winds. According to them, when the stream is completely stopped, a new Ice Age will begin in Europe. (prime time russia)

I guess the Global Warming alarmist were too busy blowing up people they disagreed with in commercials to notice. 🙂

Then there’s Obama’s Global Warming Cops, The EPA.

Tough new rules proposed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) restricting greenhouse gas emissions will “slow construction nationwide for years” – but will only reduce global temperatures 0.0015 (15 ten-thousandths) of a degree Celsius in the next century.

“(D)uring this time, tens of thousands of sources each year would be prevented from constructing or modifying,” the EPA staff wrote. “In fact, it is reasonable to assume that many of those sources will be forced to abandon altogether plans to construct or modify. As a result, a literal application (of the permit requirement) to GHG (greenhouse gas) sources would slow construction nationwide for years, with all of the adverse effects that this would have on economic development.”

But the benefit of regulating mobile sources (aka Cars) is, also by the EPA’s own estimations, as little as less than two thousandths of a degree in temperature reduction over a century.

Meanwhile, Mother nature is doing it anyways. Gee, I wonder “Global Warming” (climate Change, et al) is a liberal socialist control scam? 🙂

And way to create some jobs there, guys! 🙂

If it walks like a liberal socialist duck, smells like a liberal socialist duck,it’s a liberal socialist duck.

Rep. Frank Lucas (R-Okla.) said, “In many instances, the EPA is overreaching its authority. Instead of operating within the law, EPA believes it can dictate to Congress that legislation needs to be passed for more government authority. And if Congress doesn’t act, it threatens to regulate anyway.”

“Every day, the EPA seems to demonstrate how vastly disconnected it is to the folks who feed us.”

Gee, where have we heard this about being “disconnected” before? 🙂

President Obama made a big show this week of installing solar panels at the White House, calling it a “commitment to lead.” It’s not. It’s feel-good political symbolism masquerading as a real energy policy.

One could almost feel the prickly sweater of Jimmy Carter descending over the White House as news of solar panels gracing the roof of the residence, as they once did in 1976, was announced Tuesday.

Back then, Carter made symbolic gestures like installing panels and wearing sweaters to set a personal example for conserving energy, while ignoring the shortages, gas lines, rationing and inflation that came with high energy prices.

Inexplicably, the current president is copying him.

According to the White House blog, the new panels are “a project that demonstrates American solar technologies are available, reliable, and ready for installation in homes throughout the country,” a claim which presumes that the only reason Americans aren’t buying them is their own stubbornness.

But in reality, the panels remain costly, and experts estimate the White House installation to cost $100,000. A price tag like that means such panels will remain a rich man’s plaything, no matter how much they demonstrate a commitment to green energy.

In the White House case, the panels also represent politics. Democrats have been desperate to enact a green agenda as midterm elections approach, having failed repeatedly as their proposals collided against economic reality. So instead of grinding the economy to a halt with an economy-killing cap-and-trade law, for now the White House will have to do with its symbolic solar panels.

As harmless as this symbolism may seem to some, it amounts to a substitute for a real energy policy.

As the president installs his solar panels at taxpayer expense, he isn’t doing what he could be doing: making a practical case for energy security, something that could come from development of domestic shale, offshore oil, natural gas, coal and other resources that the environmental lobby has put off-limits over the years.

The symbolic act also amounts to a planted flag for the radical green agenda instead of an energy agenda that serves the people.

To the White House, money is limitless and green technology every inch the equal to more efficient oil. In the real world, the viability of energy is determined by its cost and availability.

People won’t install solar panels just because the White House has them. They will do so if panels make the best business sense.

Unfortunately, this White House doesn’t require that.(IBD)

Because no one in this White House has any actual business experience. They are talking out of their Liberal Elitist Academic asses.

And we are the ones getting the fecal results.

The 2005 Democrats Vs. The 2010 Democrats

You decide who wins.

The Obama White House has recently announced that they will go forward with a reconciliation process — sometimes called the “nuclear option” — to try and pass their government run healthcare plan in the Senate. This process circumvents a Republican filibuster and only requires a simple majority vote of 51 rather than 60.

What did top Democrats think of this process previously?  See below…

Barack Obama 4/25/05: “The President hasn’t gotten his way. And that is now prompting a change in the Senate rules that really I think would change the character of the Senate forever…what I worry about would be that you essentially still have two chambers the House and the Senate but you have simply majoritarian absolute power on either side, and that’s just not what the founders intended.”


Hillary Clinton 5/23/2005: “So this president has come to the majority here in the Senate and basically said ‘change the rules.’ ‘Do it the way I want it done.’ And I guess there just weren’t very many voices on the other side of the isle that acted the way previous generations of senators have acted and said ‘Mr. President we are with you, we support you, but that’s a bridge too far we can’t go there.’ You have to restrain yourself Mr. President.

Charles Schumer 5/18/2005: “We are on the precipice of a crisis, a constitutional crisis. The checks and balances which have been at the core of this Republic are about to be evaporated by the nuclear option. The checks and balances which say that if you get 51% of the vote you don’t get your way 100% of the time. It is amazing it’s almost a temper tantrum.

Harry Reid 5/18/2005: “Mr. President the right to extended debate is never more important than the one party who controls congress and the white house. In these cases the filibuster serves as a check on power and preserves our limited government.”

Dianne Feinstein 5/18/2005: The nuclear option if successful will turn the Senate into a body that could have its rules broken at any time by a majority of senators unhappy with any position taken by the minority. It begins with judicial nominations. Next will be executive appointments and then legislation.

Joe Biden 5/23/2005: This nuclear option is ultimately an example of the arrogance of power. It is a fundamental power grab.

Harry Reid 5/18/2005: “But no we are not going to follow the Senate rules. No, because of the arrogance of power of this Republican administration.”

Chris Dodd 5/18/2005: “I’ve never passed a single bill worth talking about that didn’t have a lead co sponsor that was a Republican. And I don’t know of a single piece of legislation that’s ever been adopted here that didn’t have a Republican and Democrat in the lead. That’s because we need to sit down and work with each other. The rules of this institution have required that. That’s why we exist. Why have a bicameral legislative body? Why have two chambers? What were the framers thinking about 218 years ago? They understood Mr. President that there is a tyranny of the majority.

Dianne Feinstein 5/18/2005: “If the Republican leadership insists on forcing the nuclear option the senate becomes ipso facto the House of Representatives where the majority rules supreme and the party of power can dominate and control the agenda with absolute power.”

Hillary Clinton 5/23/2005: “You’ve got majority rule and then you have the senate over here where people can slow things down where they can debate where they have something called the filibuster. You know it seems like it’s a little less than efficient — well that’s right it is. And deliberately designed to be so.”

Joe Biden 5/23/05: “I say to my friends on the Republican side you may own the field right now buy you won’t own it forever I pray God when the Democrats take back control we don’t make the kind of naked power grab you are doing.”

Charles Schumer 5/23/2005: “They want their way every single time. And they will change the rules, break the rules, and misread the constitution so that they will get their way.”

Hillary Clinton 5/23/2005: “The Senate is being asked to turn itself inside out, to ignore the precedent to ignore the way our system has work, the delicate balance that we have obtain that has kept this constitution system going, for immediate gratification of the present President.”

Max Baucus 5/19/2005: “This is the way Democracy ends. Not with a bomb but with a gavel.”

My how times have changed.

And the Hypocrisy is on the other foot.

Putting Your Money Where His Mouth is

“After a decade of profligacy, the American people are tired of politicians who talk the talk but don’t walk the walk when it comes to fiscal responsibility,” he said. “It’s easy to get up in front of the cameras and rant against exploding deficits. What’s hard is actually getting deficits under control. But that’s what we must do. Like families across the country, we have to take responsibility for every dollar we spend.”

To put Obama’s Olympian hypocrisy in perspective, one need only examine the federal budget tables posted on the White House website by Obama’s own Office of Management and Budget.

They reveal these startling facts: When calculated by the average annual percentage of the Gross Domestic Product that he will spend during his presidency, Obama is on track to become the biggest-spending president since 1930, the earliest year reported on the OMB’s historical chart of spending as a percentage of GDP. When calculated by the average annual percentage of GDP he will borrow during his presidency, Obama is on track to become the greatest debter president since Franklin Roosevelt.

Obama will outspend and out-borrow the admittedly profligate George W. Bush, a man Obama and his lieutenants routinely malign for fiscal recklessness and who, when in office, was often hailed even by his allies as a Big Government Republican. Obama will even outspend—but not quite out-borrow—his fellow welfare-state liberal FDR, who had to contend with both the Depression and World War II.

In determining this was the case, I credited the presidents prior to Obama with the federal spending and borrowing that occurred during the fiscal years that started when they were in office. I credited Obama with the spending and borrowing that his own OMB estimates will occur during the fiscal years from 2010 to 2013, which are the four fiscal years starting during Obama’s four-year term. (Before fiscal 1977, fiscal years ran from July 1 to June 30. Since then, they have run from Oct. 1 to Sept. 30.)

FDR was inaugurated in March 1933 and died in April 1945. He is thus responsible for the 12 fiscal years from 1934 to 1945. During those years of depression and world war, according to OMB, federal spending averaged 19.35 percent of GDP. During Obama’s four fiscal years, OMB estimates spending will average 24.13 percent of GDP. That is about 25 percent more than under FDR.

In the first eight fiscal years of FDR’s presidency, before Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, federal spending as a percentage of GDP never exceeded 12 (despite the Depression). During those years, it averaged only 9.85 percent. Under Obama, annual spending as a percentage of GDP will average almost two-and-a-half times that much.

In fiscal 1942, when the U.S. started dramatically ramping up expenditures to fight World War II, federal spending equaled 24.3 percent of GDP. In 2010, the first full fiscal year of the Obama era, spending will reach 25.4 percent of GDP.

Under current estimates, Obama will not beat FDR’s overall record for borrowing, although he will nearly double FDR’s pre-World War II rate of borrowing. From 1934-41, FDR ran annual deficits that averaged 3.56 percent of GDP. Obama, according to OMB, will run average annual deficits of 7.05 percent GDP. When you include the war years of 1942-45, FDR ran average annual deficits of 9.76 percent of GDP. Even without a world war, Obama’s overall prospective borrowing is at least competitive with FDR’s.

And Obama and FDR share one historic debt-accumulating distinction. By OMB’s calculation, they are the only two presidents since 1930 to run up annual deficits that reached double figures as a percentage of GDP. Obama will run up a deficit this year of 10.6 percent of GDP. The last time the deficit hit double digits as a percentage of GDP was 1945 — when Germany and Japan surrendered.

The U.S. won the Cold War without ever running a double-digit deficit. President Reagan’s highest deficit was 6 percent of GDP in 1983 — and he bankrupted the Soviet Union not the United States.

So how does Obama compare with the much-maligned George W. Bush? In Bush’s eight fiscal years, annual federal spending averaged 20.43 percent of GDP, significantly less than Obama’s estimated 24.13 percent of GDP.

Bush ran annual deficits that averaged 3.4 percent of GDP—and that includes fiscal 2009, when the deficit soared to 9.9 percent of GDP and Obama signed a $787 billion stimulus bill (some of which was spent in fiscal 2009) after Bush left office. Obama, according to OMB, will run deficits that average 7.05 percent of GDP—or more than twice the average deficits under Bush.

The bottom line on Obama: He puts our money where his mouth is.(CNSnews)

The Bush Deranged who will blame every ill in the universe on George W. Bush, who admittedly was a fiscal socialist like them in his last years.

The fact that Congress was taken over by The Reid-Pelosi types in 2007 didn’t help any.

Whether that was trying to buy off his legacy from people that had already spent years piling on him or just weakness., it’s hard to say.

Bush in his last couple of years was a train wreck.

But the current administration takes that train wreck and brings in Godzilla, King Ghidorah, Hedorah, and all the other monsters and has a stomping party on it.

Then proclaims not only is it the other guys fault but they have “saved us all”!

How great are we! 😦

BUT He made me do it!!! 😦

Bovine Fecal Matter!!

That’s like saying, after an all-night binge drinking session and getting pulled over for DUI that it was the bar’s fault or your friends who egged you on.

It’s complete crap.

So you have “fiscal responsibility” after the biggest spending binge in American History….then you propose EVEN MORE OR THE SAME  (aka Health Care, Cap & Trade, Amnesty for New Democrats,etc) and that’s supposed to work because you have re-imagined it!

The definition of insanity is doing exactly the same thing every time and expecting a different result.

They are insane.

But this is the wet dream of  several generations of socialist Democrats at precisely the wrong time.

But they can’t understand that.

Like children who have been lusting after a toy for Christmas since the day after Christmas from when they were 2 they think the message is not the problem, but how it’s phrased and delivered.

That somehow the 1000 lb. White Elephant in the room is not the problem, so let’s call in a stylist and call it a The Blanco Pachyderm Supreme, as if that will help sell there socialism.

In true Orwellian fashion, it’s not the ideas that are bad, it’s the presentation.

The almost child-like arrogance and stubbornness is not appealing.

Neither is the finger pointing.

But they can’t see that.

And that’s why they are headed straight for the iceberg aboard the Titanic.

Unfortunately, we are all the Passengers and we will all go down with them.

And it’s all those Damn Republican’s Fault! 😡

Vice President Joe Biden complains that Washington is “broken” and “dysfunctional.” In fact, Republicans blocking Democrats from further wrecking the economy is the American system at its best.

Appearing on the CBS Early Show, the vice president lamented that “Washington, right now, is broken,” adding that “I don’t ever recall a time in my career where to get anything done, you needed a supermajority, 60 out of 100 senators. … I’ve never seen it this dysfunctional.”

The man one heartbeat away from the presidency obviously has a conveniently short memory.

During the Bush administration, when Republicans outnumbered Democrats in the Senate but were lacking a supermajority, Democrats were only too happy to use the filibuster to block judicial appointees like Priscilla Owen and Janice Rogers Brown — because they weren’t liberal activists. (The courts are where liberals are able to wield the kind of sweeping powers that the people would never give them through the ballot box.)

Now, with the tables turned, Biden has come to think a lot less of the rules of that “world’s greatest deliberative body” where he spent more than 30 years.

Others on the left agree.

Lawyer Thomas Geoghegan, writing in the New York Times last month, charged that “the Senate, as it now operates, really has become unconstitutional” and argued that the Founding Fathers “were dead set against supermajorities as a general rule, and the ever-present filibuster threat has made the Senate a more extreme check on the popular will than they ever intended.”

But the derailing of the radical health care revolution being pushed by the White House and the Democratic majorities in Congress is a perfect example of how America’s legislative system can rise to greatness — protecting the majority.

Defending the filibuster last month on the Witherspoon Institute’s thepublicdiscourse.com, Radford University political science Professor Matthew J. Franck noted: “The Senate has chosen a set of rules that prize the power of senators as individuals to shape and to slow down debate in the chamber, while the House has chosen rules that streamline debate and advantage the majority party.”

The Senate filibuster is “in purpose and effect, an aid to legislative deliberation” because, according to Franck, “the Senate has always prized the freedom of action of the individual senators, to speak at length during debate and to turn the deliberations on a bill in new directions by way of amendments.”

In the case of health reform, the people, who overwhelmingly oppose the Democrats’ plans, have indeed been deliberating.

Last month they used a special Senate election in one of the most dependably Democratic states in the Union to obstruct the Democratic majority’s locomotive running through Congress.

Massachusetts Republican Sen. Scott Brown’s 41st vote means the radical left will have to wait longer to get what they crave: extensive government control over the U.S. medical system.

What Joe Biden calls “dysfunctional” is American government working as it should — thanks to the Republicans doing their job in opposing still more spending and dangerous government intrusion. (IBD)

So let’s stay in Campaign Mode.

Democrats in charge of both the White House and Congress are firing all their guns at once to tout the benefits of the $862 billion stimulus package passed a year ago this week. They’ve even planned a 35-city tour to support it. Their message?

“One year later, it is largely thanks to the recovery act that a second depression is no longer a possibility,” President Obama said Wednesday. The stimulus act has created 2 million jobs, he claimed, predicting 1.5 million more this year from the program.

Is it just a coincidence that the 3.5 million jobs he is claiming is exactly what the White House predicted early last year? We doubt it. But whatever the case, Obama’s claims are false.

Start with this: Stimulus didn’t save us from an economic cataclysm. Obama himself said so back in March, noting that the economy was “not as bad as we think,” and that he was “highly optimistic.” It’s clear he didn’t think we were on the brink of a Depression.

He was right. In an editorial at the time, we pointed to 13 separate economic indicators signaling an imminent economic recovery — with all of them flashing before the stimulus was in place.

We knew at the time that our resilient private economy would climb out of its hole, and that politicians would try to claim credit. That’s why we wrote: “No politician who voted for these job- and growth-killing measures should claim any credit for our eventual rebound.” Following Wednesday’s fact-bending dog-and-pony show, we think that bears repeating.

The claim that stimulus has “created or saved” 2 million jobs is complete fiction. It rests on the obviously false idea that money can be taken from the productive private sector and given to the nonproductive public sector and create a net gain in jobs.

Based on the imaginary existence of a so-called “Keynesian multiplier,” this kind of thinking hypothesizes jobs that don’t really exist. Sadly, when we count actual jobs, the reality is a bit starker: 8.4 million jobs lost since December 2007, the start of the recession. And more than 4 million lost since the start of 2009.

So when Vice President Biden says Americans are “getting their money’s worth” from stimulus, it should be treated as a punch line — not a policy view.

Look Ma, how great I am. 😦

Worse is the administration’s claim that stimulus is responsible for the fourth quarter’s 5.7% spurt in GDP. This, too, is utterly false.

Two-thirds of that number was made up of inventories. Businesses had liquidated so much in inventories as Obama came into office, helping to make GDP declines last year deeper than expected, that when they finally stopped the economy appeared to be growing strongly. It wasn’t.

Real final sales, a measure that excludes short-term inventory swings, rose just 2.2% in the fourth quarter — hardly a boom.

What bothered us most, however, was Obama’s reference to a “lost decade” under President Bush — a now-popular insult Democrats use to imply Obama’s predecessor is to blame for everything.

So, let’s review the Bush record one more time.

As background, Bush’s presidency began after the largest stock market crash in history, which destroyed nearly $8 trillion in national wealth. Business investment had collapsed, in part due to the Y2K debacle. The economy in early 2001 was already in recession. And within nine months we were hit by the 9/11 attacks.

Thanks to Bush’s tax cuts in 2001 and 2003, the U.S. economy came back. From the end of 2000 to Bush’s exit from office, 4.6 million jobs were created, industrial output rose 5%, productivity soared 25%, real after-tax income jumped 21% and net wealth grew by $8.6 trillion. And that includes last year’s financial meltdown.

Calling this a “lost decade” is simply wrong. Curiously, the economy was far healthier before Democrats took over Congress in 2006. Is it just coincidence that the unraveling of our financial system took place just as they regained control?

Today, stimulus, TARP and other programs intended to boost the economy are instead adding trillions of dollars in debt and spending that our kids and grandkids will have to pay off in coming decades. And let the record show: They’re not creating jobs.

Recent polls show Americans overwhelmingly believe the stimulus is a failure. They’re right. And no amount of snake oil sold by slick White House salesmen from the back of a government truck is likely to convince them otherwise. (IBD)

But Don’t tell the Democrats or liberals that, it’s Heresy. 🙂

And they will be signing it’s praises regardless.

So, How do you want your $14 Trillion Dollar Blanco Pachyderm Supreme?

Take out or Delivery? 🙂