This is not stimulating

The stimulus plan that was approved by the House and Senate this week are far from stimulating. When you look at the word "stimulate", its definition is NOT spending on anything. In my mind, it's incentive for the consumer to be spending; it's for giving tax breaks to small businesses; it's for giving more to potential car and home-buyers.

Yes, there is some of what I mentioned above, but is there enough? The Republican version had $15,000 incentive for first time home-buyers. Democrats reduced that to $8,000. Republicans wanted more tax breaks for the middle class, small businesses, temporary reduction of Capital gains tax. Democrats worked like crazy to make sure these ideas were snuffed out of the water. Instead, 2/3 of the "stimulus" is spending, only 1/3 is geared for tax relief.

Some of these programs may be worthy (many not), but it's not stimulus. It's social spending when you give the states billions of dollars, when you provide money to the poor, when you provide billions to the health industry. The fact is, these spending programs should be brought up and debated in appropriations bills, not for a stimulus package. It flat out is dishonest at worst, and conniving at best.

President's Cabinet nominees

I am writing this post in response to all of the animal liberals who verbally castrated W for some of his nominees... Now, I would agree that some of his nominees left much to be desired in all fairness. First I will mention a few that, as a conservative, I disagreed with:

• Alberto Gonzales, Attorney General- He was chosen because he was close to Bush, plain and simple. Yet, there were several other appointees that would have done better in defending decisions the administration made. But the most glaring mistake in my view, is how he handled the firing of many judges around the nation. The fact is, Presidents fire judges at their pleasure. Clinton fired more than any in history. It was his right. But the Bush firings were made political (which again is fine), but Bush and Gonzales kept digging themselves in a deeper hole by overexplaining everything. Instead, the answer should have been, "because I chose to do so as the President."
• Scott McClellen, Press Secretary- Of course, he is conservatives favorite punching bag since he came out with his book. But the fact remains, he was an AWFUL communicator. He did President Bush no service by his explanations on the war. Worse off, his presence was at a time when the Iraq war was going south. Having the first press secretary, Ari Flescher, or Tony Snow in there at that time would have helped with public opinion tremendously.
• Harriet Myers, Supreme Court- She later withdrew her name because of public pressure, but another choice of cronyism only. She didn't have the qualifications that a John Roberts, or a Sam Alito have. Thank God Bush received a mulligan on these supreme court picks.
• Don Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense- At first, even the NY Times said he was a defense heavyweight, although they differed on opinions. I say Rumsfeld wasn't a bad pick at the time, he just strategized the Iraq war in an incorrect manner. He believed that a stealth mission (less troops) would do the job in Iraq. Even after 2 years of trouble, course wasn't shifted quickly enough. It wasn't until Bush brought in General David Petreaus, and later Bob Gates as Secretary of Defense, that strategy was completely turned around into success. Bush needed to pull the trigger on Rumsfeld's firing when things weren't working, not after the defeats of the 2006 elections.
  
• Paul O'Neill, Secretatary of the Treasury- Bush's first Treasury Secretary was a Republican, with good qualifications. However, when someone is not fully on board with your biggest economic agenda (sweeping tax cuts), there's a problem. O'Neill became an outspoken critic of some of Bush's economic policy. How can this happen? Did they not get his opinion on Bush's agenda beforehand?

Now, some of BHO's nominees may turn out to be better than expected, there are problems when you nominate people who have such huge issues beforehand:

• Tom Daschle, nominee for HHS- Didn't report 3 years worth of taxes on having a driver and a Cadillac at his disposal. This averaged more than 75K per year. I can except honest mistakes, even by a Democrat. :) But in addition, Daschle didn't pay taxes on a 83K consulting fee in 2006 or 07. And back to the first issue, if he noticed this possible issue in June of last year, why did it take him 8 months to rectify this with the IRS? Especially for a guy whose made over 5MM per year since he was unseated as a Senator in 2004? The answer is, he paid them because he was nominated for Secratary of Health and Human Services. This is a known savvy political man. Does he not have a good accountant? Doubt it. Seems hardly like an honest mistake..... Obama got it right at the end, when he said it was his own mistake. But the fact is, Obama defended Daschle over this issue until he realized this was a ticking time bomb. At only this point did Obama come out and say that we can't have a double standard with nominees and everyday citizens in paying taxes... Oops, too late, damage done.
• Timothy Geithner, Treasury Secretary- As I mentioned in a previous blog post, he didn't pay self employment taxes for 4 years. When he corrected this, he only fixed the first 2 years. Only after he was starting to get heat of this did he pay the additional 2 years. And he says this was an honest, stupid mistake. In addition, he sent his children to youth camp and used this a writeoff illegally. Also, he's had an issue with hiring an immigrant without proper papers. For someone who wants to head up the IRS, these issues shouldn't be looked at as "honest mistakes". Instead, these should be disqualifiers. But Obama dug his heels in and defended his embattled nominee. Geithner was approved, mostly by Democrats.
• Eric Holder, Attorney General- He was confirmed this week. However, he has NO excuse for the assistance for helping Clinton pardon Marc Rich, a ten most wanted fugitive, back in 2000. Even Holder admits this mistake..... Now just imagine if Alberto Gonzales had made this mistake. He would have been grilled beyond belief.. and beyond repair.
• Nancy Killefer, nominee for Chief Performance Officer- She had to withdraw her name because of........... you guessed it, not paying taxes. Do you see a theme here?
• Hilda Solis, Labor Secretary nominee- Her husband's business had a $6,400 tax lien against it for the past 16 years. On Wednesday of this week, he finally paid it. Wonder why? Does this dis-qualify his wife? Probably not. However, why does the tax issue keep coming up with Democrat appointments?
• Bill Richardson, Commerce Secretary nominee- Richardson withdrew his name in December because he is under a Federal investigation for a pay for play issue. A huge donor of his in CA won a New Mexico contract from Richardson. Wonder why?