tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15329279.post2713585050121404874..comments2023-08-25T05:18:29.312-06:00Comments on Madville Times: Thune to Prostrollo: You Don't Need Gov't Handoutscaheidelbergerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03261598066395322681noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15329279.post-60018257394625139142009-08-08T00:39:46.463-06:002009-08-08T00:39:46.463-06:00In proportion to the relative amount of money that...In proportion to the relative amount of money that's been spent on the "Cash for clunkers" program -- $2.00E09 to $4.00E09 compared to $7.87E11 for the last "stimulus" (Lord, I'm sick of that word!) package -- I'd say that "Cash for Clunkers" has proven staggeringly (real word?) successful.<br /><br />A batch of my Mama's raisin-oatmeal cookies is due the Dems for this little trick. They got it right. Nonetheless I can't, at this wee hour (Hoo! Hoooooo!) emit pure praise: Even a broken thermometer tells the truth at ninety below.Stan Gibiliscohttp://www.sciencewriter.netnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15329279.post-66385095076654879032009-08-07T08:49:05.740-06:002009-08-07T08:49:05.740-06:00Tweet! B.S. Flag!
Seriously, Rod? Last week you s...Tweet! B.S. Flag!<br /><br />Seriously, Rod? <a href="http://madvilletimes.blogspot.com/2009/07/green-stimulus-that-works-cash-for.html?showComment=1249063217581#c1068955691953192320" rel="nofollow">Last week you said</a> this program was a financial disaster demonstrating government incompetence. Others were saying the short-funding showed government's lack of foresight. Now you come to say the government knew all along how wildly successful this program would be and deliberately planned for a funding shortfall? That sounds like far-too-much hindsight-nformed conspiracy theorizing. You can argue the Dems are brilliant or you can argue they are bumbling idiots, but you can't have both.<br /><br />Occam's Razor: I think the far simpler, more logical explanation is that the original bill was cut from $4B to $1B as a perfectly normal matter of political compromise to win more votes, without any sinister plot for later PR gains.caheidelbergerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03261598066395322681noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15329279.post-66978236140218884802009-08-07T07:23:34.462-06:002009-08-07T07:23:34.462-06:00Please remember, John Thune would not need to vote...Please remember, John Thune would not need to vote if Congress hadn't gutted the original Cash For Clunkers Bill from $4 Billion down to $1 Billion, knowing that it would be popular and setting up an opportunity for a national PR opportunity, as Democrats made it look like the program ran out of money after four days, but actually just wanted to make themselves look like heroes for adding $2 Billion back from the $3 Billion they cut earlier. Sort of a shell game for political PR. <br /><br />I'm guessing Thune was voting for your daughter, her children and my future grandchildren who will have to pay back the government for all these stimulus loans.<br /><br />We'll pay the piper with runaway inflation in the next two to three years. Around election time.GoldManhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09478566547133172418noreply@blogger.com