The government vending machine

  There used to be an old joke that stated, “change is inevitable unless you are talking about a vending machine.”  Since at least 2006, we have been inundated with that word- change- and, alternately, hope.  Even the Republican oppodsition began to mimic the phrase with their “maverick” ticket.  To my fellow cynics out there, we all knew that all this change and hope was nothing but a great campaign slogan and nothing more.

  If we fast forward to reality, we see that the “change” people voted for is nothing more than window dressing for advancing a liberal, damn well near socialist agenda.  Starting with the grim reaper of the economy- Henry Paulson- he convinced an ashen-faced Nancy Pelosi to ramrod a $700 billion package to bail out the finnacial industry through Congress.  Even a “Republican” president stated he had to abandon free market ptinciples to save the free market, whatever that means.  But $350 billion later, is the economy or the financial industry any better today than it was in September 2008?  Not to mention, it was the largest transfer of money to an unelected government official in history.  So those nasty free market loving, laissez faire capitalists were voted out and replaced with the candidate of “change.”  Quite frankly, my dog as President would have represented “change.”

  His first act of change was to in one fell swoop accomplish a large part of his agenda by using the economic “crisis” to pass his stimulus package.  He stated that it would create 3-4 million jobs- create, not save and create as he now states.  There are panels of economists out there who will swear on a Bible or Koran or stack of Disney videos that “deficit spending” will help the economy, or at least lessen the blow.  Those same economists are now saying: “A stimulus package will help the economy…but not this crap!”

  It si mind boggling how $50 million for the arts stimulates the economy.  Gone are the romantic days of the poor, starving artist.  And then there is the $200 million for STD education.  Most of the money is directed at the public sector, so I guess unemployment among geologists, park rangers and climate researchers for NASA will be abated.  Incidentally, why $400 million is needed for climate change research is confusing.  To hear Al Bore talk, I thought it was a foregone conclusion.  We were told the money would go towards rebuilding our aging roads and bridges, but a mere 5% of the total is dedicated to this.  Pennsylvania governor Ed Rendell stated that his state shoud get $1.7 billion for road repair.  The problem is he has over $8 billion is projects ready to go.  Under the formula set in the plan, the Milwaukee public school system is to get $88 million despite decades long declining school enrollment and the closing of over 20 schools.

  So Congress acts like a big vending machine sucking up the money from our paychecks every week.  Unfortunately, the only ones getting a bag of Doritos and a can of soda are the special interests- the labor unions, the public sector workers, and the governors of states being rewarded today for the financial mismanagement of their states over the past decade.  Meanwhile, we- the people ultimately footing the bill-get the occasional chip that falls from a broken bag.  Your average Joe gets the booby prize (a $400 tax break, $800 for married couples) unless Joe happens to be a public sector worker, preferably union.

  Either Obama is a naive dupe of the liberals in his party, or he is just plain stupid to think that he could ride into Washington and “change” things.  It takes more than watching the Super Bowl or sipping on cocktails.  Pelosi said it best when she questioned the concern and need for bipartisanship.  It is Pelosi, Reid, Barney Frank and Christopher Dodd and all the other dolts in power who are indicative of how Washington works.  We are already hearing the mantra for future pieces of legislation from Obamatrons on television: “Well, it isn’t perfect, but we cannot do nothing,” usually preceded or followed by some comment about “the same failed policies of the past eight years.”  In the end, is the strategy of St. Barry any different than the fear mongering pontifications of Henry Paulson?  He certainly did take the advice of Rahm Emmanuel and did not “waste” this crisis.  Maybe someone could explain how a majority of the voting public could not see through this sham in November 2008.  I’ll be thinking about it the next time I’m shaking the vending machine waiting for my bag of Doritos to fall.