Obama Stimulus Bill ‘Saves or Creates” Thousands of Green Manufacturing Jobs… In China

When the Obama White House is not “saving or creating” fantasy jobs here at home they’re “saving or creating” manufacturing jobs in China.


The Obama Stimulus Plan will help pay for a $1.5 billion wind farm in Texas. The project will mean thousands of new jobs for wind turbine manufacturers… in China.
The Dallas News reported:

Two weeks ago, U.S. Renewable Energy Group, led by Dallas investor Cappy McGarr, announced plans to build a $1.5 billion wind energy farm in West Texas. About a third of the money would come from federal stimulus funds. All of the wind turbines (and much of the remaining investment capital) would come from China.

“We believe that this project will greatly contribute to job creation, the goals of the Obama administration and our desire to reduce our reliance on fossil fuels and increase our energy independence,” McGarr said in announcing the deal.

There would be perhaps 330 jobs created in Texas. Most would be temporary construction jobs. Meanwhile, thousands of Chinese workers in the northeastern industrial city Shenyang would build the labor-intensive turbines.

Most of the wind energy projects seeking money under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act rely on foreign-made turbines. Even the industry we have here at home, led by GE, is looking abroad. GE’s technology will power the gearboxes of the turbines for the U.S. Renewable Energy Group. The gearboxes will be made in China.

U.S. companies emerging from the financial shocks of the last year haven’t started investing in American factory jobs. Richard Fisher, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, told an Austin audience last week that the company CEOs he speaks with are more interested in investing abroad.

That doesn’t fit with the administration’s plans. To fix the big economic imbalances of the U.S. economy, administration economists say, Americans must save more, import less and sell more U.S. goods to the world. This is particularly important in the U.S. relationship with China, which is America’s biggest creditor.

Democrats, with union support, included a “Buy America” provision in the stimulus bill. This hasn’t proved to be an obstacle to moving ahead with wind projects that rely on foreign-made turbines.

When the wind is right, the U.S. Renewable project would generate more than 600 megawatts of electricity, or enough for 180,000 homes. Texas has long recognized such energy projects as a public good and provides incentives to support them.

Only 30 of the 330 jobs created in Texas will be fulltime jobs after the project is complete.

gatewaypundit.firstthings.com

Stop lying about those stimulus jobs

Give the mainstream news media some credit: They have diligently dug into President Obama's fanciful boasts of job creation. When Obama claimed earlier this month that his $787 billion economic stimulus package had "saved or created" 640,000 jobs, a dozen news organizations pounced. They soon highlighted some of the most egregious cases of sketchy job creation in about 20 states.

From their reports, The Examiner has created an online interactive map for tracking exaggerated stimulus claims. So far, more than 75,000 jobs -- exceeding 10 percent of the total -- are either highly doubtful or clearly imaginary. In the coming weeks, we expect to add many thousands more to that total as other media organizations scrutinize stimulus grants in their areas.

Obama and his senior aides have sought to downplay the importance of exact numbers, but they invited close scrutiny earlier this year by setting dramatic expectations for the effect the stimulus program would have on employment. If his stimulus program was approved, Obama promised, unemployment would not go above 8 percent this year. The reality is that it passed 10.3 percent in October. So now the stimulus books are being cooked to mollify an anxious public worried that real-world jobs continue to disappear and angry that Obama has thrown almost $1 trillion down the stimulus rathole.

With his political advisers in a panic, Obama is now planning a State of the Union policy pivot intended to stave off a disastrous congressional election in 2010. After running up the nation's first-ever $1.4 trillion annual budget deficit for 2009, Obama will strike a new pose in January as the man who will stop government extravagance. Budget Director Peter Orszag says Obama will offer new suggestions for budget cuts and "revenue raisers," aka "tax hikes."

Obama's previous budget-cutting masquerade was laughable. In July, he called for a pathetic $265 million in cuts. But with a $3 trillion annual budget, Washington blows that much in about two blinks of an eye. Besides, most of the Obama "cuts" were proposed in full knowledge that Congress would never approve them. No doubt, Obama will present the same sort of faux budget cuts in 2010. But Obama's "concern" about excessive government spending likely will be no more credible to voters next November than the thousands of phantom stimulus jobs he claims to have created this year.

washingtonexaminer.com

Jobs 'Saved or Created' in Congressional Districts That Don't Exist

Here's a stimulus success story: In Arizona's 15th congressional district, 30 jobs have been saved or created with just $761,420 in federal stimulus spending. At least that's what the Web site set up by the Obama administration to track the $787 billion stimulus says.

There's one problem, though: There is no 15th congressional district in Arizona; the state has only eight districts.

abcnews.go.com

Stimulus Spent Over $617k in Non-Existent Missouri District

Oh, and saved a whopping total of five, count ‘em, F-I-V-E jobs:


Looky at the bottom.

Even if this were some sort of mistake and the congressional district numbered incorrectly, this means that $617,848 was spent on only five jobs. A hefty $254,822 was spent on absolutely zero jobs being saved.

What on earth kind of fuzzy math is this? Where is this money going?

thedanashow.wordpress.com

46 handshakes.... One bow

46 handshakes, One bow

Compilation of Emperor Akihito shaking hands with other foreign (and domestic) leaders, juxtaposed to Obama shaking hands with Emperor Akihito. Does anyone notice the difference? (Hint: Look at the angle created between Obama's Legs and torso)

President O-bow-ma

Crikey, is there a single adult in the White House who can teach the commander-in-chief some presidential protocol?

The Left complained that George W. Bush was too much of a cowboy on the global stage.

It’s better than having a waterboy:

First, the Saudi King. Now, the Japanese Emperor. What’s he going to do with Russian President Medvedev on Sunday — the downward-facing dog yoga pose?

FYI: Everyone else in the world seems to know how to greet the Japanese Emperor without scraping the floor…

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert:

King of Morocco:

Dick Cheney:

Prime Minister Slovenia:

President South Korea:

President Kazakhstan:

Prime Minister India:

Vladimir Putin:

President Obama:

Reminds me of one of my favorite Tea Party signs:

michellemalkin.com

Related: Did Obama Just Bow 7 Times to Japanese Emperor?

OK. We’re all familiar with the big waiter’s bow he gave to the Japanese Emperor…
But, did you notice the 6 other bows he made to the emperor and his wife?
Here’s the video:


Count em.

gatewaypundit.firstthings.com

He Did It Again… Obama Gives Japanese Emperor a Waiter Bow

Barack Obama bowed to Japanese Emperor.
The LA Times reported:

Very low bows like this are a sign of great respect and deference for a superior.

To some in the United States, however, an upright handshake might have looked better. Remember Michelle Obama casually patting Britain’s Queen Elizabeth on the back during their Buckingham Palace visit? America’s royalty tends to make movies and get bad reviews and lots of money as a sign of respect.

Obama could receive some frowns back home as he did for his not-quite-this-low-or-maybe-about-the-same-bow to the Saudi king not so long ago.

Here’s Obama’s other bows to the Queen of England and another waist bow to the Saudi King:



So will the White House deny he bowed here, too?

Power Line adds: Obama’s breach of protocol is of a piece with the substance of his foreign policy. He means to teach Americans to bow before monarchs and tyrants.

gatewaypundit.firstthings.com

Oops!… Obama Forgets to Do Something Again

Maybe he thought they were saluting him?

Via Lucianne
It’s the Teleprompter’s fault no doubt. Next time they’ll have to start that thing early.

gatewaypundit.firstthings.com

Obama’s October Deficit LARGER Than Bush Deficit For ENTIRE YEAR of 2007

More Hope & Change–
Team Obama was off on their October budget predictions by nearly $20 billion.
The deficit for the first month of the 2010 fiscal year reached $176 billion.
(It must be Bush’s fault, right?)
The Wall Street Journal reported:

The federal government kicked off fiscal year 2010 by posting its widest-ever October budget deficit, the Treasury Department said Thursday.

The $176.36 billion gap is more than $20 billion wider than the shortfall recorded in October 2008, driven up by lower tax receipts, stimulus-related revenue reductions and consistently high government outlays.

…The October deficit figure is wider than the Congressional Budget Office’s estimate for a $175 billion deficit in the month and wider than the $165.9 billion expected by analysts surveyed by Dow Jones Newswires.

President George Bush never did this.

Obama tripled the national deficit his first year in office and he’s off to a record-setting start in fiscal year 2010.

Despite the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Hurricane Katrina, the Clinton Recession he inherited, and the 9-11 attacks, President Bush brought down the national budget deficit from 412 billion dollars in 2004 to 162 billion dollars in 2007.

On July 11, 2006, the Bush Administration announced they were revising midyear budget estimates. They changed their projections after they discovered that greater than expected tax revenues would drop the deficit below 300 billion dollars. Budget Director Rob Portman drove home the message later that day telling reporters that this latest revision was proof that the administration’s tax cuts were working.

This wasn’t a one time event. During the Bush years, despite the 2000 Recession, the attacks on 9-11, the stock market scandals, Hurricane Katrina, and wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Bush Administration was able to reduce the budget deficit from 412 billion dollars in 2004 to 162 billion dollars in 2007, a sixty percent drop. In 2004 the federal budget deficit was 412 billion dollars. In 2005 it dropped to 318 billion dollars. In 2006 the deficit dipped to 248 billion dollars. And, in 2007 it fell below 200 billion to 162 billion dollars. During the Bush years the average unemployment rate was 5.2 percent, the economy saw the strongest productivity growth in four decades and there was robust GDP growth.

Then again Bush cut taxes while Obama has decided to spend his way out of this recession.

gatewaypundit.firstthings.com

Bombshell: Obama bringing KSM to NYC for trial

It’s Friday. The president is flying off to Asia. Congress is not in session. Perfect time to drop a bombshell on the American people:

The Obama administration is bringing 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed to New York City for a civilian trial.

No, it’s not a joke. Via the NYT:

Self-proclaimed Sept. 11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four other Guantanamo Bay detainees will be sent to New York to face trial in a civilian federal court, an Obama administration official said Friday.

The official said Attorney General Eric Holder plans to announce the decision later in the morning.

The official is not authorized to discuss the decision before the announcement, so spoke on condition of anonymity.

Bringing such notorious suspects to U.S. soil to face trial is a key step in President Barack Obama’s plan to close the terror suspect detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Obama initially planned to close the detention center by Jan. 22, but the administration is no longer expected to meet that deadline.

It is also a major legal and political test of Obama’s overall approach to terrorism. If the case suffers legal setbacks, the administration will face second-guessing from those who never wanted it in a civilian courtroom. And if lawmakers get upset about notorious terrorists being brought to their home regions, they may fight back against other parts of Obama’s agenda.

Here is the e-mail the DOD’s Director Victim Witness Program sent out to victims, survivors, and family members of jihadi attacks this morning (via Sgt. Tim Sumner, brother-in-law of FDNY Joseph G. Leavey, 45, Ladder 15, WTC):

You are receiving this email because you have been identified as a victim, survivor, or victim family member of an Al-Qaeda attributed attack and have requested to be kept informed of events involving detainees charged in military commissions or being held in the Guantanamo Bay Detention Facility in connection with those attacks.

We would like to inform you that the U.S. Departments of Defense and Justice will be making an important public announcement later this morning. At 10:30 am Eastern Standard Time, the Office of Justice for Victims of Overseas Terrorism will post information for victims about the announcement on its password protected victims’ website. At 11:00 am the Defense and Justice Departments will issue a joint press release notifying the public of the information, and there will also be a press conference. In addition, the Defense Department will notify victims about the information by email.

Both the Defense Department (Karen Loftus) and the Justice Department (Heather Cartwright) are sending out this e-mail to ensure that as many victims as possible receive it. We apologize if you receive duplicates. If you know of other victims who may be interested in the information, please pass this on to them.

Here’s what Tim sent in response:

We have an announcement as well: we will fight with every remaining breath in our bodies both their bringing KSM and the rest of the 9/11 conspirators to federal courtrooms within walking distance of where they slaughtered our loved ones. And whomever finds Manhattan’s federal courthouse near Ground Zero a “sentimental favorite” for the 9/11 trials is a damn fool and they ALL ought to be fired. Pass that message on, far, wide, and up and down the chain-of-command.

See here for a petition to the president.

If this White House thought Tea Party activists were an “angry mob,” wait until they see the backlash from 9/11 family members and their supporters nationwide. We’re not going to sit down and shut up about the reckless, security-undermining Obama 9/10 agenda and conflict-of-interest-ridden AG Eric Holder.

Call them out.

***

I’ve written extensively over the years on the perils of civilian trials for terrorists. See here and here and here for a refresher course in the Ally McBeal
approach to terror.

Here’s a taste of what we have to look forward to:

The idea of prosecuting suspected terrorists like burglars or drug dealers seems to make sense in principle, but jury trials for War on Terror suspects are fraught with peril.

“In ordinary civilian trials, there is no significant cost to sharing everything the government knows,” notes Johns Hopkins international law professor Ruth Wedgwood. “But this does not hold against the background of Al Qaeda’s stated ambition of mounting new attacks.” Affording accused Al Qaeda operatives the Sixth Amendment right to a public trial threatens to compromise classified information necessary to prosecute future terrorist trials. Other rights guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment’s the right to subpoena witnesses and compel them to testify, the right to an attorney, can interfere with interrogations of captured suspected Al Qaeda agents. Moreover, in civilian courtrooms, prosecutors are severely restrained from closing off classified information under the existing federal Classified Information Procedure Act. Anonymous testimony and intelligence based on hearsay are often inadmissible in civilian courts. And while the lives of those immediately involved in say, a mob trial, might be endangered, the entire nation may be at risk when we allow suspected members of a terrorist network to partake in the discovery process.

The prosecution of the 1993 World Trade Center bombers in our civilian court system, though successful, demonstrated the pitfalls of prosecuting the War on Terror like an episode of the TV show “Ally McBeal” — a courtroom comedy. The trials gave the bin Laden network a multi-million-dollar, tax-subsidized defense team, free translation services, personal dry-cleaning services, and access to information that was allegedly used by Islamists to evade surveillance.

All of the convicted World Trade Center bombers received life sentences. Two had faced the death penalty, but were spared by a minority-dominated jury that swallowed the race-baiting of traitorous defense witness Ramsey Clark (the former U.S. attorney general under Lyndon Johnson). Clark testified that no member of a racial minority group — African-American, Arab or otherwise — could expect a fair trial in the U.S. He also blamed the Gulf War and U.S. sanctions on Iraq for creating the psychological “suffering” that led to the embassy attacks. On another front, convicted mastermind Sheik Omar Abdul Rahman may have exploited his right to counsel in order to establish a terrorist message center from behind bars. His lawyer, Lynne Stewart, was indicted in the fall of 2003 on charges of providing material support to terrorists and went to trial in May 2004; she is accused of aiding a plot to kidnap and kill people to help win the release of Rahman and making false statements regarding her efforts to pass messages between Rahman and third parties…

Stewart was convicted of aiding terrorists and lying to the government in 2005 — for which she received a slap on the wrist. She is still free pending appeal.

***

Andy McCarthy exposes the underlying Obama/Holder agenda. The 9/11 show trials are a payoff to the Bush-haters and transnational Left:

We are now going to have a trial that never had to happen for defendants who have no defense. And when defendants have no defense for their own actions, there is only one thing for their lawyers to do: put the government on trial in hopes of getting the jury (and the media) spun up over government errors, abuses and incompetence. That is what is going to happen in the trial of KSM et al. It will be a soapbox for al-Qaeda’s case against America. Since that will be their “defense,” the defendants will demand every bit of information they can get about interrogations, renditions, secret prisons, undercover operations targeting Muslims and mosques, etc., and — depending on what judge catches the case — they are likely to be given a lot of it. The administration will be able to claim that the judge, not the administration, is responsible for the exposure of our defense secrets. And the circus will be played out for all to see — in the middle of the war. It will provide endless fodder for the transnational Left to press its case that actions taken in America’s defense are violations of international law that must be addressed by foreign courts. And the intelligence bounty will make our enemies more efficient at killing us.

And read this timely excerpt from McCarthy’s invaluable Willful Blindness: “Bring my lawyer! — That’s what’s so beautiful about America.”

***

Update: Just heard that former Bush AG Michael Mukasey will be addressing the Federalist Society National Lawyer’s Convention today at the Mayflower in Washington, D.C. at 2:15pm today and will take on the White House decision to prosecute Khalid Shaikh Mohammed in his speech.

michellemalkin.com

Bush or Obama: The Quiz

1. President Bush was famous for lacking "intellectual curiosity," while President Obama has been called "the smartest guy ever to become President." Who reads more books: Bush or Obama?

2. Bush was often considered to be in the grip of Big Oil. In contrast, Obama is a Harvard-educated lawyer. Which industry contributed more than five times as much as the other to politicians: the oil & gas industry, or lawyers/law firms?

3. Bush's Christian faith was at the core of his political identity, and he was considered to be in the grip of the "religious right," while Obama is considered more open-minded. In fact, Obama has said, "my faith is one that admits some doubt." Which one refers to Jesus more in public speeches?

4. Bush was criticized for excessive federal spending and running up huge deficits. Bush's deficit in 2008 was the largest in history. In fact, President Obama said,

It's a little hard for me to take criticism from folks about this recovery package after they've presided over a doubling of the national debt ... What I won't do is return to the failed theories of the last eight years that got us into this fix in the first place.

Whose deficit was more than triple the size of the other's: Bush's in 2008 or Obama's in 2009?

5. While Obama criticized Bush for "a doubling of the national debt," the federal debt held by the public went from 35.1% of GDP in 2000 to 40.8% of GDP in 2008 -- an increase of 16% as of fraction of GDP. What is it expected to be in 2016 under Obama's budget plan?

6. Obama criticized Bush for Guantanamo, military tribunals, wiretaps, troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, and "signing statements." Which one of these Bush practices has Obama ended?

Answers:

1. Bush. Obama started reading a book in April and had not finished it by June, putting him on a pace of no more than ten books per year. Bush read forty to ninety-five books a year while President, not counting a new and complete reading of the Bible every year. Bush scored 1206 on his SAT, putting his IQ in the 125-130 range, smarter than 95% of the population and in the company of Lincoln, Rousseau, and Thackeray. He graduated from Yale and earned an MBA from Harvard. Obama earned a law degree from Harvard, but has not released any of his academic records. Despite what you might have heard, we know nothing of his IQ, test scores, or grades from any of the schools he attended.

2. Law firms. In the 2010 cycle so far, Lawyers/Law Firms have contributed $33,779,866 (81% to Democrats), and the Oil & Gas industry has contributed $6,293,631 (34% to Democrats). In the 2008 cycle, the numbers were $233,499,989 (76% to Dems) from lawyers and $35,564,322 (23% to Dems). In all, lawyers contributed about six times more to politicians than the Oil & Gas industry.

3. Obama. Per Eamon Javers at Politico, "As president, Barack Obama has mentioned Jesus Christ in a number of high-profile public speeches -- something his predecessor George W. Bush rarely did in such settings."

4. Obama's 2009 deficit, the largest in U.S. history. It was more than three times that of Bush's record 2008 deficit. Per the Congressional Budget Office, the 2008 deficit was $455 B, and the 2009 deficit was $1,417 B. As a fraction of GDP, it was the largest deficit since 1945.

5. The CBO expects the debt held by the public to be 77.1% of GDP in 2016 under Obama's plan, or an increase of 89% as a fraction of GDP, and the highest level since 1950.

6. None.

• Guantanamo is still open and probably will be into 2010, maybe longer.
• Obama is keeping military tribunals and clandestine wiretapping programs.
• Obama plans to keep most troops in Iraq until the summer of 2010. Even then, he is talking of keeping about 50,000 troops there (compared to about 124,000 now). The number of US troops in Afghanistan increased from 37,000 in January 2009 to 62,000 by August 2009, and Obama is expected to send over 30,000 more. Total number of US troops in both Iraq and Afghanistan has increased under Obama so far (from about 184,000 in January to 186,000 in September).
• Obama has used signing statements himself.

americanthinker.com

Obama Won’t Rule Out Jail Time for People Who Don’t Buy Government Insurance

Just as I and so many others have said. We weren’t making this up, folks, we READ the bill.

“There’s nothing wrong with a penalty.”

“If you have the ability to buy insurance and it’s affordable and you choose not do do so forcing you and me and everybody else to subsidize you …”

Wow, an answer to a problem the Obama administration created just for the sake of the answer. Um – why do we HAVE to subsidize ANYONE? Why does this administration want to force hard-working middle-class families to pay for more mouths than the ones they created?

Where does the line stop? People not getting insurance won’t be the only thing affecting what we all pay, diet, exercise, et al. all contribute. When will the fines start for not eating the government-approved diet? If we can be fined for not “choosing” the “right to free health care bills,” as our president just said because we will become a a burden to the system, then we can be fined for not eating a good diet because that’s a burden to the system, too.

And what will happen to the children of those families who refuse the forced, sub-par, government care? When will DFS bust in to those homes and remove the children on the grounds of neglect or abuse? People don’t realize that establishing a precedence isn’t the same as slippery slope.

Via

Political Punch:

The President said that he didn’t think the question over the appropriateness of possible jail time is the “biggest question” the House and Senate are facing right now.

thedanashow.wordpress.com