Story Comments
Posted by: Klarissa 5 months, 2 weeks ago
This page is a permanent archive of the comment below and its replies.
To view this comment in the context of the full discussion for the story, use this link.
-
83%
Klarissa5 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
From another article:
Reply
"What’s more, the examination revealed that Obama officials all but avoided Southern states that Obama lost.
It is not unusual for a presidential administration to find ways to reward its supporters through federal largesse, particularly in this case, when the goal of the stimulus program is push money out the door to states and localities that can spend it quickly to jump-start the economy. The Bush administration was criticized in 2004 for sending Cabinet officials on trips that critics said doubled as campaigning for the president’s reelection bid.
But the numbers tell the tale: 52 of the 66 events were in states that backed Obama. And taken together, the itineraries amount to a veritable map of Obama’s election-night victories — big-money states like California and New York, swing states like Ohio and Colorado that Obama turned blue and other solidly Democratic states Obama kept in his column."
The events were weighted to big cities that provided Obama some of his biggest election-night margins: Cleveland, Boston, Detroit, Los Angeles, Chicago and Philadelphia.
Of the other 14 events, Vice President Joe Biden and Cabinet officials often touched down in places where Obama lost narrowly and that Democrats hope to pull into their column by 2012, such as Missouri, Arizona, Montana and North Dakota.
Only two Southern states were visited by Cabinet officials for stimulus-related trips: Georgia and Kentucky, according to information provided by the White House and an examination of news releases from all 21 Cabinet-level agencies.-
63%
mesodude5 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Schlafly Perpetuates Republican Car Dealership Closing Myth
Reply
In a June 2, 2009 Townhall blogpost, Phyllis Schlafly perpetuated a myth that is gaining traction in the conservative noise machine: that the Obama administration took a direct hand in GM and Chrysler car dealership closings and deliberately targeted dealerships that contributed to Republican candidates. This accusation is baseless. The Obama administration had no hand in deciding what dealerships would close, as GM and Chrysler CEOs have made clear. In addition, statistical analysis shows that car dealerships are overwhelmingly owned by Republicans, and more car dealerships that remained open are owned by Republicans than Democrats.
GM And Chrysler CEOs Confirmed The Obama Administration Played "No Role In Picking The Auto Dealerships That Are Being Closed." According to The Detroit News: "Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said Thursday the Obama administration had no role in picking the auto dealerships that are being closed by General Motors Corp. or Chrysler LLC. During a 40-minute meeting Tuesday at the White House with the CEOs of major automakers, LaHood said he asked the top executives at GM and Chrysler if they were forced to close dealerships. Chrysler wants to close 789 of its nearly 3,200 dealers by June 9, while GM has sent termination notices to 1,100 of its 6,200 dealerships in an effort to close them by October 2010. 'I asked (GM CEO Fritz Henderson) and (Chrysler CEO Bob Nardelli) if any of these folks were pressured to close X number of dealerships or do it at a certain time,' LaHood said during an appearance at the National Press Club. Both CEOs said no pressure was put on them, LaHood said." [The Detroit News, 5/21/09; emphasis added]
http://mediamattersaction.org/factcheck/2009060200... -
50%
mesodude5 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Fox Nation headline claims "Stimulus Not Working," but link says "funds are not enough"
Reply
May 12, 2009
On May 12, FoxNation.com featured the headline "States Say Stimulus Not Working." But contrary to the headline's suggestion that states are claiming that the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 is not providing effective economic stimulus, the May 12 Washington Post article to which the headline linked reported: "Eleven weeks after Congress settled on a stimulus package that provided $135 billion to limit layoffs in state governments, many states are finding that the funds are not enough and are moving to lay off thousands of public employees" [emphasis added].
The Post further reported that "[a]s the stimulus plan was being drawn up, there was agreement among the White House, congressional Democrats and many economists that a key goal was to keep states from making big layoffs at a time when 700,000 Americans were losing their jobs every month," and that the House-passed version of the bill included "$79 billion in 'stabilization' money to plug gaps in states' budgets," while "in the Senate, the stabilization funding was cut by $40 billion to secure the support of the three Republicans who were needed for a filibuster-proof 60 votes."
http://mediamatters.org/research/200905120039 -
100%
StevieGee5 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Klarissa, are you reading a different story than the one you posted? There is no mention of California, New York, Colorado, Missouri, Arizona, Montana, North Dakota, Georgia, or Kentucky in the article. You are either reading a different article than the one YOU posted or making stuff up. (lying)
Reply
-
loading ...
People Who Liked This Comment (10)
stephen-johnson
simonsez
nostalgia
tanglang
y_soitenly
Wolfie2007
stalemate
k9kssr
Pecossam
mollydogmaxi
mesodude
DenCuddySubmit a Story
Advertisement
Post Reply
You are not signed in to Propeller.com. Please sign in to post a reply.