Obama Public Stimulus Package Speech

**CountryBoy** · 01-05-2009, 12:21 PM

It looks like BHO is going to give a public speech, tentatively scheduled for Thursday.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0109/17039.html

I wonder if Thursday or Friday may be a good day to be in the market, since it seems to be driven my Gov't bailouts or bailout news.

If the markets are down Mon - Wed, then it might be a decent play, but then he also meets with Congress today, so the news may get baked in before Thursday. Also a lot of economic news coming out this week.

CB

**KevinD** · 01-05-2009, 01:34 PM

Originally Posted by James Gang

Taking my time,
choosin my line,
tryin to decide what to do.
Looks like my stop,
dont want to get off.
Got myself hung up on you.

**CountryBoy** · 01-05-2009, 01:44 PM

That brings back some good old memories.

CB

**budnipper1** · 01-29-2009, 06:40 PM

I am electing to leave my opinion out of this. Please form you own conclusions without hearing my "biased" opinion...

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Will spending $50 million (35 million pounds) to promote arts in the United States help stimulate the U.S. economy? How about $335 million to educate people about sexually transmitted diseases?

http://uk.reuters.com/article/stocks...BrandChannel=0

**CountryBoy** · 01-29-2009, 07:03 PM

Originally Posted by budnipper1

I am electing to leave my opinion out of this. Please form you own conclusions without hearing my "biased" opinion...

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Will spending $50 million (35 million pounds) to promote arts in the United States help stimulate the U.S. economy? How about $335 million to educate people about sexually transmitted diseases?

http://uk.reuters.com/article/stocks...BrandChannel=0

Hey budnipper,

I commented on the $335 elsewhere on the MB and it sure wasn't pretty.

CB

**ChemEng** · 01-29-2009, 07:17 PM

Originally Posted by budnipper1

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Will spending $50 million (35 million pounds) to promote arts in the United States help stimulate the U.S. economy? How about $335 million to educate people about sexually transmitted diseases?

Yes on both accounts.

**budnipper1** · 01-29-2009, 07:43 PM

Originally Posted by ChemEng

Yes on both accounts.

Why am I not surprised with your response?

**budnipper1** · 01-29-2009, 07:52 PM

Originally Posted by CountryBoy

Hey budnipper,
I commented on the $335 elsewhere on the MB and it sure wasn't pretty.

CB

I'll bet you are referring to this one?? May I add, "DITTO"?

Originally Posted by CountryBoy

This is part of our economic stimulus package?

http://www.drudgereport.com/flashsb.htm

The House Democrats’ bill includes $335 million for sexually transmitted disease (STD) education and prevention programs at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.

In the past, the CDC has used this STD education funding for programs that many Members of Congress find objectionable and arguably unrelated to a mission of economic stimulus [such as funding events called “Booty Call” and “Great Sex” put on by an organization that received $698,000 in government funds.]
This is just one of the many earmarks that I've rea about in our Stimulus package. If this is an example of the "earmarks", that aren'r suppose to be in the package, then we are in trouble. BHO had better read these guys the riot act, atarting with Harry Reid and his Mobster museum, now that'll really get folks off the unemployment line.
Anf they said the Big 3 were tone deaf, Congress is both tone deaf and brain dead.

And folks wonder why some of us are cynical and have no faith in the Gov't to do the right thing.

CB

**CountryBoy** · 01-29-2009, 09:07 PM

Yep budnipper,

That's the one, spelling mistakes and all.

CB

**Silverbird** · 01-30-2009, 10:27 PM

It's gone, no more STD funding. Now you see what it's like to REALLY see what's in the sausage. Isn't that a good thing?? You can actually embarass it into going AWAY and not staying. Before you could add more riders than on a roller coaster.

If we are worried about Government debt, we need to raise taxes, not cut them. So why are the suddenly fiscally concerned saying cut taxes? Are we worried about the pile of DEBTwe are already in, or not? You can't pay off the debt if you bring in less money! So which is it? Less Debt or try to help the economy with spending and tax cuts? One or the Other! You can't have cake and not get the calories!

**Steadygain** · 01-30-2009, 10:34 PM

Sorry for the interruption.... but am taking too much of Silverbird's home.

Just in case you're heading out soon - I hope you have a wonderful trip and that this 50th event is like the greatest highlight of their lives.

Well be safe and take care

Steady

**budnipper1** · 01-30-2009, 11:47 PM

Originally Posted by Silverbird

It's gone, no more STD funding. Now you see what it's like to REALLY see what's in the sausage. Isn't that a good thing?? You can actually embarass it into going AWAY and not staying. Before you could add more riders than on a roller coaster.

If we are worried about Government debt, we need to raise taxes, not cut them. So why are the suddenly fiscally concerned saying cut taxes? Are we worried about the pile of DEBTwe are already in, or not? You can't pay off the debt if you bring in less money! So which is it? Less Debt or try to help the economy with spending and tax cuts? One or the Other! You can't have cake and not get the calories!

What source did you use to confirm that STD funding has been removed from the proposed bill? I have not found it yet.