Hearken back if you will to those early days of the Obama Administration, when the ill advised flushing of $1 Trillion into the Potomac River was passed into law. (For the Democrats reading this, I am referring to the Stimulus.) Remember Barack Obama’s special website which allowed concerned citizens to rat out their neighbors with concerns about how the Stimulus Money was being spent? Well, you probably didn’t expect to see those stimulus dollars hard at work for Obama’s reelection.
The Labor Department paid out hundreds of thousands of dollars in federal stimulus funds to a public relations firm to run more than 100 commercials touting the Obama administration’s “green training” job efforts on two MSNBC cable shows, records show.
The commercials ran on MSNBC on shows hosted by Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann in 2009, but the contract didn’t report any jobs created, according to records reviewed recently by The Washington Times.
Spending reports under the federal Recovery Act show $495,000 paid to McNeely Pigott & Fox Public Relations LLC, which the Labor Department hired to raise awareness “among employers and influencers about the [Job Corps] program’s existing and new training initiatives in high growth and environmentally friendly career areas” as well as spreading the word to prospective Job Corps enrollees.
The firm ultimately negotiated ad buys for “two approved spots” airing 14 times per week for two months on “Countdown With Keith Olbermann” and “The Rachel Maddow Show,” according to a project report, which listed the number zero under a section of the report asking how many jobs had been created through the stimulus contract.
David Williams, president of the nonprofit watchdog Taxpayers Protection Alliance, called the contract “questionable” because it created no jobs and because of the placement of the ads on shows viewed as friendly to the administration’s policies.
“Hiring a PR firm does not create jobs, and this was obviously meant for selling a particular political agenda,” Mr. Williams said. “The placement really reeks of a political ad rather than a job ad, and taxpayers see through this.
Read the entire article at the Washington Times by clicking this link.
Much was said in reaction to Barack Obama’s announcement that he would be raising $1 Billion in campaign contributions. The left was giddy and the right was apoplectic. As it turns out, that estimation was more fantasy than fact. Fundraising is just another item in the growing list of things the Bamster is incompetent at. Taking Stimulus Money for the purposes of campaigning though, that’s another issue entirely. The incumbent already has a huge advantage in any campaign, and as such, even with his horrendous record, the Zero will be tough to beat. He after all has a vote pump at his disposal, which is the entirety of the behemoth sized federal government which he has helped to grow to gargantuan proportions.
Cross Posted from Musings of a Mad Conservative.
Tags: stimulus
You’d have to water-board Bernanke to find out
$2.6 million to teach Chinese hookers how to drink. Most of the stimulus was spent as graft to Democrat donors. It was the biggest bank heist in history.
@ Iron Fist:
With Барни Франк somewhere near the top of the pak laughing all the way…to the bank. No pun intended.
I hope this is on video, since this happened yesterday. In Florida of all places:
Let’s see how many Demo☭rats fall for this….
@ Macker:
I thought that Democrats get to vote on November 7th…
@ Iron Fist:
Dammit I don’t want them voting on my 52nd Birthday!
In case you missed it, this video about Mitt Romney is a must-see.
Bad news Barack: Electoral College computer model that’s correctly predicted presidential elections since 1980 shows big WIN for Romney
Forecast predicts loss for Obama with 218 votes versus 320 for Mitt Romney
University of Colorado model concludes all swing seats to vote Republican including Colorado, Ohio and Florida
Contrasts latest figures which predicts 282.6 votes for Obama and 255.4 for Romney
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2192464/Bad-news-Obama-Electoral-College-model-correctly-predicted-presidential-elections-1980-opts-ROMNEY.html#ixzz24NRgwg3b
mawskrat wrote:
Everybody sing!
Swing votes? We’ll carry it
And send the Obamas home
Swing votes will carry it
And send the Obamas home
I looked over the forecasts and what did I see?
Sending the Obamas home
A landslide shaping up for Mitt Romney
Sending the Obamas home
Swing votes? We’ll carry it
And send the Obamas home
Swing votes will carry it
And send the Obamas home
The stimulus was nothing more than a slush fund. It was never meant to have meaning -- after all they put that fool Joe Biden in charge of “oversight” -- a man who can’t even accurately count the number of letters in the word “Jobs.”
They created the silly phrase “saved jobs” which meant that they provided states enough money to keep state union workers on the payroll. Every Caltrans highway project in California has that obligatory bullshit green “American Recovery Act funds” sign — and I imagine NONE of them saw stimulus money; all it is is phoney advertising for Obama -- I’d love to call up the head of Caltrans and say “can you give me specific amounts of stimulus money that is refinancing the 580EB carpool lane project?” I’m sure he’ll get back to me.
Stimulus money went in many large chucks to Obama campaign donors. This money will now be returned to Obama in the form of new campaign contributions, so that in essence taxpayer funding of Obama’s campaign, except not the way that Congress intended. In some cases it went to companies who subsequently claimed bankruptcy.
Also, let’s all remember that states were to report stimulus spending in their respective states by advising which Congressional district was represented in their report. Several reports listed Congressional districts that didn’t exist -- for instance one report said the district was Arizona 30. I recall it also happened in Colorado.
But it’s Bernie Madoff that’s in prison.
@ mawskrat:
That certainly sounds good, but these computer models aren’t terribly reliable. I won’t feel better until it is over and we’ve won. It is hard to fathom how Obama isn’t losing badly, but he doesn’t seem to be. Of course, they have seemed to have gotten desperate. I’d love to see what their internal polls are doing. I doubt that they cook the books for those.
@ Iron Fist:
Its because the media and popular culture have created this false narrative of Obama as some wise semi-divine cool hip Philosopher King.
To all the AKin supporters here, he’s now down 10 against McCaskill.
This scumbag needs to go.
AP is starting to turn…
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_CAMPAIGN_OBAMA_DONOR?SITE=FLTAM&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=
brookly red wrote:
Starting to turn? They went rancid years ago…
@ Rodan:
He definitely needs to go, the question is will he? I think he’s too pig headed to quit, so that’s probably one we’re going to lose.
@ Iron Fist:
Some good news, Linda McMahon is ahead in CT and Hoekstra is tied in Michigan. SO there’s hope.
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
turning against 0, that is
@ Carolina Girl:
I bet all the accusations they make against Romney hiding money in the Caymans and Switzerland is exactly what they did with the Stimulus. It was the biggest robbery in American history.
Iron Fist wrote:
There is apparently a window until 9/25 to get him out.
What needs to be done—what clearly needs to be done—is to approach his pastor and as many other like-minded pastors in his state. His “apology” video was couched in extremely religious language, and it is only through a religious intervention phrased in the terms which he accepts, after he drops a little farther in the polls, that he will possibly be persuaded to do what he should have done already.
@ Rodan:
Mr. Akin -- this is about taking back the Senate and overturning Obamacare. It is not about your hard work or your cherished dreams of national office. Get the fuck off the stage and let someone who can beat that bitch McCaskill take the microphone. When there isn’t a single politician or pundit that is urging you to stand your ground, it’s time you listened to someone else.
The great Obama Boom!
Real-time advice: College grads are working in jobs unrelated to their studies
brookly red wrote:
I knew what you meant. They still went rancid years ago.
@ Carolina Girl:
He thinks he’s some some divine mission from God. He’s not a Conservative, he’s a Theocrat.
@ Rodan:
Winning either of those would have to count as an upset. We need one. Perhaps Romney will have coat-tails. We can only hope. I am so ready to have this election over with.
@ buzzsawmonkey:
I imagine that the RNC will also take him aside and advise him that they will be giving him absolutely NO money on which to campaign. And the Missouri GOP needs to tell him that he can expect no money from them either.
That or I suggest flying Dick Cheney and let Akin sit across a table from him and explain himself. I have images of the “Boardroom” scene from “Network” -- “You are messing with the forces of NATURE Mr. BEALE!”
@ Iron Fist:
There is always an upset in every election. If the GOP wins in CT or Mi, that would be huge. I hope Mack beats Nelson here in Florida. If Romney wins down here, then Mack will probably win.
Rodan wrote:
From the article:
Here are the ironies, and the Catch-22s: Due to the availability of loans, it is likely that most of these students did not have to work jobs to get through school. Accordingly, they were encouraged by the loan-money availability to major in subjects which would not be marketable, and/or to not consider marketability when selecting their studies. The low-skilled jobs they are taking now are a time inversion; they are getting, after college, the work experience that they should have brought to it.
At the same time, there is another irony; the deterioration of the quality of high-school education has led to a situation where, though working a cash register or some other low-skilled job does not require a four-year degree, such a degree is often demanded simply because the employer wants some sort of guarantee that the person being hired is nominally literate. In effect, one needs an unnecessary degree for a low-level job because the education system that was formerly adequate for low-level jobs no longer is.
Swiss and Cayman Island Bank Accounts… It really is that simple.
@ buzzsawmonkey:
It doesn’t help that many of these graduates have degrees in Transgender studies. Our education system is mess and I am convinced its designed that way.
@ doriangrey:
Is aid that above. That is exactly where the money is.
Rodan wrote:
If they had degrees in TGS they could work for big Sis… they more likely have degrees in business
Rodan wrote:
You’ll note that I alluded to that, by pointing out that because of the availability of loan money, kids go to college without having to work, or having had to work previously. This enables them to fall prey to choosing a major or a degree program which will not lead to employment, because they have been insulated from the realities of life up through college graduation.
At the same time, because the quality and therefore the value of a high school diploma has been so debased—vast numbers of kids in New York, for instance, require extensive remedial courses in college because they’ve graduated high school without basic reading skills—they need the overpriced college degree merely to certify that they are nominally literate, i.e., fit for an entry-level job.
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
one libs realize there is money in something they suck it dry… education is just one more victim of the institutionalized plunder
Rodan wrote:
There, fixed that for ya!
@ buzzsawmonkey:
It’s definitely a racket.
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
Nope, sorry Buzz, you actually got that one wrong. Employers want someone with a degree because the employer wants some sort of guarantee that the person being hired is trapped between a rock and a hard place and will accept a lower entry pay amount out of financial necessity because of their indebted status due to their college loans.
One of the basic maxims of management is, low skill or entry level positions are a cost variable for overhead adjustment. By maintaining the lowest possible compensation of entry level or low skill positions management is capable of affecting a smoothing (i.e. fourier transformational smoothing) of overall employe compensations rates as a aspect of overhead costs.
Rodan wrote:
I think in NYC there are 5 teaching assistants for every 1 teacher…
brookly red wrote:
There’ve been a number of articles over at PJ Media about the coming crash in higher education. Tuition has skyrocketed over the last decades in part because of the vast amount of government money being given for educational loans—and, of course, those loans cannot be discharged in bankruptcy, so you’re stuck with them no matter what happens.
It is, in many ways, similar to the government underwriting subprime loans in the housing market; as the government regs and guarantees (and regulatory requirements placed on the banks) encouraged people to buy houses they could not afford and drove up the prices of housing, so the availability of college loan money and the debasement of secondary education has driven people who have no business going to college to go and to take on vast amounts of debt.
In the meantime, not only the quality of reading and math education at the secondary level has suffered, but vocational training, which most high schools used to provide to at least some degree, has withered on the vine.
I have encountered college-educated people who do not know how a thermostat works; who do not know the first thing about simple carpentry or electrical wiring. These overeducated Eloi are at the mercy of Morlock tradespeople—which would be a sort of rough justice, were it not that the tradespeople are encouraged to produce shoddy work because they know that the people hiring them are too ignorant to call them on a botched job. In the end, everyone loses.
doriangrey wrote:
That, too, is doubtless true—but given the need for remediation at the college level, the employer’s requirement for a college background in order to have some moderate guarantee of minimal competence is also a factor.
@ buzzsawmonkey:
yup
brookly red wrote:
The high school building in my neighborhood—one school building which formerly housed one high school—now has four separate “high schools” sharing the same building. That means four different sets of administrators, over and above the teaching staff.
Now that’s a racket.
New York for years has been coming up with new “specialized” high schools; music & art, fashion, media, blah blah blabbity fucking blah. You’d think that it would be sufficient to merely have schools which teach the little dears readin’, writin’, figgerin’, some history and civics and maybe some drafting or woodshop.
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
True, and I did not mean to minimize that fact, that’s basically why entry level positions exist. They allow the employer a period of time to asses the new hires level of competency before offering them a contract that might make terminating them more difficult should they prove less than the desired level of competency.
In fact, the college remediation necessity is one of the primary justification for many business adopting the “at will” contractual structure. In the higher skill set positions it can take quite a while to discover that your seemingly qualified and competent hire, is in fact really just a very good bullshit artist.
Hiving signed a employe to a 5 year contract only to discover 2 or 3 years into the contract that they are actually just a really good bullshit artist can be a very expensive proposition.
By the way, Obama’s complete and utter failure to talk about the pathetic ruin that is American secondary education—preferring to make grandiose promises about sending everybody to college—shows that his education posturing is merely noise and wind, and a cover for payoffs to his teacher union base and his college level supporters.
New Thread.
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
I remember when I was getting my undergrad degree 30 years ago that there were college profs who were touting the idea that students should concentrate on “getting an education”, not on obtaining marketable skills. This trend has been in progress for many years. As an engineering student, I found their arguments somewhat amusing and silly.
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
I went to HS in the late 70′s… we required to take 2 academic majors and 2 vocational majors PLUS a language. For vocational I took “commercial art” as it was called then and wood-shop. The commercial art courses enabled me to work my way through college, imagine that.
AZfederalist wrote:
I obtained my college education here in the People Gulag of California back in the early 80′s, and by the grace of God, that was not the case here at the time. Academic counselors were still trying to steer students into fields that resulted in marketable skills. To bad I didn’t pay more attention to my advisers…
brookly red wrote:
Yup, I remember those days, minimum of two vocational shop classes, I took metal shop, drafting and electronics in high school, and didn’t used anything I learned as an employment skill for, nearly 20 odd years.
The “stimulus money” stimulated the bank books of Obama’s cronies.