Peoria Pundit

Sorry Obamaphiles. I calls ‘em as a I sees ‘em. I might have voted for Barack Obama and against Aaron Schock. But on the issue of the stimulus package, I’m siding with the freshman Congressman and against the freshman president.

This exchange lays out my reasons:

“I found it very interesting that after the President finished his speech and I stayed around, not one employee at that facility approached me and asked me to vote for this bill,” Schock said. “In fact, I have received over 1,400 phone calls, e-mails, and letters from Caterpillar employees alone asking me to oppose this legislation.”

“Why? Because they get it. They know that this bill is not stimulus. They know that this bill will not do anything to create long-term, sustained economic growth,” he said.

Gibbs, the White House press secretary, was asked about Schock’s comments during the regular daily briefing today.

“I think if the Congressman goes and looks at the bill through an economic lens … not just through a political one, I think he’ll see benefits not just for his district and his state but for the entire country,” Gibbs said.

Schock spokesman Dave Natonski shot back, “Congressman Schock was looking through an economic lens when he voted against the stimulus package, as it doesn’t take an economic expert to realize this so-called stimulus package was nothing more than wasteful, pork-barreled spending that would stimulate the government, not the economy.”

An aiside: This passage is from the Washington Times article Schock: No awe for Obama or stimulus. Folks, can we officially call a moritorium on the use of “awe” in any headline about Schock? Please?

The stimulus DOES have parts to it that make sense. There are a ton of unmet infrastructure needs, and it makes sense to put people to doing these projects. That sort of government spending makes sense as a way to stimulate the economy, because it’s the sort of government spending that SHOULD have been going on during the past to decades, but wasn’t.

But most of this bill’s spending isn’t about infrastructure. It’s about doling out cash to prop up unessential government programs.

And they are doing it in a way that would make the media AND most Democrats scream in outgage were the Bush administration and a Republican Congress doing the same thing.

Obama ran on a platform of more hope and less fear. Now, he’s telling us that the time to panic is now.

No. It is not. And anyone who says “slow down” is accused of mouthing Rush Limbaugh talking points or with applying for a job with FOXNews. Or, it’s rationalised away by saying Bush got away with it, so it’s unfair to criticize Obama.

Please. If you are going to make an argument on this blog, make it a rational argument, not name calling or a sputtering “but, but, but Bush …”  like you are some seven-year-old upset about how Life Is Not Fair.

Barack Obama learned an important lesson during his visit to East Peoria yesterday.

Don’t trust a word that comes out of Jim Owens’ mouth.

And by Jim Owens, I mean: “Anyone who speaks on behalf of Caterpillar.”

Frankly, I’m a bit shocked that Obama, as a former state senator and U.S. Senator from the Land of Lincoln, had not already learned this lesson.

This is what happened in the media Wednesday after Owens spoke to the President of the United States:

President Barack Obama said Wednesday that heavy-equipment maker Caterpillar has informed him it will rehire some of the thousands of workers it has laid off in recent weeks if Congress passes an economic stimulus bill.

This is what the Peoria Journal Star reported in today’s edition:

Layoffs at Caterpillar Inc. may not be over despite the recent statement by Chairman and CEO Jim Owens that the company might recall employees with the passage of a stimulus package.

“We’ll probably have more layoffs before we start hiring again,” said Owens at an impromptu news conference after President Barack Obama’s appearance Thursday at Caterpillar’s Building HH.

So, either Owens is lying, Obama is lying or Obama got it wrong.

I may not be a fan of Obama’s policies, but he is neither stupid nor is he a bald-faced liar (the former having a lot to do with the latter).

Owens, however, works for Caterpillar. That pretty much all you need to know in regards to credibility.

If you pay attention in this town for five minutes, you realize that everyone lets Caterpillar get away with all sorts of outrages to accuracy that otherwise would be called out in the media. The one going around now is that Caterpillar will move its world headquarters if Peoria county voters decide to increase sales taxes to help fund development of the former Sears Block. It’s complete B.S., but that’s what the Build a Block crowd is whispering in everyones ear these days. Some suckers believe it.

I was at work Wednesday when news of Owens “promise” to Obama hit the Web. I mentioned it to about a half dozen of my co-workers. Not one of them believed it. ‘How many people is he talking about,’ one asked. ‘Seven?’

It’s one thing to lie to local politicians, few of whom have the courage to call them on it, and quite another to lie to the President of the United States.

Owens and his predecessors can get away with it here, but he embarassed the President of the United States. I’m hoping that that lie doesn’t come back to somehow haunt the people who still work for Caterpillar.

UPDATE: I’ve reconsidered this post after looking at a longer clip of the speech in question.

Read more »

Merle Widmer writes:

Even though I disagree with a number of McCain and Palin’s beliefs and actions, this Republican combination, once elected and with our help, can slow down this countries slide into populism and socialism. The Republicans, independents and many border line Democrats must be convinced to lay aside their own personal slights, jealousies, disappointments and “large” egos, tone down the “Faustian bargain made with Dobson and his ilk (See Dobson’s choice, 2/9/08) embracing most of the fundamentals on which this great country was founded and elect McCain/Palin to office.

And I have to agree. McCain spent the primary (at least the early part) telling voters that he was a different sort of candidate. he wasn’t going to trash anyone. He quickly learned how to play the game. As soon as his campaign figured out that McCain’s choice of Palin changed the game from a likely Obama win to a dead heat in the polls, the knives came out: Palin is a secessionist. Palin faked her pregnancy. Palin is a bad mother for not stayi9ng home with her kids. Palin is a gun-toting lunatic. Palin hunts endangered species. Palin had an affair. Palin. All denied and either proven untrue or died on the vine for lack of evidence.

The only reason I was considering voting for Obama is because I thought he might be the game changer we need to move us away from the hateful partisanship we’ve been experiencing from the left and right. McCain — who is NOT a Bush-style Republican no matter how much they try to make him out to be — is probably the change agent Obama tells people he is.

I can’t think of one single accomplishment of Obama OTHER than to win elections he was originally predicted to lose. Although I do believe the nation does owe him an eternal debt of gratitude for knocking Hillary Clinton out of the race.

Obama wrote two autobiographies, and not one significant piece of legislation. McCain has his name on significant pieces of legislation, whether or not you like that legislation. And McCain has a record of reaching across the aisle, not just talking about it.

McCain’s politics regarding the economy, energy, national defense and foreign relations are far closer to my own that Obama. I think McCain is honorable. He certainly would not have managed the Iraq and Afghanistan in the same way as Bush.

I don’t see McCain putting right-wing zealots with little legal brilliance on the Supreme Court. He couldn’t do it with a Democratic controlled Congress, and I don’t see him wanting to do so. I shudder for the future of gun rights and property rights with Congress giving a rubber stamp to Obama’s picks.

And McCain is on the right side when it comes to limiting the powers of the Presidency that were allowed to expand under Bush.

Again, both Obama and McCain have their pluses and minuses. Obama simply had more minuses than pluses.

Joe Biden might have some foreign-relations cred, but his domestic positions are lousy

Via CNET:

By choosing Joe Biden as their vice presidential candidate, the Democrats have selected a politician with a mixed record on technology who has spent most of his Senate career allied with the FBI and copyright holders, who ranks toward the bottom of CNET’s Technology Voters’ Guide, and whose anti-privacy legislation was actually responsible for the creation of PGP.

And:

On Net neutrality, Biden has sounded skeptical. In 2006, he indicated that no preemptive laws were necessary because if violations do happen, such a public outcry will develop that “the chairman will be required to hold this meeting in this largest room in the Capitol, and there will be lines wandering all the way down to the White House.” Obama, on the other hand, has been a strong supporter of handing pre-emptive regulatory authority to the Federal Communications Commission.

Feh.

Aaron Schock was attended Republican Day at the Illinois State Fair and decided to toss some red meat to the faithful. Presidential candidate Barack Obama is pretty much a socialist, he told them. As State Journal-Register political columnist Bernie Schoenburg writes:

“The last time we had this level of socialism being proposed and inexperience at the helm was JIMMY CARTER,” said Schock (who was born four months after Democrat Carter left office in 1981).

I later asked Schock what he meant by the “level of socialism” Obama represents.

“Well, he’s promoting what I would term a government takeover of the health system,” Schock said. “He has said he wants to mandate free college tuition for every student in America.

“Unlike TED KENNEDY (he meant JACK KENNEDY, of course) who said, don’t ask what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country … he (Obama) says, we’re the wealthiest country in the world; you should get this, you should get that. You’re entitled to this, you’re entitled to that. To me, that’s a move toward socialism.”

Schock was not specific, at that point, on Obama’s programs.

“I’m familiar with what his work was here at the state Capitol, and to me, the best indicator of future behavior is past behavior,” Schock said. “And he has supported what I would consider to be socialistic moves on health care as a state senator.”

“I don’t remember the exact bills,” he said.

As Schoenburg notes, it sounds like Cold War rhetoric. But what else is new?

Schock faces Democrat Colleen Callahan and Green Party candidate Sheldon Schafer in the November general election. Peorian Brad Carter filed as the Constitution Party candidate, but his petitions were challenged due a lack of signatures, and an appeal may be made.