President of the United States Barack Obama

President Barack Obama on the Economic Stimulus Bill

Posted by Matt Ortega on February 6, 2009 at 05:05 PM

At the House Democratic Caucus Retreat in Williamsburg, Virginia, President Barack Obama spoke about the economic stimulus bill and the critics who believe we can turn back to the same, tired policies of the past.

The speech was fantastic so be sure to read the whole text.

Comments (9) «

Time to roll up the sleves and get busy! Thank You President Obama!

1
Trinity_Is_Nobody on February 6, 2009 at 08:29 PM

At this point we must support Barack Obama. We voted for him for all the promise he represents for our wounded country. We will criticize him of course if he should falter, but as of now, we have no reason to believe he will falter. He knows well that the stimulous package is only for first step, and that without taking the first step we cannot take the many needed further steps.
I believe that Barack Obama is The Man for the great challenges we face, and that it's our part to support him in his efforts, and to "cut him some slack!"

Gene Deitch

2
genedeitch on February 7, 2009 at 12:52 PM

I see where the President is coming from in all that he's attempted thus far regarding the stimulus bill, but as I sit here listening the the debate raging on the Senate floor, I have to hope that President Obama will use his upcoming trips to Indiana and Florida this coming week to really make his case to the American people. I understand his wish to look forward and not back, but I would like him to use some very recent facts to remind all Americans, just how and why we've gotten into this mess in the first place.

The Republican Party is out-communicating the Democrats at the moment and that is unfortunate. We as Democrats have GOT to stand up as a party to help our President in getting his message across to the nation. It can't all be left to him.

I'm becoming ill out just how well the Republicans are getting their message out on the Senate floor. Why,oh why, can't our party have effective communicators like that in elected office?

3
concerned_dem on February 7, 2009 at 01:25 PM

Someone may want to start a few online petitions to support the stimulus package ! I ran across at least 7 petitions put up by Republican groups to either defeat or change the stimulus package to all Republican ideas.
How can we be so far behind the curve on these things, no wonder the people are slowly turning against this, only one side is doing anything to get their ideas out . I heard that the congress is getting phone calls and letters 100 to 1 against this package.

4
TonyTed on February 7, 2009 at 02:50 PM

I'm tired of having the Sand kicked in the face of the progressive supporters and our own President tells us to listen to the ones that got us in this mess in the first place. Is it any wonder we lost the message when no one was stepping up to justify or explain these issues. Instead as usual, the dems cave and show the weakness and fear of the Republican power structure.

5
IL_DEM_RED_DIST on February 7, 2009 at 03:23 PM

Seems one of the way sot stimulate the US economy is to use the money spent in Afghanistan on US projects. What are we doing in Afghanistan anyway? Is it about the oil and the pipeline? Let's take the war money to find alternative sources of energy and to by the oil we need until we have enough alternatives.
The "mission" in Afghanistan... is.... to keep the Taliban from controlling the place. We can't stop that. why are we there? Why are we continuing to spend money there instead of here?

6
Riette on February 7, 2009 at 05:03 PM

Have the Democratic leaders allotted money in the stimulus package for a Republican political mob museum with Democratic Blagojevich as the wax door attendant, or what? What is the problem with the stimulus package?

I have heard and read that groups of economists are saying that America needs to spend between $650 billion and $800 billion in order to give the economy a boost. It appears that both parties are pretty much in agreement with that broad assessment but never have agreed on the exact amount of the stimulus package.

Maybe both parties’ leaders could be better in agreement with a system that decides the amount of the package instead of details deciding the amount. Why are not we simply looking at what Germany and Britain did with their stimulus packages in connection with their unemployment rate, taking our countries differences into account, and looking at what will work and what might not work?

If both parties in Congress would agree on an exact amount of the economic boost why would there then need to be disagreement over who will get the money and how it will be spent? Why would who or what programs get the money matter so much, if we need to put a certain amount of money out there anyway in order for the plan to work?

For the sake of bipartisanship, I can appreciate both parties views, especially, if all Republican’s in Congress are saying is that maybe the taxpayers do not need to put as much out there into the economy, it is their right to disagree, but arguing over the details seems kind of fruitless to me. However, it is also the Obama Administration’s right to push a stimulus amount that will work, and it seems understandable to me that the administration and the Democratic Congress are going with the $800 billion economists figure to make sure the plan works.

I mean, what are the Republican leaders back up plan’s if after their axing the administration’s stimulus amount does not work? You see, it is not the Republican leader’s responsibility to have back up plans and it will be on the Democratic Administration’s head if the plan does not work no matter what the political differences. Therefore, I say if the Administration does not have back up plans, and the Republican leader’s do not offer any, do not give in. Give up bipartisanship before you give in, there is too much at stake.

Thank You All

7
Hope4U on February 8, 2009 at 10:40 AM

The Repukes need to get out of the way. They are being obstructionists.

8
rjsnj on February 8, 2009 at 10:44 AM

Obama said the problem was the deficit. He, and other Dem's have said that Bush spent too much. And Bush's leaving us 4 Trillion in debt is bad. I agree.

How can spending almost twice as much, or more, and putting us seriously further in debt, be a good thing?

Or to put it as simple as I can;

If being 4 Trillion in debt is bad, how can being 7 Trillion in debt be better?

9
deadcrow on February 11, 2009 at 03:11 AM


« Hide Comments


Post a comment

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment.
(sign out - change name - manage account)