Then they shift gears again and say, "Well we might not take all of the money because we need to be 'fiscally responsible'" like Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal. So you know what Jindal and next-door neighbor Gov. Haley Barbour of Mississippi are doing? They are going to take most of the money but refuse the money slotted to help the unemployed because in their eyes it would mean a long term commitment to paying extra to help the unemployed. Oh the horror!! What a horrible thing to have to do--help people find new jobs. Yeah, that wouldn't help the economy at all--idiots. Plus, many of these southern states have had finanical struggles even before the recession and he's going to refuse some of the money???
I don't know about you folks but I can tell when smoke is being blown up my ass. You're not going to sit there Gov. Jindal and tell me that you're fiscally responsible by refusing (in comparison) a tiny fraction of the funds but accept the vast majority of them!! That's like eating all the cookies in the box but two and argue that you didn't eat the last two because you wanted to be "responsible" when it comes to your weight. Since we are the ones who pay the tax dollars and since we back in our states are hurting then don't you think that we have the right to some of those dollars when we really need them? Of course. That's how it works, we invest in the government to keep things going and then when we can't keep things going the government invests back in us until we can right the ship again.
Like someone on Huffington Post said: Having one of these Govs in your state is really a whole lot like taxation without representation...you the tax payer send your $$$ to the Feds and when they give you some back, [TPJ: via the stimulus] a retardo like Jindahl, Perry, Sanford, or Haley "Boss Hogg" Barbour decides you don't get anything????
I like what Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said in response to the games of these other Republican Governors. He said today that if they refuse some of their alotted money that he'll gladly take it--so would I.
And did you notice that many of the Governors that are talking about refusing some of the money to their states via the stim bill are people being talked about as favorites for the Republican party nomination for president to challenge President Obama in 2012? Gov. Jindal was talked about as being a possible V.P. choice for McCain and is now being talked about for 2012. Alaska is one of the states talking about refusing some of this money and we all know about Sara Palin's political ambitions.
In addition, Gov. Mark Sanford of South Carolina was talked about as a V.P. choice in '08 and there is considerable buzz that he might run in 2012. So, I ask you dear readers, "Is this about a principled stance or about political ambitions for president in four years?" I would bet the house on the later--if I had a house but maybe Richy Rich Jindal could offer me his. I hear the Gov. mansion in Louisiana is pretty posh--and it's paid by the people of LA so maybe they should foreclose on his house. Speaking of which, that might just happen. You might want to cool your jets a bit Gov. Jindal on refusing some of the money to look good to your base so that you can run for prez in 2012. You might not get re-elected as Gov. if you refuse this money for your constituents who are hurting. Not to mention still reeling from Hurricane Katrina and Rita.
---End of Transmission---