The Stimulus Bill Smells of Turpentine

I suspect that Obama has in mind a definite ulterior plan, for the sake of which he wants the current stimulus bill to fail to revive the economy.

The porcinity of the stimulus bill is beyond any question and well documented. But mingled with the bacony aroma that so inflames the appetites of politicians and lobbyists, there lies another odor -- the reek of turpentine.

I'm referring to the old story about the farmer who had a sick horse and wanted to call in a vet.  His neighbor said "You don't need no vet. Just feed him turpentine: two spoonfuls a day." The farmer tried it and the horse got sicker. The neighbor said, "You're not giving him enough; double the dose." The farmer followed the advice, increasing the dose several times, until the horse finally died.  While the farmer was burying it, the neighbor happened to drive by. When the farmer looked up at him, he hissed, "You didn't give him enough," and drove away. 

This ploy is often used by school boards when their students continue to fail despite increased budgets and smaller classes. Invariably, they blame their students' failures on insufficient funding. This excuse is a common resort of public and private administrators whenever their funded projects fail to live up to expectations.

The turpentine ploy provides politicians with a win-win situation. If their project succeeds, it's because of their brilliant leadership. If it fails, it was inadequately funded and needs more money.

Usually, the turpentine excuse is not advanced until the failure of a project becomes evident. But before the stimulus bill had even passed, Obama and the Democrats hinted about its likelihood of failure.  Obama himself warned that:

"our nation will sink deeper into a crisis that, at some point, we may not be able to reverse"[boldface mine in all quotes].

Rep. Brian Baird (D-WA) warned in a recent e-mail:

"... The conditions created by excessive debt on both the federal and personal level, our rising trade deficit, and the rising costs of energy all suggest that we will face painful economic times for some time to come."

And MoveOn -- Obama's personal cadre of brownshirts---has circulated claims that:

"conservative Democrats and Republicans got away with slashing key parts-billions for education, green jobs, and health care-in favor of tax cuts for the rich".

Why are the Democrats already calling for more turpentine? Don't they have any faith in their own program? The most logical answer is that they want the stimulus bill to fail. One need only to peer through the gauze curtain surrounding the bill to perceive that Obama's true purpose is (1) to pay off liberals by keeping his campaign promises to fund their pet programs and/or (2) to cause a financial crisis, as per the Cloward/Piven Strategy, for use as a pretext for increasing federal power and paving the way for socialism. To achieve either of these goals, the present amount of spending will probably not be sufficient and future increments will be needed. Therefore, the public must be persuaded to keep increasing the dose.

A couple of centuries ago, turpentine was used as a medicine for animals and men.  We now know that it is toxic. The physiological symptoms include nausea, confusion, stupor, and anxiety. The political symptoms are pretty much the same. In both cases, prolonged use can cause systemic failure -- which is why we cannot allow the Democrats to pour trillion dollar doses of turpentine down the throats of the American people.
I suspect that Obama has in mind a definite ulterior plan, for the sake of which he wants the current stimulus bill to fail to revive the economy.

The porcinity of the stimulus bill is beyond any question and well documented. But mingled with the bacony aroma that so inflames the appetites of politicians and lobbyists, there lies another odor -- the reek of turpentine.

I'm referring to the old story about the farmer who had a sick horse and wanted to call in a vet.  His neighbor said "You don't need no vet. Just feed him turpentine: two spoonfuls a day." The farmer tried it and the horse got sicker. The neighbor said, "You're not giving him enough; double the dose." The farmer followed the advice, increasing the dose several times, until the horse finally died.  While the farmer was burying it, the neighbor happened to drive by. When the farmer looked up at him, he hissed, "You didn't give him enough," and drove away. 

This ploy is often used by school boards when their students continue to fail despite increased budgets and smaller classes. Invariably, they blame their students' failures on insufficient funding. This excuse is a common resort of public and private administrators whenever their funded projects fail to live up to expectations.

The turpentine ploy provides politicians with a win-win situation. If their project succeeds, it's because of their brilliant leadership. If it fails, it was inadequately funded and needs more money.

Usually, the turpentine excuse is not advanced until the failure of a project becomes evident. But before the stimulus bill had even passed, Obama and the Democrats hinted about its likelihood of failure.  Obama himself warned that:

"our nation will sink deeper into a crisis that, at some point, we may not be able to reverse"[boldface mine in all quotes].

Rep. Brian Baird (D-WA) warned in a recent e-mail:

"... The conditions created by excessive debt on both the federal and personal level, our rising trade deficit, and the rising costs of energy all suggest that we will face painful economic times for some time to come."

And MoveOn -- Obama's personal cadre of brownshirts---has circulated claims that:

"conservative Democrats and Republicans got away with slashing key parts-billions for education, green jobs, and health care-in favor of tax cuts for the rich".

Why are the Democrats already calling for more turpentine? Don't they have any faith in their own program? The most logical answer is that they want the stimulus bill to fail. One need only to peer through the gauze curtain surrounding the bill to perceive that Obama's true purpose is (1) to pay off liberals by keeping his campaign promises to fund their pet programs and/or (2) to cause a financial crisis, as per the Cloward/Piven Strategy, for use as a pretext for increasing federal power and paving the way for socialism. To achieve either of these goals, the present amount of spending will probably not be sufficient and future increments will be needed. Therefore, the public must be persuaded to keep increasing the dose.

A couple of centuries ago, turpentine was used as a medicine for animals and men.  We now know that it is toxic. The physiological symptoms include nausea, confusion, stupor, and anxiety. The political symptoms are pretty much the same. In both cases, prolonged use can cause systemic failure -- which is why we cannot allow the Democrats to pour trillion dollar doses of turpentine down the throats of the American people.