Better Swim 16 February 2009

Workout notes I surprised myself today in the pool; 500 in right around 9 minutes, 500 of 25 drill/ 25 swim (fins), 10 x 100 on the 1:45 (one 1:40; rest were 1:37-39), 10 x 100 (25 fly, 75 free) on 2 (mostly 1:45-46), 10 x (25 free, 25 back) on 1:10 (mostly 57-58), then 100 paddle, 100 side, 100 paddle, 100 side, 100 paddle.

On my side sets I was faster than all but one other freestyle swimmer; then again the top, tough swimmers weren’t there today.

Afterward, I did yoga on my own and worked my way to 20 yoga leg lifts. My dream is to someday have a tough enough abdomen to do 100. But for now, I’ll make it a goal to reach 30.

What I did was a single person version of this, except that I paused at 45 degrees, 30 degrees, and just above the floor.

Free speech: Though I have no legal training, I agree with the thoughts presented here. The video, called “two girls and one cup”, was ruled to be obscene.

Frankly, it is none of the government’s business what I choose to watch (so long as minors or those who weren’t capable of consent weren’t used in making it).

The video: basically, it is a lesbian sex scene between two women, in which one defecates into a cup and the other ingests it and throws it up on the other one.

Now why anyone would want to watch such a thing is beyond me; after all I can enter an ultra and throw up all I want without eating poop.

But my larger point: if I want to watch such nonsense, why is it your business?

Peoria Democrats Dinner Tommorow; Schock’s statement on the Stimulus Bill

Annual Democrats’ Presidents’ Day Dinner
Feb. 16th, 2009
5:30 – 8:30pm
Planned for the ITOO Hall on Farmington Road

Featuring Key Note Speaker/Entertainer R. J. Lindsey – “FDR Impersonator”

$500 sponsor, $300 table of 8, $30 per person ($35 at the door)
Tickets are required

Make check payable to:
Peoria County Democrats

and send to:
Peoria County Democrats
P.O. Box 258
Peoria, IL 61650-0258

Any readers want to get a table?

On the other side of the coin: here is the latest statement from our “representative”

Aaron Schock’s excuse for voting against America’s interest

I was compelled to vote against the stimulus bill on Friday because it was a fundamentally bad bill. My opposition was compounded by the fact members of Congress were given less than 12 hours to study such a voluminous bill involving such a large sum of money.

Ok, Mr. Shock. The next time you vote “yes” on something, I’d like to know if you’ve read the whole bill. Also, I wonder if Mr. LaHood read every line of the Bush items he voted “yes” on (e. g., the decision to go to war in Iraq?)

Let me point out that the recent federal bailouts and pledges of support from the FDIC, Treasury, Federal Reserve and this stimulus total enough to pay off 90 percent of this nation’s mortgages. It is a shame that so much has been wasted. I cannot be a part of wasting more. This money will have to be paid by U.S. taxpayers eventually, with compounded interest.

This bill has nothing to do with the bailout…but read on…

Some commentators have said no Republican has the right to talk about the overspending in this package because of the overspending under President Bush. Not only do two wrongs not make a right, but to combat massive overspending in the previous administration with another exponential increase is akin to treating an alcoholic with a warehouse of whiskey.

This isn’t an exponential increase.

By far the biggest imperative for me in considering this legislation was the need to get it right. Our workers are hurting. Savings and investments have taken a painful dive. Our federal government responded with a stimulus bill last winter of $145 billion, which was followed by the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), more commonly known as the “bailout” bill.

While our federal government took what many felt was needed and swift action in passing TARP, it’s becoming clearer that Washington got it wrong. Our economy continues to flat-line. We don’t even know where the money is being spent. As much as I agree with President Obama on the need to act quickly, getting it right is more important.

I support stimulus measures that create real jobs and invest in lasting infrastructure. I cannot support vast increases in pork-barrel spending that do not stimulate the economy but simply stimulate government.

Ok, here comes the typical Republican claptrap. Here is a rebuttal:

2. Government spending in the bill is not stimulus

Several media figures, including CNN correspondent Carol Costello, CBS Evening News correspondent Sharyl Attkisson, and ABC World News anchor Charles Gibson, have all uncritically reported or aired the Republican claim that, in Gibson’s words, “it’s a spending bill and not a stimulus,” without noting that economists have said that government spending is stimulus. Indeed, in his January 27 testimony, Elmendorf explicitly refuted the suggestion that some of the spending provisions in the bill would not have a stimulative effect, stating: “[I]n our estimation — and I think the estimation of most economists — all of the increase in government spending and all of the reduction in tax revenue provides some stimulative effect. People are put to work, receive income, spend that on something else. That puts somebody else to work.” Additionally, Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, has said, “[S]pending is stimulus. Any spending will generate jobs. It is that simple.”

Robert Reich puts it very well:

Yet at this very moment, Senate Republicans are seeking to strip the President’s stimulus package of many of its spending provisions and substitute tax cuts. Part of this is pure pander: They know tax cuts are more popular with the public than government spending, even though spending is a far more effective way to stimulate the economy (more on this in a moment). Another part is pure partisan politics: Republicans are emboldened by Obama’s willingness to court Republicans (taking three Republicans into his cabinet, bringing Republican leaders into the White House for consultations, putting all those business tax cuts into the stimulus bill in order to gain Republican favor) without getting anything at all back from the GOP. House Republicans snubbed the bill entirely. So, Senate Republicans say to themselves, what’s to lose?

Plenty. Millions more jobs and a full-fledged Depression, for example.

Can we get real for a moment? Take a look at this chart, which comes from calculations by Mark Zandi and his colleagues at economy.com. You see that each dollar of spending has much more impact than each dollar of tax cut.

There are three reasons for this. First, most people who receive a tax cut don’t spend all of it. They use part of it to pay down their debts or they save it. Most of us did one or the other last spring with that tax rebate. From the standpoint of any particular individual, paying down debts or saving may be smart behavior — even commendable. But what’s intelligent for an individual does not necessarily translate into what’s good for the economy as a whole. The only way to get businesses to create or preserve jobs is through additional spending. And unlike tax cuts used to pay down personal debt or add to savings, every dollar of government spending flows directly into the economy and adds to overall demand.

Second, even that portion of a tax cut we might actually spend doesn’t necessarily go into the American economy. It goes all over the world. I have nothing against creating or preserving the jobs of Asians who assemble those flat-panel TVs you see at the mall, for example, but right now we’re trying to create or preserve jobs here in America. Sure, the retail workers at the mall who sell the flat-panel TV’s might benefit, but remember we’re talking about how to get the biggest bang for every dollar. When government spends to repair a highway or build a school or help pay for medical services, the money and the jobs stay here in America.

Finally, those who say cutting taxes on businesses is the best way to create or preserve jobs forget about the demand side. Even with a tax cut, businesses won’t hire workers unless there are customers to buy what those workers produce. A government stimulus that creates jobs is a necessary precondition.

Back to Mr. Schock:

When this legislation left the House, its infrastructure spending was around 7.5 percent. The returning bill was to contain much more. Instead, the word “infrastructure” has simply been redefined to include the same programs under different titles. Real infrastructure spending now only accounts for 6 percent of this bill.

The bottom line is I will not vote for something that is 90 percent wasteful just to get the 10 percent that is good.

Good? For whom?

Let me add some further perspective. For the past four years there has been widespread support for a state government capital bill to repair and build infrastructure in Illinois. Our previous governor and the General Assembly could not agree, largely due to the profound distrust legislators of both parties had for the governor. State engineers have identified $50 billion of needed infrastructure spending in Illinois.

Unfortunately, there has been no movement on a capital bill in the past 10 years. The amount that achieved bipartisan consensus last year was $35 billion. Contrast the power that would have to stimulate jobs with the only $1 billion allotted to Illinois for highways and $1 billion for mass transit in this federal stimulus bill. That $2 billion for Illinois infrastructure does not warrant putting our nation on a supersonic course to bankruptcy.

Uh, “supersonic course to bankruptcy”? Doing nothing will put us there, guaranteed. Your party put us on that path.

Our nation’s founders designed a system of government that has served us well for more than 200 years. It involves a process of committee hearings once bills are proposed. This was completely short-circuited for this bill.

This is misleading, at best. This bill had been drafted some time ago and gone in and out of committee. To claim that one had only a few hours to read it is misleading, at best.

On Thursday, I had the honor of traveling to Peoria on Air Force One with our president, who was to address workers at Caterpillar. As I sat in the audience surrounded by hard-working employees, the president called me out by name and urged those in attendance to share their opinions on the stimulus with me. The message they delivered, however, was to oppose this bill.

I sincerely want to work with President Obama on jump-starting our economy and other issues, but I could not support him in good conscience at this time. Rather than being a rubber stamp, I am more helpful to our president and our people by using my own best judgment and representing the views of my constituents, as I am empowered to do by our Constitution.

Aaron Schock represents Illinois’ 18th Congressional District in the U.S. House