Detroit local MSM come out swinging for more Obama spending

Obama wasn't even done with his horrid, platitude-ridden speech insisting that a bill no one has seen be passed immediately. WXYZ went right into anecdote mode insisting that this guy who's been unemployed for 200 years would immediately find a job if those evil Republicans would just pass the bill that no one has seen yet:

A local man who's been unemployed watched the President's speech with hope for a brighter future.

Not one coherent logical thought there whatsoever. The Detroit Free Press, of course, followed suit: Editorial: Congressional inaction not an option. It's funny how the sentinels over at the freep jump right to action. They have spent all week hiding under their desks refusing to say a boo or peep regarding Jim Hoffa's violent rhetoric right here in Detroit on Labor Day at an Obama taxpayer-funded campaign rally.

No reasonable person can claim the $447-billion American Jobs Act President Barack Obama proposed Thursday night represents an unwarranted federal intrusion in the nation's economy, although many of Obama's Republican critics undoubtedly will.

Is $446 billion (which grew from $400b which grew from $300b) pulled out of the economy to put back into another part of the economy, and taxing it on its way through, not a federal intrusion anymore? A half a trillion dollars is now considered 'modest' by the freep's standards:

The real danger is that even the moderate stimulus measures the president advanced in his fiery address will become mired in another Pyrrhic partisan debate, or that, even if adopted intact, they will do too little to boost the consumer demand on which any sustained economic recovery depends.

The centerpiece of Obama's initiative is a short-term payroll tax reduction for both employees and employers. Since the tax is collected on only the first $106,800 of earned income, it will disproportionately help the lower- and middle-income workers most likely to spend it quickly. As a bonus, the White House proposes to forgive the employer's payroll tax obligation in the first year after any new employee is hired.

No employer is going to hire someone at $40,000 a year so they can save 6% of that the first year. The credit is far smaller than the cost. The only people that are going to get hired would have been hired anyway. Just like cash for clunkers that was an utter flop.

A second component of the proposed jobs act would allocate $35 billion to local communities for the rehiring of teachers and first responders laid off as a result of dramatic reductions in local tax revenue, and an additional $100 billion for infrastructure improvements ranging from road repair to school modernization.

Um - what was the first stimulus for then? Wasn't that an infrastructure stimulus that allowed bankrupt states to create 'or save' government jobs such as teachers and firefighters? Does the freep editorial board even see the absurdity in this? And of course, there is the tried and true liberal a tactic of using Ronald Reagan to push for money to pay people not to work:

The final piece of Obama's initiative would renew unemployment insurance extensions for an additional year -- a step Republican presidents including Ronald Reagan and both George Bushes endorsed when high unemployment bedeviled their own administrations -- and two innovative programs designed to get laid-off workers back into the workforce quickly by supplementing the income from low-paying jobs and paying benefits to workers who accept minimum-wage internships in order to acquire new job skills.

And where, pray tell, will all this money come from? After all, Obama insisted it will all be "paid for." Oh, that's right - higher taxes. The Detroit Free Pres is abdicating its responsibility in reporting the truth. Even the state-run AP reporting this after Obama's campaign speech (via memeorandum): FACT CHECK: Obama's jobs plan paid for? Seems not

President Barack Obama's promise Thursday that everything in his jobs plan will be paid for rests on highly iffy propositions... the plan he presented was conventional Washington rhetoric... It employs sleight-of-hand accounting.

OBAMA: "Everything in this bill will be paid for. Everything."

THE FACTS: Obama did not spell out exactly how he would pay for the measures... White House aides suggested that new deficit spending in the near-term to try to promote job creation would be paid for in the future...

OBAMA: "Everything in here is the kind of proposal that's been supported by both Democrats and Republicans, including many who sit here tonight."

THE FACTS: ...But Obama proposes paying for the plan in part with tax increases that have already generated stiff Republican opposition...

OBAMA: "It will not add to the deficit."

THE FACTS: It's hard to see how the program would not raise the deficit...

OBAMA: "The American Jobs Act answers the urgent need to create jobs right away."

THE FACTS: Not all of the president's major proposals are likely to yield quick job growth if adopted...

Exit question: is the freep editorial board staffed with mindless drones? More from Townhall, Outside the Beltway, Big Journalism, Weasel Zippers, The Daily Caller, American Power, JammieWearingFool, Doug Ross, Gateway Pundit, American Spectator, Ben Smith, Michelle Malkin, The Other McCain, Pajamas Media and The Lonely Conservative

UPDATE: Via Instapundit:

MICKEY KAUS ON OBAMA’S SPEECH:

...a) His speaking style has deteriorated since taking office. He’s phonier than in 2008, reading with forced emphasis. At times he achieved the rare, magical combination of seeming desperate and condescending at the same time.

Mickey Kaus, by the way, is a Democrat.

b) The ”people who sent us here – the people who hired us to work for them – they don’t have the luxury of waiting fourteen months.” Why not just “we” don’t have the luxury of waiting 14 months? Why assume the disconnect–e.g. that he and the others in the room aren’t “living week to week; paycheck to paycheck; even day to day”? It puts distance (condescending distance!) between Obama and the TV audience. It’s not even true. I would venture to say that most of the people in this room, and Obama himself, know someone who is living “week to to week, paycheck to paycheck.” Some of them know me, for instance.

c) “[C]ompanies will get a $4,000 tax credit if they hire anyone who has spent more than six months looking for a job.” The problem with such tax credits, of course, is that they act as a red flag telling employers that a job applicant isn’t exactly top of the barrel.

Kinda like this Administration. Call it the CETA Presidency.
Related: AP Factcheck: Yeah, Obama Said His Plan Will Be Paid For, But It Really Won’t. “Nobody but nobody is buying the president’s speech. The AP just ran it through a shredder.”

Well, the freep ate it up!

More: Obama: Pass It Now, Pay For It Later. “His great idea: Cobble together a mish-mash of old ideas (infrastructure spending, a payroll tax cut) and pay for it later, by asking the debt commission to come up with additional deficit reductions later, preferably by hiking taxes on the rich. The second half of the speech was a heated campaign rally aimed at a cartoon version of his future opponent. . . . What was remarkable was the whiff of desperation conveyed by Obama, and the utter lack of interest by the Republicans. The speaker of the House looked bored. The Republicans neither booed nor applauded. No one thinks this grab bag, a mini son of the Stimulus Plan, is going to work. But Republicans must be relieved: Obama said nothing that would either win over independents or exert any pressure on them to pass it.”

Plus, from Ira Stoll: “President Obama has gotten to the point with me that by merely giving a speech in favor of something, he can turn me against policies that I believe in and support.” Maybe that was his secret plan all along! . . .

UPDATE #2: Via Henry Payne at The Michigan View: Rep. Candice Miller, R-Mich., in response to Obama's address to a Congress.

It is unfortunate tonight that the President offered no real details of his plan at the same time he was urging Congress to pass it. As we saw with ObamaCare, the devil is always in the details and no longer will this Congress do what then Speaker Pelosi said during the health care debate when she stated, "We have to pass the bill to find out what is in it."

There could be some areas where we can agree. I would support fundamental, pro-growth tax reform that allows American job creators to compete better across the globe and gives hard pressed American families some relief. I would support any effort to reduce the overwhelming burden of federal government regulation that has stifled job growth since President Obama took office and has placed hundreds of billions of dollars of additional costs on American businesses.

I cannot support additional spending that is not paid for or that is paid for by increasing taxes on those who create jobs.

Also: Rep. Mike Rogers, R - Mich., on Obama's speech:

Though I certainly share the President's goal of getting Americans back to work, another speech won't change the Washington, DC -created burdens that are hampering job creation.

Excessive new regulations, health care and energy costs initiated in the past three years are causing employers to think twice about hiring, growing or expanding. Until those policies change and until we stop threatening huge tax increases on people who create jobs, more of the same borrow and spend "stimulus" policies out of Washington are sure to have the same impact they had in 2009 " a huge bill to our kids, lots of money wasted and not many new jobs.

And finally this: Obama's speech: CliffsNotes version

"Spend $450 billion dollars now, it will create jobs, and I'll tell you how I'm going to pay for it a week from Monday. If you disagree, you want to expose kids to mercury."

Heh!