They call the left "radical"?

I found a book entitled "Catastrophe" that has the following editorial review:

"[The authors] Morris and McGann take a hard look at America in free fall—and at how Obama is transforming a vulnerable America into a socialist state.

They [the authors] tell the truth about Obama and his radical policies:

• He will destroy our health care system so that no one gets adequate care.
• He designed his bank rescue plan to pave the way for nationalization of the banks and socialization of the economy.
• He firmly believes in government control of our major industries—he's already commandeered the banks and the automobile industry.
• He plans to reshape the political landscape to keep the left in power for decades by cooking the census, enfranchising illegal immigrants, muzzling talk radio, and coercing workers into unions.
• He is attacking those who fight terrorism while letting the terrorists go free.
• He has repealed the Declaration of Independence and put us under a worldwide, European-dominated financial regulatory system."

Seriously?  This is a book for adults?

Is the economic stimulus plan working?

Recent campaign ads argue that the fiscal stimulus package hasn't helped at all.  Now I know that unemployment is still too high and many people are still searching for work so I'm not trying to say that economic conditions are great. However, I'm sick and tired of people saying that the Democrats are wasting  money.  What irks me most is that Republicans pretend that they would have done nothing to help the economy when in fact they proposed almost as much spending (the final price tag for the Obama plan was about $790 billion while the Republican alternative was $710 billion).  And the gigantic deficit is not only because of government spending, but it's also because tax revenue is way down due to the high unemployment numbers.  (Getting sidetracked: why won't Republicans LEAP at Obama's suggestion to freeze government spending?  Isn't that a no brainer?)

Anyway, I didn't see a lot of news coverage on last week's economic numbers that should help illustrate the immediate impact of the stimulus package.  Last Friday, the government released the numbers for economic growth in the 4th quarter of 2009.  To help put the number in perspective, let's look at some historical numbers of quarterly GDP growth.  (Source: the Bureau of Economic Analysis at http://www.bea.gov/national/xls/gdpchg.xls)

Some technical details on the numbers: Though economic growth (GDP) is reported quarterly, it is often expressed as an ANNUAL number and is adjusted for inflation.  This is called the real rate of growth as it is a measure of goods and services in the US economy.  Here is what it has looked like over the last 25 years - to go back more than 25 years ago just doesn't make much sense to me since our economy is so very different than it was in the 1950s.

Time Period	Quarterly Growth Rate
1984-2009 (Last 25 years)	2.8% average
2000-2009 (Last 10 years)	1.8% average
1993-2001 (Clinton)	3.8% average
3rd quarter 2008	-2.7%
4th quarter 2008	-5.4%
1st quarter 2009	-6.4% (stimulus package signed on 2/17/09)
2nd quarter 2009	-0.7%
3rd quarter 2009	+2.2%
4th quarter 2009	+5.7%

Look at how quickly the numbers have turned around since Obama became president.  Obama came in at a time when the economy was at its WORST - the 4th quarter 2008 and 1st quarter 2009 were the two worst quarters for economic growth in the last 25 years!  Yet, in less than one year, we've swung to +5.7% growth!

I'm not arguing that Obama is our economic savior, especially since unemployment must improve.  But how can someone say that the stimulus package didn't help?  Seriously?