Obama Administration - 'Stimulus Not Designed to Stimulate, Just Stabilize'

Turns out that the 'stimulus' was not meant to 'stimulate'. Despite the repeated reference and justification to the contrary of course. Now they are saying that the real purpose was to 'stabilize' the market. Moving beyond the double speak, there is something to read into the statement. The Obama administration must believe that the economy is not going to see significant improvements in the short term. The statement is an attempt at political cover if the economy does not recover as fast as they said it would (which it already is not).

http://hotair.com/archives/2009/07/16/new-white-house-spin-stimulus-not-designed-to-stimulate (bold mine)

"Old White House spin: Porkulus has stimulated the economy and “saved or created” 150,000 jobs.  New White House spin: Stimulus?  What stimulus?  ABC’s Yunji de NIes reports from somewhere down the rabbit hole, er, the White House briefing room:

Turns out the $787 billion “American Recovery and Reinvestment Act” (AARA) was not designed for full economic recovery, but rather to “stabilize” the downturn.  That’s the word from White House officials today, who held off-camera briefings with reporters on how the AARA is working so far.

“This legislation was designed to cushion the downturn,” said White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs. “That’s why we have always talked about this as one function of economic recovery.”

When pressed about the change in terminology, Gibbs said he was not trying to temper expectations after the fact. “I can probably find 15 or 20 occasions when I said this in the lead up,” Gibbs said, explaining that he had always defined the AARA as part of a “multi-legged stool.”

And Eastasia has never been at war with Oceania, Winston!
...
Just a reminder from Slublog about how Obama sold Porkulus in early January:

That is why I have moved quickly to work with my economic team and leaders of both parties on an American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan that will immediately jumpstart job creation and long-term growth. …

There is no doubt that the cost of this plan will be considerable.  It will certainly add to the budget deficit in the short-term.  But equally certain are the consequences of doing too little or nothing at all, for that will lead to an even greater deficit of jobs, incomes, and confidence in our economy.  It is true that we cannot depend on government alone to create jobs or long-term growth, but at this particular moment, only government can provide the short-term boost necessary to lift us from a recession this deep and severe.

But it’s not a “stimulus.”  Riiiiiiiiiiiight.

"