Good news, friends. The stimulus bill is working just as Obama promised. Thousands of jobs are being created – and not in imaginary zip codes this time. These are real manufacturing jobs. Now, here’s the bad news – the jobs are being created overseas.

Barack Obama has talked a lot about using stimulus dollars to create new “green jobs” or “clean energy jobs.” Last month, the president said, “Building a robust clean energy sector is how we will create the jobs of the future — jobs that pay well and can’t be outsourced.” It seems like all the talk about green jobs was just a lot of hot air.

ABC News and other media outlets have reported recently that stimulus money specifically intended to create “green jobs” here has in fact been used to create thousands of jobs overseas. ABC noted that “Nearly $2 billion in money from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act has been spent on wind power … over the past year. But the study found that nearly 80% of that money has gone to foreign manufactures of wind turbines.”

According to the report, the largest award – $577 million – went to a Spanish company. One Portuguese company got $230 million of your hard-earned money. Another project that is expected to receive $450 million in taxpayer funded stimulus cash would help build a $1.5 billion wind farm in Texas. It’s estimated that the project might create about 300 construction jobs. But it would also fund thousands of manufacturing jobs — in China. According to one study, as many as 6,000 stimulus jobs have been created overseas.

By the way, while the Obama Administration is wasting your money creating green jobs in China, Arizona just announced that it would no longer take part in a “groundbreaking attempt to limit greenhouses-gas emissions,” by implementing a regional cap and trade system. Why? It costs too much. State officials determined that the plan was too costly for consumers and businesses and “would slow the state’s economic growth.” But Obama and congressional liberals want to impose such a plan on the entire nation.

Even if the stimulus funds do create so-called green jobs, wind power is terribly expensive. It’s easy to understand Arizona’s decision when you consider the following analysis:

“The U.S. Energy Information Administration reported in early 2008 that the government subsidizes solar energy at $24.34 per megawatt-hour (MWh) and wind power at $23.37 per MWh. …Compare the subsidies to renewables with those extended to natural gas (25 cents per MWh in subsidies), coal (44 cents), hydroelectricity (67 cents), and nuclear power ($1.59). These are the energy sources (along with oil, which undergirds transportation) that do the heavy lifting in our energy economy.”

This is just more evidence of the grossly inefficient way government redistributes resources and wastes your tax dollars. Yet Obama and his liberal allies want to run our healthcare, too!

The evidence is now overwhelming that the Fort Hood murderer, Nidal Malik Hasan, is an Islamist who was trying to please Allah when he gunned down our American heroes. ABC News reported this morning that the CIA has evidence that he had tried to contact Al Qaeda in recent months. For normal Americans the news that he shouted “Allahu Akbar,” the battle cry of jihadists, as he poured bullets into our sons and daughters was all we needed to know.

But that information wasn’t good enough for Dr. Phil, Larry King, major media outlets such as Newsweek, the president and, sadly, even our military elites. Many of them jumped to the conclusion that this was another example of a soldier “breaking” from battle stress. It didn’t seem puzzling to them that he had never been in combat! In fact, all of our elites wanted to lecture the rest of us and warn us that we’d better not jump to conclusions.

Now we know that for years Hasan was quite open about his Islamist views. In fact, HE HARRASSED his fellow soldiers – not the other way around, as has been suggested. Complaints about Hasan’s anti-American rantings were ignored. Some military people say they didn’t file complaints because they were afraid that doing so would hurt their careers in the increasingly “politically correct” Army bureaucracy.

Hasan made presentations that justified suicide bombings, and argued that the wars we have been fighting since 9/11 are really wars against Islam. He tried to convert his military patients to Islam and was put on probation. He attended a mosque in Northern Virginia that two 9/11 hijackers also attended. The list goes on and on.

As an obvious Islamist, Hasan did the predictable – he killed as many of us as he could. His actions should be no more mysterious than those of the hijackers who killed 3,000 of us on 9/11 or the Palestinian family who celebrates when they receive news that their teenage child has blown himself up while killing Jews.

What is harder to fathom is why so many elites are more interested in spreading politically correct lies than in confronting the strong likelihood that our jihadist enemy has infiltrated key American institutions. More of our soldiers will die, as will more of us, if the media and our government leaders don’t wake up. Nidal Hasan should not have been in the Army – he should have been in jail. He should not have been assigned to counseling returning American warriors. He should not have been promoted.

On Meet The Press Sunday, Army Chief of Staff General George Casey continued to urge people not to jump to conclusions about the overwhelming evidence in this case. He expressed deep concern about a possible backlash against Muslim members of our Armed Forces. He actually said this: “As horrific as this tragedy was, if our diversity becomes a casualty, I think that’s worse.” Does he really believe that? I think that 13 American families would argue that we could have had one person less of “diversity” at Fort Hood in exchange for 13 live American heroes.

And what about the White House? Since long before this attack, this president has refused to use the phrase “Islamic terrorism,” and has banned its use by others in the government. He began his administration by attempting to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, where Hasan’s jihadist brothers are imprisoned. Day by day, America becomes less safe under his leadership.

From time to time, we share polling data with you that it is relevant to a hot topic and comes from a source we trust. We trust pollster Scott Rasmussen the most because he is the one of the most accurate pollsters in the business.

I mention this because the Washington Post released a poll yesterday that has been widely cited on Capitol Hill and gotten a lot of attention in other media outlets. The poll reportedly showed a major boost in public support for Barack Obama and healthcare reform. Here are the key findings:

• 57% of respondents approved of the president’s job performance.
• 57% support the government-run “public option” being part of the healthcare “reform” plan.
• Looking to the future, 51% of respondents plan to vote for Democrat candidates in the 2010 elections, while just 39% would back GOP candidates – a 12-point margin for the Democrats.

Well, there’s no polite way to put this, but the poll is garbage. The Post surveyed adults, one of the most inexact standards for polling. The problem with polling adults is that many of them aren’t registered to vote. They’re entitled to their opinions, but they don’t matter on Election Day. Polls of registered voters produce more conservative results than polls of adults, and polls of likely voters produce more conservative results than polls of registered voters.

Now, here’s the most absurd part of the Post poll: Just 20% of respondents were self-identified Republicans. Does anyone seriously believe that there is going to be a national election in which just one-fifth of the electorate are Republicans? Of course not. The Postwasn’t attempting to measure public opinion, it was attempting to manipulate it.

Scott Rasmussen polls likely voters (the folks who decide elections). Consider the difference:

• According to Rasmussen’s daily tracking poll, Obama’s approval rating stands at 47% favorable and 53% unfavorable among likely voters.
• On healthcare reform, just 42% of likely voters support the plan currently before Congress, while 54% oppose it.
• Looking ahead to the 2010 elections, Rasmussen finds that among likely voters, 42% support Republican candidates, while 37% support Democrats.