building infrastructure, put Americans back to work. Paid for by WHOM?

[Snookie]

The unions support him. It's legal.
You dodged my challenge by asking a question.

 

[Stephanie]

Does this really have to be explained?

In one way the country is like a company. Without investment by the owners, there is no competition. We need modern roads and bridges and rails to move product and supplies. We need sewers and clean water. We need an uninterrupted source of electricity.

Republicans have fought to keep from investing in America. They see medical bills being the number one cause of bankruptcy as a "success". They don't want Americans educated.

In fact, when you look at what al Qaeda wants for America and what Republicans want, there doesn't seem to be much of a difference, not really.

yeah right, stroke that idioticy of what Al Qaeda wants is what Republicans want..

YOU BET

 

[WillowTree]

The unions support him. It's legal.
You dodged my challenge by asking a question.

No I didn't.

 

[emptystep]

This is correct, we pay for it with our gasoline taxes. This newest bullshit is a way for obama to take taxpayer money and funnel it to the unions.

Could you offer some proof for your assertion?

can you offer some that it isn't?

That is not the way the game is played.

 

[Snookie]

The unions support him. It's legal.
You dodged my challenge by asking a question.

No I didn't.

Well, then show me proof.

 

[WillowTree]

The unions support him. It's legal.
You dodged my challenge by asking a question.

No I didn't.

Well, then show me proof.

Show me yours.

 

[PredFan]

The unions support him. It's legal.
You dodged my challenge by asking a question.

No I didn't.

Well, then show me proof.

He can't show you proof of something that hasn't happened yet. he's basing his statement on what has happened in the past. Obama bailed out the auto unions with taxpayer money. His statement was that he doesn't want this infrastructure to happen because Obama will funnel taxpayer money to the unions. He can't prove it because it hasn't happened yet. It will though, we've seen it.

 

[WillowTree]

No I didn't.

Well, then show me proof.

He can't show you proof of something that hasn't happened yet. he's basing his statement on what has happened in the past. Obama bailed out the auto unions with taxpayer money. His statement was that he doesn't want this infrastructure to happen because Obama will funnel taxpayer money to the unions. He can't prove it because it hasn't happened yet. It will though, we've seen it.

now snootier says he has proof that won't happen but he won't show it.

 

[Wry Catcher]

I am totally against this shit as all funds for rebuilding infrastruture will be paid to the unions only.. bullshit on that malarky.

Since you are "totally against this shit" what would you do?

You are the Queen of "ain't it awful" and have NEVER posted anything rational, substantive or pragmatic.

 

[WillowTree]

I am totally against this shit as all funds for rebuilding infrastruture will be paid to the unions only.. bullshit on that malarky.

Since you are "totally against this shit" what would you do?

You are the Queen of "ain't it awful" and have NEVER posted anything rational, substantive or pragmatic.

I already told you what I'd do moron,,, now listen carefully, I'll say it slowly. I would agree with infrastructure spending if it were on a "right to work basis" did you hear me that time?

 

[whitehall]

Infrastructure maintenance is necessary but the "great wall of China" was built in a shorter timespan than a single lane on a Interstate 81 bridge that has inconvenienced traffic in my area for the last couple of years. It's OK but infrastructure maintenance including "shovel ready" jobs that the president joked about do not stimulate the economy. Federal contract jobs seem like a pretty good deal for contractors but the net effect on the economy is close to zero. Only the private sector can stimulate the economy and so far this administration has shown only hostility to capitalism.

 

[Snookie]

This is correct, we pay for it with our gasoline taxes. This newest bullshit is a way for obama to take taxpayer money and funnel it to the unions.

Could you offer some proof for your assertion?

can you offer some that it isn't?

Yes but it will cost you a dozen crispy creme doughnuts.

 

[WillowTree]

Could you offer some proof for your assertion?

can you offer some that it isn't?

Yes but it will cost you a dozen crispy creme doughnuts.

Are they union made?

 

[PredFan]

can you offer some that it isn't?

Yes but it will cost you a dozen crispy creme doughnuts.

Are they union made?

Fortunately, they are not.

 

[Snookie]

can you offer some that it isn't?

Yes but it will cost you a dozen crispy creme doughnuts.

Are they union made?

How the hell should I know. I eat them, not make them.

 

[Wry Catcher]

I am totally against this shit as all funds for rebuilding infrastruture will be paid to the unions only.. bullshit on that malarky.

Since you are "totally against this shit" what would you do?

You are the Queen of "ain't it awful" and have NEVER posted anything rational, substantive or pragmatic.

I already told you what I'd do moron,,, now listen carefully, I'll say it slowly. I would agree with infrastructure spending if it were on a "right to work basis" did you hear me that time?

Define "right to work".

 

[WillowTree]

Since you are "totally against this shit" what would you do?

You are the Queen of "ain't it awful" and have NEVER posted anything rational, substantive or pragmatic.

I already told you what I'd do moron,,, now listen carefully, I'll say it slowly. I would agree with infrastructure spending if it were on a "right to work basis" did you hear me that time?

Define "right to work".

moving the goal posts does not work with me honey cup

 

[Snookie]

Since you are "totally against this shit" what would you do?

You are the Queen of "ain't it awful" and have NEVER posted anything rational, substantive or pragmatic.

I already told you what I'd do moron,,, now listen carefully, I'll say it slowly. I would agree with infrastructure spending if it were on a "right to work basis" did you hear me that time?

Define "right to work".

Paid below a living wage.

 

[WillowTree]

I already told you what I'd do moron,,, now listen carefully, I'll say it slowly. I would agree with infrastructure spending if it were on a "right to work basis" did you hear me that time?

Define "right to work".

Paid below a living wage.

wrong again asswarp.

 

[Oldguy]

Who do YOU want re-building America?

Union? Or, non-union?