The republicans are trying to.....

[Life_Long_Dem!]

I was watching CNN yesterday and they had the comment ticker going when talking about the stimulus package and someone commented that the republicans are doing all they can to cause the stimulus plan to fail so they can regain control of Congress and i totally agree. It is all about agendas in politics on either side of the aisle. The dems have control and republicans dont like it so they are trying to sabotage the prez to win back seats. Why else would they be holding up Obama's labor sec. nominee?? She is pro union and is for the employee free choice act which most republicans dont like so why cant this be about whats best for America and not whats best for my ideological beliefs??

 

[jillian]

The problem is we don't all agree on what's good for America.

 

[Xenophon]

Why did the Dems block and hold up Bush's apointees?

Both sides behave the same, and as jillian said, tehy have different views of what to do.

 

[dilloduck]

The problem is we don't all agree on what's good for America.

Now there is a good starting place for a conversation. ( not that we ever will or anything)

 

[Life_Long_Dem!]

Oh is it that unions are to much like socialism as the motto of the modern day socialist party is workers of the world unite?? and I agree that conservatives are to stuck on the past as the definition of a conservative is someone that is a traditionalist and doesnt take well to change....thats why I agree with Obama that the main issue is idealogical blockage with some republicans who are still stuck on FDR'S new deal. Also for those that want to believe its the dems fault since they have been in control since 2006 well it does not really help that they didnt have enough control to stop republican philabusters AND that bush ran out of ink on his veto pen multiple times vetoing EVERY dem bill that went across his desk.

 

[jillian]

The problem is we don't all agree on what's good for America.

Now there is a good starting place for a conversation. ( not that we ever will or anything)

i dunno... there's been a thaw. lol...

there are certain people who I don't believe want what's best (like geniuses who say the 52% of people who voted for Obama should be deported -- because that's so pro-America and all).

But I do find that most of us want what we *think* is best. ... just we can't all be correct.

 

[jillian]

Oh is it that unions are to much like socialism as the motto of the modern day socialist party is workers of the world unite?? and I agree that conservatives are to stuck on the past as the definition of a conservative is someone that is a traditionalist and doesnt take well to change....thats why I agree with Obama that the main issue is idealogical blockage with some republicans who are still stuck on FDR'S new deal. Also for those that want to believe its the dems fault since they have been in control since 2006 well it does not really help that they didnt have enough control to stop republican philabusters AND that bush ran out of ink on his veto pen multiple times vetoing EVERY dem bill that went across his desk.

There is that. But politicians vying for power don't have the same interests, necessarily, as the people who actually reside in this country. I think there are people who grew up in union households who understand and value the good things that unions do. And then there are people who, when they think union, think jimmy hoffa and corruption among union officials. Both have an element of truth. On one hand, collective bargaining is incredibly important to wage earners. On the other, unions slowing down production so that they can get overtime or so that no one looks to "good" or too "bad" is a reality as well. Like most things, the truth is somewhere in between.

 

[WillowTree]

Oh is it that unions are to much like socialism as the motto of the modern day socialist party is workers of the world unite?? and I agree that conservatives are to stuck on the past as the definition of a conservative is someone that is a traditionalist and doesnt take well to change....thats why I agree with Obama that the main issue is idealogical blockage with some republicans who are still stuck on FDR'S new deal. Also for those that want to believe its the dems fault since they have been in control since 2006 well it does not really help that they didnt have enough control to stop republican philabusters AND that bush ran out of ink on his veto pen multiple times vetoing EVERY dem bill that went across his desk.

Are you sure about that?

 

[dilloduck]

The problem is we don't all agree on what's good for America.

Now there is a good starting place for a conversation. ( not that we ever will or anything)

i dunno... there's been a thaw. lol...

That's because conservatives are nicer "minorties".

 

[Xenophon]

Are you sure about that?

Ol Bushie seemed to have a refill for TARP Pt 1 that the democrats dreamed up.

 

[jillian]

Are you sure about that?

Ol Bushie seemed to have a refill for TARP Pt 1 that the democrats dreamed up.

actually, IIRC, Bush asked for the bailout.

But he did sign Obama's ethics bill. ;o)

 

[Xenophon]

Are you sure about that?

Ol Bushie seemed to have a refill for TARP Pt 1 that the democrats dreamed up.

actually, IIRC, Bush asked for the bailout.

But he did sign Obama's ethics bill. ;o)

An idiot aks irrisponsible people for billions and gets it, what's wrong with this picture.

 

[Bern80]

I was watching CNN yesterday and they had the comment ticker going when talking about the stimulus package and someone commented that the republicans are doing all they can to cause the stimulus plan to fail so they can regain control of Congress and i totally agree. It is all about agendas in politics on either side of the aisle. The dems have control and republicans dont like it so they are trying to sabotage the prez to win back seats. Why else would they be holding up Obama's labor sec. nominee?? She is pro union and is for the employee free choice act which most republicans dont like so why cant this be about whats best for America and not whats best for my ideological beliefs??

And of course the Dems were completely altruistic when the Repbulicans were in charge. The Republicans can't get control of congress just by keeping this from passing. Maybe the next election if they manage to do that and it reflects what the people wanted, they might have a chance. Otherwise dont' worry about it. You guys are safe for a while. This is what you wanted and if/when it fails to work you will have no one to blame but yourselves.

 

[sealybobo]

Oh is it that unions are to much like socialism as the motto of the modern day socialist party is workers of the world unite?? and I agree that conservatives are to stuck on the past as the definition of a conservative is someone that is a traditionalist and doesnt take well to change....thats why I agree with Obama that the main issue is idealogical blockage with some republicans who are still stuck on FDR'S new deal. Also for those that want to believe its the dems fault since they have been in control since 2006 well it does not really help that they didnt have enough control to stop republican philabusters AND that bush ran out of ink on his veto pen multiple times vetoing EVERY dem bill that went across his desk.

You got it right.

The GOP is anti middle class/union/labor. They don't care about American workers. All their corporations are going global and that means American workers are paid too much.

The best any Republican can say about this is that the Dems are no better.

And did you know Bush never veto'ed one GOP bill from 2000-2006? Imagine all the spending the GOP did in 6 years and Bush didn't veto one thing that they sent him? Come on!

And why haven't we stopped paying $10 billion a month in Iraq? Chaney said Iraq oil would pay for the war. He said that 6 years ago.

So why did the GOP from 2000-2006 double the debt? What was their emergency? And you can take Iraq and Afganistan out of the equasion, they still raped the treasury.

To me it seems like they were trying to bankrupt the treasury because then it is a lot easier to end social programs like social security. And it didn't hurt that all their buddies got rich in the meanwhile. It's called socializing the losses and privatizing the profits.

Wouldn't it make more sense if you are going to have the government take the losses that they should also take the profits? Ohhhh, but that would be SOCIALISM!!!!

 

[sealybobo]

I was watching CNN yesterday and they had the comment ticker going when talking about the stimulus package and someone commented that the republicans are doing all they can to cause the stimulus plan to fail so they can regain control of Congress and i totally agree. It is all about agendas in politics on either side of the aisle. The dems have control and republicans dont like it so they are trying to sabotage the prez to win back seats. Why else would they be holding up Obama's labor sec. nominee?? She is pro union and is for the employee free choice act which most republicans dont like so why cant this be about whats best for America and not whats best for my ideological beliefs??

And of course the Dems were completely altruistic when the Repbulicans were in charge. The Republicans can't get control of congress just by keeping this from passing. Maybe the next election if they manage to do that and it reflects what the people wanted, they might have a chance. Otherwise dont' worry about it. You guys are safe for a while. This is what you wanted and if/when it fails to work you will have no one to blame but yourselves.

Except for Bush and the bankers that pull his strings.

Do you claim that the bankers don't pull his strings or that they also pull the Democrats strings?

PS. When Obama does fix the mess Bush created, don't be a fucking retard and say it was Bush/Tom Delay's policies from 2000-2006 that did it.

 

[Bern80]

I was watching CNN yesterday and they had the comment ticker going when talking about the stimulus package and someone commented that the republicans are doing all they can to cause the stimulus plan to fail so they can regain control of Congress and i totally agree. It is all about agendas in politics on either side of the aisle. The dems have control and republicans dont like it so they are trying to sabotage the prez to win back seats. Why else would they be holding up Obama's labor sec. nominee?? She is pro union and is for the employee free choice act which most republicans dont like so why cant this be about whats best for America and not whats best for my ideological beliefs??

And of course the Dems were completely altruistic when the Repbulicans were in charge. The Republicans can't get control of congress just by keeping this from passing. Maybe the next election if they manage to do that and it reflects what the people wanted, they might have a chance. Otherwise dont' worry about it. You guys are safe for a while. This is what you wanted and if/when it fails to work you will have no one to blame but yourselves.

Except for Bush and the bankers that pull his strings.

Do you claim that the bankers don't pull his strings or that they also pull the Democrats strings?

PS. When Obama does fix the mess Bush created, don't be a fucking retard and say it was Bush/Tom Delay's policies from 2000-2006 that did it.

You can't keep saying this is why this happened without some evidence. I'm honeslty more than willing to hear you out considering Bush's track record. But what is know for a fact is that Bush tried to do things like put tougher regulations on Freddie and Fannie. Now what SPECIFIC evidence do you have that this was bankers and Bush screwing people over?

 

[sealybobo]

And of course the Dems were completely altruistic when the Repbulicans were in charge. The Republicans can't get control of congress just by keeping this from passing. Maybe the next election if they manage to do that and it reflects what the people wanted, they might have a chance. Otherwise dont' worry about it. You guys are safe for a while. This is what you wanted and if/when it fails to work you will have no one to blame but yourselves.

Except for Bush and the bankers that pull his strings.

Do you claim that the bankers don't pull his strings or that they also pull the Democrats strings?

PS. When Obama does fix the mess Bush created, don't be a fucking retard and say it was Bush/Tom Delay's policies from 2000-2006 that did it.

You can't keep saying this is why this happened without some evidence. I'm honeslty more than willing to hear you out considering Bush's track record. But what is know for a fact is that Bush tried to do things like put tougher regulations on Freddie and Fannie. Now what SPECIFIC evidence do you have that this was bankers and Bush screwing people over?

Because Bush tried to sneak this by us:

Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.

Dirty Secret Of The Bailout: Thirty-Two Words That None Dare Utter

And you forget that before Bush asked for $700 billion, the Federal Reserve, ON THEIR OWN, bailed out AIG with $85 billion. You forgot about that money, didn't you?

Then Bush gave $350 billion to other banks. What happened to that money?

So I understand your fear. Because Bush ripped us off, you think Obama will too.

When Hank Paulson scared Congress into passing the Troubled Asset Relief Plan (TARP) last fall, he said that it would be used to buy toxic waste from banks. That never happened. All we know is that $350 billion of our taxpayer money is gone and that most of it went to banks and a bit to the auto industry. What are they doing with our money? How is the government measuring the success of TARP? Is it helping? Until we get those answers, we should not allow more good money to be thrown after bad.

Before releasing the next $350 billion, what happened to the first? - BloggingStocks

They didn't do what they said they would do with the money Bern. Now if Obama makes the same mistake, I'll start to wonder about him too. You, however, never wondered about Bush but immediately doubt Prez O?

 

[AllieBaba]

At least the people who pull his strings haven't had to withdraw from nominations due to tax fraud.

 

[frazzledgear]

I was watching CNN yesterday and they had the comment ticker going when talking about the stimulus package and someone commented that the republicans are doing all they can to cause the stimulus plan to fail so they can regain control of Congress and i totally agree. It is all about agendas in politics on either side of the aisle. The dems have control and republicans dont like it so they are trying to sabotage the prez to win back seats. Why else would they be holding up Obama's labor sec. nominee?? She is pro union and is for the employee free choice act which most republicans dont like so why cant this be about whats best for America and not whats best for my ideological beliefs??

Some bozo TV viewer saying he thought Republicans were trying to cause the stimulus bill to fail makes me wonder just how ignorant Obama supporters really are. Just how deep does it go? Democrats control both houses of Congress and can EASILY pass the stimulus written exactly as they want it without a single Republican vote. So Republicans CAN'T cause it to fail to be passed. LOL I hope that idiot wasn't suggesting Republicans were trying to make it fail to stimulate the economy -because no Republican anywhere can cause this spending spree to fail to stimulate the economy. They have already said this bill as written will NOT work. Which is why they don't support it. Duh.

Obama doesn't want this bill passed by JUST Democrats though because he needs the cover of some Republican votes when it fails to do what he is promising. What Republicans have said is that if Obama wants some Republicans voting in favor of it as well, then the details in this bill are just not acceptable to Republicans. It is filled with far too much PORK, payoffs to special interest groups and Democrat supporting organizations that Obama himself put in it that are in no way stimulative and will not create new jobs. While Obama intentionally DECEIVED Americans by saying it had no earmarks. He can twist words as well as Clinton -because technically he was correct. Technically, the definition of "earmarks" are special requests made by Senators or Congressmen of money to be included in the bill for their own personal pet projects, pay offs to constituent organizations or to be diverted back home to their state - to be inserted into the bill. Once they have been inserted, it is "pork". Pork is money to be used in ways that are unrelated to the purpose of the bill itself and will not be spent for the purpose of the bill.

Yeah, there are no "earmarks" in the bill -which only means Senators didn't put the pork in the bill. But its jammed packed full of BILLIONS in pork anyway. Put in by the WHITE HOUSE instead of Senators -stuff Democrat Senators didn't need to request because Obama did it for them so he could then turn around and stand before the American people and deliberately mislead them to believe this bill had no pork.

Corrupt Chicago politics comes to the White House.

Aside from objecting to the billions in pork, Republicans insist the bill focuses far too heavily on spending when it is a FACT that government has never been able to "spend" an economy out of a recession. NOT ONCE -even though many different governments, including our own -have repeatedly tried to do so. It has never worked. While targeted tax cuts HAVE. So Republicans wanted a better balance between tax cuts and spending before they could vote in favor of it. Oh sure, that's Republicans trying to make it fail -by insisting it must include more of the only thing known to have actually worked in the past and less of the one known to have never worked. LOL

Republicans are doing the job they were elected to do. They were not elected to come to the Senate and roll over and become Democrats or become Obama's lapdog -any more than Democrats are elected to come to Congress and turn into Republicans if a Republican sits in the White House. Each Senator and Congressman is accountable to the people who put them in office, who will throw them out of office if they don't do the job they were elected to do. No Republican campaigned on or was elected on a platform of becoming a Democrat and supporting Democrat positions if sent to Congress.

If Democrats really wanted a bipartisan bill so they could spread the blame around with Republicans when it fails to do what Obama promised - then Democrats would have been more willing to hammer out a better compromise so more Republicans could get behind it. They didn't -so the final bill is THEIRS alone. Which means Democrats will get the full credit in the unlikely event it does something positive. And when it doesn't -as Republicans are convinced it won't -then Democrats get all the blame. As they should.

By the way -anytime a politician says it is URGENT that a particular bill get passed as quickly as possible, that it is an EMERGENCY that is be passed RIGHT NOW -it means there is something buried in that bill the politician doesn't want people getting a good look at until its too late. Which is true in THIS case as well. Obama has a really nasty secret buried in this bill. One that won't sit well with a whole lot of Americans, especially among the one group most likely to vote over all others.

 

[driveby]

It doesn't mattter what Obama has hidden in that bill, the zombies will support him ......