Republicans show their true nature again!

reply to post by Southern Guardian

Originally posted by Southern Guardian

Originally posted by Signals
Research the crap the Dems added to the bill...tax cuts for corporations, tax hikes on US oil companies, etc...

I saw no mention of tax cuts for corporations or tax hikes for american oil businesses in the bill, unless I am mistaken, we are discussing HR5816?
waysandmeans.house.gov...

I will agree that it is important to research both sides and will agree that the Democratic politicians will typically have just as much of an agenda as the Republicans, but in this case your claims do not align with what is in the bill. The only mention concerns when the unemployment benefits will expire and the request to extend them. It is apparent that you are no different in misinforming people than the politicians you speak of.

In the case of extending the unemployement benefits time after time, there is no doubt it is costing our nation. But then again it will be much more costly to this nation to just unhook the support those people dearly need and in turn for them to turn to the streets, for them to cost the nation in many other ways as the result for being unemployed, or worse, to have these unemployed and Im sure frustrated honest folks turn to violence.

[edit on 1-7-2010 by Southern Guardian]

Nice try.

The stand alone bill HR 5618, was blocked by Democrats because Republicans wanted to use stimulus money to pay for it.

Democrats even rejected the bipartisan Republican effort to compromise and pay half of the cost of this bill with stimulus money.

www.weeklystandard.com...

How many jobs did the $787 Billion stimulus package create?....Answer: 0.

Wake up man! Live up to your name.

Honest people seldom resort to violence.

Criminals resort to violence. The same criminals that are probably collecting unemployment benefits and working under the table, and selling drugs on the side.

Yes, people are hurting. The best way to help these people would be to provide jobs. Good jobs. But what has the Government Done?.....Nothing!

Nothing except steal Trillions of our money, spend it on Bull.... raise our Taxes and tell us to go .... ourselves!

[edit on 1-7-2010 by MY2Commoncentsworth]

Like it or not UI has been stimulating our failing economy. It was keeping people in groceries, housing, utilities etc. If your employment is tied to consumer based industry you might find yourself out of a job too. Be careful what you wish for.

While all of us "bicker and argue over who killed who" our fearless leaders seem to be working together behind the scenes greasing the wheels for each other and special interests. Dems/Repubs are just two sides of the same coin. Doesn't really matter they both end up in someones pocket.

I blame trickle down economics....what a farce that is. I can't believe no one thought one day those holding all the wealth might just take the money and run. Trickle down economics in theory sounds good but only with lots of oversight and accountability. Instead once in office our representatives do everything within their power to lessen what trickles down. The bottom line is they serve/payback the corporate masters who put them in office not us. Corporations don't like leakage, seepage or anything trickling down. No the only thing that rolls downhill are giant corporate turds.

reply to post by Southern Guardian


The more truthful title for this thread, and what really happened is :

"Democrats Fail to Produce Passable Unemployment Bill. Again."

If the Dems brought the GOP proposal to the floor, they'd have had an extension June 1.

jw

The title of this video should read: Republicans push for jobless benefits and fiscal responsibility...... just goes to show that FOX Affiliates are also fair and balanced.


[edit on 1-7-2010 by MY2Commoncentsworth]

Originally posted by MY2Commoncentsworth
Nice try.

Nice try for what? Unless you can show me where in the bill it mentions anything about corporate tax cuts or tax hikes for oil companies I do not see how my points towards the previous member were incorrect. Unless you can show me?

The stand alone bill HR 5618, was blocked by Democrats because Republicans wanted to use stimulus money to pay for it.

While I agree to the idea of using stimulus to fund the HR 5618, the argument based on that case was months ago and the bill was passed after delays. With the proposal to request another extension for HR 5618 this time around the GOP made little to no mention of opposing it over funding desputes, they just opposed extending it, period:
www.gop.gov...

The typical key words here... "free market" "2000 pages" "government intruision". I see no metnion regarding stimulus funding. I would be curious as to whether you would assume that even with stimulus funding, that the GOP will still support these extensions? As they still oppose the stimulus itself outright?

How many jobs did the $787 Billion stimulus package create?....Answer: 0.

I will agree it didn't create 1.4 million or jobs that Biden was going about in 2009 but it certainly saved alot of jobs. Lets just say back then you would have ask this president and his administration not to pass the stimulus, not do anything, let the market be and they did jus that. I am sure months following that request we would have people like you complaining that this president isnt doing enough, while insisting that the president should leave the free market as is. Its really a catch 22 at the end of the day, especially when it comes to conservatives.

Criminals resort to violence. The same criminals that are probably collecting unemployment benefits

Oh, so these 1.2 million folks in need for extended benefits are criminals now? Im sorry I am just speechless at that comment. You have just shown me how completely clueless and dismissive you are of the situation.

Yes, people are hurting. The best way to help these people would be to provide jobs. Good jobs. But what has the Government Done?

Well is that not rather an impossible request?

People in particular on the right hand of the spectrum don't want this government to do anything to the free market, they dont want the stimulus, they don't want the government to have a hand in stimulating the economy and yet they, you, want the government to somehow create more jobs? And how is the government going to do that if people like you turn around and insist once again that the government must not have a hand in the 'free market'?

[edit on 1-7-2010 by Southern Guardian]

reply to post by Southern Guardian


Wrong.

Wrong.

Wrong.

Wrong.

Wrong.

Wrong.

and Wrong.

Congress makes things so complicated with 2000 page bills and add ons and pork......even the recent 8 page stand alone bill HR 5816 is being misrepresented by disinformation agents who are managing to demonize Republicans.

If Congress would make things simple and start doing business like any successful business that is not..........

$13 Trillion in Debt

..........Americans would see right through The Democrat Communist Agenda.


[edit on 1-7-2010 by MY2Commoncentsworth]

reply to post by Southern Guardian

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
People in particular on the right hand of the spectrum don't want this government to do anything to the free market, they dont want the stimulus, they don't want the government to have a hand in stimulating the economy and yet they, you, want the government to somehow create more jobs? And how is the government going to do that if people like you turn around and insist once again that the government must not have a hand in the 'free market'?

When the Government has a hand in the free market, it is not free.



Behold the face of Incumbency. LOL. Look at the hard working people in the audience. Then tell me you support Democrats. This guy is their spokesman. Let me know, Guardian of the South.


[edit on 1-7-2010 by MY2Commoncentsworth]

reply to post by SWCCFAN


Yep.

Those screaming for graft ("entitlements"), might be taken more seriously if they would quit whining & start explaining. Let's start with a logical & rational argument as to WHY they have a right to steal from others, and WHY Congress should violate the Constitution to justify it. This isn't the first time our government has faced public pressure to steal from person A to give to person B. More history & less histrionics would be nice.

I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on the objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents. James Madison

I cannot find any authority in the Constitution for public charity. Franklin Pierce. US President, (1804-1869)

I feel obliged to withhold my approval of the plan to indulge in benevolent and charitable sentiment through the appropriation of public funds. I find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution. President Grover Cleveland (1837-1908)

Shame on the men who can court exemption from present trouble and expense at the price of their own posterity's liberty! Samuel Adams

As on the one hand, the necessity for borrowing in particular emergencies cannot be doubted, so on the other, it is equally evident that to be able to borrow upon good terms, it is essential that the credit of a nation should be well established. Alexander Hamilton

No country can sustain, in idleness, more than a small percentage of its numbers. Abraham Lincoln. Sept 30 1859

For a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle. Winston Churchill

Maybe we ought to see that every person who gets a tax return receives a copy of the Communist Manifesto with it so he can see what's happening to him. T. Coleman Andrews, accountant and Commissioner of Internal Revenue (1899-1983)

The principle that the end justifies the means is in individualist ethics regarded as the denial of all morals. In collectivist ethics it becomes necessarily the supreme rule. Fredrich August von Hayek. Economist & philosopher (1899-1992).

Government is the great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else. Frederic Bastiat. French Economist (1801-1850)

Republicans' true colors? Same as any other America loving Patriot, regardless of political affiliation: Red white & blue.
Cheers!

Originally posted by MY2Commoncentsworth
Wrong.

Well then if I am wrong, maybe you could pick up where signals left off. Where in HR5618 does it mention anything about american business tax hikes or taxes on oil companies? Heres the bill for you to reference:
waysandmeans.house.gov...

You clearly said my response to signals was incorrect, so show me where in the bill does mention tax hikes?

When the Government has a hand in the free market, it is not free.

Exactly, and yet you blame this government for their inaction in creating jobs. So how is the government to create more jobs without being involved in the free market? What about those jobs outsourcing? What about those jobs hiring illegals? What about those jobs cutting down employees?? How is the government going to crack down on them without... well.... interfering with their businesses? Without regulation?? You fail to explain this part.

Then tell me you support Democrats.

I never once justified the corruption among Democrats, infact I have time and time again stated that both sides are corrupted. However you find it convenient to falsely label me to further your point. Just because somebody defends a bill or corrects somebodies false attacks on a political party does not make them partisan, it doesnt make anyone here.

My overall point is, if you are going to attack a political establishment, by the least get your facts straight instead spreading misinformation about bills or people. And in regards to the video, I find it rather interesting how small minded some people can be on here. This financial crises moves beyond simply 'illegals' or 'the FED', it is a combination of many things which require many solutions. When people try to single out the problem they are only scapegoating away from the bigger picture.

I would like to thank the democrats and republicans for leaving me hanging like FEMA after Katrina.I hope they are enjoying the 4th of July while my family and millions suffer.Who cares about us with bigger fish to fry or should i say spy like Russia no one will notice what is going down.Maybe they can put a hat on all us millions to stop our unemployment leak from spreading.Can i get Amen Ra? I just want my checks to pay my bills until i get a job!!!!!

Yours faithfully One of millions

reply to post by Southern Guardian

Originally posted by Southern Guardian

Originally posted by MY2Commoncentsworth
Wrong.

Well then if I am wrong, maybe you could pick up where signals left off. Where in HR5618 does it mention anything about american business tax hikes or taxes on oil companies? Heres the bill for you to reference:
waysandmeans.house.gov...

You clearly said my response to signals was incorrect, so show me where in the bill does mention tax hikes?

When the Government has a hand in the free market, it is not free.

Exactly, and yet you blame this government for their inaction in creating jobs. So how is the government to create more jobs without being involved in the free market? What about those jobs outsourcing? What about those jobs hiring illegals? What about those jobs cutting down employees?? How is the government going to crack down on them without... well.... interfering with their businesses? Without regulation?? You fail to explain this part.

Then tell me you support Democrats.

I never once justified the corruption among Democrats, infact I have time and time again stated that both sides are corrupted. However you find it convenient to falsely label me to further your point. Just because somebody defends a bill or corrects somebodies false attacks on a political party does not make them partisan, it doesnt make anyone here.

My overall point is, if you are going to attack a political establishment, by the least get your facts straight instead spreading misinformation about bills or people. And in regards to the video, I find it rather interesting how small minded some people can be on here. This financial crises moves beyond simply 'illegals' or 'the FED', it is a combination of many things which require many solutions. When people try to single out the problem they are only scapegoating away from the bigger picture.

Sorry I took so long to respond to your post Southern Guardian, but work comes first.

Signals never specifically mentioned HR5618, it was you who assumed that's what was being discussed, and it was, sort of. You see, Congress makes things complicated so we all get confused and fight amongst ourselves. What signals was probably referring to was HR4213.....
thomas.loc.gov... Check out the link, I can't copy and paste it for some reason, go figure. Click on the link, then click on HR4213, then click on Text of Legislation, then click on No. 5, HR4213 EAH PDF.

Check out the link, then check out section 501. Look at all the other crap that was included with the extension of Unemployment Benefits in the bill. Look at all the other sections. Some are good, and some are bad. They should all be voted on separately, in my opinion. But then Congress would really have to do some work now wouldn't they?

They'd have to stop jerking off underneath their desks.

There will always be something in these bills that will be objectionable to the minority. And if the minority stands firm on principle, and opposes the legislation, the other party gets to demonize them. Both party's do it. They love it. It's fun. Politics is a blood sport.

When the Government tampers with the free market, the laws of supply and demand go out the window. I agree that there should be regulations, even tough regulation where its needed, but sensible regulation nonetheless. Not stupid regulation, or a moratorium on all oil drilling. What kind of nonsense is that? All this will do is cost jobs and force the price of gas to go up. And who can afford to pay more for gas?

The government can create more jobs by getting off the backs of business,
by making it easier for them to do business, by cutting taxes and by giving incentives in the form of tax credits for corporations and small businesses that hire more employees. This is what Reagan did in the 80's. He lowered taxes, cut unnecessary regulations on business, and eased restrictions that were holding back the economy. This resulted in a 100% increase in Federal Income Tax Revenue. He doubled the drop so to speak. People could finally afford to pay their taxes.

This was possible in part because of the 20 million new jobs that were created because of these policy's. So this is how I think the Government can create jobs. You don't have to spend a dime, let alone $787 billion. We'll be paying the interest on that 787 billion forever. It's crazy. It's like buying beer and cigarettes with a credit card, you'll pay the interest for 30 years.

The problem was, the Democratic Congress wouldn't let him cut spending the way he wanted to. They spent even more money with the new windfall revenues that were flying in to the treasury. If they would have acted responsibly, they could have balanced the budget back then. Now its to late.

I'm sorry if you felt that I was labeling you. I do not think you are spreading disinformation. I just think you're confused like the rest of us.
I think the Government likes it when we are confused, they get to play their games.

Thank you for responding. Peace.


[edit on 3-7-2010 by MY2Commoncentsworth]

reply to post by projectvxn


Thank you for the applause.

I starred both of your posts.

[edit on 2-7-2010 by MY2Commoncentsworth]

Originally posted by MY2Commoncentsworth
Sorry I took so long to respond to your post Southern Guardian, work comes first.

Oh we all have obligations outside the forum. I did not put a time limit on your response.

Signals never specifically mentioned HR5618,

Oh but he did, he referred specifically to the bill and what he claimed was contained in it:

Research the crap the Dems added to the bill...tax cuts for corporations, tax hikes on US oil companies, etc..

I am all for having a nice debate over the bill and what needs to be done, or added or removed. But when somebody blatantly lies and spreads misinformation about what is actually written in the bill, it gets to me and it should be understandable. The OP clearly failed to add the Democrats to his criticism, but that doesnt justify the misinformation being spread by the other member. It is a shame that so many people readily took what he said as truth and moved on. I am sure there were many conservatives who were frustrated at the false claims being thrown as to what was actually written in the Arizona immigraton bill. It goes both ways.

You see, Congress makes things complicated so we all get confused and fight amongst ourselves.

As much as you can dislike the Democrats or the Republicans there is no doubt that the refusal to extend these unemployment benefits will put many americans on the streets, on the wrong path. We work for 80% of our lives while paying a portion of our income to a safegaurd for when we become unemployed. But when it gets to that point for many of these people, when there is absolutely nothing out there, and your representitives refuse to cover what you had been paying for so many years out of your income, there is absolutely no excuse for that action.

I have no doubt there are some Republicans who have real concerns about this unemployment bill and debt. The same could be said for Democrats. But then again blocking these benefits, turning your back away from what could be for the most part hard working americans in need at the moment, is not the answer. If Republicans really gave a damn about the american people at their time of need , their own constituents in great need at this time, they would be putting forward alternative bills to assist needy americans, or they would be requesting modifications into this extension. Instead I just see them acting as they typically do, as the party of 'no'. I see little to no solutions on their side. I already linked you to the GOP website and their list of reasons for refusing the bill. Its the typical rightwing buzz words again, 'free market' 'no more handouts' 'get a job'. Its the party of no all over again.

What signals was probably referring to was HR4213.....
thomas.loc.gov... Check out the link, I can't copy and paste it for some reason, go figure. Click on the link, then click on HR4213, then click on Text of Legislation, then click on No. 5, HR4213 EAH PDF.

H.R4213 regarded tax extensions from the year of 2009, section 501 of H.R4213 regarded foreign taxes by businesses:
thomas.loc.gov...

This was not the bill that failed to pass June 28th, this bill came up again on June 16th, HR5618 was the unemployment extension bill that failed to gain support on June 28th.

Signals made no distinction between the two and replied to the OP accordingly to the source that referred to HR5618. Unless you are to argue that signals got confused and didn't bother to read to source.

And if the minority stands firm on principle, and opposes the legislation, the other party gets to demonize them.

The Republican party stands firm on principle? What are the principals of the Republican party again? And have they been following those principals for the last three decades? Do you seriously think the Republican party has been upholding their principals in small government, fiscal responsibility? family values? For the people? If you insist on pointing out towards the fault of Democrats I will have no problem agreeing. I am sure you could do the same and rethink that comment there as well.

I agree that there should be regulations, even tough regulation where its needed, but sensible regulation nonetheless.

Well that does not make any sense. You cannot be for the free market but for regulation as well. What to you is sensible regulation without the interference in the market? I fail to see what regulation will be effective without that involvement in the market.

moratorium on oil

You mean when they force oil companies to bring their safety standards up to scratch before they can resume drilling? I do not undersand how people can complain about the governments inaction on the oil spill crises, yet they want to continue to give these oil companies the green card to freely dictate their own safety standards. Whats more you want the government to do something about this oil spill, yet this will involve tax payer money no? So essentialy we should:

-give the green card to the oil companies to dictate their own safety standards.

-The government should take action against the oil spill over a company that had a failiure in their own safety standards.

I mean where should this government go with this mess? Its a catch 22 really.

The government can create more jobs by getting off the backs of business,

Wait, so you sent me a video of a group of citizens complaining about illegals and how they are taking jobs, but you want the government to get off the backs of businesses that in some cases hire these illegals, and you want a free market. So how is this going to work?

by cutting taxes and by giving incentives in the form of tax credits for corporations and small businesses for hiring more employees.

Tax cuts do not solve problems. Its a buzz word from the rightwing that has been used way too many times. I will readily agree that tax cuts are effective, during a moderate to high economic period. During the recession? No. I do not see how tax cuts will promote a business to hire more employees during a recession period, especially during one like this one. We should make it easier for both businesses and individual americans during this period of time, but I do not think tax cuts will be the answer to this mess that is a result of so many factors.

This is what Reagan did in the 80's. He lowered taxes, cut unnecessary regulations on business, and eased restrictions that were holding the economy back.

And as the result he tripled the national debt, added another 50,000 americans to welfare, increased certain taxes towards the end of his second term.

You want to know what Reagan really did? Let me put it this way. You buy a large house, nice car, you put it on your credit card, you take out a loan for another couple of grand to set you up nicely for the next week to impress that father and mother in law coming up from Phoenix for the weekend and as the result for that entire week you are living like a millionaire. After that week, then comes the payment, then comes to cost, and guess what? You don't earn enough at work to pay it all back. Reagan created an artificial boom and evidently following the end of his term it all came to dust. Its no wonder that the first Iraq war was so convenient for Bush snr following Reagans administration.

And can tell you now what Reagan did then was little to no different to what Bush did during his administration, or what Obama has continued to do today. The only difference is that Reagan left in time to avoid having this mess result on his lap, and he has enough parrots to argue an alternative history for him.

This was possible because of the 20 million new jobs that were created because of these policy's.

It was not 21 million, and millions of jobs were lost during the early 80's, including for example those 11 thousand air traffic jobs he cut out along with many others during that time. Jobs were lost again during Bush snr. It is true he created jobs under his presidency, although this during his false growth period. America paid for it after he left his presidency.

Now its good discussing 'Reagan' and 'Tax cuts', they are all topics I am interested in, but they do not apply to the OP and as per signals false accusation.


[edit on 3-7-2010 by Southern Guardian]

www.opencongress.org...
Is the bill, presented by Representative James McDermott D-WA
No Pork, Just stand alone benefits, and its not that they want to add to the debt. They want to use war money, now the Reps did try and say half from Stimulus and half from war, but in all honesty , it should come all from war, the reason we are in debt is because of the war, and I mean Iraq the one that was not justified and was pure war mongering. And now my children's grandchildren will be paying for it. But we can't help the unemployed. The bottom line, the REPs only follow their corporate masters.

reply to post by Southern Guardian

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
It was not 21 million, and millions of jobs were lost during the early 80's,

You are right. It was 20 million. And yes, there were millions of jobs lost in the early 80's.

This was because of the policy's of Jimmy Carter. I liked Jimmy, but his policy's resulted in double digit inflation and interest rates, and over 7% unemployment. Behold, the misery index is born.

These policy's resulted in job losses, 3 block long gas lines, a recession, 21% mortgage interest rates, the birth of Islamic Fundamentalism in Iran, 13 1/2% inflation, and a rising budget deficit. Just look at the unemployment, inflation, and interest rate stats year by year and you can see why the one term presidents are one term presidents. When Reagan Came into office the following year, there were even more job losses. But I don't recall him blaming Jimmy Carter for this after the election. What I do remember was the great economic boom. Everybody had upward mobility. Anybody who wanted to work could find it. By the time Reagan left office, unemployment was around 5% and inflation was 4%. Reagan also managed to keep interest rates around 7-9%.

So I will respectfully disagree with you on most every thing that you have to say. And I hope my previous rants were not offensive to you. It's good to rant sometimes. And if you wish to continue, please do so.

research.stlouisfed.org...

www.miseryindex.us...

www.investopedia.com...


[edit on 3-7-2010 by MY2Commoncentsworth]

So you are done providing explanations for the misinformation spread by Signals over the bill and the addressing the OP?

Originally posted by MY2Commoncentsworth
You are right. It was 20 million.

Nope, it was not anywhere near to the 20 million figure, it was thought to be 16 million however I doubt that figure is even true.

Considering the measurements by many conservative talking heads, rightwing media outlets and Reagan supporters in which they and you continue to look over the 3.2 million job losses during the 1980's recession, ignoring the fact that millions of new young people joined the work force during the 1980's, the 30 or so million added to our population and considering the continued job losses following Reagans exit out of office with the 1990's recession, the amount of jobs he added came no where near to the 20 million figure.

This same argument was made for Clinton by Democrats during the 2000 elections and following that his administration created 22 million jobs. The same above could be applied.

This was because of the policy's of Jimmy Carter. I liked Jimmy, but his policy's resulted in double digit inflation and interest rates, and over 7% unemployment. Behold, the misery index is born.

Im just curious, do you believe that Obama has part to blame for the recession at this current time? Because it is interesting to note that the 80's recession started months following Reagans entry to the presidency and ended on the turn into 1983. It would be interesting for you to argue that the recession from the 80's is to blame on Carter when you apply to your blame towards this current president and the current majority.

These policy's

What policies again?

birth of Islamic Fundamentalism in Iran,

This is actually the core reason from many conservatives as to why Carter was the worst president in US history. Carter was a bad president because he 'allowed the muslims to take over Iran'. So in other words, Carter did not intervene and pull go all 'cowboy' over the situation in Iran. Essentially you blame Carter for not getting america involved in some invasion into Iran in the 1970's right? I mean why didnt he follow Bushes lead back in 03'? To this day the Iraq war added $700 billion, at current we are spending $200 million a day and we have lost over 4000 lives of soldiers. Why couldn't Carter do the same back then, right?? Police the world and put this country further into debt, unnecessarily sacrifice the lives of soldiers that are only meant to defend.

Just look at the unemployment, inflation, and interest rate stats year by year and you can see why the one term presidents are one term presidents.

And this is another misguided argument from conservatives. While Jimmy Carter's administration saw a financial crises and an oil crises, they fail to trace the source back. You see, the oil crises actually started in 1973 during Nixons administration and progressed through the 70's. Do you know why Ford lost the election in 76'? Because of the exact complaints you just made here. There was an oil crises, there was a financial crises and as the result Ford was not given the second term and Carter took over from then.

Carter failed to clean up the mess, he didnt cause it as so many conservatives would argue, and following him we ended up with a self proclaimed 'fiscal responsible' actor for a president during the 80's that added debt that tripled the debt added by all presidents before him.

So I will respectfully disagree with you

Same here.

[edit on 3-7-2010 by Southern Guardian]

Originally posted by inforeal
Republicans show their true nature again!

We wouldn't have this problem if jobs were kept in America and not sent overseas. Both parties are guilty, not just the Republicans.

Originally posted by Baloney
reply to post by PayMeh

 

Cheap shots like that reveal that you obvious have no real substance to provide in regards to my posts.
1. Its OUR money
2. It will stimulate the economy
3. It will be PAID back MANY times over.
And the economy is looking slightly better. Republicans ARE WORRIED ABOUT NOVEMBER ELECTIONS.

You really just do not know do you? I'm certain that you've posted exactly what you've heard from the MSM or chose to believe from whatever sources, if any, you rely on.

PayMeh took no cheap shot; face the facts:

The Republicans have offered more than once to RE-extend jobless benefits IF funded by unused STIMULUS (you seem to like that concept) funds, already appropriated and approved.

Democrats refuse to do that because those funds are being saved to be used just before the 2010 elections to fund union-supported public employment projects, and other programs that will benefit Democratic constituents.

Dems refuse compromise to extend unemployment benefits
...
"My concern is that the Democrats are more interested in having this issue to demagogue for political gamesmanship than they are in simply passing the benefits extension," said Sen. George Voinovich, R-Ohio, who offered a deal that was rejected by Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.
...
Voinovich told Reid he would vote for extending benefits if at least half of the extension could be paid for with unused money from the $787 billion stimulus package.

"I came to the table with a fair compromise, and the ball is in their court," said Voinovich, whose state suffers from a 10.7 percent unemployment rate.
...
After the bill failed, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., offered a compromise that would extend benefits for two months and pay for it fully with unused stimulus funding. But Reid turned it down.

"The only reason the unemployment extension hasn't passed is because Democrats simply refuse to pass a bill that doesn't add to the debt," McConnell said. "That's it. That's the only difference between what they've offered and what we've offered."

Dems Refuse Compromise

As for your blustering mantra:

1. Whatever of OUR MONEY that was paid by employers into state unemployment funds was spent long ago; states are relying upon Federal loans to support their jobless programs. OUR money is long gone.

2. So far, the $787 billion "stimulus" package has not improved anyone's economy except those of the public employee unions and special interests who've received the bulk, thus far. Look at the list of projects, and recall the non-existent congressional districts, zip codes and programs that Obama listed as providing "new jobs." This is nothing more than a "slush fund" to buy votes come election time.

3. It will never be paid back. You have nothing to support your contention of who, when or how "it will be paid back many times over." You seem to think, like Obama, that by saying it, over and over, with CAPS, makes it true for the simple minded.

Saying it. as with Obama's promises, pledges, fake "examples," and straw men, does not make it so.

"The economy is looking slightly better? New home sales DOWN 33%, existing sales down 25%, no net-new private sector jobs, foreclosures and bankruptcies at record levels, 70% of "rescued" mortgages failed, FNMA and FHMLC $166 billion (soon to be $1 trillion) underwater, and the Fed. being asked to pump $5 trillion more into the economy by monetizing debt just to keep things the same. If this is "slightly better," what is "worse?"

Look at facts before your echo what people tell you. Think for yourself, if you ever learned how. It's never too late to learn, if you haven't, but we're getting close.

deny ignorance

jw