• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Republicans block Obama jobs bill

Status
Not open for further replies.
I wonder if you wouldn't mind quoting where that promise was made? Thanks in advance.
An implicit promise was made every time BO mentioned that projection in a speech as the justification to pass the Porkulus I bill. I could do a Lexis/Nexis search to find those quotes but lack the desire to spend an additional minute of time on this matter.
 
An implicit promise was made every time BO mentioned that projection in a speech as the justification to pass the Porkulus I bill. I could do a Lexis/Nexis search to find those quotes but lack the desire to spend an additional minute of time on this matter.
Ok, you're on record as not proving your claim. I have no problem with that.

And still, it was an estimate, not a promise ...



"It should be understood that all of the estimates presented in this memo are subject to significant margins of error. There is the obvious uncertainty that comes from modeling a hypothetical package rather than the final legislation passed by the Congress. But, there is the more fundamental uncertainty that comes with any estimate of the effects of a program. Our estimates of economic relationships and rules of thumb are derived from historical experience and so will not apply exactly in any given episode. Furthermore, the uncertainty is surely higher than normal now because the current recession is unusual both in its fundamental causes and its severity." ~ Christina Romer


... and lastly, unemployment was already up to 8% when his stimulus did pass, so who expected unemployment to remain below 8% because of the stimulus? The stimulus never project reducing unemployment from the moment it was passed.
 
BO finally got a bipartisan vote ...... Republicans and democrats came to together and gave a thumbs down to BO's plan. Way to go BO.

Oh, he's had several bipartisan dissent votes. There was bipartisan dissent vote against the debt ceiling. Bipartisan dissent vote against Obama's budget (I think 1 person voted for that??). There was bipartisan dissent vote against his UHC precursor plan known has Obama-care. I'm pretty sure there are more...but there has been almost nothing Obama has put forth that got bipartisan support. It has always been bipartisan dissent.
 
So what, I think they planned to be on record all along. Apparently only you thinks this is something noteworthy.
Not exactly sure how it is you blame Democrats for blocking a bill that was filibustered by Republicans, but if the bill had no chance at passing anyway, why did Republicans filibuster it?
 
Of course it matters since had Republicans not initiated the filibuster, it would have passed in the Senate. There is absolutely no rational way you blame Democrats for Obama's jobs bill to die in the Senate.

Republicans are now on record for blocking it.

I'm not blaming them...I'm giving them credit....THEY DID THE RIGHT THING!
 
LMFAO....only 50 lib senators voted for BO's Porkulus II
That supposedly proves that it's all the Republicans fault. I seem to recall the bill was not co-sponsored, and the sponsor didn't sign up for it either and it was put forward "by request". Also, all the Republicans fault apparently.
 
Why don'tcha put some meat behind that insult and tell me which part I got wrong?
The vote they had yesterday was not on the actual bill, it was a procedural vote to advance the bill so that it could be voted on in the future. Numerous liberals senators said they were either not going to vote for the bill or they were leaning against supporting it. Those senators were given a gift yesterday by Dingy Harry. Dingy allowed the senators to vote on considering the bill, knowing full well it wouldn't pass the 60 vote mark, so that the lib's could claim they want to help create jobs. Had the actual bill been voted on, the dem's would not have received even 48 votes in it's favor.
 
At least the near trillion dollars was spent in the U.S.. What did we get for the trillion+ dollars we spent invading Iraq to hunt for WMD that weren't there?

We got a 700 million dollar embassy, the largest — and most expensive — embassy ever built. Where's your national pride? ...;)

The 104-acre compound, bigger than the Vatican and about the size of 80 football fields, boasts 21 buildings, a commissary, cinema, retail and shopping areas, restaurants, schools, a fire station, power and water treatment plants, as well as telecommunications and wastewater treatment facilities.


USEmbassyinIraqSM.jpg




Unfortunately, our bridges and highways are crumbling here at home...:(
 
Once again conservatives in Congress demonstrate that they are a greater threat to the well being of the nation that bin Laden ever was.

Spending too much money is un-patriotic. Obama said so, himself.
 
We got a 700 million dollar embassy, the largest — and most expensive — embassy ever built. Where's your national pride? ...;)

The 104-acre compound, bigger than the Vatican and about the size of 80 football fields, boasts 21 buildings, a commissary, cinema, retail and shopping areas, restaurants, schools, a fire station, power and water treatment plants, as well as telecommunications and wastewater treatment facilities.


USEmbassyinIraqSM.jpg




Unfortunately, our bridges and highways are crumbling here at home...:(

Which bridges would those be?
 
Of course it matters since had Republicans not initiated the filibuster, it would have passed in the Senate. There is absolutely no rational way you blame Democrats for Obama's jobs bill to die in the Senate.

Republicans are now on record for blocking it.

The American people gave the Republicans the biggest landslide victory in 60 years, so they could stop insane bills, just like this one. Ultimately, the Republicans are doing the job they were hired to do.
 
The American people gave the Republicans the biggest landslide victory in 60 years, so they could stop insane bills, just like this one. Ultimately, the Republicans are doing the job they were hired to do.

There you go confusing the issues with democracy.
 
Oh please, that whole bridge debacle was political opportunism. The Minneapolis I35 bridge fell and Obama couldn't let a disaster go to waste. So he found another way to raise spending. Now, low and behold, Obama needs more tax revenue. Who didn't see that coming.
 
Oh please, that whole bridge debacle was political opportunism. The Minneapolis I35 bridge fell and Obama couldn't let a disaster go to waste. So he found another way to raise spending. Now, low and behold, Obama needs more tax revenue. Who didn't see that coming.

Damn liberals and their bridges and highways. People don't need to commute or travel or anything.
 
Unfortunately, our bridges and highways are crumbling here at home...:(

I go over bridges all the time and never see them crumble away... can you show me a few crumbling bridges and roads due to lack of repair?
 
The same ones that were crumbling the last time Obama needed to blow money.

Huh... so you're saying Republican AND Democrats are letting our bridges and roads crumble away? Funny thing though... travelled 2 hours each way yesterday and both the NJ Turpike and Garden State Parkway had literally 5-20 miles of construction, Router 287 too. I mean, it's like the Federal Government decided to fund reconstruction by printing more money and sending it to the states for shovel rea.... oh wait.
 
Damn liberals and their bridges and highways. People don't need to commute or travel or anything.

Do you know why the bridge fell? It wasn't in disrepair, it was poorly engineered. It was a bad design. No amount of maintenance would have stopped the problem. Yet, Obama ran around claiming the I35 bridge failure was a maintenance issue and if we didn't give him money now more bridges would fall.
 
Do you know why the bridge fell? It wasn't in disrepair, it was poorly engineered. It was a bad design. No amount of maintenance would have stopped the problem. Yet, Obama ran around claiming the I35 bridge failure was a maintenance issue and if we didn't give him money now more bridges would fall.

So we should be negligent? Just tell 'em "Sorry bud, need to cut that federal spending."
 
So we should be negligent? Just tell 'em "Sorry bud, need to cut that federal spending."
Wait... bridge construction is regulated isn't it? Aren't bridges supposed to be inspected and the plans and construction "sound" both before during and after construction? If so, (and I'm pretty sure I'm right), how did such a poorly engineered bridge pass all these inspections?

To answer your question - the funding for the bridge should be left up to the state. If the state has no money, yes --- "Sorry bud, no money" is the answer. Close the road, divert traffic, and put the bridge reconstruction on the list of things for the future. Why are federal dollars needed here again? Shovel ready jobs? No... that didn't work already, twice. I'd be more interested in finding out how such a poorly designed and constructed bridge was inspected and who let such a bridge be used by the public given such harm could befall that public.
 
Huh... so you're saying Republican AND Democrats are letting our bridges and roads crumble away? Funny thing though... travelled 2 hours each way yesterday and both the NJ Turpike and Garden State Parkway had literally 5-20 miles of construction, Router 287 too. I mean, it's like the Federal Government decided to fund reconstruction by printing more money and sending it to the states for shovel rea.... oh wait.

I was providing a sarcastic answer, and probably should have made it more obvious. Back with Stimulus, we heard the same nonsense from Obama and the libs, with all the "shovel ready" and "infrastructure" claims. Its all hocus-pocus.

Like you, while I can always find a road that needs minor repair, we have budgets for such that rise and fall with revenue. To claim, as Obama has, that we have a crisis of bad roads and bridges is the stuff of liberal make-work stupidity.
 
It was indeed a presidential re-election bill.

It was more than that. This is an attempt to make jobs an issue for Republicans in 2012 as well. I accuse Republicans a lot of putting party before country, because they do. And so do Democrats, and this is a perfect example of the politicization of an issue for the purposes of an election. When the hell are people going to realize that our 2 major parties don't give a damn about anything except their own party? Patriots, my ass. That applies to Democrats and Republicans both.
 
Wait... bridge construction is regulated isn't it? Aren't bridges supposed to be inspected and the plans and construction "sound" both before during and after construction? If so, (and I'm pretty sure I'm right), how did such a poorly engineered bridge pass all these inspections?

To answer your question - the funding for the bridge should be left up to the state. If the state has no money, yes --- "Sorry bud, no money" is the answer. Close the road, divert traffic, and put the bridge reconstruction on the list of things for the future. Why are federal dollars needed here again? Shovel ready jobs? No... that didn't work already, twice. I'd be more interested in finding out how such a poorly designed and constructed bridge was inspected and who let such a bridge be used by the public given such harm could befall that public.

Would you like to subsidize states' bridge construction? And if the people need the bridge to get to their jobs, homes, etc what do we tell them?

Oh -- and maybe the construction company paid off the inspector so they could save money on materials and maximize profits ;)
 
Would you like to subsidize states' bridge construction?
No.

And if the people need the bridge to get to their jobs, homes, etc what do we tell them
Then the government has to utilize the existing tax money revenue to fund the bridge. If there is not enough funds, either cuts have to be made to redirect the existing funds, or if the people need the bridge that badly, tax revenues have to be increased to pay for the bridge. It's pretty simple actually.

Oh -- and maybe the construction company paid off the inspector so they could save money on materials and maximize profits ;)
Could be, but then isn't it still the responsibility of the government official who was bribed to be held accountable for the damage and loss of property and life? You don't get it though - I don't care who's responsible politically... if they did wrong they should be strung up. The construction company, the unions that back the construction company, the person making the bribe, the government official(s) receiving the bribe, the inspectors who looked the other way after the bridge was finished.


But back to the point - if it's a new bridge the people want, the people have to pay for it. They should also make sure that those involved are investigated and if any wrong doing was actually done, that those people are held accountable.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom