• 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.
Sheik Yerbuti said:
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?
Click to expand...
Why don't you ask them?
 
Catawba said:
"The protests in Egypt consist of a very small percentage of the population. The largest protest which has taken place called for a million Egyptians to march in Cairo and around 250,000 actually participated in a country of 80 million people."
Egypt’s Crisis Emphasises Hypocrisy Of Obama And The Left | RedState

So despite your earlier claim their numbers were insufficient, it would seem that a relatively small percentage of the total population can make a big difference.
Click to expand...
Which is what I already said.. as long as the movement resonates with the vast number of others who are not protesting, it can gain traction. If it doesn't resonate with the rest of the population, it fails and dies or gets violent and frustrated.



Catawba said:
Oh, we are moving the goal away from the number to the reason now...............very well, the reason resonates among the middle class..............economic justice!
Click to expand...
Dude... fact of the matter is, it could be 1 million people (still < 1% I might add) or 10 million people and the reasoning is the same. You want to look big by accusing me of moving the goal posts - fine. Doesn't change a thing... the OWS movement is going no where and the longer it sticks around NOT making an impact, not being clear and not being coherent the more it will be ignored. In case you haven't noticed, American's don't have a very long attention span.
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
From what I can tell, that was first reported by the BBC, which made the claim without naming a single Senator who said that -- and then the BCC pulled that part out of their article just 2 hours after they first released it.

'Republicans block Obama jobs bill' diff viewer (2/3) - News Sniffer
Click to expand...

Perhaps you should try looking in American news sources for American news instead of European ones. Joe Manchin was very clear that he was willing to vote to bring the bill to the floor but would never vote for it as it was presented.

Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., also expressed strong disagreements with parts of the legislation.

During a telephone press conference on Wednesday, Manchin said he hoped Democrats and Republicans would work together to pass new legislation.

"There are parts of the bill I think are good parts, some are bad parts and some are ugly," he said. "I would not have voted for passage for that bill without the changes that needed to be made."
Click to expand...
Despite vote, Rockefeller, Manchin differ on Senate jobs bill  - News - The Charleston Gazette - West Virginia News and Sports -

I also noted that you failed to respond to the fact that McConnel offered to bring the ACTUAL BILL to a vote before the Senate, skipping the cloture process and Reid refused.

Why do you think Reid refused???? Very simple, he didn't want to see the bill defeated in a bipartisan vote. The democrats wouldn't have gotten the headline they desperately needed for the election next year.
 
Gill said:
Perhaps you should try looking in American news sources for American news instead of European ones. Joe Manchin was very clear that he was willing to vote to bring the bill to the floor but would never vote for it as it was presented.


Despite vote, Rockefeller, Manchin differ on Senate jobs bill* - News - The Charleston Gazette - West Virginia News and Sports -

I also noted that you failed to respond to the fact that McConnel offered to bring the ACTUAL BILL to a vote before the Senate, skipping the cloture process and Reid refused.

Why do you think Reid refused???? Very simple, he didn't want to see the bill defeated in a bipartisan vote. The democrats wouldn't have gotten the headline they desperately needed for the election next year.
Click to expand...

Excellent point and one we have missed. Reid invoked the cloture vote, not the GOP. The GOP did not try and block an outright vote on this bill, Reid did. He invoked cloture himself so that NOBODY could debate the points.
 
1Perry said:
Fine, several Democrats. That means it doesn't pass.
Click to expand...
Of course it passes. You forget, even at several, it was retracted. And again, if it wasn't going to pass, Republicans would not have needed to filibuster it.
 
1Perry said:
Excellent point and one we have missed. Reid invoked the cloture vote, not the GOP. The GOP did not try and block an outright vote on this bill, Reid did. He invoked cloture himself so that NOBODY could debate the points.
Click to expand...
Bingo, that is exactly what happened. In addition to the two democrats that voted against the proecedural vote, three other dems said they wouldn't vote for the actual bill....meaning BO would only get 47 votes, at best, on the actual legislation.....and that had to be avoided any any cost to prevent BO from looking like a total putz.
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
Of course it passes. You forget, even at several, it was retracted. And again, if it wasn't going to pass, Republicans would not have needed to filibuster it.
Click to expand...

You have a link to where Manchin retracted his statement that he would not vote to pass it?
 
Gill said:
Perhaps you should try looking in American news sources for American news instead of European ones.
Click to expand...
And perhaps you should direct your complaint to your comrade who referenced a BBC article. I merely responded to his post by informing him the BBC story he was relying on had retracted it just 2 hours after releasing the story.

Gill said:
Joe Manchin was very clear that he was willing to vote to bring the bill to the floor but would never vote for it as it was presented.


Despite vote, Rockefeller, Manchin differ on Senate jobs bill* - News - The Charleston Gazette - West Virginia News and Sports -
Click to expand...
Ok, you found 1 Democrat. It still would have passed.

Gill said:
I also noted that you failed to respond to the fact that McConnel offered to bring the ACTUAL BILL to a vote before the Senate, skipping the cloture process and Reid refused.

Why do you think Reid refused???? Very simple, he didn't want to see the bill defeated in a bipartisan vote. The democrats wouldn't have gotten the headline they desperately needed for the election next year.
Click to expand...
Hey, you just made my point, thanks!!

Right, Reid rejected McConnel was because ne knew the bill wouldn't have enough Democrat support had it been voted on without a debate in the Senate. That's why Republicans were eager to vote on it since they too knew it wouldn't pass. After the bill was debated in the Senate, Republicans had to filibuster to kill it because they knew it was going to pass.

My point was that if Republicans knew there weren't enough Democrat votes, they wouldn't have stuck their neck out by blocking a jopbs bill and you just proved it.
 
1Perry said:
You have a link to where Manchin retracted his statement that he would not vote to pass it?
Click to expand...
Why? Even without Manchin's vote, the bill still would have passed.
 
conservativeguy said:
Bingo, that is exactly what happened. In addition to the two democrats that voted against the proecedural vote, three other dems said they wouldn't vote for the actual bill....meaning BO would only get 47 votes, at best, on the actual legislation.....and that had to be avoided any any cost to prevent BO from looking like a total putz.
Click to expand...
What other 3 Democrats?
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
Why? Even without Manchin's vote, the bill still would have passed.
Click to expand...

THe actual vote was 50-49. It's right there in your "updated" BBC article. Please note, I'm using your article.

The package failed by a vote of 50 to 49, short of the 60 votes it needed to advance in the 100-member Senate.

BBC News - Republicans block Obama jobs bill

Now, without going back and looking it seems to me that it was reported to be higher than this.......We can come to conclusions as to why false number were released if that was the case.

Remove even one and the vote is 49-50.
 
1Perry said:
Excellent point and one we have missed. Reid invoked the cloture vote, not the GOP. The GOP did not try and block an outright vote on this bill, Reid did. He invoked cloture himself so that NOBODY could debate the points.
Click to expand...
What do you think the purpose of a cloture vote is?
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
What do you think the purpose of a cloture vote is?
Click to expand...

Two reasons. In this case it was to gaurantee it didn't pass and to stop Senators from doing their job by debating a bill.
 
1Perry said:
THe actual vote was 50-49. It's right there in your "updated" BBC article. Please note, I'm using your article.
Click to expand...
Umm, that's not "my" article ... that was the article you quoted from when you claimed "several Democrats" were against it. It's still "your" article even though the BBC retracted that part.

1Perry said:
The package failed by a vote of 50 to 49, short of the 60 votes it needed to advance in the 100-member Senate.

BBC News - Republicans block Obama jobs bill

Now, without going back and looking it seems to me that it was reported to be higher than this.......We can come to conclusions as to why false number were released if that was the case.

Remove even one and the vote is 49-50.
Click to expand...
Holy ****.

Really?

You really don't know that the vote was 50-49 and not 51-48 because Reid, who initially voted yes, voted no only because doing so allows him to bring that bill up for a vote again if he so chooses.
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
Umm, that's not "my" article ... that was the article you quoted from when you claimed "several Democrats" were against it. It's still "your" article even though the BBC retracted that part.

It's the article you posted. If Reid had the votes he would have taken up the offer to skip cloture.
Click to expand...
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
And perhaps you should direct your complaint to your comrade who referenced a BBC article. I merely responded to his post by informing him the BBC story he was relying on had retracted it just 2 hours after releasing the story.


Ok, you found 1 Democrat. It still would have passed.


Hey, you just made my point, thanks!!

Right, Reid rejected McConnel was because ne knew the bill wouldn't have enough Democrat support had it been voted on without a debate in the Senate. That's why Republicans were eager to vote on it since they too knew it wouldn't pass. After the bill was debated in the Senate, Republicans had to filibuster to kill it because they knew it was going to pass.

My point was that if Republicans knew there weren't enough Democrat votes, they wouldn't have stuck their neck out by blocking a jopbs bill and you just proved it.
Click to expand...

You should really learn something about the way the Senate works. You are making yourself look more foolish with each post. McConnell pushed to vote on the bill, which MEANS THE BILL WOULD BE DEBATED AND VOTED ON !!!! The cloture vote which Reid insisted on was to DEBATE the bill and vote on it, but McConnell had already agreed to that !!!

You really think the BBC article was correct. Here's another quote from a Democratic defector:

“Out of respect for the principles of free and open debate, I will be voting to proceed to debate on the American Jobs Act. However, I cannot support final passage of the bill in its current form.

“I again emphasize my long-held belief that taxes should not be raised on wages or ordinary income. This legislation, if passed, should be paid for by other means such as raising capital gains or ending costly subsidies and tax loopholes.”
Click to expand...
Senator Webb Statement on Tonight's Cloture Vote on American Jobs Act

Further proof:

To pass the Senate, Obama’s jobs bill will need the support of all Senate Democrats and, seeing to that, at least seven Republican votes. However, Lieberman is a “no” vote right now with either the surtax or offsets on the table.

An aide to Lieberman said that if the jobs bill comes to a vote paid for by either the president’s proposed offsets or an increase in taxes on people earning more than $1 million, the senator will vote against it.

However, Lieberman would vote for a surcharge such as Reid’s, if it were accompanied by a comprehensive debt reduction agreement to be phased in over the next decade, the aide said.

Several other Democratic senators have expressed reservations about the bill in the past month.

Sen. Jim Webb has said he has serious concerns over raising taxes on earned income and has floated other ways to raise revenues, such as closing certain tax loopholes and ending ethanol subsidies. However, an aide to Webb said the Senator will wait until actual legislation is offered before reviewing the proposals.

West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin has objected to the spending portion of the bill, and Nebraska Sen. Ben Nelson has said he would oppose any tax increase given the state of the economy.
Click to expand...

Read more: Joe Lieberman | American Jobs Act | Senate Democrats | The Daily Caller

How many more quotes would you like ???
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
What other 3 Democrats?
Click to expand...

From Politico ......

Further imperiling the Obama plan’s chances, several moderate members of the Democratic Caucus — Sens. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, Jim Webb of Virginia and Joe Manchin of West Virginia — said they opposed the president’s plan and would vote against it on its merits. But they said in the spirit of holding a debate, they would vote to break the filibuster so the plan could be considered in the full Senate.

Read more: Obama jobs bill stalls in Senate - Manu Raju and Scott Wong - POLITICO.com
Click to expand...
 
1Perry said:
Two reasons. In this case it was to gaurantee it didn't pass and to stop Senators from doing their job by debating a bill.
Click to expand...
It was to end the debate, not prevent a debate.

Lawmakers, White House regroup on jobs

WASHINGTON (AP) — A day after Senate Republicans killed his $447 billion jobs bill, President Barack Obama said he isn't taking no for an answer. In his first, combative appearance since a united Senate GOP caucus filibustered the jobs plan to death, Obama promised to keep the pressure on Congress for his job initiatives.
 
The GOP said more than once, let's just vote on it. Reid said "no".
 
1Perry said:
The GOP said more than once, let's just vote on it. Reid said "no".
Click to expand...
What Reid did by changing his vote is SOP, it's done all the time. If his vote was yes and it lost, he would be unable to bring up the bill again.
 
Gill said:
You should really learn something about the way the Senate works. You are making yourself look more foolish with each post. McConnell pushed to vote on the bill, which MEANS THE BILL WOULD BE DEBATED AND VOTED ON !!!! The cloture vote which Reid insisted on was to DEBATE the bill and vote on it, but McConnell had already agreed to that !!!
Click to expand...
McConnell tried to push for a vote because he knew it wouldn't pass. Reid, also knowing it wouldn't pass outsmarted him and rejected McConnell's bluff until Reid knew he had the votes.

Gill said:
You really think the BBC article was correct.
Click to expand...
I never said anything about that article other than to show perry the BBC retracted the portion he quoted from it.

Gill said:
Here's another quote from a Democratic defector:
Click to expand...

Senator Webb Statement on Tonight's Cloture Vote on American Jobs Act

Further proof:



Read more: Joe Lieberman | American Jobs Act | Senate Democrats | The Daily Caller

How many more quotes would you like ???[/QUOTE]
WTF?? You're quoting Democrats who were against the bill initially. That's why McConnell pushed for a vote, knowing there weren't enough Democrats on board. That's why Reid rejected McConnell in the first place. That's why Reid made some changes to the bill to get more votes on it and why Republicans filibusted it.
 
Ockham said:
Which is what I already said.. as long as the movement resonates with the vast number of others who are not protesting, it can gain traction. If it doesn't resonate with the rest of the population, it fails and dies or gets violent and frustrated.

Dude... fact of the matter is, it could be 1 million people (still < 1% I might add) or 10 million people and the reasoning is the same. You want to look big by accusing me of moving the goal posts - fine. Doesn't change a thing... the OWS movement is going no where and the longer it sticks around NOT making an impact, not being clear and not being coherent the more it will be ignored. In case you haven't noticed, American's don't have a very long attention span.
Click to expand...

Must be resonating then, as it has grown across the country! Even conservatives like you are discussing them on a daily basis.
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
McConnell tried to push for a vote because he knew it wouldn't pass. Reid, also knowing it wouldn't pass outsmarted him and rejected McConnell's bluff until Reid knew he had the votes.
Click to expand...

pssst..... Reid never had the votes. Did you read the vote count ?? And why did he want a vote............because he WANTED the Republicans to vote it down.

Further proof:

WTF?? You're quoting Democrats who were against the bill initially. That's why McConnell pushed for a vote, knowing there weren't enough Democrats on board. That's why Reid rejected McConnell in the first place. That's why Reid made some changes to the bill to get more votes on it and why Republicans filibusted it.
Click to expand...

Reading comprehension is a wonderful thing...........you should try it sometime.

These three Dems, as well as the two that voted against cloture, were against the bill as it was presented, after Reid made the minimal changes to it. FIVE Dems were against this political theater posing as a bill.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom