• 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.
Objective Voice said:
Senator's Nelson and Tester are DINOs. Look at their records, especially that of Nelson who has voted more times with Republicans than he has his own party. He especially may as well just change his party association.
Click to expand...

but you all have Snowe and Collins-far more RINO than those two are DINO
 
TurtleDude said:
but you all have Snowe and Collins-far more RINO than those two are DINO
Click to expand...

They certainly didn't come to the President's side on this one now, did they? But our two DINOs certainly went to bat for the other side, moreso to protect their seats in the Senate than to do what's right for the nation. Of course, it wouldn't have helped whether Reid had Nelson, Tester, Snowe and Collins' votes. He still would have been 6 votes short from passing the President's Jobs bill regardless. But because they didn't, I can still call Senate Republicans "the Party of 'NO'" and obstructionist and be justified.
 
Last edited:
AdamT said:
Or maybe how the Republicans voted actually IS the Republicans' fault! :roll:

It's becoming increasingly clear that the Republicans would be quite happy to see a double-dip recession if it means beating Obama in '12.
Click to expand...
This implies that you actually believe the propaganda of the recovery summer? I would be delighted with a double dip recession if we were not already in an unheralded great depression. The one term Marxist cannot be gone soon enough. He is damaging the nation intentionally.
 
EDIT to my post #274: (You'll know if their modified legislation should meet with the Pesident's veto pen.) That's what happens when you type too fast.
 
Objective Voice said:
EDIT to my post #274: (You'll know if their modified legislation should meet with the Pesident's veto pen.) That's what happens when you type too fast.
Click to expand...

Why do you think this Job's bill is going to do the job when the last one failed miserably? Obama had overwhelming numbers his first two years, much more than Bush ever had during his term yet Bush gets blame and Obama never is held accountable for the poor results. Obama even had a filibuster proof Congress part of his first two years something Obama supporters forget.

As for the job's bill please tell me after the funding runs out for state jobs, teachers, fire fighters, and police where does the money come from to keep paying these workers? Liberals always buy what Obama tells them yet with 4.2 trillion added to the debt in 3 years we have a net job loss of 2.6 million. Keep buying the rhetoric, liberals. Amazing what the cost of brainwashing gets these days.
 
Objective Voice said:
You do know there are only 53 Democrats in the Senate, right? Well, actually, 50 Dems, 2 DINOs and 1 Independend (Joe Lieberman) whom I wish would just go away. Anyway...

Let me make a prediction going forward concering the President's Jobs plan. Here's what I believe will happen, keep in mind that the President has said to both parties in the House and the Senate..."if you have ideas you think will make my proposals better, I'm willing to listen..."

It started with Senator Reid when he essentially scrapped the "Buffle Rule" and suggested the "Millionaire Surtax (@ 5%)". Since the Buffet Rule would only apply to millionaire hedge fund managers, it made sense to shift the income level from $200K to $1M. Of course, we know how the Senate vote went. But still, I ask you, Republicans and DINOs alike, "if millionaire corporations aren't the backbone of our economy, if in fact, it is the small business owners who hire the most people, why would you vote against legislation that shifts that tax burden from small businessmen (income level from $200K-$1M) to those who make +$1M?"
Click to expand...

Because it did nothing for the deficit.

The President's Jobs plan will now go to the House[/URL] where it will be sliced and diced and voted on in smaller pieces. Again, I remind you that the President has said he doesn't have a problem with this as long as such bills meet his approval. (You'll know if they don't should should legislation meet with the veto pen.) With each passage of the smaller piece of legislation that would still accomplish what the President wants, just presented in smaller segments, Republicans will first attempt to water down his proposals by placing things they know won't stand a chance of passing in their bills, i.e., repeal of the PPACA (ObamaCare) and Dodd-Frank. Then with each bill that passes, Republicans will then attempt to take credit for job creation.

Mark my words on this, ladies and gentlemen. Instead of simply doing what the country needs them to do which is to focus on job creation, watch as Republicans continue to play party politics placing party ahead of country even in the midst of a vast majority of the country in unified outcry for jobs!
Click to expand...

Nothing is going to pass that doesn't in some way address the deficit.
 
Frolicking Dinosaurs said:
I think it is more like 'Once again the GOP plays directly into the hands of the Dems in Congress.' There is ample proof the Dems didn't want this bill to come up for a vote and the GOP step up and took the blame - again.
Click to expand...
I think the GOP should own the fact that they killed this bill. I fail to see how this "plan" is any different that the junk Obama's peddled before? This bill wouldn't have solved or helped a thing, because Obama is still approaching this problem with his Keynesian idea that the government can create jobs. The government's job is not to create a single job, it's to get the hell out of the way and let the private sector create jobs.
 
Catawba said:
You mean because tax cuts to working families actually stimulate the economy as opposed to the tax cuts for the rich, that don't?
Click to expand...
We don't need "tax cuts" what we need a fundamental restructuring of the tax code. Temporary band aide measures help some, but they create an aura of uncertainty. As an aside, raising taxes on "the rich" often end up hurting small business owners who file their taxes as individuals. We can't afford to raise taxes on small business owners. Also, the rich are entitled to their money as well, not just the middle and lower classes.
 
neocon1225 said:
We don't need "tax cuts" what we need a fundamental restructuring of the tax code. Temporary band aide measures help some, but they create an aura of uncertainty. As an aside, raising taxes on "the rich" often end up hurting small business owners who file their taxes as individuals. We can't afford to raise taxes on small business owners. Also, the rich are entitled to their money as well, not just the middle and lower classes.
Click to expand...

The Jobs act, that the GOP voted against, included tax incentives for small businesses. The tax breaks given to the rich under the Bush Administration were to have been temporary, supposedly as a way to stimulate the economy (trickle down economics). What happened instead was that the money didn't trickle down, it concentrated at the top. The only problem with this arrangement is that our consumer economy cannot prosper when most of the people can't afford to consume, because 85% of the country's wealth is owned by the top 20% who do not spend as much of their money (in the US) as the working class.
 
neocon1225 said:
We don't need "tax cuts" what we need a fundamental restructuring of the tax code. Temporary band aide measures help some, but they create an aura of uncertainty. As an aside, raising taxes on "the rich" often end up hurting small business owners who file their taxes as individuals. We can't afford to raise taxes on small business owners. Also, the rich are entitled to their money as well, not just the middle and lower classes.
Click to expand...

you are 100% right that we need to restructure the tax code. Complexity costs us hundreds of billions a year - that's hundreds of billions of growth we deliberately give up every year for the purpose of weighing ourselves down with unnecessary paperwork.

incidentally, while I wholeheartedly approve of having Paul Ryan (pbuh) as your avatar, I think you need to find a picture that is somewhat pulled back, so that his halo and the throng of adoring angels that follow him around singing his praises can be seen.
 
Last edited:
Catawba said:
You mean because tax cuts to working families actually stimulate the economy as opposed to the tax cuts for the rich, that don't?
Click to expand...

no. if we were to permanently flatten and lower the tax rates for working families, that would have a stimulative effect as well. If we were to permanently flatten and lower all tax rates we could have a massive stimulating effect without losing revenue (you could just be reducing nominal rates to their effective ones). it is the temporary tax credits that have no effect. They didn't work for Bush when he tried them in 2001, they didnt' work for Bush when he tried them in 2008, they didnt' work for Obama when he tried them in 2009, and they don't seem to be working for Obama in 2011. Because they don't work. Because people aren't stupid, and employers and employees both can count past 12.
 
cpwill said:
no. if we were to permanently flatten and lower the tax rates for working families, that would have a stimulative effect as well. If we were to permanently flatten and lower all tax rates we could have a massive stimulating effect without losing revenue (you could just be reducing nominal rates to their effective ones). it is the temporary tax credits that have no effect. They didn't work for Bush when he tried them in 2001, they didnt' work for Bush when he tried them in 2008, they didnt' work for Obama when he tried them in 2009, and they don't seem to be working for Obama in 2011. Because they don't work. Because people aren't stupid, and employers and employees both can count past 12.
Click to expand...

Flat taxes are regressive, which means they concentrate wealth at the top so they do not stimulate the economy as well as progressive taxes. This is because the rich do not spend as much of their wealth (in the US) as do the middle and lower working classes.
 
Flattened tax rates =/= a flat tax.

I would love to see a flat tax with a minimum no tax (say, set at 150% of the poverty line, which would make it progressive) zone, but that's not currently politically possible (as the example above is), and it's not what is under discussion here.
 
cpwill said:
Flattened tax rates =/= a flat tax.

I would love to see a flat tax with a minimum no tax (say, set at 150% of the poverty line, which would make it progressive) zone, but that's not currently politically possible (as the example above is), and it's not what is under discussion here.
Click to expand...

Right, the President's job's bill is under discussion. The GOP sure showed the majority of Americans that wanted the jobs bill to pass, who was the boss, didn't they?
 
Catawba said:
The Jobs act, that the GOP voted against, included tax incentives for small businesses.
Click to expand...
A bad bill is not made any better by a sweetener. I am glad the Republicans (and two vulnerable Democrats) did the right thing.
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
What's bad for America is good for Conservatives.
Click to expand...
I must agree with you. The one term Marxist president Obama has been very bad for America. And he has done more than any Republican to unite Conservatives and Republicans against him. The overwhelming shift in power in the mid-term 2010 elections are evidence. When he speaks he depresses the nation and rally's Conservatives. His best chance to be re-elected is if he does absolutely nothing.
 
Catawba said:
There is support from the business world for this Jobs plan:

WASHINGTON, Oct. 11, 2011 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The American Small Business Chamber of Commerce™ (The American Small Business Chamber of Commerce) calls for the immediate passage of The American Jobs Act of 2011 and continued actions to build a business climate in which America's small businesses can thrive and fuel job creation."

"U.S. Women's Chamber of Commerce Supports The American Jobs Act of 2011; Calls for Immediate Action[/URL]

"As women and small business owners face losses in demand and jobs, it is imperative that Congress acts now to spur consumer spending, investments in business growth and job creation.

WASHINGTON, Oct. 11, 2011 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Today, the U.S. Women's Chamber of Commerce(TM) (uswcc.org), representing over 500,000 members from all across America, lends full support for The American Jobs Act of 2011 and calls upon Congress to quickly pass this legislation that will drive much needed growth and job creation in America."
Click to expand...

Two Washington Lobbyists put out press releases calling on more Federal money. Boy, there is a surprise. I think both chambers of commerce need to get their money back.

Is the nation so far gone that small businesses not longer see government as the problem? This is another indicator that America is doomed as a nation. I wonder what will come next?
 
disneydude said:
The good thing to come out of this....is that it just further cements which party represents the interests of the 1%....and which party represents the interests of the rest of us.
Click to expand...
I agree. Republicans represent the majority. Democrats support themselves.
 
ksu_aviator said:
No, the Republican party's interest lie in protecting freedoms. Unlike the democrats that have chosen to create classes and assign liberties and freedoms to the classes they deem more suitable.
Click to expand...
Class warfare and the destruction of capital accumulation through progressive taxes is right out of Radical Karl's writings. The Democrats have become more radical every year. It is a logical thing for them to prefer Marx to Madison.
 
Catawba said:
What was the percentage of Egyptians that protested? And what percentage is required to affect decisions by the public?
Click to expand...
So how is that Arab Spring doing these days? Not so well? Is an Iron Veil falling all across the middle East?
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
That aside, I don't believe Congressional Republicans want the economy to improve under Obama. They woull vote down any measure he tries to pass.
Click to expand...
That just means that the one term Marxist president Obama and his fellow travelers in the Senate try to ram through bills designed to reward their friends and punish their enemies.

The first stimulus bill was a slush fund provided to unions and other democrats. I would not be surprised if a significant percentage of the money wasn't kicked back to democrats in the form of political contributions. We do not need to give the democrats more cash through another slush fund just because it says jobs in the title and has one or two good provisions.

So let's get all of those good ideas out of the bill and pass them separately. It should not be too hard to do. There were not that many good ideas.
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
. . .Obama promised to keep the pressure on Congress for his job initiatives.
Click to expand...
I bolded the operative words. The one term Marxist president Obama is working to save his job. It won't work though unless good people do nothing.
 
Catawba said:
Seriously???? This is it??? Cut regulations and taxes for the rich - trickledown economics 4.0????
Click to expand...
Now why did I know that would be your answer? Cut regulations and cut tax rates for everybody. Cut government spending. Then get out of the way. Of course, it does nothing to end capitalism. It is not Marxist in its precepts. It relies more upon limiting government than the president's government-jobs-for-everybody plan.
 
Catawba said:
The tea party has waned, as evidenced by the number of conservatives willing to accept Romney as their leader.
Click to expand...
Anybody but the Marxist.

Romney is hoping. Romney is an establishment republican. He is liberal. Under Romney we get the same government we would have under the one term Marxist president Obama. Only we get there a bit slower. We still have Obamacare. We still have death panels and rationing by government fiat. We just feel better about being cooked a bit more slowly.

No thanks.

But if the choice is Romney or the Marxist, I will vote for Romney. Let us hope that it does not come to that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom