Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13

Thread: Pelosi dismisses bipartisanship calls

  1. #1
    Defender of the Faith
    ludahai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Taichung, Taiwan - 2017 East Asian Games Candidate City
    Last Seen
    07-03-13 @ 02:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    10,320

    Pelosi dismisses bipartisanship calls

    link

    Is Pelosi trying to sabotage a stimulus package?

    In a statement sure to rile Republicans, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi Friday dismissed calls for bipartisanship as “process” arguments extraneous to passing a stimulus bill — and warned Senate Democrats against slashing proposed increases to education spending.
    What does education spending have to do with immediate economic stimulus?

    Pelosi — speaking to reporters on the second day of her retreat with House Democrats at a swank Williamsburg, Va., golf resort — was clearly annoyed with Senate attempts to slash up to $100 billion in spending from the $819 billion package the House passed last week.
    Is this being paid for by the Democrats or the taxpayers? If it is the latter, that shows unparalled hypocrisy after the grilling the car execs got for the private planes used to testify before Congress.
    Semper Paratus
    Boston = City of Champions: Bruins 2011; Celtics 2008; Red Sox 2004, 2007; Patriots 2002, 2004, 2005
    Jon Huntsman for President

  2. #2
    Sage
    jfuh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Pacific Rim
    Last Seen
    01-20-12 @ 09:14 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    16,631

    Re: Pelosi dismisses bipartisanship calls

    Quote Originally Posted by ludahai View Post
    link

    Is Pelosi trying to sabotage a stimulus package?

    What does education spending have to do with immediate economic stimulus?
    What do you think an economic stimulus is? Spending IS the whole point.

    Quote Originally Posted by ludahai
    Is this being paid for by the Democrats or the taxpayers? If it is the latter, that shows unparalled hypocrisy after the grilling the car execs got for the private planes used to testify before Congress.
    Taxpayers decided in november that democrats would be superior to republicans in resolving the crisis. Yes, democrats won an overwhelming mandate from tax payers.
    So as you were.

  3. #3
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: Pelosi dismisses bipartisanship calls

    Quote Originally Posted by jfuh View Post
    What do you think an economic stimulus is? Spending IS the whole point.
    So the Iraq war has been an economic stimulus this whole time? Who knew!


    Taxpayers decided in november that democrats would be superior to republicans in resolving the crisis. Yes, democrats won an overwhelming mandate from tax payers.
    So as you were.
    I've noticed this meme becoming more and more common among Obama's followers over the past couple days. How on earth do you think that because voters preferred Obama over McCain 53-47, that automatically means that any proposal put forth by any democrat should always happen? That's a bit of a leap in logic. If the stimulus package in its current form had been on the ballot on 11/4, you might have an argument, but as things stand, it's just a completely illogical claim.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  4. #4
    Sage
    jfuh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Pacific Rim
    Last Seen
    01-20-12 @ 09:14 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    16,631

    Re: Pelosi dismisses bipartisanship calls

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    So the Iraq war has been an economic stimulus this whole time? Who knew!
    Isn't that what the Republicans have been saying??

    Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison certainly seems to think so. Yes to that extent she is absolutely right. It's just that most of us would rather see stimulation of the economy without putting lives at risk like you republicans seem to have no problem justifying.
    SEN. HUTCHISON: It is the tax cuts that caused the economy to start going in the right direction. It was the 15 percent capital gains and dividends break that made people go back into the stock market. It was lowering everyone's tax bracket. It was having $1,000 per child tax credit and lowering the marriage penalty. Those are good tax cuts. And I disagree with Senator Kerry. On the last eight years we have increased spending. We've increasing--increased spending on military, certainly the war on terror has had a lot of infrastructure and buying of equipment for the war on terror. We have neglected our highways. The Highway Trust Fund has increased exponentially. I think that what we're talking about now is not the result of low taxes, it is the result of the, the mortgage crisis and the subprime lending and these derivative packages that the fancy people on Wall Street started putting together...
    Feb. 1: Kerry, Hutchison, roundtable - Meet the Press, online at MSNBC- msnbc.com
    Keep on justifying the war republicans.

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC
    I've noticed this meme becoming more and more common among Obama's followers over the past couple days.
    Ah yes, followers this should get interesting with more of the messiah talk that republicans seem to have such a hard on for.

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC
    How on earth do you think that because voters preferred Obama over McCain 53-47, that automatically means that any proposal put forth by any democrat should always happen?
    For starters, because it wasn't just the white house. From 06 election and 08 voters have been electing democrats, which is why congress is now flopped the way it is. Now one election might be just a fluke, but two? maybe. But what was the rhetoric that democratic congressman were saying to get elected? Was it anything different than what they are pushing now?
    You guys lost, and you lost in particular on this election on the economy. Yes, "it's the economy stupid" voters dumbly think that democrats would be better in governing than republicans just as they dumbly think that republicans would be better on national security.
    However, I would say they are dumbly right with dumb luck. Tax cuts which republicans are trying to push and push and push simply won't do squat where as spending does - particularily on infrastructure.
    Why? simple, how does an individual who got laid off because of the recession get any benefit from a tax cut when they don't have a job?
    Spending artificially increases demand and in turn stimulates growth.

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC
    That's a bit of a leap in logic. If the stimulus package in its current form had been on the ballot on 11/4, you might have an argument, but as things stand, it's just a completely illogical claim.
    Except, what were dems parading on with their rhetoric prior to 11/4? Spending on education, spending on infrastructure, ie electrical grid; spending on health care ect ect ect. What were republican rhetoric? Tax cut tax cut tax cut.

    Q: who won?

  5. #5
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: Pelosi dismisses bipartisanship calls

    Quote Originally Posted by jfuh View Post
    Isn't that what the Republicans have been saying??

    Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison certainly seems to think so. Yes to that extent she is absolutely right.
    I don't see how any of this disproves my point that "spending" for the sake of "spending" is idiotic.

    It's just that most of us would rather see stimulation of the economy without putting lives at risk like you republicans seem to have no problem justifying.
    Right, and those are the only two possible choices - pass the Democrat's bill, or kill Americans.

    Ah yes, followers this should get interesting with more of the messiah talk that republicans seem to have such a hard on for.
    I don't particularly care for that whole shtick either, I just think its amusing how party leaders (from either side) start pushing a message and then you see people parroting it back a couple days later.

    For starters, because it wasn't just the white house. From 06 election and 08 voters have been electing democrats, which is why congress is now flopped the way it is.
    So don't bitch when the Republicans in Congress hold up your bill. After all, the people voted them in there to do just that, right?

    Now one election might be just a fluke, but two? maybe.
    lol. TWO!? You mean they won TWO elections in a row?! Unprecedented. ****, the Republicans should just give it up and announce their dissolution tomorrow. TWO election IN A MOTHER****IN ROW. Damn.

    But what was the rhetoric that democratic congressman were saying to get elected? Was it anything different than what they are pushing now?
    You guys lost, and you lost in particular on this election on the economy. Yes, "it's the economy stupid" voters dumbly think that democrats would be better in governing than republicans just as they dumbly think that republicans would be better on national security.
    However, I would say they are dumbly right with dumb luck.
    So wait - you acknowledge that the people who voted Obama and the Dems in are dumb and that they did it by accident, but then you turn around and try to use that as justification for enacting whatever policies the Dems want without opposition? Good one.


    Tax cuts which republicans are trying to push and push and push simply won't do squat where as spending does - particularily on infrastructure.
    Why? simple, how does an individual who got laid off because of the recession get any benefit from a tax cut when they don't have a job?
    Spending artificially increases demand and in turn stimulates growth.
    You're obviously intelligent enough to recognize the converse argument to that, so I won't bother going into it here.

    Except, what were dems parading on with their rhetoric prior to 11/4? Spending on education, spending on infrastructure, ie electrical grid; spending on health care ect ect ect. What were republican rhetoric? Tax cut tax cut tax cut.
    You're right. And as you earlier pointed out, the public is so brilliant that they totally anticipated that by endorsing a generic Democratic platform of change, they were in actuality voting to spend $900b on condoms and solar panels.

    Q: who won?
    Q: When Bush won in 04 on his "tough talk, continue the war in Iraq" platform, did you consider that an endorsement to expand that policy, say, by invading Iran?

    Somehow I think that if we'd done that and I came on here and said "well who won the election HMMMMM?????," you'd be a lil aggravated at my idiocy, and rightfully so.


    Finally, in all seriousness, if you actually want to consider the will of the people on this (not that I think it really matters), then why don't you ask the people what they want rather than simply try to divine their desires by looking at their generic ballots from November. Oh, wait, someone already did that.

    The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 37% favor the legislation, 43% are opposed, and 20% are not sure.
    A stimulus plan that includes only tax cuts is now more popular than the economic recovery plan being considered in Congress. Forty-five percent (45%) favor a tax-cut only plan while 34% are opposed.
    Going to the other extreme, 72% of voters oppose a stimulus plan that includes only new government spending without any tax cuts.
    So what do you say, jfuh? I mean, based on your earlier comments, I have to assume that you think this is a bold refutation of the Democrat's failed proposals (or something like that, right?)
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  6. #6
    Sage
    jfuh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Pacific Rim
    Last Seen
    01-20-12 @ 09:14 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    16,631

    Re: Pelosi dismisses bipartisanship calls

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    I don't see how any of this disproves my point that "spending" for the sake of "spending" is idiotic.
    You're point is without merit, no one is spending for the sake of spending. That's just make believe republican talking points.

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC
    Right, and those are the only two possible choices - pass the Democrat's bill, or kill Americans.
    Seems to be what you're suggesting isn't it? Just a thought but I wouldn't go about trying to sell such an economic stimulus to the public at the cost of hundreds of thousands of innocent life on a pointless war to the public anymore.
    AS for "only two possibly choices" I never made that argument. My argument was that spending stimulates. Yes even war spending stimulates.
    But keep on trying to put words in my mouth with hyperbole.

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC
    I don't particularly care for that whole shtick either, I just think its amusing how party leaders (from either side) start pushing a message and then you see people parroting it back a couple days later.
    Then I suggest you not use it to lambast when it serves nothing other than to show you as a kookaid drinker as well.

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC
    So don't bitch when the Republicans in Congress hold up your bill. After all, the people voted them in there to do just that, right?
    WHo said anything about not bitching? Has anyone called for a censor of or silence of? You were the one saying if it was voted on in november, yet the very topic at the time was economy and it's not a stretch to say it's one of the primary reasons that obama and democrats won.
    If the republicans were holding on to the bill for any legitimate reason I've no problem. But you guys just are not. You're being obstructionist for the sole sake of obstructionism. For crying out loud republicans are still bitching about family planning being in the bill when one of the first things taken out was family planning.
    Great you need to sell to your base, I get that, that's fine we can include that another day.
    But after all the back and forth and even praise by house minority leaders of Obama's sincerity willing to work bipartisan what do they do? not a single one votes for it.
    So you wanted all that inclusion and it's still not enough - then bringing absolutely nothing concrete to the table except to say.
    We have a bill, we think it's a better bill, we think your bill needs to be tossed out.
    That's not bipartisan, that's "you're either with us or against us" all over again.

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC
    lol. TWO!? You mean they won TWO elections in a row?! Unprecedented. ****, the Republicans should just give it up and announce their dissolution tomorrow. TWO election IN A MOTHER****IN ROW. Damn.
    Becoming a minority that was unseen in a quarter century? Yeah I'd say you guys lost pretty badly. It's not as if you didn't see the writing on the wall though.

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC
    So wait - you acknowledge that the people who voted Obama and the Dems in are dumb and that they did it by accident, but then you turn around and try to use that as justification for enacting whatever policies the Dems want without opposition? Good one.
    Yes, dumb, I think the american public is generally dumb and apathetic.
    I've never said anything about "without opposition" you're putting words in my mouth again. Now if you didn't edit the response to the second part you would've seen why I said they got it right with dumb luck.

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC
    You're obviously intelligent enough to recognize the converse argument to that, so I won't bother going into it here.
    I think you're obtusly missing the point.
    The spending is to increase demand - it is the demand which is lacking now because the public is not spending.
    You know, the whole supply and demand thing?

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC
    You're right. And as you earlier pointed out, the public is so brilliant that they totally anticipated that by endorsing a generic Democratic platform of change, they were in actuality voting to spend $900b on condoms and solar panels.
    Well it's still better money spent than 10billion monthly to build the infrastructure of another nation.

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC
    Q: When Bush won in 04 on his "tough talk, continue the war in Iraq" platform, did you consider that an endorsement to expand that policy, say, by invading Iran?
    You probably missed the part where I said a dumb apathetic public.
    But on that, people normally don't vote to change out the commander in chief during war time.

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC
    Somehow I think that if we'd done that and I came on here and said "well who won the election HMMMMM?????," you'd be a lil aggravated at my idiocy, and rightfully so.
    That's what this is about? You're a lil aggravated?

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC
    Finally, in all seriousness, if you actually want to consider the will of the people on this (not that I think it really matters), then why don't you ask the people what they want rather than simply try to divine their desires by looking at their generic ballots from November. Oh, wait, someone already did that.
    Like I said a dumb apathetic public.
    Let me add with an attention span of 5 second sound bites.

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC
    So what do you say, jfuh? I mean, based on your earlier comments, I have to assume that you think this is a bold refutation of the Democrat's failed proposals (or something like that, right?)
    For if the public was wtf are those 20%? The public seems to have forgotten how tax cuts were a completely failed policy and have been just that for the last 8 years. They're now just drinking from the republican koolaid because Obama didn't vet properly and spent his time defending a lobbiest, and tax evaders. During which time republicans were stepping up the same old bogus rhetoric all over again.
    Spending is proven economic policy that stimulates economy.
    FDR succeeded partially but had his spending been as big as it was during WWII the depression would've ended far sooner.
    If he didn't bother to listen to conservative opinions of cutting back spending there wouldn't have been that recession in '37 either.
    Again, how do you benefit from a taxcut, or specifically as republican's are proposing, payroll tax cut, when you're not on a payroll?
    Trickle down does not work.

  7. #7
    ANTI**ANTIFA
    ReverendHellh0und's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Temple of Solomon
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 06:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    75,740

    Re: Pelosi dismisses bipartisanship calls

    For if the public was wtf are those 20%? The public seems to have forgotten how tax cuts were a completely failed policy and have been just that for the last 8 years. They're now just drinking from the republican koolaid because Obama didn't vet properly and spent his time defending a lobbiest, and tax evaders. During which time republicans were stepping up the same old bogus rhetoric all over again.



    So you are suggesting we are to spend and tax our way out of this recession?
    Last edited by ReverendHellh0und; 02-08-09 at 09:18 AM.
    Let evil swiftly befall those who have wrongly condemned us

  8. #8
    Defender of the Faith
    ludahai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Taichung, Taiwan - 2017 East Asian Games Candidate City
    Last Seen
    07-03-13 @ 02:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    10,320

    Re: Pelosi dismisses bipartisanship calls

    Quote Originally Posted by jfuh View Post
    Taxpayers decided in november that democrats would be superior to republicans in resolving the crisis. Yes, democrats won an overwhelming mandate from tax payers.
    So as you were.
    I was referring to their meeting at a swank resort. Who was paying for that? Nice try though bringing in the irrelevant.
    Semper Paratus
    Boston = City of Champions: Bruins 2011; Celtics 2008; Red Sox 2004, 2007; Patriots 2002, 2004, 2005
    Jon Huntsman for President

  9. #9
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: Pelosi dismisses bipartisanship calls

    Quote Originally Posted by jfuh View Post
    You're point is without merit, no one is spending for the sake of spending. That's just make believe republican talking points.
    Quote Originally Posted by jfuh, 10 minutes ago
    What do you think an economic stimulus is? Spending IS the whole point.
    ...okay.

    Seems to be what you're suggesting isn't it? Just a thought but I wouldn't go about trying to sell such an economic stimulus to the public at the cost of hundreds of thousands of innocent life on a pointless war to the public anymore.
    OMG hundreds of thousands of lives!??! Why don't you just skip to millions, that sounds better.

    WHo said anything about not bitching? Has anyone called for a censor of or silence of? You were the one saying if it was voted on in november, yet the very topic at the time was economy and it's not a stretch to say it's one of the primary reasons that obama and democrats won.
    If the republicans were holding on to the bill for any legitimate reason I've no problem. But you guys just are not. You're being obstructionist for the sole sake of obstructionism. For crying out loud republicans are still bitching about family planning being in the bill when one of the first things taken out was family planning.
    You honestly don't see the inconsistency in your argument here? When the dems use their majority to push forward a bill that the Republicans oppose, well, that's just what they were elected to do. When the Reps use their minority to slow down and modify a bill that they oppose, they're being obstructionist bastards who are perverting the will of the people. I just don't see how you can credibly make that argument.


    Becoming a minority that was unseen in a quarter century? Yeah I'd say you guys lost pretty badly. It's not as if you didn't see the writing on the wall though.
    I don't even know what you're trying to say. If you think this is a bad position to be in historically, you need to refresh your recollection.

    I think you're obtusly missing the point.
    The spending is to increase demand - it is the demand which is lacking now because the public is not spending.
    You know, the whole supply and demand thing?
    You're right, and tax cuts would have absolutely no effect on that. I forgot that you're an economist.

    Well it's still better money spent than 10billion monthly to build the infrastructure of another nation.
    If you set the bar low enough...

    You probably missed the part where I said a dumb apathetic public.
    But on that, people normally don't vote to change out the commander in chief during war time.
    The point is that it's a ****ty argument, and you know that, so I'm surprised to see you making it.

    That's what this is about? You're a lil aggravated?
    Illogic anywhere is a danger to logic everywhere.

    Like I said a dumb apathetic public.
    Let me add with an attention span of 5 second sound bites.
    You won't find any argument from me here.

    For if the public was wtf are those 20%? The public seems to have forgotten how tax cuts were a completely failed policy and have been just that for the last 8 years. They're now just drinking from the republican koolaid because Obama didn't vet properly and spent his time defending a lobbiest, and tax evaders. During which time republicans were stepping up the same old bogus rhetoric all over again.
    Spending is proven economic policy that stimulates economy.
    FDR succeeded partially but had his spending been as big as it was during WWII the depression would've ended far sooner.
    If he didn't bother to listen to conservative opinions of cutting back spending there wouldn't have been that recession in '37 either.
    Again, how do you benefit from a taxcut, or specifically as republican's are proposing, payroll tax cut, when you're not on a payroll?
    Trickle down does not work.
    Again, you know the rebuttal to this, and you don't agree with it, so I won't bother making it.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  10. #10
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

    Re: Pelosi dismisses bipartisanship calls

    Quote Originally Posted by ludahai View Post
    link

    Is Pelosi trying to sabotage a stimulus package?



    What does education spending have to do with immediate economic stimulus?



    Is this being paid for by the Democrats or the taxpayers? If it is the latter, that shows unparalled hypocrisy after the grilling the car execs got for the private planes used to testify before Congress.
    That shrill banshee should be tossed out of the House of Representatives now.

    I can't stand her and I wonder why even the most liberal of liberals would consider her for office of dog catcher much less a representative.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •