The vote was 244-188
-
Oakman wrote:
The fact that Obama was pimping for it (even if he took out the condom funding) leaves me with a sickening feeling.
His position simply verified what I knew to be true, he's nothing more than a far left Chicago liberal and I didn't for a minute believe he'd do anything other than go back on his word. Rush (yes, I listen to him) played two taped Obama comments today. Paraphrasing -> In one he made the statement that the economic problems are so dire that ONLY the government could right the ship. Paraphrasing -> In the second he lauded corporate America and the guy in the street saying it is up to us. Pure fucking bullshit, as you said, this is simply "to the victor" and has squat to do with the needs or well being of America.
Mike - typical white guy. The USA does have universal healthcare, but you have to pay for it. D'oh. Thomas Mann - "Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil." The NYT - my leftist brochure. Calling an illegal alien an “undocumented immigrant” is like calling a drug dealer an “unlicensed pharmacist”. God doesn't believe in atheists, therefore they don't exist.
-
did he date those comments? (Were they 11/01/2008 and 11/14/2008 or were they 9/1/2008 and 1/14/2009?) Stimulus package hasn't impressed me, but I have only heard major news reports on it.. and you guys. Is there a website like O promised?
bulg wrote:
Stimulus package hasn't impressed me, but I have only heard major news reports on it.. and you guys. Is there a website like O promised
There's one under construction called recovery.gov[^]. Apparently its purpose will be to tell us exactly how our money went - a welcome change from Paulson and Bush throwing money at the banks (AIG just gave out almost 60 million in bonuses today), but not a helluvalot more than a consolation prize.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
did he date those comments? (Were they 11/01/2008 and 11/14/2008 or were they 9/1/2008 and 1/14/2009?) Stimulus package hasn't impressed me, but I have only heard major news reports on it.. and you guys. Is there a website like O promised?
Mike - typical white guy. The USA does have universal healthcare, but you have to pay for it. D'oh. Thomas Mann - "Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil." The NYT - my leftist brochure. Calling an illegal alien an “undocumented immigrant” is like calling a drug dealer an “unlicensed pharmacist”. God doesn't believe in atheists, therefore they don't exist.
-
Oakman wrote:
The fact that Obama was pimping for it (even if he took out the condom funding) leaves me with a sickening feeling.
His position simply verified what I knew to be true, he's nothing more than a far left Chicago liberal and I didn't for a minute believe he'd do anything other than go back on his word. Rush (yes, I listen to him) played two taped Obama comments today. Paraphrasing -> In one he made the statement that the economic problems are so dire that ONLY the government could right the ship. Paraphrasing -> In the second he lauded corporate America and the guy in the street saying it is up to us. Pure fucking bullshit, as you said, this is simply "to the victor" and has squat to do with the needs or well being of America.
Mike - typical white guy. The USA does have universal healthcare, but you have to pay for it. D'oh. Thomas Mann - "Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil." The NYT - my leftist brochure. Calling an illegal alien an “undocumented immigrant” is like calling a drug dealer an “unlicensed pharmacist”. God doesn't believe in atheists, therefore they don't exist.
Mike Gaskey wrote:
His position simply verified what I knew to be true, he's nothing more than a far left Chicago liberal and I didn't for a minute believe he'd do anything other than go back on his word. Rush (yes, I listen to him) played two taped Obama comments today.
So far his actual leadership is confirming the worst expectations.
Mike Gaskey wrote:
Rush (yes, I listen to him) played two taped Obama comments today.
I had a chance to listen today. I thought his observation concerning Obama's efforts to get the republicans on board was brilliant. The democrats simply do not need republican support to do anything. If the adminstration was really optimistic about the chances of success, they would not care if the republicans support it. In fact, they would want them to oppose it in order to hold it over them in the next election. The only reason bipartisanship would be so important is so that the almost certain failure cannot be used by the republicans in the next election. Obama wants them to be shareholders in the inevitable failure so that it cannot be used against the democrats. House republicans seem to be doing everything perfectly so far - uniting around a conservative core to oppose this insanity. Senate republicans, who's seats are not as safe, not so much.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
Mike Gaskey wrote:
His position simply verified what I knew to be true, he's nothing more than a far left Chicago liberal and I didn't for a minute believe he'd do anything other than go back on his word. Rush (yes, I listen to him) played two taped Obama comments today.
So far his actual leadership is confirming the worst expectations.
Mike Gaskey wrote:
Rush (yes, I listen to him) played two taped Obama comments today.
I had a chance to listen today. I thought his observation concerning Obama's efforts to get the republicans on board was brilliant. The democrats simply do not need republican support to do anything. If the adminstration was really optimistic about the chances of success, they would not care if the republicans support it. In fact, they would want them to oppose it in order to hold it over them in the next election. The only reason bipartisanship would be so important is so that the almost certain failure cannot be used by the republicans in the next election. Obama wants them to be shareholders in the inevitable failure so that it cannot be used against the democrats. House republicans seem to be doing everything perfectly so far - uniting around a conservative core to oppose this insanity. Senate republicans, who's seats are not as safe, not so much.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
Stan Shannon wrote:
I thought his observation concerning Obama's efforts to get the republicans on board was brilliant
regardless of his showmanship he is a brilliant political analyst, and that is the reason for the recent spate of attackes on Rush. Liberals here may disagree, calling him simply a partisan of the worst order but there's plenty on the left as "bad" or worse. I like him on "my" side.
Mike - typical white guy. The USA does have universal healthcare, but you have to pay for it. D'oh. Thomas Mann - "Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil." The NYT - my leftist brochure. Calling an illegal alien an “undocumented immigrant” is like calling a drug dealer an “unlicensed pharmacist”. God doesn't believe in atheists, therefore they don't exist.
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
I thought his observation concerning Obama's efforts to get the republicans on board was brilliant
regardless of his showmanship he is a brilliant political analyst, and that is the reason for the recent spate of attackes on Rush. Liberals here may disagree, calling him simply a partisan of the worst order but there's plenty on the left as "bad" or worse. I like him on "my" side.
Mike - typical white guy. The USA does have universal healthcare, but you have to pay for it. D'oh. Thomas Mann - "Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil." The NYT - my leftist brochure. Calling an illegal alien an “undocumented immigrant” is like calling a drug dealer an “unlicensed pharmacist”. God doesn't believe in atheists, therefore they don't exist.
Mike Gaskey wrote:
Liberals here may disagree, calling him simply a partisan of the worst order but there's plenty on the left as "bad" or worse.
Olbermann does not excuse Rush, nor does Rush excuse Olbermann. Both are loud-mouthed assholes intrerested in promoting themselves by an unending stream of vituperation and simplistic reasoning. The world would be a better place if they both stfu. And no I'm not a Liberal and I'm not a Conservative. I think for myself.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
Mike Gaskey wrote:
Liberals here may disagree, calling him simply a partisan of the worst order but there's plenty on the left as "bad" or worse.
Olbermann does not excuse Rush, nor does Rush excuse Olbermann. Both are loud-mouthed assholes intrerested in promoting themselves by an unending stream of vituperation and simplistic reasoning. The world would be a better place if they both stfu. And no I'm not a Liberal and I'm not a Conservative. I think for myself.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
Oakman wrote:
I'm not a Conservative. I think for myself.
Well, I am and that is how I got here.
Mike - typical white guy. The USA does have universal healthcare, but you have to pay for it. D'oh. Thomas Mann - "Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil." The NYT - my leftist brochure. Calling an illegal alien an “undocumented immigrant” is like calling a drug dealer an “unlicensed pharmacist”. God doesn't believe in atheists, therefore they don't exist.
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
I thought his observation concerning Obama's efforts to get the republicans on board was brilliant
regardless of his showmanship he is a brilliant political analyst, and that is the reason for the recent spate of attackes on Rush. Liberals here may disagree, calling him simply a partisan of the worst order but there's plenty on the left as "bad" or worse. I like him on "my" side.
Mike - typical white guy. The USA does have universal healthcare, but you have to pay for it. D'oh. Thomas Mann - "Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil." The NYT - my leftist brochure. Calling an illegal alien an “undocumented immigrant” is like calling a drug dealer an “unlicensed pharmacist”. God doesn't believe in atheists, therefore they don't exist.
Mike Gaskey wrote:
regardless of his showmanship he is a brilliant political analyst, and that is the reason for the recent spate of attackes on Rush. Liberals here may disagree, calling him simply a partisan of the worst order but there's plenty on the left as "bad" or worse. I like him on "my" side.
He is certainly a flawed individual, but he is a genius at what he does. Thre is no one else in his league. I don't agree with a lot of what he says, but his political observations are the best you will get anywhere. His voice is indispensible to the survival of true conservatism.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
did he date those comments? (Were they 11/01/2008 and 11/14/2008 or were they 9/1/2008 and 1/14/2009?) Stimulus package hasn't impressed me, but I have only heard major news reports on it.. and you guys. Is there a website like O promised?
Here's a few things I've run accross this week. Sorry, they may not be in chronological order. Some may be of interest, some may not. Puruse at your leisure. The Bill PDF Some related stuff Stimulus Package - Map Spending by State - Wall Street Journal Economic stimulus? Feds want your medical records Sunlight Foundation » Stimulus Bill To Go Web 2.0?" Townhall.com - The Age of Entitlement Pork Watch The American Spectator : ACORN's Stimulus The Democratic Porkfest Bill of 2009 Divided US House to hand Obama stimulus win - Yahoo! Canada News Stimulus Bill Near $900 Billion - WSJ.com Senator Warns White House Will 'Create Crisis' and 'Panic' to Push Stimulus OBAMA PRESS SECRETARY DEFENDS NATIONAL MALL SPENDING... 'Will create jobs, probably through spending in small businesses' GOP: 'Won't stimulate anything but more government and more debt' Peloci-Palooza Monday - Peloci says birth control will help economy Tues - Peloci loses the birth control Washington Wire - WSJ.com : Women's Groups Protest Dropping Contraceptives Provision in Stimulu Wed - $335,000,000 FOR STD PREVENTION IN ECONOMIC STIMULUS BILL Food Stamps will stimulate Economy More than Tax Cuts says Peloc
-
Mike Gaskey wrote:
His position simply verified what I knew to be true, he's nothing more than a far left Chicago liberal and I didn't for a minute believe he'd do anything other than go back on his word. Rush (yes, I listen to him) played two taped Obama comments today.
So far his actual leadership is confirming the worst expectations.
Mike Gaskey wrote:
Rush (yes, I listen to him) played two taped Obama comments today.
I had a chance to listen today. I thought his observation concerning Obama's efforts to get the republicans on board was brilliant. The democrats simply do not need republican support to do anything. If the adminstration was really optimistic about the chances of success, they would not care if the republicans support it. In fact, they would want them to oppose it in order to hold it over them in the next election. The only reason bipartisanship would be so important is so that the almost certain failure cannot be used by the republicans in the next election. Obama wants them to be shareholders in the inevitable failure so that it cannot be used against the democrats. House republicans seem to be doing everything perfectly so far - uniting around a conservative core to oppose this insanity. Senate republicans, who's seats are not as safe, not so much.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
Stan Shannon wrote:
The democrats simply do not need republican support to do anything. If the adminstration was really optimistic about the chances of success, they would not care if the republicans support it. In fact, they would want them to oppose it in order to hold it over them in the next election. The only reason bipartisanship would be so important is so that the almost certain failure cannot be used by the republicans in the next election. Obama wants them to be shareholders in the inevitable failure so that it cannot be used against the democrats. House republicans seem to be doing everything perfectly so far - uniting around a conservative core to oppose this insanity. Senate republicans, who's seats are not as safe, not so much.
My take is that Obama wants Republican support to a. make politics less fierce, b. move the political center to the left (just as Reagan succeeded in moving it to the right). Failing that, Obama wants to be seen to be reaching out to Republicans, even if they reject him, because the public likes that. However, just like you, I am happy to see the lines clearly drawn. Let's see how the economy performs and let the political winners collect their spoils.
John Carson
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
The democrats simply do not need republican support to do anything. If the adminstration was really optimistic about the chances of success, they would not care if the republicans support it. In fact, they would want them to oppose it in order to hold it over them in the next election. The only reason bipartisanship would be so important is so that the almost certain failure cannot be used by the republicans in the next election. Obama wants them to be shareholders in the inevitable failure so that it cannot be used against the democrats. House republicans seem to be doing everything perfectly so far - uniting around a conservative core to oppose this insanity. Senate republicans, who's seats are not as safe, not so much.
My take is that Obama wants Republican support to a. make politics less fierce, b. move the political center to the left (just as Reagan succeeded in moving it to the right). Failing that, Obama wants to be seen to be reaching out to Republicans, even if they reject him, because the public likes that. However, just like you, I am happy to see the lines clearly drawn. Let's see how the economy performs and let the political winners collect their spoils.
John Carson
John Carson wrote:
. make politics less fierce,
That is about the most hypocritical comment I've ever heard made.
John Carson wrote:
b. move the political center to the left (just as Reagan succeeded in moving it to the right).
Agreed - he has already acheived that in the senate with lap dogs like McCain.
John Carson wrote:
Let's see how the economy performs and let the political winners collect their spoils.
Indeed. And standing opposed to a policy that has never worked anywhere or anytime it has been tried should be a pretty good political gamble. What will become increasingly obviously is that Obama actually is the inexperienced, ner-do-well, radical leftist, that any unbiased assessment of his life would have made obvious to anyone who cared to look.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
modified on Thursday, January 29, 2009 7:15 AM
-
John Carson wrote:
. make politics less fierce,
That is about the most hypocritical comment I've ever heard made.
John Carson wrote:
b. move the political center to the left (just as Reagan succeeded in moving it to the right).
Agreed - he has already acheived that in the senate with lap dogs like McCain.
John Carson wrote:
Let's see how the economy performs and let the political winners collect their spoils.
Indeed. And standing opposed to a policy that has never worked anywhere or anytime it has been tried should be a pretty good political gamble. What will become increasingly obviously is that Obama actually is the inexperienced, ner-do-well, radical leftist, that any unbiased assessment of his life would have made obvious to anyone who cared to look.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
modified on Thursday, January 29, 2009 7:15 AM
Stan Shannon wrote:
Indeed. And standing opposed to a policy that has never worked anywhere or anytime it has been tried should be a pretty good political gamble. What will become increasingly obviously is that Obama actually is the inexperienced, ner-do-well, radical leftist, that any unbiased assessment of his life would have made obvious to anyone who cared to look.
Place your bets. :)
John Carson
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
The democrats simply do not need republican support to do anything. If the adminstration was really optimistic about the chances of success, they would not care if the republicans support it. In fact, they would want them to oppose it in order to hold it over them in the next election. The only reason bipartisanship would be so important is so that the almost certain failure cannot be used by the republicans in the next election. Obama wants them to be shareholders in the inevitable failure so that it cannot be used against the democrats. House republicans seem to be doing everything perfectly so far - uniting around a conservative core to oppose this insanity. Senate republicans, who's seats are not as safe, not so much.
My take is that Obama wants Republican support to a. make politics less fierce, b. move the political center to the left (just as Reagan succeeded in moving it to the right). Failing that, Obama wants to be seen to be reaching out to Republicans, even if they reject him, because the public likes that. However, just like you, I am happy to see the lines clearly drawn. Let's see how the economy performs and let the political winners collect their spoils.
John Carson
John Carson wrote:
However, just like you, I am happy to see the lines clearly drawn. Let's see how the economy performs and let the political winners collect their spoils.
You, Stan. and Nancy Pelosi.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.
-
All the Republicans voted against, 10 or 11 Blue Dog Democrats joined the Republicans.[^] This means that 43.5% of the US House of Representatives does in fact retain the ability to think. There's little if any real stimulus in the bill which is little more than a shopping list for the left. WIth luck, the Senate will add more tax cuts ( a FICA holiday, for example)to put cash in people's pockets and that will be stimulative. Of course with the dollar amount being discussed congress could decide to send every household with a mortgage a check for $17,000 - that would be stimulative for certain.
Mike - typical white guy. The USA does have universal healthcare, but you have to pay for it. D'oh. Thomas Mann - "Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil." The NYT - my leftist brochure. Calling an illegal alien an “undocumented immigrant” is like calling a drug dealer an “unlicensed pharmacist”. God doesn't believe in atheists, therefore they don't exist.
From what I've heard and seen of the bill a good portion of it is going to things like health care and safety net programs like unemployment and food stamps. The biggest portion, I saw, was to go to states for discretionary spending.
-
From what I've heard and seen of the bill a good portion of it is going to things like health care and safety net programs like unemployment and food stamps. The biggest portion, I saw, was to go to states for discretionary spending.
wolfbinary wrote:
a good portion of it is going to things like health care and safety net programs like unemployment and food stamps.
Yes, all instruments of oppression employed by the left. :rolleyes:
"Republicans run for office saying that the government doesn't work, then they get elected, and they prove it." -- Al Franken
-
wolfbinary wrote:
a good portion of it is going to things like health care and safety net programs like unemployment and food stamps.
Yes, all instruments of oppression employed by the left. :rolleyes:
"Republicans run for office saying that the government doesn't work, then they get elected, and they prove it." -- Al Franken
Al Beback wrote:
oppression employed by the left. Roll eyes
When did I say oppression or by the left? I was talking about what was it, not calling anyone or anything leftist or oppressive. Your jumping to conclusions.
-
Mike Gaskey wrote:
Of course with the dollar amount being discussed congress could decide to send every household with a mortgage a check for $17,000 - that would be stimulative for certain.
Discriminatory. Far as I'm concerned, renters and folks like me who have paid off their mortgage need stimulation, too. Y'know, I could've supported a stimulus package twice the size of the one that is being passed - if it had gone to repair and maintenance of infrastructure (and replacement in the case of things like bridges where safety is important.) Instead we are getting an earmark that is simply Pelosi's version of "To the victor belongs the spoils." The fact that Obama was pimping for it (even if he took out the condom funding) leaves me with a sickening feeling.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
John, are you "whining" about Obama? With this "stimulus" package, it's been hard to bite my tongue. I don't know if I can last for 6 months without "whining" against Obama.
AF Pilot
-
Al Beback wrote:
oppression employed by the left. Roll eyes
When did I say oppression or by the left? I was talking about what was it, not calling anyone or anything leftist or oppressive. Your jumping to conclusions.
That's Al. God forbid you 'blame' a Democrat for ANYTHING!
AF Pilot
-
That's Al. God forbid you 'blame' a Democrat for ANYTHING!
AF Pilot
I wasn't blaming anyone just saying what I thought was in the bill. I'd like to know the reasoning behind the portions of it though, but those answers have to come from the people who put it together.
-
John, are you "whining" about Obama? With this "stimulus" package, it's been hard to bite my tongue. I don't know if I can last for 6 months without "whining" against Obama.
AF Pilot
Reagan Conservative wrote:
John, are you "whining" about Obama? With this "stimulus" package, it's been hard to bite my tongue. I don't know if I can last for 6 months without "whining" against Obama.
Me? Whine? Prima Facie, impossible! ;) I am, however, expressing disappointment that Obama has allowed Pelosi to so dominate the crafting of this bill. My attitude towards her is, and always has been since she was Minority Leader, one of healthy paranoia. (And Reid is her twin. He doesn't even stand up when he pees.) If Obama cannot wrest leadership on this important issue away from the two of them and bend them to his will (or if he chooses not to, mox nix) then we are indeed watching the kind of change that, back in the day, turned Rome from a Republic into an Empire. It's always a good idea, when thinking of Pelosi, to remember that the Latin for "Speaker" is "Dictator." My loyalty has never been to Obama, nor did I vote for him. My loyalty is to the United States of America. Unlike Stan (and Adnan), I do not glory in anything that harms my country, nor rejoice at failures of government that endanger it. I have never believed, nor hoped that Obama had all the answers; I did think he had the ability to lead this country. I am beginning to worry about that. btw: it's Jon. It's been Jon in my family on and off since at least the 13th century.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.