BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???

Subject: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: Bobert
Date: 26 Feb 10 - 08:53 PM

Wow!!!

maybe I missed somethin' here 'cuase I was playin' geetar and watching MSNBC but...

...did Jim Bunting, former professi9onal baseball pitcher and Repub Congressman really say "Tough sh*t" to the unelmployed before refusing to vote in favor of extending unemployement benefits??? Also reported is that after he said that he said that having to go vote was at all was an infringement on his plans to go see a college basketball game???

I mean, if that really happened then this guy has some serious anger problems, I'd say...

Did this guy really do this, 'er what???

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: mousethief
Date: 26 Feb 10 - 09:20 PM

As an Unemployed American whose coverage ends in just a little over a month, I say one finger up to these heartless bastards. I have no idea how we're going to live on my wife's salary when my unemployment ends; we'll probably lose our home and all the equity we have in it. While those fatcats and their corporate owners eat like pigs. Bitter, me?

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: katlaughing
Date: 26 Feb 10 - 10:01 PM

FRANKFORT, Ky. (AP) — Kentucky Sen. Jim Bunning is facing pressure from his home state for blocking an extension of unemployment benefits for workers who have lost jobs in the recession. Gov. Steve Beshear said 119,000 unemployed Kentuckians are currently receiving benefits through the federal extension program. In Kentucky today, police checked out bomb threats at two of Bunning's offices.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From HERE

Jim Bunning, a Republican from Kentucky, is single-handedly blocking Senate action needed to prevent an estimated 1.2 million American workers from prematurely losing their unemployment benefits next month.

As Democratic senators asked again and again for unanimous consent for a vote on a 30-day extension Thursday night, Bunning refused to go along.

And when Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) begged him to drop his objection, Politico reports, Bunning replied: "Tough shit."

Bunning says he doesn't oppose extending benefits -- he just doesn't want the money that's required added to the deficit. He proposes paying for the 30-day extension with stimulus funds. The Senate's GOP leadership did not support him in his objections.

And at one point during the debate, which dragged on till nearly midnight, Bunning complained of missing a basketball game.

"I have missed the Kentucky-South Carolina game that started at 9:00," he said,
"and it's the only redeeming chance we had to beat South Carolina since they're the only team that has beat Kentucky this year.
Story continues below

The unemployment rate in Kentucky is 10.7 percent.

The stakes are enormous: provisions of last year's stimulus bill that allow extra weeks of unemployment benefits and COBRA health coverage are set to expire on Feb. 28. State workforce agencies have already sent out letters informing recipients that they'll be ineligible for extra "tiers" of benefits starting next month. The National Employment Law Project estimates that 1.2 million people will prematurely lose benefits in March.

Judy Conti, a lobbyist for the NELP, said that even when Bunning is eventually thwarted and the extension is passed, state governments will still have to deal with the extra administrative costs of shutting down and restarting the extended benefits programs.

"Once the program is retroactively reauthorized, the federal government is going to send the same amount of money, but his own state government is going to have to spend even more money," Conti said.

"What happened last night was an absolute disgrace. There is a time and a place a purpose for debate on deficit reduction, but you don't make your stand on the back of the unemployed. It is ill-informed, counter productive and just cruel."

There is a video of it on that page, from CSPAN. The bastard!

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 26 Feb 10 - 10:19 PM

Do bears shit in the woods?

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: Riginslinger
Date: 26 Feb 10 - 10:57 PM

Yeah, it was a Senator. Senator Bunning--an ex-major league pitcher--who said, when the health care debate started (I'm paraphrasing), "when you've dealt with people like Yogi Berra, Mickey Mantle, Stan Musial, and Ted Williams, none of these people in the Senate don't come up to he mark."


             So what's the bigger challange, getting a health care bill throught the Senate, or pitching to Ted Williams?


             He's not running for re-election.

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: Beer
Date: 26 Feb 10 - 11:12 PM

Now I remember this Jim fellow. Wasn't there a book on him. Stirred a lot of Shit. Maybe it was a Biography!
Beer (adrien)

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: catspaw49
Date: 27 Feb 10 - 01:11 AM

You might be thinking of Jim Bouton.

Jim Bunning was one helluva' pitcher and the most conservative man in the Senate.   As a pitcher he had a Hall of Fame record and indeed is in the Hall but also he is one of the most exclusive group of ballplayers ever......men who threw a perfect game. I think its like less than 20 or so. A perfect game has no runs, hits, errors, or walks. No one was ever on base on the opposing team which was the Mets. Bunning was playing for the Phillies.I was 15 and I really remember it well.

As a Senator, he's an asshole.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: Janie
Date: 27 Feb 10 - 01:13 AM

I don't know that it is accurate to generalize from him to all Republicans, as tempting as that may be.

From the report I heard on NPR this afternoon, we have not heard the last from him and his willingness to use the rules of the Senate to object to many looming bills. While I certainly consider him extremely obstructive and unbalanced in his view, I am certain there will be those who consider him courageous for standing up for his principles.

I don't fault him for standing up for his principles. I do fault him for his rigidity.

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: mousethief
Date: 27 Feb 10 - 01:23 AM

I fault him that his principles hurt so many people.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 27 Feb 10 - 03:45 AM

Mousey, you are right, but what he espouses here is allegedly the core principle of Republicans - smaller government (although personally I think it is something nastier) and accordingly all Republicans are indeed tarred with the same brush.

A rabid dog bites. It is its nature. But you still shoot it.

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 27 Feb 10 - 03:48 AM

"Let Them Eat Cake!"

And The Guillotine was built...........


We are about to enter into Marie Antoinette Times once again, this time without The Guillotine, but the anger in the hearts of the peasants will do just as much damage, unless the Corporate and Political Aristocracy wakes up to the suffering that is going on, and to the fact that they have caused it.

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: Riginslinger
Date: 27 Feb 10 - 07:11 AM

What will we use in lieu of the guillotine?

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: Dharmabum
Date: 27 Feb 10 - 08:35 AM

Well Lizzie,
I wholeheartedly agree with you,except for one minor point.
That's the CORPORATE "and" POLITICAL ARISTOCRACY.
We need to remove the word "and".
I don't know which one's the head & which one's the a** of that beast,but they're both attatched to the same body.

DB.

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: Greg F.
Date: 27 Feb 10 - 09:27 AM

As a Senator, he's an asshole.

We as a nation never seem to learn, do we Spaw?

We keep electing completely unqualified sports figures, actors, generals......... and then we're surprised when they tuen out to be Assholes In Office.

Go figure.

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: Bobert
Date: 27 Feb 10 - 09:42 AM

But they have name recognition, Greg... *grin*...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: pdq
Date: 27 Feb 10 - 10:15 AM

Jim Bunning
Career wins v. losses: 224-184 (68th), 3.27 ERA, 2855 strike-outs (17th), Hall Of Fame in 1996, 9-time All-Star, Tigers/Phillies... 1955-1971, born in KY 1931.

Jim Bouton
Career wins v. losses: 62-63, 3.57 ERA, 720 strike-outs
Yankees/Pilots...1962-78, born in New Jersey.

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: Amos
Date: 27 Feb 10 - 02:15 PM

Unemployment group wants Bunning ousted from Baseball Hall of Fame
By Jay Heflin         - 02/26/10 05:49 PM ET

Sen. Jim Bunning (R-Ky.) should be ousted from the Baseball Hall of Fame because of his block on extending unemployment benefits, according to a group that advocates for the unemployed.

The benefits expire Sunday.


ÒThe most obscene thing he can do is prevent jobless Americans from getting their $350 a week unemployment check,Ó Rick Sloan, acting executive director of Ur Union of Unemployed, a grass roots organization for unemployed Americans, told The Hill.

SloanÕs group is creating an online petition to remove Bunning from BaseballÕs Hall of Fame. The list is expected to be operational by the weekend.

ÒHis legacy as a great ball player is about to be surpassed by his reputation as an obstinate and uncaring ideologue,Ó Sloan said in a statement.

Efforts to reach BunningÕs office were unsuccessful.

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: mousethief
Date: 27 Feb 10 - 02:42 PM

What does that have to do with the hall of fame? I am firmly against politicizing the hall of fame. Any more than it is.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: catspaw49
Date: 27 Feb 10 - 02:45 PM

Okay pdq.....I'll bite, What's the point of your post?

Just curious.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: Riginslinger
Date: 27 Feb 10 - 05:17 PM

Maybe just that Bunning was able to deal with Berra, Mantle, Musial, and Ted Williams, but he's 3-and-0 with the bases loaded and no outs in dealing with Pelosi, Reid, and Obama.

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: Arkie
Date: 27 Feb 10 - 06:07 PM

Not exactly pertinent when discussing Jim Bunning, but how do Republicans get the reputation for wanting smaller government when they increase spending and run up government deficit when they get a Republican president and congress? The only occasions I remember when they oppose big government is when Democrats are in power.

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 27 Feb 10 - 07:28 PM

I know I'm kibbitzing from 3000 miles distance, but, from here this seems to be exactly what is to be expected from most Republicans.

Their idea of a Republic is not about "government of the people, by the people, for the people".

It is about "government of the people for my benefit, and as long as I've got mine, screw the losers".

On day somebody is going to wake up, and think, "This isn't how it's supposed to be"!

But it is extremely unlikely that he/she will be a Republican, because, overwhelmingly this is how Republicans want it to be.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: Bobert
Date: 27 Feb 10 - 08:35 PM

Yup, Don... That's about it... That's why the Tea Party, which opposes taxes and spending, is made up purdy much of angry white men with decent incomes... Take them outta the Tea Party and you ain't got nuthin' much left...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: Riginslinger
Date: 28 Feb 10 - 07:17 AM

"...how do Republicans get the reputation for wanting smaller government when they increase spending and run up government deficit when they get a Republican president and congress?"


         I think it has to do with the way one defines "government." If you go off on some military adventure and waste billions that can never be recovered it isn't regarded as government spending somehow. If you invest money in education that will show a handsome return in twenty to thirty years, that's wasteful.

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: Bobert
Date: 28 Feb 10 - 08:13 AM

Well, yeah, Rigs... That purdy much sums up the Repubs... Never met a war not worth starting... And the more, the merrier... Bush couldn't be content with one new shiney war so he had to have two... And the "small government" Tea Partiers, picked up their six-packs and couldn't wait to get home, plunk their overweight asses down on the couch and cheer it one while watchin' it one the TV...

Kinda reminds me of people who drive wrecklessly... I've always theought that if we could put a man on the moon that we could make an accident similator and put folks behind the wheel and the similator would detect when the driver was either not paying attention or driving wrecklessly and at that split-secons similate a violent crash that was just violent enough for it to imprint in the memory...

I think we need "war similators" where folks could feel what it is like to be bombed and see their families blown to bits in that split-seconf before theu themselves were blown to bits... And I think that a requirement for anyone who runs for public office, or vote, would be to spend a few hours in that similator...

Last ight I had the strangest dream
I ever had before
I dreamed that man
Had all agreed
To put an end to war...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: Little Hawk
Date: 28 Feb 10 - 04:43 PM

What is done is done because of major money concerns, and I don't mean the money concerns of ordinary people.

War is big business. To maintain a constant state of war or preparation for war enables a huge military-industrial infrastructure to maintain itself in the style to which it is accustomed....and banks to do the lending that makes it all possible.

By maintaining themselves in that style, the military-industrial complex and the banks can afford the funds to lobby effectively enough to control government policy.

The one feeds the other.

There is no role for the general public in that agenda except to submit like good little sheep, pay their taxes, and send their kids off to pay the ultimate price on someone else's land.

This isn't new at all. It's been going on for many centuries. But it's bigger now, and the world has grown smaller.

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: mousethief
Date: 28 Feb 10 - 05:19 PM

The other thing that makes this whole thing suck is that it only took ONE MAN to shut this down. Did the Senate get to vote, to express the will of its constituents? Like hell. One steak-eating, public-option-health-cared-for, will-never-go-hungry-or-lose-the-house fatcat Republican asshole brought the whole thing down. Just one. That's democracy Republican-style. Will the Tea Party take firearms to HIS town meetings? I wish they all lost their jobs tomorrow.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 28 Feb 10 - 05:33 PM

Bunning is inexcuseable, but he ain't all Republicans. I heard a Democrat say he didn't give a Damn about The Federal deficit. Should I start a thread saying Democrats don't give a Damn about the Federal Deficit?

I'm a Democrat by the way, but I don't villify all republicans.

Jerry

Maybe that's why some fine Republican friends of mine left Mudcat.

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: katlaughing
Date: 28 Feb 10 - 05:47 PM

Jerry, with respect to you and your friends, it is regretful if they did leave Mudcat, but eight years of the shrub's disasters led to a lot of us ranting and raving here because there was no where else to do so. With a GOP Prez and Congress majority it seemed there was little hope for most of us. If we were strident about and vilified most Republicans it was because they were so prevalent and, what a lot of us considered, disastrous for our country and none would listen.

I, too, have some fine Republican friends and I am a Democrat, but even they are seeing there is a lot to regret from shrub's time in office.

FWIW,

kat

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: pdq
Date: 28 Feb 10 - 06:00 PM

Jim Bunning never said he did not support the extension of these unemployment benefits. In fact, he does support the extension.

What he asked the Democrat majority to do was fund it in such a way that it did not add directly to our absurd National Debt, which may be $2 trillion this year.

He suggested that it be paid for by some of the "Stimulus Package" money that has yet to been spent. There is plenty of money there, perhaps half of the $800 billion allowed remains unspent.

There was plenty of time to discuss the problems, but Harry Reid seems to like to wait until 11:00 on Friday nights and then force the Senators to act in despiration. Reid is an absolutely rotten leader.

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: katlaughing
Date: 28 Feb 10 - 07:49 PM

pdq, please post a cite for your info? I really am interested. Thanks

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: Bobert
Date: 28 Feb 10 - 08:09 PM

No, Kat... That is true... Rather than vote to extend the unemployment benefits Jim Bunning choose to use this as his stage to voice his complaints against the deficits... Problem is that Jim Bunnng never said a word about the deficits when George Bush was running them up...

Oh, and for the record, the '09 deficit that The Repubs have gleefully accused of Obama of having created were 100% from the budget that George Bush proposed... The incoming presdient does not submit a budget until the end of his 1st year in office...

As for Repubs??? Yeah, we all have friends who are Repubs... I have no problems with Repubs but true Repubs are an endangered species as the hard-right has decided that they don't want a black president and are making life miserable for true Repubs...

Back to Jim Bunning... If he was so concerned about the deficit he should have voted against the '09 budget that Bush proposed rather than use this occasion to not only hurt folks who have lost their jobs but also are victims of the failures of the Bush administartion...

Boo on Jim Bunning... He is a hypocrit... There are better ways to make a point than to punish victims...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: katlaughing
Date: 28 Feb 10 - 11:19 PM

Thanks for the further info, Bobert. I agree with you about "true Republicans" which my grandma was...definitely endangered. What Bunning did is unconscionable.

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 06:23 AM

Senate impasse puts federal employees out of work
By JOAN LOWY
Associated Press Writer
The Associated Press
updated 11:04 p.m. CT, Sun., Feb. 28, 2010

WASHINGTON - Two thousand federal transportation workers will be furloughed without pay on Monday, and the Obama administration said they have a Kentucky senator to blame for it.

Federal reimbursements to states for highway programs will also be halted, the Transportation Department said in a statement late Sunday. The reimbursements amount to about $190 million a day, according to the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.
The furloughs and freeze on payments were the result of a decision last week by Republican Sen. Jim Bunning to block passage of legislation that would have extended federal highway and transit programs, the department said. Those programs expired at midnight Sunday.

The extension of transportation programs was part of a larger package of government programs that also expired Sunday, including unemployment benefits for about 400,000 Americans.

(No comment required.)

John

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: beardedbruce
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 06:58 AM

Having Bobert speak for the Republicans is like having the KKK speak for the NAACP.

The senator is trying to force Congress to LOOK AT THE COST of what they are doing. If I were to write checks with no idea of how much I had in the account, that would be called "kiting" and I would be serving time. But Congress seems to think it can spend, and spend, and spend, and spend, and make NO effort ( in the specific case of this legisdlation) to even hint HOW it will be paid for.

I think everyone should get money from the government- so ALL those senators that do not pass a bill giving ME money should be yanked out of office, and replaced with someone who will send me a check.

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: beardedbruce
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 07:06 AM

Bobert,

Care to comment on this?

"As Democratic senators asked again and again for unanimous consent for a vote on a 30-day extension Thursday night, Bunning refused to go along.

And when Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) begged him to drop his objection, Politico reports, Bunning replied: "Tough shit."

Bunning says he doesn't oppose extending benefits -- he just doesn't want the money that's required added to the deficit. He proposes paying for the 30-day extension with stimulus funds. The Senate's GOP leadership did not support him in his objections."

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: beardedbruce
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 07:18 AM

Kat,

My post is from the post YOU made. (26 Feb 10 - 10:01 PM)

"Bunning says he doesn't oppose extending benefits -- he just doesn't want the money that's required added to the deficit. He proposes paying for the 30-day extension with stimulus funds. The Senate's GOP leadership did not support him in his objections."





Note that it was a call for UNANIMOUS consent, NOT a vote. The Dems did NOT want to vote on it. THAT way it could have passed.

""As Democratic senators asked again and again for unanimous consent for a vote on a 30-day extension Thursday night, Bunning refused to go along."




And Bobert's tarring of all Republicans is obviously from a bigotted mind.

"The Senate's GOP leadership did not support him in his objections."



I have to repeat this since so many here would not figure out what I was saying in my post to Bobert without further explaination.

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: Bobert
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 07:35 AM

I did comment on that, BB... If you'd spend a little less time in yer blowhard mode and more time actually reading what others have written then you would not be askin' me to comment on something I plainly had commented on...

Kat got it... It was simple English, mah man...

Back to simple reading... Reread the thread title... See those 2 "?s"??? Do you know what "?" means????

Geese, man... If you want to debate folks here ya' gotta keep up...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: beardedbruce
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 07:44 AM

Kat,

With a Democratic Prez and Congress majority it seems there is little hope for the rest of us. If we are strident about and vilifie most Democrats it is because they are so prevalent and, what a lot of us consider, disastrous for our country and none will listen.


I think MY statement is as true as yours. You have the right to feel as you stated: Why do so many here deny those they disagree with the right to feel as WE do?

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 07:49 AM

Bunning is not running for re-election.

He can therefor take the heat of furthering the Republican objective of blocking any useful activity by Congress while Obama remains in office, while diverting attention from the obstructionism evident among the entire party of the Republican Bloc(heads).

By the time there's another presidential election - and probably by the time of the next Congressional elections - there's hope that the voters will have forgotten that the Republican controlled Congress created the collapse of world-wide financial markets, and passed the bills now putting us into extraordinary deficits, and they can hope that the voters won't have noticed that the Republicans are the ones who've prevented many useful actions toward recovery.

If Butnik is right about the need to "discuss other financing" it should be up to the ENTIRE SENATE to discuss, propose, and enact what is needed, not for one idiot to stop the entire country from functioning until someone changes his diaper and makes him happy again.

John

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: beardedbruce
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 07:58 AM

John,

to repeat:

Note that it was a call for UNANIMOUS consent, NOT a vote. The Dems did NOT want to vote on it. THAT way it could have passed.

""As Democratic senators asked again and again for unanimous consent for a vote on a 30-day extension Thursday night, Bunning refused to go along."


The Dems chose NOT to bring it to a vote. The Dems control whta is voted on, NOT the Republicans.

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: Bobert
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 08:04 AM

I agree, JOhn...

What I see as the problem isn't si much the narrative of what the Repubs did during the "wasted decade" or what the Dems want to do to fix it but, as Bill Clinton once put it, "a matter of who has the microphone"...

One would think that the majority party would have the microphone but things have changed and that is no longer the case... Lemme give an example: Obama holds a 7 hour summit on health care reform and if you watch ABC, NBC or CBS, where most folks still get their nightly news, then Obama gets:

30 seconds of microphone time...

If you watch FOX news then you get:

2 minutes of negative spin on Obama and another 5-10 minutes of negative spin by the Repubs on Obama

CNN, BTW, is "right" behind FOX are a rightie propaganda station

But let's not stop there... Then for the rest of the night we are barraged with anti-Dem/anti-Obama ads so by the end of the night the average TV watcher (3 hours per day) will have seen:

-----30 seconds of Obama v. 10-15 minutes of anti-Obama!!!!!-----

That is reality here... That is why the poll numbers are weighted down so heavily against health care reform... The right either owns media outlets lock, stock and barrel or pays up gobs of time... The right has the friggin' microphone!!!! Not the majority party... That is the real story here!!!

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: beardedbruce
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 08:27 AM

Bobert,

Time spent talking during Health care summit:

119 minutes Obama +
113 minutes Democrats

111 minutes Republicans

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: pdq
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 01:37 PM

Obama signs debt limit-paygo bill into law

WASHINGTON
Fri Feb 12, 2010 3:42pm EST


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama signed a law on Friday lifting the U.S. government's borrowing authority to $14.3 trillion and installing a pay-as-you-go rule to curb spending, the White House said.

The U.S. House of Representatives passed the debt limit bill last week, giving it final congressional approval and sending it to the White House for Obama's signature.

The U.S. Treasury was expected within weeks to exceed the current $12.4 trillion government debt limit set in December. Failure to raise the limit would roil financial markets.

The bill also contained 'pay-as-you-go' legislation that requires new spending to be offset with cuts elsewhere.

Democrats, who control the U.S. Congress, crafted the "paygo" language to deflect voter anger over soaring spending and to show they are serious about fiscal responsibility. They say paygo rules helped the country turn budget deficits into surpluses in the 1990s.

Obama has proposed a record $1.56 trillion deficit for fiscal 2010 as he tries to boost growth and jobs, equivalent to 10.6 percent of gross domestic product, but projects this funding gap to have halved as a share of the economy by 2013.

(Reporting by Matt Spetalnick and Alister Bull)

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 03:50 PM

""Note that it was a call for UNANIMOUS consent, NOT a vote. The Dems did NOT want to vote on it. THAT way it could have passed.

""As Democratic senators asked again and again for unanimous consent for a vote on a 30-day extension Thursday night, Bunning refused to go along."


And Bobert's tarring of all Republicans is obviously from a bigotted mind.

"The Senate's GOP leadership did not support him in his objections."

Seems to me that the GOP leadership didn't need to back him. He'd already done the job FOR them.

If it had gone to a vote, the GOP would probably have squashed it anyway (that's what they normally do), only then they would have had to back him.

Same result either way.

Heads the GOP win - Tails the Dems lose.   Same old same old.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: michaelr
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 03:55 PM

I'm amazed that people here are still banging away on that Democrat/Republican red-herring false dichotomy.

Both parties and their elected officials, including Saint Obama, are nothing but shills for the same interest: the super-rich uber-capitalists who have controlled the US economy for over a century. These few people have decided to slam shut the window that opened after WWII and allowed a substantial number of the underclass to ascend to a relatively wealthy middle class status.

Their intent is to starve out the middle class (with whom they don't want to share their profits anymore) by running up such huge federal deficits that severe frugality measures "must" be put in place ("new spending to be offset with cuts elsewhere") - read: cuts in social spending, welfare, education, health and Social Security.

Their intent is to return this country to a feudal state: masses of the poor, controlled by a very few overlords. It's in their interest to keep us fighting about the relative merits of the Republican vs the Democratic Parties because --

-- it keeps us distracted from what's really going on.

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: beardedbruce
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 04:13 PM

"If it had gone to a vote, the GOP would probably have squashed it anyway (that's what they normally do), only then they would have had to back him."

The DEMS have more than 51 votes BY THEMSELVES. IF they thought their OWN members would vote for it, why didn't they try to pass it? IF the Repubs had fillibustered, THEN they could be blamed- but to blame them for the errors of Reid is beneath even you, I would think.

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: Amos
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 04:19 PM

Ad hominem, ad hominem
You form our best gyrations.
Ad hominem, ad hominem
Our brains are your creations.
If facts and logic do not work
We simply call the guy a jerk.
Ad hominem, ad hominem.
You are our one salvation!


A

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: beardedbruce
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 04:30 PM

Amos,

confession is good for the soul. Glad to see you are aware of your own postings.

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: PoppaGator
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 04:37 PM

Speaking of heartless Republicans, boy wonder Governor Bobby Jindal of Louisiana has already turned down Federal unemployment money for the citizens of our state, which has always been among the poorest, and large parts of which are still trying to recover from the hurricanes and floods of '05.

Jindal proclaims out of one side of his mouth that he is "only interested" in fulfilling the duties of his current office, but he sure is spending a lot of time, and raising a LOT of money, flying around the country to collect nice fat fees for speaking to the Republican "base" at Tea Party meetings and other such right-wing events.

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: beardedbruce
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 04:46 PM

"that he is "only interested" in fulfilling the duties of his current office, but he sure is spending a lot of time, and raising a LOT of money, flying around the country to collect nice fat fees "

You mean like Obama did? HOW DARE HE!

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: Amos
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 04:53 PM

"WASHINGTON, March 1 (Reuters) - Unemployment benefits for hundreds of thousands of jobless people ran out on Monday and highway programs across the United States suspended work after a Republican lawmaker prevented their renewal.

As Democrats in Congress sought to bring down the 9.7 percent unemployment rate, favored methods such as highway construction and jobless aid faced disruption after Republican Senator Jim Bunning blocked a short-term extension on the grounds that it would add to the deficit.

Democrats vowed to renew the provisions to minimize bureaucratic disruption and resume jobless payments to the 400,000 people who would otherwise lose them this month.

They also used the delay to criticize other Republican procedural roadblocks that have disrupted Democratic initiatives.

"It is a stark example of the kind of abuse we're seeing from Republicans," said Representative Chris Van Hollen, a member of House of Representatives Democratic leadership.

In the Senate, Democrats took up a job-creation package that would extend unemployment benefits for a year, help states cover spiraling healthcare costs, and renew a popular package of tax breaks that expired at the end of 2009.

A vote on the package, which likely will cost more than $100 billion, could take place this week.

House Democrats struggled to round up enough votes to pass a $15 billion package of tax cuts and highway spending that has cleared the Senate.

"I think we'll get the votes," House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer told Reuters in a telephone interview.

MODIFICATION POSSIBLE

Hoyer must win over black lawmakers who say the Senate bill is too paltry, and fiscal conservatives who say it violates budget rules. He suggested that it may be modified to satisfy those concerns.

Democrats say job creation is their top legislative priority this year as they nervously eye the November elections that could imperil their control of Congress.

Their effort has so far been hampered by Republican tactics, a record-setting snowstorm and tensions between the two chambers of Congress.

Bunning was the lone lawmaker of either party to object to a temporary extension while lawmakers work on more permanent solutions. Senate rules permit any member to hold up legislation.

His objection means that some 400,000 jobless people could lose their unemployment benefits this month and thousands of families could lose the federal health-insurance subsidies, according to the Labor Department.

It furloughs 2,000 federal highway workers without pay and shuts down construction projects across the country, according to the Transportation Department.

It also slashes pay to doctors who see patients under Medicare, the federal health program for the elderly...."

It is so nice he is standing up for principles for once. Maybe electing a Democratic president brought him to a New Awareness of his Conscience which had hitherto been dormant. If so we should do it more often.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 07:14 PM

Unfortunately, this is how they like em in my ol Home State. Rednecked and self-righteous. Bunning and McConnell... what a pair of slimeballs.

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: Bobert
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 07:38 PM

Well, apparently Jim Bunning ain't done yet... NBC reported a while ago that Gentleman Jim flipped the bird to a reporter who was trying to ask him a question??? Me thinks that the guy has some "organic issues" going on associated with the aging process...

But back to an assertion by michaelr about bothe parties being one of the same, 'er something close to that... Well, seems that we have a real difference in ideologies emerging between the two which is probably a good thing...

Now that the Repubs have found themselves out of power they have carved out the "small governement, lower taxes and less regulation" ground to defend... Seesm that this happens every time they are out of power and then they get back in and it's full-bore-ahead as they spend wrecklessly and grow the governement like only they can... Going back since Nixon this has been the case...

So now here we are back to the same old arguments and positions except this time the Repubs really do own the media lock, stock and barrel and have plenty of corporations to throw in unlimited cash to beat back the "regulators"... This is what this is all about folks... The Repubs want no rules for the so-called "free market" and plenty of rules for the working folks, especially women... The Dems say, "Hey, we've seen this movie and the ending sucks" but the Dems just don't have the media access that thr Repubs do so...

...Boss Hog wins and the bottom 95% lose...

And the beat goes on...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: michaelr
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 08:01 PM

...back to an assertion by michaelr about bothe parties being one of the same, 'er something close to that... Well, seems that we have a real difference in ideologies emerging between the two...

They want you to think that. You yourself posted the answer in your very next paragraph. The political theater is part of the distraction so anyone asking hard questions - like "what really happened on 9-11" - or questioning the centralized control of the federal government - can be labeled "lunatic fringe".

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: mousethief
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 08:17 PM

Anybody asking what really happened on 9-11 *IS* the lunatic fringe. If you can look at what is going on, right now, and say that revisiting 9-11 should be given any energy at all, you've got three and one fourths screw loose.

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: michaelr
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 08:22 PM

If you could keep an open mind for a minute or two, you should look at the Architects and Engineers for 9-11 Truth site. There is no way you can just call all these scientifically trained professionals "nuts" and be done with it.

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: katlaughing
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 10:59 PM

Their intent is to return this country to a feudal state: masses of the poor, controlled by a very few overlords.

There has never been an aristocracy as such in the USA. To say "they" want it to return to a feudal state is not accurate. It never was a "feudal state."

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: michaelr
Date: 02 Mar 10 - 02:07 AM

You're being literal, kat. I was speaking metaphorically.

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 02 Mar 10 - 03:34 AM

Apparently some here don't understand that the US Senate has its own rules, different than the House, and neither house follows "Robert's Rules of Order."

Bunning is using the threat of a fillibuster, which simply allows any single Senator to speak until that single Senator chooses to quit talking. A Fillibuster privilege can be declared by any single senator.

It requires a unanimous vote of the Senate to block a fillibuster, and as long as the ONE SINGLE SENATOR who demanded the privilege refuses to agree, there can't be a unanimous vote.

The alternative, despite anything anyone other than that one Senator can do, requires a minimum of four days before any action allowed under the Senate's own rules can occur.

Bunning knows he doesn't have the votes to "win," and his only purpose is to delay passage of the needed temporary funding long enough to cause a (temporary) collapse of the programs needing the funds. He purposefully declared his intent to Fillibuster late enough that it cannot be overturned by any measures "legal" under Senate rules in time to prevent delay of passage of the temporary funding past the existing expiration date.

Once the programs are shut down due to the lack of funds, it will take several weeks to re-start them, at an additional cost that is a large fraction of the funds the temporary funding action should have provided to begin with, so under the pretense of concern about the amount of the expenditures Bunning is single-handedly forcing an increase some estimate at 30% of what the funding bill would have provided.

The most optimistic assessment, from a commentator picked at random, is:

Senate reform, however, could have no better friend than Bunning. Last year, ending the filibuster was a quixotic blogger obsession. Now it's the subject of a petition by the Senate majority whip. Former Republican majority leader Bill Frist says his colleagues are "overdoing" the filibuster. This is how change begins, and without Bunning making clear exactly what the problem is, it would be impossible.

The fillibuster rule is an archaic and destructive "gimmick" that has been used almost exclusively for political purposes destructive to the good of the country and should have been abandoned long ago. (An opinion I believe is shared by most who have looked at what it's done to us - except perhaps for a very few power-crazed Senators.)

John

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: Bobert
Date: 02 Mar 10 - 07:48 AM

Wow, even the folks at Mornin' Joe, a Republican leaning morning political talk show, have been less than kind to one of their own this morning in coming up just short of using the "h word", as in hypocrit, in talking about Bunning...

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: michaelr
Date: 02 Mar 10 - 07:40 PM

Seems the bunny has relented.

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: mousethief
Date: 02 Mar 10 - 07:48 PM

Agree, JohnInKansas. The filibuster used to be used once in a blue moon. It's been used dozens of times in the past year. Something has gone seriously wrong. Time to kill it.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: Bobert
Date: 02 Mar 10 - 08:05 PM

Actually, mouser, it has been used over a hundred times in the last year but...

...who's countin', right???

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: catspaw49
Date: 02 Mar 10 - 08:23 PM

Yeah mouse, I agree.....but how many actual filibusters have there beenately?

This "intent" thing is crap. Let them go ahead with a real old timey filibuster and let's see if that doesn't get a rise out of the populace.   The Repubs say they are giving "Intent" and the Dems run off and hide. You say you're going to do it.....GO FOR IT ASSHOLE!!!!! Let's see how many folks like things being impeded while someone reads the phone book.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: Amos
Date: 02 Mar 10 - 08:31 PM

"awmakers have reached an agreement to end the one-man filibuster by Sen. Jim Bunning, R-Ky., that has blocked an extension of health and unemployment benefits since last week.

The Senate will take a series of votes Tuesday night, culminating in a final vote on the $10 billion bill. The legislation would provide a 30-day extension of federal employment benefits for the unemployed as well as a 65% subsidy to help people who have lost their job pay for health insurance under the COBRA program.

Bunning has argued that the measure should be paid for, which it currently is not. He had previously suggested using leftover money from the economic stimulus bill. On Tuesday, he said he would support a Democratic proposal to end a bio-fuel tax credit for "black liquor," a byproduct of the paper making process, which budget analysts have predicted could save $24 billion over 10 years.

"We cannot keep adding to the debt and passing the buck," Bunning said. "What matters is that we get our spending problems under control."

Throughout the day Tuesday, Democrats had been threatening to keep the Senate open all night, a move that would have forced Bunning to remain on the floor if he wanted to continue to block the measure.    "

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: Bobert
Date: 02 Mar 10 - 08:47 PM

Well, first of all, I'm with Spawzer....

"So you wanta fillibuster??? Bring it on???"

As fir Bunnin??? He has become the darling of the Tea Party... He is their man and expect more and more of his one man wrecking crew until his term is up...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: fumblefingers
Date: 02 Mar 10 - 09:01 PM

How many times and for how long, do you reckon, should unemployment benefits be extended?

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: mousethief
Date: 02 Mar 10 - 09:15 PM

Take the money from the bank fatcat bastards who got us into this mess and are making huge bonuses on our backs, and continue the benefits until the economy -- including employment -- turns around.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: Bobert
Date: 03 Mar 10 - 08:10 AM

Yeah, I'd have to agree with ya', mouser...

The main argument back in 2001 for the tax cuts which went heavily toward the wealthyt is that they would invest that money in creating jobs for the rest of us... Well, that clearly didn't happen... They just bought bigger houses and boats with it... Building houses and boats, while it produces some short term employement for those who build them, is not creating jobs in the long run...

The tax cuts haven't done what the wealthy said they would... Let the tax cuts expire and use that money for the unemployed...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: katlaughing
Date: 03 Mar 10 - 09:09 AM

Instead of a Middle Class, we have a Credit Class...and now many suffer for it. If folks could get to the point of living within their means, the usurers would lose their stranglehold and the power of the people would make a dent.

Subject: RE: BS: Repubs to Unemployed: Tough Sh*t???
From: Amos
Date: 03 Mar 10 - 11:03 AM

That's something has to happen one household at a time. We have never carried Credit Card debt -- we pay the balance in full each month. Even a hasty analysis of the math shows you why--it is a poisonous drain that enslaves you. If you can't afford something without using a credit card, you sure can't afford the credit card debt, either.

Obviously some emergenices have to be handled, but as a general rule best to pay 'em off and never use them for credit past the end of the month.


A