Senate Republicans kill veterans jobs bill

Go said:

Exactly, you should probably look at the Senate Majority Leader first

Click to expand...

I'm looking at every failure who voted against this bill. I hope, at the very least in private, they are embarrassed by it.

Go said:

This was a public sector jobs bill only, what sense does that make? OH YEAH, a great way to show "heartless" Republicans up by the Dems. I'm not fooled, neither should you. Political gamesmanship with the troops, classy!

Click to expand...

Even if it's only public sector jobs, we need roads built, park fixed and many other public sector jobs done.

DirkTheDeac said:

We wonder what was attached to that bill?

Click to expand...

I'm just gonna take a wild guess that you didn't get a chance to read the bill over the past 24 hours and you're just throwing out opinions without having done the work for yourself. Naw, not that...

Go said:

This was a public sector jobs bill only, what sense does that make? OH YEAH, a great way to show "heartless" Republicans up by the Dems. I'm not fooled, neither should you. Political gamesmanship with the troops, classy!

Click to expand...

Well, those are jobs, no? And, if the private sector is as you believe it to be, then it's already hiring vets en-masse, right?

Pubs are doing quite a job of their own showing themselves up as being heartless. No Dems required.

On a semi-related note, I found some of this article to be amusing.

Quote:
-----------
Days after the celebration, as Motsinger applauded the improvements at the reservoir, she pointed to Foxx's "no" vote on the recovery act.

"The necessary improvements that this anniversary was celebrating were part of ARRA, which Mrs. Foxx voted against. This is a good use of federal spending for the people of North Carolina," said Motsinger, a Winston-Salem/Forsyth County Schools board member.

Foxx's campaign spokesman, Aaron Groen, pointed to the nation's $16 trillion debt.

"One of main reasons she voted against it is that we don't have that money," Groen said. "It's all new spending that adds to the debt, and we're putting it on the credit card that your grandkids are going to pay for."

Foxx attended the anniversary celebration because she was invited, Groen said.
-----------

Funny stuff.

bobknightfan said:

Well, then, am I correct in assuming that you opposed the Bush tax cuts....and his war in Iraq.....because he never offered any way to pay for any of that when he proposed them?

Click to expand...

No I didn't. And I was wrong not to, although in fairness then the debt wasn't such a looming issue. I have also gone on record here as saying I think that ALL of the Bush tax cuts need to be allowed to expire AND we need to implement the Buffett rule (passing Simpson-Bowles would be better though).

bobknightfan said:

One reason that the debt is "such a looming issue" now is because people didn't oppose Bush's tax cuts & war in Iraq (without paying for them) ten years ago.

Click to expand...

There are many, many reasons why the debt is such a looming issue. Simply blaming Bush is unproductive and does not fix a thing. I agree that the Bush tax cuts for top earners need to be repealed. But there is nothing we can do about decisions made to go to war in Iraq 10 years ago.

Try living in the present and stop griping about the media's treatment of Howard Dean in 2004, The Clinton Democrats in the DLC, Bush's Iraq war, the election of 1972. the firing of Carl Tacy, etc., etc., etc.

bobknightfan said:

Carl Tacy wasn't fired. Damn, some posters on this board are dense. That fact has only been posted about 20 times now.

Click to expand...

Maybe I missed that because I DON'T GIVE A SHIT ABOUT SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED THIRTY YEARS AGO THAT I CAN DO NOTHING ABOUT AND HAS NO IMPACT ON MY LIFE!

But at least your were able to zero in on the main point in my post. Insightful of you.

Go said:

This was a public sector jobs bill only, what sense does that make? OH YEAH, a great way to show "heartless" Republicans up by the Dems. I'm not fooled, neither should you. Political gamesmanship with the troops, classy!

Click to expand...

So? Jobs are jobs, who cares what sector they're in? That still doesn't make the bill "shifty" - the country needs firefighters, et al.

Try again.

bobknightfan said:

There is no "maybe" about it, and, as I said, it has been posted and explained about 20 times....most recently only a couple of days ago. You evidently saw it somewhere or you wouldn't have included it in your post. You just didn't bother to worry about whether what you were posting was true or not.

Click to expand...

Well, I should at least thank you for making my original point way better than I did.

bobknightfan said:

I understand the point you were making....but I don't pay much attention to posts when the poster is not concerned enough about what he is posting to get his facts straight......especially when those facts have been stated over and over. The fact that a person would deliberately make the decision to include something in his post, but not be concerned enough to state the simple facts about it correctly makes any such post mostly worthless, in my opinion.

Click to expand...

Bob, before your response, without looking it up, I honestly could not tell you whether Tacy was fired, quit, was asked to quit, or whatever. And I don't care. All I know for certain, again without looking it up, is that somewhere around 1982 or 1983 Carl Tacy stopped being the basketball coach at WFU.

I added Tacy to my post to make my point through exaggeration. That your are so obsessed with the fact that I got something wrong relative to an event that occurred thirty years ago just proves my point.

Lighten up.