Dems would never use a shifty bill like this to score easy points in an Election year would they?? naw.
It's REALLY "shifty" to help vets get jobs.
Dems would never use a shifty bill like this to score easy points in an Election year would they?? naw.
If we had an unlimited supply of money I would absolutely agree with you. Unfortunately, we don't. In fact were in the red. Big time. Where do you draw the line? At what point do you decide that balancing the budget might actually be a good idea?
And yes, I absolutely agree with you that increased revenue must be a part of any rational plan to accomplish this. But your argument basically reads, "how dare they not spend money they don't have?"
Which is why they incorporated Republican ideas in this one.
I just posrepped you for your post before this one, so I couldn't give you another one.....but this post deserves a posrep, too!!
The issue was that it was only regarding public sector jobs just so we get both sides of the coin.
I just posrepped you for your post before this one, so I couldn't give you another one.....but this post deserves a posrep, too!!
Threads on this board have gotten to the point where they all follow what has become the liberal posting formula:
Step One - Pick a politically-related news item.
Step Town - Bitch and moan about how the news item illustrates that Republicans are greedy, disgusting, ruining the country, etc.
Step Three - Congratulate each other.
Bunch of liberals giving each other ehand jobs.
Step four - Board conservatives bitch and moan about liberal posters instead of offering counter-arguments and rebuttals to points that liberal posters make.
If we had an unlimited supply of money I would absolutely agree with you. Unfortunately, we don't. In fact were in the red. Big time. Where do you draw the line? At what point do you decide that balancing the budget might actually be a good idea?
And yes, I absolutely agree with you that increased revenue must be a part of any rational plan to accomplish this. But your argument basically reads, "how dare they not spend money they don't have?"
This is one of those things that everybody should agree SHOULD be funded, even if it's at the expense of other programs.
Why don't you balance out the costs of paying Medicaid, food stamps, welfare and other costs versus the amount of money spent on this?
This entire annual program costs THREE HOURS of the defense budget.
How much do you think we'll get back in taxes?
My bad, it's better to give rich people a tax cut they don't need and will bankrupt the country than investing in vets.
While they're at war, you are a terrorist if you don't support them, but when they come home, you're a big government liberal for caring about them.
We started these wars. We were slobbering ourselves all over. Then the vets started coming home without bootstraps. Then the wars dragged on. Now we're tired of the war and the veterans. We'll pretend it's all the democrat's fault.
And for the record, I would be all for mandating that the Pentagon fund this measure through its existing budget, or taking the funding out of the existing defense budget. Tell us how you will pay for it and I will support it 100%.
We wonder what was attached to that bill?
Dems would never use a shifty bill like this to score easy points in an Election year would they?? naw.
A "shifty bill" used to "score easy points in an election year." Sigh.
If you need more evidence that purely partisan considerations are destroying the ability of our leaders to actually govern, look no further.
What about this bill is shifty? Specifically.