Obama: Catastrophe coming if Congress doesn't act

[Parkbandit]

WASHINGTON (AP) - Republicans tried to push back against the ballooning size of President Barack Obama's economic recovery plan Wednesday, even as he warned that the financial crisis will turn into "a catastrophe" if the bill isn't passed quickly.
Obama summoned centrist senators to the White House Wednesday afternoon to discuss a plan to cut more than $50 billion in spending from the measure, which breached the $900 billion barrier in the Senate on Tuesday and appears headed higher.

Republican Sens. Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe of Maine, as well as Ben Nelson, D-Neb., have tentatively agreed to cutting more than $50 billion from the bill, a Nelson spokesman said, though details weren't yet available.

Their effort is central to building at least some bipartisan support for the bill, which has come under increasing attack for too much spending unrelated to jolting the economy right away.

Obama indicated he's amenable to changes.

"No plan is perfect, and we should work to make it stronger," Obama said at the White House Wednesday. "Let's not make the perfect the enemy of the essential. Let's show people all over our country who are looking for leadership in this difficult time that we are equal to the task."

The cost of the plan expanded past $900 billion after the Senate on Tuesday added money for medical research and tax breaks for car purchases. An effort to add $25 billion more for infrastructure projects—which narrowly failed to advance—is likely to be revived.

The cost could go higher Wednesday if a tax break for homebuyers is made more generous.

Sen. Johnny Isakson, R-Ga., is pressing for a tax credit of up to $15,000 for everyone who buys a home this year, at a cost of about $20 billion. The pending measure would award a $7,500 tax credit only to first-time homebuyers.

Taken together, the developments prompted a scolding from the Senate's top Republican.

"At some point, we're going to have to learn to say no," said Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky. "If we're going to help the economy, we need to get a hold of this bill. And making it bigger isn't the answer."

The president rejected some criticisms of the plan: that tax cuts alone would solve the problem, or that longer-term goals such as energy independence and health care reform should wait until afterward.

In remarks at the White House, Obama argued that recalcitrant lawmakers need to get behind his approach, saying the American people embraced his ideas when they elected him president in November.

But Republicans have focused the debate on questionable spending in the bill, pushing down its popularity with complaints about items such as money to combat sexually transmitted diseases, fix problems with the Census and combat the flu.

Some Democrats are griping as well. Rep. Jim Cooper, D-Tenn., a big critic of the measure, told a Nashville radio station that he "got some quiet encouragement from the Obama folks for what I'm doing.... They know its a messy bill and they wanted a clean bill."

Obama has sought each day to ratchet up the pressure on lawmakers, bringing different supportive groups to the White House, scheduling a series of TV interviews, even traveling to a charter school to tout one portion of the bill.

"A failure to act, and act now, will turn crisis into a catastrophe and guarantee a longer recession, a less robust recovery, and a more uncertain future," Obama said in his prepared remarks.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D964UGBG0&show_article=1

I wonder where all the people are that claimed Bush used fear tactics to move popular opinion are...

This bill is so full of pet projects and pork, it smells like shit.

Although, the $15K tax credit could change my mind about buying a home this year.

[Kranar]

Every 3-4 months for like the next year we're going to hear how if another 600 billion dollars isn't charitably donated to the weathiest people on Earth we're going to be headed for a catastrophe.

It's absolutely sickening.

[Parkbandit]

Every 3-4 months for like the next year we're going to hear how if another 600 billion dollars isn't charitably donated to the weathiest people on Earth we're going to be headed for a catastrophe.

It's absolutely sickening.

Well the first 'stimulus' package worked out sooo well.. if 800 BILLION doesn't make a difference.. let's try a TRILLION

Bank of America took a hairy shit yesterday...

[Xaerve]

Socialism sucks. I hope the fan boys are all happy now. He's going to blow through money, increase the deficit in this country and his band-aid isn't going to do shit.

The answer is simple: Tax Cuts. Keep people employed, keep the companies spending money.

[SolitareConfinement]

The answer is simple: Tax Cuts. Keep people employed, keep the companies spending money.

i strongly disagree. i can't even begin to think of an answer for the problem but i know this much. giving us too many tax cuts isn't going to help in the long run. sure it might help immediately however, we are spending a lot of money right now, the government can't keep spending money without taking money back in unfortunately.

[Parkbandit]

i strongly disagree. i can't even begin to think of an answer for the problem but i know this much. giving us too many tax cuts isn't going to help in the long run. sure it might help immediately however, we are spending a lot of money right now, the government can't keep spending money without taking money back in unfortunately.


Wait.. isn't the whole idea of a stimulus package to do just that.. to immediately impact the economy for the better.. and allow the system to rebound?

Paying out 1 TRILLION dollars on pet projects that won't help the economy for years (most of this trillion won't even be put in until 2010... nice stimulus) isn't the answer.

[SolitareConfinement]

Wait.. isn't the whole idea of a stimulus package to do just that.. to immediately impact the economy for the better.. and allow the system to rebound?

Paying out 1 TRILLION dollars on pet projects that won't help the economy for years (most of this trillion won't even be put in until 2010... nice stimulus) isn't the answer.

also agreed

[Stanley Burrell]

Seconded.

Let's roll out.

I challenge ParkBandit to a minivan duel: I will haul ass all over the Florida turnpike in my shaggin' wagon and refuel the economy for each stop I make on my .5mi/gallon.

[Xaerve]

also agreed

Either you did not read my post correctly or did not read PB's response correctly.

Not sure which :) -- (PB Agrees with me).

[SolitareConfinement]

i don't think either is the answer is what i was getting at. generalized tax cuts such as for buying homes could be a start because that is one that will seriously get people thinking about actually buying homes again. but i don't think all around tax cuts OR a stimulus is the answer. we need to find a way to spend less than we are taking in really that's the whole idea of making money.

[Khariz]

I'm thinking about re-titling the article "Khariz: Catastrophe coming if Congress DOES act". Xaerve is right. No more of this bullshit. It doesn't work.

[ClydeR]

It's crazy that this stimulus bill is going to cost nearly as much as the Iraq War when we won't get nearly as much good out of it.

[Parkbandit]

It keeps getting better and better:


WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama warned on Thursday that failure to act on an economic recovery package could plunge the nation into a long-lasting recession that might prove irreversible, a fresh call to a recalcitrant Congress to move quickly.

In an op-ed piece in The Washington Post, the president argued that each day without his stimulus package, Americans lose more jobs, savings and homes. His message came as congressional leaders struggle to control the huge stimulus bill that's been growing larger by the day in the Senate. The addition of a new tax break for homebuyers Wednesday evening sent the price tag well past $900 billion.

Senate Democratic leaders hope for passage of the legislation by Friday at the latest, although prospects appear to hinge on crafting a series of spending reductions that would make the bill more palatable to centrists in both parties.

Obama painted a bleak picture if lawmakers do nothing.

"This recession might linger for years. Our economy will lose 5 million more jobs. Unemployment will approach double digits. Our nation will sink deeper into a crisis that, at some point, we may not be able to reverse," Obama wrote in the newspaper piece titled, "The Action Americans Need."

He rejected the argument that more tax cuts are needed in the plan and that piecemeal measures would be sufficient, arguing that Americans made their intentions clear in the election.

"I reject these theories, and so did the American people when they went to the polls in November and voted resoundingly for change," he wrote.



So he's stating that if his pork laden bill isn't passed right now, the US could easily slip deeper into a depression and might not be able to recover.

That sure doesn't sound like hope or change to me.

[Parkbandit]

It's crazy that this stimulus bill is going to cost nearly as much as the Iraq War when we won't get nearly as much good out of it.

So as long as it costs less than the Iraq War.. then we should simply do it.

Warriorbird.. is that you?

[Back]

I wonder where all the people are that claimed Bush used fear tactics to move popular opinion are...

Yes, PB, you can draw that parallel... it is a questionable move on any leader’s part to say “we’re in deep shit” instead of “relax, we’ve got this” no matter how bad things are going.

But I think most people see this as a very tangible threat that is right on the doorstep as opposed to Saddam Hussien and his legions of faceless terrorists half a world away.

[Mabus]

It did not surprise me to see fear used as a tactic. Loss of confidence by the public has been fueled by this rhetoric even before the election. I did not think that we would see all the political capitol blown in the first month, but it is getting close to being "honeymoon over" for the new administration.

Any stimulus package (imo) should contain infrastructure repair, mortgage relief (through renegotiation, tax relief and counseling) a cut to the corporate tax and investment in small businesses through increased loan guarantees, tax relief and other means.

General tax relief (possibly even a "Tax free Year") for the regular public would also be nice to see, but even a large (and temporary) cut to the taxes of those under $250K could provide some aid in catching up on debt and in increased discretionary spending by the public.

All the pet projects are not germane to the publicly stated intent of the bill and should be stripped from it. Some of the programs have merit, and should be placed into bills whose spending is at least related to their purpose.

[Back]

It did not surprise me to see fear used as a tactic. Loss of confidence by the public has been fueled by this rhetoric even before the election. I did not think that we would see all the political capitol blown in the first month, but it is getting close to being "honeymoon over" for the new administration.

Any stimulus package (imo) should contain infrastructure repair, mortgage relief (through renegotiation, tax relief and counseling) a cut to the corporate tax and investment in small businesses through increased loan guarantees, tax relief and other means.

General tax relief (possibly even a "Tax free Year") for the regular public would also be nice to see, but even a large (and temporary) cut to the taxes of those under $250K could provide some aid in catching up on debt and in increased discretionary spending by the public.

All the pet projects are not germane to the publicly stated intent of the bill and should be stripped from it. Some of the programs have merit, and should be placed into bills whose spending is at least related to their purpose.

Good post. But...

Cuts for the little taxes people under $250k pay does not seem to me to be a way for them to get out from under heavy debt. It would just mean more consumption.

Corporate has enough tax cuts and again any more would not go towards lowering debt. As we have seen it would just go to more consumption ie. Vegas “Spa” weekends for the CEOs.

Cut taxes on small businesses. That will get you the most bang for your buck.

Infrastructure, infrastructure, infrastructure. Putting money into public works to improve everyone’s standard of living is twofold. Not only does it increase everyone’s standard of living it also creates jobs.


I should have directly responded to every line, Mabus. You have some good points and some I disagree with. Hopefully our government can find the middle ground and we can continue not having to worry about the big picture and play video games.

[Parkbandit]

Good post. But...

Cuts for the little taxes people under $250k pay does not seem to me to be a way for them to get out from under heavy debt. It would just mean more consumption.

More consumption = more money spent = stimulus. Isn't that what this bill is supposed to be for?



Corporate has enough tax cuts and again any more would not go towards lowering debt. As we have seen it would just go to more consumption ie. Vegas “Spa” weekends for the CEOs.


We're not lowering the debt with this 1 TRILLION dollar bill.. in fact quite the opposite.



Cut taxes on small businesses. That will get you the most bang for your buck.

Cut all corporate taxes. We're already paying the 2nd highest on the planet. Ireland is a perfect example of what slashing corporate taxes can do for your economy.



Infrastructure, infrastructure, infrastructure. Putting money into public works to improve everyone’s standard of living is twofold. Not only does it increase everyone’s standard of living it also creates jobs.


I'm fine with spending a few hundred billion on infrastructure. It puts people to work and it improves the country. Do it. THAT is stimulus... not like a great majority of the current bill.

[Parkbandit]

Yes, PB, you can draw that parallel... it is a questionable move on any leader’s part to say “we’re in deep shit” instead of “relax, we’ve got this” no matter how bad things are going.

But I think most people see this as a very tangible threat that is right on the doorstep as opposed to Saddam Hussien and his legions of faceless terrorists half a world away.

Much like people didn't know Osama Bin Laden prior to 9-11-01.

[Methais]

I heard a clip of Nancy Pelosi the other day saying something like "With each month that this bill isn't passed, 500 MILLION more Americans will lose their jobs."

Aha, here it is:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8hMJVXt09E

Obama should try doing something himself instead of having Pelosi run this bill for him. That, or admit he's too dumb and inexperienced to run the country.

[Parkbandit]

I heard a clip of Nancy Pelosi the other day saying something like "With each month that this bill isn't passed, 500 MILLION more Americans will lose their jobs."

Aha, here it is:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8hMJVXt09E

Obama should try doing something himself instead of having Pelosi run this bill for him. That, or admit he's too dumb and inexperienced to run the country.


http://forum.gsplayers.com/showthread.php?t=39845

Good morning. Jackass.

[Back]

More consumption = more money spent = stimulus. Isn't that what this bill is supposed to be for?

For people like Sony who got my stimulus check from last year when I bought a PS3.

I don’t think giving someone a check for $600 when they are under, say, a $300k mortgage, $12k car loan, high gas prices, utilities and everything else is a good way to get people out of debt.




We're not lowering the debt with this 1 TRILLION dollar bill.. in fact quite the opposite.

Good point. I would be more comfortable with the idea of paying off the US debt with the money. Get the foreign investors off our backs including dependence on foreign oil. This bill does that somewhat.




Cut all corporate taxes. We're already paying the 2nd highest on the planet. Ireland is a perfect example of what slashing corporate taxes can do for your economy.

Cutting corporate taxes is what I think compiled this mess. We may differ on what “corporate” means. When you say corporate I think of Exxon/Mobile, not Joe’s Plumbing Services.



I'm fine with spending a few hundred billion on infrastructure. It puts people to work and it improves the country. Do it. THAT is stimulus... not like a great majority of the current bill.

We agree.

Now I am going to drop the bomb here that will send you into such a headspin that you may never see straight again.

Leave the provision for the arts. Mount Rushmore.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

I don’t think giving someone a check for $600 when they are under, say, a $300k mortgage, $12k car loan, high gas prices, utilities and everything else is a good way to get people out of debt.

Dude, you can't just give money to people who are living beyond their means. Sell the house and car, get something you can afford. I don't know, be accountable for yourself like I (and the vast majority of Americans) already are.

Good point. I would be more comfortable with the idea of paying off the US debt with the money. Get the foreign investors off our backs including dependence on foreign oil. This bill does that somewhat.

You realize this money isn't real right? This is akin to cycling your credit cards, paying one off with the other.


Cutting corporate taxes is what I think compiled this mess. We may differ on what “corporate” means. When you say corporate I think of Exxon/Mobile, not Joe’s Plumbing Services.

Corp taxes aren't what is driving people into debt. If anything, cutting corp taxes would have likely allowed a non-viable corp to exist longer (and employee people longer). Again, I'd argue that we don't need to bail out businesses at all, natural market conditions will do that if it's a sound business and people do not expect government handouts to help pay for their $500k house on their $40k salary.


Leave the provision for the arts. Mount Rushmore.

I'm cool with that myself. Seems while it isn't exactly rebuilding infrastructure, it would create jobs and I believe improve the economy. Just make sure we aren't blindly throwing money at people, but investing in our nation instead.

[Methais]

http://forum.gsplayers.com/showthread.php?t=39845

Good morning. Jackass.

http://www.halolz.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/goatse.jpg

[Back]

Dude, you can't just give money to people who are living beyond their means. Sell the house and car, get something you can afford. I don't know, be accountable for yourself like I (and the vast majority of Americans) already are.

That was exactly my point. Throwing a few bucks at a middle class under debt isn’t going to do shit. This bill does not do that.



You realize this money isn't real right? This is akin to cycling your credit cards, paying one off with the other.

I’m not so sure about that. Paying off foreign investors and getting off the oil nipple seems to me to be a good start. Why pay rent when you can pay a mortgage?



Corp taxes aren't what is driving people into debt. If anything, cutting corp taxes would have likely allowed a non-viable corp to exist longer (and employee people longer). Again, I'd argue that we don't need to bail out businesses at all, natural market conditions will do that if it's a sound business and people do not expect government handouts to help pay for their $500k house on their $40k salary.

We agree. There is no sense in propping up a failed business with a handout. We have done this on an epic scale last year. Corporate wellfare is what it is called. Bestowing the same tax credits on small businesses would go much further and while may been considered a handout would get things going on the ground.


I'm cool with that myself. Seems while it isn't exactly rebuilding infrastructure, it would create jobs and I believe improve the economy. Just make sure we aren't blindly throwing money at people, but investing in our nation instead.

Thats my main concern. Job creation that reinvests in American quality. Triple fold that by building/renovating schools.

[Gan]

Where do I get in line?

[TheRunt]

This one made me laugh. Pelosi saying there will be no pork in the bill

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AaDtkG6afBc&feature=related

[RainyDay2080]

Any stimulus package (imo) should contain infrastructure repair, mortgage relief (through renegotiation, tax relief and counseling) a cut to the corporate tax and investment in small businesses through increased loan guarantees, tax relief and other means.

General tax relief (possibly even a "Tax free Year") for the regular public would also be nice to see, but even a large (and temporary) cut to the taxes of those under $250K could provide some aid in catching up on debt and in increased discretionary spending by the public.

All the pet projects are not germane to the publicly stated intent of the bill and should be stripped from it. Some of the programs have merit, and should be placed into bills whose spending is at least related to their purpose.

It's making me feel a bit ill to agree with Mabus, but in this particular case: what he said.

[Parkbandit]

This one made me laugh. Pelosi saying there will be no pork in the bill

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AaDtkG6afBc&feature=related

The sad part is.. she honestly believes that the spending on pet liberal projects isn't pork.. but necessary.

[TheWitch]

What I simply cannot wrap my mind around is the following:

How Congress thinks that spending money the country does not have...

Is a sensible and effective way to get us out of a mess....

That was primarily caused by people spending money they did not have.

The conundrum is making me twitch.

[ClydeR]

What I simply cannot wrap my mind around is the following:

How Congress thinks that spending money the country does not have...

Is a sensible and effective way to get us out of a mess....

That was primarily caused by people spending money they did not have.

The conundrum is making me twitch.

Stupid John Maynard Keynes and his pump priming.

[Methais]

http://forum.gsplayers.com/images/reputation/reputation_neg.gifObama: Catastrophe... (http://forum.gsplayers.com/showthread.php?p=883448#post883448) 02-06-2009 11:12 AM Wow. Idiot.

Goatse spore creature > you

http://www.halolz.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/goatse.jpghttp://www.halolz.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/goatse.jpghttp://www.halolz.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/goatse.jpg

It's a good thing you bolded "Idiot" too. Otherwise I might not have known how super serious this is.

[Mabus]

What I simply cannot wrap my mind around is the following:

How Congress thinks that spending money the country does not have...

Is a sensible and effective way to get us out of a mess....

That was primarily caused by people spending money they did not have.

The conundrum is making me twitch.

Only slightly related, but as a funny aside...
...I got this in an email today:

Sometime this year, taxpayers will receive an Economic Stimulus Payment. This is a very exciting new program that I will explain using the Q and A format

"Q. What is an Economic Stimulus Payment?
"A. It is money that the federal government will send to taxpayers.

"Q. Where will the government get this money?
"A. From taxpayers.

"Q. So the government is giving me back my own money?
"A. No, they are borrowing it from China. Your children are expected to repay the Chinese.

"Q. What is the purpose of this payment?
"A. The plan is that you will use the money to purchase a high-definition TV set, thus stimulating the economy.

"Q. But isn't that stimulating the economy of China?
"A. Shut up."

[TheWitch]

Stupid John Maynard Keynes and his pump priming.

It could be Keynesian, if there was more actual pump priming going on and less palm greasing.

[Back]

It could be Keynesian, if there was more actual pump priming going on and less palm greasing.

Its not the palm of the tax payer thats getting greased...

:whistle:

[Skeeter]

fuck it, I'm moving to Canada. I wonder if Beth needs a roommate

[Gan]

BUT ITS AN EMERGENCY FOLKS! NEXT WEEK THE ECONOMY WILL CRASH AND BURN, BILLIONS WILL LOSE THEIR JOBS AND OUR WHOLE SOCIAL SYSTEM WILL BREAK DOWN IN ANARCHY! SO I WONT HAVE ANYTHING TO SPEND MY NEW PAYRAISE ON!

OH THE HORROR!

Thats the crux of the message I hear every time they interview a congressman about the stimulus package...

:facepalm:

PS. Existing home contracts are up 39% in my office this month, REFI orders are up 110% this month.

The lowest REFI rate I've closed on so far as been 4.25% with .875 paid in origination (with no YSP).

Lowest 30 yr. fixed I've closed since the new year has been 4.875% with 1 point (discount, no origination or YSP).

And Chase has moved completely out of the wholesale market. So if you want a chase loan, you have to go to chase and not through a broker.

[Daniel]

Anecdotal evidence is always a good way to prove your point.

[Gan]

Anecdotal evidence is always a good way to prove your point.

And humor is you always thinking that I have to prove a point.

Idiot.

[Daniel]

Oh.. you were just saying? My bad. Congrats on your success. <insert line about you always bragging about how awesome you are>

[Gan]

Oh.. you were just saying? My bad. Congrats on your success. <insert line about you always bragging about how awesome you are>

Nice to see you're out trolling this morning.

Consistency - you're on the top of the pile there.

[Daniel]

Nice to see you're out trolling this morning.

Consistency - you're on the top of the pile there.

You contributed something valuable? You yourself said your speel on your business had no point.

[Gan]

Perhaps you should find someone to explain the difference between participating in a thread and trolling a thread.

[Daniel]

I was participating. Saying anecdotal evidence is not constructive is a valuable contribution. Even more so than cap locked hyperbole. IMO.

[Parkbandit]

I was participating. Saying anecdotal evidence is not constructive is a valuable contribution. Even more so than cap locked hyperbole. IMO.

You're kidding right? You've yet to participate in the thread.. which is about the Stimulus Bill and not about what Gan had for breakfast. Each post of yours is more hypocritical than the last.

Just stop.

Oh.. and save the typical "HERE COMES PB TO DEFEND YOU GAN" post.. because it has nothing to do with Gan and everything to do with you and your typical political bullshit.

[Daniel]

You're kidding right? You've yet to participate in the thread.. which is about the Stimulus Bill and not about what Gan had for breakfast. Each post of yours is more hypocritical than the last.

Just stop.

Oh.. and save the typical "HERE COMES PB TO DEFEND YOU GAN" post.. because it has nothing to do with Gan and everything to do with you and your typical political bullshit.

My political bullshit? Tell me again when this 'recession' started?

Let's not forget you and your political butt buddy were dry humping each other on how this wasn't a recession a few months ago. Now we should take it in stride that you don't believe this is that bad and some action should be taken?no thx.

[Gan]

I was participating. Saying anecdotal evidence is not constructive is a valuable contribution. Even more so than cap locked hyperbole. IMO.

We get it. Your idea of participating is trolling.

[DeV]

All the pet projects are not germane to the publicly stated intent of the bill and should be stripped from it. Some of the programs have merit, and should be placed into bills whose spending is at least related to their purpose.I agree. Especially if jobs and long-term growth are created in the process.

[Daniel]

We get it. Your idea of participating is trolling.

We get it. You don't like people raining on your republican circle jerk parade.

[Parkbandit]

My political bullshit? Tell me again when this 'recession' started?

Let's not forget you and your political butt buddy were dry humping each other on how this wasn't a recession a few months ago. Now we should take it in stride that you don't believe this is that bad and some action should be taken?no thx.


Wait.. can you also tell us the story of why the US doesn't participate in the Kyoto protocol? I never get tired of hearing that.

[Methais]

Obama is into fisting.

[Daniel]

Wait.. can you also tell us the story of why the US doesn't participate in the Kyoto protocol? I never get tired of hearing that.

Well, one of the reasons was Because it would havenjeopardized our military preparedness and operational capacity. If you follow the link in your sig you'll find the testimony to congress saying as much. That may be too much to ask from you though.

[Parkbandit]

Well, one of the reasons was Because it would havenjeopardized our military preparedness and operational capacity. If you follow the link in your sig you'll find the testimony to congress saying as much. That may be too much to ask from you though.


No no no.. tell us again how the US Military uses like 60% of all energy.. which was the main reason. That's my favorite part.

[Keller]

This all reminds me of how glad I am that the FBI arrested Blago so he couldn't appoint a new senator.

Thank GOD he wasn't able to do that.

[Daniel]

No no no.. tell us again how the US Military uses like 60% of all energy.. which was the main reason. That's my favorite part.

For the federal government yea.

[Keller]

For the federal government yea.

There is a difference between not articulating yourself correctly and just making shit up.

PB just makes shit up.

[Rocktar]

Primary reason not to participate in the Kyoto accords, the World Court and other misguided UN led useless feel good crap.

The US Government can make no law, no treaty and no agreement that supersedes the Constitution of the United States.

All of these things seek to make, by treaty, member countries answer to outside authorities without any recourse. Thus, people outside the US would have the right to come in, close companies, extract fines, arrest, convict and jail US Citizens in any location of their choosing, without any recourse by the US Government or US statute. This kind of thing simply isn't good. Arguing to the contrary is really pointless. In addition, the primary goal of the Kyoto accords was to try and punish the US for it's strength and economic size and to "level the field" for developing countries like China, Russia and so on. Fuck that. In the next 10-20 years you will see a quantum shift in how the US makes and uses energy and the rest of the world will be in the race to catch up to us in becomming clean and efficient. Just like everything else, wake the dragon and watch out. Well, if we are lucky, the dragon is awake in regards to clean energy technology and I am pretty sure that there are a lot of clever people in the US that are going to show the rest of the world how it is done.

[Gan]

We get it. You don't like people raining on your republican circle jerk parade.

They say that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

You seriously need to lose the man-crush. I dont roll that way.

[Daniel]

They say that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

You seriously need to lose the man-crush. I dont roll that way.

Actually. It wasn't imitation. It was mockery.

[Stanley Burrell]

It's only a matter of time before Obama the Fearmongerer starts telling us to use duct tape to prevent the terrorists from overdrawing on mortgage loans.

Bastard.

[Gan]

Actually. It wasn't imitation. It was mockery.

Seriously, get off my leg already?

[Daniel]

Seriously, get off my leg already?

That's a little lame don't you think?

[Gan]

That's a little lame don't you think?
Lame? yes and also accurate.

[Daniel]

Lame? yes and also accurate.

Says the guy who "advised" me to never post my picture again because of his leet photoshop skills.

[Parkbandit]

That's a little lame don't you think?


Almost as lame as bumping a 2 day old thread JUST to post that.

[Keller]

Almost as lame as bumping a 2 day old thread JUST to post that.

Some people don't neglect their real life responsibilities for the interwebz.

I'm guessing he didn't post for a couple of days because he had other shit he had to do. Not everyone can e-feud in real time.

[CrystalTears]

It wasn't worth bumping just to post that though.

Just saying.

[Keller]

It wasn't worth bumping just to post that though.

Just saying.

Weren't you the one complaining about how tired that phrase is?

Especially coming from who it came from?

Daniel and Gan mutually hump each other's leg.

Clove and Daniel mutually hump each other's leg.

PB and I mutually hump each other's leg.

Etc.

It's not new. It's not going to change.

[Stanley Burrell]

Some people don't neglect their real life responsibilities for the interwebz.

I'm guessing he didn't post for a couple of days because he had other shit he had to do. Not everyone can e-feud in real time.

The solution is to have less responsibilities.

And to starve your children until they learn how to bring you alcoholic beverages from the refrigerator.

[CrystalTears]

Weren't you the one complaining about how tired that phrase is?

Especially coming from who it came from?

Daniel and Gan mutually hump each other's leg.

Clove and Daniel mutually hump each other's leg.

PB and I mutually hump each other's leg.

Etc.

It's not new. It's not going to change.
Yeah I do hate it, I really don't care who does it. And I guess if it needs to be said that it's a lame thing to say, so be it.

You forgot to say that everyone humps Tsa`ah's leg. He'll be really disappointed that you left him out of the leg orgy.

[Stanley Burrell]

It isn't easy to hump people's legs IRL unless you're really short.

[Keller]

Yeah I do hate it, I really don't care who does it. And I guess if it needs to be said that it's a lame thing to say, so be it.

You forgot to say that everyone humps Tsa`ah's leg. He'll be really disappointed that you left him out of the leg orgy.

I considered listing Tsa'ah, but that would require too many additions to the list. That's actually when I said, "fuck it" and just put etc.

[Gan]

Says the guy who "advised" me to never post my picture again because of his leet photoshop skills.

I actually encouraged you to keep posting more attention whore pictures...

Get it straight.

[Clove]

I actually encouraged you to keep posting more attention whore pictures...

Get it straight.Gan loves new material.

[Daniel]

Yeah I do hate it, I really don't care who does it. And I guess if it needs to be said that it's a lame thing to say, so be it.

You forgot to say that everyone humps Tsa`ah's leg. He'll be really disappointed that you left him out of the leg orgy.

I find it funny that you'd give Tsa'ah shit for it, but it seems alright for Gan to do it.

In any event, I was actually busy this weekend and didn't have time post on these boards. For all of you R-teamers that have an issue with that, you are more than welcome to stop humping my leg. Like, srsly.

[Daniel]

I actually encouraged you to keep posting more attention whore pictures...

Get it straight.

My bad. I apologize for mischaracterizing the specifics of your failed attempts at e-thuggery.

[CrystalTears]

Gan doesn't say it half as much as Tsa does. And yes, I like Gan a whole lot better so I give him more slack.

I also said I understand why you responded after Keller said something, so you can release me now.

[Daniel]

Gan doesn't say it half as much as Tsa does. And yes, I like Gan a whole lot better so I give him more slack.

I also said I understand why you responded after Keller said something, so you can release me now.

Fair enough.

[Gan]

My bad. I apologize for mischaracterizing the specifics of your failed attempts at e-thuggery.

One day I hope to be a RL thug like you.

You are my fucking hero.

/sarcasm

[Daniel]

One day I hope to be a RL thug like you.

You are my fucking hero.

/sarcasm

That's awesome. It's important to have goals in your life.

Maybe then you won't feel the need to be so self important on a message board.

I'm proud of you Gan.

[Gan]

last word

[Keller]

[The] last word [is . . . ]

fail

[Gan]

[:] fail [:]

If you want to go down that road...

[Keller]

[:] fail [:]

If you want to go down that road...

I don't really get your point, but I also didn't get why you would get the last word by trying to ridicule Daniel for needing the last word.

[Gan]

Dont blame your lack of humor on me.

[Keller]

Dont blame your lack of humor on me.

last word

[Gan]

Repetitive jokes arent near as funny as they are the first time...

[Methais]

Instead of arguing how stupid X person is and how smart Y person is, I just want someone on here to convince me why this bill is a good thing and how exactly it is going to fix our economy.

Also, if you mention the word "Bush" anywhere in your post for any reason that doesn't pertain to unshaven vaginas or baked beans, you automatically lose.

[Parkbandit]

Instead of arguing how stupid X person is and how smart Y person is, I just want someone on here to convince me why this bill is a good thing and how exactly it is going to fix our economy.

Also, if you mention the word "Bush" anywhere in your post for any reason that doesn't pertain to unshaven vaginas or baked beans, you automatically lose.

If you don't vote for this stimulus bill, you hate America and want it to fail.

Bush lover.

[Methais]

If you don't vote for this stimulus bill, you hate America and want it to fail.

Bush lover.

Women who don't shave their vaginas are un-American.

[Daniel]

Women who don't shave their vaginas are un-American.

Agreed.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

I liked Obama's address tonight.

[Apathy]

Do you think Michelle Obama shaves her bush?

[Mabus]

I liked Obama's address tonight.
I thought he was a dick when he cut Helen Thomas off from a followup, and his answer to Chuck Todd's question had near nothing to do with the question. He was long winded and rehashed items from previously written speeches.

And for all you people that still believe he is a "great speaker". and questioned my view of his speech disfluencies, watch that conference. More "Uh", "Um", "a...a...a..." then my 9th grade speech teacher would have allowed for a D-.

He is so out of his league, and it shows.

[Sean of the Thread]

I thought he was a dick when he cut Helen Thomas off from a followup, and his answer to Chuck Todd's question had near nothing to do with the question. He was long winded and rehashed items from previously written speeches.

And for all you people that still believe he is a "great speaker". and questioned my view of his speech disfluencies, watch that conference. More "Uh", "Um", "a...a...a..." then my 9th grade speech teacher would have allowed for a D-.

He is so out of his league, and it shows.


Deal with it he's your president for a bit. We all need to sack up and come together this time before we pull a soviet uninon break up.


SACK UP

[Rocktar]

Yeah, just like everyone sacked it up with Bush Jr? Uh huh, fuck that. The guy is a fricking idiot and a Liberal Socialist/Marxist and I am not giving him one fucking micron of slack. You want the highest office in the land, then you better be on your game and tough as shit. He isn't.

[Daniel]

Yeah, just like everyone sacked it up with Bush Jr? Uh huh, fuck that. The guy is a fricking idiot and a Liberal Socialist/Marxist and I am not giving him one fucking micron of slack. You want the highest office in the land, then you better be on your game and tough as shit. He isn't.

Country First: Just a slogan.

[CrystalTears]

And for all you people that still believe he is a "great speaker". and questioned my view of his speech disfluencies, watch that conference. More "Uh", "Um", "a...a...a..." then my 9th grade speech teacher would have allowed for a D-.Right since Bush was so awesome at it. Wait, what?

[Mabus]

Right since Bush was so awesome at it. Wait, what?
What the hell does this have to do with Bush?

Nice diversion.

[CrystalTears]

What the hell does this have to do with Bush?

Nice diversion.
Meaning that you're talking as though we're suddenly stuck with a bad speaker in a president. Bush was fucking awful at it, but that's okay because you supported him. But for some reason Obama sucks because he says Um once in a while? Whatever.

[Mabus]

Meaning that you're talking as though we're suddenly stuck with a bad speaker in a president.
Nope.

He can read a speech, and does decently at rehearsed lines.

Not a "bad speaker", but certainly not the "great speaker" that some have claimed him to be.


Bush was fucking awful at it, but that's okay because you supported him.
Really?

I did not support Bush, and I did not vote for him either election. The first time I saw him speak it was as if the word "INEPT" was flashing in neon on his forehead. Sadly, that impression proved to not be to far from accurate.

So I suppose you will now apologize for being incorrect?


But for some reason Obama sucks because he says Um once in a while? Whatever.
That "says Um" is called "speech disfluency". It is one of the basic mistakes you handle when learning public speaking.

As to "once in a while", watch the video of the press conference with an eye for disfluency and then render your decision. I am correct in this instance, as a viewing (with an open mind) would show.

C-Span Link (http://www.c-span.org/Watch/watch.aspx?MediaId=HP-A-15267)

[CrystalTears]

I think your obsession with his speaking abilities is unnerving.

That is all.

[Mabus]

I think your obsession with his speaking abilities is unnerving.

That is all.
That is a useful tactic, but does not address what was said.

Nor does it apologize for falsely claiming I was a Bush supporter.

When all else fails, use the old standbys, eh?

[CrystalTears]

That is a useful tactic, but does not address what was said.

Nor does it apologize for falsely claiming I was a Bush supporter.

When all else fails, use the old standbys, eh?
My bad then. Seeing as how I've only seen you complain about Obama and not Bush, I'll have to take your word on that. I won't apologize for coming to a logical conclusion for how you've been behaving towards Obama and assuming you were a Bush supporter since you've done nothing but bash Democrats and Obama.

I still believe Obama to be a great speaker, simply because I can listen to him for hours and actually be moved by what he says. If you want to nitpick it down to Um and Uh, that's fine. However something in his delivery was working that got him elected.

[Keller]

Yeah, just like everyone sacked it up with Bush Jr? Uh huh, fuck that. The guy is a fricking idiot and a Liberal Socialist/Marxist and I am not giving him one fucking micron of slack. You want the highest office in the land, then you better be on your game and tough as shit. He isn't.

If he is a dim-witted Marxist -- don't you think that passing nearly a trillion dollar spending bill would be the top of his game? I would hate to see what an intelligent Marxist could accomplish. Shit.

I understand you're stupid, but I didn't think you were this stupid.

[Daniel]

My bad then. Seeing as how I've only seen you complain about Obama and not Bush, I'll have to take your word on that. I won't apologize for coming to a logical conclusion for how you've been behaving towards Obama and assuming you were a Bush supporter since you've done nothing but bash Democrats and Obama.

I still believe Obama to be a great speaker, simply because I can listen to him for hours and actually be moved by what he says. If you want to nitpick it down to Um and Uh, that's fine. However something in his delivery was working that got him elected.


Every human being has some level of disfluency. On average it's less than 10% which Obama is not even close to approaching.

Of course Mabus is being a tool for Obama. Remember when he came here and denied up and down that he wasn't against him? That lasted up until Hillary lost the primary and him and his buddies freaked out because they realized he was for real.

Seriously, Mabus. Get over it. You got less than 4 years to go for another shot. Your time will come.

[Keller]

That is a useful tactic, but does not address what was said.

Nor does it apologize for falsely claiming I was a Bush supporter.

When all else fails, use the old standbys, eh?

So you had a raging hard-on for Bush as well?

I find that hard to believe.

Whether you can honestly say you recognized Bush for what he is or not -- I can promise you that you didn't tramp around to different message boards making any and every reasonable and unreasonable criticism of him. And that's what CT was saying.

I'm sure she'll accept your apology, you sanctimonious little prick.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

I didn't vote for Obama, but I am now an Obama supporter - because I do believe in respecting our president. I also actually LIKE that he says "um" or "ah" once in awhile. The reason I actually enjoyed his conference and the content of it, was that when he stops, and blinks a lot, and says "um", he's THINKING. I loved that when asked some way out question about why we don't allow pictures of the bodies of flag covered servicemen coffins, he said essentially "I don't know, and before I answer that we are researching what the downstream repercussions are before we will change it."

To me, that means he's admittedly not omniscient, and is going to make educated and informed decisions before moving forward setting policies and procedures for our entire country. I don't care if his delivery isn't as smooth as a well polished politician. I think one of his attractive and strong points as our Commander in Chief and leader of the free world IS that he ideally won't bring years of BS to the office. What I care about is the content of his message.

My only detractor from his speech (other than some items I just fundamentally disagree with regards the bailout) was that he said "we" a few times referring to the Democratic party vs. the Republicans. He also said "they" (republicans) are fighting/want credit for tax cuts etc... I don't like that he's putting an us and them mentality to his discussions, but hey... no one can be perfect.

Didn't vote for him, and I still wouldn't, but I think he's doing a fair job so far and ultimately he IS our President, he should be respected if nothing else.

[Wrathbringer]

I didn't vote for Obama, but I am now an Obama supporter - because I do believe in respecting our president. I also actually LIKE that he says "um" or "ah" once in awhile. The reason I actually enjoyed his conference and the content of it, was that when he stops, and blinks a lot, and says "um", he's THINKING. I loved that when asked some way out question about why we don't allow pictures of the bodies of flag covered servicemen coffins, he said essentially "I don't know, and before I answer that we are researching what the downstream repercussions are before we will change it."

To me, that means he's admittedly not omniscient, and is going to make educated and informed decisions before moving forward setting policies and procedures for our entire country. I don't care if his delivery isn't as smooth as a well polished politician. I think one of his attractive and strong points as our Commander in Chief and leader of the free world IS that he ideally won't bring years of BS to the office. What I care about is the content of his message.

My only detractor from his speech (other than some items I just fundamentally disagree with regards the bailout) was that he said "we" a few times referring to the Democratic party vs. the Republicans. He also said "they" (republicans) are fighting/want credit for tax cuts etc... I don't like that he's putting an us and them mentality to his discussions, but hey... no one can be perfect.

Didn't vote for him, and I still wouldn't, but I think he's doing a fair job so far and ultimately he IS our President, he should be respected if nothing else.

Incredibly well said.

[Mabus]

My bad then.
Apology accepted.

Seeing as how I've only seen you complain about Obama and not Bush, I'll have to take your word on that.
I have stated I was not a GW supporter in several threads.

Here is one:

Considering half of "the nation" voted for GW, I find that portion of the statement a bit hard to handle. I did not vote for him (neither time), so while some here might not believe it, I am rather unbiased in that opinion.


I won't apologize for coming to a logical conclusion for how you've been behaving towards Obama and assuming you were a Bush supporter since you've done nothing but bash Democrats and Obama.

And another, with an almost exact statement I made earlier in this little discussion:

I respect the office of the presidency, but I do not respect GW. The first time I saw him speak it was as if a glowing tattoo of "inept" was on his forehead. Sadly, my assessment of him proved correct.

As you can see, I am not a Bush supporter.

I have not bashed everything Democrat, but Obama is inexperienced and untested. We have him, for better or worse, and I certainly wish him the greatest success with the "Clinton cabinet of change".

I still believe Obama to be a great speaker, simply because I can listen to him for hours and actually be moved by what he says. If you want to nitpick it down to Um and Uh, that's fine. However something in his delivery was working that got him elected.
"Great speakers" do not have speech disfluencies when speaking in public. I am sure most (if not all) of you have had some rudimentary classes in public speaking. This is a basic issue that is usually addressed early in any classes.

A speech coach could get rid of Obama's disfluency in under 3 months.

Now there is always the possibility that someone could find it endearing, or even that it softens that "elitist" edge by having him sound like he is your buddy conversing while drinking beer. I did not address that (or other possibilities).

I actually thought people would take offense to the Helen Thomas comment in my response to the press conference, as the speech issue is obvious. I thought her being 87 and using "supposed terrorists" in her initial question would be the defense of the president used by his supporters.

[Mabus]

Seriously, Mabus. Get over it. You got less than 4 years to go for another shot. Your time will come.
You have a serious troll problem. Seek help.

Who was one of the first people to post a congratulations on this board for Obama?

He is the PotUS. The election is over. Are you still rooting for the Cardinals to win the Super Bowl?

We have him, for good or ill, until either the next presidential election or the end of his second term. Success for him means success for our country, and I want our country to succeed.

[CrystalTears]

:banghead:

[Methais]

http://forum.gsplayers.com/showpost.php?p=886393&postcount=88

[Mabus]

http://forum.gsplayers.com/showpost.php?p=886393&postcount=88
The current bill will not fix the economy.

Treasury announces their plan, "Stimulus" bill passes the Senate and the market drops over 380 points.

The only way to get out of this cycle is to produce our way out of it, and there is no plan to do so in any current federal plan. Investors have pulled much of their money from our markets, and without capitol there will not be the new and substantial investments needed.

[Back]

What about the old capitalist adage... you have to spend money to make money? All businesses have some expense before they see a return on their investment.

[BriarFox]

The current bill will not fix the economy.

Treasury announces their plan, "Stimulus" bill passes the Senate and the market drops over 380 points.

You really can't gauge the efficacy of a stimulus bill by what a crazy-ass futures market is doing, if there's even a causal connection and not just a supposed one.

[Methais]

What about the old capitalist adage... you have to spend money to make money? All businesses have some expense before they see a return on their investment.

Investing in TV tuners isn't gonna have much return, unless you bank your advertising on people in the projects and section 8 housing that can't afford cable.

[Daniel]

Investing in TV tuners isn't gonna have much return, unless you bank your advertising on people in the projects and section 8 housing that can't afford cable.

Why is that Methais? If people are in the projects or on section eight then they have a MPC of 100% most likely. That means any money you give them will almost immediately be put right back into the economy.

[DeV]

Investing in TV tuners isn't gonna have much return, unless you bank your advertising on people in the projects and section 8 housing that can't afford cable.You do realize the government was giving out converter box coupons long before it was included in this stimulus package? Plus, you're assuming a whole lot of families who live in the projects and section 8 do not already have cable television and digital tv's to watch it on.

[Parkbandit]

Was there any type of check you had to go through in order to get that coupon for a converter? Or is it like every government handout program.. completely abused?

[DeV]

I'm not sure. I do know they were also being sold in stores and became sold-out in lots of places at some point. Production had to be re-started once it became evident that there was still a high demand for the boxes.

[Parkbandit]

Ah.. here's the website:

https://www.dtv2009.gov/ApplyCoupon.aspx

Looking at the application, there is no income check of any sort.. just fill out your name and address and tell about your TV service.

Well gee.. let me guess.. another government program that had the shit abused out of it and the answer is: PUSH MORE MONEY TOWARDS IT!!!!!

[Methais]

THIS JUST IN:
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a162/DoyleHargraves/Obamabrain.jpg

[Warriorbird]

How exactly would one profiteer off converter boxes? As stupid as the whole thing is?

(America could do with less tv.)

[Methais]

THIS ALSO JUST IN:

http://www.omnomnomnom.com/

Refresh it.

[Parkbandit]

HURRY, FELLAS, LET'S VOTE, I AM OFF TO ROME!
Fri Feb 13 2009 09:18:52 ET

Rep. John Culberson, TX claims the "stimulus" bill must be urgently voted on today -- because Speaker Nancy Pelosi is leaving at 6:00 PM for an 8 day trip to Europe!

Culberson made the charge on Houston's KSEV radio.

Pelosi is hoping to lead a delegation to Europe; there's a meeting with the Pope and an award from an Italian legislative group.

Calls to Pelosi's spokesman went unreturned.

In the rushing, Democrats have now broken their promise to have the public see the $790 billion bill for 48 hours before any vote.

Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) predicted that none of his Senate colleagues would 'have the chance' to read the entire final version of the 1,071-page bill before it comes up for a final vote.


http://drudgereport.com/flashpr.htm

So wait..

There is a rule in Congress that there won't be a vote for 48 hours so the members can actually read the bills they are signing.. but this one is soooo important that they don't have to read the thing?

Why does this thing feel like it's being shoved up our collective asses? What else is hidden in this bill that they want it approved before the public can actually read it?

[Mabus]

In the rushing, Democrats have now broken their promise to have the public see the $790 billion bill for 48 hours before any vote. nt it approved before the public can actually read it?
That was more then a promise, it was a unanimous House vote. The House Parliamentarian said there was no recourse for the House Democrats of the conference committee breaking the rule the House had previously (and unanimously) set for them.

But who needs 48 hours to read through over 1,100 pages?

[Stanley Burrell]

The NIH is getting a bit of money so my faith in 95% of why I voted for him has been rewarded. Huzzah.

Also, Amtrak will still be getting bailed out even after cockroaches and rats are the only surviving organic lifeforms post-nuclear apocalypse.

[Methais]

Curious....what happens if the republicans are just like FUCK YOU WE'RE NOT VOTING UNTIL WE READ THIS SHIT!!!!!!11 ?

Not that they actually have the balls to do that, but I'm still curious what would happen.

Someone needs to murder Pelosi.

[Stanley Burrell]

Curious....what happens if the republicans are just like FUCK YOU WE'RE NOT VOTING UNTIL WE READ THIS SHIT!!!!!!11 ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZMwKPmsbWE

[Mabus]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZMwKPmsbWETom Price on the "Non-Stimulus" Bill from this morning. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A68eWFAbClA&eurl=http://beltwayblips.dailyradar.com/video/chairman_tom_price_with_1_073_page_non_stimulus_te xt/&feature=player_embedded)

If there are more of these hand-written changes in a 1,000+ page bill, and they were forced to vote on it this afternoon, that shows what kind of bill it is.

Disgusting.

[Gan]

HURRY, FELLAS, LET'S VOTE, I AM OFF TO ROME!
Fri Feb 13 2009 09:18:52 ET

Rep. John Culberson, TX claims the "stimulus" bill must be urgently voted on today -- because Speaker Nancy Pelosi is leaving at 6:00 PM for an 8 day trip to Europe!

Culberson made the charge on Houston's KSEV radio.

Pelosi is hoping to lead a delegation to Europe; there's a meeting with the Pope and an award from an Italian legislative group.

Calls to Pelosi's spokesman went unreturned.

In the rushing, Democrats have now broken their promise to have the public see the $790 billion bill for 48 hours before any vote.

Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) predicted that none of his Senate colleagues would 'have the chance' to read the entire final version of the 1,071-page bill before it comes up for a final vote.


http://drudgereport.com/flashpr.htm

So wait..

There is a rule in Congress that there won't be a vote for 48 hours so the members can actually read the bills they are signing.. but this one is soooo important that they don't have to read the thing?

Why does this thing feel like it's being shoved up our collective asses? What else is hidden in this bill that they want it approved before the public can actually read it?

Obviously this is all rhetoric hyperbole because you pulled it from Drudge...

[Daniel]

Curious....what happens if the republicans are just like FUCK YOU WE'RE NOT VOTING UNTIL WE READ THIS SHIT!!!!!!11 ?

Not that they actually have the balls to do that, but I'm still curious what would happen.

Someone needs to murder Pelosi.

The democrats have the ability to vote it through anyway.

Too bad for republicans. Guess you'll take managing the country seriously next time you get the chance.

[875000]

The democrats have the ability to vote it through anyway.

Too bad for republicans. Guess you'll take managing the country seriously next time you get the chance.

I guess we'll have to. There is no greater collection of clowns than this current congressional class, and the stimulus bill is one giant joke.

[Stanley Burrell]

Tom Price on the "Non-Stimulus" Bill from this morning. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A68eWFAbClA&eurl=http://beltwayblips.dailyradar.com/video/chairman_tom_price_with_1_073_page_non_stimulus_te xt/&feature=player_embedded)

If there are more of these hand-written changes in a 1,000+ page bill, and they were forced to vote on it this afternoon, that shows what kind of bill it is.

Disgusting.

I think the problem is that each and every politician became so accustomed to forking over money/unilaterally vetoing, without using any nervous tissue higher than the spinal cord, during our last administration, that congress has a serious problem right now:

They can't read good.

I mean, c'mon Mabus, Nancy Pelosi was made Speaker during Bush II. I'm sure Obama somehow transcended linear space-time to make that possible as well.

.

All in all, you gotta give Obama some props for chopping down trees though. Let's be reasonable.

[Mabus]

I mean, c'mon Mabus, Nancy Pelosi was made Speaker during Bush II. I'm sure Obama somehow transcended linear space-time to make that possible as well.
Two years of her "leadership" has done wonderful things for the mice of California and our economy.

What I was referring to was that the House voted to post the conference bill for 48 hours before a vote would be taken. They voted to do so unanimously. 48 hours is not a lot of time, but time enough to read the 1,000+ page bill.

Then they disregarded the unanimous vote taken only 2 days earlier and pushed the bill through, without giving members (or the public or media) a chance to review it.

Pelosi not only broke her word, she went against a unanimous House vote, but she got the $30,000,000 slice of cheese for her California mouse.

But at least she can take it down to LA, and catch the new $8,000,000,000 rail from there to Las Vegas to meet Senator Reid.

No pork, earmarks or special projects in this one. It is all stimulus.

[Stanley Burrell]

Two years of her "leadership" has done wonderful things for the mice of California and our economy.

What I was referring to was that the House voted to post the conference bill for 48 hours before a vote would be taken. They voted to do so unanimously. 48 hours is not a lot of time, but time enough to read the 1,000+ page bill.

Then they disregarded the unanimous vote taken only 2 days earlier and pushed the bill through, without giving members (or the public or media) a chance to review it.

Pelosi not only broke her word, she went against a unanimous House vote, but she got the $30,000,000 slice of cheese for her California mouse.

But at least she can take it down to LA, and catch the new $8,000,000,000 rail from there to Las Vegas to meet Senator Reid.

No pork, earmarks or special projects in this one. It is all stimulus.

You're right. It doesn't matter, it got the job done. Capitalizing on the stupidity of people who don't want to read, while they say "this is unfair" waving a hefty stack of dead trees, is exactly how I think this measure is awesome.

Obama could do this until the cows come home and I really don't care if it's a more eloquent way of mirroring the by-hook-or-by-crook methods of passing paperwork that we saw for the last 8 years prior.

I actually like this better as a whole, because I don't like politicians very much in general, and I think if this forces them to do something as unpleasant as getting off their asses and reading -- Then it's fucking ace.



Plus it got passed. Wait, wait, wait!! -- No. It got passed.

[TheWitch]

Could the Obama, if he were so inclinded, line-item veto that which he vowed to keep out of this bill, ie the $8B strip of bacon previously mentioned?

Just curious....

Someone does have to build that...and CA is in the hurtbag. Two sides....

[Parkbandit]

Could the Obama, if he were so inclinded, line-item veto that which he vowed to keep out of this bill, ie the $8B strip of bacon previously mentioned?

Just curious....

Someone does have to build that...and CA is in the hurtbag. Two sides....

You think Obama will stand up to Pelosi/Reid?

Unlikely.

[Mabus]

if it's a more eloquent way of mirroring the by-hook-or-by-crook methods of passing paperwork that we saw for the last 8 years prior.

I was not "for" the spending bills or policies of the last 8 years either.

If you want to debate House violations of trust (of its own membership and the citizens), lack of true bipartisanship (except in released propaganda), practically worthless spending and a lack of clarity in legislation by comparing the Obama administration and tactics to those of GW Bush's as a defense of the current procedures that is, of course, your call.

Or you could just post some tangential craziness and make me smile. I actually enjoy your posts.

[Mabus]

Could the Obama, if he were so inclinded, line-item veto that which he vowed to keep out of this bill, ie the $8B strip of bacon previously mentioned?

Just curious....

Spending and taxation bills (usually) originate in the House, are sent to the Senate, go through Conference between the two houses of Congress, are voted on again by each house, and then must be accepted, or vetoed, in toto by the President.

Line-item veto does not exist for the PotUS.

Though there are those ugly little "executive order" flaps and "findings" where an administration refused to fully follow the intent of the law.

And one president even reportedly said (about a SCotUS decision) "they have made their decision, now let them enforce it".

So there are some legal "gray" areas in Executive power to follow the actions outlined in passed legislation and court orders.

[Stanley Burrell]

If you want to debate House violations of trust (of its own membership and the citizens), lack of true bipartisanship (except in released propaganda), practically worthless spending and a lack of clarity in legislation by comparing the Obama administration and tactics to those of GW Bush's as a defense of the current procedures that is, of course, your call.

I absolutely hope that Obama uses, like I said, the exact same unilateral paper-pushing, no matter what the guise is, to essentially reverse 90% of what the previous administration has done.

And to be honest, GWB and Co. helped build a new stepping stone in American politics of a more acceptable standard of toe-stepping as far as acceleration of money movement and fund-freezing.

The difference I see, is that if you are truly a supporter of the financial conservation of wealth, to applaud our last president for turning a surplus into a deficit, and then proceeding to place an unrealistic standard that Obama is going to be able to live up to absurd expectations of instantly fixing the economy is, essentially, like sticking one's head up their ass, having their face come out their mouth -- And then contorting your body in such a way, that you're able to fully wrap your already gastrointestinally inverted body up your self-penetrated anus once more.

We don't have a Born-Again idiot hellbent on the evil of stem cells. We have someone who just gave money to The NIH. I don't give a fuck how they did it, they just did something more beneficial for society than what was done since Bush II unilaterally vetoed RU-486, before he actually used his first veto 7 years later (et al. The Media.)

So long as N. Korea doesn't nuke us and we declare a multi-trillion dollar war on Chavez, I will now be voting for this more competent Oval Office executive again.

And to be honest, I'm tired of a society that favors the work of scabs; from jumpsuits to suit and ties, as opposed to employing a more adequately-trained American workforce: I could run my mouth as easily as Rush and do his job for him if I popped that many Oxycodones. That isn't the type of Jerry Springer work ethic that I'm going to reward and provide the majority of an economic stimulus to as an American who gives a shit about our society.

[Daniel]

And to be honest, I'm tired of a society that favors the work of scabs; from jumpsuits to suit and ties, as opposed to employing a more adequately-trained American workforce: I could run my mouth as easily as Rush and do his job for him if I popped that many Oxycodones. That isn't the type of Jerry Springer work ethic that I'm going to reward and provide the majority of an economic stimulus to as an American who gives a shit about our society.

QFT

[Mabus]

The difference I see, is that if you are truly a supporter of the financial conservation of wealth, to applaud our last president for turning a surplus into a deficit,
The you do not "see".

I am not, and have not been, a supporter of GW.

Because I hold each group at a time responsible for their own actions I do find fault with the current way the current legislation was passed.

Now you can blame George Washington for how the drapes were hung, but it does not make not reading a bill before passing it (especially since it is the largest amount spent at once in a single piece of legislation in the history of the world) in violation of previous agreements the correct method of doing business in our country.

I would like to believe that my representatives at least read a bill before the yeas and nays. This example does not support the belief that they do so.

[Daniel]

I would like to believe that my representatives at least read a bill before the yeas and nays. This example does not support the belief that they do so.

I'd like to believe that my representatives have competent staffs that can help them sift through a large document without having to wait weeks to respond to it.

[LMingrone]

Honestly, blame it all on Gen-X. They all got crazy thinking that all their investments we're going to make them millions (most of my family included).

Damn, me and my father bought a house for 269k about ten years ago, rebuilt it from the bottom up, and now (because of a divorce) it's selling for only 310k. A few years ago the house was appraised at somewhere around 600k.

I was telling everyone I knew. "dont worry, things will recover." Now I'm realizing that this might be a worse situation than even I thought.

I have a chance, right now, to buy a three family home for $50,000, and I'm scared to even try at this point in time.

[Stanley Burrell]

The you do not "see".

I am not, and have not been, a supporter of GW.

Because I hold each group at a time responsible for their own actions I do find fault with the current way the current legislation was passed.

Now you can blame George Washington for how the drapes were hung, but it does not make not reading a bill before passing it (especially since it is the largest amount spent at once in a single piece of legislation in the history of the world) in violation of previous agreements the correct method of doing business in our country.

I would like to believe that my representatives at least read a bill before the yeas and nays. This example does not support the belief that they do so.

George Washington, eh?

Maybe when our state representatives are as united as they were upon agreeing on something, like, the Declaration of Independence, then I too would also like to believe my senators wouldn't stagnate like a pool of piss, Mabus, if this hadn't been presented in the physical form of a 1,400 page document so that this tactic wouldn't even have to be a reality to be deployed in order to move moneys.

Unfortunately, I can't snap my fingers and make the ideal nicety of congress operating at 110% capacity in a world where this sort of technique didn't need to be utilized to light a fire under the ass of Capitol Hill's elected benchwarmers exist in the first place (as a subsequent reality of how a bill is even supposed to pass in the 21st century.) You can talk about fairy-land as much as you like, this is how Obama had to make it pass. Do I think it's pretty and decorated with a pink ribbon and put in a fancy box? No. Do I think that if this was catered to each and every congressional leaders' approval, would it have passed within the next century? ...

[875000]

I'd like to believe that my representatives have competent staffs that can help them sift through a large document without having to wait weeks to respond to it.

So let me get this straight. You believe that your representative has a crack team of staffers at his or her disposal who somehow have the ability to read 1100 pages of text in less than 12 hours, comprehend all of the cross-referencing in the bill, and somehow check how it interacts with the US tax code and other laws?

And, before you say yes, it was estimated that you would have to be able to read approximately 640 words per minute in order to accomplish this feat. And, keep in mind splitting it up isn't going to work -- it's not a linear document.

I suppose we should look on the bright side. At least Pelosi doesn't have to worry about her job responsibilities interfering with her trip to Rome.

[Back]

So let me get this straight. You believe that your representative has a crack team of staffers at his or her disposal who somehow have the ability to read 1100 pages of text in less than 12 hours, comprehend all of the cross-referencing in the bill, and somehow check how it interacts with the US tax code and other laws?

And, before you say yes, it was estimated that you would have to be able to read approximately 640 words per minute in order to accomplish this feat. And, keep in mind splitting it up isn't going to work -- it's not a linear document.

I suppose we should look on the bright side. At least Pelosi doesn't have to worry about her job responsibilities interfering with her trip to Rome.

I disagree. You said its not a linear document. There are sections.

If you had as few as 10 people they could easily consume 110 pages each and give valid analysis under 12 hours.

If you had as few as 5 people they could do 220 pages.

At least I would hope they were able too. I myself would not tolerate a staff that small who could not and start looking for people who could.

[875000]

I disagree. You said its not a linear document. There are sections.

If you had as few as 10 people they could easily consume 110 pages each and give valid analysis under 12 hours.

If you had as few as 5 people they could do 220 pages.

At least I would hope they were able too. I myself would not tolerate a staff that small who could not and start looking for people who could.

Except that the document references itself, the US tax code, and associated laws, which basically makes it impossible to split up and completely understand its implications. It -- and its sections -- are not stand-alone. Plus, the document was released at 11 PM. That basically means the readers would have to pull an all-nighter, which is not exactly conducive to doing an in depth analysis.

[TheRunt]

George Washington, eh?

Maybe when our state representatives are as united as they were upon agreeing on something, like, the Declaration of Independence, then I too would also like to believe my senators wouldn't stagnate like a pool of piss, Mabus, if this hadn't been presented in the physical form of a 1,400 page document so that this tactic wouldn't even have to be a reality to be deployed in order to move moneys.

Huh? It took a month from when the resolution was introduced till congress declared independence. Almost 2 mo. for it to be officially signed. An right about 6 mo. for congress to order it be sent to the states.
http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/timeline.htm

Which could be almost considered quick when you look at things like the constitution and bill of rights. The constitution took over a year from when it was written to when it was ratified by 9 of the states. And the bill of rights was somewhere around 2 years from when it was introduced to when it was ratified.

[Parkbandit]

I'd like to believe that my representatives have competent staffs that can help them sift through a large document without having to wait weeks to respond to it.

I'd like to believe my representatives when they state that they would not vote on a bill without first giving themselves and the American public a lousy 48 hours to read it.

[Parkbandit]

I could run my mouth as easily as Rush and do his job for him if I popped that many Oxycodones.

You may wish to believe that.. as most of your posts aren't based in a sober reality anyway.. but you couldn't do his or anyone else's job. Dude, you live in Mommy's basement... and it's not because you are this fantastic radio talent that just hasn't been discovered yet.

[Parkbandit]

I have a chance, right now, to buy a three family home for $50,000, and I'm scared to even try at this point in time.

Why are you scared? Are you going to flip the house?

If you can afford to buy and hold onto real estate.. now is the time to do it. The system will rebound, regardless of how the drunken sailors in Washington are trying to spend us out of a recovery. Heck.. buy it and rent it out for a while.. the rental market is getting stronger due to people being foreclosed upon.

[Parkbandit]

I disagree. You said its not a linear document. There are sections.

If you had as few as 10 people they could easily consume 110 pages each and give valid analysis under 12 hours.

If you had as few as 5 people they could do 220 pages.

At least I would hope they were able too. I myself would not tolerate a staff that small who could not and start looking for people who could.


Have you even cracked it open yet? Give it a try. Start reading it at midnight one night and tell me how far you get.. tell me how familiar you were with it by 9am.. so familiar with it that you could vote to spend a TRILLION DOLLARS of taxpayer money the next morning.

[Gan]

I'd like to believe that my representatives have competent staffs that can help them sift through a large document without having to wait weeks to respond to it.
Yea, I believe W had the same approach when he was briefed on Hussein and Iraq too.


I'd like to believe my representatives when they state that they would not vote on a bill without first giving themselves and the American public a lousy 48 hours to read it.
Or give their constituency a chance to respond to their representatives before ramroding this through.

[Daniel]

Yea, I believe W had the same approach when he was briefed on Hussein and Iraq too.



Yea. Too bad he ignored his staff and created a new one that would tell him what he wanted to hear.

That said, where the fuck does that come from?

[Daniel]

So let me get this straight. You believe that your representative has a crack team of staffers at his or her disposal who somehow have the ability to read 1100 pages of text in less than 12 hours, comprehend all of the cross-referencing in the bill, and somehow check how it interacts with the US tax code and other laws?

And, before you say yes, it was estimated that you would have to be able to read approximately 640 words per minute in order to accomplish this feat. And, keep in mind splitting it up isn't going to work -- it's not a linear document.

I suppose we should look on the bright side. At least Pelosi doesn't have to worry about her job responsibilities interfering with her trip to Rome.


Uh.

First off: What cross referencing parts are you talking about? The bill itself is broken into sections that easily lend themselves to people with particular expertise. I wouldn't expect my energy guy to read the part on military facilities as an example.

Besides, they should already be well enough versed in what is being talked about.

We aren't asking them to re-learn algebra. It's not like all of these things were willed out of thin air in 48 hours.

Even if all 1200 pages are chock full of novel ideas and never before discussed issues, they should have been well enough engaged in the process to know what was being discussed and what was going to be put forward. You act as if this hasn't been on the table and hasn't been discussed in some form for months.

So. Yea. I do expect that.

It's called being on top of your job and not bitching because someone actually asked you to do it.

[Daniel]

Except that the document references itself, the US tax code, and associated laws, which basically makes it impossible to split up and completely understand its implications. It -- and its sections -- are not stand-alone. Plus, the document was released at 11 PM. That basically means the readers would have to pull an all-nighter, which is not exactly conducive to doing an in depth analysis.

Like I said. If you're my energy guy in the house I fully expect you to know all relevant tax codes, US laws and relevant references before I tell you to read a document and tell me what you think.

[Parkbandit]

Yea. Too bad he ignored his staff and created a new one that would tell him what he wanted to hear.


OMG BUSH LIED AND PEOPLE DIED!!!!

[875000]

Like I said. If you're my energy guy in the house I fully expect you to know all relevant tax codes, US laws and relevant references before I tell you to read a document and tell me what you think.

Fine. Let's just take the Tax Code, which you claim your tax expert should be proficient in.

According to the US Government Printing Office, it's 13,458 pages in total (in printed form). The full text of Title 26 of the United States Code is a mere 3,387 printed pages, bringing the adjusted gross page count to 16,845. That's just the tax code -- it does not include any associated laws that also might be impacted. One human being -- or even a team of them -- are not going to be able to sift through thousands of pages in less than 10 hours and understand how they impact one another.


Besides, they should already be well enough versed in what is being talked about. We aren't asking them to re-learn algebra.

Yeah, when a document is as easy to read as the snipplet below shows, at 3:00 AM an underpaid staffer hyped up on Red Bull and Nodoze should have had been able to understand it in seconds.


(a) IN GENERAL.-Subparagraph (H) of section
172(b)(1) is amended to read as follows:
"(H) CARRYBACK FOR 2008 NET OPERATING
LOSSES OF SMALL BUSINESSES.-
"(i) IN GENERAL.-If an eligible small
business elects the application of this subparagraph
with respect to an applicable
2008 net operating loss-
"(I) subparagraph (A)(i) shall be
applied by substituting any whole
number elected by the taxpayer which
is more than 2 and less than 6 for '2',
"(II) subparagraph (E)(ii) shall
be applied by substituting the whole
number which is one less than the
whole number substituted under subclause
(I) for '2', and
"(III) subparagraph (F) shall not
apply.
"(ii) APPLICABLE 2008 NET OPERATING
LOSS.-For purposes of this subparagraph,
the term 'applicable 2008 net
operating loss' means-
"(I) the taxpayer's net operating
loss for any taxable year ending in
2008, or
"(II) if the taxpayer elects to
have this subclause apply in lieu of
subclause (I), the taxpayer's net operating
loss for any taxable year beginning
in 2008.
"(iii) ELECTION.-Any election under
this subparagraph shall be made in such
manner as may be prescribed by the Sec- .
retary, and shall be made by the due date
(including extension of time) for filing the
taxpayer's return for the taxable year of
the net operating loss. Any such election,
once made, shall be irrevocable. Any election
under this subparagraph may be made
only with respect to 1 taxable year.
"(iv) ELIGIBLE SMALL BUSINESS.For
purposes of this subparagraph, the
term 'eligible small business' has the
meaning given such term by subparagraph
(F)(iii), except that in applying such subparagraph,
section 448(c) shall be applied
by substituting '$15,000,000' for
'$5,000,000' each place it appears."


You act as if this hasn't been on the table and hasn't been discussed in some form for months.

And you act as if this is a static document. It was constantly being modified and rewritten as people haggled in small groups behind closed doors. Representative Tom Price even pointed out that the bill was being changed right up to printing, forcing people to amend it by hand!

So let's recap. Again. A document with more than 1000 pages. Which is supposed to be vital to our country's interests. Continiously modified. That should be cross referenced against tens of thousands of pages of laws (not exactly light reading). With a deadline of 10 hours of analysis. After 11:00 PM.

This is not a question of whether or not it should have been read and analyzed. It's a question of whether or not it could be analyzed given the unreasonable deadline.

[Daniel]

OMG BUSH LIED AND PEOPLE DIED!!!!

Your buddy Gan brought it up PB. Not me.

Try again.

[Daniel]

Fine. Let's just take the Tax Code, which you claim your tax expert should be proficient in.

According to the US Government Printing Office, it's 13,458 pages in total (in printed form). The full text of Title 26 of the United States Code is a mere 3,387 printed pages, bringing the adjusted gross page count to 16,845. That's just the tax code -- it does not include any associated laws that also might be impacted. One human being -- or even a team of them -- are not going to be able to sift through thousands of pages in less than 10 hours and understand how they impact one another.



Hence. The utilization of the adjective "competent".

If that's your job, then I fully expect you to know relevant portions of the law that applies to your job.

I damn sure don't expect you to be cracking up the US legal code for the first time whenever you get a monumental bill on your table. Hopefully that was accomplished when you were in Law School and\or when you passed the bar, or AT LEAST when you got hired for the job.






And you act as if this is a static document. It was constantly being modified and rewritten as people haggled in small groups behind closed doors. Representative Tom Price even pointed out that the bill was being changed right up to printing, forcing people to amend it by hand!

So let's recap. Again. A document with more than 1000 pages. Which is supposed to be vital to our country's interests. Continiously modified. That should be cross referenced against tens of thousands of pages of laws (not exactly light reading). With a deadline of 10 hours of analysis. After 11:00 PM.

This is not a question of whether or not it should have been read and analyzed. It's a question of whether or not it could be analyzed given the unreasonable deadline.

Thanks for ignoring EVERYTHING I said about the fact that this wasn't just dropped on peoples lap.

If someone crosses out 100 million and puts 150 million, how does that impact the relevant laws and considerations associated with the provision?

I'll save you the trouble of responding: It doesn't.

[Parkbandit]

I didn't realize that each representative had multiple individuals very well versed in the US Tax Code to read, decipher and disseminate this entire bill to each Representative that voted on it.

That would be well over 5000 people Daniel would lead us to believe worked overnight to read/understand this bill as well as properly inform the Representative on it.

Awesome fairy tale.

[875000]

http://www.nypost.com/seven/02152009/news/nationalnews/whats_the_rush__155255.htm


After pushing Congress for weeks to hurry up and pass the massive $787 billion stimulus bill, President Obama promptly took off for a three-day holiday getaway.

Obama arrived at his home in Chicago on Friday, and treated wife Michelle to a Valentine's Day dinner downtown last night. The couple was spotted leaving upscale Table Fifty-Two, which specializes in Southern cuisine, with the first lady toting what appeared to be a doggie bag.

The president plans to spend the Presidents' Day weekend in the Windy City, and is not expected to sign the bill until Tuesday, when he travels to Denver to discuss his economic plan.

Both the House and Senate passed the bill Friday night.

The push to get the bill through before the holiday weekend was so frantic, members of Congress didn't have a chance to read all 1,071 pages of the document before they could vote.

"In a perfect world it would have been nice to have had more time to process it," said Ilan Kayatsky, a spokesman for Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY).

So, it was so urgent for Congress to pass this bill that they broke a promise to give the American people 48 hours to read the bill and did not even give the people voting it enough time for analysis, but it is not so urgent that it needs to be signed into law immediately.

The economy is collapsing. But at least Nancy Pelosi gets to go to Rome and Michelle Obama got to go to Table Fifty Two for Valentines day.

[Stanley Burrell]

Huh? It took a month from when the resolution was introduced till congress declared independence. Almost 2 mo. for it to be officially signed. An right about 6 mo. for congress to order it be sent to the states.
http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/timeline.htm

Which could be almost considered quick when you look at things like the constitution and bill of rights. The constitution took over a year from when it was written to when it was ratified by 9 of the states. And the bill of rights was somewhere around 2 years from when it was introduced to when it was ratified.

That's true.

Then again, if you had a mind in Capitol Hill that was able to use the word "candid" (second paragraph, last sentence) to appeal to the the rest of the world to unite against the King using wordplay to sound familiarities with "Candide", due to someone as brilliant as Jefferson being a representative, I might have better faith, in general, of our politicians' IQ to make things work without pork/having to use an overwhelming stack of dead trees as a necessary tactic of making a bill pass.

I dunno. Maybe it isn't fair to draw an analogy to the 18th century New World, but I'd be damned if our congressional body is operating at anywhere remotely close to a capacity that suits the people's needs and does so in a timely fashion than what it had been centuries ago. I wonder what the Declaration signers would say about contemporary politics.

[Daniel]

I didn't realize that each representative had multiple individuals very well versed in the US Tax Code to read, decipher and disseminate this entire bill to each Representative that voted on it.

That would be well over 5000 people Daniel would lead us to believe worked overnight to read/understand this bill as well as properly inform the Representative on it.

Awesome fairy tale.

Really PB? That's a fairy tale?

Maybe for Republicans, but that's their own fault.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Congressional_Offices_and_Staff


Personnel: Each Member is alloted $748,312 to hire up to 18 staff and four additional temporary, part-time, of shared staff. Staff can not be paid more than $151,974 per year.


Yea. You can kindly shut the fuck up now.

[875000]

If someone crosses out 100 million and puts 150 million, how does that impact the relevant laws and considerations associated with the provision?

I'll save you the trouble of responding: It doesn't.

And if people were just changing numbers, you would be right. Except they weren't just changing numbers. They were rewriting provisions and striking limiting clauses.

So, if people have the ability to amend provisions wholesale or modify their intent (like striking a close limiting spending to "necessary activities"), could that impact the relevant laws and considerations associated with the provisions?

I'll save you the trouble of responding: It does.

[Daniel]

And if people were just changing numbers, you would be right. Except they weren't just changing numbers. They were rewriting provisions and striking limiting clauses.

So, if people have the ability to amend provisions wholesale or modify their intent (like striking a close limiting spending to "necessary activities"), could that impact the relevant laws and considerations associated with the provisions?

I'll save you the trouble of responding: It does.

You really expect me to believe that someone honestly characterized the nature of a provision when he was at the same time acting as if he had only seen those things just then and there?

The answer is no. The reality is that congressional offices have ample staffs whose job it is to analysis these projects. The reality is that many, if not all, of the elementals of the bill have been discussed in and out of closed doors for several weeks, if not months, and if not years.

Therefore, there is no justification for crying because someone "only" gave you 48 hours to look it over.

You've known this has been coming and all things considered, if you haven't situated yourself well enough to be able to do that then you probably shouldn' t be representing your people. Then again, that's a major reason Republicans are becoming increasingly marginalized in this country.

No sense of responsibility and no sense of actually doing things right. Which is a sad sad thing.

[Parkbandit]

Really PB? That's a fairy tale?

Maybe for Republicans, but that's their own fault.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Congressional_Offices_and_Staff




Yea. You can kindly shut the fuck up now.


Really Daniel? You seriously believe EACH of those 18 people are tax experts that know the US Tax code inside and out?

So 18 people at 750K a year total.. that's $41K a year for each of these tax experts. Let me know where I can get one of these people to do my taxes.. because at 41K a year, I might just hire one.

Yea. You can kindly shut the fuck up now.

[Daniel]

Really Daniel? You seriously believe EACH of those 18 people are tax experts that know the US Tax code inside and out?

So 18 people at 750K a year total.. that's $41K a year for each of these tax experts. Let me know where I can get one of these people to do my taxes.. because at 41K a year, I might just hire one.

Yea. You can kindly shut the fuck up now.

It's a good thing the entire bill isn't about taxes.

It's also a good thing that that is simply the public funds given for salaries.

The point is: You should have a competent staff who can help you understand a bill AND be on top of it before it even gets to you. If you don't then that's your own fault.

[Daniel]

It's a good thing the entire bill isn't about taxes.

It's also a good thing that that is simply the public funds given for salaries.

The point is: You should have a competent staff who can help you understand a bill AND be on top of it before it even gets to you. If you don't then that's your own fault.

Let's not even forget the staffers that support each committee and subcommittee and the fact that you can in fact work with other people.

[Parkbandit]

You really expect me to believe that someone honestly characterized the nature of a provision when he was at the same time acting as if he had only seen those things just then and there?

The answer is no. The reality is that congressional offices have ample staffs whose job it is to analysis these projects. The reality is that many, if not all, of the elementals of the bill have been discussed in and out of closed doors for several weeks, if not months, and if not years.

Therefore, there is no justification for crying because someone "only" gave you 48 hours to look it over.

You've known this has been coming and all things considered, if you haven't situated yourself well enough to be able to do that then you probably shouldn' t be representing your people. Then again, that's a major reason Republicans are becoming increasingly marginalized in this country.

No sense of responsibility and no sense of actually doing things right. Which is a sad sad thing.

Here's the thing you've yet to grasp (no surprise).. it was the CONGRESS that voted UNANIMOUSLY JUST THIS YEAR.. in an effort to be more 'transparent'.. that ALL bills would be given 48 hours BEFORE they voted on it. What was the hurry? Because Obama wanted to sign this on President's Day? How fucking sweet.. since the Founding Fathers are probably turning over in their graves.

And yet at the very first opportunity, they ram this bill right down our throats without 24 hours, let alone 48.

And seriously.. stop it with the "OMG REPUBLICANS R MARGINALIZED". You sound as retarded as the Rush Limbaughs of the world did in 1994 and beyond. Politics is all about power shifts.. this is no different. After this do nothing Congress of 2006, I wouldn't be surprised if 2010 saw the Republicans back in control of Congress again. Will you then be calling out Democrats being marginalized? Of course not.

[Gan]

http://www.nypost.com/seven/02152009/news/nationalnews/whats_the_rush__155255.htm



So, it was so urgent for Congress to pass this bill that they broke a promise to give the American people 48 hours to read the bill and did not even give the people voting it enough time for analysis, but it is not so urgent that it needs to be signed into law immediately.

The economy is collapsing. But at least Nancy Pelosi gets to go to Rome and Michelle Obama got to go to Table Fifty Two for Valentines day.

Awesome. :lol:

[Gan]

Yea. Too bad he ignored his staff and created a new one that would tell him what he wanted to hear.

That said, where the fuck does that come from?

You understood it just fine, you just refuse to admit the correlation.

And LOL at marginalized. Even if you're half right, that 'marginalization' will be dust in the wind if we keep this up, even before Obama's 100 days are up.

[Daniel]

You understood it just fine, you just refuse to admit the correlation.

And LOL at marginalized. Even if you're half right, that 'marginalization' will be dust in the wind if we keep this up, even before Obama's 100 days are up.

Yea. Sorry. There is no correlation between the massive abortion that was the administration of the Iraq war and this.

[Daniel]

Here's the thing you've yet to grasp (no surprise).. it was the CONGRESS that voted UNANIMOUSLY JUST THIS YEAR.. in an effort to be more 'transparent'.. that ALL bills would be given 48 hours BEFORE they voted on it. What was the hurry? Because Obama wanted to sign this on President's Day? How fucking sweet.. since the Founding Fathers are probably turning over in their graves.

And yet at the very first opportunity, they ram this bill right down our throats without 24 hours, let alone 48.


No notice PB? Really?

BUSH was talking about this before he left office. If your people were caught that off guard then they have serious fucking issues.

[875000]

You really expect me to believe that someone honestly characterized the nature of a provision when he was at the same time acting as if he had only seen those things just then and there?

You seemed to think so a moment ago, Daniel. You cited his example where a provision was marked up by $50 million (from $100 million to $150 million) as a means of trying to buttress one of your points.

Then again, it is not just him.

A few posts ago I used the following quote: "In a perfect world it would have been nice to have had more time to process it," said Ilan Kayatsky, a spokesman for Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY).

As I recall, Senator Dick Durbin even admitted that he and his staff did not have enough time to review the bill. So, admission of the short timeline was not exactly a partisan.



The reality is that many, if not all, of the elementals of the bill have been discussed in and out of closed doors for several weeks, if not months, and if not years.

Oh for Pete's sake. These are laws, not abstract concepts. The wording is just as -- if not more important -- than the intent. Particularly because legislators tend to cram things in at the last minute to avoid the very scrutiny that normally exists.



Really PB? That's a fairy tale?

Personnel: Each Member is alloted $748,312 to hire up to 18 staff and four additional temporary, part-time, of shared staff. Staff can not be paid more than $151,974 per year.

Let's have some fun with math.

$748,312/18 = $41,573 (rounded)

Do you honestly believe you can hire experts in the Tax Code or Energy policy conversant enough to pull an all nighter and analyze tens of thousands of pages of legal documents in less than 10 hours on a salary of $41,573?

Frame of reference: D.C. residents had a personal income per capita of $55,755. That's the average.

So more fun with math.

The average House member has 14 staff members (according to C-Span). Of those, we can eliminate 7 of the positions right off the bat as they are not specialists in a single legislative area (Chief of Staff, Legislative Director [focuses on general legislative strategy], Press Secretary, Executive Assistant/Schedules [usually two per office], Office Manager, Computer/Mail Manager, District Director). That puts us down to 6 potential positions or slots that can be focused exclusively on Legislative issues (Legislative Assistants and Legislative Correspondents).

Legislative Correspondents are more akin to paralegals: they spend the bulk of their time drafting memos and responding to constituents . Average salary: $27k. These are not your legislative experts.

Your Legislative Assistants, however, are your experts. Here is the first kicker, however. The ratio of Correspondents to Assistants tends to be 1-1, meaning that there are probably about 3 per office. Heres the second kicker: Average salary tends to be $48k.

Now, you can try arguing that they are very knowledgeable and efficient, so that only 3 are needed. But if that is true, they’d probably be in another better paying field. Or, you can try arguing that some are paid more than others, so the median pay is a poor indicator. But if that is true, then the others are below the median, and assuming relative compensation reflects their value they are less useful in a pinch.

Either way, your argument that these offices are well staffed to handle crash situations like this crumples. It has long been argued that Congressional offices are understaffed, and the workers there are stretched thin. Heck, since I lived in DC I always believed that there was a lot of wasteful spending in Congressional office, but staffing and manpower was not one of those areas.

[875000]

Let's not even forget the staffers that support each committee and subcommittee and the fact that you can in fact work with other people.

Most of whom already went home before 11 PM and were in bed when the bill was finally released for review.

But at least they were there in spirit!

[Daniel]

You seemed to think so a moment ago, Daniel. You cited his example where a provision was marked up by $50 million (from $100 million to $150 million) as a means of trying to buttress one of your points.

Then again, it is not just him.

A few posts ago I used the following quote: "In a perfect world it would have been nice to have had more time to process it," said Ilan Kayatsky, a spokesman for Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY).

As I recall, Senator Dick Durbin even admitted that he and his staff did not have enough time to review the bill. So, admission of the short timeline was not exactly a partisan.

Thank god we're not in a perfect world. I remember getting slammed on these boards 8 months ago because I was saying the classic example of a recession was not valid in the current economy and something had to be done.

You can't sick your head in the sand and then claim that people tried to sneak something by you. Sorry.



Oh for Pete's sake. These are laws, not abstract concepts. The wording is just as -- if not more important -- than the intent. Particularly because legislators tend to cram things in at the last minute to avoid the very scrutiny that normally exists.


So, you're telling me that someone created a 1200 document, at the last minute, that absolutely precluded EVERYONE from knowing what was in it or how it effected things?

Sorry. Not buying that.

There was a version in the house and it had been talked about for weeks and months prior.



Let's have some fun with math.

$748,312/18 = $41,573 (rounded)

Do you honestly believe you can hire experts in the Tax Code or Energy policy conversant enough to pull an all nighter and analyze tens of thousands of pages of legal documents in less than 10 hours on a salary of $41,573?

Frame of reference: D.C. residents had a personal income per capita of $55,755. That's the average.



Thanks. For the update. Trying to say that congressmen do not have staff that track these things is disingenuous at best. Retarded at most. This is simply the financing given them from public funds. They can still hire people with A) Their own money, B) money their constituents give them C) Money their political party gives them and D) the money they get through service contracts with the various federal agencies.

There is absolutely no excuse for not having a competent staff. Period.

[Daniel]

Most of whom already went home before 11 PM and were in bed when the bill was finally released for review.

But at least they were there in spirit!

My heart cries out to them. Really. It does.

[Methais]

I haven't been keeping up lately. Did they get called out on trying to sneak that health care shit in the "stimulus" bill? Or did it manage to weasel through?

Honestly I'm more worried about that than most if not all other things in the bill. Even though it would benefit me in the short term, since I don't have health insurance and am several years overdue to see a doctor for a checkup, I still don't want it and it's gonna fuck everybody in the longrun.

[Back]

I haven't been keeping up lately. Did they get called out on trying to sneak that health care shit in the "stimulus" bill? Or did it manage to weasel through?

Honestly I'm more worried about that than most if not all other things in the bill. Even though it would benefit me in the short term, since I don't have health insurance and am several years overdue to see a doctor for a checkup, I still don't want it and it's gonna fuck everybody in the longrun.

You have to admit the irony of this statement, Meth.

My biggest concern with this bill is the national and federal debt.

Let me find the article that outlines a few things...

[Back]

How the economic stimulus plan could affect you (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090214/ap_on_go_co/stimulus_stakes_who_gets_what;_ylt=Arl1SvgLg4ptmnp Zyv5LFAsDW7oF)

WARNING! LONG POST! It reads like a WOW patch update. Seems like any health care provisions got nerfed.


AP – Chart breaks down stimulus totals for states for infrastructure

An examination of how the economic stimulus plan will affect Americans.

___

Taxes:

The recovery package has tax breaks for families that send a child to college, purchase a new car, buy a first home or make the ones they own more energy efficient.

Millions of workers can expect to see about $13 extra in their weekly paychecks, starting around June, from a new $400 tax credit to be doled out through the rest of the year. Couples would get up to $800. In 2010, the credit would be about $7.70 a week, if it is spread over the entire year.

The $1,000 child tax credit would be extended to more low-income families that don't make enough money to pay income taxes, and poor families with three or more children will get an expanded Earned Income Tax Credit.

Middle-income and wealthy taxpayers will be spared from paying the Alternative Minimum Tax, which was designed 40 years ago to make sure wealthy taxpayers pay at least some tax, but was never indexed for inflation. Congress fixes it each year, usually in the fall.

First-time homebuyers who purchase their homes before Dec. 1 would be eligible for an $8,000 tax credit, and people who buy new cars before the end of the year can write off the sales taxes.

Homeowners who add energy-efficient windows, furnaces and air conditioners can get a tax credit to cover 30 percent of the costs, up to a total of $1,500. College students — or their parents — are eligible for tax credits of up to $2,500 to help pay tuition and related expenses in 2009 and 2010.

Those receiving unemployment benefits this year wouldn't pay any federal income taxes on the first $2,400 they receive.

___

Health insurance:

Many workers who lose their health insurance when they lose their jobs will find it cheaper to keep that coverage while they look for work.

Right now, most people working for medium and large employers can continue their coverage for 18 months under the COBRA program when they lose their job. It's expensive, often over $1,000 a month, because they pay the share of premiums once covered by their employer as well as their own share from the old group plan.

Under the stimulus package, the government will pick up 65 percent of the total cost of that premium for the first nine months.

Lawmakers initially proposed to help workers from small companies, too, who don't generally qualify for COBRA coverage. But that fell through. The idea was to have Washington pay to extend Medicaid to them.

COBRA applies to group plans at companies employing at least 20 people. The subsidies will be offered to those who lost their jobs from Sept. 1 to the end of this year.

Those who were put out of work after September but didn't elect to have COBRA coverage at the time will have 60 days to sign up.

The plan offers $87 billion to help states administer Medicaid. That could slow or reverse some of the steps states have taken to cut the program.

___

Infrastructure:

Highways repaved for the first time in decades. Century-old waterlines dug up and replaced with new pipes. Aging bridges, stressed under the weight of today's SUVs, reinforced with fresh steel and concrete.

But the $90 billion is a mere down payment on what's needed to repair and improve the country's physical backbone. And not all economists agree it's an effective way to add jobs in the long term, or stimulate the economy.

___

Energy:

Homeowners looking to save energy, makers of solar panels and wind turbines and companies hoping to bring the electric grid into the computer age all stand to reap major benefits.

The package contains more than $42 billion in energy-related investments from tax credits to homeowners to loan guarantees for renewable energy projects and direct government grants for makers of wind turbines and next-generation batteries.

There's a 30 percent tax credit of up to $1,500 for the purchase of a highly efficient residential air conditioners, heat pumps or furnaces. The credit also can be used by homeowners to replace leaky windows or put more insulation into the attic. About $300 million would go for rebates to get people to buy efficient appliances.

The package includes $20 billion aimed at "green" jobs to make wind turbines, solar panels and improve energy efficiency in schools and federal buildings. It includes $6 billion in loan guarantees for renewable energy projects as well as tax breaks or direct grants covering 30 percent of wind and solar energy investments. Another $5 billion is marked to help low-income homeowners make energy improvements.

About $11 billion goes to modernize and expand the nation's electric power grid and $2 billion to spur research into batteries for future electric cars.

___

Schools:

A main goal of education spending in the stimulus bill is to help keep teachers on the job.

Nearly 600,000 jobs in elementary and secondary schools could be eliminated by state budget cuts over the next three years, according to a study released this past week by the University of Washington. Fewer teachers means higher class sizes, something that districts are scrambling to prevent.

The stimulus sets up a $54 billion fund to help prevent or restore state budget cuts, of which $39 billion must go toward kindergarten through 12th grade and higher education. In addition, about $8 billion of the fund could be used for other priorities, including modernization and renovation of schools and colleges, though how much is unclear, because Congress decided not to specify a dollar figure.

The Education Department will distribute the money as quickly as it can over the next couple of years.

And it adds $25 billion extra to No Child Left Behind and special education programs, which help pay teacher salaries, among other things.

This money may go out much more slowly; states have five years to spend the dollars, and they have a history of spending them slowly. In fact, states don't spend all the money; they return nearly $100 million to the federal treasury every year.

The stimulus bill also includes more than $4 billion for the Head Start and Early Head Start early education programs and for child care programs.

___

National debt:

One thing about the president's $790 billion stimulus package is certain: It will jack up the federal debt.

Whether or not it succeeds in producing jobs and taming the recession, tomorrow's taxpayers will end up footing the bill.

Forecasters expect the 2009 deficit — for the budget year that began last Oct 1 — to hit $1.6 trillion including new stimulus and bank-bailout spending. That's about three times last year's shortfall.

The torrents of red ink are being fed by rising federal spending and falling tax revenues from hard-hit businesses and individuals.

The national debt — the sum of all annual budget deficits — stands at $10.7 trillion. Or about $36,000 for every man, woman and child in the U.S.

Interest payments alone on the national debt will near $500 billion this year. It's already the fourth-largest federal expenditure, after Medicare-Medicaid, Social Security and defense.

This will affect us all directly for years, as well as our children and possibly grandchildren, in higher taxes and probably reduced government services. It will also force continued government borrowing, increasingly from China, Japan, Britain, Saudi Arabia and other foreign creditors.

___

Environment:

The package includes $9.2 billion for environmental projects at the Interior Department and the Environmental Protection Agency. The money would be used to shutter abandoned mines on public lands, to help local governments protect drinking water supplies, and to erect energy-efficient visitor centers at wildlife refuges and national parks.

The Interior Department estimates that its portion of the work would generate about 100,000 jobs over the next two years.

Yet the plan will only make a dent in the backlog of cleanups facing the EPA and the long list of chores at the country's national parks, refuges and other public lands. It would be more like a down payment.

When it comes to national parks, the plan sets aside $735 million for road repairs and maintenance. But that's a fraction of the $9 billion worth of work waiting for funding.

At EPA, the payout is $7.2 billion. The bulk of the money will help local communities and states repair and improve drinking water systems and fund projects that protect bays, rivers and other waterways used as sources of drinking water.

The rest of EPA's cut — $800 million — will be used to clean up leaky gasoline storage tanks and the nation's hazardous waste sites.

___

Police:

The stimulus bill includes plenty of green for those wearing blue.

The compromise bill doles out more than $3.7 billion for police programs, much of which is set aside for hiring new officers.

The law allocates $2 billion for the Byrne Justice Assistance Grant, a program that has funded drug task forces and things such as prisoner rehabilitation and after-school programs.

An additional $1 billion is set aside to hire local police under the Community Oriented Policing Services program. The program, known as COPS grants, paid the salaries of many local police officers and was a "modest contributor" to the decline in crime in the 1990s, according to a 2005 government oversight report.

Both programs had all been eliminated during the Bush administration.

The bill also includes $225 million for general criminal justice grants for things such as youth mentoring programs, $225 million for Indian tribe law enforcement, $125 million for police in rural areas, $100 million for victims of crimes, $50 million to fight Internet crimes against children and $40 million in grants for law enforcement along the Mexican border.

___

Higher Education:

The maximum Pell Grant, which helps the lowest-income students attend college, would increase from $4,731 currently to $5,350 starting July 1 and $5,550 in 2010-2011. That would cover three-quarters of the average cost of a four-year college. An extra 800,000 students, or about 7 million, would now get Pell funding.

The stimulus also increases the tuition tax credit to $2,500 and makes it 40 percent refundable, so families who don't earn enough to pay income tax could still get up to $1,000 in extra tuition help.

Computer expenses will now be an allowable expense for 529 college savings plans.

The final package cut $6 billion the House wanted to spend to kick-start building projects on college campuses. But parts of the $54 billion state stabilization fund — with $39 billion set aside for education — can be used for modernizing facilities.

There's also an estimated $15 billion for scientific research, much of which will go to universities. Funding for the National Institutes of Health includes $1.5 billion set aside for university research facilities.

Altogether, the package spends an estimated $32 billion on higher education.

___

The Poor:

More than 37 million Americans live in poverty, and the vast majority of them are in line for extra help under the giant stimulus package. Millions more could be kept from slipping into poverty by the economic lifeline.

People who get food stamps — 30 million and growing — will get more. People drawing unemployment checks — nearly 5 million and growing — would get an extra $25, and keep those checks coming longer. People who get Supplemental Security Income — 7 million poor Americans who are elderly, blind or disabled — would get one-time extra payments of $250.

Many low-income Americans also are likely to benefit from a trifecta of tax credits: expansions to the existing Child Tax Credit and Earned Income Tax Credit, and a new refundable tax credit for workers. Taken together, the three credits are expected to keep more than 2 million Americans from falling into poverty, including more than 800,000 children, according to the private Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

The package also includes a $3 billion emergency fund to provide temporary assistance to needy families. In addition, cash-strapped states will get an infusion of $87 billion for Medicaid, the government health program for poor people, and that should help them avoid cutting off benefits to the needy.

[Methais]

You have to admit the irony of this statement, Meth.

My biggest concern with this bill is the national and federal debt.

Let me find the article that outlines a few things...

What I meant was if me or someone in my family or whatever gets sick, chances are they'll have to wait too long to get the treatment required because everything will be so flooded with people, and by the time they got around to it it'd probably be too late.

There's a reason why people from other countries with socialized health care come here to get things done.

EDIT: TLDR on that big copy & paste :(

[875000]

So, you're telling me that someone created a 1200 document, at the last minute, that absolutely precluded EVERYONE from knowing what was in it or how it effected things?

No. I am saying someone created a 1200 page document, then continually changed details that could have a salient impact, and then gave people less than 10 hours at night to figure out what was changed and how it might impact things.

Big difference.



There was a version in the house and it had been talked about for weeks and months prior.

Do you even know the legislative process? The House and the Senate bills were two different versions. They were sent to conference to reconcile the difference.

Congressmen -- Republicans and Democrats -- pointed out that they did not have time to read the final version.



Thanks. For the update. Trying to say that congressmen do not have staff that track these things is disingenuous at best. Retarded at most.

As I have pointed out numerous times, they do not have the staff to analyze a complex 1200 page document in less than 10 hours overnight. And, saying they should have just based their decisions on prior versions which heavily modified without knowing or fully understanding the modifications is just ludicrous.


This is simply the financing given them from public funds. They can still hire people with A) Their own money, B) money their constituents give them C) Money their political party gives them and D) the money they get through service contracts with the various federal agencies.

There is absolutely no excuse for not having a competent staff. Period.

Hey, you saw the numbers. Your crack team of Legislative Assistants get paid on averake $48k (below the median income in DC) and are minority of an office sized in the teens. Or are you trying to assert that C-SPAN is actually hatchet-group for the RNC?

The more important question is that given the existing staffing constraints of Congress and the importance of this bill, why didn't Pelosi and company schedule the vote three days later. It is not like this would have interfered with Obama's workload -- he isn't going to sign the bill until Tuesday.

[Methais]

If Obama declassifies everything about Area 51/aliens/UFOs, I'll start liking him.

[Back]

As I have pointed out numerous times, they do not have the staff to analyze a complex 1200 page document in less than 10 hours overnight. And, saying they should have just based their decisions on prior versions which heavily modified without knowing or fully understanding the modifications is just ludicrous.

I’ve thought about this more and you seem intent on believing that one person in the whole of Congress has to review this in 12 hours. Whom might this person be? Is the zombie body of Thomas Jefferson locked in the basement of the Capitol?

In my previous argument I stated that each Congressperson should have at least 5-10 people to review these things. Now expand that a bit to teams of Congresspeople AND their teams each reviewing sections and communicating over it since it was first introduced.

Daniel’s argument is far more plausible than yours in my opinion.

[Warriorbird]

Even if they don't have them on staff every member of Congress has access to a ton of political analytical talent if they so choose.

[Back]

Not to mention unpaid interns.

Wait. What?

[Gan]

Yea. Sorry. There is no correlation between the massive abortion that was the administration of the Iraq war and this.

The only thing missing at this point is time for fermentation...

[TheWitch]

Honestly, I'm not sure how anyone - Democrat or Repulican - can justify the ramrod nature of this bill. Debating salaries and theoretical specialties of staff overlooks the main point:

They said 48 hours, for transparency.

They lied. Why am I not surprised.

The way exceptions are being made to all the niceties of The Obama's campaign promises that he gave us all a head fake and made executive orders about in the first five days, and is now making special exceptions for right and left?

What a bunch of same old, same old, bullshit. Change, my ass.

It's the same old game. Just different players. I am really, really disappointed in him.

[875000]

I’ve thought about this more and you seem intent on believing that one person in the whole of Congress has to review this in 12 hours.

You are creating a strawman argument. My position is that there was not sufficient staff to review the final revision in the 10 hours that were provided.


In my previous argument I stated that each Congressperson should have at least 5-10 people to review these things. Now expand that a bit to teams of Congresspeople AND their teams each reviewing sections and communicating over it since it was first introduced.

And in my previous arguments I showed they did not even have that level of staffing.



Not to mention unpaid interns.

That is exactly who I would want analyzing a bill and producing executive summaries. 18-20 year olds, most of whom have never had a real job or parental responsibilities before. Not to mention they probably aren't even there because it is February; they are not out on Summer or Christmas break any longer.

While we are at it, why don't we make the Executive Assistant and the janitor work overnight too.


Again, we go back to my fundamental question: Why not wait three days longer? Congress would have given the American people and themselves more than 48 hours for review. The bill is not going to be signed until Tuesday at the earliest.

[Back]

That is exactly who I would want analyzing a bill and producing executive summaries. 18-20 year olds, most of whom have never had a real job or parental responsibilities before. Not to mention they probably aren't even there because it is February; they are not out on Summer or Christmas break any longer.

rofl.



Again, we go back to my fundamental question: Why not wait three days longer? Congress would have given the American people and themselves more than 48 hours for review. The bill is not going to be signed until Tuesday at the earliest.

I don’t know. Time to move on.

[Parkbandit]

I don’t know. Time to move on.

And it doesn't bother you at all that this bill was shoved down our throats? Why is it that if this was the Bush Administration, I would think your tune would be completely different?

Congress UNANOMOUSLY voted that they would give 48 hours before voting on legislation.. to become more transparent and give the American people time to read it.

This bill wasn't going to be signed until tomorrow... giving PLENTY of time to give the 48 hours. Why was it railroaded through in the manner in which it was? It wasn't because Pelosi was going to Rome.. since there was no chance it wouldn't pass the House. So why?

[Back]

And it doesn't bother you at all that this bill was shoved down our throats? Why is it that if this was the Bush Administration, I would think your tune would be completely different?

Congress UNANOMOUSLY voted that they would give 48 hours before voting on legislation.. to become more transparent and give the American people time to read it.

This bill wasn't going to be signed until tomorrow... giving PLENTY of time to give the 48 hours. Why was it railroaded through in the manner in which it was? It wasn't because Pelosi was going to Rome.. since there was no chance it wouldn't pass the House. So why?

I don’t know? I can see a parallel being made with the Patriot Act... that they rushed it through so no one could read the fine print. Of course the parallel ends there since the bills deal with completely different subjects.

As for transparency recovery.gov is supposed to be updated daily to track everything. We’ll see how that goes.

[Daniel]

You are creating a strawman argument. My position is that there was not sufficient staff to review the final revision in the 10 hours that were provided.



And in my previous arguments I showed they did not even have that level of staffing.




Not really. There are thousands of people on the hill that had access to the bill and should have been associated with it.

You're just treading water trying to justify Republican engineered qqing. I look forward to seeing the list of dramatic changes that were made at the last minute in pencil. I mean, it's been a few days but I guess I should give them a break because it's the weekend.

[Methais]

I mean, it's been a few days but I guess I should give them a break because it's the weekend.

Sure why not? Obama got a break for taking the weekend off, despite how INCREDIBLY FUCKING URGENT it is that we get this bill passed and signed last month because every day that goes by without this bill being passed, 16,666,666 Americans lose their jobs and the sky falls a little bit more.

[Back]

Sure why not? Obama got a break for taking the weekend off, despite how INCREDIBLY FUCKING URGENT it is that we get this bill passed and signed last month because every day that goes by without this bill being passed, 16,666,666 Americans lose their jobs and the sky falls a little bit more.

Lets be fair... the president lobbies Congress (he did), public opinion (he did) and signs it. Its Congress that had to do the heavy lifting (and they did).

[Warriorbird]

Clinton suggesting that the Obama bashers are some of the ones who got the U.S. into the mess.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/16/bill.clinton.qanda/index.html

Kind of interesting coming from Bill Clinton now... but, this board aside, I didn't see many Republicans voting against the banking stimulus... now that Obama is President it's time to baw though, even with a huge tax cut on the table.

[Methais]

Let's be fair...if it was as world endingly urgent as he claimed, he would have signed it Friday instead of, or at least before flying out to Chicago to take Michelle to Table 52 and have pictures taken sporting a doggy bag.

So far he just comes across like Pelosi's bitch and not much else.

[Warriorbird]

It's funny how worked up they can get you. Republicans do a great job at giving people things to obsess about while convincing them to oppose things that are in their own economic interest.

I sure doubt you were heavy on opposing the banking bailout, yet tax cuts that you'll probably qualify for and healthcare that might very well help you and your family out?

You're convinced that is terrible.

[Methais]

I was never for any of the bailouts, and I don't want universal health care, even though I have no health insurance and would benefit from it in the short term.

We have enough welfare in this country as it is.

[Back]

Let's be fair...if it was as world endingly urgent as he claimed, he would have signed it Friday instead of, or at least before flying out to Chicago to take Michelle to Table 52 and have pictures taken sporting a doggy bag.

I think that shows he’s human like the rest of us.


So far he just comes across like Pelosi's bitch and not much else.

rofl. Hes the POTUS and the free world! He could have acted like Pelosi and said “ferk u repub bitches” but tried to go bipartisan.

[Parkbandit]

It's funny how worked up they can get you. Republicans do a great job at giving people things to obsess about while convincing them to oppose things that are in their own economic interest.

I sure doubt you were heavy on opposing the banking bailout, yet tax cuts that you'll probably qualify for and healthcare that might very well help you and your family out?

You're convinced that is terrible.


Actually.. many Republicans and most conservatives were against the banking bailout.. and we see how effective throwing money at that problem has been.

Nice try though... but failure.

[Methais]

He's not human, he's an overgrown Webster. But with AIDS.

[Warriorbird]

So... how come it got so many Republican votes versus this one? Hmm.

[Parkbandit]

He's not human, he's an overgrown Webster.


http://kara.allthingsd.com/files/2008/11/357503.jpg

[Parkbandit]

So... how come it got so many Republican votes versus this one? Hmm.


Election year hype? If they voted against it, they believed that they would be viewed by the voting public as uncaring.

I stated from Day 1 that I was against it.. and I believe that McCain being his typical ass kissing self doomed his election bid by voting for it.

[Methais]

So... how come it got so many Republican votes versus this one? Hmm.

I'm going to guess that since the first one didn't work, they're not expecting the second to work either.

Then there's the fact that this bill has all kinds of other bullshit jammed into it, making it an even bigger waste of everything.

[Back]

Election year hype? If they voted against it, they believed that they would be viewed by the voting public as uncaring.

Are you implying that republicans vote to ensure their reelection rather than what their constituents want?

[Warriorbird]

It was very differently focused to interests that pleased them. I'm not a fan of either bailout but this almost looks more like a coddle to Republican interests (huge tax cuts) than anything else... and laying this all on Obama for attempted political advantage is pretty ridiculous.

[Parkbandit]

Clinton suggesting that the Obama bashers are some of the ones who got the U.S. into the mess.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/16/bill.clinton.qanda/index.html

Kind of interesting coming from Bill Clinton now... but, this board aside, I didn't see many Republicans voting against the banking stimulus... now that Obama is President it's time to baw though, even with a huge tax cut on the table.


The "huge" tax cut was already toned down from what was first in the Bill. And it wasn't the tax cuts that had Conservatives balking at it... it was the BILLIONS of dollars in liberal pet projects and non-stimulus spending that turned them against it.

[Gan]

q
Are you implying that republicans vote to ensure their reelection rather than what their constituents want?

Surely you're not implying that Democrats do not do the same...

[Back]

It was very differently focused to interests that pleased them. I'm not a fan of either bailout but this almost looks more like a coddle to Republican interests (huge tax cuts) than anything else... and laying this all on Obama for attempted political advantage is pretty ridiculous.

Time for an unscientific political poll for the PC pundit people.

[875000]

Not really. There are thousands of people on the hill that had access to the bill and should have been associated with it.

You're just treading water trying to justify Republican engineered qqing.

Right. It's only the Republicans that were unable to read the final version of the bill before voting on it. Let's just look at a few quotes from people, then ...


"In a perfect world it would have been nice to have had more time to process it," said Ilan Kayatsky, a spokesman for Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY).

Jerrold Nadler ... pawn of the Republican party.


Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) predicted on Thursday that none of his Senate colleagues would "have the chance" to read the entire final version of the $790-billion stimulus bill before the bill comes up for a final vote in Congress.

“No, I don’t think anyone will have the chance to [read the entire bill],” Lautenberg told CNSNews.com.

I expect Frank Lautenberg to annouce that he is switching parties before the week's end, then.


Sen. Roland Burris (D-Ill.), President Barack Obama's successor in the Senate, seemed baffled by the thought of actually reading the entire bill--as did his press secretary.

“I think it’s about 800 pages,” Burris's press secretary said before laughing lightly. “We’ll do the best we can.”

Apparently Roland Burris is part of the conspiracy too. My favorite part is that his press secretary did not even know the size of the bill.

Hey Daniel, weren't you one of the people arguing Burris should have gotten that Senate seat?

I believe there is a Dick Durbin quote someone out there also justifying not being able to read the final draft of the bill.

What do all four of these people have common?

[Parkbandit]

Are you implying that republicans vote to ensure their reelection rather than what their constituents want?

Serious question Backlash.. are you retarded?

[Methais]

What do all four of these people have common?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=botdmsQilnU

http://i287.photobucket.com/albums/ll154/spinarooni226/Clipboard01-2.jpg

OMG DID U SEE HOW I FORESHADOWED?!?!?!?!

[Parkbandit]

It was very differently focused to interests that pleased them. I'm not a fan of either bailout but this almost looks more like a coddle to Republican interests (huge tax cuts) than anything else... and laying this all on Obama for attempted political advantage is pretty ridiculous.


Actually, I don't lay all of it on Obama.. but I believe that he is using this "honeymoon" + fear-mongering about the economy to push through decades of liberal spending Wish Lists through in the name of "stimulus". The amount of tax cuts (especially with the Bush tax cuts set to revert) is minuscule compared to this partisan spending.

[Methais]

Actually, I don't lay all of it on Obama.. but I believe that he is using this "honeymoon" + fear-mongering about the economy to push through decades of liberal spending Wish Lists through in the name of "stimulus". The amount of tax cuts (especially with the Bush tax cuts set to revert) is minuscule compared to this partisan spending.

Never let a crisis go to waste.

[Back]

Serious question Backlash.. are you retarded?

I might ask you the same since you seem to support a party that you disagree with so often.

[Daniel]

Right. It's only the Republicans that were unable to read the final version of the bill before voting on it. Let's just look at a few quotes from people, then ...



Jerrold Nadler ... pawn of the Republican party.



I expect Frank Lautenberg to annouce that he is switching parties before the week's end, then.



Apparently Roland Burris is part of the conspiracy too. My favorite part is that his press secretary did not even know the size of the bill.

Hey Daniel, weren't you one of the people arguing Burris should have gotten that Senate seat?

I believe there is a Dick Durbin quote someone out there also justifying not being able to read the final draft of the bill.

What do all four of these people have common?

Rofl @ you using Roland Burris as your benchmark for competence.

[Gan]

I believe there is a Dick Durbin quote someone out there also justifying not being able to read the final draft of the bill.



According to Senator Durbin's math: Every Senator had 2,768 minutes to read 3,417 pages of legislative text that included next year's spending for every domestic program of the entire federal government and many new policy changes.

According to Senator Durbin's math: A Senator that downloaded the bill when it was posted at 12:15 a.m. Monday morning would have had to:
• Read nearly 1 ¼ pages of the bill every minute for 46 hours and 8 minutes,

• No sleep,



• No eating,


• No bathroom breaks.



Video at the link.


http://netrightnation.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=361877:dick-durbin-stimulus-speed-reader&catid=1:nrn-blog&Itemid=7

[Daniel]

Wait, I thought we weren't saying that only one person had to read the bill?

[TheRunt]

Wait, I thought we weren't saying that only one person had to read the bill?

No you were saying that. I personally want my representatives to read every word of every bill they vote on(And understand). Well every bill they vote yes on. If they voted no on all the bloated bills that tried to get ran through, a lot less bullshit would get passed.

Hell how many pages are the 2 most important documents in U.S. history the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution along with the Bill of Rights? Perhaps 15-20? And the three of them took a combined total of 2-2 1/2 years to pass. And your saying that under 24 hours is enough time to vote on almost 1 trillion dollars and over a thousand pages of text. :wtf:

[Back]

rofl. You want to talk about pork barrel spending. Just look at the past 8 years.

[CrystalTears]

rofl. You want to talk about pork barrel spending. Just look at the past 8 years.
If Bush was flippant about spending $1 trillion during a recession, I'd be pretty fucking pissed off with him too.

[Back]

If Bush was flippant about spending $1 trillion during a recession, I'd be pretty fucking pissed off with him too.

Calm down girly. I did not say Bush.

During his administration Congress raped the surplus Clinton built.

Before 9-11.

Then afterwards tax dollars went out the door with pet corporates and contractors.

Republican majority. Giving away our tax dollars.

[CrystalTears]

Calm down girly. I did not say Bush.Whose plan is it?

[Parkbandit]

No you were saying that. I personally want my representatives to read every word of every bill they vote on(And understand). Well every bill they vote yes on. If they voted no on all the bloated bills that tried to get ran through, a lot less bullshit would get passed.

Hell how many pages are the 2 most important documents in U.S. history the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution along with the Bill of Rights? Perhaps 15-20? And the three of them took a combined total of 2-2 1/2 years to pass. And your saying that under 24 hours is enough time to vote on almost 1 trillion dollars and over a thousand pages of text. :wtf:

There has to be a happy medium place where reality lies. I'm not ignorant enough to believe that each member of Congress had plenty of time to fully digest this bill and was able to make an intelligent vote on the thing.. nor am I ignorant to believe that each individual member of Congress should (or could) read the entire bill in length and fully understand it's ramifications.

Reality lies somewhere in the middle.. where no member of Congress was fully versed with this bill and voted however the party leadership told them to vote.

[Warriorbird]

300 billion in tax cuts != miniscule. There's another 200 or so in stuff that will likely see effect. That leaves 300 in spending which is huge.... but some of that is things that really aren't all that problematic, like propping up state budgets.

You weren't making topics about how evil the Republican Congress's spending was.

[Rocktar]

Calm down girly. I did not say Bush.

During his administration Congress raped the surplus Clinton built.

Before 9-11.

Then afterwards tax dollars went out the door with pet corporates and contractors.

Republican majority. Giving away our tax dollars.

Clinton didn't make a surplus, he changed the way acocunting was done and combined the Social Security tax income with the General Fund, something that wasn't previously done. So, it was all a lie since back then, SS was taking in more than it was paying. That is going to change soon and if we don't stop all the idiotic spending on feel good socialist programs, we will end up like Europe, taxed to 50% before anything else and then really in a pickle.

[Back]

Clinton didn't make a surplus, he changed the way acocunting was done and combined the Social Security tax income with the General Fund, something that wasn't previously done. So, it was all a lie since back then, SS was taking in more than it was paying. That is going to change soon and if we don't stop all the idiotic spending on feel good socialist programs, we will end up like Europe, taxed to 50% before anything else and then really in a pickle.

You are factually incorrect. Who feeds you this shit?

[Rocktar]

You are factually incorrect. Who feeds you this shit?

Sorry, facts are facts, go look at the budgets.