Total difference in attitude

by sodbuster Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:17 am

http://www.iht.com/articles/2009/01/27/america/obama.4-417200.php

Well I dont know about others but I for one am glad to see Obama hold out the olive branch and try to create a spirit of bi-partisanship in these troubled times.

And I am also glad to see so many republicans realize that this obstructionist path advocated by Rush Limbaugh will only bury them deeper into irrelevancy amongst the electorate.

"Come let us reason together" sayeth the Lord. Isaiah 1:18

by **ohio county** Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:30 am

Barack Obama has requested that Republicans keep politics to a minimum and quickly pass an $850,000,000,000 stimulus package

by sodbuster Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:36 am

Not to pick at old wounds, but can you imagine the previous Administration actually coming to speak to the Democrat caucus and offer them input into their plans?

by **ohio county** Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:38 am

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/01/27/house-republicans-express-skepticism-bipartisan-backing-stimulus/

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/01/27/republican-leaders-raise-concerns-acorn-stimulus-dollars/

Sen. David Vitter, R-La., told FOX News Tuesday that the money could be seen as "payoff" for groups' political activities in the last election. ACORN generally supports Democratic candidates and actively backed President Obama last year.

But he said the funding is just one example of frivolous spending items in the $825 billion package.

"It's just a long list of spending items. Not a real economic stimulus job creation bill," Vitter said. "It's line after line after line of favorite liberal spending programs, and it amounts to a big government bill -- not a job creation bill."

Democratic leaders in the House have already dropped federal funding from the bill for new contraceptive services and ongoing programs to stop sexually transmitted diseases after Obama told them that it did not fit in with the job-creating objectives of the package.

It may look like a bunch of happy horseshit but its the same old liberal claptrap and vote-buying.

by sodbuster Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:45 am

Well dont you agree it is best to try to get input from the other side rather than just ram it thru?

by Cato Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:46 am

sodbuster wrote:Not to pick at old wounds, but can you imagine the previous Administration actually coming to speak to the Democrat caucus and offer them input into their plans?

The previous administration was as leftist as any democratic adminsitration. You can see that in the majority of the legislation offered by the Bush Administration. The farm bills are good examples as is "no Child left behind" and all the Homeland security measures. The only real catch was that little "R" after the Bush name. I think that was what kinda galled the democrats. Just so you know, the last two years of Bush's administration was under a democratically controlled congress and things never changed. That is because there is little difference between democrats and republicans.

by **ohio county** Wed Jan 28, 2009 11:03 am

How can you tout dim bulb Carter Zerbe in local politics for suggesting we live within our means and then come over here and suggest we all roll over for Obama's multigenerational mortgage? Yes, the republicans overspent, too. I thought you hated them for that.

by sodbuster Wed Jan 28, 2009 11:18 am

Well if we spend on infrastructure to facilitate economic development isn't that an investment?

As opposed to spending a trillion $ to blow stuff up and kill people?

But I see some stuff in there that should come out of the "stimulus" bill and considered separately.

by **ohio county** Wed Jan 28, 2009 11:29 am

If we are defined by what we own, isn't that an investment in our own comfort?

by Cato Wed Jan 28, 2009 11:35 am

sodbuster wrote:Well if we spend on infrastructure to facilitate economic development isn't that an investment?

NO, it is deficit spending. You don't create wealth by taking money from one side of the economy and putting on the other. That's like cutting a foot off of a blanket and sewing on the other end hoping to make the blanket a foot longer. It just doesn't work.

by ziggy Wed Jan 28, 2009 1:56 pm

ohio county wrote:If we are defined by what we own, isn't that an investment in our own comfort?

Or discomfort .

by Aaron Wed Jan 28, 2009 2:10 pm

President Obama came to the hill because he wants to the appearance of bi-partisanship, which he knows he will not have if a significant number of Republicans vote against a bill he knows will pass.

You can think this is about doing what's best but it's not. It's about doing what appears to be best.

If he truly wanted to do what was best, he would listen to those who disagree with him. They would be the ones that can site an independent GOA report that shows that less the one quarter of the $850 Billion the President and Democrats wants to throw away will actually reach the economy before 2011.

As such, this spending bill will have little if any effect on current conditions, other then in the appearance.

by SamCogar Wed Jan 28, 2009 3:13 pm

sodbuster wrote:Well dont you agree it is best to try to get input from the other side rather than just ram it thru?

And just when did your buddies in the State Legislature ever do that?

The only damn thing Obama and the Democrats want is for a few Republicans to "vote for" that abortion of a Stimulus Bill ......... so that when the public really figures out they were screwed, blued and tatooed, ........... they can then blame it's Passage on all Republicans.

And that is EXACTLY what you will be doing Sherman, ....... EXACTLY THAT.

Nothing more, .... nothing less.

geek

.

.

by Sponsored content

Total difference in attitude

Total difference in attitude

Re: Total difference in attitude

Re: Total difference in attitude

Re: Total difference in attitude

Re: Total difference in attitude

Re: Total difference in attitude

Re: Total difference in attitude

Re: Total difference in attitude

Re: Total difference in attitude

Re: Total difference in attitude

Re: Total difference in attitude

Re: Total difference in attitude

Re: Total difference in attitude

Re: Total difference in attitude