Some of what is in the Stimulus Bill

sodbuster wrote:I dont have no problem with that.

I am just saying looking at the figures yall are gagging on a gnat.

But it looks like some of the more moderate Senators will work it out.

Just depends how long the House wants to grandstand.

But far as infrastructure I figure we could use it all on infrastructure and lots of people will be left without water.

Or hi-speed internet.

Or getting their road fixed.

Also the republicans are trying to load it up with more taxcuts and handouts for the hi and mighty rich and famous.

I dont notice you guys complaining about that.

Just the programs to help the less fortunate.

p.s. I heard on the radio the republicans are trying to slip in a $15,000 tax credit for people who buy one of the foreclosed homes.

If that's not pouring salt in the wound what is.?

Force people out of their home, then give the hi-rollers a $15,000 bounty for buying them up?

sodbuster wrote:

Also the republicans are trying to load it up with more taxcuts and handouts for the hi and mighty rich and famous.

I dont notice you guys complaining about that.

Just the programs to help the less fortunate.

I'm not going to complain about taxcuts, because that is exactly what it will take to bring this nation out of this recession. However, I will fight until the last breath is gone from me any handout to anyone rich or poor. If you want to help the less fortunate with a handout, take YOUR checkbook out of YOUR pocket and YOU pay for it. Do not force me to do what you are unwilling to do yourself and don't take the fruit of my labor to make you feel holy and fulfilled.

The tax cuts I saw weren’t for the rich and high and mighty. You'll have to provide an example of those.

As for the infrastructure, I think that infers the items you claim will get ignored.

sodbuster wrote:

p.s. I heard on the radio the republicans are trying to slip in a $15,000 tax credit for people who buy one of the foreclosed homes.

If that's not pouring salt in the wound what is.?

Force people out of their home, then give the hi-rollers a $15,000 bounty for buying them up?

So, you think it is quite OK for a person to take out a loan and not pay it back, Huh Sherman. I bet you'd be first in line to whine and cry if you were the one holding the note and the party responsibile wasn't repaying you.

On the tax cut note, I will say that Ronald Regan was handed an economic recession which he combated with primarily tax cuts and we went on an 18 year bull run with only a slight downturn in 92 (just enough of a downturn to cost Bush 1-the best President of our time the election) and Bush 2 was handed an economic downturn which he combated with tax cuts and the economy soared for 6 plus years and would still be doing so we it not for inane housing rules.

The reason Republicans argue for tax cuts is that they have a history of actually working where as all the new deal did was EXTEND Hoovers recession into FDR’s depression.

I dont have no problem with that.

What don't you have no problem with? The $650 million for the TV converter boxes? Who we going to put to work with that? The $88 million for the polar ice breaker? Why not just wait for global warming to do its job and save the $88 million?

Not to put too fine a point on it but I believe you were impugning the patriotism of those who failed to vote for this crap the other day. Now it's okay to question what's in the bill?

sodbuster wrote:p.s. I heard on the radio the republicans are trying to slip in a $15,000 tax credit for people who buy one of the foreclosed homes.

If that's not pouring salt in the wound what is.?

Force people out of their home, then give the hi-rollers a $15,000 bounty for buying them up?

You're wrong here Sodbuster. The tax credit is for the anyone who is purchasing any home, not for someone who is buying a foreclosed home only.

And as the credit is based on interest, lower cost foreclosed homes will result in lower credits.

ohio county wrote:The $650 million for the TV converter boxes?

Since when did television become a constitutional right? That's about as stupid a thing as I've heard and I can't believe MY government is funding this crap. The ONLY thing more ludicrous then MY government funding this crap is that there actually people who support them funding this crap.

And I pay 40% of every dollar I make for this garbage? I think it's time for a revolution.

Aaron wrote:

ohio county wrote:The $650 million for the TV converter boxes?

Since when did television become a constitutional right? That's about as stupid a thing as I've heard and I can't believe MY government is funding this crap. The ONLY thing more ludicrous then MY government funding this crap is that there actually people who support them funding this crap.

And I pay 40% of every dollar I make for this garbage? I think it's time for a revolution.

A revolution? We had one of those only about 3 months ago.

No we didn't.

We had an election that was bought and paid for by liberal America and advertized by the liberal media who were determined they were going to avenge 2000 and they got exactly what they wanted.

You're still O for.

Keep up the good work.

Shermmy baby wants that Stimulus Bill passed "as is".

He knows that if it gets cut ...... then WV's extimated share of a measley $1.8 billion ..... will take a BIG HIT and be cut down to a couple hundred million ....... and that wouldn't be enough to divide up between his favorite State Democrat politicos let alone all of them.

Shermmy is looking at the "lost" vote buying power.

Hell, he was probably hoping there would be enough "free money" to build and staff a fancy Truck Driving School in Jackson County and he would get appointed to be "head hauncho" over it. Work on his 2nd State Retirement, ya know.

Is it any wonder that the blue areas of this map have the highest ratio of recipients of federal government entitlement programs, including areas with high concentrations of Spanish people?



Now compare that to 2004 when GWB whipped Kerry. In comparing the two, Obama didn't pick up any large areas from Republicans as much as Republicans stayed home which allowed him larger margins in the metropolitan areas of states like Virginia, North Carolina, and Ohio.

Michigan is one of the few states that completely flopped and if you look closely, McCain actually won counties around Detroit that Bush lost in 04.

ziggy wrote:

Aaron wrote:

ohio county wrote:The $650 million for the TV converter boxes?

Since when did television become a constitutional right? That's about as stupid a thing as I've heard and I can't believe MY government is funding this crap. The ONLY thing more ludicrous then MY government funding this crap is that there actually people who support them funding this crap.

And I pay 40% of every dollar I make for this garbage? I think it's time for a revolution.

A revolution? We had one of those only about 3 months ago.

Aaron wrote:No we didn't.

We had an election that was bought and paid for by liberal America and advertized by the liberal media who were determined they were going to avenge 2000 and they got exactly what they wanted.

You're still O for.

Keep up the good work.

Whine, whine, whine.

If you don't like the way elections are "bought and paid for", then join with the folks who want to get the private money out of elections. Then you could HAVE that revolution.

Stating facts ain't whining Ziggy, it's stating facts.

And to me it seems that all you’re doing is replacing private money with government money and I'm not sure having the government in charge is the lesser of the two evils.

I’m curious as to why you oppose individuals exercising their 1st amendment rights with their money?

Aaron wrote:Stating facts ain't whining Ziggy, it's stating facts.

And to me it seems that all you’re doing is replacing private money with government money and I'm not sure having the government in charge is the lesser of the two evils.

I’m curious as to why you oppose individuals exercising their 1st amendment rights with their money?

I do not accept that bribery of public officials or candidates for public office is "free epeech". What it is is a corruption of the electral process.

I am becoming increasingly convinced a large part of the reason Sherm doesn't care about the price tag of this "stimulus" plan has to do with his age and his previous career. He is retired. He won't have to pay for it, only reap the benefits. His children and grandchildren and greatgrandchildren will be slaves to the Nanny State but because he has always made a living off of taxpayer revenue he knows nothing else. His wife is a teacher. She too makes a living off the taxpayers.

I believe in Sherm's mind we should just let the government control everything, every last cent and we'll all have a roof over our heads and food in our bellies and flu shots for the kiddos. What more does he need? What more does anyone need?

I need liberty.

Well I got to get out of here I cant take this b s any longer.

I want to know where the tv converter boxes are made. Does anybody have one?

ziggy wrote:

Aaron wrote:Stating facts ain't whining Ziggy, it's stating facts.

And to me it seems that all you’re doing is replacing private money with government money and I'm not sure having the government in charge is the lesser of the two evils.

I’m curious as to why you oppose individuals exercising their 1st amendment rights with their money?

I do not accept that bribery of public officials or candidates for public office is "free epeech". What it is is a corruption of the electral process.

That's your opinion.

This nation has tried restricting who and how much individuals can give to and with every restriction; someone finds a way around it. It's not working.

You say the only way to counter it is to put all the money in the hands of the government and allow them to control the purse strings. But the thing is, we've see how the nanny state controlling the purse strings works and that is not very good.

As it is, we as a nation are now staring at an $11 to $12 trillion dollar debt and upwards of $60 trillion in unfunded liabilities.

Plain and simple, the nanny state is a failure and I honestly see no reason for giving them more control then they already have over our elections.

That's my opinion.

Now we both have one.

"What don't you have no problem with?"

I was responding to aaron's post.

I have no problem with using the whole amount for infrastructure.

Deal with the other stuff separate I dont care.

Like I said there are enough infrastructure needs to cover that amount and more.

You guys' problem is your gang has totally screwed things up and you cant stand to see someone else fix it.

imo

Throwing away money on frivolous liberal spending desires such as SCHIPS or youth activities or birth control.

Your guys aren't fixing anything. They're changing the pendulum on the spending, that's all.

Nancy Pelosi suspended rules in Congress that kept house Republicans from contributing anything to this bill at all and that's why none of them voted for this democrat bill.

If Obama wants partisanship, he needs to instruct both house to work with Republicans on a good bill, eliminating all the needless spending and if they do that, he'll have a bill to sign by Presidents day.

If it stays the way it is, he won't.

I heard a Republican Senator from Indiana yesterday and he said Republicans would support about any shovel ready infrastructure that would be coming up in the next 3 years now because it was money that was going to be spent anyhow.

He didn't want agree with wasting money on liberal wish projects that weren't going to have any stimulus effects.

I would say that a vast majority of Americans feel the same way.

B.S. he has bent over frontwards for them trying to be bi-partisan.

I say let them block the economic recovery package and then take it to the people.

Like Harry Truman did.

Make them famous, as McCain used to say.

They care more about grandstanding and politics than the welfare of the country so go to the people, make them famous, and vote in a Congress that has the best interest of the country.

Just my opinion.

Bi-partisan my butt! Nanny Pelosi isn't interested in being bi-partisan. She isn't interested in what's best for the American people. She isn't interested in what's best for the country. She's interested in her own wealth and, especially, her own power and she shows that over and over again.

That vile she-devil is so full of herself that not only isn't she interested in listening to the concerns of Republicans in the House, she isn't interested in listening to the Democrats either. She won't listen to the American people and she won't even work with the new President although he too is a Democrat. She is only interested in generating more power for herself. She is completely unwilling to work with anyone and it is my hope that her fellow Democrats will get half as sick of her as I am and strip her of her position.

Barrack Obama many very well want bi partisanship but he's not the one writing the bill. Nancy Pelosi did that and she was not bi partisan in any way, shape or form so your opinion is wrong, plain and simple.

As Jack said, You can't handle the truth.

Pelosi Defends Democrats’ Vetting of Stimulus Plan
By Steven T. Dennis
Roll Call Staff
January 22, 2009, 12:14 p.m.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) parried GOP assaults on Democrats’ $825 billion stimulus package Thursday and refused to slow the bill down to give more time for Republican input.

“Yes, we wrote the bill. Yes we won the election, but that doesn’t mean we don’t want sustainability or Republican support,” Pelosi said.

source