Party of NO set to screw American again

[Tom]

Party of NO - the DEMOCRATs are poised to screw the American working man once again.

The repubs will pass a bill today to extend the payroll tax cut and authorize the Keystone pipeline which will create thousands of good jobs.

But the Senate will not bring it up for a vote and OBama threatend to veto it.

Why? Job creation is our number 1 concern, and the dems insist we need to extend the cuts.

Politics as usual.
The Party off NO puts their political agenda ahead of economic recovery every time.

[Greyfox]

The Keystone Pipeline is on hold because "Greens" like Robert Redford and Daryll Hannah protested it.
Obama was afraid of losing these ecological types votes and therefore delayed a decision on the project until after the election.
The project would have initiated 20,000 jobs starting in January.
In the meantime, Canada is considering the snub and looking toward building a Pacific pipeline to take oil from Kitimat BC to Asia ( and in particular China.)
Of course Obama doesn't see that relying on the Middle East for oil supplies jeopardizes the American Military and National Security.

[Robert Goren]

In Nebraska, It is the republicans that are opposing it. The republican governor even called a special session of the legestlature do deal with it. The ranchers in western Nebraska didn't want it going through their ranch land. I believe they got Keystone to agree to run it through eastern Nebraska through farm land instead but the farmers are objecting to that. The states's democrats all favor building the pipeline for the jobs. The republicans are generally opposed to the pipeline because the peoples whose land it will cross don't want it and they all vote republican. It is amazing how it is exactly opposite of what the national parties are saying. The other amazing thing is that Nebraska has hundreds of pipelines run through it and nobody ever said a word about them when they were being built.

[bigmack]

In Nebraska, It is the republicans that are opposing it. The republican governor even called a special session of the legestlature do deal with it. The republicans are generally opposed to the pipeline because the peoples whose land it will cross don't want it and they all vote republican. It is amazing how it is exactly opposite of what the national parties are saying. The other amazing thing is that Nebraska has hundreds of pipelines run through it and nobody ever said a word about them when they were being built.
In your want to continue your silly Repubo blemishing, you can't even get local news right.

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/NebgovsupportseffortstospeedupKeystoneXL-BusinessWeek.png

[Robert Goren]

That is his story now, If he supported it, why did he call a special session of the legislature to deal with it. Somebody from the national party must have had a heart to heart talk over the weekend. The key words in the story is "new and acceptable route". That gives him an out. What does Heineman think is wrong with any of the several purposed routes? Since you know so much about Nebraska politics, perhaps you could answer that.

[ArlJim78]

I thought we were looking for shovel ready projects like this pipeline?

Democrats would rather invest in food stamps and unemployment, they say it creates more jobs.

[socantra]

That is his story now, If he supported it, why did he call a special session of the legislature to deal with it. Somebody from the national party must have had a heart to heart talk over the weekend. The key words in the story is "new and acceptable route". That gives him an out. What does Heineman think is wrong with any of the several purposed routes? Since you know so much about Nebraska politics, perhaps you could answer that.
Good catch. In August, he was against it:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/story/2011/08/31/edmonton-nebraska-governor-keystone-pipeline.html

[Robert Goren]

The full story from the lincoln journalstar.
http://journalstar.com/news/state-and-regional/govt-and-politics/heineman-supports-speeding-up-keystone-xl/article_8b046085-c140-5293-a208-4208d475333f.html
Note that bigmack left off the last part of the story.
"The Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality announced last week that Pat Rice, who oversees water quality, will assume the lead role in the state review. State environmental officials have said the review will take an estimated six to nine months."
Nine months is not that far off from Obama's timeline. And I have my doubts that anything being done by the Nebraska state government would actually be done in nine months. That comes from having dealt with them in the job I held before I retired.

[bigmack]

The states's democrats all favor building the pipeline for the jobs. The republicans are generally opposed to the pipeline because the peoples whose land it will cross don't want it and they all vote republican.
Another post from Fantasyland.

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/StatementfromNebraskaDemocraticPartyChairVicCovalt-NebraskaDemocraticParty.png

[Robert Goren]

About the only thing that will change a republican's mind about something is to find out Obama agrees with them on it.

[Greyfox]

About the only thing that will change a republican's mind about something is to find out Obama agrees with them on it.

Robert..... In delaying the decision on the Keystone Pipeline,

Obama put personal interests for getting votes from the eco types before national interests - jobs, economy and National security.

It's just that simple.

[Robert Goren]

Robert..... In delaying the decision on the Keystone Pipeline,

Obama put personal interests for getting votes from the eco types before national interests - jobs, economy and National security.

It's just that simple.There is no doubt that Obama is courting the environmental vote with his decision. Just as there is no doubt that the republicans in congress are chasing campaign money from the oil companies. It's not about jobs for Americans. We all know the pipeline will be laid by illegals immigrants.

[Greyfox]

the pipeline will be laid by illegals immigrants[/b].

Huh? Tell that to your local construction guys.

[bigmack]

There is no doubt that Obama is courting the environmental vote with his decision. Just as there is no doubt that the republicans in congress are chasing campaign money from the oil companies. It's not about jobs for Americans. We all know the pipeline will be laid by illegals immigrants.
Just stunning the amount of stupidity you post.

Somebody remind this confused soul who took the most in campaign contributions from BP.

Illegals? :lol: And 'we' all know it. Who's we, anyone on Thorozine?

[Robert Goren]

Another post from Fantasyland.

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/StatementfromNebraskaDemocraticPartyChairVicCovalt-NebraskaDemocraticParty.png Vic Covalt really, I had never heard of him before your post. And I doubt if many of the other 100 or so democrats in this state had either.

[Jay Trotter]

This just seems dumb!

Why are the two issues tied together? It would appear that they are two totally different issues that should be voted on seperately. One has almost nothing to do with the other, except for the fact that they would both benefit the economy.

Perhaps, a solution would be to seperate them but have both of them put to a vote on the same day, so one isn't used against the other as a political football.

Personally, I would vote to support both. The payroll tax cut is a non-starter and the pipeline is a necessary step to energy independance. With regard to the pipeline specifically, everything comes with some risk, just ensure that the safest precautions and contingency plans are in place and that something like the Gulf disaster is being dealt with proactively but not to the point of inaction.

[bigmack]

Vic Covalt really, I had never heard of him before your post. And I doubt if many of the other 100 or so democrats in this state had either.
Then again, you're in the dark about 98% of everything.

VynzS2IcRcw

[Robert Goren]

Just stunning the amount of stupidity you post.

Somebody remind this confused soul who took the most in campaign contributions from BP.

Illegals? :lol: And 'we' all know it. Who's we, anyone on Thorozine?Maybe we should a poll on who will lay the the pipeline when it is built. Yes, it will be built and yes, I support building it as I have stated in other threads. But I am under no illusions that it is going to beprovide jobs for Americans. The whole environmental thing about its leaks contaminating the Ogallala Aquifer is a bunch of hooey. They use to have oil wells where the the original route was suppose to go and they never caused a problem. The oil wells are now dry.

[bigmack]

Maybe we should a poll on who will lay the the pipeline when it is built.
The entire country is watching what happens with this pipeline to get some jobs moving and YOU think they will hire illegals? Man, there is definitely something wrong with your melon.

Start a poll. See what happens. :D

[Tom]

This just seems dumb!

Why are the two issues tied together?

Personally, I would vote to support both.

First of all, I want you to know you are agreeing with a monkey.:cool:
They need, IMHO, to be tied together because the dems will NEVER vote for a good bill that creates jobs if if goes against their green agenda. We can't wait for that many jobs until it suits The Messiah to decide to do his damn job. Politics, probably, but both items need to get done now. Enough of this garbage.

[Jay Trotter]

First of all, I want you to know you are agreeing with a monkey.:cool:
They need, IMHO, to be tied together because the dems will NEVER vote for a good bill that creates jobs if if goes against their green agenda. We can't wait for that many jobs until it suits The Messiah to decide to do his damn job. Politics, probably, but both items need to get done now. Enough of this garbage.
Tom, taking into account that you are a primate, I will type slower.

That being said, I don't see why it wouldn't be a creative move by the Republicans to seperate the issues but have both dealt with immediately. This would force Obama to decide immediately on the importance of the "shovel ready jobs" vs appeasing the "greenies"! Keeping the issues together only gives him an out.

I don't care about the "left" or the "right" -- only what is the right thing to do in each case. Is the agenda to accomplish something tangible or simply to make the President look foolish!

It was tougher than I thought typing so slowly!

[Mike at A+]

Tom, taking into account that you are a primate, I will type slower.

That being said, I don't see why it wouldn't be a creative move by the Republicans to seperate the issues but have both dealt with immediately. This would force Obama to decide immediately on the importance of the "shovel ready jobs" vs appeasing the "greenies"! Keeping the issues together only gives him an out.

I don't care about the "left" or the "right" -- only what is the right thing to do in each case. Is the agenda to accomplish something tangible or simply to make the President look foolish!

It was tougher than I thought typing so slowly!
Do Dems really care about shovel ready jobs in "fly over" states?

[boxcar]

It was tougher than I thought typing so slowly!

Unfortunately, it still wasn't slow enough because your brain still couldn't catch up, let alone pass your fingers. You not only don't understand American politics and that this kind of strategy is frequently employed by legislators (especially by Dems) but you don't understand the rationale behind the Republicans making the connection. And I ain't connectin' the dots for you either. :)

Boxcar

[ArlJim78]

Tom, taking into account that you are a primate, I will type slower.

That being said, I don't see why it wouldn't be a creative move by the Republicans to seperate the issues but have both dealt with immediately. This would force Obama to decide immediately on the importance of the "shovel ready jobs" vs appeasing the "greenies"! Keeping the issues together only gives him an out.

I don't care about the "left" or the "right" -- only what is the right thing to do in each case. Is the agenda to accomplish something tangible or simply to make the President look foolish!

It was tougher than I thought typing so slowly!
what is accomplished by extending the "temporary" payroll tax holiday?
If you think its worthwhile, then how do you recommend that we make up the difference to social security which is already in the red?
Obama wants to raise taxes on the rich, Republicans want to cut spending, and therein lies the stalemate.
It was a gimmick and never should have passed last year and shouldn't be extended this year. I mean if you're trying to do something tangible that is. But if you don't care about deficits and are in to the whole class warfare as a campaign issue then it's a wonderful sideshow.

If you think that Obama is not playing politics with these issues and not trying to make Republicans look bad then I have a bridge to sell you.

[Tom]

It was tougher than I thought typing so slowly!

Youmighthaveapointthereaboutpassingbothandforcingh imtovetoeaclaershovel-readyjob.Buthavingthosejobsassoonasnextmonthmakesi tprettyimprotant.
Iamtypingthisveryfastsothatiwillinconvenienceyouto omuch.
Irealizedealingwithmonkeyscanbefrustratingtosome.

[boxcar]

what is accomplished by extending the "temporary" payroll tax holiday?
If you think its worthwhile, then how do you recommend that we make up the difference to social security which is already in the red?
Obama wants to raise taxes on the rich, Republicans want to cut spending, and therein lies the stalemate.
It was a gimmick and never should have passed last year and shouldn't be extended this year. I mean if you're trying to do something tangible that is. But if you don't care about deficits and are in to the whole class warfare as a campaign issue then it's a wonderful sideshow.

If you think that Obama is not playing politics with these issues and not trying to make Republicans look bad then I have a bridge to sell you.

BINGO! (Oops, I'm going to incur the wrath of Hcap, so let me rephrase/redirect my excitement to a game I do like: Gin!)

Anyway, you are, of course, correct. Obama has nothing to run on but negatives, so the Dems have been constantly trying to set the Republicans up to fail in order to give the Dems negative talking points. But finally the Repugs have done something smart (which is truly an excuse to celebrate) by turning the tables on Obama and including the pipeline measure in it. Smart move. After all, Obama has said repeatedly that he's all for cutting taxes and creating jobs. Now he's threatening to veto the bill if the Keystone pipeline thingy is included. Goes to show the Liar-in-Chief really wants neither. What he really wanted all along was the tax increase on the "rich" in order to subsidize the payroll tax cut.

Boxcar

[Jay Trotter]

Youmighthaveapointthereaboutpassingbothandforcingh imtovetoeaclaershovel-readyjob.Buthavingthosejobsassoonasnextmonthmakesi tprettyimprotant.
Iamtypingthisveryfastsothatiwillinconvenienceyouto omuch.
Irealizedealingwithmonkeyscanbefrustratingtosome.
"Ooo,Ooo,Ahh,Ahh"

[Jay Trotter]

If you think that Obama is not playing politics with these issues and not trying to make Republicans look bad then I have a bridge to sell you. I think both sides are playiing politics with these issues and as Mike Ditka says "Stop It"!

[JustRalph]

Technically, aren't humans primates?

This whole thing is a mess. Obama is dithering for his base and Boehner is trying to push something through, that he knows will be vetoed.

That's how the game is played

[Jay Trotter]

Technically, aren't humans primates?

This whole thing is a mess. Obama is dithering for his base and Boehner is trying to push something through, that he knows will be vetoed.

That's how the game is playedThat's what I'm saying.

As an aside, Ralph, you got me on the "primate" thing! You'll notice Tom didn't catch that though.

[NJ Stinks]

What he really wanted all along was the tax increase on the "rich" in order to subsidize the payroll tax cut.

Boxcar

Hey, that's exactly what I want.

I may just vote for Obama again! :jump:

[boxcar]

Hey, that's exactly what I want.

I may just vote for Obama again! :jump:

As if you'd vote for someone else :rolleyes: Who did you have in mind -- Hillary? You gonna write her in, are you? :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[newtothegame]

well now the Dems get to veto.....hmmmm wonder how that's gonna go over? More then likely wont get out of senate and if by miracle it does, Obama say's he would veto.....
So lets see him veto jobs and a payroll tax extension!!!!

House Passes Payroll Tax Cut Extension With Keystone Pipeline Provision

Posted on December 13, 2011 at 8:10pm
WASHINGTON (The Blaze/AP) — Defiant Republicans pushed legislation through the House Tuesday night that would keep alive Social Security payroll tax cuts for some 160 million Americans at President Barack Obama’s request – but also would require construction of a Canada-to-Texas oil pipeline that has sparked a White House veto threat.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/house-passes-payroll-tax-cut-extension-with-oil-pipeline-provision/

[Robert Goren]

Obama's approval ratings are bad . They are around 40%, but congress is around 10%. This bill is why. I and most people don't understand why the two things need to be tied together. Why not pass 2 bills and deal with Obama's veto of the pipeline bill when it happens? This comes from someone who supports building the pipeline.

[Tom]

You'll notice Tom didn't catch that though.

Yes I did. The monkey sees all.

[newtothegame]

Obama's approval ratings are bad . They are around 40%, but congress is around 10%. This bill is why. I and most people don't understand why the two things need to be tied together. Why not pass 2 bills and deal with Obama's veto of the pipeline bill when it happens? This comes from someone who supports building the pipeline.
Here's a hint in my opinion...because then Obama and his party could just pass the one they want, and veto the other.....:bang:

[Robert Goren]

Here's a hint in my opinion...because then Obama and his party could just pass the one they want, and veto the other.....:bang:Then the congress could over ride his veto of the pipeline bill if they could get the votes. This tying things together is just a bunch of politics as usual in Washington. I suspect the republicans really don't want the payroll tax cut to stay in place and are using this method to kill it. They should just come out and say so. We know how Obama feels about the pipeline(and will face the voters with that stand), what we don't know is how the republicans feel about the payroll tax cut bill. They don't seem to want a striaght up and down vote on it. This why congress's approval ratings are at 10%. They never want to take a real stand on anything and just look for ways to put one over on the other party and/or the president. I just think that every idea should stand on its own merits and every politician should go on record on where they stand and let the voters decide whether they like that record.

[Tom]

The sand has been taken - the repubs passed a bill that extends the payroll tax cut and created 1,000s of job through the pipeline.

Do the dems have the guts to pass it?
Do they have the guts to bring it up for a vote?

Ball is now squarely in the dem's court - let's see who is playing politics now, Bobby. Is Obama serious about cvraeting jobs? Or is he a lying SOS with a green agenda?

The American people have a win/win situation in their laps.
Will the dems kill it?

This is now 100% the responsibility of two people. Both have a little "D" by their name. What possible reason for not passing this bill is there?

[Robert Goren]

I support the the pipeline(although I have my doubts about how many of those jobs will actually go to Americans and not to illegal immigrants), but thats not the choice here. Obama has already said he would veto any bill with pipeline in it. He is willing to face the voters with choice. The choice here is keeping the payroll tax cut or making the president look bad. Clearly the republicans have chosen the latter. If they really wanted the tax cut, they could pass two bills and still make the president look bad when he vetoed the pipeline bill. It apears to me that they really don't want the tax cut and could care less about the pipeline, but don't want that to go their record. This is merely a way to muddy the water.

[Robert Goren]

The sand has been taken - the repubs passed a bill that extends the payroll tax cut and created 1,000s of job through the pipeline.

Do the dems have the guts to pass it?
Do they have the guts to bring it up for a vote?

Ball is now squarely in the dem's court - let's see who is playing politics now, Bobby. Is Obama serious about cvraeting jobs? Or is he a lying SOS with a green agenda?

The American people have a win/win situation in their laps.
Will the dems kill it?

This is now 100% the responsibility of two people. Both have a little "D" by their name. What possible reason for not passing this bill is there?He clearly has a green agenda. Everybody knows that. What that got to do with extending the pay roll cuts. The only reason it does is because the republicans have tied the two together. Let just a vote on both the pipeline and the payroll tax cuts and let the cards fall where they will.

[Tom]

Nice spin, Bobby, but two good ideas are now passed the house and await the dems to stand up and do the right thing. there is no legitimate reason not to pass this bill in the senate and have the idiot sign it. None at all.

If Dingy Harry doesn't bring it up for a vote, it is clear that he is against the tax cut and creating jobs.

[Charli125]

Obama wants to raise taxes on the rich, Republicans want to cut spending, and therein lies the stalemate.
.

Spending needs to be curtailed. You can't run a country spending more than you bring in. There is wasteful spending, earmarks, and almost no oversight.

Revenue needs to be increased. For too long Congress has made things up as they went along and that's resulted in too many loopholes. I don't think taxes need to be increased, I think loopholes need to be closed.

I'm in favor of both and I'm tired of all the politics getting in the way of fixing our country. Both sides are guilty of playing games. Both sides want to extend the payroll cuts, but neither is willing to compromise on how to pay for it. It's BS, and they should all be fired.

Unfortunately voting out the incumbents won't do a bit of good because the replacement will be bought and paid for before they get elected. Instead of running for Congress to improve the country, Congress is now a career, and a very financially rewarding career at that.

[highnote]

Good catch. In August, he was against it:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/story/2011/08/31/edmonton-nebraska-governor-keystone-pipeline.html


He is a great politician. Like ALL politicians -- he was against it before he was for it -- and vice-versa.

:rolleyes: Gotta love politicians. :D

[ArlJim78]

Spending needs to be curtailed. You can't run a country spending more than you bring in. There is wasteful spending, earmarks, and almost no oversight.

Revenue needs to be increased. For too long Congress has made things up as they went along and that's resulted in too many loopholes. I don't think taxes need to be increased, I think loopholes need to be closed.

.
I'm in complete agreement on this, cut spending and loopholes both.

and I will add another one which I think is hurting us badly.
Congress has to stop with these temporary measures, or gimmicks as I call them, which have to be renewed every year or two. We need something more solid and lasting for tax policy. Right now it's being used to raise money and score political points.
We have to get to a point of stability, and move away from this constant threat of shutdowns or tax changes. I just see all of this uncertainty in Washington as very destructive to the economy.

[Charli125]

I'm in complete agreement on this, cut spending and loopholes both.

and I will add another one which I think is hurting us badly.
Congress has to stop with these temporary measures, or gimmicks as I call them, which have to be renewed every year or two. We need something more solid and lasting for tax policy. Right now it's being used to raise money and score political points.
We have to get to a point of stability, and move away from this constant threat of shutdowns or tax changes. I just see all of this uncertainty in Washington as very destructive to the economy.

I agree. It's just creative accounting rather than fixing the actual problem.

[Tom]

Why is it that Obama does nothing but shoot off his big mouth about fixing the tax code but when it comes to actually doing something, he is never there? What a useless jerk.

[Tom]

Dingy Harry Reid, the man without and integrity, bought and paid for politician, says the Senate will NOT return to session to finish the work on the payroll tax bill.

11 days left in the year, this strike me as an impeachable offense - he needs to get his worthless ass in gear and do his job - or step down and allow a man of character to take over the job that American will just not do. Repubs are more than willing to keep working, but the lazy n'er do well dems are more interested in themselves than the millions of hard working Americans about to get screwed over.

The repubs have passed a win/win bill and the dems refuse to pass it.
The dems are telling every single American taxpayer to go to hell, while they go on yet another vacation.

And Obama - the fourth biggest turd in our history, does nothing.

Isn't it time for an American Spring?

[NJ Stinks]

Dingy Harry Reid, the man without and integrity, bought and paid for politician, says the Senate will NOT return to session to finish the work on the payroll tax bill.

11 days left in the year, this strike me as an impeachable offense - he needs to get his worthless ass in gear and do his job - or step down and allow a man of character to take over the job that American will just not do. Repubs are more than willing to keep working, but the lazy n'er do well dems are more interested in themselves than the millions of hard working Americans about to get screwed over.

The repubs have passed a win/win bill and the dems refuse to pass it.
The dems are telling every single American taxpayer to go to hell, while they go on yet another vacation.

And Obama - the fourth biggest turd in our history, does nothing.

Isn't it time for an American Spring?

Earth to Tom. Come in, Tom.

The Drama Queens in the House are kicking the can down the road every time they defend the Bush tax cuts. Period.

[ArlJim78]

the Bush tax cuts have been the Obama tax cuts for over one year now. time to modify your talking points.

[Ocala Mike]

Isn't it time for an American Spring?





First came the Town Hall meetings, then the Tea Party, then the "Occupy" movement; this IS our AMERICAN SPRING. Seems to me that if these "protests" could somehow be unified, the "politics as usual" types on both sides of the aisle could be overcome.



Ocala Mike

[ceejay]

The person that benefits the most from this unnecessary pissing contest (although that may be redundant) is President Obama. It feeds the narrative of "the do-nothing Congress."

[Tom]

Earth to Tom. Come in, Tom.

The Drama Queens in the House are kicking the can down the road every time they defend the Bush tax cuts. Period.\

You mean the OBama Tax Cuts, don't you?

BUSH had a time limit on his.
OBAMA is the one who insisted we needed to extend them and signed the bill into law.

The tax cuts are now the property of B. Hussein.

[Tom]

The person that benefits the most from this unnecessary pissing contest (although that may be redundant) is President Obama. It feeds the narrative of "the do-nothing Congress."

Almost like it has been scripted to play out this way, isn't it?

[newtothegame]

Earth to Tom. Come in, Tom.

The Drama Queens in the House are kicking the can down the road every time they defend the Bush tax cuts. Period.
And just what would you call the TWO MONTH thing the senate passed????
Nahhh that can't be "kicking the can down the road", :lol: