Jobs bill passes Senate — with 13 Republican votes
posted at 11:56 am on February 24, 2010 by Allahpundit
Only five Republicans voted for cloture on Monday, but once passage was assured, the dam burst. Let the “RINO” cries issue forth!
“We’ve had so much gridlock,” said Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), co-author of a key portion of the bill. Now, he said, “finally we have something” bipartisan to show the public.
The legislation is the first element of what Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) has said will be a multipart “jobs agenda.” The measure includes a new program that would give companies a break from paying Social Security taxes on new employees for the remainder of 2010. It also carries a one-year extension of the Highway Trust Fund, an expansion of the Build America Bonds program and a provision to allow companies to write off equipment purchases…
“There are plenty of opportunities for bipartisan cooperation,” [Lamar Alexander] said. “Where we have trouble are these great big, comprehensive, 2,000-page, full-of-surprises, turn-the-country-upside-down pieces of legislation that cost so much. If the administration would stop biting off more than it could chew, I think we would have more progress.”…
“I think it’s going to depend on the nature of the bill and on whether he’s going to try to freeze out the minority party,” Cornyn said, adding that he would advise against reading too much into Monday’s vote: “Frankly, I just don’t think it was all that big of a deal.”
Here’s the roll. It was the funding for highway projects, I think, that made the difference. Republicans voting yes: Alexander, Bond (who’s retiring), Brown, Burr (up for reelection), Cochran, Collins, Hatch(!), Inhofe(!!), LeMieux, Murkowski, Snowe, Voinovich, and Wicker. We went over the politics of this the other day — it’s a relatively cheap fig leaf for jobs creation, so some Repubs used it to purchase bipartisan cred for themselves — but the true test will come if and when Pelosi and Reid go to conference committee to reconcile it with the House bill, which is literally 10 times more expensive. Will Scotty B bite the bullet and vote for that too? I’m guessing no, but his statement after today’s vote suggests anything is possible:
We need to put partisanship aside to put people back to work. This jobs bill is far from perfect, and ideally would include deeper and broader tax cuts. I supported this measure because it does contain some tax relief that will help Massachusetts businesses put people back to work. Right now, this is a tax-cutting bill. But if it comes back to the Senate full of pork, waste, fraud and abuse, I reserve the right to vote against it.
The Facebook response from fiscal cons has not been forgiving thus far. Follow the link and note the slogan in the sidebar. Exit question: You know who might have something to say about this later today?
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »
Well said, and I agree.
mwdiver on February 24, 2010 at 12:38 PM
Weight, I am a planner. I don’t like feeling like a victimn in any sense. And we both know (but you don’t have to admit it) that this country is run on stupid arrogant people who have no clue about real jobs.
So what am I doing about it. Voting when and where I can, and doing stuff.. like stocking up on seeds, reloading my ammo, packing away clothes for cold. It isn’t that I am expecting the worst, I just don’t want to be one of those types that are caught with their pants down running around and looking for the next big thing.
Sounds crazy, but it brings me peice of mind… at least I can fend for myself.
upinak on February 24, 2010 at 12:38 PM
Very well put!
chunderroad on February 24, 2010 at 12:39 PM
Ouch, that’s just painful. He really said all of that, how disappointing.
Bishop on February 24, 2010 at 12:40 PM
This is a waste of valuable energy to get upset over this. Now if he would vote for Obamacare or for cap & trade, it would be fair to demand his head on a silver platter.
It’s all about picking your battles and sadly, you can’t pick every battle.
Pcoop on February 24, 2010 at 12:40 PM
A “Democrat victory” with the support of those always-willing dupes, the GOP.
Cicero43 on February 24, 2010 at 12:40 PM
But I’ve heard the MegMackian Republicans take up quite a bit of room…
One word: Racist!
MeatHeadinCA on February 24, 2010 at 12:40 PM
Albeit snarky, comment of the decade.
LastRick on February 24, 2010 at 12:41 PM
With pinpoint clarity, Beck nails it, but it seems, the Republicans are intent on sucking MORE!
Is the message sent by conservatives and Tea Partiers that vague, or is the habit to spend, spend, spend, too ingrained in politicians of both sides?
Good grief, the place really needs to be completely scrubbed!
donh525 on February 24, 2010 at 12:41 PM
You are if you’re supporting that fake “Tea Party” guy the Dems are bankrolling in Nevada to keep Dingy Harry in.
chunderroad on February 24, 2010 at 12:41 PM
Okay… but how about this. Stop spending, period.
How hard can that be? There is nothing going to private industry this day and age. Everyone is and will eventually be working for a government entity (which is usually liberal agenda people) and one day they will wake up when they realize that it isn’t “working”.
I hope it is soon but hey I can’t help the fact they won’t.
upinak on February 24, 2010 at 12:42 PM
Well, I’m not supporting that guy, so… uh… yeah…
MeatHeadinCA on February 24, 2010 at 12:43 PM
No better evidence of the lost and flaccid GOP.
And now we get treated to more interstate traffic jams between miles of orange cones and sauntering workers drinking coffee next to idle machinery under Maoist signs hailing the revival of America.
rrpjr on February 24, 2010 at 12:43 PM
I’m with you, upinak. I’ve been through 4 hurricanes in my life, and the worst feeling is realizing you water is off, and you’ve got nothing to drink. You go to the store and there’s nothing on the shelves, and there are hundreds of people in the parking lot waiting for emergency crews to bring water and ice. I look at what’s going on as just preparing for a wicked big hurricane. So our family has been preparing for a year. And so has our church. The good thing, however, is that with this 15 billion dollar jobs bill, we wont have to worry about anything.
Weight of Glory on February 24, 2010 at 12:44 PM
O/T: Rush just spanked his a$$ because a caller said he disagreed with Beck and that he hasn’t done enough to make Republicans change and stop spending taxpayer money.
YES! Dittocam going, he ACTUALLY spanked himself!
Sultry Beauty on February 24, 2010 at 12:45 PM
This was the best part of that comment. I wish Republicans could go further and demand a refund for the stimulus bill that didn’t work and pushed for more oversight of TARP funds. I know there is only so much they can do with a minority in Congress, but this should be part of a contract.
chunderroad on February 24, 2010 at 12:46 PM
So what hill is worth defending for these pukes? Our reps profess a willingness to stop ObamaCare, all well and good, meanwhile they stack these “trivial” multi-billion dollar spending packages in Congress and blow an equal amount of money anyway.
Bishop on February 24, 2010 at 12:47 PM
I saw that, and to top it off, following was Brit Hume and Bernie Goldberg agreeing. I was applauding because I’ve emailed Bill several times telling him how naive he is when is comes to Obama and his agenda. Most of us knew this before he was elected. If Bill is half as smart as he thinks he is, why hasn’t he known this earlier?
silvernana on February 24, 2010 at 12:47 PM
Looks like no one has figured out that Dingy Harry call this a ‘jobs bill’ because his base would freak out hearing it’s a tax cut. Now it’s the wrong type of tax cut, but a lot of comments seem to confuse this with ‘spending’ because it has a dollar value associated with it. It should actually be relatively deficit neutral, but overall very ineffective versus a cut of the corporate tax rate from 35% down to the 25-30% range (which would also be deficit neutral the first year or two, and then be positive as job/earnings growth kicks in)
phreshone on February 24, 2010 at 12:47 PM
You were supporting an OT strawman argument. Since you wanted to go there, I felt it was important to draw attention to a scenario where exactly what you were saying is applicable.
chunderroad on February 24, 2010 at 12:48 PM
Good reminder.
rrpjr on February 24, 2010 at 12:49 PM
upinak, I would rather they stop spending at all and slash entitlements and do all the things they should to encourage the private sector.
Nevertheless, the reality is that we have to get to the midterms in order to gain back at least the House and get closer in the Senate, then gridlock Cap & Trade, Obamacare, and all the other major tax and spend initiatives until 2012 when we can hopefully increase unemployment at the White House. We also need to gain Senate seats in the midterms to be able to filibuster a really horrendous Supreme Court nominee.
None of this happens if Obama is successful at painting the Republicans as the “party of no”. We also fail if the economy recovers and we are perceived as having done nothing to help it.
After 2012, then we can talk about slashing the entitlement programs.
Doodad Pro on February 24, 2010 at 12:50 PM
Weight, you are right. The 15 billion won’t come to us, but we may eventually feel it in our pockets.
As for planning and such… you and I completely on the same page.
upinak on February 24, 2010 at 12:51 PM
It wasn’t off topic. There are people on HA and elsewhere that would rationalize the behavior of Republicans before ever thinking of voting for an actual conservative. Second, if it was so OFF TOPIC, I suppose there were several of us that were pointing out the same off topic strawman.
That brings me to the strawman. You really think what I said was a strawman? How many posts here do we have about third parties (often followed by RNCers telling people to suck it up and vote R or else…)? Even if you never saw one of those posts (which must mean you weren’t paying attention or something), are you going to claim you’ve never heard this “strawman” used by an ardent RNC supporter?
MeatHeadinCA on February 24, 2010 at 12:52 PM
Thank you. It seems the Democrats aren’t completely ignorant of economics, and they want to get reelected. I don’t think it will be enough to bring the economy back in 2010, but it’s a step in the right direction.
chunderroad on February 24, 2010 at 12:53 PM
You guys are abandoning him over THIS? He stops Obamacare in its tracks, and you abandon him over a 15 billion dollar stimulus bill? What is he supposed to do, completely crap all over the people who actually elected him and vote straight republican?
thphilli on February 24, 2010 at 12:53 PM
Sorry, I meant 2012.
chunderroad on February 24, 2010 at 12:53 PM
chunderroad:
Thanks. It wasn’t my idea. It was a commenter named Abby in the earlier part of this thread.
I just seized on it because the cost ($15 billion) of the hedge is far outweighed by the potential protection it buys (protection against an “unexpected” uptick in the economy).
I still think we are in for a double-dip, but I would still be a protection buyer for some of my position.
Doodad Pro on February 24, 2010 at 12:53 PM
I don’t see anything wring with a party of no. People are fiscally hurting. Taking more money from them via taxes and such for a job’s bill that will do nothing for those who have no job, is starting to sink in.
And they are going to take it out on the people who voted for it.
upinak on February 24, 2010 at 12:54 PM
OK, let me see if I have this right on what most of you are saying about Scott Brown: He runs right to win in MA (MA? really, MA?) then moves left once he is elected? The man has to be a genius!
mwdiver on February 24, 2010 at 12:54 PM
BECKQUAKE! 5PM EST Today!
pilamaye on February 24, 2010 at 12:58 PM
That is OT and a strawman argument.
For the record, the topic is “Jobs bill passes Senate — with 13 Republican votes”
“Some people say” is by definition a strawman argument. That is all. I will also say again that a vote for the fake “Tea Party” guy in Nevada who is bankrolled by the Dems is a vote for Dingy Harry.
chunderroad on February 24, 2010 at 12:58 PM
“”One month after the September 11th attacks, Scott Brown was one of only three Massachusetts State Representatives to vote against a bill to provide financial assistance to Red Cross workers who had volunteered with 9/11 recovery efforts, we’ve learned.”"
“”The Brown campaign acknowledged the vote to us, claiming the measure would have taxed already-strained state finances.”"
That was then, fortunately now there is plenty of money laying around to spend on whatever.
Bishop on February 24, 2010 at 12:59 PM
upinak, I guess we just have to agree to disagree here. I respect your position, but this Health Care Summit is a very dangerous thing, and this $15 billion paid for a nice shield for the Republicans going into the Colosseum.
Obama has the Republicans at a disadvantage for a number of reasons:
1. TV is Obama’s turf. He has Hope and Change. We have McCain and McConnell.
2. Obama is one voice. We have all sorts of voices (including Grahmnesty, McCain, Snowe, Collins, etc.), a number of which don’t speak either coherently or conservatively.
3. Obama wants to blame the failure of healthcare reform on partisan gridlock. That is a simple argument. The counterargument is correct but complicated. A forum like this does not lend itself well to complicated arguments. It is far simpler to say, “Look at the jobs bill. We voted for that. Why can’t you come up with something we can all agree on?”
Doodad Pro on February 24, 2010 at 1:00 PM
I don’t understand why Rush, et al. can’t see WHY a third party won’t happen. We tea partiers are SERIOUS about this and none of our politicians will listen. What other recourse do we have? They aren’t hearing us.
PrincipledPilgrim on February 24, 2010 at 1:00 PM
Let me correct my former comment. I DO NOT wish to see a third party but who is the fool after a while…
PrincipledPilgrim on February 24, 2010 at 1:01 PM
Phreshone pointed out it is a tax cut, though the wrong kind, and deficit neutral overall. I think stirring up populist outrage against Brown, who was elected to represent voters in Massachusetts, for this vote is counterproductive.
chunderroad on February 24, 2010 at 1:01 PM
To everyone who is rationalizing/excusing Brown and the others who voted for this POS:
It isn’t “just” $15 billion. When reconciled with the House bill, it’ll end up somewhere between five and ten times more.
And that’s only the “estimated” cost, which means that this, like everything the thuggish wastrels in Congress do, it’ll end up costing twice what they claim. At least.
So it’ll be “only” $150-300 billion. A mere drop in the bucket when it’s so necessary to prove that Repubs can “just get along” with the spendthrift totalitarians who want to bankrupt the nation while lining their own pockets and those of their backers.
Good thinking. Not.
MrScribbler on February 24, 2010 at 1:02 PM
If that is your interpretation of the allowable discussion, then please stay on topic.
Do you want me to give you the monikers? The links? Oh, wait, you can’t answer because that would be OT.
Please stay on topic so you don’t upset yourself.
MeatHeadinCA on February 24, 2010 at 1:04 PM
Beck is right in saying they have no honor.
moonsbreath on February 24, 2010 at 1:04 PM
are you people batsh*t crazy? Brown won Uncle Teddy’s seat, stopped Obamacare and you’re bitching about him being a traitor? No wonder dems whalloped us last year- we eat our own! And I’m happy to call Brown our own- do I agree on everyithing he does? Clearly not. But this crap of “he has to be a true conservative” is crap- you can’t elect a red state conservative to a deep blue state. You run that and get ready for a permanent minority status. Pick battles you can win.
drballard on February 24, 2010 at 1:05 PM
Win in the GOP primaries.
WashJeff on February 24, 2010 at 1:05 PM
MrScribbler: If it comes back as more than $15 billion, that is the time to vote against it. You can vote for something before you vote against it.
You just can’t say you did, as demonstrated in 2004.
Doodad Pro on February 24, 2010 at 1:05 PM
Brown ran to the right of the Democrat. It does not mean that he has a Republican mandate. His #1 campaign promise was to vote against the healthcare bill and provide Republicans the 41st vote to allow for the filibuster. It meant Massachusetts does not want to pay for Romneycare twice, and they want more discussion and less corruption.
chunderroad on February 24, 2010 at 1:06 PM
Maybe you should check MY post a little while ago. I never said anything about Brown and even mentioned MY Senators BOTH voted yes, in which is a nail in thier coffin in my eyes.
So WTF are you talking about?
upinak on February 24, 2010 at 1:06 PM
I don’t understand why Rush, et al. can’t see WHY a third party won’t happen. We tea partiers are SERIOUS about this and none of our politicians will listen. What other recourse do we have? They aren’t hearing us.
PrincipledPilgrim on February 24, 2010 at 1:00 PM
FACE IT……
Rush, Hannity, Laura, Levin, etc. they have friends in the GOP and they HAVE TO STAND WITH THE RINO-Infested GOP.
PappyD61 on February 24, 2010 at 1:06 PM
So, exactly how many paper-hatted burger flipper positions is this latest “jobs” bill suppose to create?
Last time they pushed something like this through, Pelozilla erupted with a bold prediction of BILLIONS of jobs created, when it actually amounted to something like four….with the fourth guy quitting after the first three days.
pilamaye on February 24, 2010 at 1:08 PM
I’ve already moved on. You should, too.
chunderroad on February 24, 2010 at 1:08 PM
All I can figure is that they thought it was pocket change (relatively speaking) and probably the best shot at gaining a little faux bipartisanship cred and attaching themselves to something with “jobs” in the title.
Ronnie on February 24, 2010 at 1:08 PM
I’m sick to death of politicians cynically passing these so called stimulus (slush fund) bills.
The first stimulus (slush fund) bill isn’t even spent and now they are trying to pass a new one.
It’s not meant to help anyone except the politicians.
Hence the number of Republicans who voted for it.
Purely political!
donh525 on February 24, 2010 at 1:08 PM
I pride myself on having been the voice of sanity with respect to Scott Brown. Took a lot of abuse from you guys in those threads.
He is exactly what he said he would be, no more and no less. The alternative would have been far worse, but he’s never going to smell of petunias to the conservative, small government, base.
That’s why I didn’t donate to his committee. Now he’s got such a cash stockpile from you chowderheads that a real conservative will find that the dollar bills fired at his/her head will undoubtedly be marked “Made in USA by overeager conservatives”.
unclesmrgol on February 24, 2010 at 1:09 PM
Why are you dropping the F bomb?
chunderroad on February 24, 2010 at 1:10 PM
Clearly you haven’t… or you’d
1) Ignore
2) Stay on your topic
Don’t worry about me ~ appreciate the concern though ;-)
MeatHeadinCA on February 24, 2010 at 1:10 PM
He stopped Obamacare in its tracks, and that’s good enough for me. I think he’s the right candidate for Massachusetts, and he is an asset to the GOP.
chunderroad on February 24, 2010 at 1:12 PM
The pubbies obviously either didn’t read the bill, or had decided no one else reads the bills, because it is just another hoax. That was the old way, where people would look at the bill title and believe it really represented something other than the propaganda title.
I have to go with the ‘title did it for them’.
But here is a little song that shows what is really go on. It’s time for the Republicans to wake up to reality.
The bill is another porkulus scam.
tarpon on February 24, 2010 at 1:13 PM
I even provided the link.
chunderroad on February 24, 2010 at 1:13 PM
Apparently he isn’t planning on running for another term in the Senate. Guess his Climate-change stance is the magicians slight of hand. Watch my left hand fight Climate-change while my right votes for the Jobs bill.
I am getting older and having those standard memory loss problems but this is one vote my memory will remember.
Helloyawl on February 24, 2010 at 1:13 PM
wow…. stay off topic much? You are freaking out over a F which could be “the bomb” or farking or freaking. Get a grip.
I asked a question. Either answer it or just shut up. Simple.
upinak on February 24, 2010 at 1:14 PM
Democrats could pass a bill saying pedophilia was legal and if it had the word “Jobs” in it, Republicans would vote for it.
Speedwagon82 on February 24, 2010 at 1:14 PM
I think you and I are actually in agreement. Brown didn’t run as a conservative Republican. He ran as a Republican, that conservatives liked on a few issues. Some people just wanted him to be more conservative than he is, and are disappointed. I think WashJeff said it very well. Paraphrasing here, Scott Brown really only does two things, and those that expected more will be disappointed.
mwdiver on February 24, 2010 at 1:15 PM
I’m not going to get worked up over this particular vote. The bill was significantly larger and pork laden before it got pared down to the $15B size it is today. It is at least focused on something I think everyone can agree should be a priority, JOBS. I agree with other posters that you have to choose your battles carefully. I would much ratther hold the congress feet to the fire on the big stuff like O-Care, Crap & Tax, etc.
Until the Republicans gain control of the congress or have greater numbers in which to obstruct, we have to keep our powder dry.
My view is that we do what is necessary to gain control of the house, senate and White House, including holding our noses on certain votes or candidates then we can start picking off the RINO’s in a more deliberate and strategic manner.
glennbo on February 24, 2010 at 1:17 PM
Yes it is!
I’m so cynical now, that they can’t bring up any bill, without my feeling it’s all about them!
donh525 on February 24, 2010 at 1:18 PM
So we’re already throwing Brown under the bus over one vote on a relatively small piece of legislation?
changer1701 on February 24, 2010 at 1:19 PM
O’Reilly is clueless when it comes to anything involving economics. And his attempts to be “fair and balanced” and “Independent” can be excruciating to watch.
But what really concerns me are those conservatives who (egged on by Glen Beck?) are intent on purging the party of anyone and everyone they deem is a “RINO”, or the nom du jour, “progressive”.
I am not saying that we should put up with people like, say, the odious Colin Powell. I certainly understand why people are fed up with John McCain (although one has to consider whether it is realistic to think that J.D. Hayworth could win that Senate seat in the general election). However, to put people like Newt in the RINO category is petty and self-defeating (if not suicidal).
We need to maintain our sanity while we strive to follow conservative principles of liberty and fiscal discipline.
Buy Danish on February 24, 2010 at 1:19 PM
Only for a while. The zombie is still shambling about. As for being a GOP asset, you’ve just seen that asset at work.
unclesmrgol on February 24, 2010 at 1:19 PM
I agree, but I do think a mild rebuke like unfriending is appropriate. If he gets too comfortable he will go all-RINO. If he votes for any form of Obamacare, though, it’s war.
PattyJ on February 24, 2010 at 1:21 PM
I only asked you why you dropped the F bomb. It was neither freaking out nor figuring out what F stands for, and I made it clear I’m not really interested in what you have to say.
Aside from this:
I asked you whether you had considered Phreshone’s point, but you are all acting all buttsore and indignant that I picked on MeatheadinCA. Which is, incidentally, answering your question (upinak on February 24, 2010 at 1:06 PM) and very politely, too, I might add.
chunderroad on February 24, 2010 at 1:25 PM
all butt sore.. ???
you are attacking me and I haven’t said one word to you other then WTF??? Talk about getting off topic.
I didn’t read his comment as I am skimming. Is that a problem for you?
upinak on February 24, 2010 at 1:26 PM
I think betting against the economy and talking about how jobs should be a priority then voting against a jobs bill that still has to pass reconciliation in the House is dumb.
chunderroad on February 24, 2010 at 1:27 PM
BLAHHHH!
I knew he would do it; he voted for Porkulus, too. At least Corker didn’t.
ladyingray on February 24, 2010 at 1:28 PM
Scott Brown’s vote is no surprise. I knew he would vote this way on this bill. If anyone gave him money thinking he wouldn’t vote in a more “moderate” way on certain issues was foolish.
Still, he’s better than a Dem-rat in that seat.
ladyingray on February 24, 2010 at 1:30 PM
It’s a strange coincidence that you chastised me about staying on topic, when the only time I addressed you, it was specifically to ask you a question about this topic. You then said, “So WTF are you talking about?” and then said to “answer the question or shut up.”
Who is screaming F at whom? Who is yelling “shut up” here?
chunderroad on February 24, 2010 at 1:32 PM
So, will the final bill be the 15 billion price tag from the Senate? Or the 154 billion price tag from the House? Or will they pork it up further?
When the “final” bill vote cost after reconciliation inevitably clears 165-170 billion do we still have to vote for it as it’s a “jobs bill”?
This vote isn’t the important one; I’ll be more interested and concerned to see what the size of this is after they combine the bills for the next vote.
Will we keep the trimmed down jobs bill at “only” 15 billion or so; or will it explode right back to where it was when the house passed it? Or will it get even larger?
I’ll take bets, the over/under on the final bill size is probably going to be around 160 billion or so (larger than either bill).
gekkobear on February 24, 2010 at 1:33 PM
I’m really pissed about this. The GOP doesn’t get it. If they don’t nominate A REAL STRONG Conservative in 2012 – they can forget me – and a lot of others.
HondaV65 on February 24, 2010 at 12:25 PM
Right there with ya. I’m done.
NJ Red on February 24, 2010 at 1:34 PM
Do you like chewing peoples ass due to lack of bubble gum?
I said I didn’t read it as I was skimming. i.e. I haven’t read all the comments. Jump much from the path?
upinak on February 24, 2010 at 1:35 PM
*shrug*
A vote for third party is a vote for Dems. Vote that way if you must, but again – don’t delude yourself that you’re doing anything other than helping re-elect vulnerable Dems.
Sucks, I know, but sometimes reality does, in fact, suck.
Midas on February 24, 2010 at 1:37 PM
Scott Brown is already taking to dem talking points. What an azz.
Ideally, it would include some tax cuts. Paying people to hire the most undesirable workers is not a tax cut, that’s a subsidy for the Peter Principle.
Right now, you are lying like a banshee, Sen. Brown. If you consider this sort of micromanaging from Washington to be “tax-releif” or a “tax cut”, then you are too dumb for words.
I appreciate that you claimed you would vote against the health scare monstrosity, but I have some serious doubts that you will stick to that, as you can easily be dazzled by any shiny object that has “tax cut” printed on it.
What a total disappointment you are. Pathetic.
neurosculptor on February 24, 2010 at 1:39 PM
You’re referring to this comment.
You and I are in total agreement here, mwdiver.
chunderroad on February 24, 2010 at 1:41 PM
How quickly we forget, hehe. We knew when everyone was excited about him that he was no ‘conservative’, but we were happy to have him rather than the raging liberal that would’ve been elected as a Dem, perhaps.
Maybe we’d be happier now had Coakley won instead?
Midas on February 24, 2010 at 1:41 PM
It will be interesting to see how many future bills will have the word, “JOBS” included so it will pass.
yoda on February 24, 2010 at 1:41 PM
We tried to reach Bill Bennett for comment but he was out having a smoke….
pugwriter on February 24, 2010 at 1:42 PM
I think one of the points Beck is making is that we know squishy Republicans can’t be trusted. They are by nature backstabbing SOB’s. Yes Scott Brown lied to get in and then moved left when in office. How many times have we seen this from how many GOP scumbags? After you have heard lie upon lie doesn’t it begin to be your failing for trusting them?
sharrukin on February 24, 2010 at 1:43 PM
No kidding.
OmahaConservative on February 24, 2010 at 1:44 PM
Essentially this is a vote buying and self-advertisement bill:
“I voted for JOBS! VOTE for me!”
Little more.
If it had been done a year ago, instead of the waste of time on the failed Obamacare Folly , it might have had some psychological effect against the growing Recession.
Now, it’ll be seen as a transparent effort to CYA.
And maybe some public servants will be propped up for about a year (say, until around Novemeber 2010).
profitsbeard on February 24, 2010 at 1:45 PM
You don’t even know what you’re saying anymore. Then you say you’re just skimming and tell me to go back and read your comments. Seriously, who do you think you are? Goody, can’t wait to go back and slog through all your comments about stock-piling guns and “freaking, farking, flipping.”
chunderroad on February 24, 2010 at 1:45 PM
Just curious. What did Scott Brown acutally lie about?
mwdiver on February 24, 2010 at 1:47 PM
I’m guessing they won’t be bills about healthcare or climate.
chunderroad on February 24, 2010 at 1:47 PM
This was a no-win situation for rational Americans, and if Brown ends up voting for health scare (which very well might happen, seeing the twisted reasoning he employs) then the difference between Brown and Coakley will be reduced to the infinitesimal.
This is why America is heading down the sh!tter.
neurosculptor on February 24, 2010 at 1:48 PM
I’m curious about that, as well.
chunderroad on February 24, 2010 at 1:48 PM
Very good points, and more I’m interested in that outcome.
chunderroad on February 24, 2010 at 1:50 PM
party does not matter to these ewwwww poeple- if you vote for any incumbant no matter what party you are doing your country a disfavor. Vote all the bastards out!
Time to Red Dawn thie MF’er – load and lock folks load and lock!
igglesphan on February 24, 2010 at 1:51 PM
Oh, this ! thing must be like saying fark instead of another word that starts with F and ends with K. I used to do that in the sixth grade. Can’t wait to go have lunch now with those cheerful thoughts of the sh!tter!
chunderroad on February 24, 2010 at 1:53 PM
What happens people when they cross state lines into the North East…..conservative values and ideals should not change….unless there is stupid in the water? Hmmm.
HornetSting on February 24, 2010 at 1:53 PM
Switch to decaf.
chunderroad on February 24, 2010 at 1:55 PM
I still think the money I donated to the Scott Brown campaign was well-spent. I had no illusions that Brown would be any better than Snowe or Collins. However, he is 200 times better than Coakley. I thought I was spending my money to try to get a 41st vote against Obamacare and Cap & Tax and a person who would not agree with treating terrorists as common criminals. I am getting my money’s worth so far.
Putting his stances on the issues aside for a second, I think his election also has had a macro-level effect on the national political landscape that was not recognized at the time. His election forced the media to finally recognize the power of the public discontent with the Democrat-dominated government and its attempts to socialize medicine. Furthermore, it brought a lot of quality Republican candidates out of the woodwork. That is why we are talking about 60-seat pickups in the House. Without candidates, there are no races. Without Scott Brown, we probably don’t have Rubio wiping the floor with Crist.
Doodad Pro on February 24, 2010 at 1:56 PM
Scott Brown…
sharrukin on February 24, 2010 at 1:58 PM
Don’t get me wrong. I am probably one of the more staunch conservatives around (at least I feel so, others may disagree). I wish Scott Brown, et. al. would have voted against the bill, but am I surprised he voted the way he did? Not in the least. Do I feel he lied during the campaign? No, but to be honest, I didn’t follow everything he said, as MA isn’t my state, so I had no vote, anyway. Looking at the alternative being Coakley or some other Dimowit, I’d still go with Brown. A vote against health care and not giving terrorists rights of US citizens are winners in my book. We are the party of the Maine
MoronsTwins. We can’t take Brown in MA, at least until we can get to the point where we can be more picky and get a better choice? You can’t win the war without winning some battles along the way. In my mind, this win was a gift we should willingly take. We at least can live to fight another day.mwdiver on February 24, 2010 at 1:59 PM
if companies don’t have to pay the SS tax, will the employees? cause SS has so much extra cash sitting in it, right?
kelley in virginia on February 24, 2010 at 2:00 PM
I do not think a jobs bill built by Democrats means what you and Scott thinks it means.
unclesmrgol on February 24, 2010 at 2:04 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »