Why scaring grandma won't work

More deflection from the Demagogue Party supporters.

Something the Dog Said wrote:

conifermtman wrote:

LadyJazzer wrote: Oh, so saying that government "can't create jobs" was a lie... So, which is it? If they campaigned on "creating jobs" but they can't create jobs, then they were lying....

They were not lying, they are doing exactly what they said. You are just too stupid to understand. A side effect of being a die hard lib with fantasies of taxing the rich so they can feel your pain out of some sick case of schadenfreude.

Perhaps you would be so kind to point out the legislation enacted by the House Republicans that is focused on "jobs, jobs, jobs", or do you admit the Republicans lied about their sole focus being on "jobs, jobs, jobs". They have spent more time on light bulbs than on the economy.

Go here for the list: http://www.speaker.gov/Blog/?postid=250717

The Senate refuses to act on them.

You mean like the GOP in the Senate blocking every single piece of legislation with a filibuster?...Like THAT kind of blocking?

Well, I'm still confused... They campaigned on "jobs, jobs, jobs", but now you're telling us that they cannot (or don't know how) to create jobs....

So, were they lying?

conifermtman wrote:

Kate wrote:

conifermtman wrote:

Kate wrote: LJ, I think what conifermtnman is saying that when the Repubs lie, they aren't really lying, because they're Repubs and only they can understand. It's that confusing conservative logic that they use, after all, if they have to explain it, then everyone would see the error of their logic.

It is not even a Republican philosophy that government creates jobs. You two really need to pay attention.

When Republicans talk about job creation they talk about it in terms of getting government out of the way and making the economic climate conducive to business so that job creation can take place. Which is the complete opposite of what Obama and Democrats do.

So, when they campaign on creating jobs, and then do nothing in terms of laws or bills to make the economic climate conducive to creating those jobs, they are really keeping their campaign promise by doing nothing to create jobs?

That's just weird.

It wasn’t an election—it’s a restraining order on Obama. The Republicans are doing what they were put in office to do.

I'm pretty sure it was an election. I remember voting.

Are you saying that the Republicans, who campaigned on jobs jobs jobs are actually keeping their promise by not doing anything about jobs jobs jobs? Or are they stalling, trying to keep things like they are so that they can win back the White House?

Exactly what legislation have the Republicans in the House introduced that has been related to jobs jobs jobs? What bills have they written that have made the economic climate more conducive to jobs jobs jobs? It's been over six months since the R's and Teabags have been sworn in. They said they would focus like a laser beam on jobs jobs jobs.

The Viking wrote:

LadyJazzer wrote: No, there isn't "plenty of money"... You've been listening to too much FauxNews....

Yes there is. There will be $200 billion coming in and only $20 billion needs to go out to SS and Welfare. And the CBO said today that it is totally up to the Treasury department where that money goes. So it is up to Obama's administration if they get paid or not. The money is there. Scare tactics don't work on educated people. And we will continue to educate them!

Not quite Viking. SS/MC run about $105 Billion a month. It is the interest on the debt you are thinking of when you cite the $20 Billion a month figure, which is actually more like $35 Billion a month if the interest cost is actually $420 Billion a year instead of $240 Billion. SS/MC at $105 Billion a month, a DoD that runs another $45 Billion, $35 Billion for interest on the debt and you're talking around $15 Billion a month for the rest of the federal charity programs (SNAP, unemployment, welfare) and the legitimate functions of the federal government more commonly referred to as discretionary spending of which the Dept of Veteran's Affairs alone consumes about $10 Billion a month at full appropriations.

Reducing the SS/MC budgets to the 75% level that will be necessary in the future without serious reform to the programs would get you another $30 Billion or so a month and cutting the DoD to bare bones might net you another $5 - $10 Billion. Starting from the reality that there is only enough tax revenue to fund roughly 60% of the current spending levels, there really isn't a whole lot of money there if SS is going to be fully funded without an increase in the debt limit. It would take an across the board 40%+ cut to every program (interest payments can't be reduced without defaulting) to live within the current tax receipts. Exempting some programs from that full 40% reduction, especially given that they are the most expensive programs in the budget, would mean those not exempted would have to be decreased a great deal more than the 40% figure, if not entirely shut down.

Make no mistake, not increasing the debt limit would be a very painful reality. Continued increasing of it, however, would likely be more painful. Question is, who should bear the majority of the pain? Those currently retired and above the age of about 40 who are most responsible for electing the people who dug this deep hole; or the children, grandchildren and great grandchildren of these people?

conifermtman wrote:

Something the Dog Said wrote:

conifermtman wrote:

LadyJazzer wrote: Oh, so saying that government "can't create jobs" was a lie... So, which is it? If they campaigned on "creating jobs" but they can't create jobs, then they were lying....

They were not lying, they are doing exactly what they said. You are just too stupid to understand. A side effect of being a die hard lib with fantasies of taxing the rich so they can feel your pain out of some sick case of schadenfreude.

Perhaps you would be so kind to point out the legislation enacted by the House Republicans that is focused on "jobs, jobs, jobs", or do you admit the Republicans lied about their sole focus being on "jobs, jobs, jobs". They have spent more time on light bulbs than on the economy.

Go here for the list: http://www.speaker.gov/Blog/?postid=250717

The Senate refuses to act on them.

That is a very funny list. I especially like the one where 1.2 million jobs would be immediately created if only offshore drilling was expanded without oversight. That is despite the fact that even if that bill was passed, it would be a decade before any drilling would occur.

Kate wrote:

conifermtman wrote:

Kate wrote:

conifermtman wrote:

Kate wrote: LJ, I think what conifermtnman is saying that when the Repubs lie, they aren't really lying, because they're Repubs and only they can understand. It's that confusing conservative logic that they use, after all, if they have to explain it, then everyone would see the error of their logic.

It is not even a Republican philosophy that government creates jobs. You two really need to pay attention.

When Republicans talk about job creation they talk about it in terms of getting government out of the way and making the economic climate conducive to business so that job creation can take place. Which is the complete opposite of what Obama and Democrats do.

So, when they campaign on creating jobs, and then do nothing in terms of laws or bills to make the economic climate conducive to creating those jobs, they are really keeping their campaign promise by doing nothing to create jobs?

That's just weird.

It wasn’t an election—it’s a restraining order on Obama. The Republicans are doing what they were put in office to do.

I'm pretty sure it was an election. I remember voting.

Are you saying that the Republicans, who campaigned on jobs jobs jobs are actually keeping their promise by not doing anything about jobs jobs jobs? Or are they stalling, trying to keep things like they are so that they can win back the White House?

Exactly what legislation have the Republicans in the House introduced that has been related to jobs jobs jobs? What bills have they written that have made the economic climate more conducive to jobs jobs jobs? It's been over six months since the R's and Teabags have been sworn in. They said they would focus like a laser beam on jobs jobs jobs.

The Senate is sitting on them. Do a Google search, its not hard.

So, it's the Senate's fault that the Republicans aren't creating jobs jobs jobs. What a bunch of whiners. Nice deflection.

Kate wrote: So, it's the Senate's fault that the Republicans aren't creating jobs jobs jobs. What a bunch of whiners. Nice deflection.

That is reality. Why don't you call our senators and tell them to have Reid bring up the bills for a vote? What's stopping you?

conifermtman wrote:

Kate wrote: So, it's the Senate's fault that the Republicans aren't creating jobs jobs jobs. What a bunch of whiners. Nice deflection.

That is reality. Why don't you call our senators and tell them to have Reid bring up the bills for a vote? What's stopping you?

What's stopping the House Republicans from doing that? After all, they promised jobs jobs jobs. Why can't they do what they promised?