When the jobless needed help, what were Republicans doing?

[Damocles]

LOL. I seriously like this thread. It starts with an inane accusation found to be baseless considering both the massive bipartisan support for the measure and the fact that it was easily shown to be ridiculous attempt at false baiting, and ends with "You're a poopie face" posts from the desperate people trying to make it relevant.


I hope y'all call me a poopie face, and that this is the best you have to offer all during election time.

 

[Guns Guns Guns]

LOL. I seriously like this thread. It starts with an inane accusation found to be baseless considering both the massive bipartisan support for the measure and the fact that it was easily shown to be ridiculous attempt at false baiting, and ends with "You're a poopie face" posts from the desperate people trying to make it relevant. I hope y'all call me a poopie face, and that this is the best you have to offer all during election time.

Gee, yesterday you said it was a waste of time, yet here you are again?

Fact is, the non-binding resolution was a meaningless gesture introduced by Republicans at a time of crucial need for American workers.

Tell me, what has the GOP enacted that helps create jobs?

What about the provisions in the House GOP bill that would've allowed states to require that the unemployed submit to drug testing?

 

[Damocles]

Gee, yesterday you said it was a waste of time, yet here you are again?

Fact is, the non-binding resolution was a meaningless gesture introduced by Republicans at a time of crucial need for American workers.

Tell me, what has the GOP enacted that helps create jobs?

What about the provisions in the House GOP bill that would've allowed states to require that the unemployed submit to drug testing?

It generally is a waste of time. But man it's fun to watch you try to twist it into something relevant. Adding points of contention to be removed during the compromise session is an age old, and well worn strategy to ensure that points you don't want compromised remain. Do you think that 52 weeks is better than 8, and do you understand that the republicans offered a plan that continued the tax relief and allowed people to keep over $1000 rather than the rather paltry $160 that Obama demanded those "scrooges" to pass?

I'll also note that you veer away from your original contention, understanding that it really is a waste of time...

You've made me laugh today. I picture you waiving your arms above your head shouting at your computer in the hope that you'll suddenly appear less inane...

Tell me again what was the point of your original post? I notice you don't even attempt to maintain that premise any longer, is that because you understand the irrelevance of your nonsense post?

 

[Guns Guns Guns]

It generally is a waste of time. But man it's fun to watch you try to twist it into something relevant. Adding points of contention to be removed during the compromise session is an age old, and well worn strategy to ensure that points you don't want compromised remain. Do you think that 52 weeks is better than 8, and do you understand that the republicans offered a plan that continued the tax and allowed people to keep over $1000 rather than the rather paltry $160 that Obama demanded those "scrooges" to pass? I'll also note that you veer away from your original contention, understanding that it really is a waste of time...You've made me laugh today. I picture you waiving your arms above your head shouting at your computer in the hope that you'll suddenly appear less inane...Tell me again what was the point of your original post? I notice you don't even maintain that premise any longer, is that because you understand the irrelevance of your nonsense post?

The point of the OP was to highlight the irrelevant activities of the GOP (who introduced the non-binding resolution) at a time when the unemployed need jobs.

The GOP-dominated House offered a bill that deliberately contained poison pills and irrelevant additions, and they knew the Senate would refuse to accede to their grandstanding offer of "negotiation". Have you read the bill?

You will also note that the Teabaggers are furious, and I doubt their intent was to give workers a break.

Your visualizations of me are slightly creepy, BTW.

 

[Damocles]

The point of the OP was to highlight the irrelevant activities of the GOP (who introduced the non-binding resolution) at a time when the unemployed need jobs.

The GOP-dominated House offered a bill that deliberately contained poison pills and irrelevant additions, and they knew the Senate would refuse to accede to their grandstanding offer of "negotiation". Have you read the bill?

You will also note that the Teabaggers are furious, and I doubt their intent was to give workers a break.

Your visualizations of me are slightly creepy, BTW.

The point of the OP was immediately rendered irrelevant by simply pointing out that 1. Democrats supported the measure almost unanimously, and 2. It wasn't "what republicans were doing instead"...

I'll note again you veer away from it immediately because you too fully understand that it was a waste of time and so very easily shown to be utter nonsense.

Can you try to make your point relevant again in some other winding fashion that makes no sense? Please? It makes me grin.

 

[Guns Guns Guns]

The point of the OP was immediately rendered irrelevant by simply pointing out that 1. Democrats supported the measure almost unanimously, and 2. It wasn't "what republicans were doing instead"... I'll note again you veer away from it immediately because you too fully understand that it was a waste of time and so very easily shown to be utter nonsense. Can you try to make your point relevant again in some other winding fashion that makes no sense? Please? It makes me grin.

I'm glad I make you grin. You're almost the only reasonable and honest rightie here.

It's funny. When I find something a "waste of time", I don't waste time on it. Obviously you feel differently, which makes me grin.

Are you saying that the non-binding resolution undertaken by Republicans instead of meaningful legislation is more important than trying to aid American workers?

 

[Damocles]

I'm glad I make you grin. You're almost the only reasonable and honest rightie here.

It's funny. When I find something a "waste of time", I don't waste time on it. Obviously you feel differently, which makes me grin.

Are you saying that the non-binding resolution undertaken by Republicans instead of meaningful legislation is more important than trying to aid American workers?

When things are funny, but a "waste of time" I enjoy continuing to laugh and grin. My hope is to get you to continue to try to make your point relevant.

Are you saying that offering 52 weeks of aid, as well as solutions to create more jobs so they'll not actually need it at the end of that 52 weeks, is less than 8 weeks with no solutions at all?

Are you saying those Democrats that voted for that measure in droves were doing something "instead" of voting for that 8 week punt the Administration pretended was generous?

 

[Guns Guns Guns]

When things are funny, but a "waste of time" I enjoy continuing to laugh and grin. My hope is to get you to continue to try to make your point relevant.

So you enjoy trolling. Cool.

Are you saying that offering 52 weeks of aid, as well as solutions to create more jobs so they'll not actually need it at the end of that 52 weeks, is less than 8 weeks with no solutions at all?

Since you have not explained how the poison-pill laded GOP bill offered in early December would have created more jobs, nor shown how the bill that later passed offers "no solutions at all", is that a fair question?

Have you read either bill?

Are you saying those Democrats that voted for that measure in droves were doing something "instead" of voting for that 8 week punt the Administration pretended was generous?

No, because the Democrats (who also have done too little to address employment, IMO) were also proposing other solutions that were relevant to the economic crisis.

While voting for the totally symbolic non-binding resolution was silly, pointless, and wasteful, who would vote against it (other than the 9 who did and the 2 who wisely abstained)? It would be like voting against Mom and apple pie.

List is here: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/cpquery/?&dbname=cp112&sid=cp112Jx32T&refer=&r_n=hr047.112&item=&&&sel=TOC_12850&

 

[Damocles]

So you enjoy trolling. Cool.

I enjoy laughing.

Since you have not explained how the poison-pill laded GOP bill offered in early December would have created more jobs, nor shown how the bill that later passed offers "no solutions at all", is that a fair question?

So you do not think, like Nancy Pelosi, that 52 weeks of unemployment and tax cuts for the poor is stimulating? You don't remember me pointing out points that actually create jobs purposefully, I get that, because it is one way to try to twist your OP into something relevant. Do you think it is working?

Have you read either bill?

Yup, have you read more than your silly op-eds that link to the bills?

No, because the Democrats (who also have done too little to address employment, IMO) were also proposing other solutions that were relevant to the economic crisis.

Such as?

While voting for the totally symbolic non-binding resolution was silly, pointless, and wasteful, who would vote against it (other than the 9 who did and the 2 who wisely abstained)? It would be like voting against Mom and apple pie.

List is here: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/cpquery/?&dbname=cp112&sid=cp112Jx32T&refer=&r_n=hr047.112&item=&&&sel=TOC_12850&

Which doesn't change my point, the non-binding resolution clearly had massive bipartisan support and wasn't passed in lieu of something else, you clearly understand that the republicans passed other legislation directly relevant.

I'll note you cannot answer my question:

Do you believe that 52 weeks of extension is shorter than an 8 week punt?

 

[Guns Guns Guns]

I enjoy laughing.

So do I. Thanks.

So you do not think, like Nancy Pelosi, that 52 weeks of unemployment and tax cuts for the poor is stimulating? You don't remember me pointing out points that actually create jobs purposefully, I get that, because it is one way to try to twist your OP into something relevant. Do you think it is working?

What points of the non-binding resolution or the failed House bill "actually create jobs purposefully"?

Yup, have you read more than your silly op-eds that link to the bills?

Yup.

Such as?

I guess you didn't read the text. Try again.

Which doesn't change my point, the non-binding resolution clearly had massive bipartisan support and wasn't passed in lieu of something else, you clearly understand that the republicans passed other legislation directly relevant.

The non-binding resolution was a frivolous political stunt and a waste of time which accomplished nothing.

What "other legislation directly relevant" did Republicans pass?

This should be good.

I'll note you cannot answer my question: Do you believe that 52 weeks of extension is shorter than an 8 week punt?

I'll note that you are begging the question.

 

[Damocles]

So do I. Thanks.



What points of the non-binding resolution or the failed House bill "actually create jobs purposefully"?

None, but this wasn't passed in lieu of other legislation. As you've clearly indicated you fully understand in this thread.

Yup.

Good.

I guess you didn't read the text. Try again.



The non-binding resolution was a frivolous political stunt and a waste of time which accomplished nothing.

What "other legislation directly relevant" did Republicans pass?

The 52 week extension, actually including a way with zero tax dollars to create infrastructure that will create jobs for the foreseeable future. Are you trying to say now that they didn't pass what you argue was not relevant simply because a Democrat controlled house of congress didn't pass the same?

This should be good.

Actually your silliness is underlined, and it made me laugh again.

I'll note that you are begging the question.

Note away, I'll note you are avoiding answering.

Is 52 weeks better than an 8 week punt?

 

[Don Quixote]

Yeah, because infrastructure like pipelines just are born there! Stupid Damocles, thinking making stuff employs people!

how many people will be employed? VS the potential damage caused by leaks, after all pipelines never leak...

 

[Don Quixote]

None, but this wasn't passed in lieu of other legislation. As you've clearly indicated you fully understand in this thread.


Good.



The 52 week extension, actually including a way with zero tax dollars to create infrastructure that will create jobs for the foreseeable future. Are you trying to say now that they didn't pass what you argue was not relevant simply because a Democrat controlled house of congress didn't pass the same?


Actually your silliness is underlined, and it made me laugh again.



Note away, I'll note you are avoiding answering.

Is 52 weeks better than an 8 week punt?

please explain the political poison pill that would prevent a full 52 weeks

 

[Damocles]

how many people will be employed? VS the potential damage caused by leaks, after all pipelines never leak...

As opposed to nothing else towards any solution and zero attempt to create a light at the end of a tunnel and a punt that makes the argument begin again in 8 weeks?

I pointed out earlier that this was the absolute least that could be done, and one of the benefits is that it cost zero tax dollars, another benefit is that some jobs would be created in perpetuity, and another is it would be one small step towards energy independence. It would be my hope that it could later be removed when we obtain a better technology and a more "green" solution.

Do you believe that the US would be safer if they were energy independent, or do you think it is safer to continue to use outside sources for energy with no interim measure or any attempt at independence?

 

[Guns Guns Guns]

None, but this wasn't passed in lieu of other legislation. As you've clearly indicated you fully understand in this thread.

So the time wasted in committee and on the floor didn't detract from the valiant efforts of Republicans to relieve the suffering of the American worker?

If that's so, show me a list of the contemporaneous bills they passed during the same period of time.

I'll wait.

The 52 week extension, actually including a way with zero tax dollars to create infrastructure that will create jobs for the foreseeable future. Are you trying to say now that they didn't pass what you argue was not relevant simply because a Democrat controlled house of congress didn't pass the same?

Nope. The bill the GOP-dominated House passed was loaded with poison pills and they knew it was DOA the whole time. You still haven't explained how the GOP bill would've created jobs, BTW.

Note away, I'll note you are avoiding answering.

I don't answer loaded questions. Include that in your notes.

Is 52 weeks better than an 8 week punt?

Are you aware that a 1 year extension was proposed and rejected by the House?

 

[Damocles]

So the time wasted in committee and on the floor didn't detract from the valiant efforts of Republicans to relieve the suffering of the American worker?

If that's so, show me a list of the contemporaneous bills they passed during the same period of time.

I'll wait.



Nope. The bill the GOP-dominated House passed was loaded with poison pills and they knew it was DOA the whole time. You still haven't explained how the GOP bill would've created jobs, BTW.



I don't answer loaded questions. Include that in your notes.

Translation:

You ask hard questions, and I prefer to try to continue humorous attempts to make other people think my OP was relevant.

Are you aware that a 1 year extension was proposed and rejected by the House?

Are you aware that one was passed that included reasonable restrictions and some actual solutions answering the need for the extension?

 

[Guns Guns Guns]

Translation: You ask hard questions, and I prefer to try to continue humorous attempts to make other people think my OP was relevant. Are you aware that one was passed that included reasonable restrictions and some actual solutions answering the need for the extension?

LOL. You need to brush up on your translation skills.

http://www.rosettastone.com/selp1?pc=sefreeship12&cid=se-gg-5pay&gclid=CKKTlumvr60CFYUZQgodNnO0nQ

Where that list of job-creating bills House Republicans were working on while they were coming up with their non-binding resolution?

 

[Damocles]

LOL. You need to brush up on your translation skills.

http://www.rosettastone.com/selp1?pc=sefreeship12&cid=se-gg-5pay&gclid=CKKTlumvr60CFYUZQgodNnO0nQ

Where that list of job-creating bills House Republicans were working on while they were coming up with their non-binding resolution?

Silliness. Do you believe that if one guy is sponsoring a non-binding resolution that nobody else can be doing something else? Do you ignore your own posts speaking of other legislation in this very thread that ironically made your OP worthless nonsense?

 

[Guns Guns Guns]

Silliness. Do you believe that if one guy is sponsoring a non-binding resolution that nobody else can be doing something else? Do you ignore your own posts speaking of other legislation in this very thread that ironically made your OP worthless nonsense?

If somebody else was doing something else, you should be able to link to it.

 

[Damocles]

If somebody else was doing something else, you should be able to link to it.

You have several times in this thread, no need for me to link to legislation that passed the house that has already been linked. Do you forget the legislation that passed, do you forget your links to that legislation?