stimulus worked so well, we need another one

Yurt said:
you're falling for the scam damo....there doesn't need to be another bill, take the original stimulus and do this. this new bill is nothing but political showman ship. if the dems are truly serious about tax cuts, why the need for this bill, that in reality does next to nothing?
Click to expand...
No, you use this bill to gut the other. This is a serious chance for Rs to take the initiative. Talk about them finally seeing sense in tax incentives, drive the point that any spending should be taken from the previous bill, talk about how it would be even more effective if large companies had the same incentives. Talk to people about economics, drive the point that government jobs take from the private sector and rarely add to it. So on...
 
Yurt said:
you're falling for the scam damo....there doesn't need to be another bill, take the original stimulus and do this. this new bill is nothing but political showman ship. if the dems are truly serious about tax cuts, why the need for this bill, that in reality does next to nothing?
Click to expand...

You don't understand the legislative process at all if you think they can just do this with the original bill.
 
Onceler said:
Yurt, I'm not going to argue with you about the source. I'll remind you that you have cited the CBO when it's convenient for your argument; would you dispute that? I would also add that the CBO didn't say anything at all in their latest report to indicate that "the economy would have been better had Obama done nothing."

Now, your only option is to discredit the CBO & its conclusions. That's fine. But like I said, it's something, and something a lot of people give credence to. If we're debating on points, and I have a CBO report, and you have an opinion piece filled with generalizations from investor.com....who do you think wins?
Click to expand...

i've told you this before, i don't recall ever citing the cbo...i asked you last time you said this for a link and of course you couldn't find it. this is so typical of you onceler. you won't actually debate, as you just said again, i won't argue the source, then you go out and make up shit.

you made a stupid statement about the cbo and then used politicians and pundits to add authority to the cbo........and all you can do with my link is say its an opinion piece.....what is truly sad here, is that the cbo is nothing but an opinion piece and you can't see that. its virtually all estimates onceler. but go ahead and bash me over the head because politicians and pundits cite cbo....

lmao
 
Damocles said:
Usually we cite the CBO because you think it is the end all be all. So, when speaking with a liberal, if you want them to hear you then you use the sources they prize so highly.
Click to expand...

Once again, I'll take the CBO over your "hunch" any day of the week.
 
Damocles said:
No, you use this bill to gut the other. This is a serious chance for Rs to take the initiative. Talk about them finally seeing sense in tax incentives, drive the point that any spending should be taken from the previous bill, talk about how it would be even more effective if large companies had the same incentives. Talk to people about economics, drive the point that government jobs take from the private sector and rarely add to it. So on...
Click to expand...

no, you argue this is just another bill, another smoke screen by the dems. we don't need another bill.........we use the original bill that has hundreds of billions left
 
Yurt said:
no, you argue this is just another bill, another smoke screen by the dems. we don't need another bill.........we use the original bill that has hundreds of billions left
Click to expand...
And you lend "Party of No" credence. That is a losing position. Take away from the previous "stimulus", drive the actual agenda. Point out every ridiculous spending in the new bill, wreck any chance it has to come forth, drive that we need to actually stimulate business in order to create jobs. Bring it, don't ignore it, and drive the agenda. This will get more Rs elected in November. Be the party of "NO" only for bad legislation, not something that actually can be driven to meet a conservative agenda.

IF the Rs are successful the Ds will vote against the bill.
 
Yurt said:
i've told you this before, i don't recall ever citing the cbo...i asked you last time you said this for a link and of course you couldn't find it. this is so typical of you onceler. you won't actually debate, as you just said again, i won't argue the source, then you go out and make up shit.
Click to expand...

Oh, my god - are you kidding? You don't recall ever citing the cbo?

Maybe you really are psycho.

You "cited" it (or what you thought was it, but was really the Washington Times interpretation of what it said), a few dozen times on this thread:

http://www.justplainpolitics.com/showthread.php?t=23861&page=8&highlight=times

Check it out; you seemed to like the CBO more then....
 
Onceler said:
Oh, my god - are you kidding? You don't recall ever citing the cbo?

Maybe you really are psycho.

You "cited" it (or what you thought was it, but was really the Washington Times interpretation of what it said), a few dozen times on this thread:

http://www.justplainpolitics.com/showthread.php?t=23861&page=8&highlight=times

Check it out; you seemed to like the CBO more then....
Click to expand...

i knew you would obsess and cite this.....but i am not surprised.

you're such an ignorant tool. using a source to argue against the source cited is not citing the source in the way you claimed i cited cbo. if someone cites the bible as saying X, and i say, well, the bible actually says Y....that is not the same as you claiming i run around citing cbo when it suits my agenda.

thanks again for proving me right that when you think you have a point, you run all over the board looking for evidence to prove your point. yet, when asked difficult questions, you claim people jumped in late to a thread and refuse to answer simple questions because you know it makes you look bad. but oh no, when onceler believes he is right, he will scour the entire board in the attempt to prove himself right.

coward
 
Damocles said:
And you lend "Party of No" credence. That is a losing position. Take away from the previous "stimulus", drive the actual agenda. Point out every ridiculous spending in the new bill, wreck any chance it has to come forth, drive that we need to actually stimulate business in order to create jobs. Bring it, don't ignore it, and drive the agenda. This will get more Rs elected in November. Be the party of "NO" only for bad legislation, not something that actually can be driven to meet a conservative agenda.

IF the Rs are successful the Ds will vote against the bill.
Click to expand...

then you're caving to democrat propoganda....

i will say no if the something is not needed. i will not cave to democrat propoganda simply because they label me this or that.....i don't cave on other issues that most conservatives don't agree with me on, why should i cave because some knuckleheads have a campaign slogan?
 
Yurt said:
i knew you would obsess and cite this.....but i am not surprised.

you're such an ignorant tool. using a source to argue against the source cited is not citing the source in the way you claimed i cited cbo. if someone cites the bible as saying X, and i say, well, the bible actually says Y....that is not the same as you claiming i run around citing cbo when it suits my agenda.

thanks again for proving me right that when you think you have a point, you run all over the board looking for evidence to prove your point. yet, when asked difficult questions, you claim people jumped in late to a thread and refuse to answer simple questions because you know it makes you look bad. but oh no, when onceler believes he is right, he will scour the entire board in the attempt to prove himself right.

coward
Click to expand...

What in the world are you talking about?

You were CITING THE CBO. The fact that you were citing it inaccurately is irrelevant. Here are a few of your posts:

"President Obama's economic recovery package will actually hurt the economy more in the long run than if he were to do nothing, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said Wednesday. " (you kept posting this one)

"the problem with the question is you are trying to spin your way out of what the CBO said....you're trying to make it out as if that is the only harm that will result from the stimulus. it is a dishonest question and you know it. the fact remains, according to the CBO, the stimulus will harm the economy and it would have been better had obama done nothing."

It suited your agenda, so you cited it, again & again & again. There is no way to spin your way out of it.

This is TRULY embarassing, and strange. Do you really deny that you thought you were citing the CBO in the other thread?
 
your lies are boring onceler and so are you games when you avoid answering tough questions, whine about doing people's homework....yet scourt the entire board for what you think makes you right....

you're dishonest, its that simple
 
Yurt said:
your lies are boring onceler and so are you games when you avoid answering tough questions, whine about doing people's homework....yet scourt the entire board for what you think makes you right....

you're dishonest, its that simple
Click to expand...

You said you didn't recall EVER citing the CBO, and then said I couldn't find the link for it. Well, I just provided it. Not only did you cite the CBO, but you cited it again & again & again & again.

And the best you can do is come back with a pat "your lies are boring onceler."

Dude, seriously - that is very embarassing. What is there to dispute about the link I provided? Did you or did you not cite the CBO on that link, repeatedly?
 
amazing that no one who supports this second stimulus can explain why there is even a need for a second stimulus. especially since the first one worked.
 
Yurt said:
amazing that no one who supports this second stimulus can explain why there is even a need for a second stimulus. especially since the first one worked.
Click to expand...

Nah; what's amazing is that this question was answered about a dozen times on your own thread, and you somehow missed it.
 
Yurt said:
then you're caving to democrat propoganda....

i will say no if the something is not needed. i will not cave to democrat propoganda simply because they label me this or that.....i don't cave on other issues that most conservatives don't agree with me on, why should i cave because some knuckleheads have a campaign slogan?
Click to expand...
Short sighted and simply incorrect, then I am driving the agenda and using the Democrat agenda against them. Use what is gifted to you. My plan kills the bill with the added benefit of a political victory, yours gets it passed with the impression that the Rs are just obstructionist.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top