Boehner, Republicans Vote Against Economic Recovery

Discussion in 'Politics' started by jamis359, Jan 30, 2009.

  1. Does anyone actually take you seriously?
    Jump start on Socialism?
    Who are you kidding?

    What would you call nationalizing Fannie and Freddie, or handing out $700 BILLION to the financial industry, including $150 BILLION to AIG? Backstopping Bear Stearns and Bank of America?

    Get real.

    If that wasn't a "jump-start" on Socialism by your good buddy "Dumbya" I don't know what is!
     
    #11     Jan 30, 2009
  2. I don't think the "stimulus package" will do much, if anything, to help the economy.

    But if I were a Republican strategist, I would be very careful here. And it has nothing to do with Obama's "popularity". It's starting to become very evident how well Obama is playing this game.
     
    #12     Jan 30, 2009
  3. Very true.

    The Republicans have just put themselves into a nice little "box" with very little wiggle room. If the Economy comes back in late 2009 or early 2010 ( which there is a very high probability of based on where we are in this business cycle ), then the Republicans are left on the "outside" looking "in" and the entire Country will remember that.

    Obama has only been in office a little over a week, and he is already "playing" them like a "fiddle".

    But then again, what would you expect from a Party that doesn't even know what they stand for anymore . . . and have no one else but snake-oil salesman and self-promotor Rush Limbaugh as their "leader".

    Even Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell threw Bush under the "bus" this week . . . remarking that the Party can move on now that it no longer has to "carry the political burden of (Bush) over the past two terms."
     
    #13     Jan 30, 2009
  4. Partly.

    As an aside, I do not think Boehner/McConnell can lead the charge anyway. They were present with the past profligate spending, even prior to the Bush/Paulson bailout. There is too much baggage there and not enough legitimacy to do a good job. They cannot be suddenly fiscally contrite after 8 years. Doesn't wash.
     
    #14     Jan 30, 2009
  5. Few take him seriously. That's why we have him on ignore!:)
     
    #15     Jan 30, 2009
  6. Ufortunately for our country, the Clinton squad is running country now .
    We all know they are shameless .
    RIP USA
     
    #16     Jan 30, 2009
  7. Mav88

    Mav88

    Landis, for some reason your partisanship prevents you from understanding what actually happened at this meeting. The republicans offered their suggestions and the Obama just said no. "I won, I will trump you on that"- remember?

    The meeting was again just for imagery, Obama has no intention of compromising or having bipartisanship. When the country wakes up and realizes it's all about perceptions and solidifying democratic power, it will be too late. This is not a stimulus bill, it's a liberal goody bag designed to lock in elections.
     
    #17     Jan 30, 2009
  8. TGregg

    TGregg

    Just think how much saturated fat must be in this porker if none of the big government lovin' RINOs would vote for it. It's like a roomful of Rosie O'Donnells looking at a bucket of chicken and every stinkin' one of them saying "That's just too unhealthy for me."
     
    #18     Jan 30, 2009
  9. Cesko

    Cesko

    Anybody curious enough to gather some knowledge about mullato would know by now that this is a classic modus operandi of a con job president.
    Slicker than Clinton ever was.
     
    #19     Jan 30, 2009
  10. Did you read his post? That's exactly what he said.

    By the way, I take him seriously.

    OldTrader
     
    #20     Jan 31, 2009