Al Patterson
Ferroequinologist
I actually applied for a job in Texas recently. Unfortunately, with the new online app process that most companies use, you never seem to hear back. In the old days you actually got a polite rejection letter, which is better than the nothing you get today. Progress? Not in my book...
NickTrop
Veteran
Yes, move to Texas. Their unemployment rate is around 1% better at 8.3% than the national average. But you better hurry if you decide to do that, the UE rate in Texas rose dramatically since December.
6.6% is the latest US Bureau of Labor Statistics report for Travis County, not anything to celebrate, but far better than elsewhere.
charjohncarter
Veteran
Some guy that is still smoldering after almost 40 years about Nixon is off his rocker. I think many 'progressives' that are so called actors from Hollywood have suggested that people (mainly people that don't agree with them) (the Nixon hater isn't very happy maybe he should try someplace else, as far as I'm concerned he can believe whatever he wants) move out of this country, and they themselves have threatened to do just that. Unfortunately, we never seem to to able to get Barbara Streisand to do it.
Last edited:
charjohncarter
Veteran
Merely suggesting if their mental health is at risk from staying here.
gdi
Veteran
They can call a vote for cloture - ending debate and then get on with voting. Why haven't they (yes, I know it takes time, but the sooner you start...) ? Bunning doesn't have the support of the Republican leadership and this would, in great likelihood, move forward.
"He plays his games, they play theirs" to paraphrase Gunnery Sgt. Hartman.
Last edited:
If you look into the reasoning behind Bunning's maneuver, you'll see that he is simply standing up to the continuous automatic rubber stamp of the government spending money that the government doesn't have.
This all has to end at some point, doesn't it? I mean, we either inject some responsibility into the way the government throws away the people's money, or it's all over.
Just like an individual who spends beyond their means, at some point there is no more to spend, or in this case, no more to confiscate from those who produce.
This all has to end at some point, doesn't it? I mean, we either inject some responsibility into the way the government throws away the people's money, or it's all over.
Just like an individual who spends beyond their means, at some point there is no more to spend, or in this case, no more to confiscate from those who produce.
wgerrard
Veteran
Bunning was not engaging in a filibuster, so cloture doesn't apply. He was objecting to a unanimous consent order to approve the legislation. Unanimous consent is a parliamentary device used secure approval of a measure. The chair, for example, says "If there is no objection, the motion is passed." Bunning objected, repeatedly.
Moving to bring the legislation up for a roll call vote would, however, provide the opportunity for Bunning to filibuster.
The Senate probably can't muster a quorum until next week because so many senators routinely leave town every weekend. As you say, many GOP senators support the extension, so something is likely to happen next week.
gdi
Veteran
Here is a good synopsis of the situation, and why he's doing what he's doing.
If this is an emergency, then the rest of the Senate needs to get off its ass and decide where the money is going to come from first. Otherwise, it's the same thing as signing up for a mortgage without having a job to pay for it. Individuals don't do this, why should our government?
"But all Bunning is saying is, "I'm happy to let this bill go forward as soon as you add to this bill where we're going to get the money to pay for it. The bill is going to cost $10 billion and we need to say where that money is gonna come from. We need to stop deficit spending."
"That's all Bunning is saying. And he's right. We need to stop deficit spending."
"Well that's part of the genius of the idea. This could be a bill that passes unanimously. So here's a bill the entire Senate wants to pass without question, a bill with great emotional appeal. If ever there was a reason for the United States Senate to get this done, that reason is with us.
It's a simple matter, actually: Find $10 billion in the United States budget, fund the bill --Bunning will stand down-- take the vote, it'll pass unanimously and we'll extend the benefits."
If this is an emergency, then the rest of the Senate needs to get off its ass and decide where the money is going to come from first. Otherwise, it's the same thing as signing up for a mortgage without having a job to pay for it. Individuals don't do this, why should our government?
"But all Bunning is saying is, "I'm happy to let this bill go forward as soon as you add to this bill where we're going to get the money to pay for it. The bill is going to cost $10 billion and we need to say where that money is gonna come from. We need to stop deficit spending."
"That's all Bunning is saying. And he's right. We need to stop deficit spending."
"Well that's part of the genius of the idea. This could be a bill that passes unanimously. So here's a bill the entire Senate wants to pass without question, a bill with great emotional appeal. If ever there was a reason for the United States Senate to get this done, that reason is with us.
It's a simple matter, actually: Find $10 billion in the United States budget, fund the bill --Bunning will stand down-- take the vote, it'll pass unanimously and we'll extend the benefits."
gb hill
Veteran
Yes I do, but only if the American people stand up & stand together against the current criminals in Washington. As long as loyalist in the Democrat party & loyalist in the Republican keep drinking the koolaid & keep blaiming the other party then nothing will ever be done. When I rode one of six buses from N.C. to the teaparty rally in DC there were many Democrats & independents on the bus, not just Republicans. I'm afraid that the Republican party is trying to take over the teaparty movement & if they do then it will all be for naught but then what can anyone do with a two party system.
charjohncarter
Veteran
I hope you are right, I'm a little more skeptical. My feeling is the expansion of government and government debt is a contra productive exercise.
gdi
Veteran
I never said it was a filibuster. And it is cloture I was talking about - to end debate that will shut him up. Do some more googling...
From WaPO - E Klein on Bunning:
" But his play isn't to win the vote. His play is to win the clock. Breaking his hold would require a cloture vote, which would mean two days to let the cloture vote "ripen" and then 30 hours of post-cloture debate. That means benefits will run out."
From Politico :
"Bunning is furious about increased spending in the Senate – but he’s waging a lonely battle to stop it. The senior senator from his state, Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, with whom he has a frosty relationship, is not backing him up. If he refuses to relent, Democrats will have to file cloture to shut down debate, pushing back final action until next week."
Note that I am not saying that Bunning is right- I think he picked the wrong bill to try to make his point. Real people like Dave are in the balance with this issue and if it is not fully funded, then "tough sh#t" - pass it.
Last edited:
wgerrard
Veteran
The linked commentary asks "Which is more important to you: Extending unemployment benefits or getting the deficit under control?"
A reasonable question, but one I doubt Bunning would ask about legislation that funneled an equivalent amount of deficit-funded military spending into Kentucky.
If Bunning had successfully raised similar objections to the unfunded spending of the previous administration we'd be at least $1 trillion up on the deficit.
charjohncarter
Veteran
I think we took a wrong turn in 1964. And the B888888d didn't take office until 1969.
wgerrard
Veteran
The deficit is a legitimate issue. Expansion of government less so, depending on each individual's opinion on what the government is doing.
All those issues aside, unemployment is up because Americans-with-money decided that they could make more money by shuffling paper around than by actually funding productive enterprises that hired people. Lax government regulation and tacit encouragement aided and abetted their behavior. Last year the cards came tumbling down and we fell into this deep recession.
It's human nature to behave like that. Unless laws and regulations are created and enforced, we will do it over and over again.
wgerrard
Veteran
The election was in 1968. If Bob Kennedy had not been murdered, Nixon would not have been elected.
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
That's his right in a free society. What part of that don't you people get? If someone hates Nixon, he can and there isn't a damned thing you can do about it. Get over it. As much as many on the right wish it wasn't so, the USA is still a free country whose people are citizens, not subjects. We're getting dangerously close to losing that and its high time we started fighting for our rights of citizenship, including the right to disagree with you.
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
Yes, conservatard. lol
I don't think that all conservatives are idiots. If you make your living from investments rather than work, then voting for rightwing politicians makes sense. The problem is, where I live VERY few people fit that description. Very few even own their own businesses. Most are employees of someone else, usually a large company like Walmart or GM. Voting for Republicans, for these people, is like a chicken supporting the Colonel. Its retarded, but they do it anyway.
Al Patterson
Ferroequinologist
If you ever made $60,000 or so with no deductions, you might think differently. I do understand the working poor voting to pick my pocket though, which is why I voted the other side to keep their hands out of my pockets.
Now that I'm almost working poor myself, it's time to add my vote to the pocket pickers...
- Status
- Not open for further replies.