Thats just the thing. He didnt vote on the jobs bill. The jobs bill has not been voted on yet. He only voted to allow that bill to be voted on. Big difference, not a big deal as so many here are making it out to be.
-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
BROWN TURNS BLUE AS FAST AS THE TEA CHILLS IN MASSACHUSETTS
- Thread starter MaineCWPtraining
- Start date
Thats just the thing. He didnt vote on the jobs bill. The jobs bill has not been voted on yet. He only voted to allow that bill to be voted on. Big difference, not a big deal as so many here are making it out to be.
It's not a big difference at all, given the numbers in DC
Exactly - because of their large majority - anything the dems want that gets through cloture is likely to be approved.
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2009
- Messages
- 2,147
- Likes
- 446
Looks like the bill passed 70-28 in the Senate with Brown voting aye.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704240004575085410014175900.html
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704240004575085410014175900.html
800billion in tax breaks would not be spending $800 billion. It would be $800 billion the gov't would never see, or would have to reimburse businesses for quarterly, depending on the type of tax break.
You're putting words and ideas into my mouth, projecting onto me that which you hate to make your argument against my post better. Right on.
I didn't say anything about creating jobs. Tax breaks don't create jobs, they just put more money into the pockets of the businesses which can then decide to hire more people or not. Let me repeat myself, I'm all for tax breaks. Small businesses, big businesses, poor people, rich people, middle class, I don't care. I share your ideas of equal burden when it comes to taxes, but you're out of your mind if you think opposing a bill with tax breaks for small businesses is the path to leveling the playing field for taxes. All that's going to get you is a big bag of nothing.
Sounds to me like you want a reboot, not a roll back, which is too bad for you because it's unrealistic and not ever going to happen.
brown is a dipshit! so is martha coakley... republican or democrat= piss or shit. take you're pick. libertarian= the toilet which flushes the waste. i voted for Joe Kennedy! its a real shame he didnt get more of the vote. people really need to realize the folley of this 2 party system and start voting Libertatian. theyre the only ones who aren't complete hacks and will stand up for our basic freedoms.
No, I am trying to explain to you that your support for this BS is what is causing all these problems.
If you are ok with targeted tax breaks for one group, you, whether you realize it or not, are supporting targeted tax breaks for other groups.
The entire concept needs to be rejected.
I have no delusions that the repair of our system is going to be easy, fast, or ever satisfactory, but the only way we will improve things is to stop trying to "win" by getting more pork for "our side" and fight pork in all forms.
There is no good pork. There are no acceptable targeted tax cuts. If you want to make things better you need to cut taxes across the board and cut spending by as much or more to compensate.
I understand that things will have to be incrementally fixed, but increments in the wrong direction will NEVER add up to a solution. Two wrongs don't make a right.
Given the options, he was and is the best one available for the job. At least now they will stop referring to the damn Congressional seat as "Kennedy's". I wanted to explode every #%*$% time I heard that crap.
Zombi, I am not putting words in your mouth - I am pointing out the connection between what they are saying and what you are supporting:
What you have just said is equivalent "if they came up with a bill that targeted the group I liked", I'd support it.
This is the precise reason that the Republican party has been destroyed. They got into the back scratching game the Dems had perfected and lost sight of small government.
Zombi said:
What you have just said is equivalent "if they came up with a bill that targeted the group I liked", I'd support it.
This is the precise reason that the Republican party has been destroyed. They got into the back scratching game the Dems had perfected and lost sight of small government.
That's a pretty broad stroke brush to paint parties with and by that standard all politicians are at least some how related to human waste...so...actually not too far from the truth! LOL Jesting aside, this nation is stuck on a tug of war between two evils colored blue and red. They see through their own tinted lense and often times at the detriment of the people, our money and our rights. There needs to be greater mainstream acceptance and acknowledgment of other parties. Running anything other than Rep or Dem is a death sentence for a higher-office political career. Where's Ron Paul when you need him? Oh yeah, shut out by the media.
![[rolleyes]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/042.gif "Roll Eyes [rolleyes]")
I'd argue that the democracy is already over...
Couldn't have said it any better.
We still have the tools to fix the "Republic" - we are a democracy in the worst way already (mob rule).
The question is whether the "will" exists. Which is where I was beating up on zombi. Americans have to re-learn what a healthy relationship with the government looks like. We need to re-learn what the receiving end of "tough love" feels like and that it's a good thing from the government.
Right now, on balance, Americans are too accustomed to their luxuries (to the point that they don't recognize them as luxuries).
couldnt have said it better myself!That's a pretty broad stroke brush to paint parties with and by that standard all politicians are at least some how related to human waste...so...actually not too far from the truth! LOL Jesting aside, this nation is stuck on a tug of war between two evils colored blue and red. They see through their own tinted lense and often times at the detriment of the people, our money and our rights. There needs to be greater mainstream acceptance and acknowledgment of other parties. Running anything other than Rep or Dem is a death sentence for a higher-office political career. Where's Ron Paul when you need him? Oh yeah, shut out by the media.
I get it, what you say makes sense to me... but by that logic wouldn't we have made no progress whatsoever in turning this countries gun laws around? If my ultimate goal is a flat tax rate, why wouldn't I take every tax break along the road to achieving that goal? If we kept throwing out every pro-gun bill that came along because it didn't lift certain restrictions or because it didn't just say 'see: 2nd Amendment' we would be screwed.
Seems like a 'zero tolerance' approach to reducing the size and influence of the Gov't, which won't do anyone any good.
There's a wide gap between pragmatism and "100% support" for something...
I know very well that Zero Tolerance is an exercise in incompetence and futility...
The point is we have to stop giving unfettered support for people who are little more than the "enemy of my enemy".
Everyone in government needs to be reigned in and reminded of the limits of their power regardless of party.
While I agree that it may be "too early" to deem Senator Brown a failure, I would suggest that the same energy created by NES to raise his campaign coffers, (there's no question that Derek and NES were instrumental in that money bomb), be used to continually put both pressure and support on Mr. Brown. He needs to understand that his self-proclaimed title as an "independent thinker", be tempered by his statement that he works for the people of Massachusetts.....Apparently, his FB page got slammed when he danced in the water with his vote and this should be indicative of letters, E-mails, threads on other forums that supported him, (ARF.com et al) and phone calls to his office. Senator Brown may need gentle reminders to balance both his will and the will of his constituents....
Sure, that makes sense? You do know I voted for Brown?
Again, though it is not likely to make it past your wall of assumptions, my point was to get those who are "100% behind" tax cuts for people they like to stop and ask what the cost of those policies really are...
We've been playing this "enemy of my enemy" game for 30+ years and we have fewer allies than we did when we started.
You are sadly mistaken if you think I am dumb enough to not recognize the difference between tactics and strategy.
And tempered further by the Constitution to which he swore an oath.
I think this is the single biggest failure of the electorate and the exact point I have been trying to make in this thread. We need to elect people who know when to stop offering to "solve" everyone's problems when the solution exceeds the bounds of their enumerated powers.
That means saying "no" to bread and circus even if it in the short term it appears to be cash in our hands.
Again to you Vellneuve - "bread and circus" does include protecting Constitutional rights or restricting the expansion of government into healthcare. Bread and Circus is talking out tax cuts, stimulus and entitlement programs designed to snow the masses into complacency and compliance.
....And then they keep invoking terms like "Healthcare Crisis" and "Emergency" to justify their half assed approach to the issue, as if this is some kind of a "new problem" or something that didn't exist a long time ago.
![[laugh]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/012.gif "Laugh [laugh]")
The reality is its only an "emergency" because as time goes on the voting public gets more and more agitated about it, and the window for them to "do something" is rapidly closing. Big government loves an invented crisis.
-Mike
And that's not going to change. This state is lost in terms of electing national reps. No truly conservative politician will ever win national office or carry this state. They have enough trouble trying to do that in more sane states like Maine and New Hampshire. The best we can do to contribute to the rest of the country and give them less opposition by voting in people who are less likely to oppose policies and legislation proposed by conservatives from other states.
You might call that defeatism. I call it pragmatism.
Yes, we have to keep pressure on him when he votes on critical legislation... but when it comes to something like this vote, where the Dems were going to get it through no matter what and the Republicans weren't going to try to filibuster it... can't waste the effort there.
Last edited:
Voting for a candidate because it's the best option and fully supporting everything they do don't go hand in hand.
Um, without cloture, there is no bill to vote on. It required 8 Republicans to cross the line. Why do say the Dems were going to get it through no matter what?
As for "enemy of my enemy" never going to change - to some extent this is true. Representatives are never going to be anything close to perfect, so you have to choose the lesser of evils. Although it has been this bad in the past, it has not always been this bad. We now essentially have one party whose two wings are distinguished almost entirely by their stance on abortion.
There have been many times where the parties diverged more so (and that's a good thing) in their ideology and practice.
This, this and that...
![[wink]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/002.gif "Wink [wink]")
I agree. And cekim, I think I skimmed really quick through your post when I first responded. I think we actually agree on this but I misread it on the first read.
That said, I think I'm more pessimistic on society changing back towards what the Founders intended.
Similar threads
