B-Rob has some problems.

Democrats for years have said paying more in taxes is good yet B-Rob can not point to any of them that have paid one cent more in taxes than they had to.

Is second problem is with the so called clips of republicans taking credit. I did not see dates on them. That being the case the clips could have been from 2 years ago.

Third, he seems to think the Minority Party that can not stop a Democrat bill with the votes of all it’s member can pass a bill when the Majority Leader does not allow the bill a vote on the floor.

Evidently this alleged attorney is not one, he certainly has not made a case.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

@BRob:

Nice attempt at changing the subject. But you failed to address the obvious:

Is there any chance that you might know what this thread topic is?

If the stimulus was so bad, then why did the GOP in Missouri take the f-ing money?

Why didn’t they just cut the spending by a billion dollars instead?

Well they be damned, damned if they did, damned if they didn’t. Wasn’t too awful long ago that the democrats were squealing about Republican governors that didn’t want the stimulus, now McCaskill is posturing and squalling that republicans have no right to an opinion on what’s goin on in their districts.

But, funny thing about Missouri, their DEMOCRATIC Governor, Jay Nixon, had stimulus money spent in JANUARY, 2009 before it even got there. Their stimulus funding originally was overseen by Nixon’s DEMOCRATIC pal. Want to bet he appointed another DEMOCRATIC crony to take his place? Now NIXON is coming back for more.

As predicted here, Gov. Jay Nixon announced today that he will appoint his longtime deputy, Paul Wilson, to the judgeship being vacated by Richard Callahan.
~~~~

For 12 years, Wilson worked for Nixon in the attorney general’s office and was known for handling complex litigation, such as the case that led to creation of the Missouri Foundation for Health. Since Nixon became governor, Wilson has worked on the budget and has overseen the state’s federal stimulus funding.</blockquote>

http://interact.stltoday.com/blogzone/political-fix/political-fix/2010/01/jay-nixon-appoints-his-deputy-to-cole-county-judgeship/

I bet they won’t respond to Claire, just the same way you did not respond. They will change the subject, the same way you did.

Oh, they are responding to McCaskill, I remember her staff closing the blinds and locking her office doors because they didn’t want to deal with Missouri protestors, I’ve listened to her bob and weave on Kansa City local radio. She’s not so cocky when she’s being forced to explain why she’s supporting Obama over her own constituent’s concerns. BTW, Republican members of the Missouri Congress have responded in a much more civil tone I would add.

This all proves one thing, of course: GOPers will not gove credit where credit is due and, even worse, prefer to bite the hand that feeds them. Without the stimulus money to close their budget, they would have had to lay off people and cut spending. With the stimulus money, that did not happen. So don’t friggin tell me “the stimulus did not work”. Because the weasels in Missouri balancing their budgets with stimulus PROVES THE POINT.

Pfft! Here’s the nations first stimulus project:

A town with a population of 218 sitting more than three hours from St. Louis would seem like an unlikely place for the nation’s first stimulus project.
~~~
The earth-moving equipment kicked in only minutes after President Obama signed the economic stimulus bill his administration pushed through Congress 11 months ago. Missouri’s Democratic governor, Jay Nixon, was present at the first shovel turning and the state paid for a satellite truck to beam images of the ceremony to every resident of the state who wanted to see it.

State and federal officials said at that time that the bridge would create about 30 direct jobs and spin off another 220 “indirect” jobs — supplying the steel, pouring the concrete and boosting the local community’s economy.

But at the time, some politicians in Missouri’s biggest cities complained that the Obama administration should have sent stimulus construction money to urban projects, rather than to an isolated bridge in a county with a very small population base. St. Louis Mayor Francis Slay told CNN it was an “insult” that rural projects were at the head of the line.

Bottom line, they spent $9 million to replace an old bridge, fudged the jobs created numbers and didn’t stimulate the economy.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/01/29/missouri.first.stimulusproject/?hpt=Sbin

Gov. Jay Nixon, Russ Carnahan and a “White House official” will be in St. Louis today to tout a little but of stimulus. The latest example of the Obama Administration’s payoff to the unions, is a $1.1 billion (that’s with a ‘B’) grant for the building of a high speed rail service line between St. Louis and Chicago:

The White House is announcing $8 billion in grants around the nation for what some Democrats are calling a national rail-building program that could rival the interstate highways begun in the Eisenhower era.

The projects include $1.1 billion to improve a rail line between Chicago and St. Louis so that trains travel up to 110 mph. Read more…

We can all agree that job creation in this weak, Obama economy is a top priority, but creating temporary jobs for your political base – at taxpayer expense – is not the right solution. The President said last night that he would use his veto pen to enforce “fiscal discipline.” In our opinion, future projects like these are a great place to start.

http://mopns.com/2010/01/28/nixon-carnahan-in-st-louis-for-stimulus-pork-ceremony/

Notice any Republicans here?

Gov. Jay Nixon, U.S. Rep. Russ Carnahan and a White House official will be in St. Louis Thursday to detail high-speed rail funding for Missouri.

The Democrats Nixon and Carnahan will join Edward Montgomery, executive director of the White House Council on Automotive Communities and Workers, for the announcement at 12:30 p.m. at Gateway Multimodal Transportation Center.

The White House is announcing $8 billion in grants around the nation for what some Democrats are calling a national rail-building program that could rival the interstate highways begun in the Eisenhower era.

The projects include $1.1 billion to improve a rail line between Chicago and St. Louis so that trains travel up to 110 mph, and $31 million for improvements to the line between St. Louis and Kansas City.

http://www.fox2now.com/news/sns-ap-mo–high-speedrail-missouri,0,4217664.story

Heh, with all the stimulating going on, they are in the weeds. They are now talking about closing colleges because they haven’t enough money to fund them and they legally have to balance the budget. But, hey, they got a bridge to nowhere and in the future will be able to take the train to Chicago.

The gall . . . how do you drink the last swallow of Obama’s wine, then complain that you don’t like the vintage?

McCaskill’s constituents aren’t drinking anything and she’s well aware of it.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

@Donald Bly: LOL! It would explain the Dickensian rants, as well as the time wasted on them, wouldn’t it?

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Do you think Soros pays B-Rob by the word?

Like or Dislike: 0  0

BRob said; “If the stimulus was so bad, then why did the GOP in Missouri take the f-ing money?”

The GOP is not the only party that holds power in that state. The fact that the state took the money isn’t solely because of their Republicans. Democrats in that state are responsible for using the stimulus money too, even if they criticized it on the campaign trail or in public speeches.

Take for example, representative Paul LeVota of the 52nd district of Missouri, who has publicly stated to constituents that the stimulus bill wasn’t the answer to solving the states economic issues, then he decides to support the use of the funds last year and will continue to use them in the this year and next year. Of course, sometimes he defends using it too, when it serves his interests.

Does this vindicate the stimulus bill in anyway? No it doesn’t, because people are right to say that government hand outs (and they are) like this ought to be limited. And one state that has politicians from both parties trying to “have it both ways” (to quote McCaskill) hardly does anything to make this argument lose veracity.

There’s a fine line defining what’s within our means, and the most recent stimulus bill crossed that line a long time ago. The stimulus didn’t create jobs, it helped facilitate an increase in job loss. Any jobs created in the near future (hopefully) will be done so because of the American people finding solutions to the economic problems.

Deplorably, you tried to pass the fallacy that the good market experienced during the holiday season proves that Obamas leadership and stimulus money were the reasons before you went on hiatus from this blog. That tactic failed overwhelmingly for you back then, and it isn’t working well for you now.

As for us having the gall “to drink Obamas wine, then complain that we don’t like the vintage.” I think the more correct term would be kool aid. And we’re not drinking it, it’s being forced down the throats of Americans even though a vast majority of us from both sides of the aisle were vocal about our distaste for it since the beginning. The stimulus had good intentions, I am not denying that. But a few periods of good market numbers aren’t indicators vindicating the stimulus bills performance in the American economy.

May I mention that the stimulus bill has lost jobs in more places than just our country? Many people from other countries who let us borrow money from them have lost everything from their life savings to their careers and businesses. Sure, one can argue that they chose to take the risks by loaning us money during a global economic crisis. However, that hardly does the trick to make the largest increase in irresponsible spending in American history wrought by Obama look any better than it is.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Missy –

Nice attempt at changing the subject. But you failed to address the obvious:

If the stimulus was so bad, then why did the GOP in Missouri take the f-ing money?

Why didn’t they just cut the spending by a billion dollars instead?

Why didn’t they ask the Magic Tax Cut Fairie for more magic dust to make revenues grow to close their deficit?

I bet they won’t respond to Claire, just the same way you did not respond. They will change the subject, the same way you did.

This all proves one thing, of course: GOPers will not gove credit where credit is due and, even worse, prefer to bite the hand that feeds them. Without the stimulus money to close their budget, they would have had to lay off people and cut spending. With the stimulus money, that did not happen. So don’t friggin tell me “the stimulus did not work”. Because the weasels in Missouri balancing their budgets with stimulus PROVES THE POINT.

The gall . . . how do you drink the last swallow of Obama’s wine, then complain that you don’t like the vintage?

Like or Dislike: 0  0

stodghie –

On the stimulus — watch the Maddow clip where the GOPers take credit for the jobs created by the stimulus bill. THEN I would like your comments. Because there are only two possibilities here:

a) either those GOPers are lying when they say the stimulus has created no jobs, or

b) they are lying when they say the stimulus has created those jobs in their district.

Which is it? Were they lying then, or are they lying now? I would accept an “I was mistaken then” or even a “clarification” that they meant “net jobs” or some other b.s. recovery answer. But one of those statements is not true. i think I know which one it is.

Mata –

You post is indecipherable. I can tell you were angry, but you make very little sense there. But I did pick up on this:

“But apparently you and MadCow prefer to see an elected representative trashing anyone receiving cash.. even if they think the cost for giving them that cash to the nation was fiscally damaging.”

No, dearie, I am talking about someone taking CREDIT for a constituent getting cash when, in fact, they did everything to keep them from getting that money. I am talking about opposing the very job-creation mechanism you are claiming was your idea. Mike Pence did that sh*t and his explanation was, shall we say, less than noble.

I like your admission that, in effect, you would accept a night on the town from a friend who got a settlement scamming an insurance company. But you know what it is more like? Celebrating the admission of a person to a sorority when you tried you damndest, but were unsuccessful, in getting them black balled.

In such a situation, good manners would dictate that you say nothing to the person. Or you congratulate them on their good fortune. But your don’t lie and say “I am so glad you made in it to Pi Epsilon Delta” when everyone in the know knows that you did your best to keep that from happening. And you certainly don’t claim the credit for them getting in.

So to apply the analogy, the GOPers who opposed the stimulus should not be championing the projects if they think the damn thing was wrong. Or they can say nothing. But to act as if they were behind the project, or to tout the jobs the project will create (when you spend the rest of your time claiming the exact opposite) — that is just rank hypocrisy bordering on lying.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

@BRob:

And Claire McCaskill put it best: if you oppose the stimulus, then don’t take the f-ing money.

Oh, that’s too good, go ahead, listen to McCaskill. She’s in trouble in the big MO, has been for awhile. Check out what they think of healthcare and then tell me how long they will tolerate her “don’t take the f-ing money” regarding the stimulus.

SECOND REGULAR SESSION
HOUSE COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR
House Concurrent Resolution No. 18
95TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY
.4336L.05P

Whereas, the current health care proposal being debated in the United States Congress will raise federal taxes and force new taxes on Missourians, which are detrimental to Missouri’s economy; and

Whereas, Missouri families and employers may be facing even more mandates that drive up costs if the United States Congress passes the current health care proposal; and

Whereas, the federal government’s attempt to reform health care has overwhelmingly centered around increasing eligibility to health care, but not addressing important issues such as increasing access, provider rates or quality of care; and

Whereas, the current health care proposal might allow the expenditure of public funds for abortions; and

Whereas, the current health care proposal works a substantial change to longstanding practices governing end of life decisions; and

Whereas, there has been a complete lack of transparency during the final negotiations to craft this legislation and special deals have already emerged that are going to put Missouri at a disadvantage; and

Whereas, the unfunded mandates and special deals will place greater pressure on Missouri taxpayers and put funding for education, mental health services, public safety, and all other essential state services at risk:

Now, therefore, be it resolved that the members of the House of Representatives of the Ninety-fifth General Assembly, Second Regular Session, the Senate concurring therein, hereby urge our Missouri Congressional delegation to vote against the current health care proposal and develop health care reform that is affordable and accessible to all legal residents and to further request that our elected statewide officials express their respective positions on the passage of the current health care proposal and send a unified message to our Missouri Congressional delegation; and

Be it further resolved that the Missouri General Assembly urge our elected statewide officials to review the constitutionality of the current health care proposal, which includes several special deals for other states, including the “Nebraska kickback”; and

Be it further resolved that the Chief Clerk of the Missouri House of Representatives be instructed to prepare properly inscribed copies of this resolution for Governor Jay Nixon, President Barack Obama, the President of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, and each member of the Missouri Congressional delegation.

http://www.house.mo.gov/billtracking/bills101/biltxt/commit/HCR0018C.HTM

The resolution passed on a vote of 111-46. You may think she put it best about the stimulus when she unfortunately mouthed that comment, but, I think you are grasping, my Missouri friends are embarassed by Ms. McCaskill, have been for awhile. Think maybe she’s getting desperate, kind of flying blind, I bet the mighty MO gets rid of her.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

REPEAT for error CHARLIE WILSON

Like or Dislike: 0  0

MATA i read on google that former congressman CHARLIE WISON died at 76 …was on cnn i though you want to know bye

Like or Dislike: 0  0