Lodinews.com

default avatar
Welcome to the site! Login or Signup below.
|
||
Logout|My Dashboard

Republicans and stimulus bill: A study in hypocrisy

Print
Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Saturday, March 27, 2010 12:00 am | Updated: 11:33 am, Thu Jul 22, 2010.

One of the best definitions of hypocrisy is "a pretense of virtue, piety." One of the best examples of a hypocritical act is to denounce others for taking an action while taking that action oneself.

Republicans criticized Democrats and Independents for voting for the stimulus bill while they piously voted against it, allegedly because they did not want to increase the deficit. However, if they were strictly adhering to their "principles," they would not increase the deficit by taking money from the bill.

In voting against the bill, many Republicans complained that it would not create any jobs or provide for any benefit for Americans. So let's examine just a few the hypocritical comments and actions of some Republicans after the bill passed without one single Republican vote.

  • Republican Rep. John Linder of Georgia stated that the unemployment figures show that the stimulus bill "has done nothing for job growth in this country." However, two weeks earlier, he had sent a letter asking for stimulus money stating that "the employment opportunities created by this program would be quickly utilized." Washington Times 2/9/10.
  • Republican Gov. Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota claimed that the stimulus bill money was "misdirected" and "largely wasted on projects that won't create jobs." Bloomberg.com 8/28/09. Later, after requesting stimulus funds, he stated that the $130 million that Minnesota was to receive from the bill "will help unemployed Minnesotans survive the economic downturn. Minnesota continues to experience concerns about unemployment and these additional funds will help bring relief to Minnesotans who are unemployed, have entered the unemployment ranks, and we want to do all that we can to help them and the money will be a great step in that direction." Minnesota Public Radio 5/6/09.
  • Perhaps one of the most hypocritical opponents of the bill is Rep. Eric Cantor (VA-7). He condemned the stimulus bill in February as an "utter failure." Culpepper Virginia Star Exponent 11/24/09. However, later he said that the stimulus funding for high-speed rail would create "as many as 185,000 jobs and bring $21.2 billion" to the region, adding, "we've got something good going on and we want to continue that." Richmond Times Dispatch 4/27/09.
  • Sen. Mike Johanns predicted that the stimulus money "would simply never reach the economy and that "it would be hard for me to imagine that we are going to be creating many jobs here." Yet later in asking for stimulus money, he stated that the proposed project "would create 38 new jobs and bring broadband to eight hospitals, five colleges, 16 libraries and 161 K-12 schools." Washington Times 2/9/10.
  • Sen. Lamar Alexander of Tennessee said that the stimulus "is spending, not stimulus." However, he noted that it is anticipated that the project he was requesting stimulus money for will "create over 200 jobs in the first year and at least another 40 new jobs in the following years." Washington Times 2/9/10.
  • Sen. Bob Bennett blasted the bill, saying that the only thing it would stimulate is the national debt. Salt Lake Tribune 10/4/09. Of course, in asking for funding from the bill two days earlier, he had said "The addition of federal funds to these projects would maximize the stimulative effect of these projects on the local economy." Washington Times 2/9/10. Later, his spokesperson Tara Hendershott said funding for Central Utah Water Project is an example of how the senator worked to get money for Utah projects that would create jobs in the stimulus bill. Salt Lake Tribune 2/20/09. So voting against the bill to provide the stimulus money is somehow working for Utah projects.

It may be understandable that Republicans want money for their districts now that the bill has been passed, no thanks to them. However, their pious cries that the bill would not create jobs and their misleading statements that they worked to get money for projects for their constituents rings hollow when it is clear that they voted against obtaining the money for these projects. I guess you could say they were against it before they were for it.

It is the ultimate hypocrisy that Republicans claim that it is Democrats who have led this country down the deficit trail. The two presidents that have produced the largest deficits in this country's history are presidents Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush. Those are undisputed facts. Bill Clinton left George W. Bush with a huge surplus, which Bush promptly turned into the largest deficit ever recorded. And it was Republican Vice President Dick Cheney who said that "Ronald Reagan proved that deficits don't matter."

So, now Republicans want to blame one year of Obama's presidency for the present deficit, most of which resulted from Republican policies of the last eight years. Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy, and his disastrous Iraq War were only two of the policies that increased the deficit significantly, since there was never a plan to fund them. Republicans are certainly entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts.

Let's be honest. The Republicans voted against the stimulus bill and almost everything else the Democrats have proposed since Obama's inauguration for one simple reason: They want President Obama's policies to fail so that they can run the country again. Their constant obstruction is nothing more than an attempt to regain power. And there are some Republicans who will do anything to retain it, no matter how hypocritical or deceptive.

Cynthia Neely is a Lodi resident and retired city attorney.

Rules of Conduct

  • 1 Use your real name. You must register with your full first and last name before you can comment. (And don’t pretend you’re someone else.)
  • 2 Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually oriented language.
  • 3 Don’t threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
  • 4 Be truthful. Don't lie about anyone or anything. Don't post unsubstantiated allegations, rumors or gossip that could harm the reputation of a person, company or organization.
  • 5 Be nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
  • 6 Stay on topic. Make sure your comments are about the story. Don’t insult each other.
  • 7 Tell us if the discussion is getting out of hand. Use the ‘Report’ link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
  • 8 Share what you know, and ask about what you don't.
  • 9 Don’t be a troll.
  • 10 Don’t reveal personal information about other commenters. You may reveal your own personal information, but we advise you not to do so.
  • 11 We reserve the right, at our discretion, to monitor, delete or choose not to post any comment. This may include removing or monitoring posts that we believe violate the spirit or letter of these rules, or that we otherwise determine at our discretion needs to be monitored, not posted, or deleted.

Welcome to the discussion.

91 comments:

  • posted at 9:07 am on Tue, Apr 6, 2010.

    Posts:

    Cynthia Neely: I look forward to more offerings from you in the near future. This was a really good one. Keep up the great work! A lot of Lodians appreciate it.

     
  • posted at 8:43 pm on Fri, Apr 2, 2010.

    Posts:

    Cogito wrote "Even if it means their job come November"Good!

     
  • posted at 8:10 am on Fri, Apr 2, 2010.

    Posts:

    ...Well, Ms. Neely..."Republicans and stimulus bill: A study in hypocrisy"Indeed!...

     
  • posted at 3:50 am on Fri, Apr 2, 2010.

    Posts:

    we're forced to pay for the pizza that we didn't want. forced to pay for it. so, is it wrong to take a piece of pizza when the pizza we were forced to pay for, shows up. of course it isn't wrong. history shows a quicker recovery when the things are allowed to crash as apposed to proping them up artificially. the stimulus was passed against the wishes of the majority of Americans. the stimulus has failed us similarly to our so called representatives. they're not to vote as they see fit, but, as their constituents would like. just like the health care/student loan bill. pelosi, boxer, and waters are just some of our representatives that are out of touch to what the people want. VOTE PROGRESSIVES OUT OF OFFICE!!!

     
  • posted at 3:29 am on Fri, Apr 2, 2010.

    Posts:

    Yes Brian, and they're treated like crap by the party for actually thinking for themselves, and refusing to lick the boots of the Plastic Fantastic Leader of the House. But the rest of them all line up to do it with a smile on their faces. Even if it means their job come November.

     
  • posted at 3:25 am on Fri, Apr 2, 2010.

    Posts:

    Cogito, Yep.But those Joe Liebermans and Zell Millers are few and far between. Get my drift?

     
  • posted at 2:41 am on Fri, Apr 2, 2010.

    Posts:

    Brian, ever hear of a guy named Joe Lieberman?

     
  • posted at 1:56 am on Fri, Apr 2, 2010.

    Posts:

    Cogito wrote, If a conservative, both fiscally and socially, Democrat ran against either of them, I'd probably vote Dem.-A fiscally and socially conservative Democrat? Never heard of such a thing.But there are those with a D by their name who unknowingly try to be hypocrites sometimes.

     
  • posted at 3:27 pm on Thu, Apr 1, 2010.

    Posts:

    Lodian, I don't like spendy Republicans either. If a conservative, both fiscally and socially, Democrat ran against either of them, I'd probably vote Dem. But, it looks like dim prospects for anyone running with "Democrat" next to their name on the ballot. Even Barbara Boxer is on the ropes. Her seat is a dead heat, and she's trending south, in the latest polling. Obama has been to the Democrats what Bush was to the Republicans. Only in record time.

     
  • posted at 3:03 pm on Thu, Apr 1, 2010.

    Posts:

    Lodian

     
  • posted at 3:02 pm on Thu, Apr 1, 2010.

    Posts:

    The facts are clear and on record of Obama's big spending sprees that are unprecedented. He is the top dog when it comes to Presidents spending like a drunken sailor. Yet you and your ilk are still clamouring to support him.

     
  • posted at 2:47 pm on Thu, Apr 1, 2010.

    Posts:

    Cogito wrote "Lodian, is the worst thing you can say about Hayworth is that he spends like a Democrat?"No, I am saying he is a hypocrite. Like many of his ilk, Hayworth is a hypocritical Republican pointing at others for doing what he has done in spades!So, you're okay with Hayworth being the biggest spender? He supported more spending than any Democrat! He's the top dog of spending yet your Tea Party supports him. Weird.Hayworth is running against McCain and it looks like he'll beat him.Yep, hypocritical indeed.

     
  • posted at 1:47 pm on Thu, Apr 1, 2010.

    Posts:

    Lodian, is the worst thing you can say about Hayworth is that he spends like a Democrat? Maybe the people in his district, all spending habits being equal, would rather have a Republican for the rest of the reasons. The worst choice in almost every election is the Democrat.

     
  • posted at 8:44 am on Thu, Apr 1, 2010.

    Posts:

    Cogito wrote "I'm not being Hypocritical. The truth is that Hayworth is simply more conservative than McCain. Therefore, he aligns more with the growing conservative movement sweeping America. I've yet to vote for a candidate who agrees with me on every issue."So, is being the biggest spender (earmarks/pork) in congress a more conservative thing? Sure sounds like it. And is this behavior something you support? How do you feel about the Tea Party hypocrites?The point is that there are conservatives out there pointing the finger when they are the worst of the worst when it comes to over spending. Why doesn't the Republican party stand up to their own? And why does the Tea Party movement, that professes (ad nauseum) to be less government (and spending) yet fully support such a hypocrite in Hayworth? Basically, this whole Tea Party thing is just an excuse for a bunch of nuts to get together and whine, threaten and berate... while all the while they need to clean their own house.

     
  • posted at 4:43 am on Thu, Apr 1, 2010.

    Posts:

    I'm not being Hypocritical. The truth is that Hayworth is simply more conservative than McCain. Therefore, he aligns more with the growing conservative movement sweeping America. I've yet to vote for a candidate who agrees with me on every issue.

     
  • posted at 6:21 pm on Wed, Mar 31, 2010.

    Posts:

    Cogito: What do you mean by "what if's"...I prefer the facts as they stand."??The facts are clear and on record of Hayworth's big spending sprees. He was the top dog in spending tax dollars yet your Tea Party is clamoring to support him again? Can you explain such a thing? Or are your comments strictly going to be limited to your own backyard now? Recoiling? I thought we were talking about "America's future" and "what's good for our country" (your words @ 2:28pm)? Can't you stick with it here, Cogito? Why run from making comments on statements you have made? The point is, Cogito, that your Tea Party is supporting such a man like big spender Hayworth. This is but one example of your hypocritical Tea Party.

     
  • posted at 12:00 pm on Wed, Mar 31, 2010.

    Posts:

    Wow Lodian, I don't really deal in "what if's". I prefer the facts as they stand. And, as it stands, Hayworth's ability to command earmarks is the same as Ted Kennedy's. Plus, I don't live in Hayworth's district. But,as far as conservative values, McCain is about as far away as a Republican can get. The people in his district would know better than you or I.

     
  • posted at 11:33 am on Wed, Mar 31, 2010.

    Posts:

    ...Last week "Tax Day Tea Party" (taxdayteaparty.com) posted a poll for readers that asked a simple question..."Would you support J.D. Hayworth in his run against John McCain in 2010?The results? Out of about 3,500 votes, 79% of you said you would indeed support Hayworth in his challenge to John McCain for the Arizona Senate Seat." --taxdayteaparty.comWhy don't these supporters care much that their Republican was the biggest supporter of earmarks in congress. I thought the Tea Party was against the kind of spending Hayworth is known for in congress. Why do you suppose they are all about what he stands for now? Is it not hypocritical?

     
  • posted at 11:21 am on Wed, Mar 31, 2010.

    Posts:

    Cogito wrote "Btw, is that the best you got Lodian, is a Republican who hasn't held office for over 2 years, and isn't very likely to hold it next election? What a weak blog. LOL"Well, Cogito, the Hayworth and McCain race is definitely in the news. Or haven’t you heard? Are you also ignorant to the fact that the Tea Party is supporting Hayworth over McCain? I guess McCain is not enough of a right wingnut for the Tea Party supporters. It’s a hot race between Hayworth and McCain in Arizona. The numbers show McCain dropping again below 50%, and incumbents who poll less than 50% at this stage of a campaign are considered potentially vulnerable.(www.rasmussenreports.com)

     
  • posted at 10:40 am on Wed, Mar 31, 2010.

    Posts:

    i wish it was drill drill drill. but no. it's explore, explore. let's realize that he's excluding more areas to "explore" than he is allowing. he's a joke. oh, it was too funny. i saw barry with sarkozy. sarkozy was saying how barry's word is his bond. i almost fell over laughing. whether it was public funding for the election or going line by line. he's only done the things that'll ruin America. not the things Americans want him to do.

     
  • posted at 10:26 am on Wed, Mar 31, 2010.

    Posts:

    I have to give some props to Obama for doing what Bush took a lot of heat for trying. Opening up costal drilling for oil. It will create jobs and lower our dependence on the Middle East. DRILL, DRILL, DRILL! Take that you greenies! Before you know it, we'll be bomb, bomb,..bomb, bomb, bombing Iran.

     
  • posted at 9:34 am on Wed, Mar 31, 2010.

    Posts:

    Btw, is that the best you got Lodian, is a Republican who hasn't held office for over 2 years, and isn't very likely to hold it next election? What a weak blog. LOL

     
  • posted at 9:28 am on Wed, Mar 31, 2010.

    Posts:

    Really Lodian, well who would that be. Because it surely isn't that poseur passing himself as a legitimate President that currently occupies the White House. He's destroying America's future at a record pace. He doesn't have a clue what's good for our country, or he'd resign.

     
  • posted at 8:48 am on Wed, Mar 31, 2010.

    Posts:

    Cogito wrote "At least one man cares about the future of our nation."It sure wouldn't be Republican JD Hayworth, who is the Republican from Arizona that is now running against McCain. JD Hayworth is noted as being the biggest supporter of earmarks (PORK) in congress.

     
  • posted at 4:08 am on Wed, Mar 31, 2010.

    Posts:

    are you kidding me! what a joke this article is. voting against it, as their constituents wanted, was the right thing. the majority of the people were against it. and rightfully so. history shows. now, if i helped pay for a pizza. i'd expect a piece of it. same as the stimulus. we all paid into the stimulus. why wouldn't we all get some of it whether we voted for or against it. voting against it and not taking some of after having had paid for it, that'd make no sense to me. VOTE THE PROGRESSIVES OUT OF OFFICE!!!MANDATED SOCIAL JUSTICE IS UNAMERICAN!

     
  • posted at 3:50 am on Wed, Mar 31, 2010.

    Posts:

    By the way, Mr. Lundgren also happens to be a Republican.

     
  • posted at 3:49 am on Wed, Mar 31, 2010.

    Posts:

    In an article in the Bee today, there seems to be a member of congress who refuses to ask for earmark money, Seems this Congressman believes that government spending is saddling future generations with unmanageable debt, and is therefore irresponsible. He is saying "I don't have any free money to give away". He also says "As broke as the State of California is right now, the federal government is more broke". That isn't stopping Democrat Rep. Mike Thompson of Calistoga from asking for 309 million for 126 pet projects. Doris Matsui, Sacramento Democrat, wants Congress to fund 48 projects for her district. Who is this responsible politician you ask? Well, it's my representative, Dan Lungren from Elk Grove. He wants a one year moratorium on pork spending. I'm sure it's to help curb the Obama administration's unprecedented piling on of our debt. At least one man cares about the future of our nation. What a concept.

     
  • posted at 10:35 pm on Tue, Mar 30, 2010.

    Posts:

    -Another clip from this article."BUT EUROPE HAS HEALTH CARE AND THEY'RE FINE"Not according to John Lipsky of the International Monetary Fund. In a speech delivered to the China Development Forum this week, Lipsky warned the world's "advanced economies" that escalating debt directly attributable to runaway entitlement programs poses an urgent threat to the fiscal health of the entire world. The solution, he says, is deep cuts to social welfare programs:We project that gross general government debt in the advanced economies will rise from an average of about 75 percent of GDP at end-2007 to about 110 percent of GDP at end- 2014, even assuming that the temporary, crisis-related stimulus measures are withdrawn in the next few years. Indeed, we expect that all G7 countries except Canada and Germany will have debt-to-GDP ratios close to or exceeding 100 percent by 2014. Already in 2010, the average debt-to-GDP ratio in advanced economies is projected to reach the level prevailing in 1950, in the aftermath of World War II. Moreover, this surge in government debt is occurring at a time when pressure from rising health and pension spending is building up.

     
  • posted at 10:27 pm on Tue, Mar 30, 2010.

    Posts:

    http://www.villainouscompany.com/vcblog/archives/2010/03/why_america_mus.html Why America Must Cut or Eliminate Entitlements ProgramsThe debate over health care reform is now officially approaching the surreal. Unfazed by dangerously extremist questions like, "Can we actually pay for these programs?", our President and Congress have just "solved" the problem of three massive (and massively insolvent) entitlement programs - Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid - by (pick one):a. Assessing the shortfall and raising taxes to make these programs solvent.b. Assessing the shortfall and combining tax increases with spending cuts to make these programs solvent.c. Ignoring the shortfall and passing a fourth massive entitlement program.d. Ignoring the shortfall, passing a fourth massive entitlement program, and calling anyone who dares to point out the risk a dangerous right wingnut extremist.If you answered "a" or "b", congratulations. Your ability to ignore what happens in the real world is exceeded only by that of our President and Democratic members of Congress. When ordinary Americans buy things we can't pay for, we're irresponsible deadbeats who get reported to collection agencies. When Congress buys things it can't pay for, it's called "progress". Historic progress. Yesterday we were reminded that even "progress" sometimes has unpleasant consequences:

     
  • posted at 10:19 pm on Tue, Mar 30, 2010.

    Posts:

    Lodian wrote on Mar 30, 2010 6:11 PM:" ra: You say Democrats are all on welfare and that's the problem and then you say that Democrats are all wealthy and that's the problem??? Well, you can't seem to make up your mind. "-It's a generalization Lodian. Are you in that much denial of the fact that manyDemocrat Politicians past and present champion themselvesas pioneers of entitlement programs?We've seen what entitlement programs did to Detroit. Now Obama wants the whole nation to be a model for entitlements programs.

     
  • posted at 3:55 pm on Tue, Mar 30, 2010.

    Posts:

    The party of the moochers and the guilty rich.

     
  • posted at 2:14 pm on Tue, Mar 30, 2010.

    Posts:

    Lodian. You're right on this time. Democrats are exactly that, the party of the Rich AND the duped poor. The party of the uber elitist aristocracy who easy manipulate the poor and uneducated to maintain their wealth. Thanks...you nailed it. Even Stalin admitted he could care less about the the proletariat as long as he maintained his wealth and position. The tax system as it stands benefits the aristocracy because the ultra rich can always conceal their wealth from taxes - take the Kennedy clan for example. So-called progressive taxes actually don't hit the wealthiest of this country, but those just below who are in a financial position to challenge the aristocracy's wealth.

     
  • posted at 1:11 pm on Tue, Mar 30, 2010.

    Posts:

    ra: You say Democrats are all on welfare and that's the problem and then you say that Democrats are all wealthy and that's the problem??? Well, you can't seem to make up your mind.

     
  • posted at 1:06 pm on Tue, Mar 30, 2010.

    Posts:

    ra: It's only just begun. Deal with it.

     
  • posted at 12:54 pm on Tue, Mar 30, 2010.

    Posts:

    Lodian says that this spending plan -- disguised as health care -- is a good start. Based on what...? Furthermore, what's with this "start" nonsense? does that mean the geniuses in DC don't have flippin' clue how to build anything, so let's just start something? C'mon... is that best your people can do? ...That's pathetic! All I can tell you is that in this country, when the the public servants start believing they are master then the gig is up. In other words.. the people who pay the bills around here aren't going put up with this crap any longer; so stop pretending that your guy Obama is going to make it happen. It's over... get used to it!

     
  • posted at 12:21 pm on Tue, Mar 30, 2010.

    Posts:

    Suffering *sob* and die?? How dramatic! How many children died from ketchup being listed as a vegetable when libs freaked out in the 1980s claiming the very same thing? NONE. There's your answer. There are so many wealthy Democrats because they manipulate the poor and uneducated for their gain or work government jobs that produce no wealth except for their own pockets. Private Big Business, the bane of most liberals, pales to the Big Business dominion of liberals in the form of non-profits and sweetheart government contracts to provide social services.

     
  • posted at 6:12 pm on Mon, Mar 29, 2010.

    Posts:

    ra wrote "I'm saying let each side live separately with the regulations and expenses they agree with. It would be an interesting experiment to split the country in half and make individuals take sides." ra: Are you unaware that there are a lot of wealthy American Democrats in this country that support this healthcare Bill? You would be wise to keep the Democrat's money on your side of that split you are dreaming about. FYI, I know quite a few Republicans that are broke right now and many a Democrat that is doing very very well. You have no idea.

     
  • posted at 5:55 pm on Mon, Mar 29, 2010.

    Posts:

    ra wrote "It's time to help those who truly need help and kick the rest of the bums off the dole."And what plans would you put in place to accomplish such a filtering system? No one wants the "bums" on the "dole", so specifically how would you word legislation to accomplish such a task? And how many will be suffering and die while you decide how to accomplish this? This healthcare bill needed to be done and done now. The American people have waited long enough for healthcare changes in this country. Is it perfect? Of course not, but it is one heck of a great start!

     
  • posted at 5:48 pm on Mon, Mar 29, 2010.

    Posts:

    ra: It's very telling that your entire rant started with Clinton in the 90's right up until today and NEVER included the Bush wrongs! I guess he did everything right in your eyes. Is he your relative? LOL!

     
  • posted at 5:29 pm on Mon, Mar 29, 2010.

    Posts:

    Good point about Democracy. I'm saying let each side live separately with the regulations and expenses they agree with. It would be an interesting experiment to split the country in half and make individuals take sides. My guess is the welfare state side would collapse under its own weight within months. There are taxpayers and tax-takers. We all know where each aligns politically. It's time to help those who truly need help and kick the rest of the bums off the dole.

     
  • posted at 4:23 pm on Mon, Mar 29, 2010.

    Posts:

    ra wrote on Mar 29, 2010 8:28 PM:I say lets vote and let each side live the results. No bailing out the Democrats this time. "That is exactly what we did in 2006 and 2008 and will do so again in 2010. It has been going on for a long long time. It is called that great experiment. American Democracy.

     
  • posted at 3:28 pm on Mon, Mar 29, 2010.

    Posts:

    The "Independents" Neely refers to are self-proclaimed socialist/communists. Let's not try to paint them as moderates. Want to see an example of the failure of a socialist state? Just look out your window at the foreclosed homes and your recently out of work neighbors. Government spending beyond our means has bankrupted America. Ever-increasing social programs without so much a request for personal responsibility or asking what individuals can do for their country has been replaced with "just sit on your rear and keep voting for me while I rape the American taxpayer." Whether the money went to corporations or lazy individuals. Giving home loans to millions of individuals who neither qualified nor deserved loans was part of a socialist plan started by Clinton in the 1990s. Obamacare is yet another gimmee to the Communists who wish to assure the decline of America.Wahhhhh..I want my rights...How about some responsibility first? But if liberals demanded responsibility of individuals, they couldn't keep the mindless masses under their control. I say lets vote and let each side live the results. No bailing out the Democrats this time.

     
  • posted at 6:51 am on Mon, Mar 29, 2010.

    Posts:

    I voted for the American.

     
  • posted at 6:50 am on Mon, Mar 29, 2010.

    Posts:

    Cynthia Neely wrote "One of the best examples of a hypocritical act is to denounce others for taking an action while taking that action oneself."Indeed.

     
  • posted at 5:08 am on Mon, Mar 29, 2010.

    Posts:

    Democrat “Good” what for pray tell??? Republican “Bad” sorry to saythey are no worse than the socialistic Democrats.. Obama proved onething with his health care bill, he learned a lot from Charles Daily andthe smoke filled backroom politics of Chicago, ram it down their throat,they will get over it, I don’t think so this time.. But what the heck “Don’t blame me I voted for the American!!!

     
  • posted at 2:43 am on Mon, Mar 29, 2010.

    Posts:

    Me have simple reasoning. Democrat "good". Republican "bad". Ugh.

     
  • posted at 11:37 am on Sun, Mar 28, 2010.

    Posts:

    For a true comprehensive analysis of the word "hypocrisy," those progressives pointing the finger need to look in the mirror.

     
  • posted at 9:09 am on Sun, Mar 28, 2010.

    Posts:

    t jefferson wrote:" No problems...us libertarians are used to correcting the errors of both conservatives.How big of you.this is what you said in your first post:"now a simple job work for the local school district puts you in the top tax bracket"This what you said in the second post:"3rd Top tax bracket starts at ~47K in CA which is a mid level postions in a school district Clearly in the first you did not say California or Federal but knew the reader would think both.In the second knowing that you were caught misrepresenting the truth you stated they would be in the 3rd top bracket in California and were again mistaken. The 3rd Bracket starts at $37,234 and the 2nd at $47,056The point is that when caught misrepresenting the truth and knowing you did not just come out and say "I mad a mistake" like I did. I thanked you twice in my post because for me the truth is what matters not the political position. Do not let that stop you from correcting my errors. I really mean it when I say I appreciate it

     
  • posted at 8:36 am on Sun, Mar 28, 2010.

    Posts:

    No problems...us libertarians are used to correcting the errors of both conservatives and liberals...both skew things to their own ends and those that stand for freedom and liberty always get the short end of the stick...so I am used to it...

     
  • posted at 7:04 am on Sun, Mar 28, 2010.

    Posts:

    t jefferson wrote " Oh this is fun...1st point prove itWell that depends on how much you would like to wager.----------------------------------------2nd point you are quoting total government revenue not federal govt revenueYou are absolutely right. Thank you for pointing it out. Here are the corrected figures. Percentage wise the only difference is that Clinton was 5% higher599.3 65%991.2 1,154.5 75%2,025.5 1,991.4 26%2,524.0 ----------------------------------------3rd Top tax bracket starts at ~47K in CA which is a mid level postions in a school district what more do you need to know.The top tax bracket is still $373,650 for Federal income tax.Your are doing what conservatives always do. You were trying to give the impression that it was for federal too. In a nice society this is called misrepresentation. In other places it is called something else.--------------------------------------- Boxer, Feinstien and Peolsi...three of the most dispicable people on the planet. Most despicable people on the planet. into hyperbole are we?Thanks again for correcting my error. I am a Liberal and we are not into misrepresentation or whatever they call it in other places

     
  • posted at 6:02 am on Sun, Mar 28, 2010.

    Posts:

    Oh this is fun...1st point prove it2nd point you are quoting total government revenue not federal govt revenue...read what you post.3rd Top tax bracket starts at ~47K in CA which is a mid level postions in a school district what more do you need to know.I am glad you are a liberal democrat...it is easy to see why this country is so messed up with people like you supporting Boxer, Feinstien and Peolsi...three of the most dispicable people on the planet.Don't worry though as you continue to screw things up the conservative will come around and clean up the mess...until one day when we don't any more....is this that day?

     
  • posted at 3:09 am on Sun, Mar 28, 2010.

    Posts:

    t jeffersonyou hit the trifecta, the old hat trickyou said"1st I think you got an F in that college class."sorry but 3 of us out of 32 got an A. Wrong on point 1you said"2nd the federal government collect nowhere near the numbers you quote..."I got my numbers here. http://www.usgovernmentrevenue.com/of course it takes about five minutes of internet search. wrong on point 2you said "now a simple job work for the local school district puts you in the top tax bracket" I did not know that these jobs paid $373,650 wow! where do I sign up? it took me 3 minutes to find the facts at http://www.fairmark.com/refrence/index.htmwrong on point 3I am not only a shill, I am a proud Liberal Democrat who loves his President and loves Speaker Pelosi and Barbara Boxer and his country. I am also a Patriot who left his blood on the ground 12000 miles away from here serving my country. I am also a truck driver who for 30 year traveled in every part of this great country and witnessed the disaster brought about by Conservative "thought".

     
  • posted at 1:45 am on Sun, Mar 28, 2010.

    Posts:

    jlukes..1st I think you got an F in that college class.2nd your really need to go look at your federal revenue numbers...the federal governemtn collect nowhere near the numbers you quote...3rd... comparing tax rates from year to year is impossible...why...back when taxes were very high, there were numerous deductions, therefore hardly anyone paid those rates....now a simple job work for the local school district puts you in the top tax bracket....it called comparing apples to oranges...but since you got an F in "Critical Thinking" I wouldn't expect you to understand and from you letter it is clear you are a shill for the dems...great...

     
  • posted at 1:19 am on Sun, Mar 28, 2010.

    Posts:

    " trackback asked, "What would fair metrics be for determining whether or not the stimulus bill was a success?"Mr Kettleman and Sparky595 seem to think because the Unemployment rate did not immediately go back to 8% it was a failure. They fail to take into account the effects of the 30 year Conservative war against working people of this country resulting in the decimation of the middle class. Working people are financially strapped and cannot provide the demand that business and especially small business needs to keep their doors open. It is at these times the Government steps in to keep demand up so business can ride out the storm otherwise the cascading effect of business closing will result in a financial meltdown as history shows us. The real question which we cannot really know is what would the the unemployment rate be without the stimulus? It probably would have shot up even more. It is at that time that conservatives would have come out for tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. It is their answer for everything

     
  • posted at 12:52 am on Sun, Mar 28, 2010.

    Posts:

    Jerome R. Kinderman wrote :" Actually jlukes, there is no argument regarding the composition of the moon. In fact, I challenge anyone to seriously and sanely suggest that it is made of cheese, unless of course the progressives have changed the definition of the word. There seems to be a lot of that going around these days.With all due respect, that's a very silly comparison; something I would expect from the author of this column. "I think what I was trying to say went over your head. The person I was replying to in his post actually said nothing. Just as in the post you made when you take out the personal attacks there is nothing there.

     
  • posted at 12:39 am on Sun, Mar 28, 2010.

    Posts:

    Jerome, I agree. If we are to measure the success of the stimulus package, we should start with the unemployment numbers. This bill was touted as absolutely necessary. Without it, obama claimed unemployment would rise. Well, they passed it and unemployment went from 7.8% to 10%. Based off of that alone, there IS an argument that it did not work. Ms. Neely failed to mention the short comings of the stimulus, though.

     
  • posted at 7:41 pm on Sat, Mar 27, 2010.

    Posts:

    trackback asked, "What would fair metrics be for determining whether or not the stimulus bill was a success?"I think a good start would be just how many more Americans are back to work. If I recall correctly, we were assured (you know, "promised") that the unemployment rate would not exceed 8% due to the stimulus efforts. Where are we today in this regard? No answer is really necessary; it's rather depressing actually.

     
  • posted at 7:35 pm on Sat, Mar 27, 2010.

    Posts:

    Actually jlukes, there is no argument regarding the composition of the moon. In fact, I challenge anyone to seriously and sanely suggest that it is made of cheese, unless of course the progressives have changed the definition of the word. There seems to be a lot of that going around these days.With all due respect, that's a very silly comparison; something I would expect from the author of this column.

     
  • posted at 1:07 pm on Sat, Mar 27, 2010.

    Posts:

    What would fair metrics be for determining whether or not the stimulus bill was a success?

     
  • posted at 11:17 am on Sat, Mar 27, 2010.

    Posts:

    sparky595 wrote "If we are truly being honest, Ms. Neely, the republicans voted against the stimulus because they didn't agree with the legislation. There is an argument to be made that it has turned out to be a failure."It is true that there is an argument to made that it has turned out to be a failure but there is also an argument that can be made that the moon is made out of cheese.

     
  • posted at 10:28 am on Sat, Mar 27, 2010.

    Posts:

    Jerome R. Kinderman write "When taxes have become so confiscatory (as they are now), there really isn't a right time to raise them even more."The top marginal rate for the last six years has been 35%. The last time over a long period of time that it was this low was from 1925 to 1931 when it was 25%It is no accident that this was the last time the republicans tried to destroy the middle class and the economyRepublicans always pine for the good old days year top marginal rate1945 94%1950,1955,1960 91%1965,1970,1975,1980 70%1985 50%Make one wonder does it not?

     
  • posted at 9:59 am on Sat, Mar 27, 2010.

    Posts:

    When taxes have become so confiscatory (as they are now), there really isn't a right time to raise them even more. We were lied to during the health care "reform" debacle - over and over again. And as this thing plays out, we're going to be treated to what was actually in store for us from the very beginning. So let's start with the IRS and how it will be the collection arm of the new health care "reform" law. It's funny how what once used to be an insurance "premium" has been instantly transformed into an insurance "tax." I suspect that the Supreme Court is going to find itself extraordinarily busy for years to come; and it'll be about time to correct these egregious "errors" perpetrated upon the American People.November cannot come quick enough.

     
  • posted at 9:28 am on Sat, Mar 27, 2010.

    Posts:

    Cogito wrote "As for Clintons budgets, congress was led by the Republicans for his last 6 years. Plus, he was smart enough to not mess with what Ronald Reagan had put into place before him."You may be right. That could be why Clinton raised taxes like Reagan did when the times called for it.

     
  • posted at 8:49 am on Sat, Mar 27, 2010.

    Posts:

    correction to last postFederal Revenues in the Clinton era went from 2,025.3 billion to 3,756.3 billion a 70% increase

     
  • posted at 8:46 am on Sat, Mar 27, 2010.

    Posts:

    Cogito writes " Here's a few undisputed facts" for you Ms. Neely. Federal revenues almost doubled during Ronald Reagans presidency."Federal Revenues in the Reagan era went from 1015.7 billion to 1,676.2 billion a 65% increaseFederal Revenues in the Clinton era went from 2,025.3 billion to 2,025.3 billion a 70% increaseFederal Revenues in the Bush era went from 3,756.3 billion to 4,816.3 billion a 28% increaseinteresting facts:Reagan's tax increase of 1982 as a share of G.D.P., the increase was substantially larger than Mr. Clinton’s 1993 tax increase. The next year he also raised social security taxes.Mr. Clinton’s 1993 tax increase which no Republican voted for was considered a hug4e tax increaseMr Bush cut every tax he could find and according the Laffer curve (the gospel according to those who do not believe in arithmetic)revenues should have skyrocketed. Pipe dreams meet reality. Unfortunately the American people are the one who have to suffer for some people pipe dreams being enacted.

     
  • posted at 7:45 am on Sat, Mar 27, 2010.

    Posts:

    sparky595 wrote "Excellent point about clinton, too. Everyone wants to brag about how well his budgets were, but fail to mention that it was a republican controlled congress for 75% of his presidency."The is another well worn talking point that does not tell the whole story. It sort of like the talking point of how Reagen was the cause of the downfall of the Soviet Union.The Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 raised taxes on wealthy Americans. Not one Republican voted for it. Rush Limbaugh offered a one million dollar bet that this would wreak havoc with the economy and predicted skyrocketing inflation, a recession and a tanking of the economy. We all know what happened. If the republicans wanted to take credit for the surpluses they should have voted for the taxes. Democrats had the courage to do the hard thing but then Democrats are into arithmetic.

     
  • posted at 7:30 am on Sat, Mar 27, 2010.

    Posts:

    Cogito said "Let's see Ms. Neely. If I had a representative who voted against the stimulus because he was responsible enough to know all these jobs would only be a short term fix, and the debt created would be a long term problem, they'd be doing just what I thought was best. Then if it passed against my will, I would expect my representative to get as much of my tax money back for my district, since it's going to be spent anyway."I have to agree with you. I think they should take the money. I also agree if one of them has said what you said in the above quote i would have disagreed with him but i would have admired his honesty and lack of hypocrisy. The facts state otherwise. Look through her documentation. They did not do that. Show me one who did that. I also have to agree with you when you say "It never ceases to amaze me how partisan thinking can cloud ones ability to reason."

     
  • posted at 7:09 am on Sat, Mar 27, 2010.

    Posts:

    cogito, nice points. Everyone wants to forget about the congress' that surrounded these republican presidents. Kind of like everyone blaming schwarzeneger for California's problems, yet it is congressionally controlled by democrats. Excellent point about clinton, too. Everyone wants to brag about how well his budgets were, but fail to mention that it was a republican controlled congress for 75% of his presidency.

     
  • posted at 7:03 am on Sat, Mar 27, 2010.

    Posts:

    Ms. Neely wrote:'Republicans criticized Democrats and Independents for voting for the stimulus bill while they piously voted against it, allegedly because they did not want to increase the deficit. However, if they were strictly adhering to their "principles," they would not increase the deficit by taking money from the bill.'Yeah...just facts, right? So, Ms. Neely, are you saying that if the republicans would have refused money from stimulus, their 'share' would have stayed in Washington? Are you really trying to say that the $878 billion dollars would not have been fully spent if only the democrats used it? Did the republicans have an option to not spend their share and simply cut the overall price tag down? That $878 billion slush fund was not going to be reduced if republicans refused money from it. Don't be ridiculous.

     
  • posted at 7:00 am on Sat, Mar 27, 2010.

    Posts:

    Here's a few "undisputed facts" for you Ms. Neely. Federal revenues almost doubled during Ronald Reagans presidency. Spending was the problem. Budgets are put together by congress. Both houses of congress were led by the Democrats. As for Clintons budgets, congress was led by the Republicans for his last 6 years. Plus, he was smart enough to not mess with what Ronald Reagan had put into place before him.

     
  • posted at 6:52 am on Sat, Mar 27, 2010.

    Posts:

    Ms. Neely wrote:'Let's be honest. The Republicans voted against the stimulus bill and almost everything else the Democrats have proposed since Obama's inauguration for one simple reason: They want President Obama's policies to fail so that they can run the country again.'If we are truly being honest, Ms. Neely, the republicans voted against the stimulus because they didn't agree with the legislation. There is an argument to be made that it has turned out to be a failure. You say the republicans want obama's policies to fail so they can regain power? I think they want the his policies to fail because they ( and most of America ) do not believe in 'fundamentally transforming the USA' to a socialist economy, period. Taking over banks, car companies, healthcare, ALL school loans, cap and trade, stimulus, omnibus, LACK of creating jobs, amnesty for illegals, etc.... We DO want him to fail if this is how he envisions 'HIS' America!

     
  • posted at 6:20 am on Sat, Mar 27, 2010.

    Posts:

    Let's see Ms. Neely. If I had a representative who voted against the stimulus because he was responsible enough to know all these jobs would only be a short term fix, and the debt created would be a long term problem, they'd be doing just what I thought was best. Then if it passed against my will, I would expect my representative to get as much of my tax money back for my district, since it's going to be spent anyway. I don't see any "hypocracy" there, just a common sense reaction to a bad idea. It never ceases to amaze me how partisan thinking can cloud ones ability to reason.

     
  • posted at 5:19 am on Sat, Mar 27, 2010.

    Posts:

    Ms Neely: Great editorial! I always enjoy reading opinions documented with facts. Thank you for taking the time to do responsible research! The very best way to address the ongoing, dis-enformed, ignorance of most of these blogocites and Sentinel respondents is fact. Sadly, most of them will not believe the facts or do any research themselves. Easily duped by disingenuous political rhetoric, jaded cable news, and completely destructive radicals like Beck and Limbaugh, they are a most troubling force.

     
  • posted at 5:14 am on Sat, Mar 27, 2010.

    Posts:

    If you get an unemployment check you spend it. That is what you are supposed to do. The "party of no" doesn't even want you to get that. Sounds like a partyof "know nothing" to me Sparky.

     
  • posted at 5:05 am on Sat, Mar 27, 2010.

    Posts:

    jramagic - you seem a tad confused (or perhaps you didn't read the column). This isn't about the recently passed health care "reform" law - it's about the stimulus package that was passed a relatively long time ago.

     
  • posted at 3:45 am on Sat, Mar 27, 2010.

    Posts:

    sparky295 writesHmmmm.... Weren't nancy pelosi and harry reid in control of the congress since 2006? Are you now going to tell me that bush had complete control from 2006-2008? What ever bush wanted in that period, he got? Not without the help of the democrat controlled congress. Case in point: watch how much obama will NOT be able to do once the congress shifts back to the republicans this year. "Well well. something we can agree on. The Destruction of the American Middle class brought to by Conservative ideas starting in 1980 could not have come out without the collusion of many Democrats. There were Democrats who voted for the tax cuts, voted for the war, voted for Medicare part D etc. Lets not forget President Clinton who signed the bill that killed financial regulation in 1998. Yes the Republicans had much help in foisting their destructive polices on the American people that has led us to the destruction of the middle class. I knew we could agree on something though on the 2010 elections I would not count my chickens before they hatch.

     
  • posted at 3:30 am on Sat, Mar 27, 2010.

    Posts:

    t jefferson writes " well from this letter and the posts from some of the people it is clear the education system has failed some people. Ms. Neeley...keep believe that the dems are the answer to everything...you do realize you live in a state destroyed by the dems don't you...amazing.... "You are right. My favorite class is College was a course called "Critical Thinking". The piece you are commenting on I did not see the place where she stated that the "dems are the answer to everything". The topic was not how the republicans destroyed the state. It is always amazing to me that when people cannot answer the arguments they resort to personal attacks and arguments that have nothing to do with the subject at hand.

     
  • posted at 3:14 am on Sat, Mar 27, 2010.

    Posts:

    sparky595 writes " Another letter from Ms. Neely, followed by numerous defensive posts by jlukes. Interestingly, I rarely see jlukes post, but when Ms. Neely writes a letter, voila! there is jlukes defending her every step up the way. Coincidence.... I think not. "" jlukes, at 6:25, I was commenting DIRECTLY at the information that you, oops, I mean Ms. Neely presented. She didn't give much to work with in her biased slant. "I am certainly not Ms Neely. I am a 60 year old Vietnam Veteran and Liberal who obviously shares two things with Ms Neely. An interest in public policy and a love for the facts. I like her columns for that reason. The two posts I quote from the top say nothing about the topic at hand which is the hypocrisy of Republican leaders who praise the stimulus bill but voted against it. You are doing what many do when the facts are against them and do not support the merits of their argument. They attack the messenger. It is an old trick.

     
  • posted at 3:02 am on Sat, Mar 27, 2010.

    Posts:

    well from this letter and the posts from some of the people it is clear the education system has failed some people. Ms. Neeley...keep believe that the dems are the answer to everything...you do realize you live in a state destroyed by the dems don't you...amazing....

     
  • posted at 2:53 am on Sat, Mar 27, 2010.

    Posts:

    Well, I, for one, am happy it passed. I don't claim to know all about it, but it DOES rectify some glaring terrible issues like denying imperfect people health care and tossing people out of coverage once they do get ill. That simply could not continue. And, at age 60, I feel a bit better now...knowing that I am more likely to have health care going forward. Spend less on War and Wall Street & Bankers who profit from it.

     
  • posted at 2:49 am on Sat, Mar 27, 2010.

    Posts:

    jlukes wrote:'Years of so called Conservatism nearly destroyed the American economy in 2008.'Hmmmm.... Weren't nancy pelosi and harry reid in control of the congress since 2006? Are you now going to tell me that bush had complete control from 2006-2008? What ever bush wanted in that period, he got? Not without the help of the democrat controlled congress. Case in point: watch how much obama will NOT be able to do once the congress shifts back to the republicans this year.

     
  • posted at 2:43 am on Sat, Mar 27, 2010.

    Posts:

    Another letter from Ms. Neely, followed by numerous defensive posts by jlukes. Interestingly, I rarely see jlukes post, but when Ms. Neely writes a letter, voila! there is jlukes defending her every step up the way. Coincidence.... I think not.

     
  • posted at 2:37 am on Sat, Mar 27, 2010.

    Posts:

    jlukes, at 6:25, I was commenting DIRECTLY at the information that you, oops, I mean Ms. Neely presented. She didn't give much to work with in her biased slant.

     
  • posted at 2:23 am on Sat, Mar 27, 2010.

    Posts:

    sparky595 writes "So IF obama lasted 8 years like bush, the estimate be the CBO (you know, the same group that obama stands by for his healthcare numbers) is that he will add about $10 trillion do the deficit. TWICE what bush did."Years of so called Conservatism nearly destroyed the American economy in 2008. You could bring back Lincoln and you would have deficits far into the future.Deficits are loans taken out to improve the country. Bush took out loans to give tax breaks to the rich(you get 300 dollars a year back the CEO pf United Health gets $72000 dollars back), fight the Iraq war which was very lucrative for the military industrial complex, Medicare part D which funneled huge profits to the drug companies etc.Obama takes out loans to put people to work, unemployment benefits to those having trouble finding a job, health care to those who cannot afford it, infrastructure projects that create jobs, Education and retraining, tax cuts for the middle class etc.Not all deficits are the same

     
  • posted at 1:47 am on Sat, Mar 27, 2010.

    Posts:

    sparky595 said " Ms. Neely, if Eric Cantor said in April ( in your out of context quote ) that the stimulus would help his constituents, and then SEVEN months later (after the stimulus unfolded) changed his view of the success of it, what is wrong with that? That is not hypocrisy seven months later. That is re-evaluating the progress SEVEN months later and realizing it is NOT doing what it was promoted to be doing. "It would not be hypocrisy if Eric Cantor said now that he was mistaken and if he had it to do over again he would vote for the bill. I have not heard him say that and if you were to call his office and ask what his position is on the bill he would still say he was against it.

     
  • posted at 1:41 am on Sat, Mar 27, 2010.

    Posts:

    sparky595 "PLEASE.... Name ONE bill in history that democrats voted against, and THEN refused the benefits even though it passed.If you want to seem credible here, you shouldn't use such blatant hypocrisy. "this is really interesting talking about credibility. First she is not saying that it is not right to take the money. She is showing how they are talking from both sides of their mouth and is not not making a blanket statement but giving the facts and where they come from. She is showing you where to look it up. You on the other hand are making a blanket statement with no facts to back it up. Who is the credible person here?

     
  • posted at 1:25 am on Sat, Mar 27, 2010.

    Posts:

    sparky595 said "Well, it sounds like he was right, since her next comments of him shows him stating that all of the stimulus money Minnesota will get will go to help pay for unemployment benefits, not EMPLOYMENT." Yea except for the over 500 million that is going for Highway projects and the millions more going for fiber optics and broadband and the 52 million for weatherizing homes etc, etc

     
  • posted at 1:11 am on Sat, Mar 27, 2010.

    Posts:

    Ms. Neely wrote:'So, now Republicans want to blame one year of Obama's presidency for the present deficit, most of which resulted from Republican policies of the last eight years.'bush 1/21/2001 thru 1/21/2009 (96 months)--- $5 trillion in debtobama 1/21/2009 thru 3/21/2009 (14 months)--- $2 trillion in debt so far. "Washington, March 5 (UPI) -- U.S. President Barack Obama 's budget will lead to deficits averaging $1 trillion over the next 10 years, the Congressional Budget Office estimated Friday. The CBO analysis said annual deficits under Obama's budget plan would be $976 billion from 2011 through 2020, larger than expected by The White House, The Hill reported."So IF obama lasted 8 years like bush, the estimate be the CBO (you know, the same group that obama stands by for his healthcare numbers) is that he will add about $10 trillion do the deficit. TWICE what bush did.obama for 2 straight budget years, now, has signed budgets with $1.5 and $1.8 trillion deficits.

     
  • posted at 12:50 am on Sat, Mar 27, 2010.

    Posts:

    Ms. Neely wrote:'It may be understandable that Republicans want money for their districts now that the bill has been passed, no thanks to them.'PLEASE.... Name ONE bill in history that democrats voted against, and THEN refused the benefits even though it passed. If you want to seem credible here, you shouldn't use such blatant hypocrisy.

     
  • posted at 12:44 am on Sat, Mar 27, 2010.

    Posts:

    Ms. Neely, if Eric Cantor said in April ( in your out of context quote ) that the stimulus would help his constituents, and then SEVEN months later (after the stimulus unfolded) changed his view of the success of it, what is wrong with that? That is not hypocrisy seven months later. That is re-evaluating the progress SEVEN months later and realizing it is NOT doing what it was promoted to be doing.

     
  • posted at 12:36 am on Sat, Mar 27, 2010.

    Posts:

    Ms. Neely wrote:'Republican Gov. Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota claimed that the stimulus bill money was "misdirected" and "largely wasted on projects that won't create jobs.'Well, it sounds like he was right, since her next comments of him shows him stating that all of the stimulus money Minnesota will get will go to help pay for unemployment benefits, not EMPLOYMENT.

     

Recent Comments

Posted 8 hours ago by Thomas Heuer.

article: Steve Hansen: Over-regulated medication…

[thumbup] Simple salt water (saline solution) sounds simple however many people forget or don't know that it is injected into veins. It's a…

More...

Posted 12 hours ago by Jien Kaur.

article: Letter: We care about animals, but what…

Mr Ed - that last sentence was a sarcasm - the Mr Kinderman think it is better for a child to be born into misery as long as it is born and…

More...

Posted 16 hours ago by Rick Houdack.

article: Letter: We care about animals, but what…

I am outraged that someone has been forcing Jerome Kinderman and one or more or his wives or life partners to abort their babies! This is …

More...

Posted 16 hours ago by Jien Kaur.

article: Letter: Does the city of Lodi know the …

Exactly what is the issue here? Is there a United States flag that the city is displaying incorrectly and where is that flag? If it is a …

More...

Posted 16 hours ago by Steve Schmidt.

Video

Popular Stories

Poll

Loading…

Your News

News for the community, by the community.

Featured Events

CREATE AN EVENT

Mailing List

Subscribe to a mailing list to have daily news sent directly to your inbox.

  • Breaking News

    Would you like to receive breaking news alerts? Sign up now!

  • News Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily news headlines? Sign up now!

  • Sports Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily sports headlines? Sign up now!

Manage Your Lists