Jim Lulie of Holt, Missouri should remember the advice provided by Mark Twain when he said "Better to keep your mouth closed and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt". With his letter to the KC Star, Jim has removed all doubt from my mind. Jim asks why Republicans did not filibuster spending bills when George Bush was in office?
Filibuster out of control
Hopefully when the November elections roll around, voters will remember it was that fine Republican senator from Kentucky, Jim Bunning, whose mean spirited, self-centered, egotistical, self-serving attitude was responsible for the unnecessary delay of the extension of unemployment benefits for millions of Americans.
And his reasoning? The extension had to be paid for or he would continue to filibuster. I have gone back and checked the Congressional Record, and nowhere did I find this senator’s objection or filibuster to any Bush administration bill that wasn’t paid for such as the Iraqi war or tax increases to the very wealthy.
Nor have I heard of any Republican senator or congressperson chastising the hypocrisy of this man’s attitude. One can only assume then that the Republican Party is again proving it is the party of “no.” The unemployed are only one Republican filibuster away from being homeless.
Jim Lullie
Holt, Mo.
Hey Jim! George Bush did not claim during his state of the union address to reign in deficit spending by passing a Pay-As-You-Go bill. That was Barrack Obama. Jim Bunning's filibuster was his anemic attempt to hold the democrats accountable to their president's promise. It did not work as they ended up pulling funds from another unfunded bill (the Stimulus package) to cover additional weeks of unemployment compensation. Nothing was "paid" for. I believe Bunning's filibuster was only intended to point out the democrats hypocrisy. From that perspective, it was successful, but lost on Jim.
Emmy's First Birthday!
9 years ago
If only you knew how "Simply Wrong your Thoughts" in your judement of a justified and accurate letter.
ReplyDeleteEducate yourself on "Revenue Offsets" aka Obama's "Pay to Go" as dumb downed for ease of understanding for the Republicans in Congress.
You'll eat your thoughts after you read about the things you "Simply" have no clue about. Bunning and the Republican's took hypocrisy to a level outside of this universe. Read a post from someone who really knows what the hell they are talking about. An excert from this 2007 blog to give you some idea how simpleton your blog calling out an accurate letter.
http://ataxingmatter.blogs.com/tax/2007/11/amt-legislation.html
Posted by LindaMBeale on Sept.12,2007
"(Aside--we are already in a tailspin, with the credit crunch and the housing slump being what might have been expected, in part, from the way financial institutions have dominated our economy and the lack of any tough policies on environmental and other concerns over the last few years or on multinationals removing their assets (especially intangibles) to operate in other countries. Recession is almost surely in the cards; and depression--even a major depression--seems quite possible. The "growth" that this government has touted due to its tax cuts has been anemic at best, and certainly hasn't made up for the fact of the long-term impact of record deficits year after year.)"
And another, 2007 mind you, account by LindaMBeale that explains a bit more why Bunning's filibuster was a slap in the face to every hard working non-filthy rich worker in this country. Please Read:
AMT legislation: House passes pay-as-you-go AMT patch
"Last Friday, the House passed H.R. 3996 216-193, the AMT patch bill that includes a number of other extenders and revenue offsets resulting in revenue neutrality to the tax cut for ordinary American taxpayers. The House report is available here. The White House has threatened a veto, and it looks like right now there would not be enough votes to override. What a shame that this Congress is still stuck in carrying out the Republicans' fantasy of a no-tax world (at least, a no-tax world for the rich).
Not surprisingly, Republicans objected, and Senate Republicans threaten to filibuster the bill unless it is passed without the revenue offsets. What are the revenue offsets? For example, one is the taxation of managers' "carried interest" as ordinary compensation income rather than preferential capital gains income. As the Democrats noted in their release on November 8 right before the House vote, there is broad public support for this change, which would remove an inequitable loophold for wealthy fund managers and tax them like everybody else is taxed on their compensation. So why are Senate Republicans willing to filibuster the bill and cause a delay that may well create confusion and cause ordinary Americans to lose out on the benefit of the one-year patch? I guess they'd rather the managers (Wall Street high-fliers with money to spare for campaign contributions) get treated preferentially and who cares about ordinary taxpayers. The Democrats paint it more starkly--as Republicans being willing to "bankrupt America" with "borrow and spend" policies rather than to vote for fiscally and equitably sound policies. See this Nov. 9 release."
Nuff Said,
Sincerely,
HooYoo
HooYoo - Sorry for being so dense. After all, I am a stupid conservative hick. I obviously don't have the superior intellect of a gifted lib like yourself.
ReplyDeleteWhen I heard Obama say "The pay-go approach is based on a very simple concept. You don't spend what you don't have. So if we want to spend, we'll need to find somewhere else to cut. This is the rule that families across this country follow every single day, and there's no reason why their government shouldn't do the same." I thought he meant it.
Go ahead and apologize for your Liar in Chief. I won't apologize for republican sins. Throw them out too.
Very well said there, Mr. Bryant. It seems lost on many that there is right and there is wrong, and that it is not based upon the side you support as to which is which. Keep up the good work!
ReplyDelete