BROWN TURNS BLUE AS FAST AS THE TEA CHILLS IN MASSACHUSETTS

[vellnueve]

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?

I say this because I don't think the Republicans would have tried to maintain a filibuster on that vote indefinitely.

 

[cekim]

That said, I think I'm more pessimistic on society changing back towards what the Founders intended.

Not an unreasonable assumption and you may (sadly) prove me right in the end, but it is my assertion that allowing it to slip further away from that ideal and accepting that fate without a fight makes us complicit.

Politics responds to squeaky wheels. We, as a group/personality type, generally don't squeak. We need nothing from government. We ask nothing from government. Thus government does not hear our opinion...

Government hears the opinions of the mothers who let their kids play in a ditch. Government hears from the unfortunate victims of violence. Government hears from those who don't want to work or pay for their benefits from society.

Those groups of people show up to the statehouse, write letters, protest, petition, etc... Historically speaking - we don't.

If things decline further and/or fail to recover, then its our fault if we remain silent and offer unconditional support for "our party"...

 

[cekim]

I say this because I don't think the Republicans would have tried to maintain a filibuster on that vote indefinitely.

It's happened before, it will happen again. The likelihood of it happening is a function of the fear of the Rep of his constituency vs his belief that he will get something in trade for his buckling...

He could have waited for a deeper compromise. He could, like the other Republicans who did not concede, not have conceded at all...

Assumption of inevitability is the tool of compliance that is wielded so effectively in this state that we have rampant unopposed elections.

 

[rwl1955]

Scott was on Dennis & Callahan this morning. He said he supported the bill because it was the scaled back version of the original bill, 15B vs. 87B I think, and it would allow business owners to buy new equipment with a tax break.

 

[MaineCWPtraining]

Equipment manufactured abroad.

 

[Underwhere]

Scott was on Dennis & Callahan this morning. He said he supported the bill because it was the scaled back version of the original bill, 15B vs. 87B I think, and it would allow business owners to buy new equipment with a tax break.

Still wondering why a tax break for businesses necessitates a spending of 15 billion dollars.

It's not really a tax cutting bill. It's a spending bill named "Jobs Bill" with a small bit in there that will likely affect very few businesses.

The bill sets out plans to create jobs through projects to build schools, highways and bridges. It also favors projects in the energy sector and offers tax breaks for companies hiring new staff.

I think most reasonable people at this point in time would say "no" to a bill that would build schools, highways and bridges.

Package it up and call it "Jobs Bill" instead of "Spending Bill" and then throw in some small bit about "tax cutting" and all of a sudden everything is good?

 

[cekim]

Still wondering why a tax break for businesses necessitates a spending of 15 billion dollars.

Because they call taxes "revenue"... In their world, since they've already spent the next 5-10 years of tax receipts, it means accumulating more debt - as such it is reported as a "cost" of $15B beyond what was already projected...

 

[hietpasr]

Wow. He doesn't vote republican party line, so he is immediately ostracized. Real open minded guys. Maybe when you get laid off you'll give the bill a second thought.

/here's hoping

 

[theGringo]

Wow. He doesn't vote republican party line, so he is immediately ostracized. Real open minded guys. Maybe when you get laid off you'll give the bill a second thought.

/here's hoping

You think this "jobs bill" really has something to do with jobs ... dontcha?

 

[cekim]

Wow. He doesn't vote republican party line, so he is immediately ostracized.

Negative...

He voted to support a bill that no Republican should support... Has nothing to do with "party lines" and everything to do with supporting a bad, pointless bill that will do more harm than good...

What Gringo said...

 

[Underwhere]

Wow. He doesn't vote republican party line, so he is immediately ostracized. Real open minded guys. Maybe when you get laid off you'll give the bill a second thought.

/here's hoping

It's a 15 billion dollar spending bill that no one should vote for. Who cares about party lines.

If I get laid off...I'm prepared for it. If you aren't, or can't be then you're living out of your means or you're just part of the welfare state.
Nowadays people think they don't need a savings and if something happens then they can just rely on the gubbment to fix it for them.

If someone gets laid off I'd feel bad for them. It's a horrible thing to go through...but I don't think that I and everyone else should be paying their way because they chose not to be prepared for it.

Personal accountability.