Occupy Wall Street Protests

While BO's Job "Act" gets pushed aside by Harry Reid, the dims are finally able to push syrup legislation:

http://news.yahoo.com/vt-sen-leahy-seek-maple-protection-law-181422461.html

At least the dims have their priorities in order!!

 

You say that with such scorn now, but wait 'till the Mrs. makes pancakes and doesn't provide you with syrup.

 

On the contrary, I firmly believe syrup protection laws are much more important to this country than any "act" concocted by BO.

 

The BBC says the Republicans are the ones blocking the bill:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-15267269

 

Yeah another Con filibuster. Who could have seen that coming? The majority is stopped by a minority to protect the upper 1%. This is getting old fast.

 

Oops!! Funny it passed 50 to 49 but for some reason it isn't going to become law. Why? Oh yeah, the filibuster by the Cons. Now what?

 

What news are you listening to?

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/10/senate-votes-to-reject-jobs-bill/

And then it added;

 

Didn't Harry Reid vote against it?

 

Yep!. Nice solidarity there?

 

Now let's wait & see how the lefties justify Reid's "NO" vote on BO's Jobs "Act"....I'm sure they'll have one.

 

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid also joined the opposition in a tactical move that permits him under Senate rules to call the measure back up for future votes.

Read more: http://www.timesunion.com/news/article/Senate-votes-to-scuttle-jobs-bill-2214156.php#ixzz1aa5XAL3w

 

Hum? I did not see anything in there about a filibuster. Actually, I did not even seen anything about the bill in fact passing or failing.

 

Other Dims had voted against the bill, why didn't their votes suffice for this "tactical move"?
One report said the other Dims who voted against BO's job "Act" did so because they were facing tough re-election challenges. Hmmmm.....dims voting against BO's "Act" to help their chances of re-election
I'm beginning to think ol' dirty harry is positioning himself to help mount a campaign to unseat BO.

 

Then apparently you've missed most of the story you seem to have no trouble expressing your opinion on....

Senate Votes for Obama Jobs Bill, but GOP Filibusters It

Ari Melberon October 11, 2011 - 9:45pm ET

In the first official test of President Obama's jobs proposal, the Senate voted to advance the massive $447 billion bill on Tuesday. The tally was 50 to 48, with an additional vote in favor expected from Jeanne Shaheen, a New Hampshire Democrat. That majority support is a significant endorsement of Obama's economic agenda -- but you'd never know it from the way things unfolded since Tuesday night.
While opponents of the jobs bill were clearly outnumbered, they signaled their commitment to filibustering the legislation to death. It takes 60 votes to cut off debate, of course, and Republicans voted against an initial, procedural cloture motion to move from debate to the straight vote.

 

I've still never heard one criticism of the bill's provisions by you. You just want it defeated without even having one criticism of whats in it. I find that just a little strange or typical of partisan Right-winger politics.

 

So just to make sure I got this straight.
No one has filibustered anything - yet.
No one has even voted on passing BO bill - yet.

so;
"Funny it passed 50 to 49 but for some reason it isn't going to become law." WRONG
"Why? Oh yeah, the filibuster by the Cons." WRONG

 

I agree with Harry Reid- the BO jobs "Act" should be defeated!

 

That's what I thought, you have no idea what you are against. Typical.

 

How about not increasing taxes to kill the economy.
How about he has already proven that spending does not create jobs. Why on earth does he have to prove it again.

http://www.newt.org/news/newt-gingrich-statement-september-jobs-report

Just in case you missed it, the unemployment got worse for Reagan, but by this time Reagan had the economy creating 1.1 million jobs - by putting money into private enterprise. BO managed to create a measly 103,000 (half because Verizon went back to work) by having the government spend twice as much money. So far he is not even managing to keep up with the population growth.

 

Ronald Reagan raised taxes 7 of his 8 years in office. Hum?