Obama promises more than 600,000 stimulus jobs

Full story: Newsday

President Barack Obama promised Monday to deliver more than 600,000 jobs through his $787 billion stimulus plan this summer, with federal agencies pumping billions into public works projects, schools and summer youth programs.

Comments (Page 5,367)

Showing posts 107,321 - 107,340 of109,637
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
joe

San Rafael, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#116523
Jun 29, 2012
 
nac wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you insane? THEY ARE GOING AFTER THE DOCUMENTS!!! Holder is refusing. I'm sorry that the bad guy happens to be a dem this time. I fail to see how this is "not much of an issue."
If no one had died as a result of this, I could entertain the notion that this is politics, but a lot of people died. And the AG has been caught covering it up. That is an issue to most people, maybe not to those that embrace corruption...
“I’m going to be investigating a president of my own party, because many of the issues we’re working on began [with] President Bush or even before, and haven’t been solved,” Issa said during an interview on MSNBC’s “The Daily Rundown.”

Issa made clear that he intends to examine both the Bush and Obama administrations’ handling of the mortgage crisis, as well as problems at the old Mineral Management Service, an arm of the Interior Department reorganized amid reports of corruption.

“When we look at the failures of Freddie [Mac] and Fannie [Mae], the Countrywide scandal, those all began during President Bush’s time,” Issa said.“When we look at Mineral Management Service and the ultimate failure in the Gulf, that began years before.”

“I’m hoping to bridge the multiple administrations in as many places as possible,” Issa pledged.“The enemy is the bureaucracy, not necessarily the current occupant of the White House.”

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1110/446...

I guess he's changed his mind on that one. But I do like this quote:
“When we look at the failures of Freddie [Mac] and Fannie [Mae], the Countrywide scandal, those all began during President Bush’s time,” Issa said.
Teddy R

North Vancouver, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#116524
Jun 29, 2012
 
okboston wrote:
<quoted text>
Really? When did they file the civil suit? When you find that out you will know they went after the documents. Even they admitted that the charge of contempt not only does nothing to get the documents, it also will never go to trial. So how did that pressure anyone into giving up the documents? Partisan politics.
If they were serious about the people that have died as a result of F&F, they would have filed a civil suit to get the documents. They are thumbing their nose at the memory of the deceased with this action.
You're getting your wish, OKB:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/28/us-...

Please move on.

You might want to get on the line to the MediaMatters call center and the Obobo Ministry of Truth to get programmed on how to spin the latest revelations of secret wiretap applications just coming out of the Oversight Committee. I'm sure we'll all be interested to hear from you that tortured line of Obobo propaganda.
Teddy R

North Vancouver, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#116525
Jun 29, 2012
 
[QUOTE who="joe a.k.a. Chimera"]<quoted text>
“I’m going to be investigating a president of my own party, because many of the issues we’re working on began [with] President Bush or even before, and haven’t been solved,” Issa said during an interview on MSNBC’s “The Daily Rundown.”
Issa made clear that he intends to examine both the Bush and Obama administrations’ handling of the mortgage crisis, as well as problems at the old Mineral Management Service, an arm of the Interior Department reorganized amid reports of corruption.
“When we look at the failures of Freddie [Mac] and Fannie [Mae], the Countrywide scandal, those all began during President Bush’s time,” Issa said.“When we look at Mineral Management Service and the ultimate failure in the Gulf, that began years before.”
“I’m hoping to bridge the multiple administrations in as many places as possible,” Issa pledged.“The enemy is the bureaucracy, not necessarily the current occupant of the White House.”
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1110/446...
I guess he's changed his mind on that one. But I do like this quote:
“When we look at the failures of Freddie [Mac] and Fannie [Mae], the Countrywide scandal, those all began during President Bush’s time,” Issa said.
[/QUOTE]

You Obobo apologists really need to call in to Campaign Central and get the latest guidance from them as to whether you're supposed to be praising Issa's evenhandedness or demonizing him and assassinating his character. You guys are all over the map lately.

ET call home.

Sheeesh.

Since: Aug 07

South Central Virginia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#116526
Jun 29, 2012
 
TSM wrote:
<quoted text>
OKB if you are saying this is just a Political Witch Hunt than why not release the Documents look at the Political advantage it would give Holder/Obama if these Documents supports there statements! What a Gift Republicans would have given Obama/Holder!! Obama/Holder could use Reagan’s Line “There They Go Again!”
Precedent. If they release them this time without a court order, why wouldn't they release them next time?

Why didn't bush release the records when it was requested? Precedent. No one went to jail or got censured for it and no one was found in contempt. It was found that the bush administration had acted within the powers of the executive branch. So why didn't they release the documents? Precedent.

And who supported them in that endeavor? Your buddy Issa. Republicans are stranger than fiction.

Since: Aug 07

South Central Virginia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#116527
Jun 29, 2012
 
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
We were discussing Holder's legal situation.
Now, if you want to move on to Obobo's legal situation in the matter now that he's been foolish enough to escalate the F&F scandal into a Constitutional dispute of his own with the Congress, we can have that discussion also - but please make up your mind which discussion you want to have, and then stay on topic.
Who brought the Nixon tapes into the discussion and whose post was I replying to?
joe

San Rafael, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#116528
Jun 29, 2012
 
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
You Obobo apologists really need to call in to Campaign Central and get the latest guidance from them as to whether you're supposed to be praising Issa's evenhandedness or demonizing him and assassinating his character. You guys are all over the map lately.
ET call home.
Sheeesh.
You right wing droolers are always telegraphing who you are. The article demonstrates the vast difference in what Issa says and what he does. There are no investigations into the Bush admin. In fact, he was transparent in separating Bush era "gun-walking" with Obama era.

Now you may go back to your game of twister solitaire.
Teddy R

North Vancouver, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#116529
Jun 29, 2012
 
okboston wrote:
<quoted text>
Who brought the Nixon tapes into the discussion and whose post was I replying to?
You did - by arguing established precedent says it's somehow legally proper for an officer of the Executive Branch to meet a Congressional subpoena with contempt, and that the Congress should then have no recourse but to go meekly hat-in-hand to a Court to have its subpoena enforced. You argue that Congress is somehow acting improperly by asserting its unquestioned power to hold such an officer in contempt (in fact they have the power to physically arrest Holder on a Congressional warrant). You argue, effectively, there is "no precedent" for Congress having its subpoena powers over the Executive recognized as legally compelling - and that it was somehow the 'normal process' for Congress to have to go back and waste taxpayer money re-litigating this same settled Constitutional legal principle in every case when some officer of the Executive ignores and obstructs their subpoena.

It's just nonsense - and I pointed to the case of the Nixon tapes as the obvious refutation of your argument.

The public interest is not served by any officer of the Executive - let alone the POTUS himself - stonewalling a Congressional subpoena by asserting EP on simple principle with no justification and forcing an expensive legal bun-fight at taxpayer expense, when settled Law (see Nixon) has already established the Executive has no such unfettered right to do so.

Conversation 1 - HOLDER. In this case, pre-existing settled law and precedent told Holder he had no legal right to do any other than to obey a Congressional subpoena - IN FULL. He's been properly found in contempt for failing to do so. Holder has no right to invoke EP - and so EP is irrelevant.

Conversation 2 - OBOBO. Pre-existing settled law and precedent also tells Obobo he has no unfettered legal right to obstruct a Congressional investigation by invoking EP, and that officers of his administration are required to obey a Congressional subpoena - IN FULL. Obobo has foolishly opted instead to re-litigate this precedent (Nixon), and we shall see what is costs him.

I'm happy to have either conversation, but not to waste my time chasing you like mercury around the room as you flit from one to the other.
Teddy R

North Vancouver, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#116530
Jun 29, 2012
 
okboston wrote:
<quoted text>
Precedent. If they release them this time without a court order, why wouldn't they release them next time?
Why didn't bush release the records when it was requested? Precedent. No one went to jail or got censured for it and no one was found in contempt. It was found that the bush administration had acted within the powers of the executive branch. So why didn't they release the documents? Precedent.
And who supported them in that endeavor? Your buddy Issa. Republicans are stranger than fiction.
Precedent??

Balderdash.

These actions are either proper or improper - either right or wrong. "Precedent" is no defense for wrong-doing, and equally if they are in the right, that's sufficient and precedent is immaterial.

OKB, I can honestly say your powers of torturing facts, sense and logic to avoid the most simple, rational, and obvious conclusion are beyond parallel.

Obvious:

1) Nixon tapes = improper exercise of EP to cover up wrong-doing and obstruct justice

2) Bush = proper exercise of EP to protect privileged internal policy discussions within the Exec, recognized in settled Constitutional case law.

3) Holder/Obobo = we shall see - but based upon actions and events to date, Occam's Razor tells us = improper exercise of EP to cover up wrong-doing and obstruct justice
Teddy R

North Vancouver, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#116531
Jun 29, 2012
 
Chimera masquerading now as joe wrote:
<quoted text>
You right wing droolers are always telegraphing who you are. The article demonstrates the vast difference in what Issa says and what he does. There are no investigations into the Bush admin. In fact, he was transparent in separating Bush era "gun-walking" with Obama era.
Now you may go back to your game of twister solitaire.
OK, so Repub = Rightwing = Conservative = eevul. Dem = leftwing = Progressive = good and pure (and smarter and cooler and more intelligent!!).

Got it. Thanks for clearing that up.

Now - back to F&F, and "separating Bush era "gun-walking" with Obama era," you seem surprised by Issa's transparency in separating the two. Why? Do you think they're not clearly separate in nearly every respect?
GaG

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#116532
Jun 29, 2012
 
yikes

Since: Aug 07

South Central Virginia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#116533
Jun 29, 2012
 

Judged:

1

Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
You did - by arguing established precedent says it's somehow legally proper for an officer of the Executive Branch to meet a Congressional subpoena with contempt, and that the Congress should then have no recourse but to go meekly hat-in-hand to a Court to have its subpoena enforced. You argue that Congress is somehow acting improperly by asserting its unquestioned power to hold such an officer in contempt (in fact they have the power to physically arrest Holder on a Congressional warrant). You argue, effectively, there is "no precedent" for Congress having its subpoena powers over the Executive recognized as legally compelling - and that it was somehow the 'normal process' for Congress to have to go back and waste taxpayer money re-litigating this same settled Constitutional legal principle in every case when some officer of the Executive ignores and obstructs their subpoena.
It's just nonsense - and I pointed to the case of the Nixon tapes as the obvious refutation of your argument.
The public interest is not served by any officer of the Executive - let alone the POTUS himself - stonewalling a Congressional subpoena by asserting EP on simple principle with no justification and forcing an expensive legal bun-fight at taxpayer expense, when settled Law (see Nixon) has already established the Executive has no such unfettered right to do so.
Conversation 1 - HOLDER. In this case, pre-existing settled law and precedent told Holder he had no legal right to do any other than to obey a Congressional subpoena - IN FULL. He's been properly found in contempt for failing to do so. Holder has no right to invoke EP - and so EP is irrelevant.
Conversation 2 - OBOBO. Pre-existing settled law and precedent also tells Obobo he has no unfettered legal right to obstruct a Congressional investigation by invoking EP, and that officers of his administration are required to obey a Congressional subpoena - IN FULL. Obobo has foolishly opted instead to re-litigate this precedent (Nixon), and we shall see what is costs him.
I'm happy to have either conversation, but not to waste my time chasing you like mercury around the room as you flit from one to the other.
I am LMAO@U for acting like the House has any power to enforce or provide any other consequences for a citation of contempt. What exactly can they do Teddy? What?

On the other hand, they can go to court and get a court order to deliver the documents. If he fails that the court can have thrown in jail, fine him or a combination of the two.

Now what can Congress do again?

That is why it is nothing more than a political stunt by your prized
heroes.

Instead of defending them blindly all you had to do was say "Yep, I wish they would do that and stop all this blustering and blowing."

Since: Aug 07

South Central Virginia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#116534
Jun 29, 2012
 
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
Precedent??
Balderdash.
These actions are either proper or improper - either right or wrong. "Precedent" is no defense for wrong-doing, and equally if they are in the right, that's sufficient and precedent is immaterial.
OKB, I can honestly say your powers of torturing facts, sense and logic to avoid the most simple, rational, and obvious conclusion are beyond parallel.
Obvious:
1) Nixon tapes = improper exercise of EP to cover up wrong-doing and obstruct justice
2) Bush = proper exercise of EP to protect privileged internal policy discussions within the Exec, recognized in settled Constitutional case law.
3) Holder/Obobo = we shall see - but based upon actions and events to date, Occam's Razor tells us = improper exercise of EP to cover up wrong-doing and obstruct justice
And that is why they have courts to decide Teddy, because you are not qualified.
Teddy R

North Vancouver, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#116535
Jun 29, 2012
 
okboston wrote:
<quoted text>
I am LMAO@U for acting like the House has any power to enforce or provide any other consequences for a citation of contempt. What exactly can they do Teddy? What?
In theory, they can vote an arrest warrant, send the Capitol Police over to DOJ to arrest Holder and perp-walk him out in handcuffs, and then hold him in custody.

But all this is moot now, OKB - as I've already noted in a previous post, they've elected to take your advice and seek a court order.

Since: Aug 07

South Central Virginia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#116536
Jun 29, 2012
 

Judged:

1

Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
In theory, they can vote an arrest warrant, send the Capitol Police over to DOJ to arrest Holder and perp-walk him out in handcuffs, and then hold him in custody.
But all this is moot now, OKB - as I've already noted in a previous post, they've elected to take your advice and seek a court order.
Actually they can not. The Capital Police do not work for them and are not under their jurisdiction.

Yeah, in your link they said they would, but at this time they have not. They are fixing to go on vacation. After that there will be a politically motivated vote to repeal the Healthcare Bill. Shortly after that they will want to go home to run for election.

But who knows, they might find the time.

“"Beau-Se'ant”

Since: Jan 09

Manchester

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#116537
Jun 29, 2012
 
He has lied to America about virtually every promise he's made... lied about Hillary, now he's lying about Romney. Enough! We're not that gullible Mr. President!

http://www.youtube.com/watch...

“"Beau-Se'ant”

Since: Jan 09

Manchester

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#116538
Jun 29, 2012
 
The Obama lies keep mounting...

http://www.youtube.com/watch...
Teddy R

North Vancouver, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#116540
Jun 29, 2012
 
okboston wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually they can not. The Capital Police do not work for them and are not under their jurisdiction.
You're correct. They would send the House police.
joe

San Rafael, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#116541
Jun 29, 2012
 
Presidents don't control the price of gas. However, thought I would share this ...
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php...
joe

San Rafael, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#116542
Jun 30, 2012
 
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
OK, so Repub = Rightwing = Conservative = eevul. Dem = leftwing = Progressive = good and pure (and smarter and cooler and more intelligent!!).
Got it. Thanks for clearing that up.
No problem.
TSM

El Paso, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#116543
Jun 30, 2012
 
I agree with what…John Roberts wrote yesterday,'It's not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices.' How True!!
That’s why November’s election is the most important election in American History!! The goal of the Republicans/Conservatives should be to make sure Liberals/Democrats is a (Permanent Minority Party) we began the process in 2010 and shall complete our goal in 2012!!

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 107,321 - 107,340 of109,637
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••
•••
York Dating

more search filters

less search filters

•••

York Jobs

•••
•••
•••

York People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••