Obama promises more than 600,000 stim...

Obama promises more than 600,000 stimulus jobs

There are 109538 comments on the Newsday story from Jun 8, 2009, titled Obama promises more than 600,000 stimulus jobs. In it, Newsday reports that:

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.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Newsday.

Teddy R

Houston, TX

#118365 Dec 20, 2012
joe wrote:
<quoted text>
Gee, I'm sorry.
Of course you are, joe. Thanks anyway.
etuuuu

Bradenton, FL

#118366 Dec 20, 2012
Obama: Blah blah blah, fukedy blah.
etuuuu

Bradenton, FL

#118367 Dec 20, 2012

Since: Nov 08

Provo, UT

#118368 Dec 21, 2012
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
Oooh! Stinging retort there, joe. You wound me to the quick ...
Teddy,
Should I call an ambulance?
TrollBot

Houston, TX

#118369 Dec 21, 2012
Pittakos wrote:
<quoted text>
Teddy,
Should I call an ambulance?
Nah. I'll spit and rub some dirt on it. No prob.

Have a great holiday, Pitt.
joe

San Anselmo, CA

#118370 Dec 22, 2012
In 1619, the Virginia House of Burgesses passed a law making the transfer of guns to Native Americans punishable by death. Other laws across the colonies criminalized selling or giving firearms to slaves, indentured servants, Catholics, vagrants and those who refused to swear a loyalty oath to revolutionary forces. Guns could be confiscated or kept in central locations for the defense of the community. And in the late 1700s and early 1800s, the state and federal governments conducted several arms censuses.(Imagine what the NRA would say if government officials went door to door today asking people how many guns they owned and whether they were functional.)

On the western frontier in the 19th century, to stave off violence, new towns and cities enacted laws to bar carrying guns. In fact, the typical western town had stricter gun laws than many 21st-century states. Today, four states have completely eliminated permits for handgun ownership and carrying.
joe

San Anselmo, CA

#118371 Dec 22, 2012
The Second Amendment wasn't intended to protect the right of Americans to rise up against a tyrannical government.

This canard is repeated with disturbing frequency. The Constitution, in Article I, allows armed citizens in militias to “suppress Insurrections,” not cause them. The Constitution defines treason as “levying War” against the government in Article III, and the states can ask the federal government for assistance “against domestic Violence” under Article IV.

Our system provides peaceful means for citizens to air grievances and change policy, from the ballot box to the jury box to the right to peaceably assemble. If violence against an oppressive government were somehow countenanced in the Second Amendment, then Timothy McVeigh and Lee Harvey Oswald would have been vindicated for their heinous actions. But as constitutional scholar Roscoe Pound noted, a “legal right of the citizen to wage war on the government is something that cannot be admitted” because it would “defeat the whole Bill of Rights”— including the Second Amendment.
Say the Truth

Lansdale, PA

#118372 Dec 22, 2012
joe wrote:
In 1619, the Virginia House of Burgesses passed a law making the transfer of guns to Native Americans punishable by death. Other laws across the colonies criminalized selling or giving firearms to slaves, indentured servants, Catholics, vagrants and those who refused to swear a loyalty oath to revolutionary forces. Guns could be confiscated or kept in central locations for the defense of the community. And in the late 1700s and early 1800s, the state and federal governments conducted several arms censuses.(Imagine what the NRA would say if government officials went door to door today asking people how many guns they owned and whether they were functional.)
On the western frontier in the 19th century, to stave off violence, new towns and cities enacted laws to bar carrying guns. In fact, the typical western town had stricter gun laws than many 21st-century states. Today, four states have completely eliminated permits for handgun ownership and carrying.
"pla·gia·rism
[pley-juh-riz-uh&#8201;m,- jee-uh-riz-] Show IPA
noun
1.
an act or instance of using or closely imitating the language and thoughts of another author without authorization and the representation of that author's work as one's own, as by not crediting the original author..."
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/plagia...
joe

San Anselmo, CA

#118373 Dec 22, 2012
Say the Truth wrote:
<quoted text>
"pla·gia·rism
[pley-juh-riz-uh&#8201;m,- jee-uh-riz-] Show IPA
noun
1.
an act or instance of using or closely imitating the language and thoughts of another author without authorization and the representation of that author's work as one's own, as by not crediting the original author..."
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/plagia...
Oh, sorry ass wipe, I thought you actually read stuff. Here it is again. Can't wait to hear your dumb ass response, not.

In 1619, the Virginia House of Burgesses passed a law making the transfer of guns to Native Americans punishable by death. Other laws across the colonies criminalized selling or giving firearms to slaves, indentured servants, Catholics, vagrants and those who refused to swear a loyalty oath to revolutionary forces. Guns could be confiscated or kept in central locations for the defense of the community. And in the late 1700s and early 1800s, the state and federal governments conducted several arms censuses.(Imagine what the NRA would say if government officials went door to door today asking people how many guns they owned and whether they were functional.)

On the western frontier in the 19th century, to stave off violence, new towns and cities enacted laws to bar carrying guns. In fact, the typical western town had stricter gun laws than many 21st-century states. Today, four states have completely eliminated permits for handgun ownership and carrying.

The Second Amendment wasn't intended to protect the right of Americans to rise up against a tyrannical government.

This canard is repeated with disturbing frequency. The Constitution, in Article I, allows armed citizens in militias to “suppress Insurrections,” not cause them. The Constitution defines treason as “levying War” against the government in Article III, and the states can ask the federal government for assistance “against domestic Violence” under Article IV.

Our system provides peaceful means for citizens to air grievances and change policy, from the ballot box to the jury box to the right to peaceably assemble. If violence against an oppressive government were somehow countenanced in the Second Amendment, then Timothy McVeigh and Lee Harvey Oswald would have been vindicated for their heinous actions. But as constitutional scholar Roscoe Pound noted, a “legal right of the citizen to wage war on the government is something that cannot be admitted” because it would “defeat the whole Bill of Rights”— including the Second Amendment.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/five-m...
Teddy R

Mclean, VA

#118374 Dec 23, 2012
Yeah, well - that's just Mr. Spitzer's liberal gun-grabbing opinion.
joe

San Anselmo, CA

#118375 Dec 24, 2012
Merry Christmas! Happy Holidays!
joe

San Anselmo, CA

#118377 Jan 2, 2013
Looks like the Republican party is in serious self-destruct mode. Can they get any more absurd?
TrollBot

Houston, TX

#118378 Jan 3, 2013
joe wrote:
Looks like the Republican party is in serious self-destruct mode. Can they get any more absurd?
Troll. Ignore.
joe

San Anselmo, CA

#118379 Jan 3, 2013
As per news today: Yes they can.
yes

Yonkers, NY

#118380 Jan 4, 2013
joe wrote:
Looks like the Republican party is in serious self-destruct mode. Can they get any more absurd?
Agreed.
There's more to come.
joe

San Anselmo, CA

#118381 Jan 6, 2013
American Family Association spokesman Bryan Fischer today blew up over the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), warning in a blog post that “ENDA would represent the return of Jim Crow laws.”

On his radio program Focal Point, Fischer warned that if ENDA is signed into law businesses will be faced with a barrage of “flaming homosexual” job applicants.

“The homosexual lobby,” Fischer said,“will send a guy in there wearing stilettos, a dress and dangly earrings” in order to provoke Christian business-owners “not to hire him.”
joe

San Anselmo, CA

#118382 Jan 6, 2013
Conservative critics of federal social programs keep sounding the alarm that the United States is rapidly becoming an “entitlement society” in which social programs are undermining the work ethic and creating a large class of Americans who prefer to depend on government benefits rather than work.

A new CBPP analysis of budget and Census data, however, shows that more than 90 percent of the benefit dollars that entitlement and other mandatory programs spend go to assist people who are elderly, seriously disabled, or members of working households — not to able-bodied, working-age Americans who choose not to work.
yes

Yonkers, NY

#118384 Jan 9, 2013
joe wrote:
American Family Association spokesman Bryan Fischer today blew up over the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), warning in a blog post that “ENDA would represent the return of Jim Crow laws.”
On his radio program Focal Point, Fischer warned that if ENDA is signed into law businesses will be faced with a barrage of “flaming homosexual” job applicants.
“The homosexual lobby,” Fischer said,“will send a guy in there wearing stilettos, a dress and dangly earrings” in order to provoke Christian business-owners “not to hire him.”
What planet do these kooky so called "conservatives" come from?
joe

San Anselmo, CA

#118385 Jan 9, 2013
yes wrote:
<quoted text>
What planet do these kooky so called "conservatives" come from?
I believe the planet is called "Gerrymandering".
Say the Truth

Lansdale, PA

#118386 Jan 9, 2013
joe or joanne wrote:
American Family Association spokesman Bryan Fischer today blew up over the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), warning in a blog post that “ENDA would represent the return of Jim Crow laws.”
On his radio program Focal Point, Fischer warned that if ENDA is signed into law businesses will be faced with a barrage of “flaming homosexual” job applicants.
“The homosexual lobby,” Fischer said,“will send a guy in there wearing stilettos, a dress and dangly earrings” in order to provoke Christian business-owners “not to hire him.”
Says the Marin County fruit who wears stilettos, a dress and dangly earrings (but only when going "out on the town".) Not that there's anything wrong with that...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form 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.

Chicago Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 13 min Incognito4Ever 1,252,396
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 21 min Rogue Scholar 05 192,502
aggy-6-30-15 3 hr Kuuipo 21
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 3 hr ritedownthemiddle 54,003
Amy 7-6-15 5 hr mrs gladys kravitz 3
Abby 7-6-15 5 hr mrs gladys kravitz 4
News Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 6 hr Ariel Sharon 70,151
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 13 hr nonattorney spoke... 99,922
More from around the web

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages