Obama promises more than 600,000 stim...

Obama promises more than 600,000 stimulus jobs

There are 109518 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.

Since: Aug 07

South Central Virginia

#116653 Jul 3, 2012
nac wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you out of your mind???
They haven't started to enforce the law yet! But they are deciding who it WILL apply to.
Prove it. My contention is that the vast majority of waivers end before the enforcement actions begin. You are pretending it ia already being enforced.

And again, look at TSM's post. Why are you crying crocodile tears over 0.5% of the workforce? Really, is this all of the workers that support the Obama administration and therefore warrant his "special" treatment?

I mean that is less than 10% of the union workforce itself. Are you saying that 90% of unionized workers do not support the President and so do not get rewarded?
TSM

El Paso, TX

#116654 Jul 3, 2012
okboston wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, so now that I ask for proof it stops being unions and becomes workers who belong to a union.
Could that be because most unionized workforces offer healthcare while most non-union do not?
And you should be embarrased providing numbers like that. Even in todays economy there are over 150,000,000 workers and you say waivers have been issued for less than 620,000? What is that, 1/2 of 1%? So 99.5% of all workers whether or not they are union have not gotten a waiver? Is that what you are saying?
OKB you are like a dog chasing his tail!! Later

Since: Aug 07

South Central Virginia

#116655 Jul 3, 2012
TSM wrote:
<quoted text>
OKB you are like a dog chasing his tail!! Later
Your like the egg suckin dog slinking away after being caught. Some guy named Johnny Cash did a song about you.

Teddy R

Vancouver, Canada

#116656 Jul 3, 2012
okboston wrote:
<quoted text>
Prove it. My contention is that the vast majority of waivers end before the enforcement actions begin. You are pretending it ia already being enforced.
And again, look at TSM's post. Why are you crying crocodile tears over 0.5% of the workforce? Really, is this all of the workers that support the Obama administration and therefore warrant his "special" treatment?
I mean that is less than 10% of the union workforce itself. Are you saying that 90% of unionized workers do not support the President and so do not get rewarded?
OKB, now that you've had your fun vaporing on over these non-points, you ARE going to get around to explaining why you had no clue that ObamaScare exempts 11 million illegals from the individual mandate, does NOTHING therefore to curb that huge cost sink, and instead lumbers the working poor and predominantly lower middle-class who will now be forced to buy health insurance and/or who will see their premiums doubled with the burden of paying for these illegals, and why you think that's such a laudable piece of legislation.

Alternatively, we would love to have a laugh as you attempt to explain why you would kick these illegals out of the emergency rooms to bleed out on the curb if they can't pay cash, as you've posted previously.

Since: Aug 07

South Central Virginia

#116657 Jul 3, 2012
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
OKB, now that you've had your fun vaporing on over these non-points, you ARE going to get around to explaining why you had no clue that ObamaScare exempts 11 million illegals from the individual mandate, does NOTHING therefore to curb that huge cost sink, and instead lumbers the working poor and predominantly lower middle-class who will now be forced to buy health insurance and/or who will see their premiums doubled with the burden of paying for these illegals, and why you think that's such a laudable piece of legislation.
Alternatively, we would love to have a laugh as you attempt to explain why you would kick these illegals out of the emergency rooms to bleed out on the curb if they can't pay cash, as you've posted previously.
I clearly stated they should not be treated. I also clearly stated that we could either cover the working man or we (government) should cover no man. I can't be any clearer than that.

I don't expect to agree with 100% of what is in the Bill, but I accept it and will work to improve it.

Since: Aug 07

South Central Virginia

#116658 Jul 3, 2012
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
....Alternatively, we would love to have a laugh as you attempt to explain why you would kick these illegals out of the emergency rooms to bleed out on the curb if they can't pay cash, as you've posted previously.
Alternatively, they are leeches just like any other leech. They don't pay their way. Just like old people on Medicare. Just like poor people on Medicaid.

But it is you who accepts those programs (or do you want to do your own explaining about letting them die?) while allowing the working man to die on the street or get ER care if he makes it there.

Now why would any working man be behind any of those who stand in the Medicaid/Medicare lines?

Explain yourself Teddy.

Since: Aug 07

South Central Virginia

#116659 Jul 3, 2012
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
OKB, now that you've had your fun vaporing on over these non-points, you ARE going to get around to explaining why you had no clue that ObamaScare exempts 11 million illegals from the individual mandate, does NOTHING therefore to curb that huge cost sink, and instead lumbers the working poor and predominantly lower middle-class who will now be forced to buy health insurance and/or who will see their premiums doubled with the burden of paying for these illegals, and why you think that's such a laudable piece of legislation.
Alternatively, we would love to have a laugh as you attempt to explain why you would kick these illegals out of the emergency rooms to bleed out on the curb if they can't pay cash, as you've posted previously.
Like the Republican you are, I don't really expect you to answer why you would rather a working man die than a leech, after all you are a Republican.
joe

San Anselmo, CA

#116660 Jul 3, 2012
Say the Truth wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey douche, you forgot to give credit to your "source", the non-partisant HuffPo!
Aw, upset, are you. The truth hurts. You simpletons aren't worth the effort to post a source. And sources don't matter to Republicans, you had your minds made up to every subject worth talking about when you were twelve or thirteen.
Just for you:
From climate change to evolution, the rejection of mainstream science among Republicans is growing, as is the denial of expert consensus on the economy, American history, foreign policy and much more. Why won't Republicans accept things that most experts agree on? Why are they constantly fighting against the facts?
Science writer Chris Mooney explores brain scans, polls, and psychology experiments to explain why conservatives today believe more wrong things; appear more likely than Democrats to oppose new ideas and less likely to change their beliefs in the face of new facts; and sometimes respond to compelling evidence by doubling down on their current beliefs.
Teddy R

Vancouver, Canada

#116662 Jul 3, 2012
okboston wrote:
<quoted text>
Alternatively, they are leeches just like any other leech. They don't pay their way. Just like old people on Medicare. Just like poor people on Medicaid.
Sophomoric rhetorical troll - no response deserved.

Let us know when you want to have a serious conversation.
okboston wrote:
<quoted text>
But it is you who accepts those programs (or do you want to do your own explaining about letting them die?) while allowing the working man to die on the street or get ER care if he makes it there.
Now why would any working man be behind any of those who stand in the Medicaid/Medicare lines?
Explain yourself Teddy.
Your argument here is lame and fallacious sophistry - false dichotomy.

The indigent are the indigent - whether by reason of age, ill fortune, or incapacity matters not, nor does their employment status. A civilized society has a duty to provide for minimal basic welfare needs - including healthcare - of the indigent. It is frankly shocking to read your aberrent view otherwise; but of course we recognize it as just another sophomoric OKB rhetorical troll - no response deserved.

Secondly, you persist in your dogged avoidance of any recognition of the proper (limited) role of the FEDERAL government vs. the States in this regard.

I argue only that ObamaScare is an unwarranted and foolishly conceived over-reach of federal meddling in an area that is properly the province of State and local government to address.
TSM

El Paso, TX

#116663 Jul 3, 2012
The American People to Obama – You’er Fired!!
More bad news for the American Taxpayers GM shares near record low, taxpayer loss on bailout rises to $35 billion, Solyndra and other Green Energy Companies failures cost Taxpayers billions, another Liberal pipe dream Electric Cars, Gov’t Motors sells 8,800 Volts, abandons forecast of 45,000!! Jimmy come November you will have Company!!
Teddy R

Vancouver, Canada

#116664 Jul 3, 2012
okboston wrote:
<quoted text>
Like the Republican you are, I don't really expect you to answer why you would rather a working man die than a leech, after all you are a Republican.
Sophomoric whiny troll - no response deserved.
Teddy R

Vancouver, Canada

#116665 Jul 3, 2012
joe wrote:
<quoted text>
Aw, upset, are you. The truth hurts. You simpletons aren't worth the effort to post a source. And sources don't matter to Republicans, you had your minds made up to every subject worth talking about when you were twelve or thirteen.
Just for you:
From climate change to evolution, the rejection of mainstream science among Republicans is growing, as is the denial of expert consensus on the economy, American history, foreign policy and much more. Why won't Republicans accept things that most experts agree on? Why are they constantly fighting against the facts?
Science writer Chris Mooney explores brain scans, polls, and psychology experiments to explain why conservatives today believe more wrong things; appear more likely than Democrats to oppose new ideas and less likely to change their beliefs in the face of new facts; and sometimes respond to compelling evidence by doubling down on their current beliefs.
Chris Mooney??

Yeah. We should all defer to the cherry-picked musings of a kid with a B.A. in English from Yale University as being authoritative in matters of science.

GTFO - troll.
Chimera

San Anselmo, CA

#116666 Jul 3, 2012
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
Chris Mooney??
Yeah. We should all defer to the cherry-picked musings of a kid with a B.A. in English from Yale University as being authoritative in matters of science.
GTFO - troll.
Have you read the book? No? So that would be consistent with:

"...conservatives today believe more wrong things; appear more likely than Democrats to oppose new ideas and less likely to change their beliefs in the face of new facts; and sometimes respond to compelling evidence by doubling down on their current beliefs. "

Chill, conservative. We know how easily frightened you are.
TSM

El Paso, TX

#116667 Jul 3, 2012
Chimera wrote:
<quoted text>
Have you read the book? No? So that would be consistent with:
"...conservatives today believe more wrong things; appear more likely than Democrats to oppose new ideas and less likely to change their beliefs in the face of new facts; and sometimes respond to compelling evidence by doubling down on their current beliefs. "
Chill, conservative. We know how easily frightened you are.
Give me an example of a Liberal… New Idea!!
Teddy R

Vancouver, Canada

#116668 Jul 3, 2012
[QUOTE who="is it Chimera or is it joe?"]<quoted text>
Have you read the book?[/QUOTE]

No. I don't have the interest or time to waste on sophomoric partisan pop "science" written by unqualified hacks. Nor do I suffer from NPD, like many progressives who display a neurotic insecurity and obsession with "scientific studies" purporting to show how "intellectually superior" they and their fellow progressive idealogues are.

http://www.mental-health-today.com/narcissist...

Chill, progressive. We know how needy and starved for admiration you are.

Since: Aug 07

South Central Virginia

#116669 Jul 3, 2012
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
Sophomoric rhetorical troll - no response deserved.
Let us know when you want to have a serious conversation.
<quoted text>
Your argument here is lame and fallacious sophistry - false dichotomy.
The indigent are the indigent - whether by reason of age, ill fortune, or incapacity matters not, nor does their employment status. A civilized society has a duty to provide for minimal basic welfare needs - including healthcare - of the indigent. It is frankly shocking to read your aberrent view otherwise; but of course we recognize it as just another sophomoric OKB rhetorical troll - no response deserved.
Secondly, you persist in your dogged avoidance of any recognition of the proper (limited) role of the FEDERAL government vs. the States in this regard.
I argue only that ObamaScare is an unwarranted and foolishly conceived over-reach of federal meddling in an area that is properly the province of State and local government to address.
So what do you offer to replace it with, something that does what you claim a civilized society should do without all of the things that RepublicanScare offers?

And Teddy, stop playing the alpha hotel. You support those that would do away with Medicare leaving the elderly to pay a $24,000 bill with a $12,000 subsidy each year.

Or are you against that as well?

Are you looig for the holy grail? Costs less, covers more?

Since: Aug 07

South Central Virginia

#116670 Jul 3, 2012
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
Sophomoric rhetorical troll - no response deserved.
Let us know when you want to have a serious conversation.
<quoted text>
Your argument here is lame and fallacious sophistry - false dichotomy.
The indigent are the indigent - whether by reason of age, ill fortune, or incapacity matters not, nor does their employment status. A civilized society has a duty to provide for minimal basic welfare needs - including healthcare - of the indigent. It is frankly shocking to read your aberrent view otherwise; but of course we recognize it as just another sophomoric OKB rhetorical troll - no response deserved.
Secondly, you persist in your dogged avoidance of any recognition of the proper (limited) role of the FEDERAL government vs. the States in this regard.
I argue only that ObamaScare is an unwarranted and foolishly conceived over-reach of federal meddling in an area that is properly the province of State and local government to address.
Wht insuance do Republicans, or you for that matter, support for illegal immigrants?

The poor?

Enlighten me
joe

San Anselmo, CA

#116671 Jul 3, 2012
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
No. I don't have the interest or time to waste on sophomoric partisan pop "science" written by unqualified hacks. Nor do I suffer from NPD, like many progressives who display a neurotic insecurity and obsession with "scientific studies" purporting to show how "intellectually superior" they and their fellow progressive idealogues are.
http://www.mental-health-today.com/narcissist...
Chill, progressive. We know how needy and starved for admiration you are.
Man, couldn't a invented a better example of projection than your post. You seem to be the one who believes in your own personal infallible pronouncements. Look at your past pontificating.

Republicans can denounce a health-care reform plan that’s pretty similar to one passed in Massachusetts by a Republican — and the only apparent reason is that this one came from a Democrat.

Grow up, please.

Since: Aug 07

South Central Virginia

#116672 Jul 3, 2012
TSM wrote:
The American People to Obama – You’er Fired!!
More bad news for the American Taxpayers GM shares near record low, taxpayer loss on bailout rises to $35 billion, Solyndra and other Green Energy Companies failures cost Taxpayers billions, another Liberal pipe dream Electric Cars, Gov’t Motors sells 8,800 Volts, abandons forecast of 45,000!! Jimmy come November you will have Company!!
I think you got ahead of yourself on the auto stocks. Record increase in sales for the month. GM up 5%.

OBAMA, YOU GOT YOUR JOB BACK!

Since: Aug 07

South Central Virginia

#116673 Jul 3, 2012
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
Sophomoric rhetorical troll - no response deserved.
Let us know when you want to have a serious conversation.
<quoted text>
Your argument here is lame and fallacious sophistry - false dichotomy.
The indigent are the indigent - whether by reason of age, ill fortune, or incapacity matters not, nor does their employment status. A civilized society has a duty to provide for minimal basic welfare needs - including healthcare - of the indigent. It is frankly shocking to read your aberrent view otherwise; but of course we recognize it as just another sophomoric OKB rhetorical troll - no response deserved.
Secondly, you persist in your dogged avoidance of any recognition of the proper (limited) role of the FEDERAL government vs. the States in this regard.
I argue only that ObamaScare is an unwarranted and foolishly conceived over-reach of federal meddling in an area that is properly the province of State and local government to address.
Hey Teddy, couple of questions for you. What would happen to Medicare in places like Florida and Arizona if left to the states?

What would happen to illigals with healthcare in places like Arizona if left to the states?

Lets not forget that Arizona was one of the first states to institute death panels.

Texas has over 20% of its population uninsured because they are working poor. What has prevented Texas from doing anything, anything at all about this problem in the last 40 years?

Massechusettes and California have gone beyond what the federal government encourages, what other states have?

How much longer do you think it should be left to the states given your blessed "The Indigent Must be Cared For!" speech a couple of posts back?

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.

York Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News DA: Investigators 'getting close' to arrest in ... (Apr '11) Feb 8 iknowinfo 7
News Cintas plant upgrades will result in a "state-o... (Jun '08) Jan 30 Proud partner 12
Review: D & M Auto Sales (Jul '14) Jan 29 mildawg37 22
News PennDOT crews are out clearing primary and seco... Jan 25 kickinlor 1
Review: D And M Auto Sales (Jan '15) Jan 22 Mileage 37 5
News New information today in 2002 murder of Hopetha... (Jun '10) Jan 19 Christine Jones 31
News Hanover house featured on Animal Planet's 'Haun... (Oct '10) Jan 17 Vehros 92
More from around the web

Personal Finance

York Mortgages