Obama promises more than 600,000 stim...

Obama promises more than 600,000 stimulus jobs

There are 109535 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.

joe

San Anselmo, CA

#116634 Jul 3, 2012
Lockheed Martin
> Total contributions (2012-ongoing):$1,927,900
> Donations to Democratic Party: 38%
> Donations to Republican Party: 62%
> Spending on lobbying (2012-ongoing):$3,979,250
Bank of America Corporation
> Total contributions (2012-ongoing):$2,125,513
> Donations to Democratic Party: 26%
> Donations to Republican Party: 74%
> Spending on lobbying (2012-ongoing):$870,000
Honeywell International Inc.
> Total contributions (2012-ongoing):$2,222,605
> Donations to Democratic Party: 37%
> Donations to Republican Party: 63%
> Spending on lobbying (2012-ongoing):$1,750,000
Political Donations:
Huntsman Corporation
> Total contributions (2012-ongoing):$2,250,389
> Donations to Democratic Party: 0%
> Donations to Republican Party: 100%
> Spending on lobbying (2012-ongoing):$100,000
Microsoft Corporation
> Total contributions (2012-ongoing):$2,253,565
> Donations to Democratic Party: 68%
> Donations to Republican Party: 32%
> Spending on lobbying (2012-ongoing):$1,790,000
Microsoft Corporation
> Total contributions (2012-ongoing):$2,253,565
> Donations to Democratic Party: 68%
> Donations to Republican Party: 32%
> Spending on lobbying (2012-ongoing):$1,790,000
Dreamworks Animations SKG Inc.
> Total contributions (2012-ongoing):$2,370,150
> Donations to Democratic Party: 99%
AT&T, Inc.
> Total contributions (2012-ongoing):$2,504,219
> Donations to Democratic Party: 35%
> Donations to Republican Party: 65%
> Spending on lobbying (2012-ongoing):$7,050,000
The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.
> Total contributions (2012-ongoing):$4,769,994
> Donations to Democratic Party: 29%
> Donations to Republican Party: 71%
> Spending on lobbying (2012-ongoing):$1,380,000
Las Vegas Sands Corp.
> Total contributions (2012-ongoing):$11,738,600
> Donations to Democratic Party: 0%
> Donations to Republican Party: 100%
> Spending on lobbying (2012-ongoing):$30,000

“Forward - over the cliff!!”

Since: Jul 10

Soetoro, Kenya

#116635 Jul 3, 2012
There goes Holder, playing the victim card. LMAO.

"If you can't stand the heat...."

Eric Holder is a disgrace, like his boss and buddy, Obama the Teleprompter Stooge.

“Forward - over the cliff!!”

Since: Jul 10

Soetoro, Kenya

#116636 Jul 3, 2012
Pittakos wrote:
<quoted text>
Pflug, you know you are welcome to come out here anytime you want. When you start adding in all the other things we owe and will owe in the future, it really does get pretty scary.
Yup. Every man woman and child in this country already owes about $200K-300K (federal debt, and state and local which will vary) plus or minus depending on your state and local underlying debt.

People in NY, NJ, Cal, Illinois are really screwed. Many like NY have very high bonded debt (including all these "authorities" that the state designs to take debt off the books, but is in fact paid by taxpayers), and some like Illinois add in billions in unfunded pension (mostly for cops, teachers, since thats where the big headcount is) debt.

The evil public sector unions make all kinds of silly arguments justifying their gold plated pensions and benefits. They lie. The numbers don't.

“Lovely year for a Guinness”

Since: Dec 07

Daytona Beach

#116637 Jul 3, 2012
Pfluger the Union Monkey wrote:
There goes Holder, playing the victim card. LMAO.
"If you can't stand the heat...."
Eric Holder is a disgrace, like his boss and buddy, Obama the Teleprompter Stooge.
how bout' a little 'Game of Thrones'? his head should be on a stick too

Since: Aug 07

South Central Virginia

#116638 Jul 3, 2012
nac wrote:
<quoted text>
They are "granting additional time" [to comply with the law at a later date, a date that they will decide]. Still selective enforcement of the law.
Just because you approve of this selective enforcement of the law, doesn't make it any less selective enforcement of the law. Just because you don't mind, doesn't make it any less selective enforcement of the law. Just because you think it is brilliant, doesn't make it any less selective enforcement of the law.
You can't change the definition to fit your political narrative. That may work in liberal circles, but not with me.
Just admit it... it is selective enforcement of the law... and you support it. It's not that hard.
Are you really that ignorant of the subject of waivers concerning the healthcare bill?

The period of time of the waiver is clearly identified when the waiver is granted. The vast majority of waivers have been for one year.

So what has had enforcement action taken against them? To have "selective" enforcement you have to be able to show the law is actually being enforced. This goes beyond a company complying with the law. It means a company is found not to be in compliance and measures are taken by the government to enforce the law. So which company(ies) have had enforcement actions taken against them?

You can't even say selective waivers from compliance with the law UNLESS you can show the law is being enforced on others.

Just because you want to stick a finger in the administrations eye it does not mean that they are doing anything wrong or that you understand the proper use of words.

I am changing no definition:

en·force (n-fôrs,-frs)
tr.v. en·forced, en·forc·ing, en·forc·es
1. To compel observance of or obedience to: enforce a law.
2. To impose (a kind of behavior, for example): enforce military discipline.
3. To give force to; reinforce: "enforces its plea with a description of the pains of hell" (Albert C. Baugh).

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/enforcement

Granting a waiver is not enforcing PERIOD. Now show us where the law is being enforced by the government taking action against companies that are in non-compliance.

Since: Aug 07

South Central Virginia

#116639 Jul 3, 2012
finding wrote:
<quoted text>I do believe the republicans can do that, that's why I am voting for Romney.
Good, perhaps we will get the chance to see who is correct.

Since: Aug 07

South Central Virginia

#116640 Jul 3, 2012
Pfluger the Union Monkey wrote:
<quoted text>
Yup. Every man woman and child in this country already owes about $200K-300K (federal debt, and state and local which will vary) plus or minus depending on your state and local underlying debt.
People in NY, NJ, Cal, Illinois are really screwed. Many like NY have very high bonded debt (including all these "authorities" that the state designs to take debt off the books, but is in fact paid by taxpayers), and some like Illinois add in billions in unfunded pension (mostly for cops, teachers, since thats where the big headcount is) debt.
The evil public sector unions make all kinds of silly arguments justifying their gold plated pensions and benefits. They lie. The numbers don't.
You think they are screwed? The new farm bill stops direct payments to farmers. Now those leeches in the midwest states will have to start living off the sweat of their brow......literally.

And this is just the start. The other leech programs will be getting cut as well. What are all of those red states going to do without the federal teat?
TSM

El Paso, TX

#116641 Jul 3, 2012
How unbecoming of a Sitting President .4 EMAILS IN A DAY? Obama begs donors for more as Romney rakes it in, Romney leads Obama in 15 swing states, Obmaacare unpopular today as the day it was pass!! Last week Middle-Class Americans was hit with Largest Tax Increase in America’s History now how’s that Hope and Change Working for You?
nac

Selden, NY

#116642 Jul 3, 2012
okboston wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you really that ignorant of the subject of waivers concerning the healthcare bill?
The period of time of the waiver is clearly identified when the waiver is granted. The vast majority of waivers have been for one year.
So what has had enforcement action taken against them? To have "selective" enforcement you have to be able to show the law is actually being enforced. This goes beyond a company complying with the law. It means a company is found not to be in compliance and measures are taken by the government to enforce the law. So which company(ies) have had enforcement actions taken against them?
You can't even say selective waivers from compliance with the law UNLESS you can show the law is being enforced on others.
Just because you want to stick a finger in the administrations eye it does not mean that they are doing anything wrong or that you understand the proper use of words.
I am changing no definition:
en·force (n-fôrs,-frs)
tr.v. en·forced, en·forc·ing, en·forc·es
1. To compel observance of or obedience to: enforce a law.
2. To impose (a kind of behavior, for example): enforce military discipline.
3. To give force to; reinforce: "enforces its plea with a description of the pains of hell" (Albert C. Baugh).
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/enforcement
Granting a waiver is not enforcing PERIOD. Now show us where the law is being enforced by the government taking action against companies that are in non-compliance.
Ok fine. They are selecting who the law applies to and who it doesn't apply to. I consider that selective enforcement. You don't. Fair enough.
Say the Truth

Lansdale, PA

#116643 Jul 3, 2012
joe wrote:
Lockheed Martin
> Total contributions (2012-ongoing):$1,927,900
> Donations to Democratic Party: 38%
> Donations to Republican Party: 62%
> Spending on lobbying (2012-ongoing):$3,979,250
Bank of America Corporation
> Total contributions (2012-ongoing):$2,125,513
> Donations to Democratic Party: 26%
> Donations to Republican Party: 74%
> Spending on lobbying (2012-ongoing):$870,000
Honeywell International Inc.
......(2012-ongoing):$30,000
Hey douche, you forgot to give credit to your "source", the non-partisant HuffPo!
Say the Truth

Lansdale, PA

#116644 Jul 3, 2012
nac wrote:
<quoted text>
Ok fine. They are selecting who the law applies to and who it doesn't apply to. I consider that selective enforcement. You don't. Fair enough.
Libs are masters of spin and 'creative' use of language.
TSM

El Paso, TX

#116645 Jul 3, 2012
nac wrote:
<quoted text>
Ok fine. They are selecting who the law applies to and who it doesn't apply to. I consider that selective enforcement. You don't. Fair enough.
Nac you’re correct the biggest recipients of these Selective Waivers are Unions!!

Since: Aug 07

South Central Virginia

#116646 Jul 3, 2012
nac wrote:
<quoted text>
Ok fine. They are selecting who the law applies to and who it doesn't apply to. I consider that selective enforcement. You don't. Fair enough.
And yet, you can not show one single enforcement action on the part of the Obama administration. Not one.

Since: Aug 07

South Central Virginia

#116647 Jul 3, 2012
Say the Truth wrote:
<quoted text>
Libs are masters of spin and 'creative' use of language.
Yes, going to a dictionary and providing the accepted definition is quite creative. Most primary school students can perform the task.

Apparently it is something new to those that like to spin and be creative with their use of language.

Since: Aug 07

South Central Virginia

#116648 Jul 3, 2012
TSM wrote:
<quoted text>
Nac you’re correct the biggest recipients of these Selective Waivers are Unions!!
Prove it. Most unions don't provide health insurance.
TSM

El Paso, TX

#116649 Jul 3, 2012
okboston wrote:
<quoted text>
Prove it. Most unions don't provide health insurance.
OKB… Labor unions primary recipients of Obamacare waivers! The Unions workers received seven times the number of waviers compared to the Private Sector!! Labor unions representing 543,812 workers received waivers from President Barack Obama‘s signature legislation, By contrast, private employers with a total of 69,813 employees, many of whom work for small businesses, were granted waivers!! Again Selective what it’s called Pay to Play the Obama Way!!
nac

Selden, NY

#116650 Jul 3, 2012
okboston wrote:
<quoted text>
And yet, you can not show one single enforcement action on the part of the Obama administration. Not one.
Are you out of your mind???

They haven't started to enforce the law yet! But they are deciding who it WILL apply to.
finding

Jonesboro, AR

#116651 Jul 3, 2012
TSM wrote:
How unbecoming of a Sitting President .4 EMAILS IN A DAY? Obama begs donors for more as Romney rakes it in, Romney leads Obama in 15 swing states, Obmaacare unpopular today as the day it was pass!! Last week Middle-Class Americans was hit with Largest Tax Increase in America’s History now how’s that Hope and Change Working for You?
I got several e-mails last Friday begging money for bommie, I replied, telling why I couldn't vote for him, knowing he would never see the e-mails but got it off my chest, lol.

Since: Aug 07

South Central Virginia

#116652 Jul 3, 2012
TSM wrote:
<quoted text>
OKB… Labor unions primary recipients of Obamacare waivers! The Unions workers received seven times the number of waviers compared to the Private Sector!! Labor unions representing 543,812 workers received waivers from President Barack Obama‘s signature legislation, By contrast, private employers with a total of 69,813 employees, many of whom work for small businesses, were granted waivers!! Again Selective what it’s called Pay to Play the Obama Way!!
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?

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?

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 Crews cleaning up graffiti at York's Farquhar Park (Nov '09) Aug 25 Beepboop 10
News Sinhue Johnson's fight over his family shows ch... (Jan '15) Aug 20 fish 60
Donovan Rhule Wanted By Northeastern Regional D... Aug 13 Anonymous Pennsyl... 1
News Unknown woman's body found near Philly tracks (Oct '09) Aug 10 L Morales 12
Anyone have info on convicted pedophile and dru... Aug 8 shuffle 1
News Police investigate early morning shooting in York (May '10) Aug 7 Johnasya gentry 357
News Lawyer: School that blocked gay speech didn't d... Jul '15 Wondering 25
More from around the web

Personal Finance

York Mortgages