Obama promises more than 600,000 stim...

Obama promises more than 600,000 stimulus jobs

There are 109504 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

#53071 May 9, 2010
Alz wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, but you forgot how Obama dangerously delayed the decision (actually hid from it) for months.
Obama's speeches on Afghanistan have been terrible too. As the ambiguity increases, our ability to win diminishes.
Liberals suffer from the notion that "we can't win" or "win what?" If Obama was a good leader, he'd be talking about it more.
He can't even say "thank you" to Bush for doing a good job in Iraq - a job that the liberals and our other enemies said couldn't be done.
But.....
But.....
But.....
But....
Quit crying and admit your original statement was wrong.

While the decision was delayed, the actions implementing the decision were in fact moved sooner, so what the heck is your point?

Once again, in a mad dash to prove me or Obama wrong, you fail to check relevant facts which show you are going down a dead-end path.

It is people like you that forced a conservative Senator into resigning recently.

No one, not bush nor Obama, is wrong 100% of the time nor are they right 100% of the time. They certainly can not please all of the people any of the time. You are in such a rush to find something, anything wrong, you don't even stop to check. He did it, it must be wrong. That pretty much makes you useless to good conversation and so when there is nothing important being discussed, there is you.

Alz

Since: Oct 08

Chicago

#53072 May 9, 2010
okboston wrote:
<quoted text>
Infant, just because you scribble does not mean it qualifies as rational, factual writing.
I asked a simple question and you scribble again like it is "THE" answer. Any question can be anwered, a simple "I don't know" qualifies as "AN" answer. Perhaps you should learn that resonse instead of your mindless scribbles.
My learning abilities? I quest you for knowledge and find a void.
I "wake up" to this? It's the left that despises reason.
One example: http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg1992666...

The "Right" uses reason to advance. The Left uses facts to "prove" their preconceived notions and specifically disallows are attacks facts that are counter to their beliefs.

Since: Aug 07

South Central Virginia

#53073 May 9, 2010
Alz wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, but you forgot how Obama dangerously delayed the decision (actually hid from it) for months.
Obama's speeches on Afghanistan have been terrible too. As the ambiguity increases, our ability to win diminishes.
Liberals suffer from the notion that "we can't win" or "win what?" If Obama was a good leader, he'd be talking about it more.
He can't even say "thank you" to Bush for doing a good job in Iraq - a job that the liberals and our other enemies said couldn't be done.
BTW: I did not think we should have been in Iraq to begin with, so I find it hard to thank bush for that. However, once we were in Iraq, we had responsibilities. I think the combination of Rummy and Cheney advising bush pretty much screwed up our strategy until 2006.

Once the election of 2006 was over, Rummy was out of the way and Cheney was held at arms length. Our esponse to Iraq remarkedly changed to include the surge. I did not think there were enough Soldiers in the surge to the job. I happilly admit I was wrong and I thank bush for seeing something was wrong, changing course and leaving us in much better shape than we would be had he "Stayed the Course" which I think Cheney and Rummy were encouraging him to do.

Alz

Since: Oct 08

Chicago

#53074 May 9, 2010
okboston wrote:
<quoted text>
You charge me with being liberal and praying at the Progressive alter, yet a challenge you to find anywhere in my response that I indicated Jesus would not be against abortion. I challenge you to find anywhere in my response that I indicated he would not work against abortion. Show me anywhere in my response I indicated it was not wrong.
Your replies are an excellent example of what is wrong with the Republican Party. I plainly wrote that Jesus would be against abortion and that he would work against it through eduction and example, not legistlation.
How does that support your response to me?
I didn't see where you said "Jesus would be against abortion". If you did, then good. That still doesn't square with your assertion that Jesus would be a "Progressive Liberal" (or whatever words you used) because "Progressive Liberals" are pro abortion.

So are you saying "except for abortion", Jesus would be a "Progressive Liberal"?

Alz

Since: Oct 08

Chicago

#53075 May 9, 2010
okboston wrote:
<quoted text>
But.....
But.....
But.....
But....
Quit crying and admit your original statement was wrong.
While the decision was delayed, the actions implementing the decision were in fact moved sooner, so what the heck is your point?
Once again, in a mad dash to prove me or Obama wrong, you fail to check relevant facts which show you are going down a dead-end path.
It is people like you that forced a conservative Senator into resigning recently.
No one, not bush nor Obama, is wrong 100% of the time nor are they right 100% of the time. They certainly can not please all of the people any of the time. You are in such a rush to find something, anything wrong, you don't even stop to check. He did it, it must be wrong. That pretty much makes you useless to good conversation and so when there is nothing important being discussed, there is you.
McChrystal's request sat unanswered (or delayed) for months. Obama talked about his "comprehensive review" (like he does with everything) and people expected it to happen. He dithered.

You're right though: Bush wasn't 100% wrong and neither is Obama. I just can't find much where Obama is doing the right thing that works to make things better in the long run.

Since: Aug 07

South Central Virginia

#53076 May 9, 2010
Pfluger the Union Monkey wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks, I will. But don't you think, having written what you just did, that there was no "comprehensive plan" in March? That's my point. Obama had soaring rhetoric about a comprehensive plan, but in fact, the plan was still being developed.
I suppose I might be picking nits here. But as far as his economic/job creation plans (I posted them earlier), its clear that there were no plans. They were simply goals. There was no plan to achieve the goals, other than to throw billions of dollars at states and hope for the best.
It was FALSE ADVERTISING in the extreme to say he had a plan, for $150 billion, to create 5 million new green jobs. If there was such a "plan," why wasn't it implemented??
I think it is safe to say that while their may have been a broad comprehensive plan to counter terrorism in the region, there was no comprehensive plan for Afhanistan specifically and that was what McChrystal came up with and presented options at the end of August.

I tend to agree with you in this way; forecasting the economy is like forecasting weather. We know what normally happens in a general sense but we have a bad track record of predicting specifics. Americans are addctied to numbers and that leads us down paths perhaps we should not go.

I think throwing money at the states and local governments is a fair idea, but I would rather spend almost 100% on infrastructure. It not only puts people to work but also helps us increase productivity and efficiency for years to come.

Since: Aug 07

South Central Virginia

#53077 May 9, 2010
Say the Truth wrote:
<quoted text>
Mostly nonsense, true to form. Have you ever tried to fire someone? In most legitimate organizations it is difficult and labor laws protect workers. Any action against an employee must be very thoroughly documented. Non-competes are hard to enforce. Ask any HR manager...or lawyer.
1. I did not say in some states, it was not difficult to fire someone. I simply stated that in "Right to work" states, no reason was necessary. This does not releave the employer from discrimination considerations and other things.

2. I also did not say that non-compete clauses were difficult to enforce. I did state that generally "Right to Work" laws made them easier to enforce.

My whole point is that "Right to Work" laws are generally misnamed.

Since: Aug 07

South Central Virginia

#53078 May 9, 2010
Say the Truth wrote:
<quoted text>
Now you're puting words into the mouth of our Lord and Savior?
What ARROGANCE- a trait of the Left.
Are you and Alz one and the same?

Show me where I put words in his mouth. I pointed out what we have no documentation of him saying. Now show me where Jesus said abortion was murder.

If you can not show it, then that puts you on the left, doesn't it?

Since: Aug 07

South Central Virginia

#53079 May 9, 2010
george barnett wrote:
<quoted text>Unlike most Liberals/progressives Jesus didn't encourage immorality and irresponsibility.He did once state,"Render unto Caesar that which is Caesars".That rendering is somewhat less inclusive than Liberals' belief that ALL/Everything/100% belongs to Caesar for Caesar to redistribute.
Which liberals believe that? How many, percentage wise in the US believe that? This is America where even liberals are right of center when viewed on a world-wide basis.
Politics as usual

Woodside, NY

#53080 May 9, 2010
Now we see what BP bought when it made Obozo its top recipient of campaign donations.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/...

"Interior Department’s Minerals Management Service gave the rig that blew up and caused the spill, BP’s Deepwater Horizon, a “categorical exclusion” from the National Environmental Policy Act."

Read more: http://newyorkpost.com/p/news/opinion/editori...

And of course the Allinsky followers/plants in the corrupt media are burying this.

Obozo is a disaster for this country.

“Amor patriae.”

Since: Feb 08

Eastern Oregon

#53081 May 9, 2010
okboston wrote:
<quoted text>
I think it is safe to say that while their may have been a broad comprehensive plan to counter terrorism in the region, there was no comprehensive plan for Afhanistan specifically and that was what McChrystal came up with and presented options at the end of August.
I tend to agree with you in this way; forecasting the economy is like forecasting weather. We know what normally happens in a general sense but we have a bad track record of predicting specifics. Americans are addctied to numbers and that leads us down paths perhaps we should not go.
I think throwing money at the states and local governments is a fair idea, but I would rather spend almost 100% on infrastructure. It not only puts people to work but also helps us increase productivity and efficiency for years to come.
You admit forecasting the weather is fruitless yet you believe in global warming.
You believe taking money from working Americans and "investing" it in non-working environments will stimulate them to success. What happens when the freebies run out? You know and I know - nothing will change except the demand for 'more' will resonate louder and the urgency to 'act' will become more imperative. Disgusting.

Since: Aug 07

South Central Virginia

#53082 May 9, 2010
Alz wrote:
<quoted text>
You said "Funny how now that Obama is President, there are no protests about the war, and Obama, despite the civilian (inevitable) casualites, is not branded a 'war criminal.'"
See, like with EVERY ISSUE the liberals go berserk about, the issue itself is just a cover to advance their cause.
They don't give a rats add about Iraq. They don't really care about the environment. Palin is only an issue because she is a threat to them.
Literally, on every issue, they just use the issue to get at us.
Watch the talk "How Modern Liberals Think" at youtube.com/watch...
Trying the shoe-bomber in civilian court was fine until the underwear bomber came along.

Stimulus packages were fine (bush had three) until Obama came along.

Cutting Medicare was conservative until the Dems brought it up. Then Republicans defended Medicare.

It was OK to be against the President as long as you kept it at policy level until Obama got elected.

It was OK to be against administration policies provided you used factual reasoning to show why it was wrong until Obama came along.

Deficits were not a problem until Obama came along.

WAR PROTESTS: Obama is doing what he campaigned on. He is doing the peoples will. What is there to protest on the wars? Even the Tea Party people like it evidently.

Since: Aug 07

South Central Virginia

#53083 May 9, 2010
Alz wrote:
<quoted text>
Look at these two sentences:
1) "Liberals (really Modern Liberals/Progressives) never work to help the poor."
2) "Liberals (really Modern Liberals/Progressives) never work to help the poor become successful."
Liberals would go nuts over #1, but most people assume #2 and the liberals don't fight it much.
Liberals (really Modern Liberals/Progressives) never work to help the poor become successful. Instead, they work to make the rich more poor and then say the poor are victims of the rich.
One conclusion is that Liberals work to divide people. In their minds, only they are capable of directing everyone so we are all reach their Utopia - where everything is "equal."
Liberalism IS a religion. It's just a religion that makes things worse.
You care to show us what the Republicans (they are no longer conservative) have done to make the poor successful since 1960 and how successful they have been?

Since: Aug 07

South Central Virginia

#53084 May 9, 2010
Alz wrote:
<quoted text>
...and how/when did Bush run frm Afghanistan?
2002 when he focused on Iraq.

Since: Aug 07

South Central Virginia

#53085 May 9, 2010
Pittakos wrote:
<quoted text>
Republican capitalism? Capitalism is not the problem. Government spending more than it has and adding more and more programs which it can't afford is the problem.
War criminal? Impeach? On what grounds? Bush went to war with the approval of the vast majority from not only Congress but from the public. Iraq? Iraq essentially declared war on us on a daily basis by shooting ground to air missiles at our planes enforcing a no fly zone that was in place by treaty. Did Bush handle things the way I think it should have been done? Nope.(Lucky for Iraq that I wasn't making the decisions because Baghdad Bob would have been right about there being no American's in Baghdad. There just wouldn't have been any Baghdad left to go to.)
McCain? No thanks. He was just Obama light. Obama heavy is actually waking the sleeping masses up to what liberalism is all about. Maybe the Republican party will catch on and come back to it's conservative roots. Somehow, though, I doubt it.
Republican capitalism is based on pumping more currency into the economy than you are collecting through taxation, in other words deficit spending.

Democrat capitalism is based on taxing at an amount equal to the revenues being spent in order to balance the budget keeping your interest charges low. This enables us to save money (or the ability to borrow) for a rainy day.

Both Republicans and Democrats support social spending. If you don't believe me, ask when the Tea Party is going to come out against SS and Medicare.

Since: Aug 07

South Central Virginia

#53086 May 9, 2010
Pinebeetle wrote:
<quoted text>The American dream.
Finally, an honest answer from PineBeetle on what he dislikes about America.

Since: Aug 07

South Central Virginia

#53087 May 9, 2010
Nostrilis Waxman wrote:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new s/newstopics/politics/2432632/ UK-General-Election-2010-polit ical-map.html
Liberals/Socialists have not had their asses kicked like this since 1931 in the U.K.
http://www.blacksacademy.net/content/3842.htm...
Does anyone "thunk" maybe the folks are starting to see what liberals/socialists bring???
Let's all join the socialists/liberal/fascist party and visit Greece!!
We can riot, be desperate and tax eachother because the evil people that create jobs have long since left.
Let's be smart and rely on government to do everything. Liberals must be proud!
Ironic that liberals are being greeked. LOL!
You are wrong. Margaret Thatcher did it. And she did it much better.

You are wrong. Even the conservatives in England are left of the Democrat Party in the US.

You are wrong. The "conservatives" won by saying "Last time our economic system was broken and that is what we fixed. Now it is our social systems that are broke, and that is what we will fix." In other words, they are taking a more liberal view of the world.

Since: Aug 07

South Central Virginia

#53088 May 9, 2010
Bottom Line wrote:
<quoted text>
If Bush were to have declared that an increase in the unemployment
rate was a good thing because it proved that more people were now looking for work, Saturday Night Live would have had all the
material needed for a hilarious segment. Sorry, but the hard
numbers do not support your conclusion, though it does make for
one of the more creative twisting of reality that I have seen
here.
I got it ..... the unemployment rate goes down and the Democrats
give all praise to Obama. The unemployment rate goes up,
and the Democrats give all praise to Obama.
Okay, I'm game. Please explain to those of us who are obviously
confused exactly what a bad U3 or U6 unemployment rate might be?
"Pay Go is back." Where? I don't regard borrowing trillions
and then scratching one's head trying to figure how to pay for
it as "Pay Go". "Everything on the table" is a clear indication
that they are in panic mode.
Bush did claim success at employment gains even as the unemployment rate went up. This goes back to how we measure and what we look at. It is not a bush/Obama problem.

Since: Aug 07

South Central Virginia

#53089 May 9, 2010
Nostrilis Waxman wrote:
<quoted text>
Very, very, very intersting. You just broke a liberal taboo without knowing it.
You said: "We voted the incumbents out 3.5 years ago."
----------
Did you forget the economic problems started then and that the banking crisis and stock market tanked to its low point in 2009?
http://moneycentral.msn.com/investor/charts/c...
So it is now obvious you know who is responsible for the current situation?
Welcome to earth liberal!
They know it in the U.K. as they just voted in conservatives after the labour party proved they had no solutions. This was the worst defeat since 1931.
Greece is having fun too!
Do you stand by your own words that:
"We voted the incumbents out 3.5 years ago."
Or are you a typical liberal that has it both ways?
Go ahead, spin like a top now lib.
Who cares, other than you apparently, if I broke a liberal or conservative taboo?

Your insistance that problems started in January of 2007 just gives credence to those of us that see you stuck in a stale, dogmatic, ideological train of thought.

The problems really started in 2002 (to a degree that they could affect our national economic health) and mifested themselves starting about 2006. Think, when was Paulson shorting those mortgage backed securities at GS? When did the subprime mortgagges start failing in ever increasing numbers?

You seem intent on confusing when symptoms became overwhelmingly present and when you first became infected sufficiently to become sick. Why?

Since: Aug 07

South Central Virginia

#53090 May 9, 2010
Alz wrote:
<quoted text>
I "wake up" to this? It's the left that despises reason.
One example: http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg1992666...
The "Right" uses reason to advance. The Left uses facts to "prove" their preconceived notions and specifically disallows are attacks facts that are counter to their beliefs.
Why do you let an extreme example be representative of the left? Should I do the same, or have I done the same when argueing about the right?

Do you see me bring up just your preacher men as being representational of your view on the right?

I will defend the firnge left no more than I defend the fringe right. The Tea Party has gone mainstream and are fair game.

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.

US News Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Election 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 2 min AMERICAN SUNSHINE 253,463
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 3 min replaytime 216,875
News Congressman plans to introduce national conceal... 3 min GloriusGoodness 4
News Trump's repeated claim that he won a 'landslide... 4 min President Donald ... 526
A message to all voters 5 min Mia 1
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 6 min Injudgement 1,459,749
News DNC Chair Frontrunner Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Min... 6 min GloriusGoodness 9
News Thousands of people march during rally at Bosto... 1 hr Doctor Who 2,239
News The President has failed us (Jun '12) 2 hr Sunnier 404,219
More from around the web