After listening to the "back and forth" rhetoric after the House voted on the first version of the Stim Package, I was struck by the words I wasn't hearing from either side of the aisle.
From the Democrats, I never heard once an invitation to the Republicans to offer up additional ideas, solutions, or proposals that could be included, debated, argued and evaluated for the good of the country.
By the same token, from the Republicans I never heard once a definative idea, proposal or solution that would have improved the quality of the Stim Package.
All I heard from both sides were child like snipes and attacks.
I don't know about the rest of the country, but I for one am damn tired of that attitude in Washington. I give credit to Obama for reaching out and seekeing input from both sides but it seems now that most of the "old guard" in Congress are more worried about politics than they are the solutions to move the country forward.
"Obama planned to reverse one order Friday that allowed unionized companies to post signs informing workers that they were allowed to decertify their union, an order some claim is unfair because nonunion businesses are not required to post signs letting workers know they were legally allowed to vote for a union."
Although the document is true, you are not ** allowed ** to post it on your private bulletin board. Better yet, you are not ** allowed ** to post that document because another company is not ** required ** to post another document.
I guess that pesky First Amendment is worthless now that The Dear Leader has started telling us what we are ** allowed ** to say.
Bitter is as bitter does, Henry, you are in a fine dudgeon this morning. Aren't you lucky that in America you can insult and demean our President. I sure was for 8 years.
Comment by Sandi Saunders — January 30, 2009 @ 10:53 am
Henry, you post: "Although the document is true, you are not ** allowed ** to post it on your private bulletin board. Better yet, you are not ** allowed ** to post that document because another company is not ** required ** to post another document.
I guess that pesky First Amendment is worthless now that The Dear Leader has started telling us what we are ** allowed ** to say."
THIS IS THE NEWS, I should focus on? If you want us to only focus on the news, then only post the news and leave your editorial out of it. Otherwise it appears to be fair game for the discussion. People sure focus on the parts of my posts they don't like...
Comment by Sandi Saunders — January 30, 2009 @ 11:32 am
Henry,
Obama rescinds 4 orders where the government interferes in the practice of private businesses and still you find fault with Obama?
Comment by Joe (not the plumber) Merola — January 30, 2009 @ 11:41 am
Hold on. Are you saying that allowing business to post something is an example of government interfering in business? How so? It seems to me that the government outlawing the posting of something on a private bulletin board is more of an interference.
"The final order would ** require ** service contractors at federal buildings "
This also sounds like an interference.
"Obama would ** prevent ** federal contractors from being reimbursed "
This also sounds like an interference.
"A third order would ** require ** federal vendors"
Another interference.
Obama received a lot of union money. I guess it is payback time.
Now I think I've heard it all. Rudy Giuliani now says that he guaged the City of New York Budget on the level of bonuses that were awarded to Wall Steet executives and that limiting them would hurt everyone.
It never ceases to amaze me how convoluted the mentality is of some people. Why in the name of all that's holy and all that's not would you continue to pay bonuses to the very people who've run our economy over the cliff? I heard former the former CEO of Merrill (Thain) claim that the bonuses were needed to keep the top talent from leaving. For the love of mud...if that is the top talent, I would hate like the devil to see the worst talent.
Someone has got to educate these folks on the fact that you pay a bonus when you've done a GOOD job...not when you've lost billions and are begging for help from others to cover your losses.
AMEN Will, #11: Rewarding that stinky behavior is bad enough, trying to justify it just makes it worse. Good post!
Comment by Sandi Saunders — January 30, 2009 @ 3:08 pm
Regarding Post #3 and the link: I did not find it at all convoluted and understood it easily. The 'allowed' / 'required' argument is bogus. 1) the dear leaders have been telling companies what to post and make known for decades 2) if companies were ALLOWED to post the union FORMING info and ALLOWED to post the union DE-CERTIFYING info, which would get posted?
Ask OSHA how often companies disregard "posting orders" anyway. This may not be to your liking, but it is in the interest of the workers I believe. The onus has to be on the powerful or those in control in situations like this. JMHO.
Comment by Sandi Saunders — January 30, 2009 @ 3:21 pm
How is ** outlawing ** the posting of something on a private bulletin board going to help anything? It's an actual law. They didn't repeal the law. They just made it harder for workers to learn about that law.
“The men of the past were called Robber Barons… The ones who dreamt of cornering the Gold Market, or monopolizing silver, or even of paying 450 million in bonuses to 400 people who caused a company to collapse — that last example coming from the ancient history that was… yesterday. But in our fifth story tonight, financial treason so injurious to the nation that it makes a beggar out of language, and an angry President out of a heretofore almost imperturbable new chief. 18 billion in bonuses for Wall Street last year… the year you and I gave Wall Street…billions more… as bail-outs.” — Keith Olbermann on Countdown, January 29, 2009
Keith Olbermann works for MSNBC which is owned by GE which received $139 billion in government loan guarantees. Let's take a look at that salary, Keith.
You might want to take a look at what the $139 Billion is. It is "not a bailout. GE's participation simply puts GE Capital on a level playing field with other financial services companies who are eligible. We pay a market-based fee to participate in this program. It serves as an insurance program. We are not receiving a preferred equity investment in GE from the US Government."
In other words, Henry, GE is actually paying the Federal Government a fee for this insurance coverage of their debt...so in reality, GE is paying the Federal Government money, not the other way around.
RSS feed 
HARRY POTTER BANNED FROM LIBRARIES, CALLED 'DANGEROUS' FOR CHILDREN
http://www.kansascity.com/703/story/1008438.html
heh.heh.heh
Comment by Henry — January 30, 2009 @ 9:27 am
After listening to the "back and forth" rhetoric after the House voted on the first version of the Stim Package, I was struck by the words I wasn't hearing from either side of the aisle.
From the Democrats, I never heard once an invitation to the Republicans to offer up additional ideas, solutions, or proposals that could be included, debated, argued and evaluated for the good of the country.
By the same token, from the Republicans I never heard once a definative idea, proposal or solution that would have improved the quality of the Stim Package.
All I heard from both sides were child like snipes and attacks.
I don't know about the rest of the country, but I for one am damn tired of that attitude in Washington. I give credit to Obama for reaching out and seekeing input from both sides but it seems now that most of the "old guard" in Congress are more worried about politics than they are the solutions to move the country forward.
Comment by Will — January 30, 2009 @ 10:30 am
http://www.suntimes.com/business/1405064,w-Obama-repeal-four-Bush-executive-orders-013009.article
"Obama planned to reverse one order Friday that allowed unionized companies to post signs informing workers that they were allowed to decertify their union, an order some claim is unfair because nonunion businesses are not required to post signs letting workers know they were legally allowed to vote for a union."
Although the document is true, you are not ** allowed ** to post it on your private bulletin board. Better yet, you are not ** allowed ** to post that document because another company is not ** required ** to post another document.
I guess that pesky First Amendment is worthless now that The Dear Leader has started telling us what we are ** allowed ** to say.
Comment by Henry — January 30, 2009 @ 10:43 am
Bitter is as bitter does, Henry, you are in a fine dudgeon this morning. Aren't you lucky that in America you can insult and demean our President. I sure was for 8 years.
Comment by Sandi Saunders — January 30, 2009 @ 10:53 am
Focus on the news, Sandi. Not on me.
Comment by Henry — January 30, 2009 @ 11:11 am
Henry, you post: "Although the document is true, you are not ** allowed ** to post it on your private bulletin board. Better yet, you are not ** allowed ** to post that document because another company is not ** required ** to post another document.
I guess that pesky First Amendment is worthless now that The Dear Leader has started telling us what we are ** allowed ** to say."
THIS IS THE NEWS, I should focus on? If you want us to only focus on the news, then only post the news and leave your editorial out of it. Otherwise it appears to be fair game for the discussion. People sure focus on the parts of my posts they don't like...
Comment by Sandi Saunders — January 30, 2009 @ 11:32 am
Henry,
Obama rescinds 4 orders where the government interferes in the practice of private businesses and still you find fault with Obama?
Comment by Joe (not the plumber) Merola — January 30, 2009 @ 11:41 am
Hold on. Are you saying that allowing business to post something is an example of government interfering in business? How so? It seems to me that the government outlawing the posting of something on a private bulletin board is more of an interference.
"The final order would ** require ** service contractors at federal buildings "
This also sounds like an interference.
"Obama would ** prevent ** federal contractors from being reimbursed "
This also sounds like an interference.
"A third order would ** require ** federal vendors"
Another interference.
Obama received a lot of union money. I guess it is payback time.
Comment by Henry — January 30, 2009 @ 11:53 am
Henry,
I "repeal" my previous post. I totally misread the article.
Comment by Joe (ntp) Merola — January 30, 2009 @ 12:15 pm
Joe
That's because the article was written in such a convoluted way that I had to read it a few times to get what happened.
Comment by Henry — January 30, 2009 @ 1:43 pm
Now I think I've heard it all. Rudy Giuliani now says that he guaged the City of New York Budget on the level of bonuses that were awarded to Wall Steet executives and that limiting them would hurt everyone.
It never ceases to amaze me how convoluted the mentality is of some people. Why in the name of all that's holy and all that's not would you continue to pay bonuses to the very people who've run our economy over the cliff? I heard former the former CEO of Merrill (Thain) claim that the bonuses were needed to keep the top talent from leaving. For the love of mud...if that is the top talent, I would hate like the devil to see the worst talent.
Someone has got to educate these folks on the fact that you pay a bonus when you've done a GOOD job...not when you've lost billions and are begging for help from others to cover your losses.
Comment by Will — January 30, 2009 @ 2:50 pm
AMEN Will, #11: Rewarding that stinky behavior is bad enough, trying to justify it just makes it worse. Good post!
Comment by Sandi Saunders — January 30, 2009 @ 3:08 pm
Regarding Post #3 and the link: I did not find it at all convoluted and understood it easily. The 'allowed' / 'required' argument is bogus. 1) the dear leaders have been telling companies what to post and make known for decades 2) if companies were ALLOWED to post the union FORMING info and ALLOWED to post the union DE-CERTIFYING info, which would get posted?
Ask OSHA how often companies disregard "posting orders" anyway. This may not be to your liking, but it is in the interest of the workers I believe. The onus has to be on the powerful or those in control in situations like this. JMHO.
Comment by Sandi Saunders — January 30, 2009 @ 3:21 pm
I second that AMEN Sandi and Will! I mean, wtf?
Comment by HCS — January 30, 2009 @ 4:04 pm
How is ** outlawing ** the posting of something on a private bulletin board going to help anything? It's an actual law. They didn't repeal the law. They just made it harder for workers to learn about that law.
Comment by Henry — January 30, 2009 @ 4:25 pm
“The men of the past were called Robber Barons… The ones who dreamt of cornering the Gold Market, or monopolizing silver, or even of paying 450 million in bonuses to 400 people who caused a company to collapse — that last example coming from the ancient history that was… yesterday. But in our fifth story tonight, financial treason so injurious to the nation that it makes a beggar out of language, and an angry President out of a heretofore almost imperturbable new chief. 18 billion in bonuses for Wall Street last year… the year you and I gave Wall Street…billions more… as bail-outs.” — Keith Olbermann on Countdown, January 29, 2009
Keith Olbermann works for MSNBC which is owned by GE which received $139 billion in government loan guarantees. Let's take a look at that salary, Keith.
http://finkelblog.com/index.php/2009/01/30/when-will-olbermann-accept-mccaskills-400000-salary-cap/
Comment by Henry — January 30, 2009 @ 4:33 pm
Henry....
You might want to take a look at what the $139 Billion is. It is "not a bailout. GE's participation simply puts GE Capital on a level playing field with other financial services companies who are eligible. We pay a market-based fee to participate in this program. It serves as an insurance program. We are not receiving a preferred equity investment in GE from the US Government."
In other words, Henry, GE is actually paying the Federal Government a fee for this insurance coverage of their debt...so in reality, GE is paying the Federal Government money, not the other way around.
Sorry to burst the bubble.
Comment by Will — January 30, 2009 @ 5:05 pm