Connect with us

Obama Jobs Bill: Top 10 False And Irresponsible Republican Responses

Published

on

President Obama delivered a rousing speech outlining his plan, the American Jobs Act, to create jobs for Americans. Knowing any improvement in the economy or in unemployment numbers nets the President a second term, the Republicans are fiercely against his proposal to invest $447 billion — fully paid for — in getting Americans back to work, while repairing this nation’s roads, bridges, and schools.

Most important in this equation, and remember this as you read further, is the revelation — for the second time — from the congressional Budget Office (CBO) that the Stimulus, which Obama implemented when he took office, did work. In fact, “the stimulus raised real gross domestic product by between 0.8 and 2.5 percent, lowered unemployment by 0.5 to 1.6 percent and increased jobs by 1 to 2.9 million.”

So, when you have to lie for your points to sound OK, they’re not.

Here are the top 10 worst, nastiest, most negative and irresponsible responses from Republicans, who clearly are not interested in jobs:

10. Mitch McConnell:

“A debate that was forced upon us by the historic run-up in debt that’s occurred over the past two and a half years as a result of this President’s unprecedented spending,” McConnell said. “Yet here we are, tonight, being asked by this same president to support even more government spending with the assurance that he’ll figure out a way to pay for it later.”

9. Jeb Hensarling:

“By asking the Joint Select Committee to increase the $1.5 trillion target to cover the full cost of his plan, the president is essentially tasking a committee designed to reduce the deficit to pay for yet another round of stimulus.”

8. Eric Cantor:

All I can say is, we are looking forward to trying to see if we can transcend differences, set them aside and try and come together on what we can do to grow the economy and to help people get back to work. That’s why I reject the notion that there is somehow an all-or-nothing approach here, that we have got to accept his package, or somehow he will look to hold us accountable. Again, it’s about results here, and there are plenty of things that we can do to produce results, transcending the differences and trying to stick to where can find commonalities.

7. Rick Perry:

“Like the president’s earlier $800 billion stimulus program, this proposal offers little hope for millions of Americans who have lost jobs on his watch and taxpayers who are rightly concerned that their children will inherit a mountain of debt,” he said. “America needs jobs, smaller government, less spending and a president with the courage to offer more than yet another speech.”

6. Jon Huntsman:

Americans are “tired of President Obama’s empty rhetoric and failed policies; they’re desperately searching for leadership and, above all, results. Tonight’s list of regurgitated half-measures demonstrates that President Obama fundamentally doesn’t understand how to turn our economy around.”

5. Michele Bachmann:

While the President’s speech comes on the heels of a trillion dollars of failed stimulus, bailouts, and temporary gimmicks aimed at creating jobs, the President continued to cling to the idea that government is the solution to creating jobs.

I stand here tonight to say to the President, not only should Congress not pass your plan, I say, “stop; your last plan hasn’t worked, it’s hurting the American economy.” Instead of temporary fixes, do what has proved to work in the past, permanent pro growth policies that are driven by the free market.

Generational theft is a moral and ethical issue, and I care deeply about both the present generation and generations to come.

The President is politically paralyzed and philosophically incapable of doing what needs to be done.

4. Jeff Flake:

“I feel like I’ve just been to the principal’s office. It was equal parts platitudes and scolding. He has given a lot of good speeches in his day but this wasn’t one of them. It was vacuous. You knew what it was, but some of the talk made me scratch my head. Retention of teachers? It was just lines thrown out there for applause from the Left, without any real connection to what we need to do.” Obama, with his sinking polls, Flake says, threw a “Hail Mary,” and missed.

3. Steve King:

“The president said that we can reduce the deficit and pay down the national debt, which isn’t going to happen. That requires a balanced budget. This president didn’t offer a balanced budget. But he said, several times, it will be paid for. But when you listen, well, it’s goint to be paid for out of the conclusion that is drawn from the super-committee, which sets up a cage match between our national defense and our entitlements. We don’t know what it costs either. He didn’t put a price tag on it. [Note: He did. $447 billion.] Whatever it is, he would ask us to come up with those costs and do that within the crunch time of the super-committee. It’s an extremely heavy lift for Congress to come up with something like this. The president has, essentially, done what we say in the Midwest: he’s just tossed a cat into the kennel. Now he’s going to step back and watch the fur fly.”

2. Allen West:

“Did I really need to have a speech for this? You could have given me the American Jobs Act and allowed me to read it and understand it; give it to the CBO, let them evaluate it. Now he’s put the cart before the horse, telling people we need to pass something that none of us have seen. In fact, we knew nothing about this since the speech didn’t come out until 7 p.m. We didn’t have an opportunity to really read and understand these points and proposals.”

“This presidency is absolutely in real trouble,” he concludes. “What I heard at the end was a real sense of desperation. He kept talking about 14 months, we need to do this now, but where was that sense of urgency 34 months ago?”

1. David Vitter:

Stunning. Evryone standing, cheering, reassured, more confident in r future…just by #Saints entering #Lambeau. On 2 recovery–& #SuperBowl!

 

By the way, Nancy Pelosi gets it right:

“In nearly 250 days of being in the Majority, House Republicans have not passed a single piece of legislation to create jobs. The Republican silence on Thursday evening will speak volumes about their lack of commitment to creating jobs.”

 

 

 

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

BREAKING NEWS

‘National Security Implications’: Former DOJ Official Speculates on Ruling Ordering Trump Attorney to Hand Over Docs

Published

1 hour ago

on

March 22, 2023

By

A former top Dept. of Justice official says a federal judge’s expedited ruling ordering an attorney for Donald Trump to testify against his client before a grand jury and hand over documents very well may be related to “national security.”

U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell ruled that DOJ Special Counsel Jack Smith had successfully made the case Donald Trump may have committed a crime, via his attorneys, in his classified documents case. That finding allowed her to invoke the crime-fraud exception, and order Trump attorney Evan Corcoran to testify before the grand jury investigating the ex-president’s unlawful retention and refusal to return hundreds of classified documents.

Former FBI General Counsel Andrew Weissmann, who also worked for Special Counsel Robert Mueller and headed the DOJ’s Criminal Fraud Section, Wednesday afternoon on MSNBC said it’s possible Judge Howell’s expedited decisions were related to national security.

Tuesday night Judge Howell ordered DOJ to provide information by 6:00 AM Wednesday.

READ MORE: Jim Jordan’s Attack on Manhattan DA Will ‘Backfire’ and Allow Democrats to Expose Coordination With Trump: Columnist

Trump appealed Howell’s ruling, and Wednesday afternoon the Appeals Court denied his appeal related to the documents, Politico reports.

“I’ve never seen anything that quick. It’s very hard to know why. I have to say, to me, when I think about what can be a plausible reason– and this is pure speculation – is that there must be something in the papers that gave the judges concern about national security implications, because it’s such a short timeframe.”

“The reason this is a bombshell is you could end up with Evan Corcoran as a key, fundamental witness against Donald Trump in an obstruction of justice case and a false statements case,” Weissmann adds.

According to Politico, Wednesday’s appeals court ruling “effectively permits the Justice Department to circumvent Trump’s attorney-client privilege after a lower-court judge found that the documents likely contain evidence of a crime.”

 

 

This article was updated to correctly spell Andrew Weissmann’s last name.

Continue Reading

RIGHT WING EXTREMISM

Trump Appeals After Judge Agrees With Special Counsel on Crime-Fraud Exception and Requires His Attorney to Testify

Published

2 hours ago

on

March 22, 2023

By

Donald Trump’s attorneys have appealed a ruling that requires one of his lawyers to testify before a grand jury investigating his unlawful removal, retention, and refusal to return classified documents from the White House.

Attorneys for the Special Counsel “said there is evidence of a deliberate effort not to turn over all the material covered by the subpoena,” The Washington Post reports, citing people familiar with the matter.

U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell had reportedly agreed with Special Counsel Smith that there is sufficient evidence proving Donald Trump may have committed a crime via his attorneys, and ruled his attorney must testify before a grand jury. The ruling, which was not made public, was handed down Friday night, NBC News reported Wednesday afternoon.

Judge Howell “ruled in favor of applying the ‘crime fraud’ exception to Trump’s attorney-client privilege and ordered Trump lawyer Evan Corcoran to testify before the federal grand jury.”

READ MORE: ‘On Standby’: Experts Say Manhattan Hush Money Grand Jury Delay ‘Not All That Surprising’

Trump’s attorneys have already appealed the ruling.

“People familiar with the matter said an appeals panel has already begun reviewing the decision, after Trump’s lawyers appealed,” The Washington Post adds. “The extraordinarily quick timeline suggests that the judges — all nominated by Democratic presidents — intend to rule swiftly.”

Trump could take his case all the way to the Supreme Court, but The Post says it’s “not clear he would have a much better chance of success there.”

According to an NBC News report from October, Corcoran directed another Trump attorney, Christina Bobb, to sign the letter claiming a thorough search of Mar-a-Lago had been made and all classified or “sensitive” documents had been returned. That was proven untrue after federal agents, executing a search warrant, recovered hundreds of documents with classified markings.

NEW: ‘National Security Implications’: Former DOJ Official Speculates on Ruling Ordering Trump Attorney to Hand Over Docs

Continue Reading

News

‘On Standby’: Experts Say Manhattan Hush Money Grand Jury Delay ‘Not All That Surprising’

Published

4 hours ago

on

March 22, 2023

By

In a last-minute surprise move the grand jury examining the Manhattan District Attorney’s hush money case against Donald Trump was called off after being told to show up Wednesday afternoon, leaving some to wonder why. Many anticipated jurors would be voting on a possible indictment of the ex-president, one he wrongly claimed would come on Tuesday.

“The grand jury has been told to stay home today. They’re on standby for tomorrow,” an unnamed senior law-enforcement official said, Politico reports. A spokesperson for Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg told Politico, “We can’t confirm or comment on Grand Jury matters.”

Meanwhile, CNN’s Paula Reid reports, “Sources tell CNN that prosecutors have been in touch with an attorney for at least one witness, and they signal that they’re leaving the door open for that witness to potentially come back to give additional testimony.”

“One of the big questions right now is whether this grand jury has actually completed its investigation or whether they will need to hear from additional witnesses.”

READ MORE: Jim Jordan’s Attack on Manhattan DA Will ‘Backfire’ and Allow Democrats to Expose Coordination With Trump: Columnist

Reid says it’s also possible prosecutors are “taking a moment to really consider the historic weight of indicating a former U.S. president.”

Experts are offering insight on the delay, with some pointing to tying up “loose ends,” others suggesting security concerns, and others say delays like this are to be expected.

Top national security attorney Brad Moss commented on Reid’s CNN report, saying: “Interesting. Makes sense.”

Overnight, former U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance wrote, “Wherever the truth lies about what’s going on in Manhattan, that timeline suggests there may not be an indictment tomorrow or even this week.” After news that the grand jury would not meet Wednesday broke, she pointed to that remark and wrote: “This now looks like it will be the case.”

That echoes a little noticed Fox News report from Monday that indicated any possible indictment would not come before next week.

READ MORE: Trump Calls for Congress to Investigate NY AG After Judge Refuses to Delay $250 Million Fraud Trial Against Ex-President

A law enforcement “source said law enforcement does not expect the former president to be arraigned until next week as the Manhattan grand jury – which has been meeting secretly to hear evidence for weeks – has another witness on Wednesday. A virtual option was apparently ruled out as the DA is opposed to it.”

Could security be the reason for the delay? On Tuesday, award-winning reporter Carol Leonnig said law enforcement agencies are investigating “chilling” threats, including against Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg. 

“I have received copies and screenshots and internal documents and emails flagging concerns about specific protests, investigations into specific online threats that have been made that are not yet determined to be ‘credible and likely to occur’ but have been chilling nonetheless in terms of the threats that have been made about killing certain people,” said Leonnig, a Pulitzer-Prize winning author, on MSNBC’s “Deadline: White House.”

Former New York prosecutor Tristan Snell, who successfully helped prosecute the New York Attorney General’s case against Trump University, pointed to security measures as a possible reason for the delay.

“Most likely reason: all the law enforcement coordination and security logistics that are being worked out, including with NYPD and Secret Service,” Snell offered. “They don’t want to indict and then have a long gap between indictment and arrest/arraignment.”

He also noted, “part of the security is to ensure the GRAND JURORS themselves — 23 regular New Yorkers, doing their civic duty — are protected from a defendant who incites violence.”

Former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti said: “Based on what we know publicly, there are plenty of loose ends that prosecutors may need to tie up, so delay is not all that surprising.”

Watch the CNN video above or at this link.

 

Image: Evan El-Amin / Shutterstock

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.