Issa Pressed For Green Jobs Money

There were 93 freshmen Republicans minted in Nov 2010 but 48 identify as Tea party Republicans.

 

It's the never ending debate about whether Obama is smart-but-evil and knows exactly what he is doing or he's just stupid.

I'm still not sure which.

 

There are establishment Republicans who came to Washington to cash in till they retire and there are the Tea Party Republicans who are here to reform the system before it's too late.

 

You are very correct SM. And yes, bama is the CIC and should be railed for his policies. But he is no different that the last 1/2 dozen or more presidents.

Us main st americans need to stop pointing fingers at the other side and see that the political system is what is destroying us.
Putting in another puppet that is now running in the primaries won't change a thing. We need someone who isn't Mr or Mrs mainstream politician.
I don't see anyone like that. RP maybe, but many say he's unelectable.
So we'll get another mainstream politician and business as usual will continue and we as a nation will continue our decent into the last empire to fallen.

 

Your message to the other side on doing what YOU believe in....

Is you first?

Lol that's promising

 

The reality is that being moderate or generally sensible and sensitive to topics and issues in a fair way just gets ignored on forums like this. If you want a response your best bet is to be way over the top. On occasion a good conversation will spring up, the the vast majority of moderate comments are simply passed over in lieu of over the top partisan hackery. It probably has something to do with the safety of the screen. We wouldn't have these conversations in the same manner as we often see here in a coffee shop, we'd likely be far more respectful and understanding or simply walk away. It probably has more to do with the times. I can remember when moderate conversations were more the norm, but that seemed to change dramatically somewhere in the Bush years, to be fair I did not partake in many forums in the Clinton years, so my assessment is slightly skewed by my experiences. In those days it seemed that only certain issues were filled with the rampant hackery we see filling every issue now.

Prior to the 2010 mid term results, I honestly thought that moderation would arise, that Congress and the Senate would have balanced out, instead we saw a huge partisan swing. In order to really move forward as a country we need to get back to compromise. That doesn't seem likely now, we may be stuck in this hyper-partisan mode for another two election cycles. Neither side seems willing to really do anything for the country, just grab more power for their party.

Don't get me wrong, I'm a conservative and have some very extreme ideas, but I'm also a very practical person who understands that my extreme ideas are not the answer, just a desire, but easily expressed here without the consequence of any real world ramifications.

 

He came into public view in what, late 90's early 00's. And is now president. Which do you think?

 

No what I'm saying is that targeting Issa is foolish if he's going to be the only target when everyone else is doing it. To overlook or ignore the same behavior on your side isn't going to bring forth a meaningful solution, but I suspect you don't want a solution to the problem, just to spout off on the evils of the other side. I do it too, its fun. Sometime it gets boring though.

 

Well I guess that explains why righties didn't mind bushs spending...

I take it we can assume they will also excuse the next republicans out of control spending, since libs do it too.

Is there anything conservatives will do without expecting liberals to do it first?

 

The forum gives you actual human beings to curse when you push that ballot into the box. "Take that PF liberals!" lol

 

I think he was not prepared for the job. Smart has very little to do with it. I truly believe its the lack of executive experience that is the cause of the problem. In the beginning of his term he allowed Congress to walk all over him. He had no clue how to deal with them, as he was one of them. Once he figured that out he struck out on his own, lost the House and the Senate balanced out a bit. Then he became a leader with enemies at the gate, whereas it used to be friends. Of course that puts aside his ideology and agenda, just a comment on the progression or lack thereof in his leadership.

 

There is nothing wrong with 2 sides having opposing ideas.
IMO, though, the politicians just us that as ammo on the american people and especially the partisan people because they keep us pointing fingers.
While in the background the politicians really are working together to keep WS and other elites, (donors) happy.
Policy has been pretty consistant for 40 or 50 yrs.
Every election cycle we hear about energy independance, creating jobs, and other hot topic, push button rhetoric. After the election, nothing. Back to the same ole same ole.
Until the majority of people wake up to the fact we are the fiddle and the gov't is the fiddler, we will keep getting played.

 

Very true!

 

I have already said that it could be either one.

But does it really matter if Obama's hurting the country by design or through incompetence?

 

Once the money is allocated how stupid it would have been for him NOT to go after his states share?

OK how about all Democrats who opposed the war stop trying for defense contracts and defense spending in their states? How about those who opposed NCLB stop taking education funds?

 

That road leads to greater debt, spending has to be cut, we simply cannot bear the load forever. That's not a partisan statement, that's a simple reality we have to face.

That's the problem, nobody will compromise in the current political environment, and it seems the masses are lined up to keep it that way. Compromise is a two way street, it will never happen if the expectation is only thrust on one side.

 

Hell, we don't even need compromise to get it started. Just do what business do when revenues fall off. Slash 10% across the board. If that isn't enough, slash another 10%. Keep slashing until you stop bleeding cash.

 

We knew this going into 2010. Everyone, at least the most forward thinking of us predicted that this would happen. Complete and total gridlock until 2012. I remember the threads where most of us were predicting that the Government would go into complete and total lockdown and nothing would get done for two years.

We also agreed that it was a good thing because that means the Federal Government is weak enough for certain rambunctious States to experiment with unilateral action to improve conditions themselves, like Walker.

2012 the Gridlock ends, one way or the other. One sides heads are going to explode that is for sure. Obama may or may not make it out, depends on who wins the Primary and what his message is.

The problem is, as long as the Government is gridlocked it's also weak for other foreign nations to get disrespectful and think we won't one day come back and slap the taste out of their mouths and put them back in check where they belong.

 

There is something inherently disingenuous occurring when the "Shades of Gray" / "Living Document" crowd centers an argument around imperfect adherence to Black and White.

 

Is he against picking winners and losers or not? Is he admitting govt CAN create private sector jobs?

This contradicts his entire supposed philosophy

 

We need opposing views, but we need to compromise. That's what we used to do. Its been over a decade of hyper-partisanism, some say it started with the Clinton impeachment others the Bush election (theft in eyes of some liberals). Its really starting to have a negative impact on the nation. It is up to us, to elect people that will get us back on track.

In regards to energy policy, the biggest problem I see is that there is no viable alternative that suits the needs of our nation. What we have is a bunch of competing ideas that are are merged together as an 'alternative' but not a solution to our actual needs.

As to job creation, that's not something the government can do. What they can do is fix their end of the economic mess, by getting our revenues and spending in order. They can also decrease the uncertainty by forming policy that has definitive outlays that businesses can actually look at to adjust their own strategies. We have way too many 'plans' that span years in terms of costs and spending cuts. All of which can be changed on a whim, that breeds uncertainty as well.

 

I agree 100%, cuts across the board. I say leave it to the Department/Agency heads to figure out, as its way too complex for Congresscritters to be wasting time on.

 

Compromise??? Yours saying conservatives refuse to be consevative until liberals are also!

 

Shades of gray like when picking winners and losers will help his district

 

Knock, knock. Hello, hello!! Are you really dispondent or dispondent's alter ID.
Gov't can only get out of the way to job creation. That has to be with small business and red tape needs to be cut for small businesses to thrive.
Having said that, the red tape is their for large businesses to have a competitive advantage. I've seen neither party reduce red tape to make it easier for small businesses do what they do best. Cater to their customers and expand.

IMO, for energy policy, we have no real sustainable resource that can be relied upon 100%. Wind, solar, geothermal, etc should be tapped. They may not provide 100% but even 20 or 30% will reduce the gas/coal/oil dependance. And as those technologies become cheaper and more advanced they may take up more of the needs. But to completely disregard them IMO is ludicrous.