Remember_When

Tue, Nov 8, 2011 : 1:26 a.m.

How forgetful people seem to be. When Reagan did almost the same thing the liberals talked about how he was bankrupting the nation and forcing our children into poverty. Reagan's economic run lasted until the last year of Clinton's presidency. It was all gloom and doom. Now the Democrats want to do the same thing and they criticize the Republicans for not supporting it. Interesting! The big difference here is that when Reagan did it, the nation wasn't in this much debt. The old arguments the Democrats used then would stand up better today than in the 80's. But it seems the Democrats have forgotten their own opinion on this matter. They hated this idea in the 80's, but today when we are in deeper debt, they think it's the best idea ever.. So I would like to ask the Democrats how the times are so different? If it was so bad then, why does it fly with the current debt level? Just a simple request for justification of the flip flop of opinions.

Ron Granger

Mon, Nov 7, 2011 : 1:38 p.m.

I prefer the Republican alternative myself - block, obfuscate, obstruct, and shutdown government in an all out effort to get back into power so we can return to the halcyon days of Bush and enriching the military industrial complex. War is now our national business. Want a job? Join the military or a "security" company.

Scylding

Mon, Nov 7, 2011 : 5 a.m.

I agree with Mike K., Obama is pandering to his constituency. I would add that he's trying to expand it. He's buying votes. It's the same thing FDR did with the same kind of abuse of executive power. The Democrats loooove creating public sector jobs, because those who get the jobs know that their employment depends on keeping big gov lovers in power. Every job created is a future vote. Every agency created is hundreds or thousands of future votes. Teachers? They vote 90% plus for the Dems. They're just more government employees. And we just have to grin and bear it. We pay taxes to fund the government effort to hire more Democrats to indoctrinate our children so that they will (they hope) vote in more Democrats. If that isn't corruption, what the heck is?

kittybkahn

Mon, Nov 7, 2011 : 4:07 a.m.

I agree with Ms. Goslin. But of course Republicans won't let anything President Obama proposes succeed. As they have openly stated, their priority is to see President Obama fail. - even if it means our country fails. Republican senators and congressmen seem to forget that their job is to speak for their constituents, most of whom openly support the President's jobs act. Can someone please remind them that Reagan raised taxes eleven times. Then perhaps they will stop their obstructionist ways and work to get something done to help the American people.

G. Orwell

Mon, Nov 7, 2011 : 4 a.m.

Is this opinion page a joke? The last Obama stimulus package cost $312,500 per job created. Probably jobs flipping burgers at McDonalds. These job creation bills or stimulus bills are nothing more than boondoggle to distribute our money to Obama's cronies. Just as Bush/Cheney did by starting wars to benefit the likes of Haliburton. Does Solyndra sound familiar.

Mike K

Mon, Nov 7, 2011 : 1:22 a.m.

Obama's "jobs" bill is nothing more than pandering to his constituency, "putting teachers and construction workers back to work". I appreciate teachers - especially with two kids in the district, but how much stimulation does society get from giving a teacher a job for a year? Job creation MUST be in the private sector. Every private sector employee generates tax REVENUE such that we might be able to hire more teachers. Public sector employees of course pay tax, but they are FUNDED by the same tax dollars; hence not a sustainable model. If Obama really wanted to create jobs, he would propose to MAKE, CONSTRUCT, BUILD something tangible and of value to society that reached into a wide cross section of private sector business. Period.

braggslaw

Mon, Nov 7, 2011 : 1 a.m.

Donbee is so right. There are trillions of dollars sitting on the sideline. CEO's are afraid to spend because they do no know what type of costs/taxes/regulations they will have to absorb in their business model. The Pelosi/Obama taxing, regulating, redistribution agenda is preventing businesses from growing and investing, thus leading to no economic growth and no hiring. There is a silver lining. If a republican president is elected (don't care who), those trillions of dollars will flood into the economy creating a late 80's type economic boom. It doesn't matter if the new republican president is an idiot, companies are itching to invest they just need the green light.

braggslaw

Mon, Nov 7, 2011 : 12:12 a.m.

What a bunch of garbage Borrow more money from the Chinese to employ temp public sector workers? We are not greece

bedrog

Mon, Nov 7, 2011 : 12:05 a.m.

Has the millenium / salvation arrived with Obama?? NO! But on balance he's still head and shoulders above any of his opponants when it comes to intellect, pragmatism (as opposed to faith based fanaticism) and general awareness of a wider world which is beyond any one person's ability to shape absolutely. Romney might have been a contender but he seems to have squandered his credibility as a decent former governor of a blue state by jumping on the arrogant "know nothing" bandwagon- to- hell that is the 'teaparty'. That Obama's various positive plans have come to less than fruition is due to the knee- jerk obstructionism of that crowd, and Obama's main dereliction ( if such it be) is trying to politely treat with them as honest partners in governance instead of figuring out ways of playing harder ball. If he wants a 2nd term he'll have to learn to be less nice. Pity that Rahm Emmanuel is out the picture as an advisor.

Joe Hood

Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 11:10 p.m.

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

joe.blow

Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 7:12 p.m.

"While President Obama unveiled the American Jobs Act more than a month ago, the GOP-controlled House seems content to play politics instead of putting Americans back to work." Liberals love playing this card. The Americans job act hasn't even come up for debate in the Democrat controlled Senate yet, so guess what, the House hasn't even seen a breath of this bill yet. Democrats aren't voting for this, yet they're blaming republicans. Typical Obamanomics.

joe.blow

Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 7:06 p.m.

How can you trust Obama? The most transparent president in history is refusing to comply with a congressional subpoena to release documents about his last jobs bill. What's this jobs bill going to do, give only a few Billion of our money to those who donated to his campaign? You can't trust him, it's up to congress to create a jobs bill, Obama's likely going to be indited.

DonBee

Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 7:04 p.m.

I humbly disagree. This proposal should be called the "American Income Redistribution Act" The plan has $80 billion in Infrastructure spending and more than $350 billion in transfer payments. If the numbers were reversed, I could see the job creation, but this is the same transfer payment scheme that failed the first time around. A number of independent studies show the first stimulus bill created few private section (tax paying jobs) and saved mostly existing public sector jobs. If you want to create jobs, stop the regulation creation machine in Washington DC. Thousands of companies are sitting on the sideline trying to figure out if the new regulations will mean having to move off shore. Right now if all the EPA regulations go into effect more than 30,000 megawatts of electric generation will stop operating in the midwest. Most of these are the lowest cost providers. That means electric bills will rise next summer by between 20 and 50 percent. If your a manufacturer, do you want to see your bill rise by that much? Cheaper in Mexico or even Canada.

Jacob Bodnar

Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 7:02 p.m.

By the way, it will not help small business hire workers by cutting the payroll tax. It's an extension of a payroll tax cut that's been active for two years. A tax cut that is temporary, which means in the future those taxes will eventually got back up again - which is precisely why small businesses don't hire workers based on that temporary cut. And, oh by the way, it's precisely why they haven't hired because of that cut in the last two years.

Jacob Bodnar

Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 7 p.m.

Oh yeah, it will give us a "much needed shot in the arm" much like the first stimulus did. Oh wait...that didn't happen.

Sparty

Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 6:39 p.m.

Amen Laura. The bipartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates 1.3 million jobs would be created with the Presidents plan immediately. The same CBO estimates the republican plan, based on elimination of regulations that they claim Obama has written far exceeding prior presidents (not true -- he's written far fewer and at far less cost than GW Bush or even Ronald Reagan), would create ZERO jobs. That's right. The Presidents plan would create 1.3 million new jobs now vs 0 for the republicans as determined by the independent, bipartisan Congressional Budget Office. Watch the conservatives try to twist these facts until they are blue in the face.