Quote from: Just_the_facts_mamm on February 04, 2012, 09:22:48 PM
Well they are congressmen and it's their job (supposedly)

So are you trying to imply that there is an amendment to the just proposed bill about deregulation, that does WHAT?
This must be a very obscure job proposal.  Be specific or give it up Boo.

Still waiting for you to prove there are 25 jobs bills

Why again did they not talk about these job creating bill after the pres speech in Sept about jobs, where he pretty much called them out on the carpet and said "where's the jobs bills" (crickets could be heard in the chamber)

The GOP get up and respond after every speech. They do each Saturday after the pres gives his little talk.

WHY no rebuttal THAT day. GOT NO JOB BILL'S???

This rebuttal issue is really thread worthy. I got to know.

There it is folks. A child that refuses to debate what I post yet demands even more....

Quote from: The Boo Man... on February 04, 2012, 09:09:27 PM
So if we use your logic, Congressmen don't have to read the bills. They just read the "description.". And in doing that they never see all the amendments that have to be voted on.

Well done stupid.

YES like they did with obamacare

Quote from: Just_the_facts_mamm on February 04, 2012, 09:22:48 PM
Well they are congressmen and it's their job (supposedly)

So are you trying to imply that there is an amendment to the just proposed bill about deregulation, that does WHAT?
This must be a very obscure job proposal.  Be specific or give it up Boo.

Still waiting for you to prove there are 25 jobs bills

Why again did they not talk about these job creating bill after the pres speech in Sept about jobs, where he pretty much called them out on the carpet and said "where's the jobs bills" (crickets could be heard in the chamber)

The GOP get up and respond after every speech. They do each Saturday after the pres gives his little talk.

WHY no rebuttal THAT day. GOT NO JOB BILL'S???

This rebuttal issue is really thread worthy. I got to know.

Regurgitating standard Daily Kos tripe.  PolitiFact debunked DK's claim of no Republican jobs bills back in October:

But the post's most important flaw is the contention that Republicans have offered "zero" bills on job creation. This number stems from a methodology that also excludes Obama's American Jobs Act from the category of "job creation" bills. If  you look at alternative job-related subject headings, the number of bills offered by lawmakers from both parties actually exceeds most of the social-issues listed in the blog post.  We rate this claim Pants on fire.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/oct/25/facebook-posts/blog-post-says-gop-has-sponsored-zero-job-creation/

Quote from: Just_the_facts_mamm on February 04, 2012, 10:36:16 AM
I would have to say the same back to you! Conservative, fact less propaganda seems to be the stable here.

Now, I realize that you think  most of us are full of horseshit, but I believe the word you were looking for here is staple.   :D

Quote from: bluelieu on February 05, 2012, 12:19:07 AM
Regurgitating standard Daily Kos tripe.  PolitiFact debunked DK's claim of no Republican jobs bills back in October:

But the post's most important flaw is the contention that Republicans have offered "zero" bills on job creation. This number stems from a methodology that also excludes Obama's American Jobs Act from the category of "job creation" bills. If  you look at alternative job-related subject headings, the number of bills offered by lawmakers from both parties actually exceeds most of the social-issues listed in the blog post.  We rate this claim Pants on fire.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/oct/25/facebook-posts/blog-post-says-gop-has-sponsored-zero-job-creation/

Did you read the entire page you linked to?
They are rating the BLOG POST as "pant's on fire"

AND in the end they don't SAY they DID or did NOT put real "job" bills up to congress.

The essence of the Politico blurb is that there are dozens of bills about a broad spectrum of things, and anyone of of them might contain the "birth" of new jobs.

THAT being said.

NO ONE can answer the question as to why after being called out on the carpet by the President, the GOP did not respond with the 25 job bills that Boo likes to say exist??

The next day some member of congress (R) pretended (I think, it may have been real) to  put up HIS jobs bill which called for an end to all taxes.

The GOP HAD NOTHING to offer the public and felt it best to just keep quite!

They rebut the Presidents saturday morning talk to the public, why not his speech on jobs??

Cause they DON"T have squat to offer!

Unless one of you can show me some.
Your up Boo!

Quote from: Just_the_facts_mamm on February 05, 2012, 10:17:55 AM
Did you read the entire page you linked to?
They are rating the BLOG POST as "pant's on fire"

AND in the end they don't SAY they DID or did NOT put real "job" bills up to congress.

The essence of the Politico blurb is that there are dozens of bills about a broad spectrum of things, and anyone of of them might contain the "birth" of new jobs.

THAT being said.

NO ONE can answer the question as to why after being called out on the carpet by the President, the GOP did not respond with the 25 job bills that Boo likes to say exist??

The next day some member of congress (R) pretended (I think, it may have been real) to  put up HIS jobs bill which called for an end to all taxes.

The GOP HAD NOTHING to offer the public and felt it best to just keep quite!

They rebut the Presidents saturday morning talk to the public, why not his speech on jobs??

Cause they DON"T have squat to offer!

Unless one of you can show me some.
Your up Boo!

Right back atcha... Read the conclusion , The "pants on fire" was directed at the claim  of zero bills on job creation, not the blog itself.  Furthermore, if we do accept the "jobs creation" premise, then the American Jobs Act falls off the scope too.  Without getting into numbers, Politfact concedes that both parties have put forth "alternative" job-related headings, when it says "the number of (such) bills from both parties exceeds the total of social-issue bills mentioned in the blog (a claim which came from the Daily Kos).

Quote
But the post's most important flaw is the contention that Republicans have offered "zero" bills on job creation. This number stems from a methodology that also excludes Obama's American Jobs Act from the category of "job creation" bills. If  you look at alternative job-related subject headings, the number of bills offered by lawmakers from both parties actually exceeds most of the social-issues listed in the blog post.  We rate this claim Pants on Fire.

Quote from: Just_the_facts_mamm on February 04, 2012, 08:42:37 PM
First off,
IF we were in the middle of bombing Afghanistan, lets hope that WE HAD the proof necessary, otherwise we are WARMONGERS
and shouldn't have been bombing them in the first place.

SO we have the proof.
What's so wrong about Osama going to a neutral 3rd country?

WE HAVE THE PROOF, right?
So why would that matter.

Instead, the choice is to risk tens of thousands of troops lives and spend god knows how much cash!

That's not leadership. That's grandstanding.  Bush did it cause HE COULD!

That and being the "war president".
(Do I have to post that link again?)

AND as far as Osama getting away, The Taliban couldn't have given him up if they didn't have him, in which case they are going to get pounded by US forces!
I think after the mini Iraq war with Bush one, that part of the world got a better idea how good the US war machine IS.

Avoiding a pounding by our forces WAS probably high on their agenda!

You do know that Osama and al Qaeda took credit for the WTC attack, correct?
Do you happen to have some reason we should have ignored their confession of guilt?