« | »

Durbin: Dems Don’t Have Votes For ‘Jobs Bill’

From Chicago’s radio station WLS-AM 890:

Durbin on Obama jobs bill: We don’t have the votes

Bill Cameron

CHICAGO (WLS) – On Tuesday, President Barack Obama tried to keep the pressure on Congress to consider his nearly $450 billion jobs bill, saying it had been two weeks since he sent the bill to Capitol Hill "and now I want it back."

"I want it back, passed, so I can sign this bill and start putting people back to work," Obama said Tuesday. So why have Democrats delayed action in the U.S. Senate on President Obama’s stimulus bill?

How odd to hear this admitted out loud. Of course this is just a local radio station.

WLS Radio’s Bill Cameron reports his own party has delayed action in the Senate and talked with Senator Dick Durbin, the number two Democrat in the Senate, about the reason why.

“The oil-producing state senators don’t like eliminating or reducing the subsidy for oil companies, “ Durbin tells WLS Radio, “There are some senators who are up for election who say I’m never gonna vote for a tax increase while I’m up for election, even on the wealthiest people. So, we’re not gonna have 100% Democratic senators. That’s why it needs to be bi-partisan and I hope we can find some Republicans who will join us to make it happen.”

Which once again proves that we should never send any RINOs to Congress. Because all they do is provide cover for the Democrats.

But so far, Durbin concedes Democrats don’t have the votes in the senate to pass it, “Not at the moment, I don’t think we do but, uh, we can work on it.”

Apparently, the Democrats in Congress like their jobs more than they ‘love Obama.’

There has been no clear sign that his campaign for his bill is winning over Republicans in Congress whose support he needs

By attacking the Republicans at every turn, the only clear sign is that Obama is not even trying to get this bill passed. — Which was probably the plan all along.

This article was posted by Steve on Friday, September 30th, 2011. Comments are currently closed.

5 Responses to “Durbin: Dems Don’t Have Votes For ‘Jobs Bill’”

  1. proreason says:

    It’s just a matter of priorities. Dems are 100% focused on cutting the budget, and don’t have time right now for jobs.

  2. untrainable says:

    …saying it had been two weeks since he sent the bill to Capitol Hill “and now I want it back.”
    The bill hasn’t even been brought to the floor for a vote. Obie gave the bill to them and they have been sitting on it because they all know, as we all know, that this bill was never meant to be anything more than a re-election campaign talking point. It was meant simply to make republicans (tea party) look uncooperative. “Uh, those evil Republicans… don’t want you to go back to work. They don’t want you to make a living. They don’t want you to get what you deserve (in the way of personal payouts from my stash). And if you don’t pass it, I’m taking my ball and going home.”

    Great plan Barry. But you didn’t take one thing into account. You’re not the only one up for re-election. Your deciples aren’t quite as high on kool-aid as they were last time. And if you’re going to throw up a straw man, at least give your liberal buddies something they can vote for and still get re-elected. Sending down something that they’ve already voted against puts them in an awkward position. They can vote for it and lose their job at the next election because they’re flip floppers as well as being tax and spenders, or you can vote against it and take Barry’s demonization of conservatives off the table on the jobs issue. In liberal circles CYA is the default position and I see dems slowly hunkering down into that default position. Watching Barry (the sinking ship) and his suplicants (the rats jumping off) during this election cycle is going to be very interesting.

  3. BigOil says:

    Are the Democrats racists or obstructionists? I think they just want a black president to fail.

  4. Tater Salad says:

    Published on DickMorris.com on October 1, 2011

    Printer-Friendly Version
    When President Obama says that the rich don’t pay their share of taxes, he is lying, distorting, and demagoging.

    Here are the facts according to the IRS:

    • Those making more than $1 million pay 24% of income in taxes
    • Those making $200,000 to $300,000 pay 17.5%
    • Those making $100,000 to $125,000 pay 9.9%
    • Those making $50,000 to $60,000 pay 6.3%
    • Those making $20,000 to $30,000 pay 2.5%

    And what of millionaires who pay no taxes?

    There are 1,470 of them. They represent six-tenths of one percent of all those with million dollar incomes in the U.S. If we assume that they make an average income of $2 million a year each, taxing them at the same rate as other millionaires (24.4%) would yield $367 million, which would increase Treasury income tax revenues by 30 one-hundredths of one percent or one-third of one-tenth of one percent!

    Overall, the IRS reports that the revenues from the income tax are sharply skewed toward taxes on the rich:

    • The top 1% pays 39%
    • The top 5% pays 60%
    • The top 10% pays 72%
    • The bottom half pays 3%

    So who does Obama think he is kidding?

  5. Rusty Shackleford says:

    Of lesser note but of equal importance is the fact that the national socialists not only are predictable, but they can also predict the actions of the so-called republican establishment, which is “socialist light”. There are differences between parties but while the socialist democrats all-out openly demand government control of everything, the republican party (RINO’s) go about things similarly but only openly oppose the DNC when they can make political hay. Like when Boner made some very pronounced demands of Blammo the Clown. And still, the whole thing was literally a media circus. Nothing really got done.

    As regards government in general, when democrats hold power, the deficits and spending go every higher, ever quicker. With republicans, the spending and taxing go up, but at a slower rate. Both parties believe that buying votes is the only way to get them. They ignore the “war of ideas” that the democrats can never win and instead, work very hard trying to avoid “angering” not only the conservatives, who they regard mostly as freak-show nutjobs on almost the level the democrats do, but are incredibly worried about pissing off the left, because they will get crucified by the media. As far as the real prima-donna, hollywood wanna-be’s are…I’m afraid I’d have to say they are more on the republican side than the democrats. Popularity overall seems more important to them, really, because they work so hard to avoid criticism than the left. The left has the media, so they are almost automatically immune from it. The right has nothing…so….feels insecure to start with.

    But the point is, like Eisenhower said, “Sometimes what’s right isn’t always popular, and what’s popular isn’t always right.” But today, the ever-introverted politicians on the right are so concerned with “looking right”, they talk of “compromise” and “reaching across the aisle”. I liked it better when Reagan said, “My idea of compromise? We win, they lose.”

    Compromising with a national socialist is like saying, “I’ll only set part of your house on fire”. Their ideas are wrong, don’t work and cost an awful lot of money. Then, to cover their incompetence, they spent more money, waste more time and well, the key word there, I guess is waste.

    Meanwhile, not a single republican, with very few exception, ever call them out on it. When there should be representatives blaring over loudspeakers about the massive failures and illegal activity of this government, they remain curiously silent. I think, like always, that the most basic of human emotions, fear is the big motivator here. A representative is afraid to confront the democrats for:

    Fear of:

    Being called a racist
    Being held under the spotlight by the media
    Being held accountable for any/all past transgressions
    Being ridiculed, even with fabricated accusations or made up stories

    And many more. But fearful people is what we have in power when it comes to republicans. Although McCain demonstrated courage while in captivity, he has shown every signature of being afraid of the democrats. And so do many (most) other republicans in office.

    Yet, I have seen some republicans, and democrats as well, call out some things that the government has done and openly criticized the party and even the petulant, imbecilic, arrogance of Obama. Which, given some of the circumstances, speaks not so much about courage, as it does to the fearful, cowardly types looking to scapegoat. Not that it’s inappropriate in this case, but, often the first to come out and criticize are trying to deflect blame away from themselves. Though, often in this case, it does seem that the criticisms are spot-on and not so much projection as they are open and honest assessments of poor performance.

    But, it may be that Cain is the only one that the masses can/will accept to openly mock/criticize/admonish/excoriate the sitting president. Rumbles of “Uncle Tom-ism” are already beginning, but that’s to be expected…though it’s likely that any of the racist whitefolk in the media, of which there are many, will be at a loss as how to describe such activity. Any/all templates they have are categorically racist and….given their denial of black-on-black crime in urban evening news reports, they will go critical mass as to how to report it when Cain calls Obama a marxist. Already the MSM doesn’t really report anything that Cain says, and how will the campaign go if he’s the republican nominee? Look for All Obama, All The Time on your evening political ads. Nary a peep from Cain…because they won’t give him any air time. (fairness doctrine, my ass).

    They want a white-guy republican in the race so they can 1)call it a racist election if the white guy wins and to, once again, dig up all the dirt, real or imagined on the white candidate so as to drag them through the (real or imagined) mud.

    Doing that to Cain will present a really difficult problem. This is because the MSM refused to vet Obama…but….when they start “vetting” Cain, they will lose their African-Amnerican viewers because, as was put to me by a black friend of mine, “He may be a republican, but he’s still black and the black community won’t like any negative things said about him on that basis alone.” Which is an interesting point of view, as much as I disagree with it. For the record, I would have appreciated full and fair vetting of ALL presidential candidates, not just a slug-fest on Sarah while crickets chirped in the Obama-vetting room.

    So, again, I’ll vote all republican down the board when November comes next year but….I sincerely doubt many of them will be interested in undoing all the crap that this administration has done to the nation in the form of harmful regulation and other laws that just suck. Then, if there’s a republican house, senate and president, every single move they make to rescind things, will be reported as “crimes against humanity, baby-killing and elderly murdering” and so on. Not to mention racist against Obama’s attempts to “save the country” which was his real intention all along. And, especially if the economy starts booming in 2013 or 2014.

    In other words, if you thought it was bad with their trying to hang Bush every hour of every day, you ain’t seen nuttin’ yet.

« Front Page | To Top
« | »