Skip to main content

View Diary: The stimulus and the filibuster (160 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  RECOVERY, not stimulus (8+ / 0-)

    DK writers should not be using Republithug terminology.

    Yes we can. Yes we did. Yes we our community!

    by politicslovr on Mon Feb 02, 2009 at 10:02:26 AM PST

    •  How is stimulus not a recovery? (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Wary, Wisper, caps lock on

      This I would love to hear.

      •  In my mind, (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        A stimulus translates to a boost, which is good.  However, we need a little more than a boost.  We're in a deep, dark, wet hole.  The GOP likes to argue that contraception, unemployment benefits and medicaid don't stimulate the economy - that is, it doesn't translate into X amount of jobs or extra revenue.  However, it does aid in recovering from this traumatic economic disaster.

        Hope that makes sense.

        Yes we can. Yes we did. Yes we our community!

        by politicslovr on Mon Feb 02, 2009 at 10:07:14 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I don't think that makes it a Republican term. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Tuscarora, caps lock on
          •  From what I understand, (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            the biggest goal of this bill is NOT to stimulate the economy.  Why else would it be called the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act?  We needed a stimulus years ago.  It's too late for that.

            I don't think the word "stimulus" in itself is a bad thing nor do I consider it a strictly Republican concept.  Instead, I would argue that the GOP uses this term to manipulate/hijack the aspirations of the legislation.

            Yes we can. Yes we did. Yes we our community!

            by politicslovr on Mon Feb 02, 2009 at 10:14:53 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  OK. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              caps lock on

              I don't think so.

            •  That would seem to be a problem, then, (0+ / 0-)

              because we really do need to stimulate the economy more than we need anything else.

              All the bridges or trains in the world are pointless if there is nobody to cross them or take them.

              And, while education is a benefit in and of itself, what is the point of pouring money into schools for kids without hope for tomorrow?

              As Bill Clinton put it, it's the economy, stupid.  If that ain't working, everything else is pointless.

              Free speech? Yeah, I've heard of that. Have you?

              by dinotrac on Mon Feb 02, 2009 at 10:28:19 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  Republicans HATE the word "reinvestment" (0+ / 0-)

              It reminds them of the Community Reinvestment Act, a piece of legislation that really irks, not because of the results, but because of the regulatory precedent it sets--an opportunity for communities to inspect the books of financial institutions and thereby violate their private and proprietary dealings.

              The CRA is the equivalent of the FOIA.  Both attack the most vulnerable and sacrosanct aspects of public and private enterprise--the ability to keep secrets.

              I suspect that in some circles secrecy is perceived as the key to power--power is not in doing good, but in not letting other people know what you are doing.

              How do you tell a predator from a protector? The predator will eat you sooner rather than later.

              by hannah on Mon Feb 02, 2009 at 11:06:00 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  It's our failure to frame the debate that (0+ / 0-)

              has allowed Repugs to control the debate. We haven't focused on changing the language.  Throughout the Bush admin "stimulus" has been the usual term for injecting money to rev up the economy. MSM has hardy noticed Obama's change in terminology & Repugs reinforce "stimulus" because they don't want people to realize that the bill is supposed to anything more. Fostering the use of the word makes it easy to ridicule spending that doesn't appear to be related to job creation.

              We have not done much to explain the basis such spending, so the Repugs are defining the bill as pork.

          •  Rec List diary made this distinction (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            this morning as well.  Maybe I agree with landofenchantment.

            Daily Kos Time for a Little Class Warfare (music & pix)

            Anyway, thanks for your story, KagroX.  Educational as usual.

      •  it's the framing (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        or it's not what you say but how you say it.

    •  Recovery or Stimulus (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      whatever you call it. It is about stopping or slowing the bleeding.

      The key to getting the thing passed is to get it to Conference.  

      Remember: whatever eventually comes out of conference cannot be filibustered.  

      There was always zero chance that the senate would vote for and approve the House bill without any changes.  So I say, let the Republicans have their amendments, pass the Senate version, go to conference, TAKE OUT ALL THE REPUBLICAN PROVISIONS, then return it to the respective chambers for final votes.

      It will pass both houses easily at that point.

    •  The Republican terminplogy for this bill is (0+ / 0-)

      Spending bill

      I'm using my quiet voice... {CLO}

      by caps lock on on Mon Feb 02, 2009 at 10:59:12 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site