Skip to main content

The GOP holds the Senate hostage, certainly not for the benefit of out-of-work Americans.

No they have other "interests" they are stubbornly protecting -- no matter how much their inactions may end up hurting the American Economy:

GOP blocks jobs bill in Senate -- Nov. 3, 2011

The Senate voted 51-49 in favor of a procedural motion on the bill, which would spend $60 billion on transportation and infrastructure. However, 60 votes were required to break a GOP filibuster on the bill.

It was the third time in recent weeks Republicans were able to block measures that had been components of the American Jobs Act, initially proposed by the administration as a comprehensive, $447 billion package intended to boost hiring and give money to states to hire teachers and public safety workers.

"The American people deserve to know why their Republican representatives in Washington refuse to put some of the workers hit hardest by the economic downturn back on the job rebuilding America," Obama said [...]

Many Republicans said they favored transportation and infrastructure projects but objected to a provision that would fund the projects with a new tax on income over $1 million, The reported.

Well the GOP has taken a stand for millionaires, against the real world interests of average Americans.

Because the GOP really couldn't give a rip about us -- you know us non-millionaires.

Funny how things can suddenly change, when the GOP senses the heat -- and actually decides to let the hostages, out for some "fresh air."  

When they open the gate on their stone-wall, and actually let the American People's Business, come to an actual vote on the floor of the Senate ...

On such rare occasions, who's interests each political side is trying to protect, even becomes that much more clear ... the wealthy or the workers?

Obama chides GOP on tax vote -- July 25, 2012

The U.S. Senate Wednesday voted down a GOP bill to extend all Bush-era tax cuts and passed a Democratic version extending rates for all income up to $250,000.

"It's time for House Republicans to drop their demand for another $1 trillion giveaway to the wealthiest Americans, and give our families and small businesses the financial security and certainty that they need. Our economy isn't built from the top-down, it's built from a strong and growing middle class, and that's who we should be fighting for."  [Obama said.]

The Senate's 51-48 vote in favor of the Democrats' bill followed a 54-45 vote against the Republican measure, The New York Times reported. Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, was the only Republican to break ranks on the first vote, The Hill reported.

It is long past time for our non-quitive national media,

to quit letting the republicans have a pass with their embargo-like filibuster-agenda,

and start asking a question or two about exactly:

-- Why they are blocking the American Jobs Act?

With follow-ups:

-- Does the GOP actually want American infrastructure to fall apart?

-- Does the GOP actually want American people to be out of work?

Foreign Investors are flocking to America to buy our T-Bills -- even paying us for the privilege of lending money to us.

It is the height of Financial Mismanagement for the GOP stonewallers in Congress,

NOT to take advantage of the "cheaper than dirt" money and finally PUT the American People back to work.

And for the national media NOT to ask such Questions, is the height of Journalistic Misconduct, and abuses the very responsibilities of a Free Press, designed to protect a free democracy ...

When they just decide to let the Republicans continue to have their American-Jobs-blocking way -- unquestioned, unchallenged ... unnoticed.

Sooner or later, the American People are going to notice that the GOP Filibusters were never intended to help average Americans, out-of-work or otherwise ... but rather help those "interests" of the wealthy few -- those WHO really don't need anymore help.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (12+ / 0-)

    What is necessary to change a person is to change his awareness of himself.
    -- Maslow ...... my list.

    by jamess on Sat Jul 28, 2012 at 10:14:56 PM PDT

  •  exactly, well said in every way. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MsGrin, jan4insight, jamess

    The Media/MSM is killing people with it's complicit stupidity with this hostage taking, but remember they are held hostage as well...access denied...the all too predictable result of the media allowing itself to be coopted by the cocktail weenies and the weenies that eat them..

    From those who live like leeches on the people's lives, We must take back our land again, America!...Langston Hughes

    by KenBee on Sat Jul 28, 2012 at 11:27:44 PM PDT

  •  That would be 'whom' (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    ...objective case or whatever.

    "For what profit a man, if he gain the world, but has to pay taxes on it?" -ontheleftcoast, The Book of Paul

    by MsGrin on Sat Jul 28, 2012 at 11:52:37 PM PDT

  •  GOP (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    to answer your question.

    A conservative is a man with two perfectly good legs who, however, has never learned how to walk forward. Franklin D. Roosevelt

    by notrouble on Sun Jul 29, 2012 at 12:05:22 AM PDT

  •  Some people are into power and power, (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jamess, Chi

    to be felt, has to hurt.  For a long time now, our representatives in Congress have felt challenged.  After all, if the people govern, then they are demoted to being mere public servants. So, while, by tradition, Congress critters were mainly engaged in doling out various natural resources and public assets to their friends and supporters, when this distribution of free goods began to be challenged by an interested public and then their whole performance in office was questioned, incumbents turned to issuing threats to keep their constituents in line. The threats, mostly focused on some disaster the "other party" would enact, if it got a chance, proved to be cheaper and more effective persuaders and less risky than doling out bribes.  Besides, an unruly public needed to be shown who's boss.  So, from time to time, when threats were not enough to get reelected, some austerity (deprivation) needed to be imposed. That proved to be fairly easy in the past when there was always some population that could be deprived without raising much of a fuss.

    Remember how we all bought into "ending welfare"?  How were we persuaded to do that when "promoting welfare" is a basic charge to Congress?  We bought into the notion that rights have to be deserved because entitlements, as remnants of aristocratic titles, are wrong.  Which was, of course, a lie. A title is a right and an entitlement is having that right recognized.  Which is what our uppity agents of government don't want to do--recognize human and civic rights and give them their due.

    Why did we not notice? I suspect it's largely because our petty tyrants in Congress were well practiced and citizens asserting their right to rule was a novel enterprise. We the people were used to coming hat in hand and begging for some crumbs from Mother Nature's larder -- a plot for a garden where the elect got thousands of acres for ranching, mining and deforesting the land.

    Also --
    Whereas in prior centuries Congress doled out natural resources to various kinds of "barons," the advent of fiat currency (in 1971, the same year universal suffrage arrived), made it possible to make the distribution of public resources and assets less direct and less obvious.  That is, by controlling who got the money via whatever legal machinations were needed, Congress was able to exercise control without seeming to. And, to counter balance Congressional caprice, the executive came up with all kinds of technical reviews and hoops to justify projects, leaving just a few "earmarks" for Congress critters to use to purchase their incumbency. The Tea Party objection was actually well taken.  The 85 freshmen elected in 2010 has really shaken up Capitol Hill.  Unfortunately, the message to the remaining incumbents is that they have nothing to lose and the electorate deserves to be punished for being uppity.  
    What we've got in Congress is a bunch of "unjust stewards" who are busy writing down what their masters are owed in order to feather their nests for when they are fired.

    Congress pointing the finger at private corporations was a really stupid move.  Industrialists and commercial companies actually have better things to do than lobby capitol hill to minimize the mischief Congress critters threaten to keep themselves in office. So, while the banks and other financial engineers are parasites that have to be brought under control, there's no reason for the corps to love Congress.  Which is why the Koch Brothers arrogated the Tea Party and made common cause with them.

    Finally, there's a practical reason for Congress to oppose direct grants of dollars to the states.  If Congress sends dollars for needed projects, then the states and local communities, where the infrastructure is definitely needed, will have no reason to borrow dollars from the banks and pay them back with interest.  It's bad enough that the Fed has set the base rate so low that it's harder and harder to get rich off the spread.  What we need to remember is that the denizens of Wall Street have not yet forgotten the halcyon days of 1991 when the thirty year Treasury bond paid a dividend of 8.1%  Recently, there's been all kinds of faux hand-wringing because Spain, which is supposedly in dire straits has had to borrow at 6%. I say "faux hand wringing," because there's no doubt suppressed glee.  Any sign that making money scarce has had the effect of increasing the cost is welcome. After all, financial engineering is such an easy and bloodless way to get rich!  As long as they don't have to think about the fact that the money is worthless.  :)

    Willard's forte = "catch 'n' cage"

    by hannah on Sun Jul 29, 2012 at 02:44:15 AM PDT

  •  Republicans want Obama to fail. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    maryabein, jamess, Chi

    This simple fact was stated by the real head of the republican party rush limbaugh shortly after the 08 election. They care nothing about our country only about their own power.

    ",,, the Political whorehouse that is Fox News." Keith Olbermann

    by irate on Sun Jul 29, 2012 at 04:33:03 AM PDT

    •  Just another (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      embargo-like filibuster-agenda goal,

      that the Media fails to disclose to the American People.

      thanks irate

      What is necessary to change a person is to change his awareness of himself.
      -- Maslow ...... my list.

      by jamess on Sun Jul 29, 2012 at 08:29:10 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  how much (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      irate, Chi

      does Rush make in his dictatorial contract again?

      Something like 400 million.

      you'd think the Media would be interest in that factoid,

      for the sleaze aspect, if nothing else ...

      you know like how they used to "fawn over" the antics of Kim jong il,  

      another ultra-rich tyrant, who 15 minutes is long over.

      What is necessary to change a person is to change his awareness of himself.
      -- Maslow ...... my list.

      by jamess on Sun Jul 29, 2012 at 08:36:37 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site