Democrats, Taking their ball and going home until the end of January !!!

It seems to me that a majority of them up there are concentrating on keeping people in dire straits versus starting to dig out of the hole. They still have the mindset to just keep on spending while piling on debt. 2 month extension only creates a payroll nightmare, but what do they care. I miss the days when a company could project out 3 to 5 years, not month to month.

Only question is what is their real agenda only wanting to extend it to 2 months?

Democrats don't want jobs, they want to keep giving handouts no matter how "Expensive it is for the many"!

I've come to the same conclusion.

That is what the GOTP would love to have the majority of Americans believe.

The fact is that because they won't surcharge the Wealthiest Americans we are in this predicament - and they are jeopardizing the American economy and the welfare of most all Americans for their partisan political games ...

This article and those who continue to broadcast GOTP propaganda are using the same old GOTP strategy ... lie, lie lie and then lie some more.

Something will stick.

And if that doesn't work they play the religious card, the gun lobby card, the acorn card, the race card, the Jewish card, the tax card, the gay card, the immigration card, the health card, the war card, the welfare card, the unemployment card etc etc etc

The truth is that the GOTP consists of a bunch of JOKERS.

Yep, quick so called fixes are so very temperary and never really work!

It is cheaper to fix it right the first time so that operations are more productive!

Republicans want what President Obama wants (One year extension),

NO, Republicans want to kill the bill so they don't have to vote against it. House GOP postpones payroll vote. Bunch of spinning propaganda, this is.

The fact is that because they won't surcharge the Wealthiest Americans we are in this predicament - and they are jeopardizing the American economy and the welfare of most all Americans for their partisan political games ...

And they have had almost 3 years to have accomplished tax reform instead of these stupid games they are playing.

I don't know what could have motivated the writer of this article to wake up this morning spewing all over the place, this is an example of a GOP hangover.

No surprise that this diatribe is long on obtuse vitriol and woefully short on salient facts, starting with the myth that the Keystone XL pipeline is some big job creator. It isn't. The only shovel-ready aspect to this is the bull$hit from the oil lobby for the consumption of he willfully nescient. Multiple studies confirm that the pipeline's job impact is both minimal and temporary.

http://money.cnn.com/2011/12/13/news/economy/keystone_pipeline_jobs/index.htm

Any remotely astute person understands that the job-creation arguments in favor of the pipeline offered by the energy lobby range from fantasy to flat out lies.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/keystone-pipeline-jobs-claims-a-bipartisan-fumble/2011/12/13/gIQAwxFisO_blog.html

Further, the House version of the payroll tax cut legislation put all of the burden for paying for it on federal workers, Medicare & Medicaid recipients and the unemployed while completely protecting millionaires from any participation whatsoever.

If republicans were at all serious about a one year extension, all they would have to do is take out the Keystone pipeline and change the word "two" to "twelve". But today's House republican caucus is the biggest bunch of corporate whores ever to infest the halls of Congress. They know that their policies are either too destructive or not at all useful enough to stand on their own so they attempt to attach their crap to important legislation and blackmail the entire country into allowing some special interest leach to put the nation in even greater long term danger.

I expect democrats to once again cave because republicans are committed to killing the hostage in order to extract value for their corporate pimps. But the arguments presented in the "article" above are nothing more than intellectual impotence wrapped in umbrage and ignorance.

The only thing unbelievable is that anyone would view the above article as remotely credible.

I like how the lefties didn't waste any time collapsing your comment when you responded to Coral.

The fact is that because they won't surcharge the Wealthiest Americans we are in this predicament

That's not fact, it's your opinion. In the lefts mindset, the only way to fix things is by increasing taxes on those who have more than you do. From those who have to those who have not. That's nothing but flat out theft. You wanna tax somebody, go after Obamas buddy Buffet.

Nice rhetoric about the lie, lie, lie and then lie some more. Sounds like you're trying to give the right credit for plays you on the left made famous.

Isn't that what Deutsch said about Obama on MSNBC the other day? Obama was elected because of the way he would make this country feel.

LOL!!

The truth is that the GOTP consists of a bunch of JOKERS.

And the Dems are made up of clowns. How does that song go? Oh, yeah: "Clowns to the left of me, Jokers to the right, here I am, stuck in the middle with you."

Sooooo, Democrats, Liberals and Progressives are wimps ?

Yes, absolutely, among other things. The House republican caucus deserves a drive-by rhetorical bitch-slap every other hour of every day for their fecklessness, their mendacity and their prostitution. Their working-class voters should face non-stop ridicule for their stupidity in voting against their own interests just because the President is painted as the proverbial "other". Republicans are bullies and the only way to deal with a bully is to whoop his ass. It's high time Progressives did so.

Apparently Dwillie, you found it important enough to comment

Absolutely. I didn't say that the article was unimportant, I said that it isn't credible (and I'm correct in that assessment). I find the refutation of mendacity to be very important. As long as I see you posting, you can count on assertive rebuttal.

you do know that this pipeline is going through more than one state, right?

Of course. Republicans propose to expose multiple states to environmental damage in order to emply 5,000 people for two months in a project that doesn't reduce our dependence on foreign oil or fossil fuels at all. It's a horrible deal for the American people, but republicans are willing to block the extension of tax cuts that have helped produce 1.5 million jobs already in order to push a bad deal through.

If the Keystone pipeline were good policy, republicans should have the courage to vote it up or down on its own merits. It's the House republican caucus who are the cowards, no better than the terrorist hiding among civilians to use them as human shields.

Surtax on the wealthy won't even put a dent in the problem. It's all Liberal politics, period.

I can tell you've thought hard about this one.

Democrats are the bullies of those that actually "WORK". Dems are saviors to the rest, because of "Free" coupons and "Stuff".

And again, that's some hard thinking.

I suggest that if actually thinking is too hard for you, just stop.

but republicans are willing to block the extension of tax cuts that have helped produce 1.5 million jobs already in order to push a bad deal through.

dwillie, can we get some evidence of the supposed 1.5 millions jobs these tax cuts created. I didn't know that tax cuts had businesses and hired workers.

@ aMiddleAmerican

The CBO calculates 13 jobs for every $1.0 million of payroll tax cuts. Check it out here:

http://useconomy.about.com/od/usfederaltaxesandtax/f/Do-Tax-Cuts-Create-Jobs.htm

As part of the President's complete job creation package - the one republicans have rejected - Moody's Analytics expects even higher job creation and incremental GDP growth. Feel free to check that out too:

http://www.economy.com/dismal/article_free.asp?cid=224641&src=mark-zandi

Calculations and real jobs are two different things.

According to the way they are counting jobs for the stimulus -- money used for pay raises would actually count as a fraction of a job. But, obviously, there is no real job.

http://imho1.wordpress.com/2011/11/05/imho-3-million-jobs-are-you-still-buying-that-bsht/

Before the Democrats bring their balls home aren't they suppose to have brought them first?

Just asking.

Just curious greg, is it possible for any conserv to have enough?

Their working-class voters should face non-stop ridicule for their stupidity in voting against their own interests just because the President is painted as the proverbial "other".

@Dwillie..if you were close by I'd give you a high five!!!! That is spot on!!!

Their working-class voters should face non-stop ridicule for their stupidity in voting against their own interests just because the President is painted as the proverbial "other".

@Dwillie..if you were close by I'd give you a high five!!!! That is spot on!!!

Davy, define "enough". How much of other people's money do those who pay no taxes want? And at 15 trillion dollars in the hole, don't you think it's time for "EVERYBODY to pay THEIR FAIR SHARE" we keep getting lectured about by Obama?

Besides, the Senate put together a POC bill that will cost an additional 1 trillion dollars:

http://www.cncworld.tv/news/v_show/20688_US_Senate_passes_payroll_tax_cut.shtml

Hmm, so we just kick it down the road for two months so Dingy Harry and the rest of the schmucks can get home for Christmas? Why didn't they stay there and work with the House to get it done...and another thing, why did they have to pass a CR to fund the government...Oh right, because Harry Reid, the Senate OBSTRUCTIONIST failed to bring the House budget for this year to the floor of the House when it passed last APRIL!

The Senate bill is a joke, just passed for the sake of getting out of there and so we can have another stupid go round in February. And it is FULL of PORK! Let's cut the crap and get this junk done!

http://www.blogrunner.com/snapshot/D/2/2/senate_to_pick_up_its_pace/

Of course, we know that this is Obama and the Dems strategy..it's the only way he can win...Guess he channeling Woodrow Wilson now ( it's so hard to keep up with the different Presidents this President wants to portay himself as). He sure can't run on the economy:

http://www.cnn.com/2011/12/14/politics/congress-payroll-tax-cut/index.html

Beohner won't or can't do it...He agreed to this compromise friday bbut his teabaggers won't let it get done...All he has to do to get the senate conferees he claims he wants to give a one year extension is sign the 2 month extension so we no the aren't full of @!$%# as per usual with any negotiation that involves the leaderless house majority. Beoner has absolutely zero leverage with this...the only dupes who believe it a far right they pander exclusively to, and Obama is gaining in the polls while the congress sinks to 7% approval.

He agreed to this compromise friday bbut his teabaggers won't let it get done..

No, not exactly...they agrees to the government funding bill but not the other parts because they wanted to "bundle them".

After the meeting, Boehner insisted that Republican and Democratic negotiators worked out a deal on the government funding bill, but that Senate Democrats are holding action on that measure hostage to negotiations on the payroll tax cut bill.

"It's pretty clear to all of us that President Obama and Senator Reid want to threaten a government shutdown so they can get leverage on a jobs bill because the United States Senate can't pass one," Boehner said.

2nd source above.

I do believe this should be evident just how weak of a "leader" John Boehner is.

Never did Nancy Pelosi have such trouble keeping House Democrats in line...never.

See folks...that's called "getting things done"...and it's something American Voters tend to respect over grandstanding.

As far as the pipeline goes, You have no clue if it's an environmental problem or not. It ain't even built and your already calling it an "Environmental Hazard".

Obviously, Greg, you are the one with no clue of the fact that pipeline ruptures occur all of the time.

You can read about them here:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43790734/ns/business-stocks_and_economy/t/bp-pipeline-leaks-oily-mixture-alaskan-tundra/#.TvDTN_F5mSM

You also have no clue that the oil industry has understated the potential hazards associated with the pipeline. You can read about that here:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/11/keystone-pipeline-leak_n_894526.html

I can't even call what you're asserting typically conservative, greg, because there was a time (long ago) when conservatives actually allowed facts to guide policy proposals. Now, republicans put out for whatever pimp waives some money at them.

Never did Nancy Pelosi have such trouble keeping House Democrats in line...never.

LOL, you are right...they all marched in lock step right behind the der speaker's leaders behind! Not a single independent thought anywhere...just like good little "followers".

Yeah Greg who needs to think about fouling a water aquifer the supplies 7 states? Who needs science anyway. You raise anti intellectualism to a high art...

At this point in history, the only positive contribution RWNJ's could ever have in America would be as fertilizer in the desert southwest. C'ya Teabags!

greg, the oil industry has a clear track record of management that results in catastrophic environmental events and only the morbidly obtuse ignores that track record in favor of a few thousand temporary jobs.

Argo Merchant - 7.7 million gallons
Exxon Valdez - 10.8 million gallons
Amoco Cadiz - 68.7 million gallons
Nowruz Platform - 80 million gallons
Atlantic Empress - 90 million gallons
Ixtoc I - 138 million gallons

Wikipaedia lists two dozen pipeline failures that have occurred in 2011 alone.

You think a few thousand jobs over a two year span to create something that provides the US with little incremental benefit is worth that level of risk? Any detached view unaffected by Obama Derangement Syndrome rightly views such a perspective as completely idiotic. That amount of environmental risk for a few thousand temporary jobs s just plain stupid. There is absolutely zero downside to the economy from not approving Keystone now.

The oil industry simply has not made an adequate case to anyone not already whored out to them. If they had, then republicans would not have to force it into other legislation and extort the American people on behalf of foreign oil.

The CBO calculates 13 jobs for every $1.0 million of payroll tax cuts. Check it out here:

Soooooo, the Bush tax cuts were good? I wish you lib/progs would make up your mind!

I wish you would actually read the source. If you did, you would see that extension of the Bush cuts create a third of the jobs per million that the payroll cuts create because the vast majority of the benefits go to the rich who don't generate incremental consumer demand.

source, dwillie?

Teabag terrorist lies. Teabags have pointed the cannons at their own decks and fired. C'ya Teabags!

Exactly, the American public needs to be reminded weekly that House republicans have raised their taxes.

All of the jobs supposedly created by the Keystone pipeline are for the manufacture and construction of the pipeline. Temporary jobs. Or as the GOP is wont to call them - not real jobs.

Vol,

See 1.19

see that extension of the Bush cuts create a third of the jobs per million that the payroll cuts create

4.33 per million is a better than the stimulus. Which created a debatable 3 per million spent. hmmmm

Overselling the Stimulus was the biggest mistake of the Administration's first term. We were headed for depression without it.

The CBO calculated the jobs gained/saved number at up to 4.5 per million for the Stimulus.

Source:

http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/801-economy/99915-cbo-finds-stimulus-bill-boosted-job-growth

We were headed for depression without it.

Interesting opinion!

The CBO calculated the jobs gained/saved number at up to 4.5 per million for the Stimulus.

So it might have been as good as the Bush tax cuts at creating jobs.

Bush tax cuts: $544.3 billion…The bulk of that cost — $463 billion — is for the extension of cuts for families making less than $250,000, including two years of relief for 2010 and 2011 for the middle class from the Alternative Minimum Tax.

The rest — $81.5 billion — is attributable to the extension of cuts that apply to the highest income families. CNN Money

In other words, 85% of the tax cuts went to the middle class.

Argo Merchant - 7.7 million gallons
Exxon Valdez - 10.8 million gallons
Amoco Cadiz - 68.7 million gallons
Nowruz Platform - 80 million gallons
Atlantic Empress - 90 million gallons
Ixtoc I - 138 million gallons

Compared to how many gallons shipped?

Kinda like complaining how unsafe flying is, but when compared to miles flown it is safer than driving across town. Hope this is not too obtuse for you!

Actually dwillie, I was taking about the oil...what is your source for that?

Interestingly your source for the jobs created by the stimulus was from May 2010. I believe the estimate and hype about how many jobs were created has been downplayed since then:

The CBO report provided a broad range of the estimated number of full-time jobs created because of the stimulus — from a low of 500,000 to a high of 3.3 million jobs.

Previous estimates indicated that the stimulus funded more than 400,000 full-time jobs in the third quarter, but the CBO said in its report that the figure was not a "comprehensive" look at the law's impact.

The effects of the stimulus are fading after having peaked in the first half of 2010, the report noted.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/68965.html#ixzz1h8FQ1aYB

The rosy report was from the first half of 2010...and you, of course, took the "HIGH" estimate...

And then we have to consider what they considered a "job" because first we were told it would be jobs "created", then it became "jobs created or saved" (mainly public sector union jobs), then it became "lives touched" to be included in the count...The fact that the unemployment rate remained steady at 9-10% to me is a better indicator, but even with that, there are many who have simply dropped off the radar of the unemployed (myself included).

Good chart here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2820286/posts

"Lives touched" here at a cost of $194,000 per job!

http://scottystarnes.wordpress.com/2010/08/23/gao-created-stimulus-job-costs-the-taxpayers-194000-each/

Compared to how many gallons shipped?

Really? Read that again.

I doubt it matters how many gallons were shipped compared to how many gallons puked into our aquifer. I mean, really....that makes the spillage allowable??????

Really? Read that again.

So should we stop flying because of a few plane crashes?

Should we stop all wind turbines because they kill a lot of raptors and other birds everyday?

But I understand that the concept is a little difficult for some. It is a risk reward thingy! hmmmm

Vol,

Sources for oil spills:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_oil_spills

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36852827/ns/us_news-environment/t/top-worst-oil-spills/

Your $194,000 per job figure equates to 5.15 jobs per million, which is higher than the CBO number I provided. Thanks for confirming that Darkdonnie is once again wrong.

Thanks for the link... DD was correct though in his analogy.

So should we stop flying because of a few plane crashes?

And, no, you miss the whole point:

So, accoding to your calculations, we created 5.15 jobs per 1 million dollars and you think that is a GOOD thing?? And again, you are using the wrong numbers, the stimulus ended up costing not 787 billion, but 862 billion when it was all said and done (another lie - it ALWAYS costs more than they say), so your numbers are still off because the entire cost had not been calculated in May of 2010 when your story was sourced.

But this is an interesting point, ABC is now reporting:

Officials from the policy-neutral National Payroll Reporting Consortium, Inc. have expressed concern to members of Congress that the two-month payroll tax holiday passed by the Senate and supported by President Obama cannot be implemented properly.

Pete Isberg, president of the NPRC today wrote to the key leaders of the relevant committees of the House and Senate, telling them that “insufficient lead time” to implement the complicated change mandated by the legislation means the two-month payroll tax holiday “could create substantial problems, confusion and costs affecting a significant percentage of U.S. employers and employees.”

“We’re neutral and we’d be happy to do the work,” Isberg told ABC News.

“The concern is really for those who don’t use a payroll service provider,” he said. Americans will have different outcomes, he said, causing confusion “because they’ll have different outcomes. Some will have it done on time, some won’t, some will have adjustment notices later in the year.”

The two-month payroll tax holiday, which the president has said should be extended throughout 2012, will mean that wages would face a Social Security tax of 4.2 percent during January and February, but it would increase to 6.2 percent in March.

Isberg wrote that “many payroll systems are not likely to be able to make such a substantial programming change before January or even February. The systems affected tend to be highly complex, normally requiring at least ninety days for a change of this magnitude for software testing alone; not to mention analysis, design, coding and implementation.”

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/12/two-month-payroll-tax-holiday-passed-by-senate-pushed-by-president-cannot-be-implemented-properly-experts-say/

Of course, Jay Carney came out and explained how it wasn't Obama's fault (although he was on cahoots with reid on the two month plan) saying:

You know, he(Obama) would far rather ask this administration to work overtime during the holidays to make that happen than ask Americans to spend the holidays worrying how they’re going to make ends meet with a thousand dollars less in their pockets.”

Good! Then call the appropriate Senators, who were in such a rush to pass this POC legislation to begin with and get out of DC, and Representatives back, get it in committee and get it done for us!

No, Vol, DDs analogy is obtuse and wholly tangential to the specific issue of this pipeline. Neither postponing nor stopping Keystone shuts down the industry and the relevant comparison is not the possibility of barrells spilled vs. barrells transported. Keystone presents long-term possibility of catastrophic event vs. the piddling benefit of a few thousand jobs over two months. At any rate, whatever specious benefit there is associated with Keystone, it gets neither worse nor better with the passage of a couple of months. There is absolutely zero efficacy to holding payroll tax cuts hostage for Keystone.

As for the cost/benefit of Stimulus, it is you, Vol, who miss the point. In 1.43, DD asserted that the Bush tax cuts created more jobs per million than the Stimulus. Hypocritically, you didn't require any source information from him (no surprise). I provided a source that showed the Stimulus result beating the Bush tax cut result and your rebuttal in 1.47 provided an even more definitive refutation of DD's "point" in 1.43. If you're going to argue that the Stimulus cost too much relative to the result, then the Bush tax cuts were even moreso.

Bipartisan legislation was already passed in the Senate and Boehner was all for it until the teabagger caucus bitch-slapped his punk ass. Senate republicans were also in "cahoots" with the two month plan. If House republicans are so strong in their position then they can demonstrate the nads to vote the Senate legislation up or down instead of taking the weasel move of voting to eep it off the floor. Contrary to Boehner's spin, there is no reason to go into committee and if payroll taxes go up next month, the House republican caucus is clearly to blame.

So your argument is that we should be ok with risking environmental catastrophe with the Keystone pipeline because we've screwed things up so badly already? Hmmmm.

BUILD THE PIPELINE !

Ooooo, all caps, bold with an exclamation point. The foundation of every compelling argument (/sarc).

Let me try.

TO HELL WITH THAT PIPELINE!

The systems affected tend to be highly complex, normally requiring at least ninety days for a change of this magnitude for software testing alone; not to mention analysis, design, coding and implementation.”

Well since the payroll tax holiday is currently in effect and set to expire, these "highly complex systems" should already be calibrated to accommodate it. Right?

i'm going to stop right here.

i did have a few questions to ask...

(like, why are temporary jobs now good instead of bad, as they've been repeatedly called under the president's policies; how does driving your car or flying at risk of death equal the same risk as perhaps 100's of years of damage and forced hard labor for people and animals who remain alive; and, why do critics love to equate being a Democrat, a liberal or anything of the sort to having no job or understanding of work-for-pay or having a lust for "free stuff", despite ANY evidence of this whatsoever, other than their own cries of such unfounded insults?)...

and a few comments to make...

(like, risk & reward are so, so dicidedly different from reason & responsibility...again, very, very different; objective, non-partisan CBO findings supporting GOP/conservative policy = GOOD hard numbers, while objective, non-partisan CBO findings supporting ANYONE ELSE'S policy = a sinister bunch of liberal-loving number crunchers whose real-world experience and advanced educations (i.e. - degrees) mean nothing in the grand scheme of things; and, Republicans do not want a 12 month deal any more than a 2 month deal: they want their deal, which is an oil pipeline AND tax cut for the wealthy (i mean, job creators). oh, and a one-term president -- that's their #1 priority, not jobs. in other words, another day, another Republican heap of obstruction.)

but, i haven't even had a cup of coffee yet, so i'm just going to go with: everything dwillie says. he very, very clearly has this debate in check (the "source from me but not from him" line in #1.52 kills). on the flip side, i will say that those here supporting the claims of this article are some of the best i've seen...at talking in circles, pretending to understand economics and justifying poor policy initiatives with even poorer supporting evidence.

you're my new favorite Viner, dwillie.

You could make a billion gazillion dollars off of all the "Flip Flops" coming from Democrats.

you just solved the budget AND debt crisis, greg! perhaps you should propose your idea to Congress. although, as dwillie has already warned, it would probably appear about as credible as this article. especially since "a billion gazillion" isn't a number, but is something a 5 year-old would say...the House will love it!

is there a way to "vote down" an article?

absolutely, positively, unequivocally, yes, bondibox (#1.55). what say you, vol fan?

i don't know, am i, greg? i don't know you. either way, i was asking the entire class.

So greg, you're saying no matter how fat your investment portfolio, deposit box or bank accounts get, you gotta have moremoremoremore etc. But then, that's the conservative way...

the relevant comparison is not the possibility of barrells spilled vs. barrells transported.

Yes it is, but i understand that you do not "get it"!

Keystone presents long-term possibility of catastrophic event vs. the piddling benefit of a few thousand jobs over two months.

Studies show that construction of the pipeline would create 20,000 jobs immediately, and, directly and indirectly, more than 600,000 jobs by 2035. report

is there a way to "vote down" an article?

where does this sentence say "greg"? you know what, don't bother. i might as well be asking a 5 year-old...

TO HELL WITH THAT PIPELINE!

And to Hades with American jobs...let's just keep relying on foreign oil and the people who have us over the barrel, to speak. Better yet, we can buy it from Brazil who we just gave billions last year to drill, and Obama said, "we will be their first customer"!

Geez, what a brilliant plan..and what a great boon for Brazil's economy!

Christopher, I dunno, I will leave it to the people who are in charge of "calibrating" the payroll.

Won't we still rely on "foreign" oil with a Canadian pipeline? I say lets just RESTART DRILLING IN ALASKA! Damn it, we already paid for the friggin Trans-Alaskan pipeline and it's only running at 1/3 capacity!

The exclamation was not a statement of policy, merely a mirror illuminating the petulence of 1.54.

We've been presented studies commissioned and offered by entities with their own vested interest in getting the pipeline built. It is not at all clear whether their presentation represents analysis or advocacy and there are studies that offer alternative views. If the efficacyof the Keystone Pipeline is as solid as advocates assert, then there really isn't any reason to include it as part of the payroll tax cut extension now. It should stand on its own on its own merits. Republican attempts to extort its inclusion only detracts from the credibility of the effort.

Further, vol, your making other assertions that have absolutely zero basis in fact does not lend credibility to your argument on Keystone. The "Brazil" deal you're complaining about was actually an Ex-Im Bank facility established when the bank's board consisted of Bush Administration appointees, not Obama. Further, Petrobas can only use the facility to purchase American made equipment, thus producing American jobs. If you care to actually educate yourself on the facility you can read about it here.

The Senate produced bi-partisan legislation that John Boehner supported until the teabagger caucus made him their little be-otch. If he had brought the legislation to a vote, we would be done now and legislators would have the time to negotiate the longer-term extension. As long as republibaggerservatives believe they can get their way through brinksmanship, I say fine, let the payroll tax cuts expire. There isn't enough bull$hit spin in the world to deflect culpability from the House republican caucus.

DD, your insults don't come close to figleafing the intellectual flacidity of the republibaggerservative position nor do they obscure morbid inanity of assertions made by the presented article and concurring vine posts.

Darkdonnie:

thanks for the link. very revealing. that said...

"studies show" allot of things for this proposed pipeline, many of them in almost complete conflict with each other concerning job creation and fiscal impact. but besides that, you should really read a little closer...fine print is everywhere, not just in cell phone contracts.

i'll bet it felt good to suggest that 600,000 jobs MIGHT be created by the Keystone XL project -- even though that number falls under Case #4 of this report which includes ALL projects prosed. the pipeline we're actually discussing (Case #2) comes in at what appears to be one-quarter of that number. yes, i agree, 150,000 jobs is a lot, but it's not 600,000, just so we're clear and not feeding the echo chamber. that said...

(from the Executive Summary) These pipeline proposals face opposition, and the possibility exists that one, two, or all three may not be realized.

anytime something starts with "these...proposals face opposition" i would be cautious about the full weight of the information to follow, not to mention the mindset of the proposers (what makes one think it necessary to show potential opposition to a plan before it's ever revealed?), and the possibility that something "may not be realized." i'm sure Canada would love for all of their pipeline proposals to go through; all you have to do is look at the graphs in the Executive Summary to see that this project is a helluva lot more beneficial to Canada than it is to the U.S. no, that doesn't deem it suspect, but it does deserve consideration. in addition, while i understand the purpose of reports such as these (that being, to gage the overall possibilities involved through projections), as with the quoted line above, this Canadian-authored report is FULL of "if," "however," "estimated," and "assumes." there's a whole lot of speculation if you ask me...25 future years of speculation with no assurance of "realized" assumptions or success, but a sure, real possibility of 25 years of evironmental disaster.

frankly, reports aside, as some have said, the bottom line is: is this project the right project for the U.S. to be a partner to at this time, based on what we know for certain, and will it have a lasting, significant impact on any of the CURRENT ails faced by the U.S. (as opposed to those of the next 25 years in the "proposed" future)?

The United States: 10'S OF MILLIONS under- or unemployed; millions more joining the ranks of poverty; a health care system that doesn't support the health of its citizens, but pointedly supports capitalism; a dangerously overpopulated prison system that doesn't support rehabilitation, but, like health care, pointedly supports capitalism; a justice system overwrought with frivolous lawsuits, corruption and discrimination, but, again, pointedly supports capitalism; an education system that can't educate its students because, unlike health care, it severely undercompensates its core professionals (i.e. - teachers); a wealth gap that resembles the depths of the Grand Canyon and the dangers of autocratic societies; and an infrastructure and energy grid that needs serious upgrades and advances.

i'm simply not convinced that a 300-mile oil pipeline owned by another country will fix ANY of these ailments.

vol fan: one of the benefits of being in a committed relationship with a woman named Lucia Owens is that she holds a Bachelor's degree in Business, a Master's in Human Resources and is employed in a senior role in the field. so, i don't have to "leave it to the people who are in charge of 'calibrating' the payroll" to understand this particular part of the discussion -- i live with someone who does this job, daily. i dunno, call it luck. i can assure you, bondibox is correct. but thanks for playing, and, next time, know your opponent before playing.

greg, like vol fan, know your opponent before playing. as it turns out, i'm an experienced, working editor, so comprehension of the English language is a necessity for me. i don't make full effort to edit my own work in web forums, hence my slight lack of adherence to grammatical rules -- because nobody pays me to do it. i'm not sure why, but after i've had an opportunity to get some other things done today, i'll take the time to provide you with an explanation (based on the English language) to the specific comment in question that will [hopefully] show you: how very wrong your references are, particularly in #1.64; why i agree that "Comprehension of ones own writing" is essential to debate; and that it is a mind as a whole that is a terrible thing to waste, not the operations therein. (by the way, it's "one's," not "ones." and that one's free.)

stay tuned...in the meantime, you really, really should READ: http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/606/01/

DD, your insults don't come close to figleafing the intellectual flacidity of the republibaggerservative position nor do they obscure morbid inanity of assertions made by the presented article and concurring vine posts.

Wow those are some big and purdy words. Did you use a thesaurus?

christopher michael,

So am I correct is assuming you are not for the pipeline? And the American jobs it would produce now and into the future?
Good for you, I am for it, just as Obama is for it now! hmmmm

Did you use a thesaurus?

No need. But you need not feel ashamed in doing so yourself.

no, you are not correct. i didn't say that i was "not for" the pipeline, but i can see how my not being openly for it in text might lead you to that assumption -- and by "i can see," i mean, i have eyesight.

what i have suggested is that this proposed pipeline project -- with all of it's uncertainty, risk and assumed reward -- just doesn't stand up to the "need" test for me at this time. i provided a LONG list of things that could really use our attention and would create many more mostly PERMANENT jobs and a better quality of life for our population, instead of some other country's -- i thought we were all in agreement that we need real, lasting jobs here, not abroad, now, not MAYBE 25 years in the future? if this were Canada, i might be more inclined to [blindly] support it as it appears to potentially be a huge benefit to that country; maybe someday, Canada will invade us and win -- at the least we'd get health care.

but more importantly, as has been suggested, if the merits and benefits of this project are so very good for our country, then it can be presented, debated and voted on solo -- i thought we were all also in agreement that attaching legislation to other legislation is a sneaky, piss-poor way to legislate?

in short, i'm neither for nor against this project at this time -- i simply don't find it currently credible or worthy of congressional debate considering our other more pressing issues. that which i thought i said with "i'm simply not convinced that a 300-mile oil pipeline owned by another country will fix ANY of these ailments." but, whatever.

did i miss the "Obama is now for it" breaking news? and if he was, what does that have to do with me?

ps. - it's not surprising that literally NO ONE "for" is responding to the substance of my comments...just assumptions and silence. telling...