Nancy Pelosi should know "a total failure" when she sees one.

[hork]

I'm also curious as to what the problem with the last two years has been? in your lists there are several provisions that have passed that benefited tons of Americans and the nation as a whole.

i also can't help but notice there are many acts that passed congress, which in turn were vetoed by the administration that you've left off. although I'm sure you realize those too.

[P562045]

Now I clearly stated early on that this was a list of the accomplishments of congress.

I also stated that I would list things that the president actually signed into law only. There is one exception to this rule but in this instance I thought it was very important to mention what happened in the house and I will get to that in a minute.

I did it this way because the last time I checked something does not become law unless the president signs it.

There is only one thing on the list that the president did not sign into law. This was the little incident just before the August recess earlier this year in the house. [#11 on my list].

Oh yes the congress has had many great ideas that I hope become law next year.

But there were quite a few things that were for the express purpose of keeping up the mantra of Bush is evil and the republicans are so evil as well. I am quite shocked that the president would veto such things.

That reminds me there have been a ton of hearings for the express purpose I just gave. And what exactly does this accomplish except to make the majority feel better?

I don't really want to use the real numbers because it does not provide useful numbers for me.

Unemployment is at 6.50% right now and will continue to rise because of this horrible economy.

The low unemployment number for Carter was May of 1979 which was 5.60% which is lower than it is now. Now the highest unemployment rate for Carter was 7.8% in July of 1980.

I could only hope the unemployment figures by this time next year will be higher than the figure I just gave. This is so that the main stream media will give a more accurate description of this economy when it keeps running around and saying this is the worst economy since the great depression.

As for inflation it is only calculated yearly and not monthly.

The highest inflation since 1948 was under Carter which was 13.58% in 1980.

Since 2008 is wrapping up there is no inflation number for this year.

So I am going to use the worst inflation year of this president because of course it is his sole responsibility if inflation goes up or down. In 2005 inflation was at 3.39%.

Now I am really hoping that inflation is much higher than that for this year. Again this is so that the main stream media can give a more accurate account that the economy now is the worst it has been since the great depression. Plus the media is going to need to blame someone for the rotten economic numbers at least initially in the Obama years. Well we should just continue to blame Bush and the republicans as well yet again of course.

Why is inflation important in the first place. It means people have to pay more for something? This means there is less spending power if people have to pay more for one thing less things will eventually be purchased.

[hork]

Originally Posted by P562045

I don't really want to use the real numbers because it does not provide useful numbers for me.

nuff said.

[P562045]

Note to self.

I really need to get this all on one page at the end of this year.

I would hope this congress does not do anything the first five days of next year but who knows.

Why am I so critical of this list?

It is not so much what is on the list but what is not on the list.

It should be pointed out there are some things on the list that are indeed important but is that even close to a majority of the things I have listed so far?

Now I must keep going back to do we have some serious issues that need to be dealt with or not?

Now if we don't keep dealing with these issues will these problems continue to get better or worse.

We have had a president and congress that has not exactly had the ability to deal with these critical issues over the last two years. I would not want to say whom should get blamed for this others should decide for themselves. But in fact I think both branches have an equal responsibility of not getting things done that need to be done in the time frame I am talking about.

Now my greatest fear is that we get so off track that we leave other problems that need addressing as well. I have very much noticed in the last few days that the economy is what we need to fix even next month but there are other things as well. Addressing this economy in a responsible way is going to take a lot of time, money and energy. And that is only one problem and there are many more problems to address than just that one that are equally important as well. Iraq is another little issue as well. We better get this one right as well or there will be just as severe consequences as our current economic situation as well.

One of the things Iraq has taught us is using the military is very costly and I am not just talking about the money being spent either.

One last question. What did the president veto that he should have signed into law and I am just talking about since early January of last year?

[spoc22]

Originally Posted by hork

what about the guy who was making 65k a year when he bought his house (valued at let's say 125k) and recently was laid off because of budget cutbacks and not because of job performance. screw him and the 100's like him too?

sorry, don't mean to interject, just never been a fan of social darwinism.

Ken, let me ask you a question. Where is the cut off point? People are not being required to think things out and make responsible, sensible decisions. My wife and I bought our house 31 years ago. We have had several opportunities to upsize our home at times when we could have afforded to but each time we would ask ourselves, "What if one of us loses our job?" Each time we made the decision to stay in our >1100 sq. ft. home because we didn't want to run the risk of losing our home. So now since someone else didn't weigh the possibilities, I have to pay higher taxes to bail this other guy out? While I understand the concept of equal opportunity, I reject the notion of equal outcome.

[Bill Shaw]

...and now this from our Lady Speaker.

Wow.

I'm sure Tina Fey will be all over this one

[P562045]

Thank you Ms. Pelosi for some good old scare tactics.

Now if we don't get this stimulus package sooner rather than latter 500,000,000 people will lose their jobs.

I don't think Ms. Pelosi said Americans in this particular clip.

But I thought this stimulus package was going to create millions of jobs but that must not be the case if we keep wasting our time.

Well it does take time to get the crap out of this bill right?

That is correct and part of the reason is that the language in the bill is so vague in some spots it makes a person wonder what the heck does that mean.

My all time favorite was in a defense bill called atmospheric water harvesting.

I still can't figure out why we need to collect rain water in the first place.

[rich76]

Pelosi is a childish biatch. She's throwing a temper tantrum now because she isn't going to get all of the things in "her" stimulus package that she wanted. There has to be give and take to get these things done...especially in these horrid economic times, and especially with astronomical amounts of money they're dealing with.

I hate to be so negative but IMHO it won't long before all of the countries that own so much of these United States call in their markers and then see what happens. It will be devastating for sure.

[rich76]

Originally Posted by spoc22

Ken, let me ask you a question. Where is the cut off point? People are not being required to think things out and make responsible, sensible decisions. My wife and I bought our house 31 years ago. We have had several opportunities to upsize our home at times when we could have afforded to but each time we would ask ourselves, "What if one of us loses our job?" Each time we made the decision to stay in our >1100 sq. ft. home because we didn't want to run the risk of losing our home. So now since someone else didn't weigh the possibilities, I have to pay higher taxes to bail this other guy out? While I understand the concept of equal opportunity, I reject the notion of equal outcome.

Hmmmmmmmmm....still no answer to your question Steve......