funjumper101 15 #1 September 26, 2012 The title of this thread is accurate, except for one MAJOR detail. The detail is that the 58 votes were IN FAVOR of the bill. The 40 votes were scumbags opposed to the bill. Using procedural trickery, the scumbags shat upon the veterans. How charming. How many of the scumbags pitched a bitch in 2005, DEMANDING an "up or down vote", by the Senate, when Democrats abused the same rules to stop them? 51 votes is supposed to be all that is required to pass a bill through the Senate. The primary job of the VP is to cast the 51st vote in case of a tie. Due to gross abuse of the Senate rules, the party of NO has been able to stop pretty much everything that was promised in the 2008 election. Then they have the gall to spew bullshit about how little was done. The gullible sheeple on the right wing join in the chorus, repeating the bullshit. How come RWCs let this happen? Do you all have so little respect for the law that you all let htis happen? The clear answer is YES, we don't care about how the rules are supposed to work. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nanook 1 #2 September 27, 2012 How much will the Act cause and what does it compel businesses to do?_____________________________ "The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine" - Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CarpeDiem3 0 #3 September 27, 2012 QuoteHow much will the Act cause and what does it compel businesses to do? News: http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/250391-gop-kills-veterans-jobs-bill-with-budget-vote Bill: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d112:1:./temp/~bdjHZh:@@@D&summ2=m&|/home/LegislativeData.php| Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 197 #4 September 27, 2012 “The question in my mind is, will we at some point in the future recognize the hole we’re in,” Coburn said on the floor Wednesday. “When we find ourselves in $16 trillion of debt and we pay for a five-year bill over 10 years, we make the problem worse.”Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,621 #5 September 27, 2012 Quote“The question in my mind is, will we at some point in the future recognize the hole we’re in,” Coburn said on the floor Wednesday. “When we find ourselves in $16 trillion of debt and we pay for a five-year bill over 10 years, we make the problem worse.” Certainly it's better to stick it to unemployed veterans than to ask the 1% to pay a bit more than a 13.9% tax rate.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
matthewcline 0 #6 September 27, 2012 QuoteThe title of this thread is accurate, except for one MAJOR detail. The detail is that the 58 votes were IN FAVOR of the bill. The 40 votes were scumbags opposed to the bill. Using procedural trickery, the scumbags shat upon the veterans. How charming. How many of the scumbags pitched a bitch in 2005, DEMANDING an "up or down vote", by the Senate, when Democrats abused the same rules to stop them? 51 votes is supposed to be all that is required to pass a bill through the Senate. The primary job of the VP is to cast the 51st vote in case of a tie. Due to gross abuse of the Senate rules, the party of NO has been able to stop pretty much everything that was promised in the 2008 election. Then they have the gall to spew bullshit about how little was done. The gullible sheeple on the right wing join in the chorus, repeating the bullshit. How come RWCs let this happen? Do you all have so little respect for the law that you all let htis happen? The clear answer is YES, we don't care about how the rules are supposed to work. Well the Act was brought up in a manner in violation of "the law" and the vote stopped that violation. The 60~ amendments may not have been a helpful thing either. The HOR Bill is moving forward and will (if passed) then go the Senate for a vote, as per the proper, or "legal", procedure, yes? I know your hatred of the Conservatives/Right/Republicans is strong, but do not blindly think the Liberal/Left/Democrats are any better. They are all Politicians, they all do the same shit for their benefit. Neither ideology alone is the fix. MattAn Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CarpeDiem3 0 #7 September 27, 2012 Well, that previous link "timed out"... So here's a cut-and-paste copy: SUMMARY AS OF: 7/30/2012--Introduced. Veterans Jobs Corps Act of 2012 - Directs the Secretary of Veterans Affairs (VA) (Secretary) to establish a veteran jobs corps to employ veterans: (1) in conservation, resource management, and historic preservation projects on public lands and maintenance and improvement projects for cemeteries under the jurisdiction of the National Cemetery Administration; and (2) as firefighters and law enforcement officers. Requires priority employment for veterans who served on active duty on or after September 11, 2001. Provides for such employment in coordination with the Attorney General, the Commanding General of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the Secretaries of Agriculture, Commerce, Homeland Security, and the Interior. Directs the Secretary to establish a steering committee for assistance in providing such employment. Directs the Secretary of Labor to commence a pilot program to assess the feasibility and advisability of providing veterans seeking employment with access to computing facilities in order to: (1) match veterans with available jobs based on veterans' skills acquired as members of the Armed Forces, and (2) allow employers to post information about available jobs. Directs the Secretary, as a condition of a grant or contract to a state for certain veterans' employment and training programs, to require the state to demonstrate the consideration of any military training received by a veteran when approving or denying a commercial driver's license or a certification to be a nursing assistant or certified nursing assistant, or an emergency medical technician or paramedic. Directs the Secretary of Labor to establish minimum funding levels for specified veterans' benefits contracts and grants to ensure that each state receives sufficient funding to support at least one disabled veterans' outreach program specialist and one local veterans' employment representative per 5,000 square miles of service delivery area within the state. Directs the Secretary of Labor, during the one-year period beginning on the date of enactment of this Act, to provide the Transition Assistance Program to veterans and their spouses at locations other than military installations in at least three and up to five states selected by the Secretary based on the highest rates of veteran unemployment. Amends the Internal Revenue Code to provide for a 100% continuous levy upon the property and rights of Medicare (title XVIII of the Social Security Act) providers and suppliers neglecting or refusing to pay taxes. Repeals provisions of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 providing for a program for the research, development, demonstration, and commercial application of technologies for ultra-deepwater and unconventional natural gas and other petroleum resource exploration and production. Permits the Secretary of State to deny, revoke, or limit a passport to any individual upon receiving certification from the Secretary of the Treasury that such individual has a delinquent tax debt in an amount in excess of $50,000. End quote. It seems there is a procedural problem with this bill, since spending bills are supposed to originate in the House, according to the constitution, not the Senate. So they need to fix that, first of all. Should veterans get preference in hiriing over other citizens? Do we want another job placement bureaucracy just for veterans, on top of the ones that already exist? Why not just have the veterans go to the already existing job placement processes? And what's with that unrelated 100% levy stuff? And if you owe back taxes of $50k or more you can't get a passport? What if you get a job overseas that would help pay those back taxes? Should citizens lose their freedom to travel because they owe back taxes? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #8 September 27, 2012 Quote Should veterans get preference in hiriing over other citizens? of course and to be fair to all other demographics, we also need a bill for each one that preferences them too therefore all demographics will be preferenced equally ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #9 September 27, 2012 The Constitution stands in the way of so many things both good and bad. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 197 #10 September 27, 2012 That this bill would have been good for veterans is not in question. What it represents is the entire problem we have as a nation that continues to spend more than it takes in. Where/when do you draw the line? Everything should be on the table and not exempt. But even that won't solve the problem. We need politicians who are willing to make the tough decisions and are more interested in the future of our country than re-election.Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
funjumper101 15 #11 September 27, 2012 QuoteThe Constitution stands in the way of so many things both good and bad. The changed rules regarding the filibuster are the source of the problem. Stand up and voice your opposition for as long as you can. When done sit down, STFU, and let the up or down vote proceed. THAT is what the rules used to be. You, of all people, should know that. The RWC ignorance cancer is spreading rapidly. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,621 #12 September 27, 2012 QuoteThat this bill would have been good for veterans is not in question. What it represents is the entire problem we have as a nation that continues to spend more than it takes in. . If the very wealthy paid more than 13.9% then we could take in more and maybe help veterans.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #13 September 27, 2012 QuoteQuoteThe Constitution stands in the way of so many things both good and bad. The changed rules regarding the filibuster are the source of the problem. Stand up and voice your opposition for as long as you can. When done sit down, STFU, and let the up or down vote proceed. THAT is what the rules used to be. You, of all people, should know that. The RWC ignorance cancer is spreading rapidly. Ignorance? Article 1, Section 7 of the Constitution states, "All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives." That's pretty unambiguous. Google "blue-slipping" while you're at it. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #14 September 27, 2012 QuoteQuoteThat this bill would have been good for veterans is not in question. What it represents is the entire problem we have as a nation that continues to spend more than it takes in. . If the very wealthy paid more than 13.9% then we could take in more and maybe help veterans. You are providing a clear example of what airdvr is talking about. If there is to be increased revenue then how about paying for the stuff we already have to pay for? We're already over a trillion in the red. "Let's increase the spending but we'll pay for it. See? The deficit doesn't increase! Yay!" There are people like me who say, "Raise revenue, cut the spending, and let all bills be revenue positive." 100,000 new "revenue neutral" bills don't do a thing for the deficit. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
matthewcline 0 #15 September 27, 2012 In theory, not in application. MattAn Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nanook 1 #16 September 27, 2012 QuoteQuoteHow much will the Act cause and what does it compel businesses to do? News: http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/250391-gop-kills-veterans-jobs-bill-with-budget-vote Bill: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d112:1:./temp/~bdjHZh:@@@D&summ2=m&|/home/LegislativeData.php| Looked into it and realized we already have something like this in place. In Govt jobs, veterans already have front of the line priveleges for all those organizations specified. We already have this. This bill is a waste of money._____________________________ "The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine" - Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
