I posted about this in another thread, but it seems to have gathered a little momentum in the press and the hypocrisy about earmarks enhances the story. Again, that quote should be the focus of a national ad campaign between now and November 2012.
Saw the story yesterday and the estimates on the job losses this morning. I didn't think I could like Boehner any less, but his comments in combination with his stance on the F-35 fighter has proven me wrong.
House Votes to Strip Funding for Second Joint Strike Fighter Engine http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...p-funding-second-joint-strike-fighter-engine/ Succumbing to budget hawks and Defense Department officials who called the program too unnecessary and costly, the House voted to strip General Electric of its funding for the backup engine on the new F-35 stealth fighter jets. The vote was 233-198 with one member, Rep Mel Watt, D-N.C., voting present. House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, did not vote, which is customary for the speaker even though he supports the second engine in part due to the influence of GE in his district. The goal is to save $3 billion over a decade on the 3,000 jets being developed by Lockheed Martin and comes as Congress is voting on $100 billion in cost savings for the rest of the fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30.
It is pretty obvious the GOP is trying at all cost to have as few jobs as possible created by 2012. If they can fool folks into thinking it is due to some concern with deficits all of a sudden, great.
That looks remarkably like conditions in places like Indonesia, India, and some parts of China in 2011. Have a browse through pictures of the favelas outside Rio. There is a reason that they are willing to accept lower wages.
It's "Hooverville." I was referring to Herbert Hoover's tight economic policies at the start of the Great Depression. Now is not the time to balance the budget.
Reduction in spending? Check. Favorable future outlook on jobs? Check. Reduction of the size of government? Check. Seems like a pretty good idea to me. The fact that it could hurt Obama in 2012 is icing on the cake.
Sigh. Does someone want to provide him with some facts as opposed to conservative/libertarian talking points as recycled through Fox News. Facts about job creation, taxes cuts for the wealthy and deficits, size of government under Republican/conservative Dem permanent war policies. BTW the military are government workers and hundreds of thousands of private war makers paid one hundred percent with federal money funneled through contractors are essentially government workers. Kudos to Sam for pointing out the fallacy of the Fox talking point on the expansion of government workers under Obama.
No matter where you cut spending, it's going to hit the economy. Whether it be the elderly, federal works, or someone. That's why we need to cut spending in a way that doesn't impact us this year. And probably need to reform the tax code to raise revenues so that the rich and corporations don't get away with so many loopholes. Also cutting things like oil subsidies - I am surprised no one is talking about that. I mean, oil subsidies - that's 4 billion a year alone. 4 billion that doesn't create jobs. Why don't we start there?
Hard choices are going to have to be made, and somebody is going to have to get food taken off their plate to fix the deficit, but being deliberately misleading by trumping up the "gubbermint workers" boogeyman is not the way to seriously fix this problem. That is putting politics ahead of solutions.
In the original article isn't Boehner admitting that the outlook for jobs isn't good and he doesn't care?
