Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
The First 10 Senate Bills of 2009
Topic Started: Jan 11 2009, 10:06 AM (414 Views)
George K
Member Avatar
Finally
First 10 Bills

* S.1 – American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009

A bill to create jobs, restore economic growth, and strengthen America’s middle class through measures that modernize the nation’s infrastructure, enhance America’s energy independence, expand educational opportunities, preserve and improve affordable health care, provide tax relief, and protect those in greatest need, and for other purposes.

* S.2 – Middle Class Opportunity Act of 2009

A bill to improve the lives of middle class families and provide them with greater opportunity to achieve the American dream.

* S.3 – Homeowner Protection and Wall Street Accountability Act of 2009

A bill to protect homeowners and consumers by reducing foreclosures, ensuring the availability of credit for homeowners, businesses, and consumers, and reforming the financial regulatory system, and for other purposes.

* S.4 – Comprehensive Health Reform Act of 2009

A bill to guarantee affordable, quality health coverage for all Americans, and for other purposes.

* S.5 – Cleaner, Greener, and Smarter Act of 2009

A bill to improve the economy and security of the United States by reducing the dependence of the United States on foreign and unsustainable energy sources and the risks of global warming, and for other purposes.

* S.6 – Restoring America’s Power Act of 2009

A bill to restore and enhance the national security of the United States.

* S.7 – Education Opportunity Act of 2009

A bill to expand educational opportunities for all Americans by increasing access to high-quality early childhood education and after school programs, advancing reform in elementary and secondary education, strengthening mathematics and science instruction, and ensuring that higher education is more affordable, and for other purposes.

* S.8 – Returning Government to the American People Act

A bill to return the Government to the people by reviewing controversial “midnight regulations” issued in the waning days of the Bush Administration.

* S.9 – Stronger Economy, Stronger Borders Act of 2009

A bill to strengthen the United States economy, provide for more effective border and employment enforcement, and for other purposes.

* S.10 – Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2009

A bill to restore fiscal discipline and begin to address the long-term fiscal challenges facing the United States, and for other purposes.

=-=-=-=-=-=

#10 seems to be a bit ironic, considering #1, #2, #3, #4....
A guide to GKSR: Click

"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... "
- Mik, 6/14/08


Nothing is as effective as homeopathy.

I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles.
- Klaus, 4/29/18
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Axtremus
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Not at all... "fiscal responsibility" does not mean being a tight wad, but that money is spent on (or invested in) the right things.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mark
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Idiots.
___.___
(_]===*
o 0
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
QuirtEvans
Member Avatar
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
I assume George meant that he and other conservatives are utterly opposed to spending money on numbers 6 and 9.
It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mikhailoh
Member Avatar
If you want trouble, find yourself a redhead
All noble goals. But the devil, or the salvation, is in the details.

I have to tell you I'm liking this idea of investing in better information technology for healthcare. But I admit it is a selfish position.
Once in his life, every man is entitled to fall madly in love with a gorgeous redhead - Lucille Ball
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
QuirtEvans
Jan 11 2009, 10:19 AM
I assume George meant that he and other conservatives are utterly opposed to spending money on numbers 6 and 9.
In what sense does the national security of the US need to be restored and enhanced?

GWB seems to have excelled in that department, much to the criticism of the Left.
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
QuirtEvans
Member Avatar
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
ivorythumper
Jan 11 2009, 10:29 AM
QuirtEvans
Jan 11 2009, 10:19 AM
I assume George meant that he and other conservatives are utterly opposed to spending money on numbers 6 and 9.
In what sense does the national security of the US need to be restored and enhanced?

GWB seems to have excelled in that department, much to the criticism of the Left.
As usual, you're ignoring the point, because that's losing ground for you.

To remind you, George's point was NOT that it didn't need to be done. It was this:

Quote:
 
#10 seems to be a bit ironic, considering #1, #2, #3, #4....


My point was that conservatives always seem to be in favor of #6 and #9, no matter how much they cost.

So, I assume you're telling George that he's focusing on the wrong issue?
It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
QuirtEvans
Jan 11 2009, 10:34 AM
ivorythumper
Jan 11 2009, 10:29 AM
QuirtEvans
Jan 11 2009, 10:19 AM
I assume George meant that he and other conservatives are utterly opposed to spending money on numbers 6 and 9.
In what sense does the national security of the US need to be restored and enhanced?

GWB seems to have excelled in that department, much to the criticism of the Left.
As usual, you're ignoring the point, because that's losing ground for you.

To remind you, George's point was NOT that it didn't need to be done. It was this:

Quote:
 
#10 seems to be a bit ironic, considering #1, #2, #3, #4....


My point was that conservatives always seem to be in favor of #6 and #9, no matter how much they cost.
As usual you miss the point entirely.

"A bill to restore fiscal discipline and begin to address the long-term fiscal challenges facing the United States, and for other purposes." Also applies to 6.

Your silly comment that "conservatives always seem to be in favor of #6 and #9, no matter how much they cost" is foolish. We seem to be spending enough on national security to keep us safe, and the system seems to be working very well. So when the Dems are arguing in the title of the bill that national security needs to be "restored and enhanced", it is reasonable to ask what this means.

Quote:
 


So, I assume you're telling George that he's focusing on the wrong issue?
You really can't follow an argument, can you? The ellipsis after the sequence #1, #2, #3, #4 indicate continuation. A period would indicate termination.

The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
QuirtEvans
Member Avatar
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
ivorythumper
Jan 11 2009, 10:53 AM
QuirtEvans
Jan 11 2009, 10:34 AM
ivorythumper
Jan 11 2009, 10:29 AM
QuirtEvans
Jan 11 2009, 10:19 AM
I assume George meant that he and other conservatives are utterly opposed to spending money on numbers 6 and 9.
In what sense does the national security of the US need to be restored and enhanced?

GWB seems to have excelled in that department, much to the criticism of the Left.
As usual, you're ignoring the point, because that's losing ground for you.

To remind you, George's point was NOT that it didn't need to be done. It was this:

Quote:
 
#10 seems to be a bit ironic, considering #1, #2, #3, #4....


My point was that conservatives always seem to be in favor of #6 and #9, no matter how much they cost.
As usual you miss the point entirely.

"A bill to restore fiscal discipline and begin to address the long-term fiscal challenges facing the United States, and for other purposes." Also applies to 6.

Your silly comment that "conservatives always seem to be in favor of #6 and #9, no matter how much they cost" is foolish. We seem to be spending enough on national security to keep us safe, and the system seems to be working very well. So when the Dems are arguing in the title of the bill that national security needs to be "restored and enhanced", it is reasonable to ask what this means.

Quote:
 


So, I assume you're telling George that he's focusing on the wrong issue?
You really can't follow an argument, can you? The ellipsis after the sequence #1, #2, #3, #4 indicate continuation. A period would indicate termination.

It would certainly make it easier if you could follow a discussion. But, apparently, you can't.

You have tried to switch the discussion from George's point ... you can't have fiscal responsibility if you're doing the first nine things ... to whether #6 is even necessary.

George did not question whether #6 was necessary. Only you did.

Your point is different than George, but you've dug your trench, and now you'll die in it before you'll admit that you're wrong.

It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
QuirtEvans
Jan 11 2009, 10:58 AM
It would certainly make it easier if you could follow a discussion. But, apparently, you can't.

You have tried to switch the discussion from George's point ... you can't have fiscal responsibility if you're doing the first nine things ... to whether #6 is even necessary.

George did not question whether #6 was necessary. Only you did.

Your point is different than George, but you've dug your trench, and now you'll die in it before you'll admit that you're wrong.

Once again we get on the wild ride at Quirtland.

1) You never answered my question "In what sense does the national security of the US need to be restored and enhanced?" It may or may not need to be restored and enhanced. I suspect that the Dems are suddenly on this because they control the purse strings, and they are not really interested in "fiscal responsibility". They were all up in arms over the Patriot Act and Bush's supposed limits on civil rights, and now they are looking to clamp down even more on national security?

2) Where have I made a factual statement that even admits of "being wrong"? I asked a question. That is part of a discussion. It is nothing like your factual statements about Frist's purported medical diagnosis or Bush's changing his mind or schizophrenia about SS -- both of which were thoroughly dismantled by the actual texts that you cited, but you decided to dig in to those trenches and try to divert attention to how tenacious I am.

3) You again try to avoid admitting your blatant misreading of George's syntax. The ellipsis doesn't exclude my point, it includes my point. That is the trench you are digging in, Quirt, and you are looking foolish for not admitting it and backing away from that silliness.
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
QuirtEvans
Member Avatar
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
ivorythumper
Jan 11 2009, 11:10 AM
QuirtEvans
Jan 11 2009, 10:58 AM
It would certainly make it easier if you could follow a discussion. But, apparently, you can't.

You have tried to switch the discussion from George's point ... you can't have fiscal responsibility if you're doing the first nine things ... to whether #6 is even necessary.

George did not question whether #6 was necessary. Only you did.

Your point is different than George, but you've dug your trench, and now you'll die in it before you'll admit that you're wrong.

Once again we get on the wild ride at Quirtland.

1) You never answered my question "In what sense does the national security of the US need to be restored and enhanced?" It may or may not need to be restored and enhanced. I suspect that the Dems are suddenly on this because they control the purse strings, and they are not really interested in "fiscal responsibility". They were all up in arms over the Patriot Act and Bush's supposed limits on civil rights, and now they are looking to clamp down even more on national security?

2) Where have I made a factual statement that even admits of "being wrong"? I asked a question. It is nothing like your factual statements about Frist's purported medical diagnosis or Bush's changing his mind or schizophrenia about SS -- both of which were thoroughly dismantled by the actual texts that you cited, but you decided to dig in to those trenches and try to divert attention to how tenacious I am.

3) You again try to avoid admitting your blatant misreading of George's syntax. The ellipsis doesn't exclude my point, it includes my point. That is the trench you are digging in, Quirt, and you are looking foolish for not admitting it and backing away from that silliness.
Quote:
 
You never answered my question "In what sense does the national security of the US need to be restored and enhanced?"


I didn't answer your question because it has nothing to do with George's point. I refuse to respond to you if you can't stay on topic. I guess that means I won't be responding to you much.
It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
QuirtEvans
Jan 11 2009, 11:14 AM
I didn't answer your question because it has nothing to do with George's point. I refuse to respond to you if you can't stay on topic. I guess that means I won't be responding to you much.
How can asking a question about something in the topic be off topic?

How we discuss whether #6 is relevant to #10 if you won't even discuss what #6 intended?

You are looking pretty silly, as well as petty here.
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
QuirtEvans
Member Avatar
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
ivorythumper
Jan 11 2009, 11:17 AM
QuirtEvans
Jan 11 2009, 11:14 AM
I didn't answer your question because it has nothing to do with George's point. I refuse to respond to you if you can't stay on topic. I guess that means I won't be responding to you much.
How can asking a question about something in the topic be off topic?

How we discuss whether #6 is relevant to #10 if you won't even discuss what #6 intended?

You are looking pretty silly, as well as petty here.
Once again, here's the issue under discussion.

George said you can't have fiscal responsibility if you do the first nine things.

My point was that conservatives rarely oppose spending money on #6.

George did not question whether #6 was necessary.

That's the topic. Stay on topic, or talk to yourself.
It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
Quirt takes his football and goes home. :lol2:
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
QuirtEvans
Jan 11 2009, 11:20 AM
ivorythumper
Jan 11 2009, 11:17 AM
QuirtEvans
Jan 11 2009, 11:14 AM
I didn't answer your question because it has nothing to do with George's point. I refuse to respond to you if you can't stay on topic. I guess that means I won't be responding to you much.
How can asking a question about something in the topic be off topic?

How we discuss whether #6 is relevant to #10 if you won't even discuss what #6 intended?

You are looking pretty silly, as well as petty here.
Once again, here's the issue under discussion.

George said you can't have fiscal responsibility if you do the first nine things.

My point was that conservatives rarely oppose spending money on #6.

George did not question whether #6 was necessary.

That's the topic. Stay on topic, or talk to yourself.
Which is why I asked what was intended by #6. Try to follow that argument. You make a claim that conservatives are rarely opposed to #6. I am not sure if I am opposed or not, so I asked the question.

You refuse to answer and accuse me of digging in a trench and not following the discussion? Bizarre.

I guess I am talking to myself since I am the only having a rational discussion here.
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
QuirtEvans
Member Avatar
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
I'm just tired of your style of switching the topic whenever you find yourself on losing ground. I'd rather rub your nose in your inability to stick to the topic.
It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
QuirtEvans
Jan 11 2009, 11:25 AM
I'm just tired of your style of switching the topic whenever you find yourself on losing ground. I'd rather rub your nose in your inability to stick to the topic.
I asked a question that was entirely germane. You either missed the point entirely and went on your usual splenetic tirade, or realized the implications of what I was asking and decided to try to change the topic. I doubt fatigue has anything to do with it, especially since you are a master of changing topics to suit your position and try to save face.

Your hypocrisy is evident given that in the Burris thread you start in on Frist, as if that were germane, and as if you were even correct about it. So let's not be quick to lecture others on changing topics. Sauce.. goose... gander as you so frequently pontificate.

This thread reminds me of the quote from the Norm Coleman thread about the complaint "ignores the existence of counter-evidence, employs one maneuver when it is self-benefiting and opposes the same maneuver when it goes against them," That is your modus operandi, Quirt. it is what you did in the Bush/SS thread, and the Interior Building modernization thread. I am happy to keep rubbing your nose in the sh!t that you dump here. Bad doggy, indeed.

If you don't want to be called out on your hypocrisy, the first step is to not be a hypocrite.
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
QuirtEvans
Member Avatar
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
You might want to try that yourself.

But I'm done playing your game. If you won't stick to the topic, I will no longer follow you on your trip through an intellectual house of mirrors.
It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
what game? I asked a question that was entirely relevant to the topic.

You are just taking your football and going home since you are losing. It probably worked when you were seven, I would have thought you'd have learned how to handle opposing views in healthier ways since then.
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
QuirtEvans
Member Avatar
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
ivorythumper
Jan 11 2009, 01:09 PM
what game? I asked a question that was entirely relevant to the topic.

You are just taking your football and going home since you are losing. It probably worked when you were seven, I would have thought you'd have learned how to handle opposing views in healthier ways since then.
IT, you are hallucinating. Your question was not germane. I've explained why. The fact that you can't see it ... not my problem.

You always think you've won. You can't stick to the topic if a gun is put to your head ... you can't admit that you're wrong under practically any circumstances ... in short, you're one of the most irritating people I've ever encountered. It's like having a discussion with a very smart insane person.

I guess I should just go back to ignoring you. There are those who have urged me to do just that. I've thought that ignoring you gave you more credit than you deserved, but I'm thinking that might be the best approach.
It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
You don't get to decide if your interlocutor's question is germane or not. You dismissed it out of hand, you continued to dismiss it when I showed why it is germane, and you will continue to dismiss it presumably because you simply don't want to deal with the implications of it.

I don't find any great joy in trying to untangle your web of half truths, misquotes, evasions, red herrings, shifting ground, choosing what words are acceptable and which are not, personal attacks when you run out of arguments, your self serving maneuvers, your unwillingness to answer counter evidence, or any of the other bullsh!t that you attempt.

It really doesn't matter what you do, Quirt. You can ignore me, but I will still point out the fallacies in your arguments as I wish when I see them.
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
QuirtEvans
Member Avatar
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
ivorythumper
Jan 11 2009, 01:31 PM
You don't get to decide if your interlocutor's question is germane or not. You dismissed it out of hand, you continued to dismiss it when I showed why it is germane, and you will continue to dismiss it presumably because you simply don't want to deal with the implications of it.

I don't find any great joy in trying to untangle your web of half truths, misquotes, evasions, red herrings, shifting ground, choosing what words are acceptable and which are not, personal attacks when you run out of arguments, your self serving maneuvers, your unwillingness to answer counter evidence, or any of the other bullsh!t that you attempt.

It really doesn't matter what you do, Quirt. You can ignore me, but I will still point out the fallacies in your arguments as I wish when I see them.
The problem is that you have no idea what a fallacy is, no ability to identify one, and no self-control to admit you're wrong even when it's clearly demonstrated.

I believe I have my solution, though.
It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
QuirtEvans
Jan 11 2009, 02:20 PM
The problem is that you have no idea what a fallacy is, no ability to identify one, and no self-control to admit you're wrong even when it's clearly demonstrated.

I believe I have my solution, though.
That is really indicative of the sort of nonsense you resort to when you can't otherwise carry on a discussion.

QED

Somehow, I think the Ivorythumper is a doppleganger for your own bad patterns. It must be psychologically easier for you to attack things you don't like about yourself by imputing them to others.

It's like watching you live out Fight Club. :lol2:
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
QuirtEvans
Member Avatar
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
ivorythumper
Jan 11 2009, 02:28 PM
QuirtEvans
Jan 11 2009, 02:20 PM
The problem is that you have no idea what a fallacy is, no ability to identify one, and no self-control to admit you're wrong even when it's clearly demonstrated.

I believe I have my solution, though.
That is really indicative of the sort of nonsense you resort to when you can't otherwise carry on a discussion.

QED

Somehow, I think the Ivorythumper is a doppleganger for your own bad patterns. It must be psychologically easier for you to attack things you don't like about yourself by imputing them to others.

It's like watching you live out Fight Club. :lol2:
/ignore
It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1hp
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp

The text for any of these bills is not yet available, so can't really say yeah or nay to them. At this point they are like the beauty contestant wishing for world peace. However reality says it all going to be a boondoggle. Throw a lot of money at ideals, build more government agencies to manage the effort, and at the end of the day not much will get done.

The bills are also contradictory. For example S.1 talks about rebuilding the nations infrastructure. Most of the comments I have heard talked about refer to the state of the nations bridges and highways. Now I ask you to look at S.5 which talks about reducing the US's dependence on foreign oil, and to reduce the risks of global warming. Well, if this is the goal then absolutely minimal effort should be put into the nations highways. Instead the effort should be to get all the truckers off the road, and all freight onto a more efficient rail system. This should be followed by an assessment of the suburban light rail systems in major cities around the country, and a large effort made to put in as much light rails systems as possible, in an effort to get people out of their cars.

S.9 talks about stronger borders and employment enforcement - presumably to put Americans back into jobs occupied by non Americans - in an effort to build a stronger economy. (note all these bills seem to have been sponsored by Democrats - the very ones who have been against enforcing the borders). Considering this and the desire to wean ourselves from foreign oil - well I guess we're now just anti foreign anything! And S.9 is co-sponsored by people like Feinstein and Boxer. Huhh??? What next - will they be joining the Minutemen down on the border?

S.9 also talk about creating a stronger economy. If I remember correctly much of our problems were created (as Greenspan has admitted) by low interests rates for too long, presumably providing cheap credit which drove consumerism. I may have this wrong, but wasn't it the Feds who drove the interest rates down in an effort to effect the economy and control inflation. Great job.......and now they're going to pass a bill to do it all over again. Right! Oh, and now that we know what low interest rates did for us, where are the interest rates now..............lower than they've ever been. Any lower and they'll be at zero.

So excuse me if I'm dubious - too much Libertarian in me these days. I want less government involvement not more.
There are 10 kinds of people in this world, those that understand binary and................
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Create a free forum in seconds.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic »
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1