BREAKING: Senate Republicans vote to block $447 billion Obama jobs bill, roll call continues.

[NRaleighLiberal]

Source: AP, LA Times

Reporting from Washington and Pittsburgh— The Senate failed to advance President Obama's jobs package, as Democratic leaders are expected to begin carving the $447-billion package into individual proposals that may have a better chance at passage.

The Senate was still voting late Tuesday, but Democrats did not have enough votes to overcome a filibuster led by Republicans. Most Democrats supported the bill while all Republicans were voting to block it.

Senators rejected the legislation on various fronts. Republicans opposed spending more money to hire teachers or give workers tax breaks to spur the economy. Democrats largely rejected taxing the rich to pay for it.

snip...

"We're going to have to break it up," Obama said.

Read more: http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-senate-jobs-vote-20111011,0,507073.story

[frazzled]

1. Have any Democrats defected yet?

I'm disgusted that Reid can't hold his caucus together, even for a symbolic vote.

[Firebrand Gary]

4. Would you rather he have a symbolic vote or keep control of the upper chamber?

Just saying, because that's the choice

[frazzled]

8. It was a vote simply to talk about it, not pass it

They filibustered their own party's legislation. Republicans never do that.

Besides, these same senators always vote against their caucus, so we don't seem to get anything done anyway. Control the agenda, sure. But I'm getting fed up. This was not just any old bill. It was critical. I don't cut slack for political jams in cases like this.

[Firebrand Gary]

18. The GOP will campaign on it that it was the actual bill. Same difference.

It's a strategy that they used heavily in 2010 that work well for them.

[frazzled]

82. D'oh

What do you think I am, stupid? And why do you think I'm so angry that a couple of Democrats broke ranks? They'll use that, too: "It was a bipartisan rejection." Your little theory about how their procedural vote would have cost us the Senate is not so smart.

[Pirate Smile]

12. What is in the Bill is popular. They are stupid to vote against it.

[Deep13]

69. "We" clearly don't have control of the Senate. nt

[Robb]

2. Per CSPAN, 50 Democrats voted "aye."

Nelson and Tester (D-NE and D-MT) joined the GOP in a "nay" vote.

Edited to add link to Nelson's press release on his vote: http://bennelson.senate.gov/press/press_releases/nelson-opposes-more-spending-and-more-taxes.cfm

[Firebrand Gary]

5. any Republican yes's?

[TrollBuster9090]

31. Snowe and Collins are going down next time, so there will be two REAL Democrats from Maine.

Meanwhile, the Democratic Party should kick Nelson and Tester out with extreme prejudice, and try two real Democrats in their place. The worst that can happen is an even swap.

[elocs]

53. Given the numbers, it's likely the Democrats will lose the Senate next year.

They won't be kicking anyone out.

[Hulk]

7. No real surprise on Nelson and Tester....

Wolves in sheeps' clothing. Nothing more. Sacks of shit are such thin democrats, it's not even funny.

[MNBrewer]

55. And yet some people on DU get upset if it is pointed out that Democrats are part of the problem

They ask, "then why are you on DEMOCRATIC Underground" and post the "rules" that state that you must support Democrats in elections.

DU is getting as disfunctional as Congress.

Maybe DU3 will solve everything LOL

[bjobotts]

67. Bullshit.You say "Democrats" when it's really only a couple of Democrats.U imply most Democrats.

That's what republicans do with their "both sides do it" bullshit. A couple of dems vote with them and they then say "bipartisan" or Obama's own party is against him...and it's bullshit just like your comment.

[Psephos]

85. What's bullshit is...

...your bullshit response to a fellow DUer with an opinion different from yours. I suppose it's lost on you why heterogeneity of opinion leads to resilience, and homogeneity of opinion leads to brittleness.

We have a Democratic majority Senate. Judged by results - the only test that matters - it's clear they are bumblefucks when the chips are down.

[No Elephants]

93. Democrats also say it's "bipartisan" if only a Republican or two vote with Democrats.

That is the nature of our ultra partisan system.

Ironically, as the goals of the Parties themselves get more and more alike, the partisanship seems to increase, too.

Go figure.

Not too long from now, we may have what is, in essence, a one Party system that still can't agree on anything.

What a joke.

[stevenleser]

114. Exactly, 2 out of 52 Dem Senators voting the wrong way is hardly grounds for a sweeping indictment

of "Democrats in Congress"

[No Elephants]

92. DU requires you to support incumbent Democrats in an election, but not in a primary.

And you can criticize Democrats from the left, but you cannot say you vote against Democrat in an election, or say that you will not vote for any Democrat in an election (or not vote at all), or encourage anyone else to not vote for any Democrat in an election.

Also, expect DU rules about criticism to tighten up when we enter "election season," as that term is defined by DU.

I very much doubt DU 3 will change any of that as this Board's purpose is what it is, no matter which version of software the Board is using at any given time.

[MNBrewer]

120. DU can't require me to vote any particular way

[lumberjack_jeff]

115. Surprised by Tester.

I generally like him. From his website:

(U.S. SENATE) – U.S. Senator Jon Tester today released the following statement after voting against the $447 billion American Jobs Act:

“The things I support in this bill are outweighed by the things I can’t support. We shouldn’t be sending billions of dollars in bailout aid to states. And I can’t support tax gimmicks that do little to create jobs and fail to address a much bigger underlying problem: The need for a big, broad and bipartisan plan to cut the deficit and to make sure we can pay our bills and rebuild our economy.

“Moving forward, we need to focus on investing in the things that create jobs in this country: Our critical infrastructure, education, and research and development. We need significant but responsible cuts to government spending. We need a wholesale reform of our tax code to make sure that millionaires and corporations pay their fair share, and to make taxes more fair for working families. And we need to ensure that critical initiatives like Social Security and Medicare are built to last, so they can benefit our kids and grandkids.

“This measure does none of those things. It is an expensive, temporary fix to a problem that needs a big, long-term solution. And I look forward to working together, putting politics aside, to find a solution that’s right for Montana and the nation.”

[TrollBuster9090]

29. Nelson and Tester need to be taken down HARD in a primary.

They are going to lose anyway in their districts, but at least this way we'll send a message. The message being: Stop worrying about keeping your job as a Senator. If you double cross your party base, we'll GUARANTEE you lose your job as a Senator because we won't even LET YOU RUN next time!

Some people are hot to primary Obama, in an effort to drive him leftwards. I think this is counter productive. The way to drive Democratic Presidents to the left is to push the Overton Window to the left, and then force them to chase it. Presidents have no choice but to run to the center. Our job is to move the center back to the center, and away from the extreme right, where it is now. The best way to do this is from the bottom up, not the top down. (ie-beating the crap out of local Reps and Senators who defy the base, rather than chopping the knees out from under the highest profile Democrat.)

[harun]

66. Baucus too. They are all traitors.

[No Elephants]

94. Possibly Kabuki.

Working hypothesis:

The Senators who will win points in their own respective states by doing (or obstructing) something are the ones chosen to do (or obstruct) it. Everybody wins.

[harun]

111. Everyone one wins but us. But I agree with the hypothesis, you see

this on both sides of the aisle.

[lumberjack_jeff]

116. Montana won't elect someone we consider liberal enough. n/t

[progressoid]

91. Fuckin' Nelson.

What a waste of a seat.

[ProSense]

3. Senate Republicans vote to kill Obama's jobs bill

Senate Republicans vote to kill Obama's jobs bill

HINGTON (AP) — Senate Republicans have voted to kill the White House jobs bill despite weeks of campaign-style barnstorming by President Barack Obama across the country.

Forty-six Republicans joined with two Democrats to filibuster the $447 billion plan.

That vote was not final. The roll call was kept open Tuesday night to allow Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H. to vote. But it would have taken 60 votes in the 100-member Senate to keep the legislation alive.

<...>

Republicans opposed the measure over its spending to stimulate the economy and its tax surcharge on millionaires.

[rsmith6621]

9. Effin 60/40 rule instead of a simple majority...

....That was Harry Reids doing...

[rsmith6621]

11. The Re-Thug are now on RECORD.

[cstanleytech]

33. Which I suspect that obama and the democratic leadership is counting on.

After all it gives the dems plenty of more ammo and closer to the election at that to show that the republicans largely arent working for the american people but rather against them.

[TrollBuster9090]

37. Basically, yes. The Dems have finally figured out how to use Poison Pill Legislation

Poison Pill Legislation is where you put APPLE PIE and SHOOTING PUPPIES in the same bill, so that no matter which way the opposition votes, you can accuse them of either being against APPLE PIE or in favor of SHOOTING PUPPIES.

Reid used an obscure parliamentary trick to put this bill directly on the calendar for a vote, without sending it to committee where it would, no doubt, have been picked to shreds by chickenshit Republicans AND Democrats alike. This way, Reid forced a vote on the ORIGINAL BILL without amendments. Republicans may have wanted to vote for individual things in the bill which were attractive, but couldn't vote for it in its entirety.

So now, Obama and the other democrats get to go around the country pointing out all the attractive individual things the Republicans voted to block.

[No Elephants]

98. And they are breaking up the bill so only the things the Republicans like will become law.

Brilliant use by Democrats of the poison pill strategy.

:sarcasm:

[Imajika]

14. It would have lost more Senators in a straight up or down vote...

Some like Lieberman were willing to vote on cloture to let debate proceed, but not on passage. There were a handful of others in the same camp like Senator Webb as I recall. In order to get at least a majority and avoid an embarrassment for the White House, a few that are supposed to be on our team voted to allow cloture but don't actually support the bill.

[Firebrand Gary]

21. C'mon are you kidding? That 60/40 rule worked pretty well for us when we stopped W

from privatizing social security. It sucks when it works against us but comes in handy when we need it to defend us.

[TrollBuster9090]

41. I don't recall the 60/40 rule being used to block privatization of Social Security.

Just to block Bush from appointing WINGNUT JUDGES. Something the Dems did ONCE IN AWHILE when the GOP controlled the Senate, and which the GOP has done EVERY DAY since 2006.

[Zorra]

84. It wasn't.

Vote was 52 - 45.

[No Elephants]

97. I am not sure it works for Americans overall.

In these highly divided times, we are unlikely to see 60 votes in a caucus again any time soon..

Gridlock generally works for conservatives, who, as a general rule, don't want change.

It also works for both sets of incumbents, each of which can blame the other side when things fail to pass.

Also, conventional wisdom is that an incumbent never loses his or her seat over a bill that is NOT passed, only over bills that do get passed.


None of that works for voters, who want change and also want to know whom they can actually hold accountable.

I have less objection to a 60-40 vote, as long as all votes are on bills, not filibusters to prevent bills from getting voted on, and all votes are on the record.

Fat chance getting any of that because incumbents don't want to be accountable.

[Zorra]

83. Reid can end the filibuster any time he chooses. He

just never chooses to.

[No Elephants]

100. Reid does what his caucus wants. If that were not so, he would not be Democrat leader, whether

the Democrats are in the majority or in the minority.

Anyone who thinks anything is about Reid and not about at least a majority of Democratic Senators is mistaken.

[No Elephants]

102. Harry Reid invented the filibuster rules? Don't think so. See also Reply 100.

[Major Hogwash]

16. Time to get those GOP assholes out of office!!!

In some cases, that time came a long time ago.

[alp227]

22. can you clarify how the Bush tax cuts filibusters were busted?

Vice President Cheney had to break a 50-50 tie in the Senate in both 2001 and 2003. Given how 50 Dems voted yea, I was hoping that VP Biden could intervene in the event of a tie.

[TrollBuster9090]

43. The difference was that the Dems didn't filibuster Bush's tax cuts.

It was allowed to go to a vote, and Cheney broke the tie.

The reality is that you can ALWAYS find enough Democrats to support a vote-pandering TAX CUT. That means that TAX CUTS are the easiest thing in Washington to pass, and the hardest thing to oppose.

[bjobotts]

71. Not in a filibuster.The majority doesn't win. It takes a supermajority of 60/40 not 51-50

[alp227]

87. 60 to shut down debate? and 51 to pass bills?

[No Elephants]

101. 60 to keep a bill from being voted on. 50 plus the VP to pass or defeat a bill that does manage to

get to a vote somehow.

And 67 to change any Senate rule.

Those are all products of Senate rules, not the Constitution, which simply allows each House to make rules for its own governance.

Senate rules express the numbers in percentages, though, because you can't assume there will always be 50 states and therefore 100 Senators.

[No Elephants]

105. Maybe that depends on your definition of "winning." The main thing for most of these clowns is not

public service, but re-election and/or securing good jobs for family members and enuring their own post-"service" career.

[sakabatou]

6. Motherfuckers!

[primavera]

89. You sound surprised.

Repukes would band together to outlaw breathing if Obama advocated for it.

[sakabatou]

90. I'm not surprised

Just frustrated

[newspeak]

117. so true, even when it's mostly repug policies

while we are going down the drain, the repugs are playing their little unconscionable games. They could give a rats arse what's happening in the real world, must live in lalaland up on the hill.

And the truly devastating thing is the repugs want to gain back that power and do the same shite that got us into the mess in the first place. They have no grandiose plans to help us, just to make their friends richer and richer until we're all done in.

[thelordofhell]

10. Make...... Them...... Actually...... Filibuster

Enough of this fake voting procedural crap. I want to see some republican deucebag reading a fucking phone book for 8 hours.

[SoapBox]

13. Ditto.

[unblock]

17. procedural delays are the very definition of a filibuster.

refusing to yield the floor while giving a marathon speech, possibly including reading from the phone book, is merely one dramatic example of a filibuster and today is the stuff of hollywood and the senate's distant past.

it hasn't been necessary ever since the 1975 change to senate rule xx.

i agree that changes to limit filibusters may make sense, republicans certainly have abused the privilege; but, going back to using a form that the senate eliminated because its use turned the senate a joke would not make much sense either.

[bjobotts]

73. To "actually filibuster" only requires one member to object with one sentence on Motion to proceed

The republicans told us the first day Obama was president they would filibuster everything and prevent his entire agenda.They have filibustered more in past 2yrs than dems have since the beginning of the filibuster rule. The senate is run by a minority who represent only 22% of the population because of this overly abused outdated rule...and continue to allow it out of fear they may need to filibuster something when they are in the minority. They just don't trust the American people with the democratic process of majority rule. The senate has been broken by republicans just like every bit of government they get their hands on.

It's a dysfunctional obstruction to democracy and the democratic process.
Get rid of republicans or get rid of the senate...or change the way a filibuster can operate and the times it can be used.

[alp227]

88. Bernie Sanders actually SAID STUFF for 8 hours during the Bush tax cuts renewal debate

His speech (available as "The Speech" in book format) needed to be said even if it didn't get a majority vote for the repeal.

And if a filibuster is to really outrage the public it should last maybe 12, 16 hours?

[Major Hogwash]

15. They're on the record now!!!

Let 'em run away from it all year next year, they can't!!

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[red dog 1]

24. You can't blame Obama for this one.

[BumRushDaShow]

34. But inevitably many will

because the "bully pulpit" that he was told to get on "was just words" and "action" was more important. But since the "action" didn't happen due to the Senate failure, then it's naturally Obama's fault. :sarcasm: :crazy:

[No Elephants]

95. LOL!

[Pirate Smile]

20. Looks like it will be 51-48 after Shaheen votes.

[red dog 1]

23. Both Tester and Nelson are up for re-election next year!

[neverforget]

25. Run against the Do Nothing Congress

[bluestateguy]

26. "could begin taking up individual elements of the jobs package, possibly as soon as next week"

Yeah, no rush there guys.

Those people out of work have lots of time on their hands as they wait around for you to pretend like you give a shit.

[wordpix]

61. why rush? Unemployment hasn't hit 10% yet, or 20, and they've got theirs

Their salaries, their puppetmasters' perks, their revolving doors, their speaking fees, their pensions for life, their parking spaces, staffs, barber shop, cafeteria, health care, gym---hey, why upset the apple cart rushing to help some people without jobs? And while they're at it, why not up the Soc. Security and Medicare eligibility age, too?

[No Elephants]

106. Please see Reply 99.

[No Elephants]

99. What makes you think that any part of this bill that passes will benefit people who are out of work?

By breaking it up, they may be all but ensuring that only the tax breaks and incentives pass. If anything, those may be expanded even more.

[AbigailThomas]

27. DEAR DEMOCRATS DO NOT WATER DOWN THE BILL

I really hope they do not decide to water down this bill to not include tax increases on the wealthy!!! Dems should stick to their guns and force them to vote over and over again against the majority of Americans!! They really should just go for broke and vote on Schakowsky's bill that would put MORE people to work than the President's bill!!! You can read about it on her facebook: http://fb.com/janschakowsky

[robinlynne]

28. woah. "Democrats largely rejected taxing the rich". I just read that sentence 3 times.

It seems more significant than all the rest to me.

[Muskypundit]

36. They are the one percent. Simple as that. Some things to politicians, D or R are more important

Than doing the right thing, the popular thing. Their bottom line, for one. Fuck em all, toss em out

[TrollBuster9090]

45. Pretty much. Loyalty to the brotherhood of Plutocrats comes first.

Party loyalty is second, and serving the country and the people who elected you is a dead last.

I remember when James Carville got invited to Rush Limbaugh's wedding, and he went, I thought "yeah, well, bloviating in front of a TV camera is one thing, but free shrimp cocktails is something else!"

[Muskypundit]

47. It stuff like that, which makes me think this whole political system is a ruse

To get us to hate each other so they can keep theirs. Divide and conquer. Damn.... the more and more I think about it, the more correct I find these protesters.

[Pavlo]

58. Ding, Ding, Ding,

The lines between the two parties are blurred. We continue to elect royalty and lawmakers whom supposedly
know more and better, than us. The sooner the cheerleaders posting on here learn that the sooner things will start to get better.
Term limits comes to mind as a idea which time has come. Age limits would be another recommendation 65 and out!

[gmee2]

80. Term limits were already passed in the state of Washington.

The Speaker of the House at the time Foley a Dem from Washington went to court to have it reversed which it was in federal court.
By the time the election rolls around no one will care about this vote; their economic woes will drive them to say there is a need for something new. The party in power will suffer huge losses and in 2012 because Obama is the president the Dems will be blamed. If Obama was the great communicator that all of us thought in 2008, he could have turned it around by now. Clinton and Reagan would have gone on TV and spoked directly to the people and put so much pressure on Congress that they would have folded. Reagan did it with the Dems controlling both houses and Clinton with Repubs controlling them. This president is weak and clearly out of his league.

[No Elephants]

112. President Obama is not the issue. It's way beyond one person. Please see Reply 103 and my sig..

[wordpix]

60. gov of, by and for the rich, it's very clear that's the way it's operating

with a few misfits like Bernie Sanders thrown in to make it plainer than plain, but there are only a few so they're easily overrun.

[No Elephants]

110. Please see Reply 93.

And my sign line.

There was a reason the Koch brothers contributed to the Democratic Leadership Council around the same time they were cooking up the Tea Party.

The protestors are correct.

[No Elephants]

108. How could The Carvilles have turned down that invite, given who Mrs. Carville is?

[RBInMaine]

50. That's a misprint. The PUKES are against taxing the rich.

[wordpix]

59. The LA Times misprinted THAT? They should issue a retraction right away, then

I'm not so sure...so many Dems have turned out to be DINOs I just don't know

[bjobotts]

74. Good luck with that. 2 dems were against taxing the rich so they say "Democrats"

[No Elephants]

103. Our form of government is kleptocracy. Our form of economy is plutonomy.

The kleptocrats participate in the plutonomy, right along with the (other) wealthy, as well as enabling, aiding and abetting the wealthy in perfecting the plutonomy for their benefit.

Now, if only they would teach that in civics classes, we might be able to take back our country. Or maybe it's too late. I don't know anymore.

[ProfessionalLeftist]

30. "Democrats largely rejected taxing the rich to pay for it."

:wtf:

Those are not Democrats.

[TrollBuster9090]

46. They are until we primary the s#!t out of them!

The only way we'll ever get even the Democratic party to start paying attention to the people who actually VOTE for them, rather than just the people who fund their campaigns, is if we take these people out in the PRIMARIES.

"Stop worrying about keeping your job in the Senate. If you double cross the party base, we'll GUARANTEE you can't keep your Senate job because we'll see to it you don't even get to RUN again."

Not that it'll matter too much to them, given that they all have wingnut welfare jobs waiting for them after retirement from the Senate. Seven figure a year jobs as "consultants" to the companies they favored during their Senate careers.

[No Elephants]

107. The system is designed to re-elect incumbents and to make sure liberals don't win office.

The Senate rules ensure that.

So do the policies of the DNC, the RNC and the behavior of politicians of both Parties.

[red dog 1]

32. "Democrats largely rejected taxing the rich to pay for it?"

[uppityperson]

35. k&r for what a surprise. not

[marasinghe]

52. yep, as expected. circus for the masses; circle-jerk for the tribunes; orgies for the wealthy.

we've gone full circle, back to the law of the jungle: alphas & drones get to feast; workers allowed to subsist on offal; while the weakest get to fall by the wayside & rot.

[AlbertCat]

38. Democrats largely rejected taxing the rich to pay for it.

The ONE idea that will definitely work.... they reject.

Dems are such doofuses :eyes:

[red dog 1]

48. Jim Webb (D-VA) opposed surtax on millionaires!

"Senator Jim Webb voted with his fellow Democrats to break the filibuster, but he said in a statement today that he couldn't support the bill's final passage in it's current form because of his opposition to the 5.6% surtax on millionaires".

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503554_162-20118915-503544.html/

[wordpix]

56. Jim Webb, traitor!

[red dog 1]

39. Nelson and Tester have to go!

[Downwinder]

40. Guess I'll have to take a job occupying.

That's one I can do, take up space.

[wordpix]

57. ha, ha, come down to DC, we should occupy the Capitol like they did in WIS

[So Shall Us]

42. Now USE THIS, Mr. President!

And get ANGRY about it!

[Nihil]

104. Good joke!

Suggesting that any particular plutocrat will get "angry" about the success
of the plutocracies strategy?

:rofl:

"It's a big club and you ain't in it."

[valerief]

44. Their billionaires must be so proud! nt

[Doctor_J]

49. Nuclear

Fuck these people. they represent about 20% of the nation, all hate radio addicts.

[bjobotts]

76. We should give the senate a book called "Legislating For Dummies".Repubs are destroying the economy

on purpose.

[Demeter]

51. Was anybody expecting anything different?

Put your hand down, Barry.

[harun]

68. LOL, not out of the Senate.

[wordpix]

54. wtf? "Democrats largely rejected taxing the rich to pay for it"

Gawd forbid we should tax the rich who BTW use our roads, rail lines, bridges, airports, sewer and water systems, oceans, national parks, national forests, air, water, soil...

A-holes think they're above it all. They've got another think coming.

[bjobotts]

77. 2Democrats...2 democrats...2 democrats...2 democrats. Geez. explore a little.

[jimlup]

62. Fuck heads! (venting rant follows...)

Sorry for the language and I know that this is really an expected political play but God damn it! Working people are being hurt badly by these fucks. It is time to fucking fight back! God damn it I'm mad as hell tonight and apparently need to vent a bit.

[RayTy]

63. i'm scared to death right now

i don't post much on here but i do read a lot and am just so sick of all this right now!!!!!!!!!!

[dennis4868]

64. that damn Obama...

it's all his fault...if only he listened to Adam Greene and went around the country getting support for his plan it would have forced the repubs to stop obstructing progress....fuck you Obama...listen to the PL already! :-(

[blueclown]

65. Tester and Nelson are running for re-election.

Cowards.

They need primary challengers now.

[otohara]

118. How Does This Help?

voting against jobs?

[blueclown]

121. Their rationale would probably be that their states will likely vote for GOP nominee

So, in order to win their Senate elections, they'll need to win over some Republican presidential voters. What's the best way for them to do that? To oppose one of the president's "controversial" bills, The American Jobs Act.

[AsahinaKimi]

70. Republicans won't be satisfied till America Burns to the ground

They wouldn't vote for a kids birthday party at this point. Monku yuun ja nee yo!!Fuzaken ja nee yo! Namen ja nee yo! Itazura da naa! Shinjimae!

[bjobotts]

78. They have gated communities which excludes most Americans.Only here a few months a yr

[The Wizard]

72. Who could have guessed? (NT)

[PragmaticLiberal]

75. So what should the president do now?

:-(

[bjobotts]

79. America will never recover till all republicans are voted out of government.Can't work with crazies

[robinlynne]

86. It can not happen with our current eleciton system. You know that, right.

[No Elephants]

113. Will never happen; and even if it did, there would still be the excuse of blue dogs/DINOs..

Time for Americans, Democrats included, to wake the fuck up.

Politicians are just not that into us.

[mvd]

81. The President has a campaign issue now. I'd rather it passed because..

there's been no better plan with a chance of passing, but now the President can say Repukes (and a few Democrats, though he wouldn't mention them) aren't serious about jobs.

[No Elephants]

96. "Break it up" IOW, all the tax breaks will probably pass.

[auburngrad82]

109. Dems need to hold the GOP over the fire on this one

People want to go back to work. This could be a huge mistake for the GOP come 2012.

[Blue_Tires]

119. Not surprising, but still disappointing...

and the turncoat dems need to FOAD