Unemployment Rate Tops 10 Percent For The First Time Since 1983

uffda-I think you're confusing my comments about the Hagel Bill, S.190(109) with the GLB Bill of 1999. Two separate issues, two different Congresses, two completely different Bills. I know that the Dems in general, and Billy-Bob Clinton would LOVE to blame the GLB bill for the financial crisis. But if you explore the Bill, a majority of Dems voted for it as well, (138-69House, 54-44Senate). Did they vote for it because of the further provisions/amendments allowing for more legislative avenues to force banks to make risky loans, ie., the CRA? I don't know...but it was a bipartisan vote, Clinton did threaten to veto the Bill, and Banks had been asking for a partial revision of the Glass-Steagall Bill since the '80's. So I don't know what you're referring to when you state the "Dems threatened to filibuster the GLB Bill", as it was a bipartisan vote, at least in the House, with one Dem voting for it in the Senate. Focus on the amendments placed into the Bill by the Dems to strengthen and protect the CRA...http://banking.senate.gov/conf/ ....check out the Compliance provisions of the CRA amendment

Now...fast forward to 2004...the Hagel/Sununu/Dole/McCain Bill...otherwise known as S.190...it would have created a greater regulatory authority, above and beyond OFHEO to control/oversee the GSE's, (Fannie and Freddie). The Dems blocked it's passage...in lock step, and the GOP never pushed a vote because they knew they would lose. You seem to be resistent/reticent to view the youtube videos I suggested...why is that?

@drhunt1

STILL can't or won't answer the simple question of why repubs sponsored a bill to eliminate the provisions of Glass-Steagal, and why, if they suddenly had a change in heart about passing it, didn't do so in the 6 years they had iron control of the White House and congress. Instead, you continue to deflect, insult, and generally prove that your arrogance is no subsitute for intelligence. When the dems threatened to filibuster, repubs repeatedly counter-threatened with the nuclear option...in other words, had dems threatened to filibuster any bill to repeal Gramm's legislation, repubs, had they felt strongly about it, would have imposed the nuclear option. That should be simple enough for even YOU to understand.

uffda-Pulll-lease! Have you ever heard of a threat of a filibuster stopping legislation from coming to a vote? Are you that naive? Do your own research...I've given you PLENTY of information to do your own DD in this matter. Let me spell it out for you, and I'll type real slow so you don't miss it...do a google/youtube search on Meeks, Waters and Armando Falcon. The IT is a wonderful thing, and the hearings in front of the House Finance/Bank Cmte is rather incendiary towards the Dems. I have yet to hear Barney frank answer to the questions surrounding how incredibly wrong he was, and how the housing sector/mortgage crisis was ready to implode while he was seriously in denial..as were all the rest of the Dems on that Cmte. Watch it for yourself...you ceertsinly don't have to take my word for anything...but don't play the ignorance card with me...it's no excuse, not in the age of cyberspace. There's enough information for you to digest, and you're wasting time arguing with me, about a subject you're not well versed. Watch the youtube video...'burning down the house'...simplistic certainly, but a decent starting point. Hope it helps.

@35 drhunt1

Your inability to actually remember back to the complete dominance of the repub party in 2002 is astounding. Can you name a single dem filibuster from 2000-2006 on any legislation of an note? Can you remember the repub threat to go nuclear if they didn't get everything they wanted? The repubs never needed a super majority, as all repubs voted as a bloc then, as they do now, as opposed to dems, who even now are split between Blue Dogs and the rest.

Your lecturing in an attempt to help the repubs push the blame for their own greed and/or incompetence is transparent in the extreme. It is laughable how the repub revisionist history is still being written in all contravention of reality, in the effort to portray themselves as helpless victims, cowed by the all-powerful Bill Clinton, Barney Frank, Hillary Clinton, or whatever perceived villian you choose. How sad that the "party of personal responsibility" is so glib in speaking about personal responsibility, but totally unable to exhibit any.

#34 Uffda-I gave you an EXCELLENT answer in #18. The GOP did NOT have a super-majority...understand? So S.190(109)...the Hagel Bill was, like I wrote, sunsetted, because it would never pass the Senate due to...ta ta! filibustering! Likewise, H.R. 1461 in the House. Do your OWN research on the matter...watch the archived youtube videos showing Frank, Meeks, Waters and the rest of the Dems skewer Armando Falcon, head of OFHEO, for submitting his damaging report on Fannie and Freddie. Pull your head out and perform at least a modicum of evaluation on the subject BEFORE pointing a finger of doubt at me. Bush asked for regulatory reform in 2002...but never got it. Housing prices already began the separation from the cost-of-living index BEFORE the GLB Bill. But after that Bill was passed...and within it, greater and stronger provisions to force Banks to make riskier loans, the bubble REALLY grew. And while you can say that several GOP leaders screwed up...check out the voting record on the Dems...they were in ,ock-step protecting their "babies"...the GSE's and the CRA. Seek the truth, it shall set you free.

@18 drhunt1

I gave you a lot of time to answer my questions, but I guess it wasn't sufficient, or was too difficult for you to come up with a plausible answer, because all I got was lot of deflection. So, apparently the repubs MUST have wanted to eliminate regulations on the banking industry, such as Glass-Steagal, as it was Phil Gramm's name on the bill. After that, if repubs had suddenly had a change of heart, they had iron control of the executive, legislative and judicial branch for 6 years, yet they never made a single attempt to repeal Gramm's law. Your assertion that they couldn't do it because dems threatened a filibuster was absolutely hilarious. The dems were completely powerless and virtually invisible for most of Bush's time in office, and if the term "rubber stamp" could ever be applied to congress, it was the repub-controlled congress of 2000-2006.

No, you can blame Clinton all you like, or Barney Frank, or anyone else you like, but then again, that is the repub modus operandi. Repubs are quick to take credit if something looks good, even quicker to blame someone else if it fails. Sometimes they switch back and forth on an issue over and over again, which makes for great theater.

#31
First dumb first, second dumb second.

First dumb:
---------------
"First...where's all the shovel ready jobs being created?"
---------------
In places like MT:

Stimulus Funding Supports Shovel-Ready Preservation in Montana
http://www.preservationnation.org/resources/public-polic /perfect-storm/case-studies/montana-stimulus.html

And MA:
ROUTE 24 INTERCHANGE LATEST "SHOVEL READY" STIMULUS PROJECT
http://www.eot.state.ma.us/default.asp?pgid=content/rele ses/pr062509_ARRArte24&sid=release

And in practically every other state of the Union. Of course, you'd know that if you weren't so intellectually lazy as to rely on the bloviations of a fat pill popper and the fantasies of the False News Nutwork as your sources of information.

Second dumb:
---------------
"Second, I already stated that the Bill was partisan payback...to the unions, which, of course, includes the teachers' union."
---------------
I know you did, because I already quickly dismissed that irrelevant opinion the first time.
There was no need to make a fool of yourself, and make me outrightly dismiss it again.

Oh, and the construction jobs? Neat thing about those workers who use shovels and the like.
They use them to construct things.

Imagine it.

#27Fact-perhaps you need to explore the REAL roots of the financial crisis that's upon us. It was created, strengthened and then protected by the Dems. Do a youtube search on "burning down the house"...a rather simplistic video showing the participants involved. Use it as a starting point...and then get back to me. Hope it helps.

#30Capt-I'm LMAO! Only a liberal who's been given a wood-shed type beating, could spin it around and make it look like you're the better prepared! Man...you must come from the Barney Frank school of guilt deflection! First...where's all the shovel ready jobs being created? Second, I already stated that the Bill was partisan payback...to the unions, which, of course, includes the teachers' union. What happened to the construction jobs? What happened to keeping the unemployment under 8%? Having a hard time digesting that? And as the article stated, even those teachers' jobs with support employees was grossly overstated. I know that it must be extremely difficult comprehending this intricate info when one only has two neurons held together by a spirochete, so I'm trying to be patient. And yes...I'll type slower if you think that would help! Please let me know...hope it helps.

#26 drdunce

Nope.

I'm simply pointing you in a direction in which you can look to find a concrete answer to your original question ("Can you or that intellectual juggernaut, Capt Schenk, show me any item in the Stimulus Package that was intended for REAL job growth?"), as opposed to simply flat-out giving you the answer.

This isn't Information Welfare, wherein a bunch of rightwingnut hypocrites demand handouts on information they're too intellectually lazy to find on their own.

But since you're, as a righty, too stupid to figure it out on your own, and I'm, as a lefty, too compassionate and understanding of your limitations to allow you to continue to flounder in public... I'll offer two additional hints.

Hint #1: Look at the types of jobs created and saved in the cite in post #14
Hint #2: Think "infrastructure investment"

Then, start looking through ARRA, otherwise known as the "stimulus package", wherein President Barack Hussein Obama (elected by the largest popular vote margin of any non-incumbent in the history of the Unite States) made good on yet another campaign promise by providing 95% of taxpayers with a tax cut.

Best of luck in your search.

6. Bob Bobington

“Can you point me to the healthcare reform that Obama has worked on?”

Why cccourtinlee-

H.R.3962
Affordable Health Care for America Act
Nov. 8, 2009

Statement from Rahall Regarding the Passage of H.R. 3962: The Affordable Health Care for America Act

Special to Huntingtonnews.net

Washington, DC (HNN) – U.S. Representative Nick J. Rahall, D-WV issued the following statement regarding the healthcare reform bill, The Affordable Health Care for America Act (H.R. 3962), which was passed by the House of Representatives by a vote of 220 to 215 on November 7th, 2009

http://www.huntingtonnews.net/political/091108-staff-polit calrahall.html

1.voltar

Guaranteed? Got a link?

Obama shrines? Got a link?

drhunt1
@26

Your link points out thousands upon thousands of jobs saved/created.

"Asked how many jobs actually would have been lost at CSU campuses without the stimulus infusion, Potes-Fellow said she did not know, though she said it would have been significant. "

This translates to as many mortgages saved and families not thrown into the streets while money circulates, businesses can continue to sell their products and services, communities remain standing until the Bush Great Recession's hang over gets better.

#25 Capt- You're NOT defending the ARRA when you stated that 4400 jobs were created by the SP? LMAO! First you point out that jobs were created thus, defending it, then you state that it's not your place to defend the Bill, just that jobs were created. How pathetic an argument is that? Wow! $787 Billion...yes, that's right...BILLION dollars...for what? How about...http://www.sacbee.com/topstories/story/2309303.html

#22 drdunce

There's no need to defend ARRA. It's not my place.
I'm simply pointing out that jobs were indeed saved and created by it.
Repeating your irrelevant opinion over again won't change that fact, much as you hope it will.

Over 20 million manufacturing jobs lost due to NAFTA, CAFTA, the WTO and other investment-class, crony, anti-American. anti-labor trade scams.

7 million jobs lost since 2008 due to investment-class crimes on Walstreet.

Big bright orange signs to brag about fixing a few potholes here and there and no serious job-creation program on top of the crap I pointed out above easily translates into a 10% unemployment rate reported when the real number is closer to 20%.

It is not rocket science Obama. You try to salvage or preserve investment-class crimes against 98% of us, we will continue to get the same crap corporatists like yourself have been giving us for 30 years.

#21 Capt- perhaps you need to increase your meds...you're not making much sense...although I have to admit, trying to rationalize/defend the SP is an absolutely impossible task...as you continue to demonstrate with every post. There was NO real job growth contained in that Bill...just partisan paybacks to the constituencies that supported BO campaign, ie., the unions mainly. Why do you think that Reid refused to let anyone read the Bill before they voted on it? It's really rather a simple explanation, even for you to fathom. But what's most glaring in your extremely imprecise responses to my posts, is the obvious omission in addressing the salient points. Defend, demean, avoid, lather, rinse, repeat...certainly not a tactic of a position of strength, n'est-ce pas?

#19 drdunce

Yes. 4,400 jobs. In Maryland alone, thus far.

But really all it took was 1 job created by ARRA to show that there were items contained within it geared toward "real job growth" (comment #10), whatever that is.

You make it too easy. You're not even trying anymore.

#17 Alan
"He *did* indeed say that if the stimulus package was passed unemployment would not go beyond 8%."
----------------
He did? surely you can easily provide a link to his comment then. Right?

Or maybe you mean to say "White House Economic Advisors projected unemployment rates without the stimulus package of 9 percent and rising while projecting unemployment rates with the stimulus package of 8 percent"?

That would certainly be more accurate than trying to bolster any false, rightwingnut claims of any promise made by the President.

"Personally, I never heard anyone say he promised that the money would be returned to taxpayers if it did"
------------------
That's because no such promise was made.
But he gave taxpayers money back in the stimulus anyway. 95% of them, just like he promised.

"Also, I *have* seen many proposals from the other side on many issues, but they are being ignored as usual, so stop the ridiculous "you guys don't propose any solutions, you just complain" lie."
------------------
That there have been "proposals" is technically true. Republicans have proposed, in numerous ways, keeping the status quo. Most intelligent people would acknowledge that proposing to keep the status quo does not a plan make. Except for a plan deserving of being ignored.

"We will get NOWHERE but dead if we don't stop getting caught up in this false left-vs-right crap"
-------------------
You mean like a post filled with rightwing apologism before diving into something like "all a bunch of leftist criminals that should be arrsted"? That kind of crap, maybe?

#14 Capt.-4400 jobs? Are you kidding me? You're not serious...are you? And do you REALLY believe the number made by the WH that ~640K jobs were created or saved? Wow! $787B for that...assuming that it's true...which of course, it's not. You look REALLY silly attempting to rationalize the SP...almost as much as the Dems and BO. Partisan paybacks.... Hope and Change replaced by Fear and Loathing....great stuff. It's like 1993 all over again.

#12 uffdaguy-a little decorum in your posts would be appreciated. Research the GLB Bill...Clinton threatened to veto the Bill if the GOP didn't allow an amendment that strengthened the CRA. Look it up. And although the GLB Bill has been criticized by the Dems for it's "deregulatory" provisions, the dems backed it ONLY because of the provisions that REQUIRED banks to accept lower income borrowers. Risky investments by mortgage companies and Banks actually occured prior to the GLB Bill, and you can look that up as well. Just take note of the graphs showing separation of housing appreciations and the cost-of-living indexes. Further strengthening of the CRA only hastened that bubble...that, and the promise made to the Banks by the GSE's that they need not worry about bad debt, Fannie and Freddie would purchase the loans. Bush tried to warn Congress about the looming crisis, but they did nothing. S 190 was sunsetted under the cloud of Democrat filibuster. Remember, that even though the GOP controlled both Houses, they did not have a super-majority. Not to write that there were some GOP members that weren't guilty, just that it was the Dems, in lockstep, that protected their own legislation and bureacracies. Perhaps you need to get your facts straight before taking me on, in this debate on this subject matter. If you want proof as to what i write, and can't/won't research the material yourself, I'm sorry...your fault, not mine. But let me know...I still have the links available.

He *did* indeed say that if the stimulus package was passed unemployment would not go beyond 8%. (Personally, I never heard anyone say he promised that the money would be returned to taxpayers if it did.)

As far as the so called healthcare 'reform', no Obama did not write it. The truth is that neither Pelosi or Reed wrote it. The TRUTH is that the healthcare & insurance companies wrote the bill! It is an unconstitutional takeover of a huge sector of our economy (again), and a payoff for the healthcare & insurance companies.

Also, I *have* seen many proposals from the other side on many issues, but they are being ignored as usual, so stop the ridiculous "you guys don't propose any solutions, you just complain" lie.

Still, what all of you don't seem to get is that the left wing and right wing are all part of the same bird. BOTH have been and are leading us to destruction. With only a few exceptions, the all are a bunch of elitist criminals that should be arrested for treason. We will get NOWHERE but dead if we don't stop getting caught up in this false left-vs-right crap. Not seeing that is just plain ignorant. Just look at the economic changes alone:

Reagan/Repubs pass GATT
Clinton/Dems pass NAFTA
Clinton/Dems repeal Glass-Steagal
Bush/Repubs block re-institution of Glass-Steagal
Bush/Repubs pass TARP 1 to pay off bankers that caused collapse
Obama/Dems pass TARP 2 to further pay off bankers that caused collapse & got Obama elected

Notice a pattern?

And it continues. If there is any hope for economic recovery, the healthcare and cap-and-trade bills have to be stopped. If not, the massive taxation and printing of money from nothing that these bills will cause will kill us.

I meant "...the bad trade agreements..."

[I HATE that we can't edit our comments anymore!]

If you hate this country's involvement in bad the trade agreements that have shipped decent wage jobs overseas, and are in the Pacific Northwest area on Dec. 5th, come to this protest. Our voices MUST be heard.

http://www.december5.org/

#10 drdunce

"REAL" job growth? As opposed to fake job growth?
http://www.gazette.net/stories/10302009/polinew195842_32 22.shtml

Ask any of those 4,400 folks. I'm sure they'll tell you that now having a job is real.

#6
"Can you point me to the healthcare reform that Obama has worked on?"
-------------------
It's making it s way through Congress, despite the whining and foot-stomping of Regressives.
You should probably pay closer attention.
You look silly.

@drhunt1

You continually amaze me, but on second thought, I shouldn't be surprised. Like all repubs, you treat the 8 years of the Bush debacle as it if never happened....we somehow magically moved from Clinton to Obama without a break.

If what Clinton and the rest you blame for the current financial mess was so bad,. WHY DIDN'T BUSH AND THE REPUBLICAN-CONTROLLED CONGRESS DO ANYTHING TO FIX IT IN THEIR 8 YEARS IN CONTROL????? Answer: It was repubs like Phil Gramm who PUT THERE NAMES ON THE BILL THAT ELIMINATED GLASS-STEAGAL. How difficult is it for you and your ilk to act like real men and accept responsibility for what you did or did not do?

From one of your dimwitted single-line posts on another thread, I think you are flattering yourself if you believe you are wearing a "thinking cap" or "using your noggin". You are an intellectual fraud, as your posts on this thread conclusively demonstrate.

uffda-you, of course, are referring to the GLB Bill that did away with Glass-Steagll. But did you know that Clinton threatened to veto that Bill if further provisions weren't written into it, thereby strengthening the Community Reinvestment Act? I suggest you look into the CRA as the source/beginning of our financial plight...that, and the GSE's.

uffda- you're now not using your noggin...and that's not good. Can you or that intellectual juggernaut, Capt Schenk, show me any item in the Stimulus Package that was intended for REAL job growth? The TARP plan stabilized the financial markets, by giving the Banks liquidity in the face of massicve debt. That was accomplished under Bush. GM and Chrysler should have just gone BK in the beginning...and I didn't agree with Bush to bail out AIG and Citi. The freedom in this country to succeed is also the freedom to fail. The capitalistic system works...those that are fiscally prudent and make wise business decisions, typically suceed. Those that don't, fail. Bad behaviour should not be rewarded as it was at the end of Bush's term, and throughout the Obama administration. Those that are directly responsible for the biggest financial failure in our tiimes are still governing this country...eg., Dodd, Frank, Meeks, Waters, Schumer, Jim A. Johnson, Paulson, Geithner, Bernanke...and yes...your messiah. Unless you understand the causes of the problem, you don't know the solution.

@8 bob

Once again, saying that the solution is to "do nothing" isn't much of a solution at all, as Herbert Hoover discovered at the start of the Great Depression. Sitting back and letting the market fix itself is exactly what Hoover proposed, and by the time he realized that was the wrong tack to take, it was too late.

Our current problems began when we scrapped legislation like Glass-Steagal that had been enacted in the wake of the Depression in order to prevent another one. Greed made Wall Street, and in turn, congress, eliminate those firewalls that had been erected, opening the way for "too big to fail" financial firms to come into being. Am I happy we bailed out AIG, Citibank and the rest? No way. But I do believe that had we not done so, we would be in a full-blown depression right now. Will the TARP and stimulus packages create inflation in the future? Probably so, but the fact is that without those spending programs, we would already be economically dead. It's like paramedics dealing with a heart attack victim. Will CPR break the victim's ribs, causing a lot of pain in the future? Of course, but if the victim isn't given CPR, he'll be too dead to even worry about the sore ribs.

@Uffdaguy

Again, just because you call it a sham or don't agree with it doesn't make it not exist. I've heard many a repub say that we should have let the market correct itself (which is why they voted against the stimulus), or that unused stimulus money should not be used to put us further in debt. I may not agree with it, but I can't say they aren't saying anything.

You may not want to hear it or agree with it but you can't say they are silent.

@6 bob

Obama made the mistake of letting congress come up with healthcare plan this time, as the last time a president proposed a healthcare reform bill, congress blocked it, (Clinton). He supports the current bill, (which I don't because of the lack of a strong enough public option). The 250 page repub bill released earlier this week was a sham, as it merely legitimized current insurance company practices such as recission and denying care due to pre-existing conditions, while doing absolutely nothing to cover those who are unable to get insurance now. Nor does it control costs, which repubs claim is a failing with the dem bill.

As for the economy, they haven't submitted a single plan of their own, preferring to simply say they disagree with what Obama has done. Naysaying is the exact opposite of leadership, which repubs still fail to comprehend. I WANT to hear what repubs think can be done to fix the economy, but there is no response, most likely because none of them have any ideas about what to do. They had 8 years to screw things up, which they did in a spectacular manner. Now we have to suffer for the cleanup.

@Uffdaguy

Just because you don't agree with repubs plan doesn't mean they haven't proposed them. I don't agree with repubs healthcare reform...but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Can you point me to the healthcare reform that Obama has worked on?

#2 Bob Bobsonbones

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/ 009/jul/09/eric-cantor/Cantor-and-other-republicans-say-obama-pr mised-s/

Perhaps you need to refresh yourself on the actual meaning of the word "promise"?

#1 voltar

Point readers to the text of the legislation that says money would be returned to taxpayers if unemployment went over 8%. It's okay if you can't. Just admit you were wrong.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/ ul/09/eric-cantor/Cantor-and-other-republicans-say-obama-promise -s/

After a claim as dumb as that, I figured it wasn't worth reading the rest of your post.
So I scrolled it.

Instead of both of you whining like out of control 3 year olds, why don't you enlighten us with your solutions? Oh, that's right, repubs don't have solutions to anything, whether it is in Afghanistan, the economy, healthcare, or any other issue of any significance. WAAAAAAAAAAA.............

You must be mistaken...it's impossible. Obama promised it wouldn't go above 8%.

Whew...It's a good thing the Dear Leader passed that stimulus package that guaranteed unemployment would not go above 8%, or our money back! No kidding!

Then again, He could just print up some more money until it costs $100,000 for a loaf of bread, like that socialist economic powerhouse, Zimbabwe!

Or better yet, he could just stand in front of His teleprompter and give a two hour speech about some great meeting with ACORN and the FEC and then slip in his opinion about the unemployment:

Me good, Bush Baaaaaad!
Me good, Bush Baaaaaad!
Me good, Bush Baaaaaad!
Me good, Bush Baaaaaad!

We should all retreat to our Obama shrines (It's Friday after all) and pray to Him (towards the Holy City of Chicago) and thank him for saving and creating all those invisible shovel-ready jobs...