Senator Bunning Exposed

[Nbadan]

...I think Bunning got hit in the head with the ball to many times during his baseball career....


-2PAjr53AiU

Summary: Cenk explains how (R) Senator Jim Bunning's "principled stance" on blocking unemployment benefit extension is laughable. Not only is Bunning in favor of benefits IF they're coupled with tax breaks for corporations, but he's also shown in the past that he's in favor of extending unemployment benefits...depending on which party is in power.

[Yonivore]

Why I took a stand (http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2010/03/column-why-i-took-a-stand-.html)


I will be the first one to admit that I have cast some bad votes during my tenure, and I wish I could have some of them back. For too long, both Republicans and Democrats have treated the taxpayers' money as a slush fund that does not ever end. At some point, the madness has to stop.
I think he owns his hypocrisy right there.

[Nbadan]

So Bunning is a born again Conservative :lol

Bunning doesn't own..he is owned, by the health-care, insurance and oil industry lobbyists..

[Jamtas#2]

Just so I can get this straight, do you disagree with the notion that we should pay for bills as they get passed, or just upset that it wasn’t during the Bush administration that this stand was made?

I understand this didn't come up at all with him during the Bush years, but does that mean that one a person has voted irresponsibly in the past, they have no right at all to change their vote because of that?

I really haven’t heard anyone on here that opposes him deny that it was right to oppose spending this way, just attacks that it is convenient for his change of heart because the party in power changed, never mind the fact that this wasn't a straight party vote and he was the only one holding it up.

I really can't stomach the notion of "yeah it was wrong when his party did it, so now its our turn to get to be wasteful and wrong too and you can't say anything"

I was totally not a fan of the Bush irresponsibility when it came to spending. But I certainly won't say it's ok for Obama (whom I did vote for, to set the record straight that I'm not a right wing "repug" spewing my vitriol now when I should have been saying this during the Bush years- on this board at least, since that is all that will count for some here) and Democrats to get a free pass because Bush and the Republicans were irresponsible.

Regardless of his motivations (even if they were to just block democrats), I believe Bunning did the right thing. Was this the best bill to make that stand with...yes and no. No because we are talking about people who need this the most as opposed to standing up to the wall street bailout, but yes because say if he had chosen one of Bush's bills first to block, this would still need to be blocked just based on the fact they didn't have the funds setup to cover it yet.

The first step has to happen somewhere, and if it had to be this bill- so be it. For all those who were affected by it, I do sympathize for the situation, but why was the motion to get this passed done so near to the funds running out? And regardless if it is a program I support or I oppose, I want it to be funded and not just figured out later. Hard decisions are going to have to be made at some point. I'd rather us be more like the person who is running up close to their credit limit and deciding to make a change to get things on the right track, than be like the one who has maxed out 4-5 cards and is now realizing that they are in a bad place and need to fix things.

[Spurminator]

Why can't it be paid with unused stimulus funds? What happens when this extension expires? Do we do this all over again? Do we keep adding $15B to the debt every month?

[Spurminator]

Character assassination is the chickenshit way to debate this. But it's par for the course.

[exstatic]

Character assassination is the chickenshit way to debate this. But it's par for the course.

Is it truly "character assassination" to proclaim the man a hypocrite? He's voted for non-funded unemployment extensions before. Hell, he didn't even vote for the pay/go bill!!!

I feel mildly sorry for the man, because he got the stiletto in the back from his own party, but just go out with some dignity, Senator, not on some quixotic quest for shit that was NEVER important to you before.

For a week, he's actually displaced Joe Lieberman as Senate whiney attention whore baby, a feat I never saw happening until Joe hung it up or got run by his constituents. Lieberman must be furious. Time to rattle the Dems cage in 5...4...3...2...

[Winehole23]

/furlined bathtub

[Winehole23]

http://images.mmorpg.com/images/newsImages/252009/Bath%20Tub%20Art%20Car%203.jpg

[coyotes_geek]

Character assassination is the chickenshit way to debate this. But it's par for the course.

Calling out Bunning is fair game. What's chickenshit though, and very much par for the course around here, is using the man as an excuse to ignore the issue.

As for who's being a hypocrite, Bunning isn't being any more of one than those who pushed for paygo to get passed and now don't feel like following it. Apparently all the paygo vote was really about was just a campaign ploy where democrats could boast "see how fiscally responsible we are, we passed paygo", knowing full well that most voters will not notice the disconnect between passing it and actually abiding by it.

[101A]

Calling out Bunning is fair game. What's chickenshit though, and very much par for the course around here, is using the man as an excuse to ignore the issue.

As for who's being a hypocrite, Bunning isn't being any more of one than those who pushed for paygo to get passed and now don't feel like following it. Apparently all the paygo vote was really about was just a campaign ploy where democrats could boast "see how fiscally responsible we are, we passed paygo", knowing full well that most voters will not notice the disconnect between passing it and actually abiding by it.


Good post

[Spurminator]

Is it truly "character assassination" to proclaim the man a hypocrite? He's voted for non-funded unemployment extensions before. Hell, he didn't even vote for the pay/go bill!!!

I feel mildly sorry for the man, because he got the stiletto in the back from his own party, but just go out with some dignity, Senator, not on some quixotic quest for shit that was NEVER important to you before.

For a week, he's actually displaced Joe Lieberman as Senate whiney attention whore baby, a feat I never saw happening until Joe hung it up or got run by his constituents. Lieberman must be furious. Time to rattle the Dems cage in 5...4...3...2...

Yeah yeah yeah, fine, now...


Why can't it be paid with unused stimulus funds? What happens when this extension expires? Do we do this all over again? Do we keep adding $15B to the debt every month?

[Nbadan]

Harry Reid made me do it? Seriously?

0daYM7OnD8c

[ChumpDumper]

lol minions.

[Nbadan]

By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: March 4, 2010



So the Bunning blockade is over. For days, Senator Jim Bunning of Kentucky exploited Senate rules to block a one-month extension of unemployment benefits. In the end, he gave in, although not soon enough to prevent an interruption of payments to around 100,000 workers.

But while the blockade is over, its lessons remain. Some of those lessons involve the spectacular dysfunctionality of the Senate. What I want to focus on right now, however, is the incredible gap that has opened up between the parties. Today, Democrats and Republicans live in different universes, both intellectually and morally.

Take the question of helping the unemployed in the middle of a deep slump. What Democrats believe is what textbook economics says: that when the economy is deeply depressed, extending unemployment benefits not only helps those in need, it also reduces unemployment. That’s because the economy’s problem right now is lack of sufficient demand, and cash-strapped unemployed workers are likely to spend their benefits. In fact, the Congressional Budget Office says that aid to the unemployed is one of the most effective forms of economic stimulus, as measured by jobs created per dollar of outlay.

But that’s not how Republicans see it. Here’s what Senator Jon Kyl of Arizona, the second-ranking Republican in the Senate, had to say when defending Mr. Bunning’s position (although not joining his blockade): unemployment relief “doesn’t create new jobs. In fact, if anything, continuing to pay people unemployment compensation is a disincentive for them to seek new work.”

In Mr. Kyl’s view, then, what we really need to worry about right now — with more than five unemployed workers for every job opening, and long-term unemployment at its highest level since the Great Depression — is whether we’re reducing the incentive of the unemployed to find jobs. To me, that’s a bizarre point of view — but then, I don’t live in Mr. Kyl’s universe.

And the difference between the two universes isn’t just intellectual, it’s also moral.

Bill Clinton famously told a suffering constituent, “I feel your pain.” But the thing is, he did and does — while many other politicians clearly don’t. Or perhaps it would be fairer to say that the parties feel the pain of different people.

During the debate over unemployment benefits, Senator Jeff Merkley, a Democrat of Oregon, made a plea for action on behalf of those in need. In response, Mr. Bunning blurted out an expletive. That was undignified — but not that different, in substance, from the position of leading Republicans.

NY times (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/05/opinion/05krugman.html)

[Spurminator]

The question is not whether to pay unemployment. The question is how to fund it. What happens when this extension expires?

[Nbadan]

The question is not whether to pay unemployment. The question is how to fund it. What happens when this extension expires?

Sooner or later they have to end....even now they are clearly needed worse in certain parts of the country than others...for instance, driving around San Antonio, it's hard to find any sign of a recession...

[EmptyMan]

It's called being a lame duck, not gaf about playing the game anymore, and finally finding your balls to go out like Sherman.

[exstatic]

Here’s what Senator Jon Kyl of Arizona, the second-ranking Republican in the Senate, had to say when defending Mr. Bunning’s position (although not joining his blockade): unemployment relief “doesn’t create new jobs. In fact, if anything, continuing to pay people unemployment compensation is a disincentive for them to seek new work.”

This clown obviously has never been on unemployment. When I was unemployed for 10 months back in 2004-2005, if I DIDN'T have the taxes withheld, it would just cover my house payment, AND NOTHING ELSE. No food, utilities, gasoline, car payment, CC payment. Nothing else.

[Winehole23]

The question is not whether to pay unemployment. The question is how to fund it. What happens when this extension expires?Seek more extension.