Oh, because it wouldn't be the cure all, let's just ignore the inconvenient truth.
Whatever dude, if the economy is adding in excess of 200k net jobs a month and you are hung up over a delay (note, delay, not outright cancellation) to a project with about 20k jobs for half a year, go ahead and post away about those job-killin' regulations. I won't lose any sleep over it.
Well, why did he design it that way if he's soooo good at this?
Where did I say I thought the bill was well-designed? Or that Obama was good at this? Or that he designed the stimulus bill at all because it actually went through the House and Senate? Or even that I liked the bill that was passed? I think you are confusing me with someone else, or making some very untrue assumptions, I can't figure out which.
Because it's be stagnate for quite some time and nothing major has changed?
You think it's a one way street? Employment situation is pretty bleak in the US right now.
As I pointed out in my post, one metric has been more stiff due to the mechanics of its calculation. I can't extract the graph, but look at this
February BLS report, chart #2 on the right of the first page.
That's not stagnant.
Even the unemployment graph (chart #1 on the left) shows a clear, if slow, declining trend.
Ummm, I'm not partisan... I dislike both parties, but I can call a situation how I see it. See after my joint reply to the three of you for why I make that claim.
Can you make the same claim?
You gotta show it, not say it. I think my posts are clear enough to demonstrate my intentions to an outside observer, I won't address it any further.
Question for all 3 of you... How long was it before Obama met with the House Minority Leader after he was inaugurated?
Also, was he, as the President, saying anything to object to Repubs getting literally locked out of House committee meetings in those first 2 years?
Wouldn't that put a bad taste in the Dem party's mouth if Bush Jr had done those things?
If you don't think Obama compromised with and accommodated the Republicans on the Bush tax cuts, on the composition of the stimulus bill, on the ratio of spending cuts to revenue increases in the debt ceiling
debate debacle, on the freaking healthcare bill which
was the Republican/Heritage Foundation healthcare proposal from the 90s, then you have such a stringent definition of "reaching across the aisle" that no man in history can attain it unless he spinelessly caves to whatever the fickle and mercurial opposition wants.
Besides, you said "zero effort". Effort does not correlate with success. And you cannot tell me with a straight face Obama hasn't tried at least once. Ziggy's catering line is particularly insightful here.
Stimulus was a 1/3 tax cuts wasn't it? Remind me which party gets all hot under the collar from tax-cuts. Except of course when Obama comes up with them.
Depends on how you count. 35% was a direct tax refund, which is what most people think of as "tax cuts". However, there was an AMT adjustment, and the aid to the states was sent specifically to offset what would have been a state tax increase to pay for vital services (education, fire, police, etc.). So anywhere from 35% to something like 70% was some form of tax relief.
