Bunning blocks unemployment benefits

[Kosar_For_President]

Sarah Palin stormed the bestseller list last year with "Going Rogue"-a political memoir whose title coyly referenced the former GOP vice presidential nominee's supposed defiance of the consultants running the McCain campaign. But this year we have a new poster boy for the Going Rogue playbook: GOP Sen. Jim Bunning of Kentucky. For the past week, Bunning has been single-handedly blocking more than a million Americans from receiving unemployment and COBRA health insurance benefits, as of today, when their benefits funded under the 2009 stimulus law run out. The suspension of benefits affects everyone from doctors to government employees.

 

Since cutting health and unemployment benefits isn't the most popular thing to do in a job-starved recession, the Senate had reached near unanimity on extending these programs. But near-unanimous isn't enough when senators are looking to stretch out the lifespan of benefits about to lapse-they need to reach unanimous consent. And that requirement has delivered a great deal of power into Bunning's hands-- power that has allowed him to block the extension until the Senate find $10.3 billion in spending cuts elsewhere to fund the safety-net spending.

 

"I believe we should pay for it," Bunning said. "I'm trying to make a point to the people of the United States."

 

Bunning has long been something of an outlier, even within his own caucus. Last year, he announced his plans to retire, having received de facto votes of no confidence from most Senate campaign strategists. And now that he's got nothing to lose next November, he's bucking all kinds of pressure from GOP leaders, who argue that Bunning's quixotic stand has done nothing to improve the party's "party of no" image.

 

And indeed, Bunning has seemed oddly cavalier about the broader fallout from his one-man crusade -except that is, when it comes to his own college hoops-viewing schedule. "I have missed the Kentucky-South Carolina game that started at 9:00 and it's the only redeeming chance we had to beat South Carolina since they're the only team that has beat Kentucky this year," he said on the Senate floor last Thursday night. Later, when a Senate colleague pleaded with him to drop his objections to the extension, Bunning reportedly responded by saying, "Tough sh*t."

 

Many on the right and the left have weighed in on Bunning's stance in recent days. The Atlantic Monthly's Megan McArdle called it "political poison," as she says that even conservatives are sympathetic to the needs of the nation's jobless right now. She added that Bunning's efforts would probably be better served if he found "some useless defense appropriations to complain about" instead. And well before this latest flap, blogger Matt Welch wrote in a review of Bunning's odd, belligerent career that the lawmaker has obviously "lost his marbles."

 

Still, some conservative writers are hailing Bunning's efforts. Redstate.com, for instance, praised the senator for "standing strong for the American people," adding that Bunning showed courage in daring "to ask the simple question of how these extensions would be paid for."

 

One thing is quite clear: Senator Bunning is not backing down. When questioned today by ABC reporter Jonathan Karl in the hallway of the Hart Office Building, Bunning refused to answer any questions about his actions. When Karl attempted to follow him into the elevator with a cameraman in tow, Bunning yelled "Excuse me! This is a Senator's only elevator!" And to drive the point home, Karl writes, the senator "walked toward the elevator and shot the middle finger over his head."

[calfoxwc]

obaMao and the Dems in Congress have blown about 2 TRILLION dollars on bogus crisis claims, just so they

 

could claim they "saved everybody" from losing their jobs, except a lot of that money was never even spent,

 

and a lot of what was spent, was spent on pet projects to reward Dem states with Dem senators and reps.

 

How ARE they going to PAY for it, when they have already sent us over a financial cliff into nearly permanent debt?

 

There is more and more unemployment all the time, and housing is being defaulted on, etc more and more....

 

next time, what do you do then? Print more money?

 

Next time, what do you do THEN? Print MORE FREAKIN money?

 

obaMao and the leftists have already gone too far. There is no more money left to hedge on for unemployment benefits.

 

Those stupid freakin phoney "stiumulus" expenditures should have not been spent, to pay for these unemployment benefit

 

extensions.

 

And, btw, there are a ton of self employed (including consultants like me whose skillset becomes in less demand)...

 

that is a huge extra hundreds of thousands of people, maybe more, that are never considered unemployed because

 

they don't GET unemployment benefits.

 

IOW's, we don't have any emergency benefits extension money, because the ignorant doofus president and leftists

 

in Congress already spent it all for political reasons.

 

 

[heckofajobbrownie]

First of all, Cal, nothing you say is true. Nothing. You're completely clueless. Every figure you use is wrong. I don't expect that to stop you, but you're as lost as a human being can be and still be able to read.

 

As for Kosar, are you really defending this guy?

 

It's pretty common knowledge around DC that the man isn't exactly all there anymore. Everyone is quietly waiting for him to retire. Most Republicans aren't with him on this but they can't seem to get him to stop. He's an ornery old fart.

 

Of course, what he's doing is insane. Nor is he even suggesting where he'd cut to make up these offsets he's talking about. (They never do.) He's just a grumpy old prick who is causing a lot of people unnecessary hardship. In addition to unemployment and COBRA benefits, starting today Medicare reimbursement rates to doctors drop by 21%.

 

But at least I know I can come in here and find someone willing to pick up the flag and run with this nonsense. Yes, let's cut unemployment benefits for people in recession. That way, according to Senator Kyl, they'll want to go out and apply for all those jobs that don't exist.

 

What a wonderful bunch of cranks.

[Mr. T]

Heck this may seem politcally incorrect and you have probably never even heard this two letter word before in your life, so here it goes.

 

NO!

 

You are wrong.

[Kosar_For_President]

First of all, Cal, nothing you say is true. Nothing. You're completely clueless. Every figure you use is wrong. I don't expect that to stop you, but you're as lost as a human being can be and still be able to read.

 

As for Kosar, are you really defending this guy?

 

It's pretty common knowledge around DC that the man isn't exactly all there anymore. Everyone is quietly waiting for him to retire. Most Republicans aren't with him on this but they can't seem to get him to stop. He's an ornery old fart.

 

Of course, what he's doing is insane. Nor is he even suggesting where he'd cut to make up these offsets he's talking about. (They never do.) He's just a grumpy old prick who is causing a lot of people unnecessary hardship. In addition to unemployment and COBRA benefits, starting today Medicare reimbursement rates to doctors drop by 21%.

 

But at least I know I can come in here and find someone willing to pick up the flag and run with this nonsense. Yes, let's cut unemployment benefits for people in recession. That way, according to Senator Kyl, they'll want to go out and apply for all those jobs that don't exist.

 

What a wonderful bunch of cranks.

 

No Heck I am not defending this guy, see, there you go assuming again, you do that shit all the time.

 

He is an asshole and his staunch, I'm THE American and making a point, bullshit is f*cked. This is not the time to make a point. This is not welfare. This is for people like me who send out 130 resumes in a week and not get one call back. There are people NOT taking advantage of the system. But Bunning seems to know best. It's filibuster bullshit because this quack thinks people are out to get him by lessening his fund raising for re-running for Senate, so he takes it out on the people. Who's going to lose the votes? Not him...

 

“To win a general election, a candidate has to be able to raise millions of dollars to get the message out to voters,” Bunning said. “Over the past year, some of the leaders of the Republican Party in the Senate have done everything in their power to dry up my fundraising. The simple fact is that I have not raised the funds necessary to run an effective campaign for the U.S. Senate.”

 

Dude needs some pussy.

 

Given he did vote no on both Bush's and Obama's stimulus packages, why didn't he do this then for big business?

[Kosar_For_President]

Heck this may seem politcally incorrect and you have probably never even heard this two letter word before in your life, so here it goes.

 

NO!

 

You are wrong.

 

T, Heck is right here 100%. At least in the statement below.

 

Yes, let's cut unemployment benefits for people in recession. That way, according to Senator Kyl, they'll want to go out and apply for all those jobs that don't exist.

 

Why is that wrong? So you are telling me if you lost your job, and your benefits ran out you'd be hitting Subway in the morning and Telemarketing at night? Come on T. So you'll work 80 hours a week to make sure ends meet?

[DieHardBrownsFan]

Okay, I lost my job primarily due to PNC getting TARP money that enabled them to buy National City Bank. Now this a---hole want's to delay or stop an extension because he want's to "know where the money is coming from"? They didn't ask that when they loaned the fat cat bankers billions. Now they want to persecute unemployed workers, like myself? Who lost their job primarily because these idiots gave sub prime loans at huge interest rates and then got bit because people couldn't afford the huge interest rates? Give me a freaking break.

[Westside Steve]

That way, according to Senator Kyl, they'll want to go out and apply for all those jobs that don't exist.

 

What a wonderful bunch of cranks.

 

I watched Olbermann's show too Heck.

You guys really are off the deep end over Bunning.

But:

Kyl is probgably right.

I don't know a lot of folks on unemployment that really bust ass to get a job until the benefits start to run out.

 

And really Heck, why would you?

 

You get hosed out of a good paying job so the unemployment is likely close to or more than the available jobs are paying?

One would be a fool to not take that benefit.

 

Good for the economy? Probably not. Understandable? Sure.

 

WSS

[heckofajobbrownie]

I didn't watch Olberman. I never watch Olberman. That's just the caricature you've created in your head. Don't be that guy. I work in politics. It's not like I need Keith Olberman to tell me what's going on in Washington.

 

And it doesn't surprise me that you think Kyl is right. Even if you grant that unemployment benefits give people a disincentive to find work (which isn't true in most situations - unemployment checks rarely give you as much money as a job does) it's still not a good argument against giving people unemployment benefits in an economy that isn't going to start creating jobs for some time. You can't tell people to get off their ass and get a job when there are far more unemployed than jobs.

 

Unemployment benefits are also among the most effective stimulus measures there are, since almost all that money gets spent by the unemployed. It goes right back into the economy. So it costs money, but is good for the economy.

 

To say nothing of the fact that it's helps people by keeping them from being desperate, as you note. I think.

 

As for Kosar, I thought you bolded the "point" Bunning was making because you agreed with his point. My mistake. But you also didn't write anything else.

[Mr. T]

We are one more year awaay before small businesses start to rebound, small businesses employ more than half of the workforce.

 

Banks are not lending to small businesses at the present. This something that mny small businesses require to manage payroll. Until that trend (Banks lending to small business) comes back around dont expect small businesses to pick up and start hiring.

 

The market is still unstable, even with all of the TRILLIONS of $$$ the Liberal Dems have spent.

 

So do you propose that we stop helping those who are not able to help themselves? I do agree that there is a % of those who are lazy and will wait for there unemployment to run out.

 

But why should they lose money and except a job doing the same thing for half of the pay? It is an employers market at the present.

[Westside Steve]

I didn't watch Olberman. I never watch Olberman. That's just the caricature you've created in your head. Don't be that guy. I work in politics. It's not like I need Keith Olberman to tell me what's going on in Washington.

 

Don't be that guy?

From the guy who invokes the name of Matt Drudge in half the posts?

 

But seriously Heck I do watch Olbermann on occasion just to see what the loons on the left have to say and that was the basis of the show last night.

I'm sure it's not the only place to get the same information.

 

And it doesn't surprise me that you think Kyl is right. Even if you grant that unemployment benefits give people a disincentive to find work (which isn't true in most situations - unemployment checks rarely give you as much money as a job does)

 

I said that with todays economy getting a job that pays what the one you lost paid is harder and harder. Right?

 

 

it's still not a good argument against giving people unemployment benefits in an economy that isn't going to start creating jobs for some time. You can't tell people to get off their ass and get a job when there are far more unemployed than jobs.

 

Well if it were me (I assume you too) I wouldn't take a shitty job until I had to.

If if I wasn't able to support myself as I do now I'd take a job somewhere. But I'd feel it was beneath me and I'd wait until I was forced to. As you probably would.

 

But before you gripe I'm speaking for you, how about it?

Lets say you lose the job fetching Rahm Emmanuel's coffee. (kidding bud) Choice is unemployment or managing the 7 11 for similar dough.

 

Unemployment benefits are also among the most effective stimulus measures there are, since almost all that money gets spent by the unemployed. It goes right back into the economy. So it costs money, but is good for the economy.

 

Waiting until the lst week of benefits is probably not so good.

 

To say nothing of the fact that it's helps people by keeping them from being desperate, as you note. I think.

 

Sure. And affords a well needed vacation in many cases. And I don't really have a bitch with it. Working people out of a job on the rare occasion deserve a little break.

 

WSS

[Kosar_For_President]

I don't know a lot of folks on unemployment that really bust ass to get a job until the benefits start to run out.

 

I guess that is the point Steve. Bunning is trying to classify people who are lazy and not lazy. Yea I admit I took 6 weeks off, but since then, I have literally been putting 100 resumes out a week. I have 2 1/2 months less and an no way have I been dogging it. The point is, how the f*ck does Bunning know who's dogging it? He doesn't.

[Kosar_For_President]

Waiting until the lst week of benefits is probably not so good.

WSS[/b]

 

Don't be a Bunning. Are you telling me people who have worked their who lives like me, aren't out looking for work? How the f*ck do you know, just because their benefits run out, they are not looking, wow that's cynicism for you. I've paid into the system for 18 years non stop (barring a company closure for 2 month 8 years ago) and now that my unemployment is "exhausted" I can't receive what I paid into it? That is the most pompous thing I have ever heard you say, usually you are down to earth.

I guess that is what they need to look at. How many years a person was working TOTAL before without taking unemployment. Sure they can be eligible after a year or what ever, but the length of the benefits should be determined how many years this person put into the system. Isn't that the opposite of entitlement, which is basically what everyone is bitching about.

 

I am sure Die Hard would agree here. He should be given as many weeks as he needs until he finds work for the time he's put in. Dude's a f*cking vet too.

 

Shit I'm just asking not to be homeless in May, I'm not exaggerating here.

[Westside Steve]

So if we assume that everyone without a job is looking as hard as they possibly can, why not make unemployment open ended?

No time limit?

WSS

[Kosar_For_President]

So if we assume that everyone without a job is looking as hard as they possibly can, why not make unemployment open ended?

No time limit?

WSS

 

Don't be a douche. It's not welfare, Stevie. Look at my suggestion, yes suggestion above.

[Kosar_For_President]

People look at employment and for god's sake credit history to get a f*cking job. Why not look at it to keep unemployment until they can get a job?

 

And think of it this way, a kid who has been working his job for 3 years and is 22 is young enough that has family support if need be.

 

Or maybe up the amount times one needs to apply each week. And check up. I have not once asked to show my applications. I have a list of 500+ places.

[Westside Steve]

Don't be a douche. It's not welfare, Stevie. Look at my suggestion, yes suggestion above.

 

Didn't you just admit to taking 6 weeks off bhut now you're really looking?

 

" Yea I admit I took 6 weeks off, but since then, I have literally been putting 100 resumes out a week. "

That's not unreasonable IMO, it just is what it is.

WSS

[Kosar_For_President]

Didn't you just admit to taking 6 weeks off bhut now you're really looking?

 

" Yea I admit I took 6 weeks off, but since then, I have literally been putting 100 resumes out a week. "

That's not unreasonable IMO, it just is what it is.

WSS

 

I was still sending out resumes, just not at the tune of 100 a week. NOT the last week of my benefits my friend. I still have 2 1/2 months. But you seem to assume like the asshole Bunning that everyone is waiting until the last week. You can't be more wrong on this Steve.

[heckofajobbrownie]

Um, I mention Matt Drudge because 70% of the posts in here are links taken off Matt Drudge's website. And yet no one posts anything from Keith Olberman.

 

This is your example of equivalency? Really? Someone does something a lot and the other guy doesn't do it at all ...so it's a wash? You're bringing your inability to make distinctions to a new low here.

 

As for the argument you're making, once again you've shrunk it into a place where it's only on small points that miss the larger picture, much like Senator Kyl is doing. Sort of like saying "It's true that taxes create inefficiencies, so let's not collect taxes."

 

As for your bolded section, Kosar, that's how unemployment benefits are calculated in most states - how much you made and how long you worked determines how much you get in each check and how long you'll receive them. There are also policies to prevent people who don't look for work from collecting checks, and time limits on the total number you can get.

 

The larger point being that stricter time limits make sense when unemployment is at 4%-5% because there are likely jobs out there that the unemployed worker could have accepted within the time allotted. But it doesn't make much sense in a time of 10% unemployment, when there are far more unemployed Americans than jobs, especially when the unemployment situation doesn't look to be improving much any time soon.

 

What Bunning is doing is ridiculous. And what Kyl is saying not only largely wrong, but misses the point entirely. And everyone knows it - including most Republicans.

 

If it didn't affect real people in serious situations, I'd be all for them babbling away. It's good politics for the Democrats. The problem is, these idiots are going to cause real pain to real people, and needlessly.

[Kosar_For_President]

As for your bolded section, Kosar, that's how unemployment benefits are calculated in most states - how much you made and how long you worked determines how much you get in each check and how long you'll receive them. There are also policies to prevent people who don't look for work from collecting checks, and time limits on the total number you can get.

 

Actually Heck, it's only from your last job. Not the years of work you put in before hand.

[heckofajobbrownie]

That's what I'm saying - how much you made and how long you worked (at your last job).

 

It differs from state to state, but that part is pretty much universal.

[Kosar_For_President]

That's what I'm saying - how much you made and how long you worked (at your last job).

 

It differs from state to state, but that part is pretty much universal.

 

I know but my suggestion is to look at someones total work history. As a temporary solution until unemployment goes down, look at someones TOTAL work history in terms of years.

 

The people like me and Die Hard are being thrown into this, we must be lazy mold because we don't have a job after working 18 years without a hitch.

[heckofajobbrownie]

I think you'd run into the argument that you're actually better prepared to weather the period of unemployment than someone who is, say, 28 and has worked every year since they graduated college. You've had more time to save. Plus, if we're rewarding time in the system, someone who has been working on again and off again is already going to see a smaller UI check than someone like you.

 

The more important thing is helping people stay at a minimum level of subsistence while the economy shakes this off. If more and more people start going under, it stresses not only them, but also the state budgets, often in ways that are often more costly than unemployment insurance - decreased tax revenue, decreased economic activity, homeless programs, crime, etc.

 

Problem is, this recovery looks like it's going to take a while. Probably 2-3 years.

 

[calfoxwc]

Who writes for you Heck? Or do you write for yourself after you go reserach, as usual, and you pretend you knew stuff all along.

 

Slightly less that TWO FREAKIN TRILLION has been spent, numbnuts.

 

A long while back, if I recall correctly, you said you couldn't wait to find me at a tailgate and kick my ass.

 

Hey, I'm not a big guy, ask Steve.

 

but you can't. Find me in an alley, in a parking lot, you come after me in a tailgate, you will fail.

 

Outside of that, you are a hypocrite on this forum. Your personal attack, slur against anybody who won't

 

let you dominate the forum with your arrogant bs and kiss your pink pinky ring are stale and boring.

 

If you were as "right" as you "believe" , you could do better than that.

 

I'll start a new thread to explain how you are full of hot air.

 

I will say this, though. you say I can get unemployment even though I am a subcontractor (albeit an obsolete one) ?

 

I called them. They said a few years ago, I didn't qualify. This year, eh, today, I have applied. We'll see if I qualify.

 

I had it from the vets admin, and the unemployment office a few years ago, "no".

 

So, if that has changed, that's great. Or, I got bad info from way back from those actual sources.

 

And, apparently, there is a program now that may help me pay for retraining into a more viable offshort of what

 

I've been doing.

 

Very cool. If I can get that, I can develop the skills I need, and pay 70% of my salary to pay off obaMao's deficit.

[Westside Steve]

Um, I mention Matt Drudge because 70% of the posts in here are links taken off Matt Drudge's website. And yet no one posts anything from Keith Olberman.

 

This is your example of equivalency? Really?

 

It is Heck.

See if you say something that Olbermann said it's valid becqause, well gee, you didn't hear it there.

 

 

If it didn't affect real people in serious situations, I'd be all for them babbling away. It's good politics for the Democrats. The problem is, these idiots are going to cause real pain to real people, and needlessly.

 

 

So let me ask again, if you think the vast majority of unemployed are doing their best to find work why wouldn't you want to make coverage open ended?

 

And why am I not surprised you dodged the question concerning whether you'd take a shit job rather than accept unemployment.

 

WSS

[heckofajobbrownie]

Steve, I do work 13-14 hours a day. I can't spend all my time answer your points. I'll get to them when I can and if I care.

 

Trust me, it's not because they're devastating. It's just more of your obsession with exceptions to the rule.

[Kosar_For_President]

Plus, if we're rewarding time in the system, someone who has been working on again and off again is already going to see a smaller UI check than someone like you.

 

Just for the last year Heck. And preparing by saving, that sounds like a Republican stance. What if they have been working with 6 kids? I don't know anyone that can save with 6 kids. There are exceptions. Work history should be how they gauge this. Like I said before, employers do.

[heckofajobbrownie]

I was unaware that saving your money was a Republican idea.

 

Honestly, there's probably no greater delusion on the right (and on this board) than the one that pretends that Democrats or liberals wish for an entirely different economic system or form of government, and that you're the people standing in between capitalism and socialism, freedom and tyranny.

 

It'd be comical if it weren't such a paralyzing waste of time.

 

 

[Kosar_For_President]

I was unaware that saving your money was a Republican idea.

 

No not accounting for unforeseen circumstances is what I meant, aka Bitch Bunning. Come on Heck get with it, lol, jk.

[Mr. T]

I was unaware that saving your money was a Republican idea.

 

Honestly, there's probably no greater delusion on the right (and on this board) than the one that pretends that Democrats or liberals wish for an entirely different economic system or form of government, and that you're the people standing in between capitalism and socialism, freedom and tyranny.

 

It'd be comical if it weren't such a paralyzing waste of time.

 

Your biggest problem within the democratic party is that the progressives have taken it over and the your spokesmen/women are idiots like Hillary, Gore, Obama, Pelosi, Reid and none the less Bwarney Fwranks. And then all of their beloved followers who are working under them and setting policies in DC are coming from the radical left. Your so called blue dogs have been nuetered and are all flash and no bang.