The Democratic Congress Woman from Mars Wrote:Yesterday we did have Mr. Bernanke in our committee and he came to tell us what he’s doing with quantitative easing and that is trying to stimulate the economy with the bond purchases that he’s been doing because he’s trying to keep the interest rates low and jobs – and he said that if sequestration takes place, that’s going to be a great setback. We don’t need to be having something like sequestration that’s going to cause these jobs losses, over 170 million jobs that could be lost – and so he made it very clear he’s not opposed to cuts but cuts must be done over a long period of time and in a very planned way rather than this blunt cutting that will be done by sequestration. As you know in this committee we have all of HUD and HUD is responsible for so many programs that determine the quality of life for women and families. CBDG, a form of grant programs will be cut by $153 million dollars, these are grants that help with cities and children and low-income programs. We also will cut the Home Program by $52 million if sequestration takes place, Native American Housing grants by $34 million, House and Choice grants $113 million, Public Housing – mostly single women in Public Housing – another $304 million, and homelessness, everybody claims to be concerned with homelessness and the growing number of women and children who are out their homeless but look they will take a $99 million dollar hit and on and on and on. We are here today, one more time, talking about women and children and families and how we can protect our women, children, and families and have a decent quality of life – sequestration will set us back, all of the gains that we have made will be lost with sequestration.
Umm I think thats more jobs than we have in the naiton..
(02-28-2013 02:13 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote: [ -> ]The Democratic Congress Woman from Mars Wrote:Yesterday we did have Mr. Bernanke in our committee and he came to tell us what he’s doing with quantitative easing and that is trying to stimulate the economy with the bond purchases that he’s been doing because he’s trying to keep the interest rates low and jobs – and he said that if sequestration takes place, that’s going to be a great setback. We don’t need to be having something like sequestration that’s going to cause these jobs losses, over 170 million jobs that could be lost – and so he made it very clear he’s not opposed to cuts but cuts must be done over a long period of time and in a very planned way rather than this blunt cutting that will be done by sequestration. As you know in this committee we have all of HUD and HUD is responsible for so many programs that determine the quality of life for women and families. CBDG, a form of grant programs will be cut by $153 million dollars, these are grants that help with cities and children and low-income programs. We also will cut the Home Program by $52 million if sequestration takes place, Native American Housing grants by $34 million, House and Choice grants $113 million, Public Housing – mostly single women in Public Housing – another $304 million, and homelessness, everybody claims to be concerned with homelessness and the growing number of women and children who are out their homeless but look they will take a $99 million dollar hit and on and on and on. We are here today, one more time, talking about women and children and families and how we can protect our women, children, and families and have a decent quality of life – sequestration will set us back, all of the gains that we have made will be lost with sequestration.
Umm I think thats more jobs than we have in the naiton..
That just proves how serious this is! :domokun:
Considering the labor force is around 135 million, we're going to have an unemployment rate well over 100%! Some people are going to lose their jobs twice at the same time!
Too bad hers isn't one of the ones lost.
Is that old milkshake still around? Geez...put her out to pasture already please!
(02-28-2013 02:13 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote: [ -> ]The Democratic Congress Woman from Mars Wrote:Yesterday we did have Mr. Bernanke in our committee and he came to tell us what he’s doing with quantitative easing and that is trying to stimulate the economy with the bond purchases that he’s been doing because he’s trying to keep the interest rates low and jobs – and he said that if sequestration takes place, that’s going to be a great setback. We don’t need to be having something like sequestration that’s going to cause these jobs losses, over 170 million jobs that could be lost – and so he made it very clear he’s not opposed to cuts but cuts must be done over a long period of time and in a very planned way rather than this blunt cutting that will be done by sequestration. As you know in this committee we have all of HUD and HUD is responsible for so many programs that determine the quality of life for women and families. CBDG, a form of grant programs will be cut by $153 million dollars, these are grants that help with cities and children and low-income programs. We also will cut the Home Program by $52 million if sequestration takes place, Native American Housing grants by $34 million, House and Choice grants $113 million, Public Housing – mostly single women in Public Housing – another $304 million, and homelessness, everybody claims to be concerned with homelessness and the growing number of women and children who are out their homeless but look they will take a $99 million dollar hit and on and on and on. We are here today, one more time, talking about women and children and families and how we can protect our women, children, and families and have a decent quality of life – sequestration will set us back, all of the gains that we have made will be lost with sequestration.
Umm I think thats more jobs than we have in the naiton..
Therein is the difference in thought, people not government should be responsible for their own quality of life. Welfare programs are not
gains.
(02-28-2013 02:45 PM)Redwingtom Wrote: [ -> ]Is that old milkshake still around? Geez...put her out to pasture already please!
You wanted to know who was saying the world was going to end?
(02-28-2013 03:15 PM)Smaug Wrote: [ -> ] (02-28-2013 02:45 PM)Redwingtom Wrote: [ -> ]Is that old milkshake still around? Geez...put her out to pasture already please!
You wanted to know who was saying the world was going to end?
Of course I was also referring to posters on here...not over-the-hill insane elected officials.
...and the president. And the secretaries of state, education, agriculture, transportation...
Maxine Waters is the same person that pushed bailout funds to OneUnited, the same bank for which her husband had a substantial investment. That woman is an ethics violation just waiting to happen. No credence given to anything she has to say.
(02-28-2013 04:50 PM)VA49er Wrote: [ -> ]Maxine Waters is the same person that pushed bailout funds to OneUnited, the same bank for which her husband had a substantial investment. That woman is an ethics violation just waiting to happen. No credence given to anything she has to say.
Tut, tut. A committee of her peers
absolved her of any culpability in the matter. How dare you suggest that this honorable public servant would throw her grandson/chief of staff under the bus, where he received a horrifying slap on the wrist.
(02-28-2013 02:45 PM)Redwingtom Wrote: [ -> ]Is that old milkshake still around? Geez...put her out to pasture already please!
She's a high ranking member of your party.
I think that says it all.
(02-28-2013 02:45 PM)Redwingtom Wrote: [ -> ]Is that old milkshake still around? Geez...put her out to pasture already please!
"Milkshake". "Out to pasture".
Liberal code words.
Racist.
Another example of the failed leadership in Washington that has lead us to this mess.
(02-28-2013 05:19 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote: [ -> ] (02-28-2013 04:50 PM)VA49er Wrote: [ -> ]Maxine Waters is the same person that pushed bailout funds to OneUnited, the same bank for which her husband had a substantial investment. That woman is an ethics violation just waiting to happen. No credence given to anything she has to say.
Tut, tut. A committee of her peers absolved her of any culpability in the matter. How dare you suggest that this honorable public servant would throw her grandson/chief of staff under the bus, where he received a horrifying slap on the wrist.
My bad, I just figured thugs such as Waters and the great Charles Rangel would be reprimanded by their peers and voted out by their constituents. Silly me.
(02-28-2013 05:19 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote: [ -> ] (02-28-2013 04:50 PM)VA49er Wrote: [ -> ]Maxine Waters is the same person that pushed bailout funds to OneUnited, the same bank for which her husband had a substantial investment. That woman is an ethics violation just waiting to happen. No credence given to anything she has to say.
Tut, tut. A committee of her peers absolved her of any culpability in the matter. How dare you suggest that this honorable public servant would throw her grandson/chief of staff under the bus, where he received a horrifying slap on the wrist.
Do you ever wonder why none of these crooks get expelled? I think it's because almost everybody up there has so much going on under the table, and I'll wink at your indiscretions if you'll wink at mine.
I would not be surprised in the slightest to discover that 60-75% of congress, both houses, both parties, have something at least this egregious going on. And 100% of presidents.
Good work if you can get it.
(03-01-2013 09:12 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: [ -> ] (02-28-2013 05:19 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote: [ -> ] (02-28-2013 04:50 PM)VA49er Wrote: [ -> ]Maxine Waters is the same person that pushed bailout funds to OneUnited, the same bank for which her husband had a substantial investment. That woman is an ethics violation just waiting to happen. No credence given to anything she has to say.
Tut, tut. A committee of her peers absolved her of any culpability in the matter. How dare you suggest that this honorable public servant would throw her grandson/chief of staff under the bus, where he received a horrifying slap on the wrist.
Do you ever wonder why none of these crooks get expelled? I think it's because almost everybody up there has so much going on under the table, and I'll wink at your indiscretions if you'll wink at mine.
I think they're pawns for power-brokers.
