It's never easy to pass bills that help the common folk. I fully expect capitulation on much of any bill passed for jobs to placate the usual suspects, such that real help is severely diluted--probably in favor tax cuts. Again.

Why do they want America to fail? Just to make Obama and Demorats to look bad. Comforting to know that about 40% of Congress is made up of them.

while we're fantasizing that the clown car will actually do something, german work-share programs are excellent triage...

When in danger, or in doubt
Run in circles, scream and shout.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Demand Creates Jobs.

The economy will be in the pits until we pay off our debts and return to the American Way: Buy Now, Pay Later. . .

Sweet Jesus, it's exhausting being Claire McCaskill's constituent.

Blue Girl, you need a Senator that is determined to create more jobs in real estate like our Senator Isakson in Georgia.

"The economy will be in the pits until we pay off our debts and return to the American Way: Buy Now, Pay Later. . ."

Here's an idea Mr/Ms. "DAY": don't comment until you wake up and drink a caffeniated beverage.

Another idea for Steve: let's have a moratorium on gauging Rethug and "Blue Dog" reaction to any MAJORITY LEADERSHIP proposal made in the Congress until we first fully understand the proposal and have a chance to discuss its true merits. Time enough for the Bull Shit after that.

Have these people been rubber-stamping legislation written by corporate lobbyists for so long that they have forgotten how to craft legislation on their own that would benefit their constituents, even for a short period of time?

A jobs bill would help people earn pay for their own shelter and food, and put cash into the economy, thereby allowing retailers and service providers more time to recover.

God knows, the friends of congress, those big boys who got hundreds of billions in bailout money, are not going to help put money into the economy. Seems to me that bailing them out was supposed to keep credit available, i.e. make cash available to small businesses in particular.

So now without available credit, businesses are forced to operate on cash flow from operations. If people are not working and cannot buy their goods or services, businesses have just lost two of their main sources of cash. What's left? Sell their assets? Sell the business? More shut doors. More unemployment.

Even a jobs bill with a short time line would be better than allowing this.

Point taken, ComradeAnon. What is so infuriating about Claire is that there is not an issue on which there is a happy medium. She is either garnering my undying support when she tackles contractor and military issues, or irritating me endlessly when getting all auditor-y and penny pinching when the situation calls for busting out that credit card we all say we keep for emergencies.

I'm laughing/crying with you. Whats more frustrating, having 2 republican senators or a blue dog dem? Probably your situation.

You know what is REALLY frustrating about Claire? I did the oppo research of SASC minutes and busted Talent for his record of missing meetings, and after she dropped that on him in a debate and caught him flat-footed, she pulled ahead and kept the lead through the election.

Talk about hoisted on ones own petard.

How do the Dems sell a Jobs bill when the stimulus bill was suppose to create the jobs?

The stimulus bill was to stop the bleeding of corporate America, not to heal the gushing arterial wounds of the working man's (and woman's!) economy.

A jobs bill is meaningless without a thorough reckoning with current war spending.

How can we possibly justify the trillions spent to date "over there."?

Yes, I do credit the perpetuawar with much of our economical demise.

When are we going to spend dollars HERE, in the good ol' USA?
(defense jobs aren't a good return on tax-dollars.., bombs aren't
a sustainable way to secure jobs, just pork)

Cut the defense budget by 50%, invest that 50% in job creation and infrastructure and sail off into a more prosperous future for us all.

I know I'm pipe dreaming.

"The stimulus bill was to stop the bleeding of corporate America, not to heal the gushing arterial wounds of the working man's (and woman's!) economy."

No....the TARP bailout passed in the waning days of W's admin was to stop the bleeding of corporate America. The stimulus passed when Obama took over was touted as intending to keep unemployement at 8% or less and "saving or creating" 3 million jobs. So far all we have seen is government lies about jobs saved or created.

Stimulus part one has been an abject failure so far. Expect the new majority to try for an equally flawed stimulus part two as they try to stem the tide of independents fleeing the fold.

What is so infuriating about Claire is that there is not an issue on which there is a happy medium.

Extremism in the service of showboating (and avoiding rational analysis) is a vice.

I sometimes get the impression Eric Cantor is easily confused.

That would be an extremely generous assessment. The man is dumber than a developmentally-challenged box of hammers.

Maine Sens. Olympia Snowe (R) and Susan Collins (R) both signaled reluctance, while Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said the idea of a jobs bill is an "insult." Minority Whip Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) said of a renewed congressional effort to create jobs, "I don't think that would be a good idea."

And I love how these posturing fools -- millionaires all with gold-plated health insurance courtesy of the taxpayers -- cavalierly dismiss the 10% unemployment rate (with the attendent number of adults and children going hungry). "Let them eat cake," I suppose. These are hideous people.

More fake jobs in nonexistent congressional districts.

Since John McCain doesn't say who he thinks a jobs bill is an insult to, I'll agree with him that it's an insult to economic know-nothings everywhere.

So far all we have seen is government lies about jobs saved or created.

Sorry, but this assertion is totally false.

Stimulus part one has been an abject failure so far.

Nope, it just didn't go far enough, largely because of the objections from people who will oppose this new effort.

I thought the $1 trillion stimulus bill was going to turn the economy around. Now I guess we need a jobs bill. I guess I can see how Cantor was confused.

Given that we are talking about public jobs rather than private sector, I guess you can call me......Comrade

I don't suppose anyone here would look to the private sector to create jobs? Of course since businesses are unsure how much they will be on the hook for health care, cap and tax, and the 2011 tax increases is it any wonder why they aren't hiring?
Just give us all government jobs, call us comrade and we'll all meddle on through a grey life.

I thought the Stimulus Bill was the the "jobs bill." I mean when our president was pushing the bill he mentioned "jobs, jobs, jobs" and it was supposed to cap unemployment at 8%. So I'm not sure I understand where the author's point when he says, "now that a jobs bill is back on the table." If he is referring to the fact that the first Stimulus bill was NEVER about creating jobs, then ok, I'm with him. My guess, that's not his intention. A quick reality check, a "jobs bill" has always "been on the table." That is what we needed in February, that is what Republicans wanted. The author seems to be indulging in a little politicized revionist history. For if the first Stimulus bill did provide "jobs, jobs, jobs," then we wouldn't really need a "jobs bill" at this point, would we?

That is what we needed in February, that is what Republicans wanted.

False. Republicans at the time were divided between 1) doing nothing and letting the economy "sort itself out" and 2) giving tax breaks. The stimulus bill was a compromise to the Republicans in that roughly 50% of it was tax breaks, over $300 billion dollars.

I thought the Stimulus Bill was the the "jobs bill."

You thought wrong. While it was hoped that the stimulus bill would create up to three million jobs, much of the monies went for unemployment benefits, health care benefits, housing programs, energy research monies, education investment, et al -- and tax breaks.

For if the first Stimulus bill did provide "jobs, jobs, jobs," then we wouldn't really need a "jobs bill" at this point, would we?

A significant portion of the stimulus money won't even be disbursed until 2010 when it is the states who will take the monies and put it toward projects. So far the reporting from the states is that around 650,000 jobs have been saved or created from the monies in the stimulus bill, with less than half of the stimulus funds having been drawn down so far.

Also: 3.5% growth in GDP = stimulus.