<p>Interesting. From wikipedia, a (sometimes questionable) source never noted for its conservative spin:</p><p> </p><p>In the Senate, the bill was stalled by Majority leader Harry Reid on September 27, 2011 who said "I don’t think there’s anything more important for a jobs measure than China trade, and that’s what we’re going to work on next week," with emphasis on taking up more tenuous legislation which is less likely to draw political attention.[16] On October 4, 2011, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell attempted to offer the Act as an amendment to the China trade bill, saying that while he disagreed with the bill's approach to job creation, it deserved to be voted on.[17] </p>
<p> </p><p><br>Many Democrats have balked at the bill, siding with the Republicans, especially those facing difficult re-elections in congressional districts where they are hesitant to support unpopular legislation.[49] A majority of the Democrats support individual components of the bill, but are unwilling to commit to the bill in its entirety, despite the White House's disapproval of the weak showing of support. Some Democrats from core Democratic districts oppose the American Jobs Act because it gives more tax breaks, thus contributing more to the federal deficit, which has given Obama more responsibility to sell the plan first to the American public, as he has done on a very prominent, nationwide speaking tour.[50][51][52]</p>
<p>Both moderate and progressive Democrats have expressed concerns about the bill. Joe Manchin, a more moderate-leaning Democrat, has openly voiced his opposition with the administration by arguing against the inclusion of too much spending, given by his remarks on September 29, "The ugly part of that act is $450 billion of spending, after we've spent, spent, spent." On the other side, progressive Democrat Peter DeFazio, a more progressive-leaning Democrat from Oregon, argued against the inclusion of nearly $250 billion of tax breaks, saying "Half of it is tax cuts, and quite frankly tax cuts don't work."[53][54]</p>
<p> </p><p>It looks as though Krugman and the NYT don't want to have to be bothered by those pesky facts either.<br><br></p><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 6:53 AM, Tom Hansen <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:thansen@moscow.com" target="_blank">thansen@moscow.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid" class="gmail_quote">But, remember, Romney doesn't want his campaign "restricted by fact checkers".<br>
<br>
Seeya round town, Moscow.<br>
<br>
Tom Hansen<br>
Moscow, Idaho<br>
<br>
"We're a town of about 23,000 with 10,000 college students. The college students are not very active in local elections (thank goodness!)."<br>
<br>
- Dale Courtney (March 28, 2007)<br>
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
On Sep 10, 2012, at 6:27 AM, Joe Campbell <<a href="mailto:philosopher.joe@gmail.com">philosopher.joe@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
>> Now, all of this puts the White House in a difficult bind. Making a big deal of Republican obstructionism could all too easily come across as whining. Yet this obstructionism is real, and arguably is the biggest single reason for our ongoing economic weakness<br>
><br>
> Good point!<br>
><br>
> =======================================================<br>
> List services made available by First Step Internet,<br>
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.<br>
> <a href="http://www.fsr.net" target="_blank">http://www.fsr.net</a><br>
> mailto:<a href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">Vision2020@moscow.com</a><br>
> =======================================================<br>
<br>
=======================================================<br>
List services made available by First Step Internet,<br>
serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.<br>
<a href="http://www.fsr.net" target="_blank">http://www.fsr.net</a><br>
mailto:<a href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">Vision2020@moscow.com</a><br>
=======================================================<br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>