"Claire McCaskill is one of the most vulnerable Democrats in the country because she has been marching to the left in lockstep with Barack Obama," said Lloyd Smith, Executive Director of the Missouri Republican Party. "Now, at a time of nearly 10 percent unemployment and economic uncertainty, Claire McCaskill wants to slam Missouri families and job creators with a massive job-killing tax increase. And when Barack Obama needed McCaskill's vote for ObamaCare and the failed stimulus, she stood shoulder to shoulder with him and the extreme left in support of nearly $3 trillion of new spending and government takeovers."
Monday, November 29, 2010
Missouri GOP head rips McCaskill
The Republican Party held on to Kit Bond's Senate seat and now it wants to regain the one currently held by Democrat Claire McCaskill. The following statement was issued today by Missouri GOP executive director Lloyd Smith:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
Yawn.
"Now, at a time of nearly 10 percent unemployment and economic uncertainty, Claire McCaskill wants to slam Missouri families and job creators with a massive job-killing tax increase."
Which tax increases, specifically? Letting the tax cuts for those with incomes over 250K lapse? If so, how does that lead to a loss of jobs?
"And when Barack Obama needed McCaskill's vote for ObamaCare"
...the same health care system Republicans from Nixon to Dole supported, making Obama center right on health care historically.
"...and the failed stimulus"
Failed how? By assuring that unemployment didn't go to 15%?
"...nearly $3 trillion of new spending and government takeovers."
Which takeovers? The GM one, which saved who knows how many jobs, and which netted the government a few billion?
Lloyd, you can rip Claire all day but you can't beat her with Simple Sarah or Slim Jim. So who's gonna do it? You?
blah blah blah, that's all I hear from the Republicans, that and their consistent cry babying.
It's all about party, and not about ideology. This has estranged the conservative (small government, pro-Constitution) voter from the state GOP. Roy Blunt has a very mixed record (yes on TARP and C4C),but the conservatives were out in the cold, again.
Who will they see fit to anoint in the race against McCaskill? I pray that it will be someone who understands Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, but this seems unrealistic.
When the national (it's not really federal in the Jeffersonian sense, now is it?) government collapses, they'll be irrelevant anyway.
Stimulus provided road paving, sewer and water line improvements, and jobs, in Cassville, Mo.
Stimulus provided lots of continuing work on I-44. I suspect those folks would have been unemployed otherwise.
Stimulus also provided lots of tax relief, the be all end all for today's (not yesterday's, not even Reagan's) republican party.
I thought federal and state fuel taxes built and maintained roads and bridges. Silly me.
Silly Me Anon 3:50:
You have Google? Do a search.
http://www.modot.mo.gov/firstinnation/documents/EconomicRecoveryMapOverlay.pdf
There you go. Federal tax dollars at work, building roads and keeping Missourians employed.
And that's only the ROAD portion of ARRA at work in Missouri. Want a breakdown of everything else?
6:39
Have you noticed the number of workers on the Springfield Hwy. 65 project? Damn few. A small group of operators and laborers move from section to section. The project is taking forever.
Oh sure, a couple of concrete companies sell product and run their trucks and plants. Equipment companies get to lease some equipment. Are these companies buying new stuff as a result of this and other projects? Not according reports within the industry.
These projects are designed for hugh profits to the contractor. But, this hasn't changed since the days of Masters-Jackson. Competitive bidding is quite simply good communications between a very limited number of contractors when projects are announced.
I could go on but what's the use? So, why don't you take Google and stimulate yourself.
7:48
You point being what, with respect to the stimulus?
7:10
Are you presenting that the economy has been fixed?
How do you measure the benefits of stimulus dollars?
1. Unemployment is up.
2. Sales tax revenues are down.
3. The balanced budget in Missouri is spending fewer dollars.
4. Public assistance request are outstripping available dollars.
5. Foreclosures are up.
6. The housing market (20%) of our local economy has collapsed.
7. The transportation sector is shrinking in tanker and flatbed volumes. Vans are weak.
8. Energy prices are soaring, not bassed on supply and demand but on the weak dollar.
9. Orders for hard goods for inventories are trending down to potential shortages.
10. Food prices are up based on costs to produce.
Unfortunately, the earlier post simply outlines that long-term and permanent economic growth in jobs that generate tax revenues and spending in our local economy is not developing.
The cute little map with the red lines of highway projects is simply temporary (and wasteful?) spending. MoDOT employees are employed but major layoffs are on the horizon at CONCO Quarries in Springfield.
Now that you have established that you are the leading authority on stimulus spending, please enlighten me.
to 7:10
i see that you are one of those that planned on riding the tide of an inflated economy, paying little taxes, and then complaint when it didn't go as you wanted. please tell me what the amount of national debt was when bush took office and tell me what it was when obama took office. next, what would have happened to the world as we know if obama hadn't done what he did.
sorry, but our problems can't be solved in the short amount of time that you spoiled little mind wants it!
1:42,
WHAT?
8:42
I may no little about the stimulus, but you clearly know less. Let's do the walk though:
>>Are you presenting that the economy has been fixed?
I never said the economy has been fixed. I said that unemployment would be far, far worse without the stimulus. Are you denying that?
>>How do you measure the benefits of stimulus dollars?
Okay, let's walk though your numbers.
>>1. Unemployment is up.
Up from 8.5%, down from 10%. Again, without stimulus, estimates were that it would have been at 15%.
Economies do not turn on a dime (maybe they do in your bizarro world, but they don't in the real world). The economy was in full blown disaster mode when Obama took over two years ago. Without the stimulus, it would be far worse.
>>2. Sales tax revenues are down.
This has nothing to do with the stimulus. Housing is down, unemployment is up. Consumer spending is down, as are tax revenues. Big shocker.
>>3. The balanced budget in Missouri is spending fewer dollars.
Nothing to do with stimulus. In fact, without stimulus, Missouri state employees would have seen massive layoffs in the last two years.
>>4. Public assistance request are outstripping available dollars.
Nothing to do with stimulus.
>>5. Foreclosures are up.
I'm getting tired of saying "nothing to do with stimulus" but I'll say it again. Or better yet, create an acronym -- NDWS.
>>6. The housing market (20%) of our local economy has collapsed.
NTWS.
>>7. The transportation sector is
shrinking in tanker and flatbed volumes. Vans are weak.
Good lord. NTWS.
>>8. Energy prices are soaring, not bassed on supply and demand but on the weak dollar.
Weak dollar policies were pursued by Bush too and by Obama. Lifts production b/c exports are cheaper. Oh, and NTWS.
>>10. Food prices are up based on costs to produce.
NTWS and inflation is not up, in fact, deflation on the whole seems to be the problem.
>>The cute little map with the red lines of highway projects is simply temporary (and wasteful?) spending. MoDOT employees are employed but major layoffs are on the horizon at CONCO Quarries in Springfield.
Without stimulus, those cute little red lines wouldn't exist. Considering that almost everyone agrees that the US's infrastructure is in sad shape, it looks like those cute red lines were a good idea. In addition, (b) no red lines = more unemployment.
Let me guess: no stimulus, 15% unemployment, and you'd be complaining that the government isn't doing anything about creating jobs.
>>Now that you have established that you are the leading authority on stimulus spending, please enlighten me.
I may know little, but you know less.
Post a Comment