When I saw that Joe Wilson had put out a press release talking about incentives to create jobs, I thought Great! Some substance! A release in which I won’t have to read any fulmination about “liberals” and how they’re the root of all evil! After all, a jobs plan has to be pragmatic thing, meant to address the broad complex of practical, real-world problems leading to our current economic malaise.
Wilson Urges Job Creation Incentives as Unemployment Rises
(Washington, DC) – Congressman Joe Wilson (SC-02) today released the following statement after the Department of Labor announced the unemployment rate rose to 9.6 percent and the U.S. economy lost jobs for the third straight month:
“I’m not sure where Administration officials are spending their summer, but here in South Carolina, this is certainly not the ‘Recovery Summer’ we were promised.
“For 16 straight months, unemployment has been above nine percent. Why the Administration and liberal leadership in Congress isn’t talking about job creation plans each and every day is beyond belief. People are hurting and the time to act is now, not later or in another 16 months,” said Congressman Joe Wilson.
Congressman Joe Wilson has outlined a job creation plan that offers incentives to small business owners to hire more employees and gives American families more money to invest. See his plan here and pass it along to Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
The boldfacing is Joe’s, not mine.
He just can’t help himself. It’s like Tourette’s or something. He’s incapable of completing a thought without reference to “liberals” or “Pelosi.” Just watch, and see if I’m not right.
They said liberal and Pelosi once… big f’n deal…
The thing you should be mad about is that he doesn’t actually urge anything…
If you don’t think his rant about the opposition in that release was irrelevant and egregious, you’re not bothering to deconstruct it. For instance, you’re not noticing that in a release that is allegedly about job creation incentives, he never gets around to describing said incentives, but manages to spend two paragraphs (of a four-graf release) ranting about the “liberals.”
Fortunately, he DOES provide a link. Follow it if you’d like. But I can save you the trouble: If you’ve seen Nikki Haley’s economic development agenda, you’ve seen this — only on different levels of government.
Only thing missing is privatization. Joe must have been off his feed, or failed to consult the playbook.
Personally, I’m just waiting to get a release in which a Republican cites tax cuts and deregulation as the cure for the common cold. They certainly prescribe them for everything else…
S’okay–he’s also blaming his ethics problems on Pelosi, too, while not clarifying what’s under investigation beyond the glassware….that’s transparency, I guess. (get it–glassware?)
Some of “You Lie”‘s proposals made a little bit of sense. I had no idea that unemployment benefits were taxable. Then again, they are probably pretty small so any taxes are probably minimal.
But good grief, if all those tax cuts are implemented the national debt would skyrocket. The GOP is good at preaching fiscal responsibility but when it comes time for actual policy proscriptions their true colors are shown. They just don’t give a damn about the deficit.
I’d appreciate it if the Senate could pass a bill, now stalled, that would make it easier for small businesses to borrow money. It’s designed to help small businesses.
@ bud– Unemployment benefits are taxable, as they should be. Your total yearly financial picture is taken into account. If you normally make six figures, were out of work for a month, say, and then got another high-paying job, why shouldn’t you pay taxes on income? If you are truly destitute, you wouldn’t owe much tax, if any!
If he repeatedly runs his political spot long enough that “Joe means Jobs,” then it must be true. While many in his district realize that he is a political hack, most just vote for him because he is a Repub.
Can’t wait to see him and his s e grin at the Chapin festival 😉 – maybe he’ll bring his Joe Means Jobs Bus and sling some burgers and cut the fat for the crowd.
Like some humor – check out his site: http://www.joemeansjobs.com/
That is all.
1OE HAS A JOB with benefits! $12!(That’s well below minimun wage)
“Number of foreign trips since May 2002: 30 (THAT’S A TRIP EVERY 4 MONTHS!)
Itemized costs: $99,767* (which doesn’t include large sums of non-itemized, taxpayer-covered funds to pay for U.S. Air Force planes used to transport him and other lawmakers.)
Per diem expense money: $37,533*
Rank in total costs among 435 representatives: 29 (he’s in the top 7% – I knew he was outstanding at something)
Rank in costs among 734 representatives since 1994: 39 (top 5%)
* Costs and per diem expenses don’t include most recent trip, to Afghanistan
Sources: Congressional Record; Congressional Quarterly MoneyLine”
I THINK WE KNOW WHERE TO CUT THE FAT!
Well, more information is out, and there is indeed much more than 12 goblets involved, there is a long history of very extensive travel. Wilson’s response is that this is an example of Nancy Pelosi and her liberal allies attacking Joe for visiting our troops in a war zone. However, the Office of Congressional Ethics is not even a Congressional committee, it is a bipartisan office established to avoid having active members of Congress involved in carrying out the investigations. Wilson knows that, and he lies. His statement is not just partisan exaggeration, it is a straightforward lie.
From another perspective, my husband was in the Army and served in Vietnam. His thoughts on Congress members showing up in a war zone to build up their pro-military resumes is not positive. He regards it as a blatant misuse of federal funds, an exercise that wastes the time of troops who have better things to do (especially when their personal time is infringed on to put on a show for these self-important twits), and a frequent source of additional danger to troops in the field. If Mr. Wilson isn’t disposed to put on a uniform and fight, he should stay away from the war zone.
@ Lynn T–Aw c’mon–you don’t think the troops are all excited when a super-tan 50-something Congressman shows up? I mean, he’s cuter than Bob Hope was!
and does anyone see the similarities between Joe’s travels and Sanford’s travels? Very expensive to the taxpayers for little benefit, while advocating cuts to everyone else.
A majority of campaign signs means nothing, but Rob Miller is way ahead in that category down in Beaufort. Of course, that’s his hometown and he IS a Marine. On another note, I was looking through a Beaufort at the B&B where we stayed over the weekend. Inside was a picture of one of the fine old mansions on the Point, captioned, “Fripp-Sanford House, home of Dr. and Mrs. Marshall C. Sanford, Pompano Beach, Florida.” (1963)
Those overseas trips to visit the troops are an obsene waste of taxpayer money. They’re designed to do one thing and one thing only: bolster the pro-military credentials of the person taking the trip.
Gotta disagree with you there, Bud. I’m a big believer in congressional travel. It broadens their minds (something that is desperately needed), and brings them face-to-face with things they’re making decisions about.
A member of Congress who spends all his time in Washington or back in the district with his finger in the wind is no use to anyone. He’s a rat in a wheel in a cage, perpetually running for the next election, and not learning a thing.
–“It broadens their minds (something that is desperately needed)’
Yeah, but you can lead some horses to water…..
It’s not clear in either Wilson or DeMint’s cases that any actual mental broadening has occurred.
Then we should require the junketeers to produce a report detailing what they learned. We should also see the complete itinerary and expenses posted within days of their return. I can do my expenses and submit a status report every week – why can’t they? We are their bosses, you know.
Brad, I agree that informative travel would be great, but the possibility of Wilson’s kind of travel broadening anyone’s perspective is very slim. The military doesn’t turn these folks loose to acquire their own perspective on things, in fact they’d be nuts to let these people out of their sight where they would be a danger to themselves and others. Congressional visitors are so closely supervised that the chance of any unedited information reaching them is about zero, so they might as well pick up their edited information in Washington.
Ooooh! I like it, Doug!
“How I Spent Your $100,000: What I Learned During My International Photo Opportunities” by Addison Graves Wilson.
Even if you can logically argue that some congressional travel makes for a quality learning experience it is impossible to deny that a major part of congressional travel is merely part of a campaign strategy. Let’s keep these trips to a bare minimum and like Doug says, make them report what they’ve learned in a formal way.
As for the $12 goblets. Sounds like there is a definite violation of the travel expenditure rules. That no longer seems in dispute. The only question is just how big is the violation. Just because the infraction is small doesn’t make it ok. This will be interesting to watch.