Sen. McCaskill is Not For Extending Unemployment Benefits Because Republicans Are Against It

http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/sen-mccaskill-i-cant-be-more-unemploy

know what tender feelings our elected officials have, but there's no friendly way to point out that someone is a coward -- and yes, that's what Sen. Claire McCaskill is. Rather than make the case for the many, many unemployed people of her district, rather than rub the Republicans' noses in the fact that they have all the money in the world for tax cuts but none for the single most useful stimulus available, Claire simply throws up her hands and says, "But the Republicans won't let us!"

What kind of Democrat isn't even going to try to help her constituents unless the Republicans first give her permission? Is this a game of Mother May I? And is this what passes for leadership in the political class?

I have one thing to say to Sen. McCaskill: Shame on you.

During a Tuesday visit to a factory in St. Charles, Mo., Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill said she opposed extending federal unemployment benefits."I'm not for extending the unemployment benefits any further," McCaskill said in response to a question from local TV station KMOV before saying she would support a continued payroll tax cut.It's not clear from McCaskill's statement whether she is opposed to giving the unemployed additional weeks of benefits or if she opposes renewing the existing extra weeks of aid.

Members of Congress have frequently been confused on unemployment l

All it would take is just one republican to vote independently of his/her party and vote the way his/her constituents want. Knowing that act could provoke a primary fight, lose donations, invite harsh and unrelenting criticism. But voting in a way that shows s/he trusts that his/her vote is principled and necessary, and that either the constituents will remember or they won't.

What the hell is with all of these Democrats (including and most notably Obama) taking the "Well, something is not going to pass so no sense talking about it or pushing for it."

Seriously? Seriously, people?

took office,and a couple of months ago she said she didn't care if she got re-elected,her and a few more who came in 2006 started helping the republiCONS soon after he took office.

This is one of the main reasons he couldn't get anything done.

:argh:

I think we have way too many DINOS.

Tester, and many more in the Democratic party the media always asks why couldn't Obama get his agenda done and they have been repeating it over and over since he was elected knowing full well why he couldn't.

Every time,they tried to pass a bill couldn't get enough Dems because a lot of them are really republicons.Heath Schuler was so happy after the 2010 election that he showed up bright and earlier the next day on Scarb to tell the world how happy he was and that now they could get things done.

unless the Republicans first give permission?


The President.

It was the beginning of the big O wave. It was big shock too, because she and Hillary are both female Dems from the midwest/south, birds of a feather so to speak.

She is also one of the wealthiest congress critter thanks to her families nursing homes and medicare.

the republiCONS right when the Democrats need her vote the most and on the most important issues.

IMHO that is reasonable. I don't believe Unemployment Benefits should continue indefinitely either