ADVERTISEMENT

This is the Democratic Party.

Certainly poor and misleading wording. I agree. Maybe twitter should mark it for inaccuracy or pull it down. I would be okay with that…. Except Elon whined against it for so long, he can’t.
I don’t really care if it’s tweet from a conservative or liberal, Pub or Dem, Twitter (Elon) has no business censoring this type of speech. Especially at the direction of our government. I’m fine with placing a footnote on it for clarification.
 
I know I should go the 'This is the Republican Party' thread. But this is where the conversation presently resides, so sue me.

I was extremely pleased to see some of the Republican party show some cojones today and throw out Santos. I wish they had the cojones to do the same to Trump in his impeachment trial.
 
I know I should go the 'This is the Republican Party' thread. But this is where the conversation presently resides, so sue me.

I was extremely pleased to see some of the Republican party show some cojones today and throw out Santos. I wish they had the cojones to do the same to Trump in his impeachment trial.
Dems need to follow the Pub’s lead and get rid of Senator Menendez.
 
  • Like
Reactions: noble cane
This isn’t some random Congressman. They won’t voluntarily reduce the majority to 50-49, even for a week. You’ve got wayyy too many octogenarians serving. What if he goes, then two Dems have heart attacks? Or a couple of them get shot at baseball practice?

And there’s some weird rule in NJ that if he resigns then Gov Murphy picks the replacement until a special election can be held. But if it’s within 120 days or so of the general election for that seat, the appointed Senator serves until the next general election. That would make the appointment much more valuable to the Murphy people. Or some such nonsense. I tuned it out when it was explained to me.

This stuff is 4D chess and the news makes it look and sound simple.

So he will hang on.
 
This isn’t some random Congressman. They won’t voluntarily reduce the majority to 50-49, even for a week. You’ve got wayyy too many octogenarians serving. What if he goes, then two Dems have heart attacks? Or a couple of them get shot at baseball practice?

And there’s some weird rule in NJ that if he resigns then Gov Murphy picks the replacement until a special election can be held. But if it’s within 120 days or so of the general election for that seat, the appointed Senator serves until the next general election. That would make the appointment much more valuable to the Murphy people. Or some such nonsense. I tuned it out when it was explained to me.

This stuff is 4D chess and the news makes it look and sound simple.

So he will hang on.
I don't believe they've had an investigative subcommittee on Menendez like they had on Santos either. It's a little more important for either party in the Senate than it is in the House, for reasons that you seemed to be making a side reference to. The lesser #'s in the Senate vs the House and the more important votes in the Senate vs the House make it more important to either party to protect a Senator.(no matter what has or hasn't done) The proof or lack thereof doesn't sway the party that could lose a representative.
 
Correct. A loss of the majority would mean executive and judicial appointments, defense spending and certain covert operations appropriations would grind to a halt for instance. And that’s just the little stuff for openers.

Bills would start coming out of committees in both houses, some with bi-partisan support, that both houses would pass headed into an election year that Biden absolutely wouldn’t want on his desk. As of now, Senate staff don’t even work on certain issues the House folks are cranking on, because everyone knows the bills won’t see a vote.
 
the gov gave $350,000,000.00 to planned parenthood.

Then pp donated much of it back to democrat campaign. Nice.

How much did the the gov give to anti abortion organizations.
 
the gov gave $350,000,000.00 to planned parenthood.

Then pp donated much of it back to democrat campaign. Nice.

How much did the the gov give to anti abortion organizations.
A large % of that was reimbursement for services provided to Medicare & Medicaid patients. They didn't give them 350M anymore than they 'gave' money to Health insurance providers/Drs. The amount of grants was much less than 350M. The government subsidies were probably around 100-150M. And Planned Parentood receives a whole bunch more money from other Health Care providers(payment for services by private insurance companies) and private donations.

Anti abortion clinics received around 90M last year in government subsidies. The world is not so black & white as you want to make it.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: TU_BLA
A large % of that was reimbursement for services provided to Medicare & Medicaid patients. They didn't give them 350M anymore than they 'gave' money to Health insurance providers/Drs. The amount of grants was much less than 350M. The government subsidies were probably around 100-150M. And Planned Parentood receives a whole bunch more money from other Health Care providers(payment for services by private insurance companies) and private donations.

Anti abortion clinics received around 90M last year in government subsidies. The world is not so black & white as you want to make it.
no dirct payment to campaigns

I support pp, just not gov funded pp
 
no dirct payment to campaigns

I support pp, just not gov funded pp
But you support government funded anti abortion clinics?

They all support lobbyists in congress and Republican & Democratic campaigns. You are deluding yourself if you don't think so. Direct or indirect doesn't matter. Supporting lobbyists and politicians is more money on the table for both sides of the the issue. If the right party wins, or the lobbyists help push a bill through, that's bread on their books.

You want to pay for your wife's, daughters, or granddaughters extremely high priced services at one or the other? Because if they didn't get government funding you would be paying for research through your bills. Everything is not as simple as you think it is. You can't fund one through subsidies and not the other.

You also need to get your figures right when quoting government support. When two thirds of the 'support' you quote is payment through Medicare and Medicaid for services rendered, not subsidies for projects. If they have private donations that equal or exceed the government subsidies(which they do) then they have every right to donate to politicians and take a tax break for those donations.
 
But you support government funded anti abortion clinics?

They all support lobbyists in congress and Republican & Democratic campaigns. You are deluding yourself if you don't think so. Direct or indirect doesn't matter. Supporting lobbyists and politicians is more money on the table for both sides of the the issue. If the right party wins, or the lobbyists help push a bill through, that's bread on their books.

You want to pay for your wife's, daughters, or granddaughters extremely high priced services at one or the other? Because if they didn't get government funding you would be paying for research through your bills. Everything is not as simple as you think it is. You can't fund one through subsidies and not the other.

You also need to get your figures right when quoting government support. When two thirds of the 'support' you quote is payment through Medicare and Medicaid for services rendered, not subsidies for projects. If they have private donations that equal or exceed the government subsidies(which they do) then they have every right to donate to politicians and take a tax break for those donations.
i do not support gov funding of either side.

Not a function of the gov.
 
I know its a tempest in a tea cup.. but i wonder if Mayor Bynum or Holt sent an invite out to everyone for a holiday party and later edited the invitation to include white people only if everyone would just call it an honest mistake and praise the gathering of like minded persons?

 
So... a cabinet member goes to the ICU and no one tells the boss?
 
So... the United States authorizes combat operations against a known proxy of a nuclear power and nobody is in contact with the Secretary of Defense? The United States is delivering military support to two allies involved in combat operations overseas and the President doesn’t have a weekly staff meeting or personal update from the SecDef?
FIFY
 
  • Like
Reactions: noble cane
Apparently we are going to get involved again in Bosnia..

Its like the whole world sees us as weak..

US fighter jets to fly over Bosnia in warning to 'secessionist' Serbs https://www.reuters.com/world/europ...bosnia-warning-secessionist-serbs-2024-01-08/
I can't imagine why. The number 2 person in our military thinks he can dupe the President and is apparently going to be allowed to get away with it. Not to mention how much back bone that Putin, the Iranians and the French think we have.
 
I appreciate all the news clippings you guys make…. I have refrained from doing so on the Republican side because there are too damn many and I have a job.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: noble cane
So.. we are launching an offensive against the Houthis... arent these the same Houthis that Biden squeezed the Saudis over when he came into office?
 
No chance this guy has 5 more years in him. Still hoping Trumps legal problems force him to drop out and the Dems realize Biden lacks the cognitive ability to be an effective President and talk him into dropping out.

 
No chance this guy has 5 more years in him. Still hoping Trumps legal problems force him to drop out and the Dems realize Biden lacks the cognitive ability to be an effective President and talk him into dropping out.

Neither of them have five years in them. Which one has the more competent administration? How many major scandals among department heads do you recall hearing about in Bidens? How many do you recall in Trump‘s?

I can recall about 20 senior officials off the top of my head entering and exiting the Trump admin because no one wanted to work with him. And before you say something about that being a sign of strength, let’s remember that they had to be hired. He’s not good at picking people to help him run the country, or if he is, he’s terrible at retaining them.
 
Neither of them have five years in them. Which one has the more competent administration? How many major scandals among department heads do you recall hearing about in Bidens? How many do you recall in Trump‘s?

I can recall about 20 senior officials off the top of my head entering and exiting the Trump admin because no one wanted to work with him. And before you say something about that being a sign of strength, let’s remember that they had to be hired. He’s not good at picking people to help him run the country, or if he is, he’s terrible at retaining them.
not a balanced system
 
Neither of them have five years in them. Which one has the more competent administration? How many major scandals among department heads do you recall hearing about in Bidens? How many do you recall in Trump‘s?

I can recall about 20 senior officials off the top of my head entering and exiting the Trump admin because no one wanted to work with him. And before you say something about that being a sign of strength, let’s remember that they had to be hired. He’s not good at picking people to help him run the country, or if he is, he’s terrible at retaining them.
He actually started out being fairly decent at selecting members of his administration. He took counsel better when he first came to office. Then when he was advised by them that what he was doing was against rules and regulations of policy or flat out illegal, he fired them. Or King Donald made them so irritated that he was taking none of the advice for which they took the job to give, that they turned in their papers of resignation.
 
Neither of them have five years in them. Which one has the more competent administration? How many major scandals among department heads do you recall hearing about in Bidens? How many do you recall in Trump‘s?

I can recall about 20 senior officials off the top of my head entering and exiting the Trump admin because no one wanted to work with him. And before you say something about that being a sign of strength, let’s remember that they had to be hired. He’s not good at picking people to help him run the country, or if he is, he’s terrible at retaining them.
I don’t see that as really the issue. The issue becomes the VP who will almost certainly take over. Harris is dumb as rocks but coherent. I doubt she will sit back in LaLa land like Biden and allow those around him to govern. No clue who Trump will pick as VP but I assume it won’t be a good choice. There are no good options here.

What are Biden’s people doing to address the debt and the rising debt service costs? Who is in charge of what is or will shortly become the most pressing problem plaguing this country?
 
Last edited:
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT