Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Politics

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by drayer54 View Post
    She was called cancer by McConnell only a day or so ago amongst other criticisms.


    The threshold seems low for the US House. Especially in non-competitive districts.


    It's a bit of a skewed and holier than thou take with a Maddow view of the party- but not miles off. I've called this confrontational politics. Designed to stir anger, dig the divide, raise money, and accomplish nothing. MTG's top staffer raised tons of money doing this in the Georgia statehouse and many think of him as a scammer and intentional agitator. When I heard she hired him, I knew where this was going. She will say whatever gets the camera and accomplish nothing. I hope she lasts less than one term, but the problem isn't unique to the GOP- well those dynamics may be, but the problem is that people don't think and just fall in line with the propaganda.

    Conservatives demanding a check has been my biggest face palm of the year, but yeah- unusual times.
    I am not familiar with Maddow except that I have seen her on Sunday and for election shows. So I don't understand what the similarity is. I have seen that your posts are heavy on blaming the media for ills, but I still believe people make up their own minds, filtering out those who are on the margins or contribute nothing to government. I don't watch any of the nightly cable opinion programs.

    Comment on the main points of my post or Whiskey's Walther article only if you wish to.

    As far as the House Education Committee in the last Congress, 437 bills were introduced with much of the work going to Subcommittees, of course, four were passed by the House and three by the Senate.
    https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bil...2697&bill_type[]=3
    Bills passed by the House include bills on Diversity (passed House only), Holocaust Memorial (signed by Pres), and Recognizing Inspiring School Employees (RISE) Award Program establishment (signed) and Coronavirus relief for Child care (signed). The Dems on the Education Committee are pretty diverse and with a number of prior educators. One out twenty-four Reps on the Committee has education experience. All are white with Betsy DeVos goals.
    Last edited by Legacy; 02-03-2021, 03:18 PM.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by dublinirish View Post
      Incorrect. He never referred to her by name.

      Also low and behold as soon as Dems rightfully call for MTG to be removed the GOP hatches this ridiculous and pathetic scheme

      <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Letís be clear: this false equivalency is a pathetically desperate smear rooted in racism, misogyny, and Islamophobia. Marjorie Taylor Greene has incited violence against her fellow members of Congress. She's unfit to serve, even by today's <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/GOP?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#GOP</a> standards.<a href="https://t.co/t0X2B56Wgt">https://t.co/t0X2B56Wgt</a></p>&mdash; Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib (@RepRashida) <a href="https://twitter.com/RepRashida/status/1356998358733357058?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 3, 2021</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
      You seem to know who he was talking about, no?
      Tlaib... lol
      Originally posted by Legacy View Post
      I am not familiar with Maddow except that I have seen her on Sunday and for election shows. So I don't understand what the similarity is. I have seen that your posts are heavy on blaming the media for ills, but I still believe people make up their own minds, filtering out those who are on the margins or contribute nothing to government. I don't watch any of the nightly cable opinion programs.

      Comment on the main points of my post or Whiskey's Walther article only if you wish to.
      My point is that this view of the GOP seems to be selective and heavily skewed from a liberal point of view. It's how someone who doesn't like the GOP would try to characterize it. It's not the GOP that I see and hear. The party isn't MTG, the media wants it to be MTG.

      It's obvious that some of these issues cited in terms of things like being annoyed by SJWs, critical race theory or cancel culture may be common, but the author tries to paint the GOP as isolated to pro-life Christians. The party and the base have evolved and it needs to in order to continue to be relevant. Trump offered a unique brand and many wage earners who traditionally voted D swapped over in the last cycle while suburban women flocked to the left. My favorite trend when I did the PAC work was union workers moving right because they didn't feel like the D's that the union hall was pushing was representing them anymore. Many interesting dynamics going on but I believe this author is trying to intentionally paint an unflattering image of a party he doesn't care for vice an insightful reflection of a new reality.
      Running the damn ball since 2017.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by dublinirish View Post
        Incorrect. He never referred to her by name.
        lol, you read his statement and that's your takeaway?
        Based Mullet Kid owns

        Comment


        • Originally posted by dublinirish View Post
          Incorrect. He never referred to her by name.

          Also low and behold as soon as Dems rightfully call for MTG to be removed the GOP hatches this ridiculous and pathetic scheme
          Just for you and by name!

          https://www.republicanleader.gov/lea...taylor-greene/
          Running the damn ball since 2017.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by drayer54 View Post
            You seem to know who he was talking about, no?
            Tlaib... lol


            My point is that this view of the GOP seems to be selective and heavily skewed from a liberal point of view. It's how someone who doesn't like the GOP would try to characterize it. It's not the GOP that I see and hear. The party isn't MTG, the media wants it to be MTG.

            It's obvious that some of these issues cited in terms of things like being annoyed by SJWs, critical race theory or cancel culture may be common, but the author tries to paint the GOP as isolated to pro-life Christians. The party and the base have evolved and it needs to in order to continue to be relevant. Trump offered a unique brand and many wage earners who traditionally voted D swapped over in the last cycle while suburban women flocked to the left. My favorite trend when I did the PAC work was union workers moving right because they didn't feel like the D's that the union hall was pushing was representing them anymore. Many interesting dynamics going on but I believe this author is trying to intentionally paint an unflattering image of a party he doesn't care for vice an insightful reflection of a new reality.
            Ok. I'm similar to Maddow and so many of the extreme examples that keep getting posted on this board or any of the Rep leaders who strenuously criticize her behavior and say there is no room in the Party for her, right? Yes, I think the party has "evolved" and lost its soul. Trump's "brand" that has evolved to where he is the major player in the Party and supports MTG and her views when she ran for office. Disgusting to the majority of Americans including me.

            She hasn't publicly apologized for any of her statements. This Party used to maintain a basic standard. Steve King would not have had his committee assignments taken away in the way this Party has "evolved". Cancel culture? MSM? Socialism? Unflattering picture? SJWs? There's no place in this Party for Trump's so-called RINOs, but there is room for someone who calls for the execution of all Dems. Lots of sycophants though, who refuse to sanction someone like MTG.

            Disgusting. But that's how they define "relevancy".

            Comment


            • Being a former college prof, I was made a little more hopeful when I heard former Republican governor and fiscal conservative Mark Sanford say that he felt that the party could regain its reputation and future by embracing and demonstrating the following five things which were lacking over the past four years:

              1. Adherence to Truth;
              2. A Tone which is not Tone-deaf;
              3. Return to Reason;
              4. Understanding and utilization of Science;
              5. Understanding of Math.

              That list is simply terrific as a set of guide posts for knowledge and analysis based upon knowledge, and education of the citizenry about real matters confronting our country and the whole world.

              Comment



              • <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">More:<br><br>-- Romney plan would zero out existing US programs, such as TANF &amp; CDCC<br><br>-- Several experts said families would overwhelmingly come out ahead, but some argued plan would be better if those were kept<br><br>-- Romney plan would be permanent, not 1 year<a href="https://t.co/aHSIVrioVa">https://t.co/aHSIVrioVa</a></p>&mdash; Jeff Stein (@JStein_WaPo) <a href="https://twitter.com/JStein_WaPo/status/1357345695640870921?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 4, 2021</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

                This is a GREAT proposal from Romney. Basically UBI for children, and will likely do wonders for child poverty. It would replace existing programs/credits with recurring monthly child payments that get clawed back through taxes for people with high earnings.

                Truly one of the most "every day life" impactful pieces of legislation we've seen in awhile, and I'm interested to see what happens with it. I think there is a reasonable chance that this passes as an amendment.
                Last edited by IrishLax; 02-04-2021, 01:34 PM.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by IrishLax View Post

                  <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">NEWS: <a href="https://twitter.com/MittRomney?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@MittRomney</a> unveils plan to provide $3K per child, giving bipartisan support to President Bidenís major effort around child poverty<br><br>Romney plan would also offer $4,200/year per child under 6<br><br>Expect it as amendment to Dems budget resolution today<a href="https://t.co/aHSIVrioVa">https://t.co/aHSIVrioVa</a></p>&mdash; Jeff Stein (@JStein_WaPo) <a href="https://twitter.com/JStein_WaPo/status/1357344348979875848?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 4, 2021</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

                  This is a GREAT proposal from Romney. Basically UBI for children, and will likely do wonders for child poverty. It would replace existing programs/credits with recurring monthly child payments that get clawed back through taxes for people with high earnings.

                  Truly one of the most "every day life" impactful pieces of legislation we've seen in awhile, and I'm interested to see what happens with it. I think there is a reasonable chance that this passes as an amendment.
                  Based on one economist I recently listened to, this could eradicate childhood poverty in the US. My biggest question is how are the parents or guardians held accountable to spending it for its intended use.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by IrishLax View Post

                    <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">More:<br><br>-- Romney plan would zero out existing US programs, such as TANF &amp; CDCC<br><br>-- Several experts said families would overwhelmingly come out ahead, but some argued plan would be better if those were kept<br><br>-- Romney plan would be permanent, not 1 year<a href="https://t.co/aHSIVrioVa">https://t.co/aHSIVrioVa</a></p>&mdash; Jeff Stein (@JStein_WaPo) <a href="https://twitter.com/JStein_WaPo/status/1357345695640870921?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 4, 2021</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

                    This is a GREAT proposal from Romney. Basically UBI for children, and will likely do wonders for child poverty. It would replace existing programs/credits with recurring monthly child payments that get clawed back through taxes for people with high earnings.

                    Truly one of the most "every day life" impactful pieces of legislation we've seen in awhile, and I'm interested to see what happens with it. I think there is a reasonable chance that this passes as an amendment.
                    Whiskey had a great post in the Economics thread detailing the benefits of going towards a UBI vs tax credits on a year end tax return filing.

                    This would be tremendous, intervening at an early stage is always cheaper and more effective than say no-charge college.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Irishize View Post
                      Based on one economist I recently listened to, this could eradicate childhood poverty in the US. My biggest question is how are the parents or guardians held accountable to spending it for its intended use.
                      This is certainly the trickiest part, and "bad parents" will undoubtedly be the primary contributor to childhood poverty/hunger if this policy is implemented.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by IrishLax View Post
                        This is certainly the trickiest part, and "bad parents" will undoubtedly be the primary contributor to childhood poverty/hunger if this policy is implemented.
                        I'm glad you guys are trying to solve the world's problems. Meanwhile, our Congress is pushing votes to try and keep MTG in the news and social media is on fire about Alexandria Occasio Smollett's lies about 1/6 and the fact check business trying to cover for her.
                        Running the damn ball since 2017.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by IrishLax View Post

                          <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">More:<br><br>-- Romney plan would zero out existing US programs, such as TANF &amp; CDCC<br><br>-- Several experts said families would overwhelmingly come out ahead, but some argued plan would be better if those were kept<br><br>-- Romney plan would be permanent, not 1 year<a href="https://t.co/aHSIVrioVa">https://t.co/aHSIVrioVa</a></p>&mdash; Jeff Stein (@JStein_WaPo) <a href="https://twitter.com/JStein_WaPo/status/1357345695640870921?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 4, 2021</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

                          This is a GREAT proposal from Romney. Basically UBI for children, and will likely do wonders for child poverty. It would replace existing programs/credits with recurring monthly child payments that get clawed back through taxes for people with high earnings.

                          Truly one of the most "every day life" impactful pieces of legislation we've seen in awhile, and I'm interested to see what happens with it. I think there is a reasonable chance that this passes as an amendment.
                          Should have been proposed a long time ago. Can't wait to hear the reasons to oppose this.

                          Comment


                          • This will be a good test to see if there's any substance to the GOP's recent "populist" turn. Though I fear it was mostly window dressing for Trump's grievance politics.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Irish#1 View Post
                              Should have been proposed a long time ago. Can't wait to hear the reasons to oppose this.
                              A Republican proposed it.

                              Originally posted by Whiskeyjack View Post
                              This will be a good test to see if there's any substance to the GOP's recent "populist" turn. Though I fear it was mostly window dressing for Trump's grievance politics.
                              I think it sticks.
                              Running the damn ball since 2017.

                              Comment


                              • I hope this succeeds because it'd be a great reform, and also show the Trumpers in the GOP that they are an irrelevant minority and the adults are willing to compromise to get things done.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X