Page 20 of 44
Re: Congress
Posted: Tue October 05, 2021 9:39 pm
by Bi_3
B wrote:Bi_3 wrote:They don’t want a gotcha of her being mean, they want a video of a middle aged blonde white woman yelling at a young brown skinned girl who is fighting for her family’s citizenship
That doesn't do anyone any good either. They have to know that.
Unlike how proggles can subvert moderates in the House, she can’t be “primaried” for three years, which means they are at her mercy for another two at least and those activist threats of running a leftie against her are meaningless. BUT, if she has to resign over a racism scandal, particularly in AZ when the victim is a Dreamer…
Re: Congress
Posted: Tue October 05, 2021 9:55 pm
by tragabigzanda
FUCK ICE
Re: Congress
Posted: Tue October 05, 2021 9:56 pm
by tragabigzanda
FUCK ICE
Re: Congress
Posted: Tue October 05, 2021 10:01 pm
by B
Bi_3 wrote:B wrote:Bi_3 wrote:They don’t want a gotcha of her being mean, they want a video of a middle aged blonde white woman yelling at a young brown skinned girl who is fighting for her family’s citizenship
That doesn't do anyone any good either. They have to know that.
Unlike how proggles can subvert moderates in the House, she can’t be “primaried” for three years, which means they are at her mercy for another two at least and those activist threats of running a leftie against her are meaningless. BUT, if she has to resign over a racism scandal, particularly in AZ when the victim is a Dreamer…
I'm not quite cynical enough to hang with you on that assumption of their motives.
Re: Congress
Posted: Sun October 10, 2021 7:09 pm
by Biff Pocoroba
Chuck Grassley is the oldest sitting Senator. He is 88 running for his 8th term in 2022.
Re: Congress
Posted: Mon October 18, 2021 11:24 am
by B
"There's no work requirements whatsoever. There's no education requirements whatsoever for better skill sets. Don't you think, if we're going to help the children, that the people should make some effort?" Manchin said.
--------
No, I don't. I think Congress should, across the board, cut the cost of raising children.
I am, however, fine with an income cut off. $60,000 seems a bit low. Stress in my house was absolutely INSANE when we were trying to cover daycare. I'm not sure how we got through that.
Re: Congress
Posted: Mon October 18, 2021 9:24 pm
by elliseamos
B wrote:"There's no work requirements whatsoever. There's no education requirements whatsoever for better skill sets. Don't you think, if we're going to help the children, that the people should make some effort?" Manchin said.
--------
No, I don't. I think Congress should, across the board, cut the cost of raising children.
I am, however, fine with an income cut off. $60,000 seems a bit low. Stress in my house was absolutely INSANE when we were trying to cover daycare. I'm not sure how we got through that.
Yeah, I've got 2 of 3 out of daycare now. It'd be nice if after-school care was free, but it's at least less than daycare.
Re: Congress
Posted: Wed October 20, 2021 5:36 pm
by Green Habit
Re: Congress
Posted: Wed October 20, 2021 5:45 pm
by simple schoolboy
elliseamos wrote:B wrote:"There's no work requirements whatsoever. There's no education requirements whatsoever for better skill sets. Don't you think, if we're going to help the children, that the people should make some effort?" Manchin said.
--------
No, I don't. I think Congress should, across the board, cut the cost of raising children.
I am, however, fine with an income cut off. $60,000 seems a bit low. Stress in my house was absolutely INSANE when we were trying to cover daycare. I'm not sure how we got through that.
Yeah, I've got 2 of 3 out of daycare now. It'd be nice if after-school care was free, but it's at least less than daycare.
They're giving the old ACA treatment to childcare.
Re: Congress
Posted: Wed October 20, 2021 6:05 pm
by tragabigzanda
FUCK ICE
Re: Congress
Posted: Wed October 20, 2021 6:20 pm
by McParadigm
Reminder that Joe threatened to retire early in 2017, 2018 and 2019...each time as a strategy for increasing his influence over intra-party discussions.
That doesn't mean this is a bluff, but I don't know how it wouldn't end his career. For all his bipartisanship talk, roughly 80% of his voters in 2018 were registered Democrats. He doesn't pull conservatives away from the R ticket in anywhere close to electable numbers, and West Virginia has an abnormally low percentage of active unaffiliated voters. Like 22% or something.
Splitting the blue vote between Joe and a Democratic Party candidate would certainly be enough to hand the state to Republicans, but I think the same result would happen if he just retired tomorrow. In both cases, Republicans take the seat and he's out of a job. Left to wallow in his coal money bin, or whatever.
Re: Congress
Posted: Wed October 20, 2021 6:29 pm
by simple schoolboy
tragabigzanda wrote:Dems killing it
The childcare thing is just the perfect PMC solution: require expensive credentials that have almost no bearing on the quality of the service.
Edit: PMC works as well as AWFL
Re: Congress
Posted: Wed October 20, 2021 6:33 pm
by Bi_3
simple schoolboy wrote:tragabigzanda wrote:Dems killing it
The childcare thing is just the perfect AWFL solution: require expensive credentials that have almost no bearing on the quality of the service.
Also, what stops the providers from just upping the price now that they know families have an extra $300/kid/month?
Re: Congress
Posted: Wed October 20, 2021 6:49 pm
by simple schoolboy
Bi_3 wrote:simple schoolboy wrote:tragabigzanda wrote:Dems killing it
The childcare thing is just the perfect AWFL solution: require expensive credentials that have almost no bearing on the quality of the service.
Also, what stops the providers from just upping the price now that they know families have an extra $300/kid/month?
This only makes sense as a handout to a union. Are childcare workers unionized, or do they intend to organize them?
Re: Congress
Posted: Wed October 20, 2021 7:31 pm
by tragabigzanda
FUCK ICE
Re: Congress
Posted: Sat November 06, 2021 3:31 pm
by Bi_3
Finally, the left has permitted us the chance at "clean water" and "safe bridges". Well most of the left. Shockingly, there are a few who thought it was not a good idea to use federal money to remove lead pipelines and build out new transmission lines and EV charging stations and pass a bipartisan bill that the Senate had already signed off and could go to Biden's desk at moment... until after the elections allowing a week of gloat from the red team. Now who might be opposed to that? Who I ask?
- Spoiler: show
CNN wrote:
Here are the six House Democrats who broke from their party to vote against the bill:
Rep. Jamaal Bowman of New York
Rep. Cori Bush of Missouri
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York
Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota
Rep. Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts
Rep. Rashida Tlaib of Michigan
Edit: Per Axios, here are the details:
What’s in it: The infrastructure bill will cost $1.2 trillion over eight years, and offers more than $550 billion in new spending, including:
$110 billion toward roads, bridges and other much-needed infrastructure fix-ups across the country; $40 billion is new funding for bridge repair, replacement, and rehabilitation and $17.5 billion is for major projects;
$73 billion for the country's electric grid and power structures;
$66 billion for rail services;
$65 billion for broadband;
$55 billion for water infrastructure;
$21 billion in environmental remediation;
$47 billion for flooding and coastal resiliency as well as "climate resiliency," including protections against fires, etc.;
$39 billion to modernize transit, which is the largest federal investment in public transit in history, according to the White House;
$25 billion for airports;
$17 billion in port infrastructure;
$11 billion in transportation safety programs;
$7.5 billion for electric vehicles and EV charging; $2.5 billion in zero-emission buses, $2.5 billion in low-emission buses, and $2.5 billion for ferries;
The bill will include language regarding enforcement of unemployment insurance fraud;
And it will add $256 billion in projected deficits over 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
Re: Congress
Posted: Sat November 06, 2021 5:07 pm
by McParadigm
It was smart of progs not to trust whatever promises moderates are making behind the scenes. Procedural agreements and process concessions don’t hold a lot of value when the people you’re negotiating with are still openly demonstrating and communicating that they won’t pass the bill.
It was even smarter of Republicans to send a few votes over, allowing the House to pass BIF without the prog votes. They, like Manchin, Sinema, and all the rest of us, know that passing BIF destroys any leverage the progs have and guarantees that the reconciliation bill gets ground down to a pulp. They could have stood up and done this at any time in the past few months (it’s supposed to be a bipartisan infrastructure bill, after all), but it was wise of them to get as much mileage out of the Dem drama as possible….and to ensure that Dems went into this years midterms without a national stage win to promote.
Re: Congress
Posted: Thu December 16, 2021 3:27 am
by Bammer
Pramila goddamn Jayapal did a little bit of an online town hall event today. Don’t be shocked to see her try to get in there as speaker of the house …
Anyway, she made a comment that really pissed me off and it has nothing to do with her policy opinions: She loathes any elected official who doesn’t toe the party line…actually used the word “idiotic” to describe it.
Fuck that shit. People should be able to make independent decisions. This party groupthink bullshit really pisses me off.
Re: Congress
Posted: Thu December 16, 2021 5:22 am
by Monkey_Driven
The world can't be filled with mavericks, bammer.
Re: Congress
Posted: Thu December 16, 2021 5:48 am
by simple schoolboy
Monkey_Driven wrote:The world can't be filled with mavericks, bammer.
We intentionally don't have a parliamentary system, so...