Last night President Biden told U.S. states on Thursday to make all adults eligible for a coronavirus vaccine by May 1 and urged Americans to stay vigilant or face more restrictions, hours after he signed a $1.9 trillion stimulus bill into law. Patting himself on the back for the latest Stimulus bill --- conveniently forgetting the Stimulus bills that the Trump Administration offered up.
Biden said if Americans "pull together there could be a greater sense of normalcy - and some backyard barbecue parties with small groups. "Just as we are emerging from a dark winter into a hopeful spring and summer is not the time to not stick with the rules,” he said. Never giving credit to the Trump administration for the plan and initiative that brought us the vaccine that has us on the way to a wonderful spring and summer.
Biden said he was ordering U.S. states, territories, and tribes to make all adults eligible to receive a coronavirus vaccine by May 1. The White House has said it would have enough vaccine supply to vaccinate the adult population by the end of May. About 10% of Americans so far have been fully vaccinated. Great news!
Biden campaigned on a promise that he would tackle the pandemic more effectively than Republican President Donald Trump, and he has sought to encourage and model behavior, such as mask-wearing, that Trump eschewed. Yet we pretty much of the Country were wearing masks for a very long time, due to state mitigation orders...
He also ran on the unification of American's. Bringing American's together...
Then there was this ---
In his speech, Biden immediately took a swipe at former President Trump by saying the virus was initially met with “denials for days, weeks, then months, that led to more deaths, more infections, more stress, more loneliness.” He clearly sought to more or less say, Trump, did nothing to tackle the pandemic crisis.
Which in my view is ridiculous. If not for Operation Warp Speed, we would not have a vaccine as of yet. Biden would be giving a much more somber address in regards to where the country would be fighting this pandemic. Biden had a wonderful chance to give credit where credit is deserved. He chose to toss rotten meat to his base. He had a chance to discuss the good work of Operation Warp Speed and his administration. He chose not to.
And what happened to his promise of unification, healing the divide? He never fails to go for the throat to feed his base.
Myself, when I heard his opening statement I turned him off... I have mentioned this before --- speech 101 Your audience remembers the first and last words from a speech. And yes I switched him off not wanting to listen to another well-written politicking speech.
"Good evening, my fellow Americans.
Tonight, I'd like to talk to you about where we are as we mark one year since everything stopped because of this pandemic.
A year ago, we were hit with a virus that was met with silence and spread unchecked, denials for days, weeks, then months. That led to more deaths, more infections, more stress, and more loneliness."
Today I read the transcript and was very pleased with my decision to tune out of Biden's address.
So, hopefully, you will share your thoughts.
Transcript -- https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/11/politics … index.html
Aside from there being more militant, nazi-tier leftists making their voices heard than I have ever seen before, and riots breaking out for months with support from health, news, and political officials, the pandemic has had very little effect on my daily life. Even when I caught COVID on Thanksgiving, all I did was isolate for two weeks, which is only slightly different from any other sickness I've had, and then my life went back to normal.
Politicians, inherently, cannot promote unity outside of their base in the public eye. Notice, though, our government remains united to such a degree we do not tear it down from within nor without. Trump was the first President in my life to make me feel like we were going to have a government-led revolution, and I was wary to see how it would play out.
Nonetheless, things are quieting down post-Trump, and though the credit goes very little to Biden, we must admit that Biden's behavior (staying out of the spotlight, mostly) is working in everyone's favor. The rest of the world is coming back into the fold, and most people are excited to put the Trump era in the dumpster where it belongs.
I can agree with all you stated. Makes me realize we got what we got, and sadly enough we are what we are. We seem to be a society that just --- "Goes gently into the night".
Things have quite down with Trump vacating the White House. Back to the status quo, and that does work for some. Myself, I liked the change, I see us rushing backward into a Government overlooking our every problem, and using a blanket mentality that most do really appreciate. So your statement runs very true. --- "Biden's behavior (staying out of the spotlight, mostly) is working in everyone's favor. The rest of the world is coming back into the fold, and most people are excited to put the Trump era in the dumpster where it belongs."
So, pleased to see your comment.
How much credit did Trump give Obama for turning things around from the tsunami in 2008? Nada... he spent much of his political capital attacking Obama.
While you are disatified, I am most pleased with progress so far.
Having to get the American Rescue Act passed without a single GOP vote. Their proposals were so far off the mark, it could be said that they were not negotiating seriously. There has been no middle ground with them. This example is a pattern that the Democrats would do well to note carefully going forward.
I don't think I'm alone in giving Obama lots of credit for the recovery from the recession.
His work produced the slowest recovery in history, he spent vast sums of money without ever producing anything lasting or concrete. No new dams, no new roads, no new anything; just political bailouts and free money to those that planned poorly. Obama gets the credit for not following the methods used in the past of putting people to work to earn and spend, thus rebuilding the economy; instead he simply gave money out for nothing in return.
You have a right to your opinion, Wilderness, but I don't share it.
Every proposal Obama put forth was obstructed by the Republicans, but lessons learned and it won't happen this time
I understand you don't share it. You have your own opinion on what Obama had built with his stimulus checks - the repaired bridges, the new dams, the reconstructed roads, the new subways.
When I look at how that "stimulus" money was spent (though it wasn't called that then) in our history (building the interstate highway system, for example), and how Obama spent it, I see a world of difference. You don't. But that is because you require that Obama be praised so won't look at it with a critical eye.
Wilderness, I remember 2008 and the devestation to the economy, Republicans have short memories whenever it is convenient, don't they? Your world and my world are different, and yours cannot be proven to have anymore credibility than my view. We let the voters decide.
"But that is because you require that Obama be praised so won't look at it with a critical eye."
No more than your tendency to put Trump and your GOP buddies on a pedestal, when they certainly don't deserve to be there. So, I guess to each, his or her own? Your objections are just standard GOP boilerplate.
Obama came into a financial crisis, his recovery was slow, but in his last two years picked up momentum, and the economy was rebounding when Trump took over. This pandemic was a crisis like no other, there was not one world leader that could handle a virulent spreading virus as stat has come to prove. Without a vaccine viruses spread. That is the science that many just could not face. They blamed one man for the crisis. Yet every world leader had the same results. Illness, and death, and failing economies. Trump worked to provide a vaccine, a vaccine most countries are using to vaccinate their citizens. Biden landed in a pot of jam when it comes to COVID. He is dispensing a vaccine due to Trump's initiative. Biden himself receive the vaccine before Trump left office... I give credit where due.
My Op was more about Biden being hypocritical in one to breathe stating he will unify the country, in the next breathe blasting Trump as if he did little to nothing to handle the COVID crisis. Just pointing out Biden taking a cheap political swipe. IMO no way to unify the country.
You seem to be very consistent with praise for Biden. Not sure what progress he has made on anything but the COVID stimulus bill, and yes he has differently done a good job picking up where Trump left off with getting the Vaccine out. I see lots of brewing problems that he will not address. He will not or can not face the press... That stimulus was a sure thing, written in stone, he did little but sign it.
I will agree there will be no middle ground with the GOP. But this is pretty much normal, business as usual. It most likely will never change. The congressional numbers are the voice in our government. This is what we have let it become.
I hope Biden does well, I love my country. However, I just have little faith in the Democratic party, and they are pulling the strings.
Did you listen to Biden's address last night? If so, did you find his insults directed at Trump unifying?
My blood boiled.
I watched the speech and I didn't even remember that partt until you brought it up here.
I would speculate that is because I found nothing unusual about his words because they are simply the truth. Only die-hard Trumpers thought he was doing a good job handling the pandemic and, in fact, his poor handling of it is widely considered to be one reason he lost the presidency.
So sorry your blood boiled. That must have been uncomfortable.
Panther, his handling of the pandemic and the resulting economic downturn was the reason he lost. You have to really work hard as an incumbent not to manage to get a second term.
"I would speculate that is because I found nothing unusual about his words because they are simply the truth. "
Your truth. Factually Trump the Trump administration is responsible for providing America and actually the world with a vaccine in record time. Biden is doing nothing but distributing that vaccine that Trump worked on getting in record time. That's my truth --- Biden trying to take credit for what trump did is purely discussing.
I have let this go for a loooonnngg time, but I don't think many people give Trump credit for creating the vaccine in a hurry because they know the scientists and drug companies did it and Trump had nothing to do with it. In fact, you're the only person I've ever heard give him credit for it. Over and over again. Your opinion on this does not seem to be shared by very many people.
AS always you read my comment out of context. Note the words "Trump administration". I used those words in my OP, as well in my comment responding to you. So I am not sure what you are referring to. Hope this clarifies what the Trump administration provided due to the Trump administration and Trump's initiative to create Operation Warp Speed.
Not sure if you are aware of the contracts that the Trump ad. made with 8 pharma companies. Contracts that funded research and development or ultimately a vaccine. I may have attributed the credit to Trump or Trump's initiative at some point in another thread.
Due to Operation warp speed being Trump's idea.
"Operation Warp Speed (OWS) was a public–private partnership initiated by U.S. President Donald Trump and his administration to facilitate and accelerate the development, manufacturing, and distribution of COVID-19 vaccines, therapeutics, and diagnostics."
https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/p … ring%20on.
Yes, I am aware that Trump, for once, did what a competent president would do. Hope he didn't strain himself too much.
Well, I am thankful he came up with a solution to get a vaccine quicker. I guess we could have waited a bit longer, and lost more citizens.
I am for giving credit where it is due, but for that to mean anything it has to apply universally. Is that the way Trump behaved? I will give Trump credit for his "Warp Speed" program. But obviously, too little to late as the electorate was not impressed. I don't see why Trump gets a free pass for behavior that you attack Biden over?
If there is no middle ground, we Democrats will just have ram things thru removing the filibuster as necessary.
He did a lot more than just sign it, he stood firm against Republican delay and obstruction, since there were no Republicans in support of the bill.
No, I did not see his address, last night. If I did, I could probably have an additional comment to two to make.
I had little or no faith in the Republican Party when they were in control, just the opposite, isn't that odd? We can look at the same things and see it all quite differently.
I am not attacking Biden. I pointed out his words. As many here did with Trump. This is a political forum, my OP was about a political speech that truly rubbed me the wrong way. I questioned and discussed Trump's inappropriate statements here on HP's, as I intend to do with Biden.
Trump never got a free pass with me. Yes, I have defended some of his statements when I felt they had been reported out of context.
We are not at odds all of the time. I am very versatile, and I do not lock my opinions down. I am realistic, and when I can see a pattern, such as Congressional gridlock I do feel open to predict. Hopefully, my predictions are not always taken as to how I would like to see something happen or turn out, but rather how I see something realistically turning out.
You have misunderstood my comment in regard to our Congress --- I have little faith in Congress over many years now. As I said there will be no middle ground with the GOP. But this is pretty much normal, business as usual. It most likely will never change. The congressional numbers are the voice in our government.
"Congress --- I have little faith in Congress over many years now. As I said there will be no middle ground with the GOP. But this is pretty much normal, business as usual. It most likely will never change. The congressional numbers are the voice in our government."
This is unfortunate, as it was not always this way with one political partiy voting against the initiatives of the other down to a man or woman.
I see nothing status quo about much of anything to do with politics these days; if anything, it is more risky to even express an opinion in public than it ever has been. Biden's administration, whoever the head honcho may be, is making the proper decision to step back and stop fanning the flames of vitriol.
I mean, god damn, do you know how many times I've been threatened with death for my skin color in the last four years? That's on Trump and his tactics, not the dems as much as they are to blame for fanning racial unrest.
I'm grateful we have someone more senile than Trump in office, it is really working out in every way as far as my personal life goes. That's saying a lot as well, before Trump no president ever had an effect on my personal life.
I see all of Obama's policies quickly restored, as well as most of the people that worked in his administration being back in the White House. This to me is stepping back into the status quo. Biden has even adopted Obama's habit of not addressing the press.
You put it out there ---so how is Biden affecting your personal life, for that matter any part of your life. Just curious. Hey, you brought it up. I love to learn, and I am very interested in how Biden has affected your life. Plus, will offer a freash conversation.
Too early to tell, but I expect my community here in California will continue to deteriorate. It is rare I run into natives in California anymore, of course by natives I mean individuals whose ancestry has been here longer than a generation or two. Even rarer is meeting people who speak English as their first language, though I couldn't care less.
Other than that, the second Biden was elected they (dems) seemed to stop pushing for a race war. Trump was paving the way for dems to ignite racial wars all over the country, and he wouldn't stop, causing me to move to action in my, and many other communities during the BLM protests and riots. If that could be attributed to Biden (it can't, really), then that's how he as affected my personal life thus far.
My biggest fear for my personal life, overall, is that California will only have white communities locked behind gated communities sometime in the near future. This wouldn't be an issue, either, if the communities being taken by legal and illegal immigrants alike assimilated to American culture and law. Unfortunately, I am the one who is expected to change my culture and home to accommodate others, and there are so many different cultures warring with one another here.
Off topic: California is basically being split between Mexicans and Chinese, among other less-visible cultures. Los Angeles alone is having turf wars between cartels and the mafia for legitimate businesses, and it is spreading far outward from there. Though, it isn't something you'll hear about on the news because the wars are being fought with business, and not on the street; so, those of us on the street see it as a race issue since the authorities won't take it seriously.
Crazy times, and with the public support for the calls for the death of the white race it is hard to remain objective and impartial.
"Crazy times, and with the public support for the calls for the death of the white race it is hard to remain objective and impartial."
So, is that the real reason so many are attracted to Trump?
At least you are honest about it as your sentiment, not recognizing this opinion for the delusion that it is...
There are many cultures, why is the preservation of your world outlook and view so paramount? I don't know anything about race war, is that what you are looking for?
Why are so many of YOUR people so paranoid, it is a Zero Sum game?
Everyplace is not Los Angeles, California. You need to move to another part of the country for a different perspective.
Here is what I am getting from you, as I understand it: "You are attracted to Trump. You have to find reasons to defend your culture in the face of being told your culture is less important than an immigrant's culture, and your acceptance of their culture makes no difference either way. Your fear of a race war might imply you want a race war. I'm assuming who YOUR people are, and claiming they are paranoid. You need to move from your birthplace if you want what you had in your birthplace in the past."
First and foremost, I hate Trump.
The preservation and continuance of my culture is important because it is inclusive of all cultures, and regularly leads to a healthy diversification and blending of cultures. Look at Hollywood, and voila, international culture being blended to create something beautiful on a regular basis. Diversity, inclusion, and fairness are my culture, if that disappears then I don't even want to think of what we'll get in its place.
I just said I was wary of a race war, and I disagreed with Trump's tactics that were causing racial unrest; stupid question.
Who are my people, from your understanding? I have a very diverse group of people in my personal life, and we all come from different races, creeds, etc.
I shouldn't have to move to another area to feel like I can safely reside in, or even exist in my own country. That's the same as telling people not to come here because they aren't from the same culture I am, that is another stupid stance to hold. Everyone of every culture should be allowed to exist and celebrate their culture in unison with others, and no one should be forced to adhere to one dominant culture or be threatened because they do not. America is an amalgam of cultures, and to assimilate to American culture is to celebrate all world cultures together.
You'd need to take direct part in the younger side of things, things like TikTok and protests, to understand how badly America is regressing on the racial front on all sides.
Greetings, Tyler, leave it to me to "jump the gun".
Whenever I see "race war", I see red as it is the Right's "final solution" to our national problems regarding race.
We are all receiving mixed messages from a variety of sources, many of them not credible.
You have a problem with Trump, no dispute there.
As Sharlee says, Trump is not a racist, that may well be true. But he is a race baiter, using the strife on this issue to his political advantage. That is just as bad.
The reality is as you say, this is a diverse society, so who is messaging that whites have to be on the offensive as if their very existence is in peril?
Kyler, I have spent 4 years living in the "inland Empire" of Southern California and 3 years on the plains of Eastern Montana. Attitudes and folkways can differ with a change of geography. If you have been attacked or intimidated based on your ethnicity, I would disapprove as I would not have that done to me.
I misunderstood your initial message and want to clarify that we are on the same page.
As for younger side of things, perhaps. I have avoided much of the social media as getting into my affairs beyond my comfort level. But we always believed that the younger generation would be more tolerant and thereby would find a everly more diverse society as non threatening. Was I wrong?
"As Sharlee says, Trump is not a racist, that may well be true. But he is a race-baiter, using the strife on this issue to his political advantage. That is just as bad."
This is very true. Please consider that race is being used by both sides as a tool. It has become a dangerous tool to our society. Both sides are using the tool. And black people are ultimately the ones that will be hurt.
As I said this kind of politicking is setting race relations back all the way to the 50's one can feel it in conversation. It's really up to us as people to wake up and see what's going down. Otherwise, all will become worse.
Just step back and think how the media continually keeps race relate stories in the headlines. Even at this point showing Blacks canceling out their own. As in the case of Sen, TimScott. A man that should glean respect from all for his accomplishments. --- being called a token... This purely discussting. Pitting one against her will ultimately have people taking sides. It would seem the Dems continue to make every attempt to make blacks feel diffrent. Look around, that is part of our history. Yes, always room for more work. But it would seem the Dems seek to control not help black citizens as they portray. Oh well, can't stop a bolder that is already rolling down a mountain.
Just consider my view.
In America, race has always been a pricking point in our national affairs, that from the very inception of this Republic. We are use to being "hurt" from most sides, it just comes down to matter of degree.
But, from where I sit, Trump and his attacks on me and mine have been far virulent than that of Joe Biden. At least Biden also have the benefit of introducing policies that I support, I can't say that for Trump. So, if I am going give to anyone the benefit of the doubt over a gaffe....
I have nothing against Senator Scott, except that he is simply on the wrong side. I don't support much of the philosophy of the Republicans. So, it doesn't matter about the color of the individual who is draped in their banner.
Well, regarding so many current vital statistics and history, we are different.
We are simply getting more assist from the Democrats than we could expect from Republicans.
That is my take on this.
Yes, we agree Trump was part of the problem, but the two parties have race baited for decades. Using race like a ping pong ball. As I said consider that race is being used by both sides as a tool. It has become a dangerous tool to our society. Both sides are using the tool. And black people are ultimately the ones that will be hurt.
You claim Biden has policies you support. Could this just be due to your values and your ideologies, race aside? I can understand that if that's the case. I can't understand him doing much for your race. More for you as an American. that supports the Biden agenda.
You claim Sen. Scott is just on the wrong side. Have you really listened to or researched his philosophy? Did you realize he was very much responsible for Opportunity Zones? He is a Republican working for all of us... So could we look at him a just a man that is accomplished and possibly just respect him for his fortitude, and what would appear good job performance? Or is it fair as Joy Reid did -- just cancel him out due to her thought that he is a token. If we adopt that attitude we can put her on the same list, and Obama, and Harris, need I go on. Labeling a person is just not fair. However, this mentality is taking hold. It will take us back many decades. Decades where we saw growth, healing,
understanding. I lived through the Detroit riot, I lived through seeing racism at a low, and have over years witnessed such growth, such coming together.
So once again what have the Democrats done for black citizens or what do you see them doing at present?
"You claim Biden has policies you support. Could this just be due to your values and your ideologies, race aside?"
Most certainly, yes, I will vote for a white Democrat over a black Republican any day.
Sen. Scott is a Republican with a Republican philosophy. Case in point, do you not think that our group adversely affected in the COVID pandemic and generally at an economic disadvantage is going to appreciate the fact that Biden got the rescue bill through while not one Republican, including Senator Scott, supported it?
Biden did not focus on the Black community, but his policies benefit us as well as others. While relative to that, the GOP did little or nothing.
The enterprise zones were short of what was needed and really did not resonate with the Black community. I remember similar programs such as urban enterprise zones during the 1990s. Being in federal contracting myself, they were, like Small Business Set Aside, a preferred source of supply for goods and services in Goverment Contracting. But, actual application was minimal relative to the risks that these Private Sector companies assumed having their businesses located in the zones, and the benefits oftentimes were not worth the risk. There simply was not that much business benefit derived from the program, otherwise it would not had to have been reinvented.
But, I do not see a reason to be rude toward Senator Scott, that is unnecessary.
Do you happen to remember what the Dems did in regard to the last bill? Held out 9 months. In the end, it passed as we knew it would, As we know this last Stimulus would pass. It's all politics on both sides. ( month Pelosi left all in limbo. This time the Dems did not drag their feet. Hope to give a boost to Biden.
I vote with an open mind, and really try to look at both candidates, not a party. I look at a representative on keeping their promises. I don't in any respect care about the talk, I like action. Results.
Let's not leave out Republican obstruction and stinginess as part of the delay. Pelosi wanted to in tie things in the bill that Republicans opposed and vice Versa
This latest stimulus passed because Republicans had to be swept aside to get it done, that is the reason we now have results instead of delay.
But when it was all said and done, now the check is in the mail and without any help from the opposition. So, in regards to President Biden, I say, promise kept.
I'll quote what I said in another area to Sharlee:
"Had Trump just pulled the Grey Rock Method out more often, like Biden is doing, perhaps I would not have had to join the BLM protests for the safety of my community. The things I witnessed during the BLM protests and riots were some of the most disgusting displays of racism I've ever seen, but the silver lining there is that I now understand how non-whites felt in the past.
It's scary to be in a crowd chanting, "Kill all whites," and, "F$@! white people," as they march down main roads setting businesses on fire and assaulting anyone who dares to get in their way. The news wouldn't cover it, either, they'd only push what they wanted people to know. It was, and still is a very helpless feeling."
The protests were eye-opening for me, in so many horrible ways.
As for social media and the younger crowd, it is becoming acceptable to promote breeding people out of existence, targeting people for character assassination based on race(review bombs are one of the most-used tools for this, as well as contacting employers in waves), and even spreading videos and imagery of different races being murdered by certain races. The trends vary from gruesome imagery, to using sexual imagery to promote racism in a violent way.
If it were appropriate, and wouldn't get me banned, I would link you to where millions of young Americans and other individuals from around the world congregate to express this racism from the safety of their own home. Unfortunately, my word will have to do as it concerns these matters.
The newest addition to the racist social media movements are the WMAF (white male asian female) variants. For some reason, people are trying 24 hours per day, 7 days per week to pit whites against Chinese specifically, but all Asian races as a whole. It's sickening.
It is good to hear you have not witnessed, nor experienced racism against white folks. I've had to deal with it my whole life due to growing up in a racially-blended ethno-diverse family. I've written on the topic, but really failed to do it justice; perhaps one day I'll take the time to write on it all properly, and by then I hope everyone is aware how far backwards we are traveling on race issues.
To the older generations social issues are a political matter, but to the younger generations it seems to be a war where one side will win or no one will be left standing. The young are consistently martyring themselves socially in an attempt to be heard, on all sides of social issues, but the politicking is costing lives.
Oh, and let's not forget the "Super-Straight" movement that is trying to catch steam. Things are nuts, but the media won't touch any of it because it isn't the attractive money-maker. So, I suppose we will keep seeing relations everywhere in America deteriorate. It'll be interesting to see how all of us younger generations function with one another as older adults; my guess is that it will all keep rolling downhill like it has since I was a wee lad.
Cancel culture, thus far, has been my generation's greatest tool of destruction.
Thank you for sharing... I was so curious as to how or why you were being discriminated against. I was unaware you live in California. That explains a lot. Not sure things will get better in regard to the number one spoken language in California, Texas, and Arizona. Biden has an open invitation to any and all that want to walk across the border.
Holy hell I can't imagine the turmoil you are living in. I am not sure what can be done at this point with all the problems you have shared. I liked Trump's ideas, and policies in regards to immigration. He did not do a superb job, but I think he was doing a good job putting up some stumbling blocks.
Do I think ultimately trump was responsible for the racial tention? I think Trump was used by the Dems as a Trump card they knew they could cash in on. It worked. Basically, I don't think Trump himself is a racist. I think he does not discriminate when it comes to calling out a problem or a person. He is transparent, unfiltered.
And yes we have a real ongoing problem with race in America. IMO the Democrats made sure to stoke the fire and could care less about racism. They continue to give the message to black people that they are different, and need help. Wonder when Black people might realize they have made great strides on their own, and don't need anyone to give them a hand up.
The problem was Trump's willingness to discuss it in the first place. Racism is not a good topic for conservatives to discuss, as democrats have that market cornered. By even discussing the topic, addressing protesters as if they were rivals, he opened the door for more hatred from the left. For some reason people have been unified by hatred far more closely and intensely as time goes on, rather than what is preached by the left of ending it.
Had Trump just pulled the Grey Rock Method out more often, like Biden is doing, perhaps I would not have had to join the BLM protests for the safety of my community. The things I witnessed during the BLM protests and riots were some of the most disgusting displays of racism I've ever seen, but the silver lining there is that I now understand how non-whites felt in the past.
It's scary to be in a crowd chanting, "Kill all whites," and, "F$@! white people," as they march down main roads setting businesses on fire and assaulting anyone who dares to get in their way. The news wouldn't cover it, either, they'd only push what they wanted people to know. It was, and still is a very helpless feeling.
We'll see how things go, but as of yet I'm preferring our POTUS out of the spotlight. For the sake of our country and its reputation, we don't need another angsty old white guy in front of the cameras and blowing up twitter all day every day.
I think I understand where you are coming from. And you have touched on some truths that many are afraid to even think. I think we are very close to taking sides due to race. It's like all that was accomplished over the past 50 years is gone or never was. The hate can be cut with a knife. I agree with part of your thought --- we don't need another angsty old white guy. I would like to see a younger, intelligent president.
Fact's it was the Trump administration's Operation Warp Speed that set up a partnership with the vast majority of Vaccine distribution sites. OWS also set up a program that requested retired Dr. and Nurses to come out of retirement to help administer the vaccine. They set up partnerships with large hospitals, and clinics to administer the injections. And I have several times posted the contracts that OWS had with 8 Pharma companies for research and development and vaccine in the millions. (Pfizer is the only company that did not take funds for research and development, but a contract for millions of od doses of vaccine and the option to order millions more as Biden did thanks to that contract clause .) Biden has done little to nothing but depend on the contracts and partnerships, and programs Trump's OWS provided. And they did it long before Biden walked into the White House.
The Department Of Health And Human Services Nov 12, 2020
https://www.hhs.gov/about/news/2020/11/ … cines.html
OWS intended to start roll pout of Vaccine in Jan 2021, which they started shortly before Biden was sworn in. In fact, Biden and Harris were vaccinated before he was sworn in.
https://www.healthcarefinancenews.com/n … evelopment
https://abc7news.com/joe-biden-covid-va … s/9561849/
Biden has offered anything new to controlling COVID other than his
wear a mask for 100 days ... which not sure he realizes we have been wearing masks for a year.
Joe is doing nothing at all but taking. The Stimulus bills are due to Congress. The COVID progress is on OWS, and the Trump ad. I would have more respect if he would not make such a fool out of himself making a feeble attempt to take credit for progress on COVID.
Really Joe unification --- yesterday at Biden's press conference he chose to make a very derogatory remark that referred to President Trump as more or less a murderer.
"When an unaccompanied child ends up at the border, we [aren't] going to let them starve to death and stay on the other side -- No previous administration did that either, except Trump. I'm not going to do it," Biden told reporters."
Confused --- maybe, but more like taking the opportunity to toss slop at his base.
Yeah Joe, really unifying? Discussing, display of cheap Democratic politicking.
This man has hoof and mouth diseases. He just can't keep his mouth shut when he should... No matter how hard they try they are unable to control him. It would be better for the country if they put him back in the basement. He is an embarrassment to America.
https://nypost.com/2021/03/25/fact-chec … onference/
Glad to see you finally care so deeply about unification.
Never said I did... In fact, truthfully I don't support the unification with a party that is hell-bent on ruining America. Could care less... I was pointing out once again the hypocrisy of Biden's unification promise, and his cheap old habit of politicking to toss food to his base. Hope I have set you straight on how I feel about unification.
I think maybe you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what Biden means when he speaks of Americans coming together. I believe he is referring mostly to the people working together to solve problems regardless of ideology. I don't think he believes Democrat and Republican elected officials will ever be unified, but I do think he thinks Americans can be unified around certain basic tenets. I truly believe had he been president when the pandemic hit, mask wearing would not have been such a partisan ussue, because he definitely does not fan those type of flames.
Just how I see it. By the way, he is telling the truth about how Trump handled the pandemuc. Trump lost because of it. Unification does not require sugar-coating the devastating effects of poor policies. It is more about not putting citizens against each other, but helping them see how they can come together to help mitigate a crisis or problems.
I will make this comment one of the shortest I have offered up --- Not interested in any form of coming together with the other half... I have no respect for their mindset or their ideologies. So why would I want to come together? Half the country has zip-in common with the other half. I have no respect for the BS that liberals dish up. I certainly will not have it shoved down my throat.
I have the identical opinion regarding the Right and Rightwingers.....
It is still unfortunate that people brought up within the same nation can see things so much differently.
Very unfortunate. Not sure where when half the country became discussed with the status quo. So many opting not to continue down a path we find leads to Bigger Government and losses of the civil rights we cherish. Many are just not willing to give up the ideals America was built on.
The ideals America was built on...like women, those who did not own land, and black people could not vote. Some ideals should evolve with the times.
You are absolutely correct. Some ideals should evolve with the times. Gay marriage, equality under the law for all, children in sweatshops, etc.
But the list does NOT include (IMO) such things as a work ethic, self dependence, hard work, owning what we buy with our labor, etc. And those things, too, are under pretty constant attack by the left.
I think you interpret a recognition that the nature of work is evolving and some people will inevitably be left behind in a changing evonimy, combined with the belief that the value of a human being is not based on how much material wealth they create, as an attack on your values. (Sorry for the long sentence, lol)I
I don't see it that way at all.
I don't see the right having evolved from the idea of plantation owners profiting off the sweat of the hard work of the peasants while reaping what they sow and giving them nothing for wages. That philosophy is still the prevalent view of the right. And then blaming them for not being able to break the cycle of poverty.
That is, indeed, another place that does not need to "evolve". When it comes to contracts between two people agreeing to the same thing we do not need some govt. committee saying that contracts between consenting adults are not valid.
Is it smart to categorize people by political party or race? Not sure how I would feel if I were a black person to be stuck in a category due to my race. It would seem you are saying Blacks are less intelligent, and all put up with being taken advantage of. Wonder what a man like Obama would think of your anology. You do realize Black people have struggled to not be considered as a race that just can't break out of poverty?
It would seem you have no understanding of a thing I'm trying to say. You articulating your own clearly racist interpretation of my point is a massive failure. When did I even say black people? You added race to that discussion - and then added an intelligence line of thought often seen in racists. I was talking socioeconomic class, devoid of race with my wording.
I was responding to how you worded your comment, how you chose to categorize not only those on the right but black people too. Hey, you have the right to say whatever you please. But, I saw something derogatory about your inference.
Here is the comment I was responding to --- "I don't see the right having evolved from the idea of plantation owners profiting off the sweat of the hard work of the peasants while reaping what they sow and giving them nothing for wages. That philosophy is still the prevalent view of the right. And then blaming them for not being able to break the cycle of poverty."
Who are you referring to when you used the word "them" twice". In context with claiming " "I don't see the right having evolved from the idea of plantation owners profiting off the sweat of the hard work of the peasants while reaping what they sow and giving them nothing for wages"...
Were you referring to white people that worked for plantation owners? Who were you referring to when you stated ---"And then blaming them for not being able to break the cycle of poverty."
It may be well true we have different opinions in regards to racism. I don't look at the black race as anything but human beings as I consider myself.
It was not I that added race to the conversation, You certainly gave the impression you were putting the black people in a category of people that could not break out of poverty. Perhaps you could have said some of "THEM" can't break out of poverty
I will admit you really brought something that I noted about liberals. Most do categorize, are unable to look at an individual. It seems prevalent in today's society to categorize.
All I can say, if I were black I would either be pissed or laughing at your comment.
I called them black --- You just referred to blacks as "them". Maybe you should think about that.
Uh, he referred to "peasants," which you then ascribed a race to. His point is accurate, in my.opinion.
When did peasants work on plantations? Did plantation owners profit off the work of peasants? Get real.
I never have heard plantation works referred to as peasants. They were referred to as slaves, not peasants or them.
https://www.thefinertimes.com/peasants- … iddle-ages
I guess you have a gap in your education.
Yeah, and these peasants from middle age are in America making every attempt to work themselves out of poverty. Your comments always speak loudly not about only your education, but your logic.
I don't think he specified America, but I didn't go back to read it. My sense was that he was using the peasants/plantation owner system as a way to describe his view of some conservative thinking.
There is nothing wrong with simply saying you misunderstood or misinterpreted. All of us have huge gaps in our educatuon, by the way, so don't take it so personally.
The basics of the English language as misunderstood by Sharlee...
As I just stated 'peasants' earlier in the sentence, the word 'them' later in a sentence then refers to that word.
In the follow up sentence, the 'them' would still refer to the word peasants.
Now a peasant could be any nationality or race, but you specifically saw black people. Why do you see peasants as automatically black? And then why would you try and add in a discussion about black people and inferior intelligence?
Perhaps a history lesson about indentured servitude is in order.
Certainly you're not afraid to discuss black people, but it rarely reflects well for you when you do.
So you feel it were "peasants that worked the plantations, where the plantation owners profited off their sweat? And not paying them at all --- This would be funny if it were not so sad. Could you offer some form of source where unpaid peasants worked for plantation owners, for free? Who were thee peasants, were they white folk from Sweden?
Hopefully, others will read your comment --- In fact, this comment deserves its own thread. It should be studied, deciphered as to its context. I frequently bring up the context and feel when chatting context can be misunderstood.
"I don't see the right having evolved from the idea of plantation owners profiting off the sweat of the hard work of the peasants while reaping what they sow and giving them nothing for wages. That philosophy is still the prevalent view of the right. And then blaming them for not being able to break the cycle of poverty."
In regard to it was you that belittled the black race... Peasants did not work for plantation owners for free, that would be black slaves... nor are peasants currently working their way out of poverty.
Actually many peasants did work for free - the free part was the cost of the passage to the Americas. Hence the link to indentured servitude - which many nationalities took part in.
That source was included in that last post. Your knowledge of history would be funny if it wasn't so sad.
But here is one really good quote - between one half to two thirds of European immigrants to the American colonies came under indentures.
And try not to misquote me like you did or I'll start calling you Dan. I never said 'peasants that worked the plantations' as you so nicely put in quotes as quoting me directly.
I did not misquote you at all. I quoted your very words. unless you have changed them. I followed the conversation, perhaps you might want to backtrack and read your previous comments You were in no respect conversing about peasants.
Drop it you look foolish. I have added a thread to ascertain what others might see in the context of the comment.
Sharlee said: 'So you feel it were "peasants that worked the plantations,'
Go ahead and look at my statement, I never said this. You reworked the words similar to what Dan does to help support a narrative never intended.
I get what you were trying to do here. You wanted to try and paint me as a racist and it backfired on you spectacularly since you were the one that created the narrative around black people. Should have just owned it and moved on.
So now you decide to double down and actually added a thread to show everyone how you tried to fabricate some intent at racism and made yourself look like a racist instead. I'm willing to bet you left out the context of the original conversation to help yourself look less like the person who brought black people into the narrative.
I made mention of the original conversation frequently. American scocieconmics. As you did correct me in one of your first posts me that that was what the conversation was all about.
Again I did not bring up the words Plantation owners and "them". That was you in your conversation about the right still supporting the values of salve owners. And I am by no means afraid to bring up any race of human being, Black, white, you name it.
"I don't see the right having evolved from the idea of plantation owners profiting off the sweat of the hard work of the peasants while reaping what they sow and giving them nothing for wages. That philosophy is still the prevalent view of the right. And then blaming them for not being able to break the cycle of poverty."
I am referring to the ideals that we were offered by Our Constitution ---popular sovereignty, limited government, separation of powers, checks and balances, judicial review, and federalism.
IMO we have at this point a Government that is well overstepping its boundaries.
America has truly evolved with time and will continue to evolve in a natural progression. It has progressed due to our Nations's freedoms and all of the wonderful checks and balances that were laid out in our Constitution.
I see the Constitution being shredded by our Government at this point.
Hey, this is why there is such a great divide. And ya think this will all just dissipate and poof we will all come together... Don't think so. Just ask yourself did you ever think the Capitol would be overrun? Lots of hate brewing. Neither side has even a smidgen of respect for the ideology of the other.
No, there cannot be unification as the interests and Republicans and Democrats are like oil and vinegar. I did not elect just another Republican in 2020, and I do not expect Joe to behave like one
But, elections have consequences and your side lost. There is a difference between conferring with Republicans about proposed legislation and having them obstruct and bring your agenda to complete standstill.
I'm not in favor of unification with a party that attacks it's own government, whether it be through propaganda from the president they elected or from the stupid followers that were convinced to physically attack the nation's Capitol.
Is government overly big and bloated. Sure, and that's a problem, especially from a deficit stance. But to be convinced that a lying, malignant narcissistic conman who was clearly a functional illiterate, as well as being named as a co-conspirator in a felony conviction in order to secure his election, is the voice you want to follow - as I have said before, I see that more as a threat to America than something to unify with.
Well, Valeant, the GOP and the Rightwing are dead to me right now and I don't care what it is they pine for, most probably, I will stand against it.
Yes, the government is big and bloated and the Republicans as the so called "fiscally responsible" party hasn't helped much.
It is just a matter of where the money is spent and what the priorities are. I have 2 trillion to spend on R &D for a flightless dodo bird, while the American people are in need? There is one example for me.
I, having worked in Federal contracting, know how much waste is built just within our procurement systems. Agencies were encourage to buy sterling silver pickle forks to spend all their allotment for that fiscal year or risk receiving less in the subsequent year.
There are tons of waste and graft that permeate everything as such that both parties can agree that it should be eliminated. Who knows how much we can save on a bipartisan basis?
We will never save on a bipartisan basis until we end the Capital Hill culture that produces pork. The only way I've ever heard that even might help there is a line item veto for the president, but Congress will never allow that to happen...it would put a stop to the pork barrel spending than retains their job for them.
Another major problem is that federal funds, and thus federal legislators, have become so entrenched in every project that happens in the country. A town can't build a water treatment plant without federal help. They can't widen a road without it. They can't build a school without people from a different state picking up much of the tab.
As long as that continues - as long as we demand that people that will never see any benefit from our project are required to provide funding for our wishes and dreams - we will not save anything at all.
I really cannot say that I disagree with the bulk of this comment, Wilderness.
But what happens when a dam needs to be repaired in Pocatello? The municipal/county of even state government lacks sufficient funds. As a red state, would you raise taxes in your state to avoid federal funding involvement in the needed repair? Because a major part of infrastructure needs to be repaired.
Pocatello does not own any dams. If the state of Idaho does, they are very small ones. The federal government owns all major dams in the country.
But the feds do not own the water treatment plants, they do not own the museums, they do not own state/county/city roads. Yet they are tasked with funding maintenance for all of them, and for building new ones as needed. That cannot be justified ethically and it is a major reason our federal taxes are so high. It is also a major reason that the federal government is able to control states as it does (do you remember the 55 mph speed limit, and how the feds convinced states to agree to it?).
"But the feds do not own the water treatment plants, they do not own the museums, they do not own state/county/city roads. Yet they are tasked with funding maintenance for all of them,"
This is incorrect. Cities fund and maintain city roads, counties fund and maintain county roads, and states fund and maintain state roads. Museums, unless they are federally owned and operated, are usually nonprofits that are funded by grants, donations, and sales revenues.
Roads are classified by functiion, i.e. Interstate (federal), Major Arterial (usually state), Minor Arterial (usually county), Street (usually city), etc.
Major Arterials (such as state highways) can run through small towns and large cities but their construction and maintenance are funded by the state. City streets are funded by the city.
The federal government does have specific pools of money that states and cities can apply for to assist with certain specific aspects of construction/maintenance. Sometimes, combined funding can be found for something like a traffic light on a state highway that goes through a small town. We just did that in our city.
Sorry, PP, but you are missing a great chunk of money if you don't think the Feds contribute to these things.
My state recently borrowed millions for county road improvements, using as collateral future Federal payments towards road repair. "Garvey" bonds they are called - Grant Anticipation Revenue Vehicle - and without those anticipated contributions from the federal government they could not be made.
New schools always get a big bump from the feds as well; it is one of the talking points when getting a bond passed to complete the funding. The first step, before even presenting to the public, is to find out how much can be had in federal funding.
Mass Transit is another major recipient of federal funding; we wouldn't have any were it not for federal money, meaning that someone it another state paid for the monorail in your city (not "your city" of course, but you get the picture).
Water/sewer treatment is another, with many towns waiting until it is absolutely necessary that the work be done in the next year or two (or the city evacuates), whereupon the feds kick in large sums to keep the city. Seen that trick pulled more than once!
You are partially right but cities are responsible for funding and maintaining their own roads and to say that the feds are tasked with that responsibility is wrong (to use just one example).
OK - I agree with you. Both feds and localities provide the funding for local roads. I did not mean to imply (though I see how it came across that way) that the feds provide 100% of the funding for local road improvements.
Same for the rest of the list as well; it is a combination of forced contributions from people in other states (federal tax base) plus money from those that will actually benefit that builds/repairs most of the local infrastructure in the country. The federal government is only responsible for 100% of the upkeep on those structures it owns: the interstate highways, federal parks and buildings, national parks, etc.
*edit* Found an interesting article that says federal funding is available to help plan and develop "recreational areas such as playgrounds, tennis courts, outdoor swimming pools, hiking trails, picnic areas, campgrounds and boat-launching ramps. Funds are also used to build restrooms, water systems and other support facilities for the general public". Want a nice public swimming pool with playground for your grandkids when they visit? The Kansas wheat farmers will help provide one even though their own kids don't have anything for 50 miles and will never enter a public swimming pool.
https://bizfluent.com/list-6827184-fede … ities.html
I think you'd be amazed at what the federal government will help fund for your community, all paid for by people that will never see it, let alone make use of it.
I am probably more aware than most people about what federal funds are available to help local communities due to my prior work experience with nonprofits and local governments. These funds are available to any community that can show a need that coincides with the criteria. As a U.S. citizen, I like knowing that if I travel to another city or state for work or recreational purposes that I will be drinking safe water, traveling on safe roads, and expect a minimum standard of living for my fellow Americans.
Your swimming pool example is extreme and I am actually skeptical that federal funds could be used to build a city swimming pool. They are extremely costly to run and maintain so even if federal funds were granted for the initial construction, a community would have to be able to fund its maintenance and keeping it open to the publuc.
In any case, I understand your point but I do believe federal funding to help fund local projects is a positive thing for all of us. I do not begrudge it like you seem to be implying you do.
But PP, that swimming pool is NOT extreme! The plain fact is that the federal govt. has it's hands, via purse strings, in nearly every action that localities take.
I DO begrudge it, at least at the level it is now. It is one thing to help out a neighborhood/city with something they're struggling with funding; it is another to force people, simply as a matter of course, to supply funding for projects all over the country they will never use. It not only produces that enormous federal control it produces endless pork, a dependence on others for what we want and an assumption that those farmers in Kansas owe us our swimming pool. It is not healthy for the nation to be so dependent. IMO - others will disagree, finding that the most healthy course of action is by committee, where marxism rules and everyone gets the same regardless of effort.
You can't live in a society of this magnitude without the concept of interdependence. There are reasonable limits, of course. but the examples you give are superlative and unlikely.
You are absolutely correct that we are a nation, not 50 independent states, but it hinges (as usual) on those reasonable limits. That is where we differ, for you as a liberal wish a large, controlling central government giving rules for everything while conservatives wish as much independence, whether individual people or states, as possible.
But those examples are NOT either superlative or unlikely. They are an everyday fact of life in the country today; the federal government will supply funding (though not usually all of it) for very nearly everything a town, city, county or state wishes. Some of it is outright pork (remember the "bridge to nowhere" in Alaska?), some of it comes in the form of grants available to all. And it has created a tremendous dependence on the largesse of Capital Hill, and the resulting control from Capital Hill.
Another real life example: the feds wish to expand dependence of the individual via medicaid, so they will pay states to expand their medicaid rolls. And my state ran ads for months based on that federal aid, touting over and over that Idaho would profit from the aid rather than the expansion costing them anything at all. Idahoans thus expanded their dependence on the people of New York, Kansas and Kentucky for their health care while the Idaho tax coffers (supposedly) grew larger at the expense of those same states. Idaho can now buy more parks, roads and whatever else than they could before...while people in New York, Kansas and Kentucky pick up the tab.
(I don't actually know if the plan worked out that way, with Idaho taxes increasing, but that is how it was advertised. And it sold on that concept; that people in other states would pay to increase the tax coffers of Idaho. Greed seems to almost always triumph.)
I am with you on this point, Panther.
There was this situation in a small town in Southern Illinois where the sewer infrastructure had broken and during rain raw sewage would seep on to the surface and pollute groundwater. The residents complain, but the city says that it did not have the millions in its coffers to address the problem. Are they just supposed to live with the health hazard and not expect help from elsewhere just because the source of that help would not directly benefit those paying to make the repairs?
I pose that question to you, Wilderness.
Well, assuming that it broke from an unforeseen storm or "natural" cause. Not a car running into it or something like that and not because it was past it's projected life span.
First, why does the city have no money set aside for emergencies? Why is their credit so bad they cannot borrow what they need, raise taxes to pay the loan, and have it done with? Because they don't need to - they can always make people in neighboring states pay for their needs?
But yes, I understand that "Acts of God" will happen (witness the hurricanes and such) and that it behooves the nation to help out. I have no problem there.
But when that broken pipe was 50 years old, had never been checked or serviced, could reasonably be expected to fail in the near future...why wasn't it taken care of before it actually broke? This is what I see over and over - towns, particularly small ones, simply put off what needs doing because they know they can force someone else to pay for it if they do. And that is neither ethical nor reasonable. They had the money to build the thing in the first place, but didn't bother to consider the future maintenance/replacement.
I find myself struggling to find reasons to want unification with a party that so clearly lacks any regard for the average citizen.
There was a riot at the capital? So what. There were riots all over the country preceding that and not one Democrat gave a hoot for people who suffered through fires, looting, vandalism, shootings and fear for their lives. Not one Democrat condemned the images of the elderly being harassed and abused by antifa. Not one Democrat stood up for the rule of law for those citizens.
Do you honestly think it's fair to whine about a few law makers who were not in danger, were not hurt, did nothing but grandstand and throw up fences to protect themselves when they could have cared less about the average American citizen? I'm afraid I have absolutely no sympathy. Quite frankly, they made mountains out of mole hills in order to further divide us.
Wow, what reality are you trying to sell here?
A riot? That was a full on insurrection. Nice try to rewrite history. One party tried to stop the peaceful transfer of power - as in - they tried to stop our democratic way of functioning as a country based on lies.
And I certainly believe there was danger as they killed a policeman to get into the Capitol and were hunting for specific people after creating a gallows outside. You're seriously going to tell me that if some, predominantly, white people constructed a gallows with a noose outside where you work, you wouldn't feel threatened if you were a black representative of Congress?
The fact you have no sympathy when a policeman is killed shows how far right you've turned and confirms why our party wants absolutely nothing to do with people like you.
Antifa was hunting police. Did the left care? You can certainly blow this out of proportion to justify your hate. That is what the left in Washington push. Hate. Division. Lies to drive their agenda. From what I've read they have decided the police officer at the capitol died of other causes. Not his interaction with those rioters. But, that doesn't fit the narrative so you ignore the data.
I am encouraged, daily, as I interact with real people across the U.S. who clearly are not buying into the insanity Washington is pushing and you appear to be buying.
The hate that concerns me is yours of our own government.
They have determined that Sicknick had a blood clot and then a stroke. He was sprayed with bear spray, which is basically a more potent version of pepper spray. When inhaled, it leads to elevated blood pressure which can cause ... wait for it ... a stroke or heart attack. But way to ignore the dangerous side effects of a weapon used by those real people who actually bought into the insanity that attacking police was justified.
There is also a difference, a huge one, between talking with Republicans and inviting them on board with proposals designed to harm the country and actually working with them to find a middle ground.
So far, I haven't seen Joe offer to work with anyone at all to find a common ground. Just an offer to talk with anyone joining him in his pet projects.
Well, since he only has one major piece of legislation, where every elected Republican declined to vote for something that 60% of their own constituents backed. You didn't see any common ground reached when 60% of the opposing party supports his proposal? Really?
Claiming that it was designed to harm the country would be one of your many lies you tell at this site.
Not sure what you're talking about. The biggest things I've seen from him is to completely mess up border control and to shut down a part of our energy production. The opposing party did NOT agree with either one, let alone at the 60% level.
Valiant made a cogent comment in reply to yours and I can only add to it.
The GOP version of the COVID relief bill was so far off from the mark of that proposed by the administration and democrats, that it appeared that Republicans did not intend to negotiate in good faith. And when things did not move in their direction, they sat it out to a man/woman. I am not not willing to engage with them when they behave like this.
Very truthful, I appreciate that. Yes, you are looking for policies that we disagree on. It would seem no unification is possible, And I think the Republicans will fight like hell to stop the Democrats ' agenda. At this point, the Republicans can push no agenda only stop one. An agenda that offers nothing but destruction.
This will be all I can ask of the GOP at this point. Obstruction like we have never witnessed.
That's the problem. So one side lost. The American people are divided. Fairly evenly. No side is so much in the majority where the other side should be completely left out in the cold nor does either side have the right to push policies so alien to the desires of the other half of America that large swaths of the population feel disenfranchised..
No side has a mandate from the American people to shove their agenda down the throats of the other.
No President has won by such a landslide that their platform is a mandate. Until both parties learn to compromise this crap will continue.
So, where was your side when the GOP wanted to ram down tax cuts for the wealthy and destroy Obamacare?
Trump did not even get the majority of the popular vote that may have given him and his side more legitimacy.
The Republicans today are totally uncooperative and that cannot stand.
Yes, compromise is desirable, but in the meantime things just cannot be allowed to stand still toward that end.
I elected Joe Biden to get results, not excuses that he is waiting for Republicans to weigh in on everything that is part of his agenda, the one that the American electorate clearly preferred.
I would call an election where the American people gave one party the Presidency and both houses of congress a mandate. Just like they did for the GOP in 2016.
They gave it this time to shove science down your throat. They gave it to shove democracy down there. They gave it to shove some truth down there instead of the lies you were being fed.
Where was your side when it was decided that young people, just starting out in life and with low incomes but excellent health, shall subsidize the health insurance for the elderly, who mostly have more wealth and worse health?
It was called the Social Security Act of 1935. I thought that the concept was a good idea then and still is. I pay taxes to support the elderly when I was young, so that now that I can be the beneficiary of the same program.
Subsidy is the reality in any advanced nation. I have to pay mill levy for public schools that I don't use. But again, somebody paid this tax for me while I was in school.
"This man has hoof and mouth diseases. He just can't keep his mouth shut when he should... No matter how hard they try they are unable to control him. It would be better for the country if they put him back in the basement. He is an embarrassment to America."
Sounds so familiar, it reminds me of the very shortcomings found in No. 45.....
I saw a feeble old man propped up in front of a camera, sputtering off what was on a teleprompter.
I felt while watching a snippet of it, that he was the correct leader for our current time, he embodies the current state of our nation, its economy, and its direction very well.
My goodness, he said "peasants" not "slaves." If he had meant to say slaves he would have said so.
This is not rocket science. lol
'Them' to her will always be black people. It's becoming more and more obvious with every post she makes.
To those who understand how the English language works, the use of them in my sentences clearly refers to the word peasant - for the ninth time trying to explain it to her.
And the fact that she does not understand history or that words sometimes can have multiple definitions only adds to her ridiculous claims about what was meant by peasant.
Gee...what happened to that other thread? I wonder.
I think I have made my point. And I did it all without needing to insult your person or your education...
I understand the point as well, that you felt the need to attempt to retaliate from that Kamala Harris bail reform thread, the one where you stated that 'all peaceful black lives matter protesters who were arrested are criminals,' where a few of us called you out on that statement. I understood your motives quite clearly here to try and paint me in the same light we all saw from you with that statement.
Sharlee stated: 'It would seem you are saying Blacks are less intelligent...'
I bet there's more than a few people here who would be insulted to be accused of something as vile as that statement. The fact that you don't view that as an insult is a whole thread all to itself. Maybe I'll start that one and ask for context about how someone even thinks to publish a line like that.
I won't address your first paragraph without a link to the quote. Context matters as well as facts. I would suggest you find that quote with a link before building a thread. The comment I pointed out has been posted and you provided the link.
Please build the thread, I certainly would like to see you produce the quote. " 'all peaceful black lives matter protesters who were arrested are criminals,'
I certainly remember a conversation about Harris blindly encouraging people to donate to an organization that bailed out rapists and child abusers, and --- " Minnesota Freedom Fund backed by Kamala Harris ‘bailed out registered sex offender accused of raping an 8-year-old girl" https://www.the-sun.com/news/1495022/mi … -offender/
Or -- "Kamala Harris pushed bail fund that helped murder and rape suspects get out of jail while awaiting trial " https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news … ting-trial
https://nypost.com/2021/02/03/man-twice … ted-again/
https://apnews.com/article/race-and-eth … ceec9cf7b1
Hopefully, you build that thread, it would be a very interesting conversation with a ton of information on the entire scandal. where VP Harris back a group she may not have known much about. But just most likely looked at supporting the group for a political ploy. IMO not too bright on her part.
You cannot even read a statement and understand that a thread would have been built around you saying, 'It would seem you are saying Blacks are less intelligent...'
But since you want a link, here it is: https://hubpages.com/politics/forum/351 … oe-?page=5
It was one page ago.
To be honest I did not read it but skimmed it. I noted you leaving a quote that you claim I made about Harris. I want to see a link to that quote.
And after reading the entire comment I will be glad once again to offer why I feel 'It would seem you are saying Blacks are less intelligent". I can copy and paste the entire contents that gave way to my view.
I think that statement would make an interesting thread, have at it. Like I said I think I could copy and paste my response.
In fact, I should have presented the comment where I expressed that very sentiment. I certainly could delve deeper into my opinion on why I feel your comment insulted not only blacks but people that have "right" ideologies.
I don't see the right having evolved from the idea of plantation owners profiting off the sweat of the hard work of the peasants while reaping what they sow and giving them nothing for wages. That philosophy is still the prevalent view of the right. And then blaming them for not being able to break the cycle of poverty.
Sharlee --- Is it smart to categorize people by political party or race? Not sure how I would feel if I were a black person to be stuck in a category due to my race. It would seem you are saying Blacks are less intelligent, and all put up with being taken advantage of. Wonder what a man like Obama would think of your anology. You do realize Black people have struggled to not be considered as a race that just can't break out of poverty?
This Is an opinion I offered in regard to your comment. I certainly have a right to offer my opinion. Hopefully, you noted my careful wording to offer context to my thought --- using the words --It would seem... Clearly a thought, an opinion.
https://hubpages.com/politics/forum/351 … ost4181158
Then you replied and referred to me as being racist in your following comment. I politely replied giving a very in-depth explanation of my opinion. You may not like my opinion but I was not showing any form of racism, in any respect. I was giving my honest opinion. You don't like it? I could care less... I have no respect for your opinion either. Or respect your ideologies. Those are truths. When I used the term it would seem, that's thought not an absolute truth or fact.
https://hubpages.com/politics/forum/351 … ost4181174
I note that the thread Context Matter has been taken down. So you're on your own. HP apparently did not approve of the thread. So, conversation over. Find someone else to converse with. Someone that has your views.
I now see that your lack of knowledge about US history and the varying definitions of the word peasant confused you. Someday, I hope you can come to admit that to yourself.
And when someone raises a conversation pertaining to the intelligence levels of black people, I will always see that as racist.
So, yes, I agree. Conversation over.
by Jack Lee 4 years ago
After a major hurricane hit Purto Rico dead on, why is it so difficult to get them help? Food, water, and basic necessities...? We are only a few hundred miles away. There are ships and air transports and all kinds of relief efforts by private charities and our US military. There are many cruise...
by Sharlee 14 months ago
It is early to determine how Joe's foreign policies will work out for America. However, he appears to be starting off with an ideology that he will speak loud and strong, and carry a big-ol' foam rubber stick. In comparison to our previous president that stated on several occasions "keep...
by Allen Donald 2 years ago
Leaked emails from Trump advisor Stephen Miller have become public. Here's a link:https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/201 … ked-emailsHow can we separate White Nationalism from the Trump Administration now?This is policy in the Trump administration.
by Jack Lee 4 years ago
As most of you know, I support many of Trump’s initiatives and I defend him here on hubpages when he is unfairly criticized by the media and others.You may also know I did not vote for Trump or Hillary in the 2016 election.Now, after over one year in office, and the signing of the latest Omnibus...
by Readmikenow 16 months ago
Do Democrats believe all their problems are over now that they've successfully gotten an illegitimate president and vice president in office?I think they have no idea of the problems that are going to be coming their way.Millions of Americans, and myself included, believe harris and Beijing biden...
by JOC 12 months ago
There seems to be a lot of right-wing partisan rage at this site in the last month. Let's recap why there was a need for a change.- Covid-19 Denialism that led to an additional 450,000 dead Americans.- Covid Denialism that led to an added $7.8 trillion to the national debt in just four...
Copyright © 2022 Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of Maven Coalition, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|