What's new
By:
Filters

The Biden Administration and All Things Politics

Al-O-Meter said:
What changed is that democrats lied. The guy you quoted who said Republicans did this in retaliation for Democrats making prescription drugs more affordable is telling the truth.

For those new to this story, a provision of the Affordable Care Act was passed with a sunset. It had to be done that way to get the cost down being advertised to the voting public. That sunset is coming up which would have meant the ACA would have become a crapload more expensive right before the midterm elections. The democrats hammered out a deal to push out the sunset another 3 years over strong republican objections. It is laughably called the Inflation Reduction Act but in reality it is the opposite. It is also being sold as a solution to climate change, but both the bill's title and climate change spending are cover for the real purpose of the bill; to not have ACA bills double right before the midterm election.

The republicans supported the bill to help out the troops with the understanding the democrats wouldn't push through another multi-trillion dollar spending bill. The democrats lied and so the republicans withdrew their support.
Click to expand...
www.yahoo.com

Jon Stewart calls out Fox News for refusing to have him on to discuss veterans' healthcare (updated)

Stewart spoke to anyone who would listen about Senate Republicans blocking a veterans’ healthcare bill, including right-wing outlet Newsmax, but Fox News refused.
www.yahoo.com www.yahoo.com

Stewart also called out Senate Republicans for now blocking a bill that they overwhelmingly supported just last month. The block was led by Sen. Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania, who falsely claimed that a minor but necessary tweak to the bill in the House created a $400 billion slush fund. But Toomey’s argument is easily debunked due to the fact that the spending in this bill would need to be in a budget presented to Congress each year by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs.

“By the way,” Stewart said, speaking of GOP Senators, “most of whom voted for the bill, and then turned around and voted against it even though there was no material change. I’ve never seen anything like it. Nobody on the Hill has seen anything like it.”
 
The Thriller said:
I hope voters keep this in mind. Which party is trying to solve problems and which is actively trying to throw sand in the gears? Fist bumping over hurting veterans? Imagine the outrage if the squad did that.

View: https://twitter.com/davenewworld_2/status/1552781198614732800?s=21&t=r4pffC_OzZEaVFzvnkOlIw




View: https://twitter.com/mattgertz/status/1552634253682302976?s=21&t=r4pffC_OzZEaVFzvnkOlIw


View: https://twitter.com/sykescharlie/status/1553106829772734464?s=21&t=r4pffC_OzZEaVFzvnkOlIw


View: https://twitter.com/isaacdovere/status/1552711466058399744?s=21&t=r4pffC_OzZEaVFzvnkOlIw
Click to expand...

Can you imagine what kind of term Biden could be having if not for Manchin?
 
Red said:
www.thedailybeast.com

Jon Stewart Expertly Trolls Fox News Viewers While on Fox News

While discussing how the GOP has stalled a vets health care bill, Stewart cracked some unsubtle jokes at the network’s expense.
www.thedailybeast.com
Click to expand...
This is one of the more egregious obvious slam-jobs in the legislature in recent memory. The fact that this was shot down, and that Stewart is 100% correct on the bill itself by the way, is not just ridiculous but petty and childish in the extreme. A bill aiming solely at helping veterans who have been harmed fighting for this country gets shot down because the republicans are mad something else might get passed they don't like is just sickening. Where the **** is the justification for this? I wish there were a way to get every bill-maker who voted against to spend 15 minutes defending their vote in front of a bi-partisan group of citizens. That would be high comedy, more of the Shakespearean kind, you know, mixed with equal parts tragedy.
 
Everyone should watch this. Watch the entire thing. But focus especially on 2:44-4:30 where Putin’s propagandists praise Tucker and Tulsi and then say the quiet part out loud, “we need Trump back into the White House to weaken America, NATO, and to destabilize the American system.” They even talk about how they need Trump to send out the national guard to attack American citizens causing so much domestic instability that America will no longer be able to support Ukraine.


View: https://twitter.com/juliadavisnews/status/1552150996742184961?s=21&t=6xJUyWANT9ZvCpiC-9h1dA
 
The Thriller said:
Everyone should watch this. Watch the entire thing. But focus especially on 2:44-4:30 where Putin’s propagandists praise Tucker and Tulsi and then say the quiet part out loud, “we need Trump back into the White House to weaken America, NATO, and to destabilize the American system.” They even talk about how they need Trump to send out the national guard to attack American citizens causing so much domestic instability that America will no longer be able to support Ukraine.


View: https://twitter.com/juliadavisnews/status/1552150996742184961?s=21&t=6xJUyWANT9ZvCpiC-9h1dA
Click to expand...

And we have really known about Putin/russia and trump/maga love affair for quite a while now. This isn't really news to me but it would be nice if trumpers saw and acknowledged it. They never will do either thing though.
 
LogGrad98 said:
This is one of the more egregious obvious slam-jobs in the legislature in recent memory. The fact that this was shot down, and that Stewart is 100% correct on the bill itself by the way, is not just ridiculous but petty and childish in the extreme. A bill aiming solely at helping veterans who have been harmed fighting for this country gets shot down because the republicans are mad something else might get passed they don't like is just sickening. Where the **** is the justification for this? I wish there were a way to get every bill-maker who voted against to spend 15 minutes defending their vote in front of a bi-partisan group of citizens. That would be high comedy, more of the Shakespearean kind, you know, mixed with equal parts tragedy.
Click to expand...
I did a little digging on this, because why would the Republicans vote for it a month ago and now oppose the exact same bill? It looks like the democrats snuck in another $400 billion in unrelated spending in the revised bill and that's why they opposed it. Why can't the government vote on individual bills? Why do they tie them together? The veterans support would pass no problem.
 
He likes it so much that he voted against it…


View: https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1553758040188485635?s=21&t=f_liG4zF0GVgLzGOtRivQQ


Stewart is just cutting through the Republican ********:

View: https://twitter.com/mollyjongfast/status/1553755075281043456?s=21&t=f_liG4zF0GVgLzGOtRivQQ


View: https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1553762968571199490?s=21&t=f_liG4zF0GVgLzGOtRivQQ


The truth is, Biden and the Democrats are getting some legislative wins at the right time before the midterms trying to help people, govern the country (what a concept), and they sense their chances of retaking Congress slipping. So now they’re going to crap all over veterans to try and slow down the Democrats’ momentum. Hope it backfires. Government should be striving to make the lives of its citizens better; not just demagogue and pass tax cuts for the richest in America.
 
Surely said:
I did a little digging on this, because why would the Republicans vote for it a month ago and now oppose the exact same bill? It looks like the democrats snuck in another $400 billion in unrelated spending in the revised bill and that's why they opposed it. Why can't the government vote on individual bills? Why do they tie them together? The veterans support would pass no problem.
Click to expand...
Not true. Chuck Todd and Job Stewart explain this. I suggest you watch this 1 min clip so you get better informed.


View: https://twitter.com/mollyjongfast/status/1553755075281043456?s=21&t=f_liG4zF0GVgLzGOtRivQQ


Some critical thinking might also be necessary. Repubs are acting like they’re concerned with spending… on veterans… just two years after they spent like drunken sailors on bailouts for farmers because of failed trade wars with China and a tax cut to top earners while the economy was doing just fine. Anyone who thinks Republicans care about budgets and deficits should know that I have a bridge to sell them.


www.newsweek.com

Under Donald Trump's Watch, the National Debt Increased by $7.8 Trillion

Trump promised to "get rid" of the national debt during his 2016 presidential campaign.
www.newsweek.com www.newsweek.com
 
Last edited:
Surely said:
I did a little digging on this, because why would the Republicans vote for it a month ago and now oppose the exact same bill? It looks like the democrats snuck in another $400 billion in unrelated spending in the revised bill and that's why they opposed it. Why can't the government vote on individual bills? Why do they tie them together? The veterans support would pass no problem.
Click to expand...
I keep reading this. I've seen no evidence of it. Everyone backing the bill says go read it, nothing has changed. Everyone who says they added spending never provides the verbiage differences detailing this, they just say "oh yeah well they did". Why don't they just post the passage that says "here's the extra spending in plain English and this is what it's for" but no one does.
 
Surely said:
I did a little digging on this, because why would the Republicans vote for it a month ago and now oppose the exact same bill? It looks like the democrats snuck in another $400 billion in unrelated spending in the revised bill and that's why they opposed it. Why can't the government vote on individual bills? Why do they tie them together? The veterans support would pass no problem.
Click to expand...
Ya everything im reading says that the 400 billion was always in the bill. Only change was some wording about the 400 billion from discrectionary spending to mandatory spending or something like that. And from what I have read even with the word mandatory in there it still has to be voted on by congress each year.

I think republicans simply dont want anything good to be passed while democrats have control of the house, senate, and presidency. I think that is the only reason it didn't pass. Republicans are willing to make themselves and the country look bad as long as it prevents the democrats from looking good. Its stupid petty crap.
 
It sounds like everyone is in favor of taking care of the veterans. So why can't they pass a 1 page bill that funds that? Why tie it to anything else? Sounds like this could be resolved really quickly.
 
fishonjazz said:
Ya everything im reading says that the 400 billion was always in the bill. Only change was some wording about the 400 billion from discrectionary spending to mandatory spending or something like that. And from what I have read even with the word mandatory in there it still has to be voted on by congress each year.

I think republicans simply dont want anything good to be passed while democrats have control of the house, senate, and presidency. I think that is the only reason it didn't pass. Republicans are willing to make themselves and the country look bad as long as it prevents the democrats from looking good. Its stupid petty crap.
Click to expand...
Exactly this

Simple question, why shouldn’t spending on the health care of veterans be mandatory spending? Do you have any good answers for this? What about the Republicans on here who are defending this bill’s failure? Seems like a political dud to me to argue over whether it should be discretionary or mandatory spending. How does making veterans come back every so often to get funding for their health ailments help anyone? Just get them the money they need to be taken care of. Repeal the Trump tax cuts or slash ICE funding if Republicans are truly concerned with the budget.
 
Last edited:
Surely said:
I did a little digging on this, because why would the Republicans vote for it a month ago and now oppose the exact same bill? It looks like the democrats snuck in another $400 billion in unrelated spending in the revised bill and that's why they opposed it. Why can't the government vote on individual bills? Why do they tie them together? The veterans support would pass no problem.
Click to expand...
The obvious reason they are opposing is the Manchin deal going on right now. Other **** is happening they don't like so they are being petty children. It's been their general MO since 2016.
 
Here is the bill that passed in June:

www.congress.gov

H.R.3967 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): Honoring our PACT Act of 2022

Summary of H.R.3967 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): Honoring our PACT Act of 2022
www.congress.gov

Here is the bill that failed a few days ago:

www.congress.gov

S.3373 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): Honoring our PACT Act of 2022

Summary of S.3373 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): Honoring our PACT Act of 2022
www.congress.gov

@Surely can you point to the major changes to the bill that you oppose? I certainly am not seeing any additional funding or pet projects here. The text looks pretty much the same as the bill that passed in June.

Let’s… do some critical thinking here. The midterms are coming up and this would be a big win for Democrats. Don’t you think there’s a possibility that Republicans are merely trying to obstruct the Democrats’ momentum here in an attempt to hurt them for the midterms? Especially after the Manchin-Schumer deal looks to be going forward?

I mean, does this look like a group of people concerned with budget deficits? Or does this look like someone who is happy to play political games?


View: https://twitter.com/meidastouch/status/1553037966057955328?s=21&t=AQqtH6eYx_7-kyFZMiRrkA
 
LogGrad98 said:
I keep reading this. I've seen no evidence of it. Everyone backing the bill says go read it, nothing has changed. Everyone who says they added spending never provides the verbiage differences detailing this, they just say "oh yeah well they did". Why don't they just post the passage that says "here's the extra spending in plain English and this is what it's for" but no one does.
Click to expand...
They can’t provide the verbiage because it doesn’t exist. They just hope low info voters just accept whatever ******** Republican senators shovel at them and let grievance and tribalism take care of the rest.
 
So what's the extra 400 million for, if it is there at all?

Does each bill summarize the total cost? Are they 400 million different?
 
Gameface said:
So what's the extra 400 million for, if it is there at all?

Does each bill summarize the total cost? Are they 400 million different?
Click to expand...
It is an argument as to whether the 400 is discretionary spending or mandatory. But really they are using that as a smoke screen to kill something to stick it to the Democrats because of other stuff happening aside from this.

This is eye-opening, but BE WARNED THERE ARE BAD WORDS SAID IF YOU WATCH THIS VIDEO! WATCH AT YOUR OWN RISK!!


View: https://youtu.be/fmacgVAtxSk
 
LogGrad98 said:
It is an argument as to whether the 400 is discretionary spending or mandatory. But really they are using that as a smoke screen to kill something to stick it to the Democrats because of other stuff happening aside from this.

This is eye-opening, but BE WARNED THERE ARE BAD WORDS SAID IF YOU WATCH THIS VIDEO! WATCH AT YOUR OWN RISK!!


View: https://youtu.be/fmacgVAtxSk
Click to expand...

So the big stumbling block is if they can decide to cut this funding on a yearly basis?

Do they support providing treatment for people who were injured as a direct result of serving their country or don't they? Why would you need easier ability to cut it if they support it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top