What's new

The Biden Administration and All Things Politics


The Thriller

Well-Known Member
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.
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.
 


Gameface

PICKS = FLEXIBILITY
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2020-21 Award Winner
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?
 

LogGrad98

Well-Known Member
Contributor
2020-21 Award Winner
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?
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!!

 

Gameface

PICKS = FLEXIBILITY
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2020-21 Award Winner
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!!


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?
 

The Thriller

Well-Known Member
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 just highlighted the silliness of the Republican position here.

It’s pretty obvious that they’re really just opposing this as payback for the Manchin deal that was just struck. Republicans hope that low info voters who can’t be bothered to spend 3 mins to learn about this bill and tribalism will bail them out of taking just a god awful position on helping veterans.
 

Avery

Well-Known Member
I still contend that perhaps the next presidency should be settled with the following three events in lieu of voting:

1. Jeopardy-style quiz show - most points win one point
2. Ninja Warrior obstacle course - fastest time/furthest progress with each receiving three tries wins a point
3. (If necessary) Game of HORSE with the winner getting the presidency, loser has to retire from politics forever
 

LogGrad98

Well-Known Member
Contributor
2020-21 Award Winner
I still contend that perhaps the next presidency should be settled with the following three events in lieu of voting:

1. Jeopardy-style quiz show - most points win one point
2. Ninja Warrior obstacle course - fastest time/furthest progress with each receiving three tries wins a point
3. (If necessary) Game of HORSE with the winner getting the presidency, loser has to retire from politics forever
1659373074611.png
 


Top