Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[crashcourse]

Shut your hole

[Jeff Buchanan]

David French makes a good point:

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/07/democratic-civil-war-root-for-nancy-pelosi-and-joe-biden/

Being the glass half full guy here, maybe there is hope for finding a path towards reasonable solutions to long term problems in America. What we have now is an executive spouting fundamentally divisive shit and demanding unreasonable things both at home and abroad and an opposition asking for the voters to embrace socialist idiocy.

[froot loops]

There is no sense in shooting for an improvement to the existing ACA as long as there are endless lawsuits designed to kill all of the ACA. The GOP's behavior and deportment regarding the ACA since it's passage rendered the attempt at bipartisanship as utterly foolish. They watered it down for bipartisanship and then received no votes from the folks they watered it down for. They adopted a Heritage Foundation plan to get votes and didn't get any votes. French argues for Biden and his improvement to the ACA, it sounds good in theory but it won't work. It would be a second fools errand. As long as Mitch McConnell is around there are no reasonable solutions and he's not going anywhere.

[Jeff Buchanan]

I agree with your take on the ACA. However, it does represent what was reasonably achievable given the reality of the health-care market place and the politics surrounding it. Was it perfect? No and in a lot of a ways it wasn't a great or even good plan. But it can be made better despite your take on McConnell and the Senate that I disagree with.

French's point was that the leadership of the D party is telling the whacko's at the extremes of both parties that what you want is not politically achievable. The corollary then is a second message for both parties to start thinking about what is politically achievable. For example, an improved method, with a starting place being the ACA, to deliver health care to Americans is entirely possible if the extremes of both parties will STFU and figure out that voters want the kind of Congressional action that characterized several bi-partisan legislative efforts in the past.

The link below provides an interesting history of these efforts. It goes way back but the period from the early 80s and during the Reagan administration demonstrate that besides bitter bipartisan divisions in Congress, passing meaningful legislation involving important issues can be accomplished. It takes leadership and French is suggesting that rooting for Pelosi and a Presidential candidate for the D party that, despite his milk-toast political past, if elected is not going to be as divisive as Trump has been and will continue to be if he is re-elected. IOW, there is a chance to get decent immigration, tax and health care reform if the whackos are marginalized and adults act like most voters expect them to.

https://bipartisanpolicy.org/history-of-bipartisanship/

[Dr. Strangelove]

you ask for a november 2020 miracle that gets trump re-elected

I give you the mod squad

spend as much time calling Pelosi and biden racist as they do trump

equate immigration detention centers to Nazi concentration camps that slaughtered 8 million

ban coal ban medical insurance companies ban student debt ban cows

anybody thasnt agree with us is racist or sexist or phobic insert prefix here

no role for white guys either dem or republic

AOC and the other three are a perfect foil

I've heard the phrase if you don't like it get the hell out for years and years

but now that trump says it its racist

[crashcourse]

my father in law used to tell that to his youngest kid--if you don't like it move

certainly many take that phrase seriously on the other side also.

many people moving to carribean central America Canada etc--threat of many more moving if medical insurance is one payer or whatever directions this country chooses to go should socialism become more established

I never heard that phrase and thought whomever uttered it was racist--much more likely they are nationalist

[Ghengis Jon]

I like instant karma.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/05/us/texas-robber-gun-shot-trnd/?iid=ob_article_footer_expansion

[Dr. Strangelove]

my father in law used to tell that to his youngest kid--if you don't like it move

certainly many take that phrase seriously on the other side also.

many people moving to carribean central America Canada etc--threat of many more moving if medical insurance is one payer or whatever directions this country chooses to go should socialism become more established

I never heard that phrase and thought whomever uttered it was racist--much more likely they are nationalist

[froot loops]

I agree with your take on the ACA. However, it does represent what was reasonably achievable given the reality of the health-care market place and the politics surrounding it. Was it perfect? No and in a lot of a ways it wasn't a great or even good plan. But it can be made better despite your take on McConnell and the Senate that I disagree with.

French's point was that the leadership of the D party is telling the whacko's at the extremes of both parties that what you want is not politically achievable. The corollary then is a second message for both parties to start thinking about what is politically achievable. For example, an improved method, with a starting place being the ACA, to deliver health care to Americans is entirely possible if the extremes of both parties will STFU and figure out that voters want the kind of Congressional action that characterized several bi-partisan legislative efforts in the past.

The link below provides an interesting history of these efforts. It goes way back but the period from the early 80s and during the Reagan administration demonstrate that besides bitter bipartisan divisions in Congress, passing meaningful legislation involving important issues can be accomplished. It takes leadership and French is suggesting that rooting for Pelosi and a Presidential candidate for the D party that, despite his milk-toast political past, if elected is not going to be as divisive as Trump has been and will continue to be if he is re-elected. IOW, there is a chance to get decent immigration, tax and health care reform if the whackos are marginalized and adults act like most voters expect them to.

https://bipartisanpolicy.org/history-of-bipartisanship/

It absolutely will not be made better by McConnell and Senate. Their goal in life is to remove it and strip any recipients of their health coverage, their can be no other takeaway from the last 10 years. My take on McConnell 100 percent is correct, he is only about power. Obama certainly wasn't demonstrably divisive with the ACA(he tried bi-partisanship and was given the birtherism treatment!). His point man was the milquetoast Joe Biden. If Biden was to be elected, McConnell 1st and only goal would be to make him a one term president as he stated with Obama. That means scorched earth politics by 100 percent opposition as is his track record suggests. There can be no other intepretation.

I like Biden but he thinks he understands McConnell and he doesn't. Like the immortal Mike McDermott said in the movie Rounders, "Listen, here's the thing. If you can't spot the sucker in your first half hour at the table, then you ARE the sucker."

[froot loops]

Long article on the decades long CBP dysfunction

[crashcourse]

the president wrote in a series of tweets

[froot loops]

when you are elected to the House of Representatives, your job is to tell people how the government is to be run.

in the context of what was happening it is not in my opinion

Yeah of course not, I'm sure you thought Captain Birtherism was sent on his path by a true desire to confirm Barack Obama was born in Hawaii. LOL

[Dr. Strangelove]

[iam416]

Omar is detestable.

[iam416]

PDJT saw Pelosi finally standing up to the most vile and insipid of her party and knew he had to reunite them. He has no chance running against a quasi sane D. His only chance is to saddle the Ds with those wackjob ignoramouses. Gotta keep them together.