All_Pro_Bills

The fundamental issue is what was their source(s) of the false story that Giuliani was the target of "Russian misinformation"? It seems ironic the story itself was misinformation. And more critical I expect they all knew the story was false before they reported it. Which has other important implications. Of course they will all say as news outlets they need to protect their confidential sources but do those protections extend to liars and people that plant false stories for political gain and to cause harm to others? Perhaps something for the courts to look into if lawsuits against news outlets follow? As for the source my guesses: A misinformation source inside the US intelligence community. A misinformation source inside DOJ or the FBI. A misinformation source inside the Dept of State. A misinformation source from a House committee like the Intelligence committee.

I'm thinking all those imaginary voters that cast ballots to springboard Joe from a marginal candidate to the Democratic nomination on Super Tuesday and to the Presidency in the General Election forgot to tune in to the speech from fantasy land the other night. But that aside why did the President that got the most votes ever produce such lousy ratings?

Always someone else's fault! That's a good insight. I can certainly concede to the point Trump dodged responsibility. Its one of the reasons he lost the election. But isn't blaming someone else the basis of all liberal ideology? Without a doubt it is. Now I'm not suggesting they have a monopoly on skirting blame but its their number one go-to move for sure. To prove it all you have to do is listen to their words, look at their actions, and at what remedies they propose. Always and everywhere absolving the "victim" of any and all responsibility for any and all outcomes.

What was the deal with the masks? Were they planning to go out and rob a bank after the speech? A room full of completely vaccinated people that can't get sick. All for show I guess and more patronizing virtue signalling.

Simply, your existence entitles you to nothing more than life, liberty, and the freedom to make your own fate and think for yourself. But we're in an era where an epidemic of entitlement is everywhere driven by the idea somebody else better off "owes" you something.

Many felt this provision was inserted by Trump in the previous administration's tax package in order to "stick it to" wealthy blue state Democratic contributors and supporters. That seems quite plausible. And the idea now with Congressional members from these states is to give those party loyalist pulling in $400K+ and responsible for close to 90% of all donations to the party their deductions back. How this contradiction resonates inside the party with the current "tax the rich" message is unclear. One alternative which is these states cutting their state and local income taxes to directly give back money appears to elude consideration and their thoughts.

It seems all these tax code changes may be DOA in Congress as there are 20-25 Democratic house members that are signaling they will not support the administrations legislation unless the SALT deduction limit of $10K is eliminated as part of any tax package. The administration to this point has expressed no interest in removing current State and Local Tax deduction limitations.

Yes all these things are happening and they're not good. But the thing is, I agree with a many of the goals and objectives the liberals have laid out. Where we disagree is how to get is all done. How to pay for it all. One of my primary life philosophies is "take care of yourself first" If you don't or can't do that how can you be in any position to help anyone else? And my main disagreement with their approach to all their ideas is all the benefits of all the programs are granted to specific individuals or groups and the costs of all the programs are socialized and put on the backs of other individuals or groups. It doesn't seem equitable that someone pays the whole dinner check and doesn't get to eat based solely on the premise they can afford it. Remove all the political rhetoric and social goodie-goodie talk and it all boils down to who pays for it. I think it was Milton Friedman that said there are four ways money gets spent. They are: 1. You spend your money on yourself 2. You spend your money on someone else 3. You spend someone else's money on yourself 4. You spend someone else;s money on someone else. Guess which one's the liberals prefer? Yes, number 3 and 4. There's our problem. The lib's are like the friend you have that when you split the dinner check they order a burger and fries. And when you pay they order surf and turf, a couple appetizers, and dessert plus a half-dozen mixed drinks.

What you said might be true but I've said the exact same thing about poor and uneducated inner city residents that for generations use public assistance as a career path but many here and elsewhere are blind to the similarities and comparisons. And did you ever work in a factory? I did working for 6 years including my time in college to pay my bills so I understand the things people complain about. If you did you should know too. But none of that addresses by key point which is the US created the "monster" that is now China under less than clear intentions. .

China's created a large number of rich oligarchs that have become billionaires because they are officials of the CCP so its another version of crony capitalism. But absent from the debate here is the understanding of the true motivation and intent for the US to create a formidable economic and growing military competitor. Because that's what a series of US administrations over the past 40 years accomplished starting with the granting most-favored nation trade status to China and then encouraging businesses to move production to China and out of the U.S. Mostly done under the absurd notion that they'll adopt of system of democracy through engagement. So all this helped China grow and caused great harm to American businesses and cities and citizens in exchange for "every day low prices". Lots of people in America consuming cheap stuff sitting at home on welfare and public assistance with no jobs and no prospects because the US government encouraged the shipment of their jobs to China. And here we are today bitching about China's ambitions and the threat they pose when its our own fault by starting the process going in the first place. "Reap what you sow", right?

What tax cut? Mine went up! And I wasn't too happy about it either. I wouldn't characterize what's going on as progress unless you're goal is destruction of our economic system and a falling standard of living for everybody. If you think we're making progress that's your choice but I expect you're in for a rude awakening very soon.

The question is where are the funds for all this coming from? The US government is broke and doesn't have any funds to do anything. 80% of the Federal budget is borrowed money every year. The only way the national debt is serviced is by issuing more debt to pay off older debt coming due. That meets the definition of a Ponzi Scheme. The Federal Reserve acts as a money laundering agent for the US treasury and their policies are the number one cause of income inequality as massive amounts of money and debt are funneled into the financial markets where those assets are majority owned by the 1%. Capital used to be created and generated by productive activities but no longer. Its just printed or created by a few keystrokes on a balance sheet somewhere. Our defense budget is about $800B a year and is bigger than combining the spending of the 2-12 countries on the list. Many of which our allies. Yet we are in no major conflicts at the moment and keep spending more. Our industries and productive capacity have been gutted and moved offshore, many to the aforementioned China. 10's of thousands of small towns and businesses have been destroyed. The economy for all purposes has been financialized and most people make "money" by moving "money" around. Bi-coastal financial cities and states have sucked assets out of the middle. 20% of the labor force works for the government at some level. For every 13 workers there is one person on long term disability even though most of the dangerous jobs have been eliminated. Everyone from the top on down is feeding like a pig at the public trough. Our education system is in shambles and college costs are out of control and out of alignment with the "value" they produce for graduates. Many of which can't find jobs using their degree. Our health care system is controlled by price fixing monopolies at all levels of the delivery system. Hospitals, drug companies, insurers, etc. Housing prices are out of reach for many and the cost of food is rising rapidly, which hurts the poorest most, and price inflation is picking up everywhere. Meanwhile, businesses can't find workers because the governments COVID relief payments are so generous that people make more sitting at home. So until either we're forced to or decide to cut and eliminate all the dead wood and passengers on the bus here this dysfunction all continue or it will crash on its own weight at some point. We are going to build back better nothing. Meanwhile, China can funds all kinds of projects like the Belt and Road initiatives. Is quietly colonizing Africa and making all kinds of deals and arrangements for resources and markets around the world. Our government is focused on the folly of maintaining the current world order. China runs trade and budget surpluses, its central bank holds trillions in reserves, and they have the productive capacity to generate capital to fund all kinds of domestic initiatives. The Chinese are raising and educating generations of scientists, engineers, and other professionals and we are producing social justice warriors along with unskilled and unemployable woke generations that are functionally useless. I say the war is over and we've lost unless we get smart and eliminate all the hustles and cons and get serious. That requires social and political cooperation which as we know we're short on these days. And the infrastructure legislation as currently defined is less infrastructure and more special interest spending.

As the left keeps reminding everyone they hold the moral and ethical high ground. So saying Trump did something as a justification for similar actions or behavior by the Biden administration seems a bit hypocritical and conditional. And while Trump was pretty bad I think this administration is headed in the direction of becoming the worst Presidency in the history of the country. Or maybe they end up killing us all starting WW3 with China and/or Russia? Whatever your political or social views my advice is to be prepared for the biggest financial and social crisis of your lifetime and its your choice to be a casualty or a survivor.

That's the Achilles Heel of the intellectual, academic, and coastal elitist left. Their existence depends on the very people they despise. People that have provide sector jobs and businesses that produce real goods and services. At some point the "deporables" will figure it out, stop supporting them, and let them fend for themselves and watch them starve to death in their Utopian communities. And at that point problem solved..

I would have expected our current President's approval rating to be a lot higher given the way the administration and their media agents are parading around like they've received some overwhelming mandate from the voters to enact all kinds of policy initiatives and changes. But the Presidential election was decided in a few swing states where the lead changed at the 11th hour almost simultaneously, the Senate is tied 50/50 with a VP tiebreaker vote if needed, and the House margin is 6 seats. That's hardly a mandate and if history is any guide Congress will flip back to the Republicans in 2022. The COVID relief bill had little to do with COVID relief and more about addressing a lot of special interests and state debts and rewarding party faithful. The Infrastructure bill is the same with not much spending for infrastructure. The southern border is a disaster, they're picking no-win fights in Ukraine and Taiwan with Russia and China, deciding not to honor the Afghanistan pullout deal of May 1st (while planing to leave 1000's of contractors and mercenaries behind to continue the war) which will surely lead to attacks on US troops, they're moving to placate Iran which Israel will not accept, staying in Syria and Iraq. And to top it off the great uniter appears to be failing at unification as there's more domestic unrest, riots, shootings, and all kinds of violence. And lots of inflammatory rhetoric coming out of the White House (just like Trump got cited for) and not a lot of talk about reconciliation and coming together. In summary, everything is falling apart right on schedule.

Law or no law if you're being threatened with physical harm and you believe fleeing is the best course of action and you have to run the dirt bags over to do that then you do that. You're about to get attacked and your attackers are not conflicted with some moral decision. They are out to hurt you. Especially so if you're in some liberal left jurisdiction where you know the government is telling the cops to do nothing to stop rioters and look the other way. And if necessary take your chances in court later. Better to be judged by twelve then to be carried by six.

He wouldn't have commented and the the story would be buried on the back-page and the media wouldn't make a big deal about it. Here's where all this is headed and why its headed that way. Local law enforcement is one of the last institutions or organizations the liberal left does not control. So they whip up the hysteria level via their media comrades and other voices at every opportunity. This is leading to calls for "reform". And the reform they're looking for is to enact "Federal" oversight and control over local police departments. Once done they will complete their FUBAR exercise of driving our country into 3rd world nation economic and social classification and then hand out surplus Mao cultural revolution outfits purchased from China at a discount since they no longer use them.

For me its a little simplistic when I hear people saying black lives matter or all lives matter. Because its a general statement that needs some qualification. My personal perspective is I believe black and all lives matter of people like school teachers, nurses, people of all races that treat others in a civil manner, people that respect the rights of others, all law abiding and honest citizens, people that are constructive and not destructive, and people of all races and demographics that have virtue and integrity. But I don't care much about the lives of people like murderers, rapists, sexual predators and other undesirables that cause harm to other people no matter what color they are. So to me ALM and BLM but I've got some people I'd exclude from that belief. If somebody takes exception to my exceptions that okay but that's how I feel.

Yes. I was flipping channels the other night and I came across a segment of his show where they were showing video of what I remember was US interior department officials on some zoom meeting introducing themselves and telling the audience what "pronouns" they prefer. I found it hilarious. Who really cares what pronouns you prefer? But I know who doesn't care. All our competitors and enemies like the Russians and Chinese. While we're wasting time arguing and advocating for all kinds of trivial social BS they are making moves around the world to squeeze the US out of the game. And its working.

This Tweet is misinformation and should have banned on Twitter as making up crap and posting it doesn't make it real. But Libs don't get "Dorseyed" on twitter. If the officer was "beaten" then it seems reasonable to expect the medical examiner would have noted any bruises and contusions and perhaps reached a different conclusion on the autopsy report. Or is there some conspiracy to protect the insurrectionists inside the government?

I'm waiting for twitter to ban her for inciting violence. And waiting, and waiting. Also waiting for the Taliban's information officer to get banned for using the platform to threaten violence toward American service personnel last week. And waiting and waiting. But its unlikely either will get "Dorseyed".

When people make references to systemic racism and grouping of people by race I think about the manager that hired me into my position a couple years ago. She is a very intelligent and accomplished African-American women that left our firm about a year ago for a corporate VP position at a large commercial bank. Earlier this year she was voted onto the board of directors of an S&P 500 company. Quite an accomplishment for anyone, much less a women of color. We still keep in touch and I can't say enough about her abilities and how she helped me. But I can't help wonder how she could rise to the considerable income and position she's currently holding as a 'victim' of systemic racism that is supposed to exist. Surely the system would not allow this? How can the believers in the systemic theory explain this contradiction? And for that matter the accomplishments of a multitude of other famous and affluent blacks. And while we're at it the plight of poor and uneducated mostly rural whites. Are these poor whites choosing not to take advantage of their superior position in life to live better than how a majority of oppressed minorities live? Lots of questions and no good answers. That's a fundamental problem with racial grouping. It ignores the qualities and attributes of the individual, their specific circumstances, and assumes they all share the same homogeneous traits. Whites are oppressors, blacks are victims. Other successful minority groups unexplained or left out of the theory. And what is a mixed race white/black child? Their identity must be an exercise in confusion for the groupers.

I'm not sure if racism is "systemic" or "not systemic". I'm finding it unproductive to even discuss or debate because as currently defined it is a completely subjective term based on the specific interpretation of anyone and everyone. I expect that you, and I, and almost everyone on the board has a different understanding and definition of the term systemic as it might relate to race. So when we debate the presence or absence of systemic problems we're all coming to the party with different expectations. How can you debate, resolve, or agree on something that you cannot first quantify, much less fix it? For example, there are millions of encounters and interactions between people of different races every day and it might be safe to say that 99.999% of those encounters are civil and lead to no acts of bias or harm. So while we need to acknowledge acts of bias exists does a level of .001% equate to systemic? Some might say yes some might say no. When I hear the word systemic I envision some factor that effects something at a high rate and impact. But what is the impact and rate of being systemic. In my experience if you can't quantify a problem then you can't fix it.

The CDC advises that because of UV ray's ability to kill viruses which is present in sunlight it is much safer to loot and riot during the day than it is at night.

Traditionally you got a vaccine, such as for influenza, in order to protect yourself from getting the flu. The idea that you're getting vaccinated to protect others simply wasn't something discussed or suggested. What's interesting is the idea of vaccinating citizens has transformed to an effort to protect society rather than to protect individuals. So the theme being pushed is you need to do you job to protect others and your safety is only important to the extent it facilitates protection of society as a whole. So socialism has crept the philosophy behind the response to COVID. Looking at it from this angle may help explain the reluctance of "officials" to open social and business activities to the vaccinated and recovered that have antibodies to protect themselves.