Joe Biden's Presidency

[Bird of Prey]

It’s really funny how the GOP acts like the IRS needs more money to audit poor people. What are they auditing? People have their W2 sent to the IRS. All the documents for people on the lower income scale transmitted to the IRS.

You're really a total DOLT. Why don't you take up another hobby? There has not been one Republican advocating anywhere that the IRS "NEEDS MORE MONEY". Point TWO Polly, over one half of all IRS audit last year were directed at small businesses and lower income people. Point THREE, what does the W2 being sent to the IRS have to do with anything? ALL W2's go to the IRS, STUPID. And a ton of low income taxpayers file their own paperwork and tailor the return to their own mortgage, loans, and warranted deductions and do not take the standard deduction.

Personally, I have had my taxes done by the US Army. As a disabled veteran I can have the military do it and do so. So.... if the PIECE OF **** IRS wants to audit my return, they can talk it over with the Colonel in charge of the department processing of my tax returns.

[WES445]

I get Wes’ frustration, and while presidential elections in my lifetime have almost always been a choice between tweedledee and tweedledum, the last two (2016, 2020) in particular, have revealed quite clearly the rot at the core of the system. If 2024 is a repeat of 2020, then the rot will most definitely have settled in for the long haul.

A large part of the problem derives directy — and in cases, indirectly — from the Constitution itself (with things like the Electoral College, the tortuous process for making amendments, or the outdated elements in the document).

SCOTUS rulings, notably Citizens v. United, have exacerbated the rotting process.

Finally, there is the stranglehold over the process held exclusively by the two major parties, whose primary goals more often than not are simply either getting in or remaining in power.

None of these is going to change until…well, until the proverbial feces hits the fan. Dog knows when that’ll be or in what form it’ll take, but it’s coming. EDIT: My best guess: In the words of the poet “This is the way the world ends. Not with a bang but a whimper.”

Fine, you identified the problem, how do we remedy it cause it seems to be not working.

[natepro]

But I get your point very clearly and you and the moderates are just about as worthless as the republicans. You don't give a crap about my community issue which is reflected by the DNC policies and this bill and I am fine with that. Really, gotten use to the DNC's excuses by now. Just shut your mouth about my complaining when my community, once again come up short, ok? Don't take it personally, cause I would said the same to a republican.

ohh I forgot,

If there's one thing we can be certain of, it's that you didn't get anything very clearly.

Literally the thing I'm arguing for is how to make those things happen, and your response is that I'm a moderate who is basically a Republican, I guess?, and that I'm happy with things as they are now. It's like a conversation I don't even need to be around for, because anything that's actually said has no effect on whatever rant you're going to go off on next.

[mngopher35]

Ugh. No. Just no. I "got on him" not because he said anything about what was in the bill, but because of his reaction to what I said initially. And now he seems to have completely contradicted all of it, so who knows.

It is beyond disingenuous to act like I "kept pushing" after he "admitted he didn't have the answers," given that he did it one post ago as I write this. Feel free to go back and read for yourself, up until his last post he barely acknowledged the question, much less say he didn't have any answers; instead, he decided to just keep repeating straw men.

You're certainly free to defend his "main point," but that would make you the only person who knows what it even is at this point.

You have consistently been trying to use that he (by his own admission) doesn't have a clear answer to the questions you ask to deflect from his main point (which was about what was missing in the bill). That's part of the issue, this entire thing has clearly been a way for you to not address the actual issue noted and whine about him and make it about him. Just like dbroncs you chose this specific route instead leading to those questions despite him saying openly now he doesn't have all those answers (and as I explained no one would).

Your strawman arguments and entire approach matching trumpers tells me plenty about who is the one being disingenuous here. I will happily engage with discussion about the issues in the system and why Wes was generally right with it being an issue. Oh I see what you meant now, it was obvious he didn't and wouldn't have an answer though as my first post got at. Turns out he admitted it in the post you reference shortly after my posts. It was obvious reading his posts what he was actually focused on.

I guess I am the only one actually reading his posts then? You seem to be focused on bashing him for not being able to explain when he already said he can't this is exactly what happened with hawkeye/dbroncs that was described earlier. You taking this approach is your choice and I will definitely side with those making correct points (we need to work to solve the gun issue, there are issues with the party/system and how it works). I don't care about the side show or trying to expose others for their lack of knowledge/answers on deflections. I just explained briefly multiple issues within the party and you still choose to focus on Wes instead of that discussion. It's obvious what is going on here.

[WES445]

If there's one thing we can be certain of, it's that you didn't get anything very clearly.

Literally the thing I'm arguing for is how to make those things happen, and your response is that I'm a moderate who is basically a Republican, I guess?, and that I'm happy with things as they are now. It's like a conversation I don't even need to be around for, because anything that's actually said has no effect on whatever rant you're going to go off on next.

I never got into this discussion to say how to make things happen. If I was that smart, I wouldn't be talking with you and out doing it. It is a butt silly question you brought to the conservation. I am mentioning those who got left out in the cold on this bill.

[natepro]

You have consistently been trying to use that he (by his own admission) doesn't have a clear answer to the questions you ask to deflect from his main point (which was about what was missing in the bill). That's part of the issue, this entire thing has clearly been a way for you to not address the actual issue noted and whine about him and make it about him. Just like dbroncs you chose this specific route instead leading to those questions despite him saying openly he doesn't have all those answers.

Your strawman arguments and entire approach matching trumpers tells me plenty about who is the one being disingenuous here. I will happily engage with discussion about the issues in the system and why Wes was generally right with it being an issue. I will quote where he says it in a minute from above even despite your claims.



He explains it pretty clearly right here I would argue, including the bold.

I guess I am the only one actually reading his posts then? You seem to be focused on bashing him for not being able to explain when he already said he can't this is exactly what happened with hawkeye/dbroncs that was described earlier. You taking this approach is your choice and I will definitely side with those making correct points (we need to work to solve the gun issue, there are issues with the party/system and how it works). I don't care about the side show or trying to expose others for their lack of knowledge/answers on deflections. I just explained briefly multiple issues within the party and you still choose to focus on Wes instead of that discussion. It's obvious what is going on here.

If he didn't have an answer, he could've said that the first time it was asked. He didn't. He could've said it the second or third or fourth time; he didn't. He didn't say it at all until before that reply, and then he completely contradicted himself in the process.

Quoting the post I was referring to and then acting like it's not the one I was talking about is a strange way to go.

You continue with this disingenuous ****, so I'm just going to lay it all out. Let's look at where in the conversation that post fell, shall we?

After long circle jerk on the BBB policy this is what was left out after the Dems where cheering passing the new verison of it.

Universal pre-K
Child care
Elder care
housing fund
community college, free,
EITC expansion
Closing Medicaid gap
Immigration
Tax rate hikes
Millionaire surtax
Ending carried interest

But it is nice to know that the republicans block a cap on insulin cost for many Americans on private insurance. But that didn't stop Chuck Grassley from tweeting that he voted to make insulin available four pennies on the dollar two uninsured and w high deductible plan but it was the Dems who blocked it.

Those things don't happen without more Democrats in office. It's just that simple.

It wouldn't happen if the Democrat ran both houses at 80%, had the Oval Office and SC were filled with democrat hacks. Some group of Manchin like dems would block it. Don't fool yourself into thinking they work for us. Donor money runs wild on both sides of the fence and businessmen always expect returns on their investment.

Then you're complaining, for some reason, about things you think have zero chance of happening.

The fact that this bill was passed at all, with what good is done by it, is a further illustration of why it matters. You can talk about theoretical "Manchin-like Dems," whoever they would be outside of him and Sinema, but you also can't name a single Republican that would vote for more, given that we know not a single one voted for this bill.

Bringing the republicans into this don't excuse the troubling job this party is doing for it's base. We aren't having a who is the crappiest party game when judging the democrat efforts. Any internal problems, like Sinema and Manchin, in getting things done, is the leadership problem. Which was front and center during the first two years of Biden's administration. You actually think that little farce really inspire their base who were watching much need policies been whittle down to this? It is like promising a kid a pony for Christmas and he get a pot holder. you would expect him to grin with pleasure? Big promises that turn into low return don't you get you a participate trophy.

But if you are into low returns, like not including a insulin cap or not having child credit policies which really did help lift children out of poverty, fine. Stay in the party. Not raising min. wage while the republicans are pose to cut social aid, fine stay in the party. At the end of the day to say the democrat are at least not like the republicans isn't enough. We expect move from democrat and they didn't delivery.

Hope you didn't burn your "Biden will be another FDR" bumper sticker, you can run that bs during the 2024 election. Maybe Hillary will chastise the democrat base again for not appreciate the things that the DNC have accomplish like you two are doing

Then we are just f aren't we when it comes to climate change. Cause there is zero chances of Congress not continuing to support fossil fuels over alternative energy. There was a nice little package for fossil fuels in this bill. Change the system or just learn to live with the result of a broken system which Pelosi is apart of . Crowing about bringing in the most money into the DNC coffers.

I mean.. That seems to be your answer, yeah. It's all I've heard from you. It's like you think we can pass laws if we just want it badly enough.

I mean.. That seems to be your answer, yeah. It's all I've heard from you. It's like you think we can pass laws if we just want it badly enough.

You'll notice how far into it we are and the post you quoted, with the bolded line, still hasn't appeared. Continuing...

What expectations? You don't seem to have any.

Show me where I said anything about "not complaining" about them.

Isn't this whole discourse base on my complain about the democrat not delivering what is needed?

What expectation? I don't seem to have any expectation? I wouldn't complain if I didn't have expectation. As in complaining to show one dissatisfaction for something.

What kind of stupid word game are you playing?

How can you have any kind of expectations when you can't even say how any of this would happen in the first place? You notice that he asked you "what does burn it all down look like exactly" and you didn't even approach answering the question? The problem isn't that you have complaints, it's that you have only complaints. "Burn it all down" is no more a suggestion than "fix everything" is.

Fine, keep a corrupt system, like that won't destroy this country with it's inaction on climate change and social unrest.

Oh, that right it is working so great for us now, silly me.

You can't even describe how you would replace it or what you'd replace it with. You complain about anything that could actually move things in a positive direction, you complain when things are moved in a positive direction but not far enough, but when asked to explain how any of the things you want will be accomplished it's apparently a secret. It's pointless whining.

HAHAHAH, yeah, it's a pointless whiny to a moderate. Live with it. Others in the democrat party aren't to happy with the DNC's accomplishment either. You losing supporters. Hell, some even ran to Trump.

So, keep making it about me, when others in the base are voicing the same things. What? You are just going to call them whiners too like Hillary and then beg for their support come election time?

But yeah, it just come down to me whining.

I'm "making it about you" because I'm talking to you, and you're the one that said we should burn it all down. What that means, how that's accomplished, what we replace it with, what the 300 million people living here do as it's all happening - apparently these are details we need not concern ourselves with.

Or you just haven't thought beyond "burn it all down."

Then you got your head up your arse, if you think that it just my "whinnying" is the problem. I talking politic not my personal wish list like you think. If the DNC can't get their supporters to the ballot box to support Biden , you can send your hate mail to me.

You are being foolish, we had a damn civil war to change a deeply racist policy, we survive what was needed to be done at a high price. Change don't come cheap.

We don't even have to have a civil war, just quit supporting those who brought us to the state we are in now. Vote in people who are willing to cut military expenditure for social need, people who willing to talk to our enemy without beating war drums. People seems to forget that is possible.

All we lack is the will to do so. Every social advancement we have undergone have cost blood and money. Quit being chickenshit and step up the plate.

We're still not there. This is all of that "kept pushing" you were talking about I was doing, except it's all still before he says anything about not having the answers. On we go.

I didn't say you were the problem, I said you're the one I'm talking to.

Just so I'm clear: the way we "burn it all down" is by voting in different people? That's your suggestion to change the system?

Well got damn son, I do believe the Constitution stated that possibility.

You do know "burn it down" is being use figuratively not literally?

I know that "burn it down" isn't "just vote for different people!" What part of that changes the system?

At last, we arrive.

Let's not dive down into what you know cause so far it seems you are willing to ride with what we have for leaders.

And no, I don't have the answer outside a willingness to try a different course since this one isn't working. That is a fact you aren't able to get around. It ain't working for most, thus the dissatisfaction. Isn't like the democrat is a winning team that brought us forty some years of prosperity. No, they haven't instead we got a mean downward mobility happening right now. The democrats as they are now aren't for the challenge or the republicans as our present abortions status shows.

It isn't the system that is corrupt or inefficient but the people within it. Why is that so hard to grasp for you? Honestly. Change the people and get ones who are motivated to do the heavy lifting?

And now the corrupt system, the broken system, the corrupt foundation... isn't corrupt.

The guy can't even agree with himself at this point, but sure, you'll "side with those making correct points." Or you'll ignore the field of strawmen he created instead of answering anything, ignore the fact that he went from "burn it down" to "elect different people," ignore that he completely contradicted himself and breezed past it like it didn't happen, and then call other people disingenuous.

I didn't make him say any of those things, I didn't use some crazy rhetorical jiu jitsu to make him contradict himself, he did that all on his own. And you want to act like he had some clear, concise, consistent point.

If anyone else here had contradicted himself like he did, you'd be one of the first to call it out; instead, not a whisper. But yeah, I'm definitely the disingenuous one here.

[WES445]

Oh, sweet lord are you for real?

I was suppose do this here and there. I didn't do this. You can't do jit jitsu. Got damn, just write out a rule of engagement so we can not continue this discourse.

[natepro]

I never got into this discussion to say how to make things happen. If I was that smart, I wouldn't be talking with you and out doing it. It is a butt silly question you brought to the conservation. I am mentioning those who got left out in the cold on this bill.

Yes, how to accomplish the things we want is a very silly question. Why would we even want to think about such things? Total waste of time.

[natepro]

Oh, sweet lord are you for real?

You poor little headcase.

Good one.

[mngopher35]

If he didn't have an answer, he could've said that the first time it was asked. He didn't. He could've said it the second or third or fourth time; he didn't. He didn't say it at all until before that reply, and then he completely contradicted himself in the process.

Quoting the post I was referring to and then acting like it's not the one I was talking about is a strange way to go.

You continue with this disingenuous ****, so I'm just going to lay it all out. Let's look at where in the conversation that post fell, shall we?






You'll notice how far into it we are and the post you quoted, with the bolded line, still hasn't appeared. Continuing...







We're still not there. This is all of that "kept pushing" you were talking about I was doing, except it's all still before he says anything about not having the answers. On we go.




At last, we arrive.


And now the corrupt system, the broken system, the corrupt foundation... isn't corrupt.

The guy can't even agree with himself at this point, but sure, you'll "side with those making correct points." Or you'll ignore the field of strawmen he created instead of answering anything, ignore the fact that he went from "burn it down" to "elect different people," ignore that he completely contradicted himself and breezed past it like it didn't happen, and then call other people disingenuous.

I didn't make him say any of those things, I didn't use some crazy rhetorical jiu jitsu to make him contradict himself, he did that all on his own. And you want to act like he had some clear, concise, consistent point.

If anyone else here had contradicted himself like he did, you'd be one of the first to call it out; instead, not a whisper. But yeah, I'm definitely the disingenuous one here.

Sure and you could have just not played games because he answered negatively about dems and the system. You both chose to do this but at least he had a real point initially. You just wanted to try and make him look foolish because he doesn't have the answers no one would. I don't have as big of an issue personally with the one making a point.

I already read the entire thing haha. I edited my post before this, it wasn't disingenuous I didn't understand your point. I already addressed in my first post though and then again just there how no one would have an answer. It was obvious from the start and that's the entire reason you pushed it further.

His responses seem to get at not trusting the democratic party and even mentions money. You guys even discuss the similar idea I pointed out of not being worse doesn't mean good. He had a lot of the same points clearly stated in these posts I kept telling you he had lol. It's because I actually read them, now after quoting them you will actually reread and realize that's the case. It's just as I said, then you started questioning him about the specifics you knew there would be no answers too. This only helped my point lol.

You were focused about making it about his lack of knowledge/answers once he pointed out those issues. Just because he doesn't have the answers doesn't mean he wasn't correct. I will gladly discuss them and already have to an extent but you continue to waste time focusing on Wes instead. It's so obvious why that's the case, especially when he clearly made some of the same points I was saying he had. If I am the only one that saw it then maybe I was the only one actually reading his responses trying to understand. You clearly had a different agenda in mind as I keep getting at though because you didn't acknowledge it and did instead go down the mindless questioning route mentioned.

I already explained multiple times over I don't agree with everything or his approach. He said off base things too but when people play dumb games it bothers me less if that happens to them. Whining about Wes changes nothing I have been pointing out about you though. You are still pointing the finger at others trying to say worse instead of acknowledging issues within.

[WES445]

Yes, how to accomplish the things we want is a very silly question. Why would we even want to think about such things? Total waste of time.

When ask of one of the poster here. You think any of us can answer that question? How about you? I don't hear anything from you but "the DNC did the best that they can" like that is a suitable answer for any job done. You are twisty little muther f'er aren't you. Playing silly games.

[dbroncos78087]

This is a witch hunt! Am I doing this right?

Oh wait…no sorry I believe if someone breaks the law, they should be punished.

[natepro]

Sure and you could have just not played games because he answered negatively about dems and the system. You both chose to do this but at least he had a real point initially. You just wanted to try and make him look foolish because he doesn't have the answers no one would. I don't have as big of an issue personally with the one making a point.

I already read the entire thing haha. I edited my post before this, it wasn't disingenuous I didn't understand your point. I already addressed in my first post though and then again just there how no one would have an answer. It was obvious from the start and that's the entire reason you pushed it further.

His responses seem to get at not trusting the democratic party and even mentions money. You guys even discuss the similar idea I pointed out of not being worse doesn't mean good. He had a lot of the same points clearly stated in these posts I kept telling you he had lol. It's because I actually read them, now after quoting them you will actually reread and realize that's the case. It's just as I said, then you started questioning him about the specifics you knew there would be no answers too. This only helped my point lol.

You were focused about making it about his lack of knowledge/answers once he pointed out those issues. Just because he doesn't have the answers doesn't mean he wasn't correct. I will gladly discuss them and already have to an extent but you continue to waste time focusing on Wes instead. It's so obvious why that's the case, especially when he clearly made some of the same points I was saying he had. If I am the only one that saw it then maybe I was the only one actually reading his responses trying to understand. You clearly had a different agenda in mind as I keep getting at though because you didn't acknowledge it and did instead go down the mindless questioning route mentioned.

I already explained multiple times over I don't agree with everything or his approach. Whining about Wes changes nothing I have been pointing out about you though.

I didn't play games.

I did have a "real point."

You've at least managed to get something right: him not having an answer is why I pushed on it, because it's not a solution to anything. It's not even a real criticism, it's just ignoring reality so he can complain. And you have, apparently, decided this is both valid and worth defending. You can imagine my surprise.

Look, this is very simple. This is the very first thing I said:

Those things don't happen without more Democrats in office. It's just that simple.

Is it right or wrong?

[natepro]

When ask of one of the poster here. You think any of us can answer that question? How about you? I don't hear anything from you but "the DNC did the best that they can" like that is a suitable answer for any job done. You are twisty little muther f'er aren't you. Playing silly games.

Because one of the posters here - namely, you - is the person that expressed the opinion. Is this the stance you take on everything here? Why talk about it if we're not the ones actually implementing the solution? What's the point of talking about anything here, then?

[mngopher35]

I didn't play games.

I did have a "real point."

You've at least managed to get something right: him not having an answer is why I pushed on it, because it's not a solution to anything. It's not even a real criticism, it's just ignoring reality so he can complain. And you have, apparently, decided this is both valid and worth defending. You can imagine my surprise.

Look, this is very simple. This is the very first thing I said:



Is it right or wrong?

It's most likely correct. That's not the same thing as having more dems means we would get those things though. That's the point of his response to you. You just quoted it.

It is a real criticism to point out that those key aspects are missing from the bill. It is fair to question how much the dems are willing to fight to make larger changes based on what we have seen from this party time and time again. There are issues with the party/system even if he doesn't have all the answers he was correct there too. You pushed him because it was a way to deflect from those issues within to point the finger at him for not having an answer. As I keep explaining it's exactly what the cult members on the other side of the aisle do. You kept playing but what about with him as well.

All 3 of you are the posters on the left I argue with most probably (and probably spock). You being the least likely so I picked you to engage with since it had been a while since we had. I also hoped you would be the most open to looking back at the situation and admit what was going on. He openly states that he isn't smart enough on issues or have answers across multiple topics and threads. I agree he goes over the top sometimes with strawman but look who he is responding to. I dealt with strawman coming from you earlier so it isn't a one way street all on him. I don't know how in depth I need to go bashing another poster before you stop playing the same but what about him. It's no different then when I am accused of only going at conservatives.

This is why it seems obvious you are just playing the same games. I am open on going further and answering some of those questions if you would like. I also don't have the answers but as I showed earlier I have some at least worth engaging on if we want to get into the issues with the party. Those issues are why many don't trust them to push for actual change even if they do have two more as you get at. This bill had key pieces missing in part due to where we are at with the party/system. We just had Trump as POTUS and Roe v Wade has been overturned. A lot of the points he was making have validity whether or not Wes himself is perfect. I am willing to go further on those issues if you actually want answers/thoughts from someone who largely agrees with some of his main points.