Re: The Most Fresh & Cordial Political Thread Ever
 

[quote=MTK;1318734]Shame that veterans are being jerked around like this

[URL="https://thehill.com/policy/defense/3578353-veterans-groups-lash-out-after-gop-blocks-toxins-bill-im-sick-and-tired-of-this-bulls/"]Veterans’ groups lash out after GOP blocks toxins bill: ‘I’m sick and tired of this bulls—’[/URL][/quote]

It's what republicans do, jerk around people no matter who, Veterans, Women , Gays , Republicans don't give a shit about anyone but trump.

Re: The Most Fresh & Cordial Political Thread Ever
 

Effort to fund a national 3rd party by former Democrat and Republicans.

[url]https://www.yahoo.com/news/exclusive-former-republicans-democrats-form-223654665.html[/url]

Re: The Most Fresh & Cordial Political Thread Ever
 

[quote=Giantone;1318745]It's what republicans do, jerk around people no matter who, Veterans, Women , Gays , Republicans don't give a shit about anyone but trump.[/quote]

But you're a Republican. Or so someone says.

Re: The Most Fresh & Cordial Political Thread Ever
 

[quote=nonniey;1318752]But you're a Republican. Or so someone says.[/quote]

G1's no Republican.

Anyway, it was the Dems who F'd this one up - trying to change the language so that they can spend $400 billion on who knows what over the next 10 years, rather than stick to what was originally agreed upon.

Re: The Most Fresh & Cordial Political Thread Ever
 

[quote=Chief X_Phackter;1318753]G1's no Republican.

Anyway, it was the Dems who F'd this one up - trying to change the language so that they can spend $400 billion on who knows what over the next 10 years, rather than stick to what was originally agreed upon.[/quote]

lol, so say's a member of the trumpette clan. Hate to break your heart but a republican that can think and see for myself and not be bullied around like the trump sheep here. Your trump party just gave the finger to Veterans.

Re: The Most Fresh & Cordial Political Thread Ever
 

[quote=nonniey;1318752]But you're a Republican. Or so someone says.[/quote]

Yes I am but unlike you and the other trump sheep I can think for myself.

Re: The Most Fresh & Cordial Political Thread Ever
 

Finally registered to vote here in SC. You don't even register under a political party. Open primaries, you can vote for whichever party you want to vote with from primary election to primary election. I like it.

Re: The Most Fresh & Cordial Political Thread Ever
 

[quote=sdskinsfan2001;1318758]Finally registered to vote here in SC. You don't even register under a political party. Open primaries, you can vote for whichever party you want to vote with from primary election to primary election. I like it.[/quote]

I'm all for getting rid of political parties!:biggthump

Re: The Most Fresh & Cordial Political Thread Ever
 

[quote=Giantone;1318759]I'm all for getting rid of political parties!:biggthump[/quote]

Well look at us, we now agree on at least 4 things:

1. Flat tax
2. Getting rid of political parties

Both of which will never happen, but we can dream.

3. Foreign policy (pretty sure we're mostly in agreeance here if memory serves)
4. America is The GOAT

On that note, I am backing back out of this thread.

Happy Friday everyone!

[IMG]https://c.tenor.com/ktndB1hN5GEAAAAd/gif-america.gif[/IMG]

Re: The Most Fresh & Cordial Political Thread Ever
 

[quote=sdskinsfan2001;1318761]Well look at us, we now agree on at least 4 things:

1. Flat tax
2. Getting rid of political parties

Both of which will never happen, but we can dream.

3. Foreign policy (pretty sure we're mostly in agreeance here if memory serves)
4. America is The GOAT

On that note, I am backing back out of this thread.

Happy Friday everyone!

[IMG]https://c.tenor.com/ktndB1hN5GEAAAAd/gif-america.gif[/IMG][/quote]

[IMG]https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRJB-_LD-gb46JqKQ7uVytwEBob7p7ZviHSBQ&usqp=CAU[/IMG]

Re: The Most Fresh & Cordial Political Thread Ever
 

Can't this guy ever STFU????


[url]https://news.yahoo.com/trump-says-nobodys-gotten-bottom-194139327.html[/url]


INSIDER
Trump says 'nobody's gotten to the bottom of 9/11' while hosting a Saudi-funded golf tournament

Trump said "nobody's gotten to the bottom of 9/11" during a Saudi-backed golf tournament.

Family members of 9/11 victims called on Trump to cancel the event at his Bedminster private club.

Trump also defended Saudi Arabia. "What they're doing for golf is so great," he said.

Former President Donald Trump said "nobody's gotten to the bottom of 9/11" when asked about the protests against a Saudi-backed golf tournament being hosted at his club in Bedminster, New Jersey.

"Nobody's gotten to the bottom of 9/11, unfortunately, and they should have, as to the maniacs that did that horrible thing," Trump told ESPN during the LIV Golf pro-am at the Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster. LIV is a new golf tour funded by Saudi Arabia's sovereign wealth fund — overseen by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.

Trump also went on to defend Saudi Arabia. "I've known these people for a long time in Saudi Arabia and they've been friends of mine for a long time," Trump said. "What they're doing for golf is so great."

Re: The Most Fresh & Cordial Political Thread Ever
 

[quote=Giantone;1318754]lol, so say's a member of the trumpette clan. Hate to break your heart but a republican that can think and see for myself and not be bullied around like the trump sheep here. Your trump party just gave the finger to Veterans.[/quote]

LMAO!!

That's your [I]tired[/I] go-to for every discussion. Must be the "trumpette clan" & STFU...

Anyway, it's not anyone's "trump party" giving the finger to Veterans. It's the Dems giving the finger to America with their willy nilly approach to spending. As a Veteran who was exposed to, and has friends who were exposed to burn pits, I would rather them get the bill right - and have it voted through for "only" its intended purpose. Those Veterans (and others) who are calling foul are just the loudest, they don't represent the majority.

This bill will pass, but only after the Dems are done playing games with the $$$.

Re: The Most Fresh & Cordial Political Thread Ever
 

[quote=Chief X_Phackter;1318777]LMAO!!

That's your [I]tired[/I] go-to for every discussion. Must be the "trumpette clan" & STFU...

Anyway, it's not anyone's "trump party" giving the finger to Veterans. It's the Dems giving the finger to America with their willy nilly approach to spending. As a Veteran who was exposed to, and has friends who were exposed to burn pits, I would rather them get the bill right - and have it voted through for "only" its intended purpose. Those Veterans (and others) who are calling foul are just the loudest, they don't represent the majority.

This bill will pass, but only after the Dems are done playing games with the $$$.[/quote]

LOL, how the hell do you represent the majority??? Thank you for your service (seriously) but screw you on your constant Dem this and Dem that. You and chico won't admit the republican party is the downfall of this country. Dems aren't saints and they get a ton of shit wrong but your blatant ignorance of what is going on is amazing . chico is just a fool but I expected more from you. You cry foul about Dem spending but ignore that the republicans come back with their own spending plans and that's what piss's republicans off now , Dems getting shit done when republicans couldn't. This country came to a complete stand still for 2 years due to a [B]World Wide Pandemic[/B] not trumps fault or Bidens any deaf, dumb and blind person could see that prices were going to go threw the roof when we came out of this. Hell yeah Government spending went up , are you saying it wouldn't have gone up if the republican plan was approved??? Oil companies cut back production during the pandemic and still have not increased production to before pandemic output any moron knows this except chico. Dems are their own worst enemy but you should be happy that the Dem(rep) Manchin is there to block everything that the Dems could do to make things better. Yes spending is way up you think I like paying $5 for gas ? To ignore that this all started while you boy was in Office is hysterical and for fuck sake you all want him back, yeah STFU and JHC are about all that can be said!

Re: The Most Fresh & Cordial Political Thread Ever
 

Jon Stewart nails it!

[url]https://www.thedailybeast.com/jon-stewart-says-fox-news-refused-to-have-him-on-to-talk-about-veterans-health-care[/url]


Jon Stewart said in an interview Thursday night that Fox News “refused” to book him for an interview to comment on GOP senators late Wednesday voting down legislation expanding health care for veterans affected by toxins while serving. “There is an information silo. I was lucky enough to get a hold of Newsmax this morning and go on there. [That] might have been the first time those viewers have ever heard about it,” Stewart told MSNBC host Mehdi Hasan. “Fox News—they refused to put me on all day. We have been begging them to get on the air all day long so that we can finally bring along some possible accountability to these senators.” The former host of The Daily Show made his presence known on multiple fronts Thursday. Referring to Republicans while speaking outside the Senate, an irate Stewart asked, “How are these people human?” On Friday morning, a Fox News spokesperson emailed: “We have welcomed Jon Stewart on our programs many times to spotlight his critical work with veterans and 9/11 first responders and look forward to having him on America’s Newsroom today at 10:30 AM.”

Re: The Most Fresh & Cordial Political Thread Ever
 

[quote=Chief X_Phackter;1318777]LMAO!!

That's your [I]tired[/I] go-to for every discussion. Must be the "trumpette clan" & STFU...

Anyway, it's not anyone's "trump party" giving the finger to Veterans. It's the Dems giving the finger to America with their willy nilly approach to spending. As a Veteran who was exposed to, and has friends who were exposed to burn pits, I would rather them get the bill right - and have it voted through for "only" its intended purpose. Those Veterans (and others) who are calling foul are just the loudest, they don't represent the majority.

This bill will pass, but only after the Dems are done playing games with the $$$.[/quote]



You fell for the lies!
[url]https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/jon-stewart-calls-out-fox-news-for-refusing-to-have-him-on-to-discuss-veterans-healthcare-055303489.html[/url]

Re: The Most Fresh & Cordial Political Thread Ever
 

[quote=Giantone;1318780]LOL, how the hell do you represent the majority??? Thank you for your service (seriously) but screw you on your constant Dem this and Dem that. You and chico won't admit the republican party is the downfall of this country. Dems aren't saints and they get a ton of shit wrong but your blatant ignorance of what is going on is amazing . chico is just a fool but I expected more from you. You cry foul about Dem spending but ignore that the republicans come back with their own spending plans and that's what piss's republicans off now , Dems getting shit done when republicans couldn't. This country came to a complete stand still for 2 years due to a [B]World Wide Pandemic[/B] not trumps fault or Bidens any deaf, dumb and blind person could see that prices were going to go threw the roof when we came out of this. Hell yeah Government spending went up , are you saying it wouldn't have gone up if the republican plan was approved??? Oil companies cut back production during the pandemic and still have not increased production to before pandemic output any moron knows this except chico. Dems are their own worst enemy but you should be happy that the Dem(rep) Manchin is there to block everything that the Dems could do to make things better. Yes spending is way up you think I like paying $5 for gas ? To ignore that this all started while you boy was in Office is hysterical and for fuck sake you all want him back, yeah STFU and JHC are about all that can be said![/quote]

Lol…Completely ignoring the energy policies Biden implemented day 1. Completely ignoring statements made by Biden on his strategy:

Direct biden quotes

Number one, no more subsidies for fossil fuel industry,” Biden said at the debate. “No more drilling on federal lands. No more drilling, including offshore. No ability for the oil industry to continue to drill, period, ends, number one.”

I’m talking about stopping fracking, as soon as we possibly can,” he said. “I’m talking about telling the fossil fuel industry that they are going to stop destroying this planet. No ifs, buts and maybes about it.”

Completely ignoring the fact Biden has negotiated with despots begging for oil production while shutting down production here.

Completely ignoring the fact the US was an energy exporter for the first time in 50 years under the last administration

Sorry the Covid excuse doesn't cut it for the American people. Keep spinning

Re: The Most Fresh & Cordial Political Thread Ever
 

[quote=Giantone;1318784]You fell for the lies!
[url]https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/jon-stewart-calls-out-fox-news-for-refusing-to-have-him-on-to-discuss-veterans-healthcare-055303489.html[/url][/quote]

LOL, There are plenty of sources out there that completely contradict what he is saying. I'm not going to do the work for you, I'm sure you can find them if you so choose. But go ahead and buy into whatever John Stewart and Yahoo Entertainment are putting out there.

Re: The Most Fresh & Cordial Political Thread Ever
 

[url]https://www.dropbox.com/s/mj4zezgunge8fwi/6.16%20Honoring%20our%20PACT%20Act.pdf[/url]

^^ actual Bill if anyone wants to read it. I quick read it and it seems to be all about toxic exposure to armed forces members. There is zero mention of funding or cost here. I did read the bill would bring in more than it would cost ... i imagine bc medical costs would go down w early detection and prevention to future exposure.

It covers burn pit exposure .. as well as a nuclear cleanup in late 80s, agent orange in vietnam ..

-----------

Republicans blocked this bill bc they will block any bill while a D is president and they were made about the surprise domestic package Manchin agreed to behind their back


------------

if anyone has any link to back up this "funding" reason for blocking the bill, id love to see it. And not the blurb were it was some un-named source saying it .. something objective

if you just think "republicans said theres the green deal in there and not actually helping troops" and then say "im not going to provide you sources" .. maybe youre being lied to.

maybe you enjoy being lied to.

One spoon fed lie, one after another .. you dont even have to have your eyes open.

Just sit back and get fed like a toddler.

Re: The Most Fresh & Cordial Political Thread Ever
 

[url]https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigration/biden-administration-fill-border-wall-gaps-yuma-arizona-rcna40567[/url]

The Biden administration on Thursday authorized completion of the Trump-funded U.S.-Mexico border wall in an open area of southern Arizona near Yuma, where four wide gaps make it among the busiest corridors for illegal crossings.


Joe Biden less than 2 years ago:
“There will not be another foot of wall constructed on my administration, No. 1," he told NPR's Lulu Garcia-Navarro

I remember hearing the border wall was racist and xenophobic…lolololol. Meaningless words I guess these days. They mean absolutely nothing

Re: The Most Fresh & Cordial Political Thread Ever
 

[quote=Chief X_Phackter;1318786]LOL, There are plenty of sources out there that completely contradict what he is saying. I'm not going to do the work for you, I'm sure you can find them if you so choose. But go ahead and buy into whatever John Stewart and Yahoo Entertainment are putting out there.[/quote]


So you didn't look at the link, I get it, trump can't admit he's wrong either just like you.

Re: The Most Fresh & Cordial Political Thread Ever
 

[quote=Chico23231;1318785]Lol…Completely ignoring the energy policies Biden implemented day 1. Completely ignoring statements made by Biden on his strategy:

Direct biden quotes

Number one, no more subsidies for fossil fuel industry,” Biden said at the debate. “No more drilling on federal lands. No more drilling, including offshore. No ability for the oil industry to continue to drill, period, ends, number one.”

I’m talking about stopping fracking, as soon as we possibly can,” he said. “I’m talking about telling the fossil fuel industry that they are going to stop destroying this planet. No ifs, buts and maybes about it.”

Completely ignoring the fact Biden has negotiated with despots begging for oil production while shutting down production here.

Completely ignoring the fact the US was an energy exporter for the first time in 50 years under the last administration

Sorry the Covid excuse doesn't cut it for the American people. Keep spinning[/quote]
chico talking....................

[IMG]https://thumbs.gfycat.com/AstonishingCaringDolphin-size_restricted.gif[/IMG]

Re: The Most Fresh & Cordial Political Thread Ever
 

[quote=SunnySide;1318793][url]https://www.dropbox.com/s/mj4zezgunge8fwi/6.16%20Honoring%20our%20PACT%20Act.pdf[/url]

^^ actual Bill if anyone wants to read it. I quick read it and it seems to be all about toxic exposure to armed forces members. There is zero mention of funding or cost here. I did read the bill would bring in more than it would cost ... i imagine bc medical costs would go down w early detection and prevention to future exposure.

It covers burn pit exposure .. as well as a nuclear cleanup in late 80s, agent orange in vietnam ..

-----------

Republicans blocked this bill bc they will block any bill while a D is president and they were made about the surprise domestic package Manchin agreed to behind their back


------------

if anyone has any link to back up this "funding" reason for blocking the bill, id love to see it. And not the blurb were it was some un-named source saying it .. something objective

if you just think "republicans said theres the green deal in there and not actually helping troops" and then say "im not going to provide you sources" .. maybe youre being lied to.

maybe you enjoy being lied to.

One spoon fed lie, one after another .. you dont even have to have your eyes open.

Just sit back and get fed like a toddler.[/quote]

Lotta spoon feeding going on...

I would also like to see a link - with some objective evidence - that shows Republicans voted against the cloture motion due to the domestic package Manchin agreed to, rather than because of the budget gimmick that would authorize $400 billion over the next 10 years of existing spending - outside of the $280 billion that they all agreed upon.

Anyone have that link? If not, maybe you're being lied to...

Re: The Most Fresh & Cordial Political Thread Ever
 

[quote=Giantone;1318801]So you didn't look at the link, I get it, trump can't admit he's wrong either just like you.[/quote]

Oh I looked at it. There's really nothing relevant in it.

Here's the summary:
-Fox News didn't want John Stewart on.
-Stewart called out Senate Republicans for blocking the bill (which was actually just a cloture motion).
-The block was led by Sen. Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania - says he made false claims about a $400 billion slush fund, but doesn't explain why the claims are false or provide any evidence showing the claims are false.
-Says Toomey’s argument is easily debunked, but doesn't provide any facts as to how or why.

More spoon feeding.

Re: The Most Fresh & Cordial Political Thread Ever
 

[quote=Chief X_Phackter;1318805]Oh I looked at it. There's really nothing relevant in it.

Here's the summary:
-Fox News didn't want John Stewart on.
-Stewart called out Senate Republicans for blocking the bill (which was actually just a cloture motion).
-The block was led by Sen. Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania - says he made false claims about a $400 billion slush fund, but doesn't explain why the claims are false or provide any evidence showing the claims are false.
-Says Toomey’s argument is easily debunked, but doesn't provide any facts as to how or why.

More spoon feeding.[/quote]
Thank you , This is a great example of trump ignorant BS pretending it doesn't say this or that when it debunks your claim and clearly does, congratulations you're full trump sheep.

Re: The Most Fresh & Cordial Political Thread Ever
 

Sorry man. If you wanna put all your faith in John Stewart & Yahoo Entertainment, when they provide zero facts to back up what they are saying, that's on you. That's a true Sheep.

Re: The Most Fresh & Cordial Political Thread Ever
 

[quote=Giantone;1318807]Thank you , This is a great example of trump ignorant BS pretending it doesn't say this or that when it debunks your claim and clearly does, congratulations you're full trump sheep.[/quote]

[url]https://www.toomey.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/toomey-congress-must-protect-veterans-care-bill-from-being-used-as-vehicle-for-massive-unrelated-spending-binge[/url]

There is a 400 billion budget spending gimmick which is unrelated to veterans. When an amendment came up to remove this gimmick, it was voted down by democrats. If it’s remove the bill would pass. Democrats and Jon Stewart can shut the fuck up about the vote down

Re: The Most Fresh & Cordial Political Thread Ever
 

[quote=Chico23231;1318814][url]https://www.toomey.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/toomey-congress-must-protect-veterans-care-bill-from-being-used-as-vehicle-for-massive-unrelated-spending-binge[/url]

There is a 400 billion budget spending gimmick which is unrelated to veterans. When an amendment came up to remove this gimmick, it was voted down by democrats. If it’s remove the bill would pass. Democrats and Jon Stewart can shut the fuck up about the vote down[/quote]

That's just an announcement by his office saying why they voted it down.

It would really be more helpful if they could point to the specific line item as the reason for the no-vote. Surely if this is the case a record exists of the amendment to change the budget gimmick?

Re: The Most Fresh & Cordial Political Thread Ever
 

[url]https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3967/amendments[/url]

No snide comments/etc. here - I really am curious and if you guys are willing to play nice I am legit interested in figuring out who is lying here. But I need help on this.

Because if this is the case and the Dems added 400 billion in bullshit mandatory non-military medical spending to a bill using the troops as cover - they should absolutely be called out on their bullshit right?

The link I posted above is a link to the bill, specifically to all 55 amendments made (it's not as bad as it seems, most of those amendments are described as "Text of Amendment as Submitted: S2836 Purpose displays after an amendment is proposed" which I assume is some clerical thing.

So we need to find the amendment where the Dems took 400 billion in discretionary spending (for something totally unrelated to military healthcare) and switched it to mandatory after June 16.

Why June 16th? Because on June 16th [URL="https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3967/actions"]the Senate had a vote[/URL] where the bill passed 84-14. So obviously the left made that amendment after the fact to try and sneak it through.

I'm being totally serious here guys - put aside your partisan bias and help me figure out who's lying here. No hearsay in this one - this is the official record from Congress. If it happened it has to be in there somewhere.

Re: The Most Fresh & Cordial Political Thread Ever
 

[quote=mooby;1318818][url]https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3967/amendments[/url]

No snide comments/etc. here - I really am curious and if you guys are willing to play nice I am legit interested in figuring out who is lying here. But I need help on this.

Because if this is the case and the Dems added 400 billion in bullshit mandatory non-military medical spending to a bill using the troops as cover - they should absolutely be called out on their bullshit right?

The link I posted above is a link to the bill, specifically to all 55 amendments made (it's not as bad as it seems, most of those amendments are described as "Text of Amendment as Submitted: S2836 Purpose displays after an amendment is proposed" which I assume is some clerical thing.

So we need to find the amendment where the Dems took 400 billion in discretionary spending (for something totally unrelated to military healthcare) and switched it to mandatory after June 16.

Why June 16th? Because on June 16th [URL="https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3967/actions"]the Senate had a vote[/URL] where the bill passed 84-14. So obviously the left made that amendment after the fact to try and sneak it through.

I'm being totally serious here guys - put aside your partisan bias and help me figure out who's lying here. No hearsay in this one - this is the official record from Congress. If it happened it has to be in there somewhere.[/quote]

[url]https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3967/text#toc-id8d28be5dbe7641119ca3b32d1e58ca80[/url]

This is actually pretty interesting, don't think I'm any closer to solving this but I found this under Section 805c:

[quote=PACT act section 805c]
“(c) Authorization Of Appropriations.—There is authorized to be appropriated to the Fund for fiscal year 2023 and each subsequent fiscal year such sums as are necessary to increase funding, over the fiscal year 2021 level, for investment in—

“(1) the delivery of veterans’ health care associated with exposure to environmental hazards in the active military, naval, air, or space service in programs administered by the Under Secretary for Health;

“(2) any expenses incident to the delivery of veterans’ health care and benefits associated with exposure to environmental hazards in the active military, naval, air, or space service, including administrative expenses, such as information technology and claims processing and appeals, and excluding leases as authorized or approved under section 8104 of this title; and

“(3) medical and other research relating to exposure to environmental hazards.
[/quote]

Also found this under subsection? 2 under 805.

“(2) No amount appropriated to the Fund in fiscal year 2023 or any subsequent fiscal year pursuant to this section shall be counted as discretionary budget authority and outlays or as direct spending for any estimate of an appropriation Act under the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 621 et seq.) and any other Act."

What do you guys think?

Re: The Most Fresh & Cordial Political Thread Ever
 

[quote=mooby;1318815]That's just an announcement by his office saying why they voted it down.

It would really be more helpful if they could point to the specific line item as the reason for the no-vote. Surely if this is the case a record exists of the amendment to change the budget gimmick?[/quote]

ABC news:

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer has said he would schedule another procedural vote on Monday. He offered Toomey a vote on an amendment to close the "budget gimmick" that would require 60 votes to be added to the bill. It's unclear if Toomey, and other Republicans, will accept that deal and allow the bill to proceed to a final vote on the floor.


Looks like Dems will remove it Monday. Good

Re: The Most Fresh & Cordial Political Thread Ever
 

[quote=Chico23231;1318822]ABC news:

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer has said he would schedule another procedural vote on Monday. He offered Toomey a vote on an amendment to close the "budget gimmick" that would require 60 votes to be added to the bill. It's unclear if Toomey, and other Republicans, will accept that deal and allow the bill to proceed to a final vote on the floor.


Looks like Dems will remove it Monday. Good[/quote]

Whole lotta talking but all I really want to see is the amendment that states in writing what the actual budget gimmick is and whether or not it actually pertains to the bill in question.

Re: The Most Fresh & Cordial Political Thread Ever
 

[quote=mooby;1318815]That's just an announcement by his office saying why they voted it down.

It would really be more helpful if they could point to the specific line item as the reason for the no-vote. Surely if this is the case a record exists of the amendment to change the budget gimmick?[/quote]

Well it is Toomey saying this - not a Ted Cruz or a Rob Johnson. People like to look at the source - just saying.

Re: The Most Fresh & Cordial Political Thread Ever
 

[quote=mooby;1318818][url]https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3967/amendments[/url]

No snide comments/etc. here - I really am curious and if you guys are willing to play nice I am legit interested in figuring out who is lying here. But I need help on this.

Because if this is the case and the Dems added 400 billion in bullshit mandatory non-military medical spending to a bill using the troops as cover - they should absolutely be called out on their bullshit right?

The link I posted above is a link to the bill, specifically to all 55 amendments made (it's not as bad as it seems, most of those amendments are described as "Text of Amendment as Submitted: S2836 Purpose displays after an amendment is proposed" which I assume is some clerical thing.

So we need to find the amendment where the Dems took 400 billion in discretionary spending (for something totally unrelated to military healthcare) and switched it to mandatory after June 16.

Why June 16th? Because on June 16th [URL="https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3967/actions"]the Senate had a vote[/URL] where the bill passed 84-14. So obviously the left made that amendment after the fact to try and sneak it through.

I'm being totally serious here guys - put aside your partisan bias and help me figure out who's lying here. No hearsay in this one - this is the official record from Congress. If it happened it has to be in there somewhere.[/quote]

......nothing was added to the bill after that vote.

Re: The Most Fresh & Cordial Political Thread Ever
 

[quote=mooby;1318818][url]https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3967/amendments[/url]

No snide comments/etc. here - I really am curious and if you guys are willing to play nice I am legit interested in figuring out who is lying here. But I need help on this.

Because if this is the case and the Dems added 400 billion in bullshit mandatory non-military medical spending to a bill using the troops as cover - they should absolutely be called out on their bullshit right?

The link I posted above is a link to the bill, specifically to all 55 amendments made (it's not as bad as it seems, most of those amendments are described as "Text of Amendment as Submitted: S2836 Purpose displays after an amendment is proposed" which I assume is some clerical thing.

So we need to find the amendment where the Dems took 400 billion in discretionary spending (for something totally unrelated to military healthcare) and switched it to mandatory after June 16.

Why June 16th? Because on June 16th [URL="https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3967/actions"]the Senate had a vote[/URL] where the bill passed 84-14. So obviously the left made that amendment after the fact to try and sneak it through.

I'm being totally serious here guys - put aside your partisan bias and help me figure out who's lying here. No hearsay in this one - this is the official record from Congress. If it happened it has to be in there somewhere.[/quote]

100% agree.

Here is what I think happened after doing what I can to find something other than talking heads' versions of what happened.

The bill was voted on in June - and passed. It wasn't unanimous. Sen. Toomey along with 13 other Republicans voted Nay. I can't find anything in particular regarding their reason(s) for voting Nay in June, but I don't think it's questionable to assume that they voted Nay in June for the same reason(s) they voted Nay on the cloture motion.

I cannot find anything that was "added" to the bill with regard to spending between June 16th and the cloture motion. However, there is/was definitely $400 billion reclassified as direct spending.

[B]Current-Law Discretionary Spending Reclassified as Direct Spending[/B]
Estimated Authorization 0 25.4 29.6 34.0 38.8 43.5 48.5 53.6 58.9 64.3 127.8 [B]396.6[/B]
Estimated Outlays 0 22.9 29.2 33.6 38.3 43.0 48.0 53.1 58.4 63.8 124.0 [B]390.3[/B]

[B]g. [/B][I]Some activities that would be funded through the new Cost of War Toxic Exposure Fund are similar to activities currently funded from other discretionary appropriations. As a result of section 805, CBO anticipates that some of those currently discretionary appropriations would be provided through the new mandatory appropriation instead, to the extent that costs for those similar activities exceed the amounts provided in 2021. As a result, this table shows a reduction in spending subject to appropriation under current law, and an offsetting increase in direct spending.
[/I]
[url]https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2022-06/hr3967_senate_version.pdf[/url]

You would have to talk to the individual Senators including Toomey to be sure, but my guess is Toomey and the other 13 didn't like the reclassification of spending in June - hence voted no. And then since that vote in June they were able to convince enough of their colleagues to side with them at the Cloture motion - so they can amend the bill to remove that mandatory or direct (unappropriated) spending.

It does appear that Sen Toomey submitted an amendment on 7/25:

[url]https://www.congress.gov/congressional-record/volume-168/issue-123/senate-section/article/S3643-2?q=%257B%2522search%2522%253A%255B%25223967%2522%252C%25223967%2522%255D%257D[/url]

However, this amendment was ordered to "lie on the table". Motion to table – A proposal to set aside any pending question. Used to dispose of a question the Chamber does not want to consider further. Agreement to the motion is equivalent to defeating the question tabled.

Re: The Most Fresh & Cordial Political Thread Ever
 

[quote=Chief X_Phackter;1318831]100% agree.

Here is what I think happened after doing what I can to find something other than talking heads' versions of what happened.

The bill was voted on in June - and passed. It wasn't unanimous. Sen. Toomey along with 13 other Republicans voted Nay. I can't find anything in particular regarding their reason(s) for voting Nay in June, but I don't think it's questionable to assume that they voted Nay in June for the same reason(s) they voted Nay on the cloture motion.

I cannot find anything that was "added" to the bill with regard to spending between June 16th and the cloture motion. However, there is/was definitely $400 billion reclassified as direct spending.

[B]Current-Law Discretionary Spending Reclassified as Direct Spending[/B]
Estimated Authorization 0 25.4 29.6 34.0 38.8 43.5 48.5 53.6 58.9 64.3 127.8 [B]396.6[/B]
Estimated Outlays 0 22.9 29.2 33.6 38.3 43.0 48.0 53.1 58.4 63.8 124.0 [B]390.3[/B]

[B]g. [/B][I]Some activities that would be funded through the new Cost of War Toxic Exposure Fund are similar to activities currently funded from other discretionary appropriations. As a result of section 805, CBO anticipates that some of those currently discretionary appropriations would be provided through the new mandatory appropriation instead, to the extent that costs for those similar activities exceed the amounts provided in 2021. As a result, this table shows a reduction in spending subject to appropriation under current law, and an offsetting increase in direct spending.
[/I]
[url]https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2022-06/hr3967_senate_version.pdf[/url]

You would have to talk to the individual Senators including Toomey to be sure, but my guess is Toomey and the other 13 didn't like the reclassification of spending in June - hence voted no. And then since that vote in June they were able to convince enough of their colleagues to side with them at the Cloture motion - so they can amend the bill to remove that mandatory or direct (unappropriated) spending.

It does appear that Sen Toomey submitted an amendment on 7/25:

[url]https://www.congress.gov/congressional-record/volume-168/issue-123/senate-section/article/S3643-2?q=%257B%2522search%2522%253A%255B%25223967%2522%252C%25223967%2522%255D%257D[/url]

However, this amendment was ordered to "lie on the table". Motion to table – A proposal to set aside any pending question. Used to dispose of a question the Chamber does not want to consider further. Agreement to the motion is equivalent to defeating the question tabled.[/quote]

Sorry Chief, I'm going off [URL="https://www.toomey.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/toomey-congress-must-protect-veterans-care-bill-from-being-used-as-vehicle-for-massive-unrelated-spending-binge"]Toomey's official statement here. [/URL]

From my understanding, he's saying in its' current form this bill will enable 10 years of spending totally unrelated to veterans. This is kind of going over my head a bit, but it sounds like he's saying there is 400 billion in current discretionary spending that is covered under mandatory spending in this new bill - so how does that translate to freeing up 400 billion in loose change for Congress to spend on whatever they want with no oversight?

Re: The Most Fresh & Cordial Political Thread Ever
 

[quote=mooby;1318833]Sorry Chief, I'm going off [URL="https://www.toomey.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/toomey-congress-must-protect-veterans-care-bill-from-being-used-as-vehicle-for-massive-unrelated-spending-binge"]Toomey's official statement here. [/URL]

From my understanding, he's saying in its' current form this bill will enable 10 years of spending totally unrelated to veterans. This is kind of going over my head a bit, but it sounds like he's saying there is 400 billion in current discretionary spending that is covered under mandatory spending in this new bill - so how does that translate to freeing up 400 billion in loose change for Congress to spend on whatever they want with no oversight?[/quote]

Admittedly, this is going a bit over my head as well. It's not easy to follow/track.

Page two of the first link I sent outlines Increases in Direct Spending.

[I]Mandatory—or direct—spending includes spending for entitlement programs and certain other payments to people, businesses, and state and local governments. Mandatory spending is generally governed by statutory criteria; it is not normally set by annual appropriation acts.[/I]

That is the only thing I can think of (or find) that he may be referring to, as it adds up to about $400 billion.

Re: The Most Fresh & Cordial Political Thread Ever
 

Bills should not be written so convoluted that we can't even understand them. And it's done purposely. They're all sons of bitches.

Re: The Most Fresh & Cordial Political Thread Ever
 

[quote=Chief X_Phackter;1318837]Admittedly, this is going a bit over my head as well. It's not easy to follow/track.

Page two of the first link I sent outlines Increases in Direct Spending.

[I]Mandatory—or direct—spending includes spending for entitlement programs and certain other payments to people, businesses, and state and local governments. Mandatory spending is generally governed by statutory criteria; it is not normally set by annual appropriation acts.[/I]

That is the only thing I can think of (or find) that he may be referring to, as it adds up to about $400 billion.[/quote]

It’s not up for debate, 400 billion in spending is confirmed by the CBO…when Jon Stewart was press about the fact, he changed subjects.

It’s laughable at the dishonesty this point. Just remove the unrelated spending and the bill gets passed.

Re: The Most Fresh & Cordial Political Thread Ever
 

[quote=Chico23231;1318839]It’s not up for debate, 400 billion in spending is confirmed by the CBO…when Jon Stewart was press about the fact, he changed subjects.

It’s laughable at the dishonesty this point. Just remove the unrelated spending and the bill gets passed.[/quote]

LOL, you really are as stupid as you act! Amazing!

Re: The Most Fresh & Cordial Political Thread Ever
 

[quote=Giantone;1318843]LOL, you really are as stupid as you act! Amazing![/quote]

Are you even capable of contributing to the conversations on this board? Mooby and Sunnyside posted good links above which generated good discussion on the subject and yes even Chico made good contributions to the discussion. You however post this which is generally all you ever post.