Cont: The Biden Presidency (3)

[Delphic Oracle]

What part of "Biden got it done!" do some of you not get? Labor got it! Results speak, period. Trump would have told the unions to go **** themselves!

It is possible to say "they did a little good today" yet also place it in the context of an overall loss of ground over time.

Or perhaps "we won the battle but we've been losing the war for 20+ years and our general is also admonishing us for even fighting it because exponential growth of economic consumption is of vital interest to the country."

 

[Stacyhs]

The democratic party as currently constituted is a right wing party, flitting between the conservatism of Heath and the free-market nuttiness of Thatcher and Reagan. It's not my fault US politics has flown so far to the right that you refuse to see what left wing politics actually is.

You see anything to the right of your personal far left beliefs as conservative. There is nothing in-between for you. This is what the BBC said of Thatcherism:

At its most crude, Thatcherism represents a belief in free markets and a small state. Rather than planning and regulating business and people's lives, government's job is to get out of the way.
It should be restricted to the bare essentials: defence of the realm and the currency. Everything else should be left to individuals, to exercise their own choices and take responsibility for their own lives.

Democrat Party: "the government should regulate the economy and fund social programs through taxation" and "generally considered more willing to intervene in the economy, believing that government power is needed to regulate businesses that ignore social interests in the pursuit of earning a return for shareholders. This intervention can come in the form of regulation (such as limits on carbon emissions) or taxation to support social programs."

It took Thatcher's own background and personality, her belief in traditional family values and strong defence

She believed that Victorian family values..... Conventional marriage and a nuclear family were the building blocks

One example of her impact on society was the inclusion of Section 28 of the Local Government Act 1988. The controversial clause stated that a local authority shall not "promote the teaching in any maintained school of the acceptability of homosexuality as a pretended family relationship".

Democrats: Support same-sex marriage and inclusion. They believe that families come in many forms, not just the 'nuclear family' of husband/wife/children. It's not the Dems who are passing anti-LGBTQ+ laws like we see being passed in red states like Florida. In fact, they actively oppose them.

Low taxation was a key area where Thatcherism was applied. Under the previous Labour government, there had been high levels of income tax for high-earners, but Thatcher progressively cut income tax - the basic rate of tax fell to 25%, while the higher rate was slashed from 83% to 40%.

Democrats: Lower taxes for the poor and middle-class but raise taxes on the wealthy. All Democrats in Congress voted against Trump's 2017 tax cuts which favored the wealthy.

Thatcher introduced privatisation of state-owned industries, including British Telecom, British Gas, British Airways and electricity companies, putting them back into private hands.

Democrats: Oppose privatization of our prison system (GOP supported), privatization of Funds that Support Schools and Students,oppose the GOP/Trump supported selling off of public lands to private companies


The claim that Democrats are just Thatcherites is not supported by facts. It's a claim based on a personal belief that some Dems are just not as extreme left as some here think they should be.

 

[Stacyhs]

It's always a bit strange seeing Democrats trash-talking Reagan, considering the entire party has triangulated itself into a Reaganite position. The right wing in this country has galloped so hard into extremism that Democrats seem quite liberal or even progressive in comparison, but even compared to our own recent history they are obviously quite right wing. The party would rebuke people with LBJ's or RFK's politics as progressive loonies today, and denounce someone like FDR as a full blown communist.
The party leaders would sooner risk fascist takeover of government than give up their neoliberal ideology for something more progressive and left populist.

What a load of bollocks. Provide evidence of this. Making claims like this is easy, but backing it up with evidence? Not so much.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

What a load of bollocks. Provide evidence of this. Making claims like this is easy, but backing it up with evidence? Not so much.

Denial is a hell of a drug

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triangulation_(politics)

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

Denial is a hell of a drug

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triangulation_(politics)

Regarding drugs, where are the threads about the Cocaine found in the White House?

A good thread title would seem to be "The White House, Roaming Cocaine and Crickets."

 

[Stacyhs]

Denial is a hell of a drug

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triangulation_(politics)

I repeat: Bollocks.

"considering the entire party has triangulated itself into a Reaganite position."

Since when is Clinton's policy of 30 years ago the "entire party"? You conveniently ignore this quote from you link:

"Brent Cebul argues that triangulation represented a traditional liberal effort to structure the economy with the goals of creating new jobs, and producing fresh tax revenues that can support progressive policy innovations. Cebul claims this tradition goes back to the local and state policies inspired by the New Deal, and the "supply-side liberalism" of the 1970s.

Your wikipedia description of triangulation provides no evidence that today's Democratic Party is "quite right wing" or that it would "rebuke people with LBJ's or RFK's politics as progressive loonies today, and denounce someone like FDR as a full blown communist."

Try again.

 

[Stacyhs]

Regarding drugs, where are the threads about the Cocaine found in the White House?

MTG thread page 29, The Trump Presidency page 18, but mostly in the Hunter Biden Interview on Jimmy Kimmel pg. 9.

A good thread title would seem to be "The White House, Roaming Cocaine and Crickets." "Republicans Kneejerk Tying of Hunter Biden to Cocaine Found at WH Despite Zero Evidence"[/QUOTE]

Fixed that for you. Speaking of 'hunters', aren't you in mourning for Bigfoot hunter, Claudia Ackely?

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

MTG thread page 29, The Trump Presidency page 18, but mostly in the Hunter Biden Interview on Jimmy Kimmel pg. 9.

A good thread title would seem to be "The White House, Roaming Cocaine and Crickets." "Republicans Kneejerk Tying of Hunter Biden to Cocaine Found at WH Despite Zero Evidence"

Fixed that for you. Speaking of 'hunters', aren't you in mourning for Bigfoot hunter, Claudia Ackely?[/QUOTE]

So that's a hard "no" on any discussion of Cocaine found at the Biden White House then. It's as expected.

Nice deflection and redirect, it's a bit sad to use news of someone's death as a tool of debate but I've come to expect nothing less from Lefties.

 

[Mike!]

My money's on a Trump friendly Secret Service agent attempting to plant it in an effort to make Biden look bad. They were caught on surveillance and have already been quietly dealt with.

 

[Aridas]

So that's a hard "no" on any discussion of Cocaine found at the Biden White House then. It's as expected.

Have any actually worthwhile evidence to present on that, then? At last check, it was under investigation and without actually useful facts to work with, empty speculation is what's left. Boring empty speculation, really, though it certainly can be fodder for flights of fancy.

With the facts available at present, I would rate the chances of Republican shenanigans to be notably higher than the chances of, say, Hunter Biden being responsible, like many Republicans would like to fantasize. It wouldn't even really be out of character for Republicans to be adopting tactics designed to sabotage the US in various ways as they seek to gain some political advantage by doing so - that's most of their standard tactics, after all.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

Have any actually worthwhile evidence to present on that, then? At last check, it was under investigation and without actually useful facts to work with, empty speculation is what's left. Boring empty speculation, really, though it certainly can be fodder for flights of fancy.

With the facts available at present, I would rate the chances of Republican shenanigans to be notably higher than the chances of, say, Hunter Biden being responsible, like many Republicans would like to fantasize.

Evidence? Cocaine being found in the White House? That seems to be clear. Or evidence someone in the Biden family has had Cocaine drug related issues? Seems as though it should be a pretty easy crime to solve.

I think speculation about how the baggie of Cocaine seems to keep changing locations of where it was found would be an interesting topic of discussion.

I realize for many it may seem a bit embarrassing to address but from a security concern that little baggie of Cocaine could have also been a baggie of Anthrax in our President's home. Someone needs to at least lose their job over this. I'm embarrassed for Cocaine to be found in the White House as well.

 

[Mike!]

Evidence? Cocaine being found in the White House? That seems to be clear. Or evidence someone in the Biden family has had Cocaine drug related issues? Seems as though it should be a pretty easy crime to solve.

I think speculation about how the baggie of Cocaine seems to keep changing locations of where it was found would be an interesting topic of discussion.

I realize for many it may seem a bit embarrassing to address but from a security concern that little baggie of Cocaine could have also been a baggie of Anthrax in our President's home. Someone needs to at least lose their job over this. I'm embarrassed for Cocaine to be found in the White House as well.

You do know about 400 people work at the White House full time, right? And unlike the Trump administration, very few Biden family members are included in that roster.
No thoughts on a Trump friendly Secret Service agent planting it? I think the odds on that being the source are many magnitudes greater than any Biden family involvement whatsoever.

 

[Stacyhs]

Fixed that for you. Speaking of 'hunters', aren't you in mourning for Bigfoot hunter, Claudia Ackely?

So that's a hard "no" on any discussion of Cocaine found at the Biden White House then. It's as expected.

Nice deflection and redirect, it's a bit sad to use news of someone's death as a tool of debate but I've come to expect nothing less from Lefties.[/QUOTE]

We mentioned it as you can see on the pages I directed you to. What is there to say about it until we know something from the investigation? All we can do is speculate. It's not like it was found in Biden's bedroom or where Hunter stays when he's there. It was found in an area widely used by tours and staffers. What do you want?

You asked "Regarding drugs, where are the threads about the Cocaine found in the White House?"

I directed you to the discussion of that subject in three different threads. So exactly how is that deflection and redirection?

How is asking you if you're in mourning for Ackely using it as a tool of debate?
You never asked a question that is debatable. Unless you think asking where the threads are located is debatable?

 

[Stacyhs]

Evidence? Cocaine being found in the White House? That seems to be clear. Or evidence someone in the Biden family has had Cocaine drug related issues? Seems as though it should be a pretty easy crime to solve.

This is exactly what I was talking about...nothing but wild speculation based on personal bias, not facts. Do you think Hunter Biden is the only person who had access to that area who's used coke? If that's all it takes for you to accuse or convict him, please, don't ever sit on a jury.

I think speculation about how the baggie of Cocaine seems to keep changing locations of where it was found would be an interesting topic of discussion

.

"Keeps changing"? Are you intentionally implying it's changed more than once for some reason?

WASHINGTON — Multiple officials involved in the White House cocaine inquiry now say the bag of powder was found in a cubby near the White House's West Executive entrance, not the formal West Wing lobby, as was previously reported.

Early reports are often incorrect. But let me guess: it's a cover up!

I realize for many it may seem a bit embarrassing to address but from a security concern that little baggie of Cocaine could have also been a baggie of Anthrax in our President's home. Someone needs to at least lose their job over this. I'm embarrassed for Cocaine to be found in the White House as well.

Nice try. But I doubt that's your motive for asking about the coke.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

You do know about 400 people work at the White House full time, right? And unlike the Trump administration, very few Biden family members are included in that roster.
No thoughts on a Trump friendly Secret Service agent planting it? I think the odds on that being the source are many magnitudes greater than any Biden family involvement whatsoever.

So your response is "It's Trump's fault."
OK.

An investigator of this incident should not consider anyone with past or present drug use related issues with access to the area where the cocaine was found?
OK.

Seems like drug screening must no longer be a thing for those with a Security Clearance. I would think that every one of those "over 400 employees" would be subject to drug testing as related to holding a security clearance. Things may have changed.

 

[Mike!]

So your response is "It's Trump's fault."OK.

An investigator of this incident should not consider anyone with past or present drug use related issues with access to the area where the cocaine was found?
OK.

Seems like drug screening must no longer be a thing for those with a Security Clearance. I would think that every one of those "over 400 employees" would be subject to drug testing as related to holding a security clearance. Things may have changed.

That's not really what I said, but if it makes you happy to think it was, rock it I guess. What I offered was speculation that was at least far more grounded than the ridiculous idea Hunter left it lying around, by a good margin.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

This is exactly what I was talking about...nothing but wild speculation based on personal bias, not facts. Do you think Hunter Biden is the only person who had access to that area who's used coke? If that's all it takes for you to accuse or convict him, please, don't ever sit on a jury.

.

"Keeps changing"? Are you intentionally implying it's changed more than once for some reason?


Early reports are often incorrect. But let me guess: it's a cover up!



Nice try. But I doubt that's your motive for asking about the coke.

Since you brought up Hunter Biden specifically it would seem you have a working knowledge of his alleged drug abuse, likely from the Laptop information and pics that were labeled as "Russian disinformation". So, a grain of salt with the possible "Russian disinformation". Even if he's not "the guy" he's still a suspect during the investigation based on that information.

I don't think Hunter would be stupid enough to bring drugs into the White House. And, I don't care if Hunter does drugs or not. Everyone should have the freedom to destroy their lives with substances if that's what makes them happy.

The location of the Cocaine has changed over time. First it was reported to have been found "in the Library" considered an area open to tours, updates since include that it was found in the "West Wing formal lobby". Finally the location changed to say the bag of powder was found in a cubby near the White House's West Executive entrance, a secured area.

So yeah, I'm saying they keep changing the story about where the Cocaine was found as evidenced in multiple Press reports.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

That's not really what I said, but if it makes you happy to think it was, rock it I guess. What I offered was speculation that was at least far more grounded than the ridiculous idea Hunter left it lying around, by a good margin.

The difference is that it's kind of a conspiracy theory to suggest it was an inside job by a Secret Service agent loyal to Trump. It's not a conspiracy theory to ask if a known drug user/abuser with access to that area could have left something behind. IMO.

 

[Stacyhs]

Since you brought up Hunter Biden specifically it would seem you have a working knowledge of his alleged drug abuse, likely from the Laptop information and pics that were labeled as "Russian disinformation". So, a grain of salt with the possible "Russian disinformation". Even if he's not "the guy" he's still a suspect during the investigation based on that information.

I know about his past. Did I say he wasn't a suspect? NO. But so is anyone of the hundreds of people who were in the area the baggie was found. What's sad is the knee jerk reaction of people, including Trump, MTG, James Comer, Darrell Issa, Kari Lake, et al all pointing specifically to Hunter and their motive isn't exactly a secret.

I don't think Hunter would be stupid enough to bring drugs into the White House. And, I don't care if Hunter does drugs or not. Everyone should have the freedom to destroy their lives with substances if that's what makes them happy.

May I remind you that Hunter is a recovering addict?

The location of the Cocaine has changed over time. First it was reported to have been found "in the Library"

Like I said, initial reports can be wrong. It was never in the library:

Initial reports Sunday night indicated the bag of cocaine was found in the White House library.

Those stemmed from a garbled audio recording of responding DC firefighters who mentioned “the library” in relation to the cocaine. However, the first responders were actually referring to a field test of the cocaine not testing positive against any substance in their hazardous materials “library,” according to freelance journalist Andrew Leyden, who first broke the story after noticing a Hazmat team at the executive mansion.

considered an area open to tours, updates since include that it was found in the "West Wing formal lobby". Finally the location changed to say the bag of powder was found in a cubby near the White House's West Executive entrance, a secured area.

It changed ONCE.

So yeah, I'm saying they keep changing the story about where the Cocaine was found as evidenced in multiple Press reports.

Nope. It took me about two seconds to find the source of 'library' story in the left wing New York Post.

Like I said, try doing some research outside of right-wing echo chambers.

 

[Stacyhs]

The difference is that it's kind of a conspiracy theory to suggest it was an inside job by a Secret Service agent loyal to Trump. It's not a conspiracy theory to ask if a known drug user/abuser with access to that area could have left something behind. IMO.

You're the one who wanted to discuss an event we know virtually nothing about which means you're going to get speculation. Don't ask for something and then virtue signal when you get it.