Stay Strong Joe Manchin

[scotchtiger]

He may single handedly save us $2 trillion.

"No, no, my topline has not been -- my topline has been 1.5 because I believe in my heart that what we can do... and what we can afford to do without basically changing our whole society to an entitlement mentality," Manchin said.

Manchin also said he shared the $1.5 trillion number with President Biden in "the last week or so." And he condemned progressives for threatening to tank the infrastructure bill over their reconciliation demands.

 

[Willence]

Could not agree more. Thank goodness for he and Senator Sinema. They are saving us from the spread of this insanity that's taken hold of so many in this country.

 

[Clem'sSon]

Amen.

Biden prepares to scale back lofty goals as signature spending plan under threat

President Joe Biden and his senior Democratic allies in Congress are preparing to lower their ambitions for a signature legislative achievement on their top social priorities.

www.reuters.com

 

[PAWrocka]

West BY GOD Virginia.

and I loved what he said to the Liberals in his party. Basically said if they disagreed with him, he’d see them on the campaign trail.

 

[yoshi121374]

We genuinely guys like Manchin on both sides of the aisle to take back their parties. We need people that can get common sense things done.

 

[jakefest]

We genuinely guys like Manchin on both sides of the aisle to take back their parties. We need people that can get common sense things done.

^^^ This

 

[adgjunior]

We genuinely guys like Manchin on both sides of the aisle to take back their parties. We need people that can get common sense things done.

There were Republicans that tried to take back their party from Trump in January. Just not enough Senators had the balls to bury him. Now he’s the elephant in the room that they all have to deal with so the party can find new leadership before 2024.

 

[yoshi121374]

There were Republicans that tried to take back their party from Trump in January. Just not enough Senators had the balls to bury him. Now he’s the elephant in the room that they all have to deal with so the party can find new leadership before 2024.

I like some of those republicans. Kinzinger from Illinois seems solid.

 

[Clem'sSon]

And now the "progressives" are going to hold the Infrastructure Bill (which, even I, as a hard-line Right-Winger, think provides some substantive good) hostage because they aren't gonna get their "wish list" items in the reconciliation bill.





I know, I know......Holy run-on sentence, Batman......

 

[DW4_2016]

And now the "progressives" are going to hold the Infrastructure Bill (which, even I, as a hard-line Right-Winger, think provides some substantive good) hostage because they aren't gonna get their "wish list" items in the reconciliation bill.





I know, I know......Holy run-on sentence, Batman......

conservatives would never do something so sinister.



jesus man.

 

[Clem'sSon]

conservatives would never do something so sinister.



jesus man.

Of course. And I'll criticize them equally.

Your turn.

 

[TigerGrowls]

There were Republicans that tried to take back their party from Trump in January. Just not enough Senators had the balls to bury him. Now he’s the elephant in the room that they all have to deal with so the party can find new leadership before 2024.

So you wanted them to impeach Trump in spite of no crime committed just to get rid of him?

 

[jakefest]

There were Republicans that tried to take back their party from Trump in January. Just not enough Senators had the balls to bury him. Now he’s the elephant in the room that they all have to deal with so the party can find new leadership before 2024.

The 2024 Trump factor could be the single thing that destroys the GOP's chances of taking back the white house. He needs to get behind a candidate and decline to run but his ego is to his detriment. Instead, he will divide the party and risk splintering voter support. Whilst I still don't think all of his policies were terrible, he would just have a target on his back from 2024 to 2028. Actually, the way things are going that might be true for any president going forward.

The last thing this country needs is yet another late 70's president and another 4 years of aggressive media and party bias. The country needs to find its way back to the center in a real big hurry.

 

[yoshi121374]

The 2024 Trump factor could be the single thing that destroys the GOP's chances of taking back the white house. He needs to get behind a candidate and decline to run but his ego is to his detriment. Instead, he will divide the party and risk splintering voter support. Whilst I still don't think all of his policies were terrible, he would just have a target on his back from 2024 to 2028. Actually, the way things are going that might be true for any president going forward.

The last thing this country needs is yet another late 70's president and another 4 years of aggressive media and party bias. The country needs to find its way back to the center in a real big hurry.

I 100% agree with this. We really need someone moderate who is broadly popular. The challenge for both sides continues to be getting nominated if you are a moderate. The Nomination process forces candidates to move away from the center.

We truly need someone younger as well. It's hard to see someone in either party who fits this mold right now.

 

[Willence]

I 100% agree with this. We really need someone moderate who is broadly popular. The challenge for both sides continues to be getting nominated if you are a moderate. The Nomination process forces candidates to move away from the center.

We truly need someone younger as well. It's hard to see someone in either party who fits this mold right now.

There are lots of people who would fit this mold. I just want people who follow the Constitution and care about what it says and what it means for our people. I don't care what party they're in. If Democrats decide to start upholding the Constitution and all things and at all times and I would vote for them. Unfortunately right now they are the furthest party from the Constitution. The GOP isn't much closer and that's a tragedy considering they've always claimed to be that.

I do think there should be a constitutional amendment put forward that limits people from being able to run for office after the age of 70. Maybe even 65. All these people who are in their late seventies and early '80s that are in political office made me sick. Go be with your grandkids and live your life. You can't take the power with you...

 

[scotchtiger]

There are lots of people who would fit this mold. I just want people who follow the Constitution and care about what it says and what it means for our people. I don't care what party they're in. If Democrats decide to start upholding the Constitution and all things and at all times and I would vote for them. Unfortunately right now they are the furthest party from the Constitution. The GOP isn't much closer and that's a tragedy considering they've always claimed to be that.

I do think there should be a constitutional amendment put forward that limits people from being able to run for office after the age of 70. Maybe even 65. All these people who are in their late seventies and early '80s that are in political office made me sick. Go be with your grandkids and live your life. You can't take the power with you...

We need term limits. With those, Biden would have been out of politics decades ago and we wouldn't have a senior citizen with declining mental acuity leading the free world.

Trump is a unique issue all his own, but term limits solve many of the problems.

 

[yoshi121374]

We need term limits. With those, Biden would have been out of politics decades ago and we wouldn't have a senior citizen with declining mental acuity leading the free world.

Trump is a unique issue all his own, but term limits solve many of the problems.

I 100% agree with term limits. There was never a constitutional intention that congress would be a full time job.

 

[Willence]

I 100% agree with term limits. There was never a constitutional intention that congress would be a full time job.

That is why, as people laugh at me for it, I say we need dorms for Congress to live in while they serve in the Congress. The whole idea was to make the levers of "power" as uncomfortable and unglamorous as possible. No pensions. Same benefits as the VA.

It's far too comfortable a life now. It is supposed to be public service. That's how we get our best there instead of our worst which is what we have now. The good people there now will still be there once we change things and there are truly good people there on both sides.

 

[nytigerfan]

We need term limits. With those, Biden would have been out of politics decades ago and we wouldn't have a senior citizen with declining mental acuity leading the free world.

Trump is a unique issue all his own, but term limits solve many of the problems.

I think term limits would solve Trump too. Every time a republican announces their retirement they immediately start criticizing Trump. If there were term limits, then these pubs would not be so terrified of Trump unleashing his loyal army of Q Anon supporters on them.

My criticism of Manchin is that he does not want to address climate change because of the coal impact on his state. I am a believer that we must address climate change, and I think everyone knows it.

 

[Willence]

My criticism of Manchin is that he does not want to address climate change because of the coal impact on his state. I am a believer that we must address climate change, and I think everyone knows it.

I respect your right to believe this. But everyone doesn't agree with the measures because they are typical of this day and age. They are "feel good" policies that have no real chance to impact the change they think we are causing. I've always been an environmentalist but any meaningful change is going to have to be practical. This issue has been so politicized and warped that it's not clear at all what's transpiring. And I've spent a lot of time reading this and the math on what's going on. It doesn't all add up. Not even close.

 

[nytigerfan]

I respect your right to believe this. But everyone doesn't agree with the measures because they are typical of this day and age. They are "feel good" policies that have no real chance to impact the change they think we are causing. I've always been an environmentalist but any meaningful change is going to have to be practical. This issue has been so politicized and warped that it's not clear at all what's transpiring. And I've spent a lot of time reading this and the math on what's going on. It doesn't all add up. Not even close.

So I am trying unsuccessfully to translate that. Maybe you can help by answering a few questions about your beliefs?

Do you believe that climate change is real?
Do you believe that man is responsible?
Do you believe man can change it (assuming you believe it is real)?

 

[Willence]

Do you believe that climate change is real?

Ever since the dawn of time the climate has been changing. So of course I believe that. One need only review the geological history of this planet to know the climate is always changing.

Do you believe that man is responsible?

There are 7+ billion people on this planet. There's no possible way we don't have some influence on the climate of this planet.

Do you believe man can change it (assuming you believe it is real)?

I believe that it is our sacred responsibility to be stewards of our planet. I believe any moral person would see it as their responsibility to leave things better than they found them and not consume a disproportionate amount of resources as their life is no more valuable than another. Historically speaking, the people on this planet have utterly failed in this pursuit. Our family would be in the bottom percentage of carbon production if you believe that is a concern. I haven't had any government restrictions on my life or what I can do. We just made a choice. If more people were to make that choice, yes we could slow the change for sure. What I don't believe is that at a government or corporate level this can be enforced because the politics around this are too seductive to resist for many of our so called "leaders."

 

[DW4_2016]

Ever since the dawn of time the climate has been changing. So of course I believe that. One need only review the geological history of this planet to know the climate is always changing.



There are 7+ billion people on this planet. There's no possible way we don't have some influence on the climate of this planet.



I believe that it is our sacred responsibility to be stewards of our planet. I believe any moral person would see it as their responsibility to leave things better than they found them and not consume a disproportionate amount of resources as their life is no more valuable than another. Historically speaking, the people on this planet have utterly failed in this pursuit. Our family would be in the bottom percentage of carbon production if you believe that is a concern. I haven't had any government restrictions on my life or what I can do. We just made a choice. If more people were to make that choice, yes we could slow the change for sure. What I don't believe is that at a government or corporate level this can be enforced because the politics around this are too seductive to resist for many of our so called "leaders."

"Our family would be in the bottom percentage of carbon production if you believe that is a concern"

this is incredibly unlikely. almost to the point of impossibility

 

[nytigerfan]

Ever since the dawn of time the climate has been changing. So of course I believe that. One need only review the geological history of this planet to know the climate is always changing.



There are 7+ billion people on this planet. There's no possible way we don't have some influence on the climate of this planet.



I believe that it is our sacred responsibility to be stewards of our planet. I believe any moral person would see it as their responsibility to leave things better than they found them and not consume a disproportionate amount of resources as their life is no more valuable than another. Historically speaking, the people on this planet have utterly failed in this pursuit. Our family would be in the bottom percentage of carbon production if you believe that is a concern. I haven't had any government restrictions on my life or what I can do. We just made a choice. If more people were to make that choice, yes we could slow the change for sure. What I don't believe is that at a government or corporate level this can be enforced because the politics around this are too seductive to resist for many of our so called "leaders."

This is where we fundamentally disagree. You, me and others recycling, driving electric cars, etc is going to make the change needed. Governments, nations, and yes corporations have to drive the change on a massive scale. Corps are going to do shit unless the government steps in and makes them do it. That is why the leaders of these corporations that put profit over sustainability are all investing in underground bunkers for them and their families to live in when the shit starts to hit the fan.

I applaud you for being farther along than most of the republican party in that you actually answered yes to those first two questions. The right's standing has shifted in the last few years from

It's not happening

OK, it's happening but it is not man made

OK, it is man made, but we cant do anything about it cause it'll wreck the economy (specifically the coal industry)

OK, we won't destroy our economy but whats the point of doing anything if all the other countries are not doing the same.

Many on this board are still stuck in phase one.

DO NOTHING. The mantra of the new Republican Party.

 

[Willence]

This is where we fundamentally disagree. You, me and others recycling, driving electric cars, etc is going to make the change needed. Governments, nations, and yes corporations have to drive the change on a massive scale. Corps are going to do shit unless the government steps in and makes them do it. That is why the leaders of these corporations that put profit over sustainability are all investing in underground bunkers for them and their families to live in when the shit starts to hit the fan.

The current solutions put forward by government (Paris Accords which are worthless) and other things corporations are putting forward are just worthless. And not one element of this is going to deal with the real issues of how we deal with the further industrialization of nations like China, Nigeria and India which are going to produce far more carbon than we ever did. That's assuming one believes this carbon argument as told. You'll take back some of what you said about me but I don't buy into all that as told currently. And one of the scariest things on Earth is when people trumpet "scientific consensus." That term has proven to be quite the paradox throughout history.

Carl Sagan said "Science requires the most vigorous and uncompromising skepticism, because the vast majority of ideas are simply wrong, and the only way to winnow the wheat from the chaff is by critical experiment and analysis." He was right. We've taken this fundamental element out of everything we do these days. You can pick nearly any subject and find this is the case. There is next to no evidence we'll ever have to live in underground bunkers. That's a bridge or two too far and it undermines everything.

I would end by saying that I encourage you to consider the role people who are on your side of the ideological fence have played in the skepticism regarding our climate challenges. Things like not turning to nuclear power to avoid a carbon apocalypse. The who private jets to places to meet about the climate stuff. The massive profits involved for many who are putting forward this stuff. And most of all, the abject politicization of this matter and demonization of those who are skeptical. I could list about 500 things.

Target is one I can pick on now. Here's their message on the climate:

Climate | Target Corporation

Our Target Forward goals include committing to be a net zero enterprise by 2040 to reduce climate impacts across our operations and supply chain. Learn more about our climate policy and goals.

corporate.target.com

Last week I received a supply of 5 of the same item in via three different deliveries on three different dates. If a company is serious about the climate, that would be a good place to start. All this stuff you talk about is just lip service. No one is really doing a lot and that's largely because we've shut down any skepticism or new ideas about this matter. Instead, we're just pushing forward that "the science is in" on this and we're not going to change course. That serves no one...

 

[dual_tiger]

I 100% agree with this. We really need someone moderate who is broadly popular. The challenge for both sides continues to be getting nominated if you are a moderate. The Nomination process forces candidates to move away from the center.

We truly need someone younger as well. It's hard to see someone in either party who fits this mold right now.

Her name is Tulsi Gabbard.

​

 

[scotchtiger]

Changed thread title. Come on Joe. Please don't let these morons add more entitlement programs that will inevitably become permanent fixtures in our budget.

Mr. Biden said Tuesday he was hopeful Mr. Manchin would be willing to spend more than the $1.5 trillion he had earlier proposed. “Sure sounds like he’s movin’. I hope that’s the case,” Mr. Biden said.

 

[Willence]

Changed thread title. Come on Joe. Please don't let these morons add more entitlement programs that will inevitably become permanent fixtures in our budget.

Mr. Biden said Tuesday he was hopeful Mr. Manchin would be willing to spend more than the $1.5 trillion he had earlier proposed. “Sure sounds like he’s movin’. I hope that’s the case,” Mr. Biden said.

West Virginia needs to ditch him asap. It's just too much of a risk to haves someone like him in place.

 

[firegiver]

Of course. And I'll criticize them equally.

Your turn.

... how many times did they shut down the government (costing us all shit tons of money by the way) over the last 10 years?

 

[nytigerfan]

The current solutions put forward by government (Paris Accords which are worthless) and other things corporations are putting forward are just worthless. And not one element of this is going to deal with the real issues of how we deal with the further industrialization of nations like China, Nigeria and India which are going to produce far more carbon than we ever did. That's assuming one believes this carbon argument as told. You'll take back some of what you said about me but I don't buy into all that as told currently. And one of the scariest things on Earth is when people trumpet "scientific consensus." That term has proven to be quite the paradox throughout history.

Carl Sagan said "Science requires the most vigorous and uncompromising skepticism, because the vast majority of ideas are simply wrong, and the only way to winnow the wheat from the chaff is by critical experiment and analysis." He was right. We've taken this fundamental element out of everything we do these days. You can pick nearly any subject and find this is the case. There is next to no evidence we'll ever have to live in underground bunkers. That's a bridge or two too far and it undermines everything.

I would end by saying that I encourage you to consider the role people who are on your side of the ideological fence have played in the skepticism regarding our climate challenges. Things like not turning to nuclear power to avoid a carbon apocalypse. The who private jets to places to meet about the climate stuff. The massive profits involved for many who are putting forward this stuff. And most of all, the abject politicization of this matter and demonization of those who are skeptical. I could list about 500 things.

Target is one I can pick on now. Here's their message on the climate:

Climate | Target Corporation

Our Target Forward goals include committing to be a net zero enterprise by 2040 to reduce climate impacts across our operations and supply chain. Learn more about our climate policy and goals.

corporate.target.com

Last week I received a supply of 5 of the same item in via three different deliveries on three different dates. If a company is serious about the climate, that would be a good place to start. All this stuff you talk about is just lip service. No one is really doing a lot and that's largely because we've shut down any skepticism or new ideas about this matter. Instead, we're just pushing forward that "the science is in" on this and we're not going to change course. That serves no one...

Oh my.

The Paris Accords are not worthless.

China is already pretty industrialized and they are currently investing and innovating in renewable energy like crazy. It will be yet another thing that we have to buy from them unless we get our shit together.

Yes, we would need to bring other countries along (especially India) but we can't begin to do that until we start to address the problem oruselves. Remember, our last president said publicly that climate change was a chinese hoax.

The democrats plan currently includes funding to advance nuclear fusion, so hopefully that alleviates your skepticism.

I am glad to hear that you see massive profits in renewable energy. That is a nice shift from our last president claiming it would wreck our economy. And anyway, the only anything gets done in this country is if there are massive profits to be had. I would rather us get those than China, but that is just me.

Your target example just makes my point for me (thanks). The only way to get both Target and its consumers on board for the government to step in.

 

[Willence]

I am glad to hear that you see massive profits in renewable energy. That is a nice shift from our last president claiming it would wreck our economy. And anyway, the only anything gets done in this country is if there are massive profits to be had. I would rather us get those than China, but that is just me.

Your target example just makes my point for me (thanks). The only way to get both Target and its consumers on board for the government to step in.

The massive profits I was referring to come from people who are gaming the system just like all the other gaming of the system that comes through government directing society. I think that's where we part on most things. The government doesn't need to step in because when it does, it's looking for how it can gain power over things. There's never been a government that wanted to serve the good of the people. Our founding fathers understood this which is why they sought to limit, frustrate and thwart the federal government's attempt to gain power at every turn. Government should serve to protect the boundaries not be a participant or funder of any particular direction. That's the value of regulation over participation. We don't have true regulation. We have taxation, power plays and participation. All are bad!

 

[scotchtiger]

Oh my.

The Paris Accords are not worthless.

China is already pretty industrialized and they are currently investing and innovating in renewable energy like crazy. It will be yet another thing that we have to buy from them unless we get our shit together.

Yes, we would need to bring other countries along (especially India) but we can't begin to do that until we start to address the problem oruselves. Remember, our last president said publicly that climate change was a chinese hoax.

The democrats plan currently includes funding to advance nuclear fusion, so hopefully that alleviates your skepticism.

I am glad to hear that you see massive profits in renewable energy. That is a nice shift from our last president claiming it would wreck our economy. And anyway, the only anything gets done in this country is if there are massive profits to be had. I would rather us get those than China, but that is just me.

Your target example just makes my point for me (thanks). The only way to get both Target and its consumers on board for the government to step in.

Republican's stance (or lack of stance) on the environment is frustrating, and it's a losing policy position.

 

[nytigerfan]

Republican's stance (or lack of stance) on the environment is frustrating, and it's a losing policy position.

And I think they know it a losing policy position long term. But for right now, there are plenty of republican voters who still think it is a hoax.

I remember even Trump bragging on the 2020 campaign trail about how emissions had dropped during his presidency in an attempt to woo college educated independents. Of course, he failed to mention they only dropped in his first year, and then grew substantially the next few years after he had dismantled Obama's policies.

 

[scotchtiger]

And I think they know it a losing policy position long term. But for right now, there are plenty of republican voters who still think it is a hoax.

I remember even Trump bragging on the 2020 campaign trail about how emissions had dropped during his presidency in an attempt to woo college educated independents. Of course, he failed to mention they only dropped in his first year, and then grew substantially the next few years after he had dismantled Obama's policies.

I think most are catching on, but it's a lower priority issue than others. And they don't necessarily like the democrats' approach.

For example, I had a meeting with my 2 neighbors. Both very successful, both very likely republicans. We're rebuilding a large pier head. Relating to structure height, one mentioned, "Believe what you want, but the water is rising." We were all like, "no shit." We all know the problem.

Something needs to be done, and Republicans would be smart to pivot and find better solutions.

 

[TigerGrowls]

We need term limits. With those, Biden would have been out of politics decades ago and we wouldn't have a senior citizen with declining mental acuity leading the free world.

Trump is a unique issue all his own, but term limits solve many of the problems.

This was already tried way back and the courts ruled it unconstitutional and thus overruled the will of the people. This was big news back when it occurred. The establishment political class and the long term govt bureaucrats in some cases are an infestation and will fight to stay in place.

FOLEY TO JOIN SUIT AGAINST TERM LIMITS

SPOKANE U.S. House Speaker Thomas Foley, a 14-term congressman, will join a lawsuit to be filed next week challenging the state's term limits initiative, his office confirmed Friday.

lmtribune.com

FOLEY TO JOIN SUIT AGAINST TERM LIMITS​

• Associated Press
• May 29, 1993

SPOKANE U.S. House Speaker Thomas Foley, a 14-term congressman, will join a lawsuit to be filed next week challenging the state's term limits initiative, his office confirmed Friday.

The League of Women Voters of Washington State will be the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit, to be filed in U.S. District Court in Seattle, attorney Frederic Tausend said.
Foley, who campaigned against the 1992 initiative, is joining the lawsuit to give it proper legal standing, said Jeff Biggs, a spokesman for the Spokane Democrat.

In 1990, Foley was credited with almost single-handedly turning back another term limits initiative in the state.

Washington voters last year gave 52 percent approval to the measure. It limits U.S. representatives to three two-year terms and U.S. senators to two six-year terms. The term limits would take effect only if 25 other states approve the term limits.