toss-upI think we can all agree that Bill Pullman had the best speech as president.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
toss-upI think we can all agree that Bill Pullman had the best speech as president.
I didn't watch either, but I'm guessing that's probably fairly accurate. Which, of course, is not the purpose. It's supposed to be a "state" of the union versus a campaign/political speech. I think they should just stop with the "speech" altogether. Constitutionally, there is no requirement to do one in person and it is done, technically, at the invite of Congress. Jefferson submitted it in writing and everyone did it like that until Woodrow Wilson (which should tell us everything we need to know) restarted the practice of oral speeches. The general populace doesn't care anyhow, unless something zany happens.I didn't watch Biden or Trump's speech, but I'll summarize it for those of you who didn't watch it.
Biden: I've done a great job getting us past the cluster**** of Trump. We would do more if the Republicans worked with us, but they are being mean. I call on them to work with us on issues.
Trump: Everything he said is a lie. I'll do a great job getting us past the cluster**** of Biden. We could do more if the democrats worked with us, but they are being mean. I call on them to work with us on issues.
I didn't watch either, but I'm guessing that's probably fairly accurate. Which, of course, is not the purpose. It's supposed to be a "state" of the union versus a campaign/political speech. I think they should just stop with the "speech" altogether. Constitutionally, there is no requirement to do one in person and it is done, technically, at the invite of Congress. Jefferson submitted it in writing and everyone did it like that until Woodrow Wilson (which should tell us everything we need to know) restarted the practice of oral speeches. The general populace doesn't care anyhow, unless something zany happens.
I wonder if Biden ALSO played the victim card regarding investigations and charges against him.I didn't watch Biden or Trump's speech, but I'll summarize it for those of you who didn't watch it.
Biden: I've done a great job getting us past the cluster**** of Trump. We would do more if the Republicans worked with us, but they are being mean. I call on them to work with us on issues.
Trump: Everything he said is a lie. I'll do a great job getting us past the cluster**** of Biden. We could do more if the democrats worked with us, but they are being mean. I call on them to work with us on issues.
I had wondered about this myself, so I checked. Yesterday, his to do list was receive the briefing at 9:00 AM and give his speech at 9:00 PM. Today, he leaves the WH at 1:40 PM, gives a campaign speech at a middle school in Philly at 5:00 PM and then it's off to Delaware.I gotta say I was quite impressed with Biden being able to go an hour while staying relatively sharp and lucid. I imagine they had him pumped full of some good stuff - the come down today is probably brutal.
I gotta say I was quite impressed with Biden being able to go an hour while staying relatively sharp and lucid. I imagine they had him pumped full of some good stuff - the come down today is probably brutal.
He certainly accomplished his goal of going on there and delivering a strong campaign speech in front of Congress. I do wish we got an actual state of the union at the State of the Union speech, but that's obviously a lost cause at this point from both parties.
Before you get too hypocritical you need to also ask the looming question of why are Trump and the Republicans turning their backs on the deal they've been asking for all that time.The looming question that had to immediately come to everyone's mind is, why the F did you wait until now to get this incredibly effective legislation in place?
Because, despite the label and the constant drumbeat, the bill sucks. The fact that you have fully swallowed the WH, media, and D claims that it helps is not the same as a "deal they've been asking for". It will only make things worse (unless the goal is to process more and more) and funds other things completely unrelated to OUR border. Further, it doesn't represent anything from an actual overhaul of immigration policy standpoint.Before you get too hypocritical you need to also ask the looming question of why are Trump and the Republicans turning their backs on the deal they've been asking for during that time.
So you're suggesting the Republicans who helped draw up the bill are reneging on their hard work because they now realize their effort sucks? That's quite an endorsement.Because, despite the label and the constant drumbeat, the bill sucks.
Before you get too hypocritical you need to also ask the looming question of why are Trump and the Republicans turning their backs on the deal they've been asking for all that time.
The next question is, why the F didn't you mention the dem lard attached to it?
Despite your ignorant attempt to blame everything on the "dems," check out the response from Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.) last night:learn to read, blah, blah, blah . . .
I completely agree, but I think it was effective because most voters don't care about content/policy, they consume the fiery 10 second soundbites, and check to see if he dozed off during the speech or not. The average voter is quite dumb, and half of them are dumber than that - they're unfortunately not able to even properly analyze/comprehend what would be a good policy and what wouldn't.With that said, the content of the speech was pretty trash. Like you said, it was less a SOTU and more of a campaign speech. The TDS was ever present with Biden referencing Trump continuously and of course the Dem buzzwords of "democracy at stake" and other such garbage was a big part of it.
I think you could hold the election today, in November, or this time next year - and the results would be effectively identical. There may be a very small amount of votes that are up in the air, but I imagine everyone already knows who they're voting for and aren't likely to be swayed, despite what they may say. The only thing that would change that is the black swan type event you alluded to like a large scale war or virus or whatever.It won't save him though. Trump has huge momentum, especially with voters of color. And that will be the difference. At least right now. I acknowledge that a lot could change before November. I anticipate another war or virus or something before then so we'll see.
Before you get too hypocritical you need to also ask the looming question of why are Trump and the Republicans turning their backs on the deal they've been asking for all that time.
i don’t have time to comment all day like you do, but i did finally read those opinions…i’m sure they’re tee’d up in your bookmarks for these moments, so i do appreciate that.
saw nothing on obama fanning flames, stoking fires, or not having the desire for improved race relations.
lol you sound exactly like the anti-george w bush crowd in the early 2000’s…they blamed him for everything that went wrong in their own life…sorry it’s been so tough on you.
maybe you have an opinion on the women’s basketball team and their god awful play from week to week?…is this an indictment on banghart or deja?
You got the Trump doesn't want Biden taking credit part correct, but the Trump administration had issues at the border well before the current one.Because Trump doesn't want Biden taking credit for fixing a problem that he himself caused.
oh OK, wow, that's really revealing...."(unintelligible) six years now...".Despite your ignorant attempt to blame everything on the "dems," check out the response from Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.) last night:
For context, Biden was explaining that the repubs finally able to draw up a great deal in terms of what they'd been wanting for eons. They weren't having to compromise instead they were taking concessions. Republic Lankford knew that, and his sad face "that's true" says it all -- the Conservatives were losing a good thing due to Maga.
You got the Trump doesn't want Biden taking credit part correct, but the Trump administration had issues at the border well before the current one.
Relative to prior presidents, despite his rhetoric, Trump wasn't effective. Illegal crossing didn't change. Legal border stuff only changed when a global pandemic hit. If you are judging by numbers you'd want to go to back Obama's admin.lol. Whatever you need to tell yourself.
For context, Biden was explaining that the repubs finally able to draw up a great deal in terms of what they'd been wanting for eons. They weren't having to compromise instead they were taking concessions. Republic Lankford knew that, and his sad face "that's true" says it all -- the Conservatives were losing a good thing due to Maga.
Relative to prior presidents, despite his rhetoric, Trump wasn't effective. Illegal crossing didn't change. Legal border stuff only changed when a global pandemic hit. If you are judging by numbers you'd want to go to back Obama's admin.
Someone needs to add-up all the primary votes for Nikki Haley. Those are all votes that Trump will not be getting. Except all the black people, of course.
and that's why we want Trump. The repubs that supported the bill were caving to the usual dem tactic of sneaking fat in with a bill that they know will put the opposition in a can't win position...help pass the bill and give the dems the fat they want, or oppose the bill and have the dems make them out to be against (fill in the blank, in this case border security).For context, Biden was explaining that the repubs finally able to draw up a great deal in terms of what they'd been wanting for eons. They weren't having to compromise instead they were taking concessions. Republic Lankford knew that, and his sad face "that's true" says it all -- the Conservatives were losing a good thing due to Maga.
dude, you've been shot down on this so many times it's a wonder you can still post. Try a different tune for our sake if not for yours.Relative to prior presidents, despite his rhetoric, Trump wasn't effective. Illegal crossing didn't change. Legal border stuff only changed when a global pandemic hit. If you are judging by numbers you'd want to go to back Obama's admin.
They weren't having to compromise instead they were taking concessions.
First of all, the bill isn't earmarked at $180 billion. It's $118 billion. And it breaks down like this:and that's why we want Trump. The repubs that supported the bill were caving to the usual dem tactic of sneaking fat in with a bill that they know will put the opposition in a can't win position...help pass the bill and give the dems the fat they want, or oppose the bill and have the dems make them out to be against (fill in the blank, in this case border security).
*The 180 bil. 'Border Security' Bill has only 20 bil for the border and the other 100 bil. is for various foreign aid. I wonder who decided to call it the 'Border Security' Bill.
Trump says fvck that, we'll get what's right when we are in control and able to bypass dem deception.
*ETA and that isn't the only reason the deal smells...
Bad Bill
How can anyone call this a "Border Security Bill" when over half of it is Ukraine aid? Strip it down to the $20.2B for improvements to U.S. border security, and then it's legitimate.First of all, the bill isn't earmarked at $180 billion. It's $118 billion. And it breaks down like this:
$60 billion in military aid for Ukraine
$14.1 billion in aid for Israel
$4.83 billion in aid for the Indo-Pacific region
$10 billion in humanitarian assistance for Ukraine, Israel, Gaza, among other places
$2.3 billion in refugee assistance inside the U.S.
$20.2 billion for improvements to U.S. border security
$2.72 billion for domestic uranium enrichment
I don't see any "dem lard" in there. Maybe you can point it out.
Second of all, Nolan Rappaport?
🤣
And you're calling me a numbnuts?!?!
Why don't you contact the congressman who sponsored the bill and ask him?How can anyone call this a "Border Security Bill" when over half of it is Ukraine aid?
Website | https://mariodiazbalart.house.gov/ |
---|---|
Contact | 374 Cannon House Office Building (202) 225-4211 Contact |
Party | Republican |
House | Florida, District 26 118th (2023-Present) |
Welcome to American two-party legislation. I would wager that EVERY BILL that is ever passed looks like that.How can anyone call this a "Border Security Bill" when over half of it is Ukraine aid? Strip it down to the $20.2B for improvements to U.S. border security, and then it's legitimate.
You got the Trump doesn't want Biden taking credit part correct, but the Trump administration had issues at the border well before the current one.
lol. Whatever you need to tell yourself.