- Mar 25, 2023
- 1,163
- 794
- 44
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
Before this gets memory-holed, and Democrats start engaging in revisionist history. And this is from CNN
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
There's nothing wrong with what she's quoted as saying in that article. Re-evaluating spending to see if it matches priorities is a good thing. Heck, one could even argue that it's a conservative thing, since it's in service of optimizing efficiency.Before this gets memory-holed, and Democrats start engaging in revisionist history. And this is from CNN
I don't disagree with everything she said --I do worry about militarized police departments with giant budgetsThere's nothing wrong with what she's quoted as saying in that article. Re-evaluating spending to see if it matches priorities is a good thing. Heck, one could even argue that it's a conservative thing, since it's in service of optimizing efficiency.
"Defund the Police" had a number of different meaning, or was "semantically overloaded" as one poster here likes to put it. Some just meant cutting police budgets willy nilly. Other, more intelligent, uses of it meant re-evaluating budgets and policies to see if some of the tasks and situations currently assigned to police would be better addressed by other agencies staffed by people with other skillsets. That latter approach is (or at least appears to be from the article) what Harris is describing.
There's a lot of policies within this administration that has had effect on America's "norms" ... have they been positive or negative. A few being ...I don't disagree with everything she said --I do worry about militarized police departments with giant budgets
but she did cheer on the cutting of police budgets, and she pandered to the "defund the police" crowd
the is going to be an election issue, and believe me, Trump is going to remind everyone of this if they have a debate
I agree completely, which is why it is so crucial I’m going to vote to keep Harris out of the White House.There's a lot of policies within this administration that has had effect on America's "norms" ... have they been positive or negative. A few being ...
Defunding the police?
Mass migration?
Wars?
Simple question ... was our country more stable under the Trump administration (of which the 3 listed was not going on) of the Biden administration .... of which Harris of course supported 100%
The democratic party are for these things .... and I don't see anything positive coming out of it.
and this is “bad”?and she wants to abolish the filibuster in order to push through the "Green New Deal"
my solution, no taxes of any kind will be paid by descendants of slaves for 200 years, I haven’t heard of her “plan” (if it exists)will sign a slavery reparations bill
Whatever happened to these plans?and supported Biden's plan to prosecute SCOTUS justices, impose term limits on them, and even pack the court
If she agreed with you politically would she be “sane”?woman is completely nuts
It's nuts to want to abolish a procedural rule that developed by accident, was mostly used at first to block civil rights advancements, and has stymied everything that can't make it through the budget reconciliation workaround? When was the last time the filibuster worked as advertised by encouraging bipartisanship?and she wants to abolish the filibuster in order to push through the "Green New Deal"
Don't forget the links! C'mon, do some homework. Tell us where you get your talking points so we can see the context and have an adult conversation.and she wants to abolish the filibuster in order to push through the "Green New Deal"
will sign a slavery reparations bill
and supported Biden's plan to prosecute SCOTUS justices, impose term limits on them, and even pack the court
woman is completely nuts
'I've got this great idea. To stop legislation going through, you get the floor and hold it by reading through all of Doctor Seuss, War and Peace, and the lyrics of all the Eagles songs'.It's nuts to want to abolish a procedural rule that developed by accident, was mostly used at first to block civil rights advancements, and has stymied everything that can't make it through the budget reconciliation workaround? When was the last time the filibuster worked as advertised by encouraging bipartisanship?
and she wants to abolish the filibuster in order to push through the "Green New Deal"
will sign a slavery reparations bill
and supported Biden's plan to prosecute SCOTUS justices, impose term limits on them, and even pack the court
woman is completely nuts
No one alive owned slaves. People are not entitled to special privileges just because of the abuse of their ancestors. Period.and she wants to abolish the filibuster in order to push through the "Green New Deal"
will sign a slavery reparations bill
and supported Biden's plan to prosecute SCOTUS justices, impose term limits on them, and even pack the court
woman is completely nuts
She said she would abolish the filibuster to pass the green new deal. And I have heard her speak about free mental health care and free health care for stress related illnesses as a form of reparations. These are things that she herself has said.The things people attribute to her without any shred of evidence is nuts.
How did she say that she would accomplish this? Because AFAIK, the filibuster is a senate rule, not a law, and can only be rescinded by the senate itself.She said she would abolish the filibuster to pass the green new deal.
I’ve heard the sound bite a dozen times today. She was a senator wasn’t she?How did she say that she would accomplish this? Because AFAIK, the filibuster is a senate rule, not a law, and can only be rescinded by the senate itself.
Four years ago. Is that the concern - that she would’ve done something differently at her last job if she’d had the chance?I’ve heard the sound bite a dozen times today. She was a senator wasn’t she?
How is that radical? The practice only gained frequent use in the 20th century and the rules governing its employment have been changed several times.It’s one of the many radical things she’s advocated