I really think messages like this have particularly nasty premises and lead to pretty awful things.
I dont. I've seen plenty of parents justify keeping poor, disproportionately African American kids out of their nicer, newer schools in order to ensure that their students are receiving the best education their tax dollars can buy. They probably justify it as good parenting. Instead, they treat it as a zero-sum game that inevitably leaves minorities and the poor (those with the least power to wield) perpetually disadvantaged.
Did we read the same thing? NBC is pushing the idea that giving your kids *private school educations* and *tutors in public school* or *community service* perpetuates racism. Just trying to do the right thing for your kid, and literally nothing else.
"Yet, as Hagerman told me, "all of these families in their own ways were participating in the reproduction of racial inequality." Children were sent to private school, or when they went to public school benefited from private tutors or enrichment classes. Even community service can reproduce racist ideas."
NBC is hardly "pushing" the idea. They reported in the publication of a book with a somewhat startling message.
Further, it seems pretty clear to me that the message is true. That in fact everything you've mention in your last couple posts is true:
When you have the kind of bigoted opinions about whites and especially rural or conservative whites that so many major players on the left seem to harbor, it doesn't take long before those nasty opinions turn into skewed judgement and prejudice. I know you won't particularly agree that this is the cause of this latest media scandal, but I think it would be hard to rule out that it doesn't at least play a part.
I mean the anti white kind of stuff never ends in the media. It only gets more mainstream, promoted by ever more "respectable" publications.
"Hagerman's book is a careful, painful and convincing argument that when white people give their children advantages, they are often disadvantaging others. Racism is so hard to overturn, in part, because white people prop it up when they work to make sure their children succeed."
I think Hagerman is more or less correct - and my concurrence is not because I'm racist or, if you prefer, bigoted against white people. I don't see any evidence of bigotry against white people by any "major players on the Left."
Hagerman is talking about systemic racism. It's not personal bigotry or prejudice; it's the societal result of generations of bigotry and prejudice.
Well here in the UK we haven't got so many "generations of bigotory and prejudice". Black people were invited here to work as recently as the 1950's. Many of them did very well. Their children not so much though compared to the generations of children from some other ethnic minority groups who came later.
So what's it down to here in the UK and other parts of Europe? Same ridiculous crime stats, same family breakdown, same lack of achievement in education.
People give their children advantages by being good parents. Hardly a lot to ask and very little to do with racism, systematic or otherwise.
Also, I object to the framing of "whiteness" itself. That, to me, seems like an inherently racist way to phrase something, as if particular attitudes like "ignorance of racial and social matters" or "putting your kids into private schools" are somehow stereo-typically "white" things. We just don't use that sort of terminology for anyone else because it would be deemed offensive.
To be truthful here, I gave you an agree but I'm sending my daughter to public school mostly because I don't want her to be sheltered. I don't think public education is as bad as its reputation and it does foster a sense of community that isn't there in private schools. Having said that, I live in a suburb that is like 90% white, so I can't honestly say what I would do if I lived in say, Detroit. Her best friend is Muslim though and I don't have any problem with that. Even my far-right fundamentalist parents love my daughter's friend so I can say that real-life experience will trump bigotry every time. Sheltering our children doesn't do them any favors...
Edit: I personally think the asshole percentage is roughly the same for every race, color, religion, background, income level, or political affiliation.
I went to public school for elementary school at first. When my family got wealthier due to my dad getting a higher-paying job in another state, I went to private school for middle school, but the place was so competitive and high-pressure that my brother and I left to go to public school for high school. Going to private school was one of the absolute worst times of my life--though part of that is because I went during middle school, which is terrible by default, and coincided with a few years of depression that weren't necessarily caused by either. My brother had it even worse, because he actually did all his homework.
The private school went from Montessori (which is rich people talk for kindergarten) to 12th grade. It was very much about college prep. Kids used to joke that people who graduated either went to Harvard or an insane asylum. Kinda grim considering we were like 13.
Fun fact: Rick Riordan used to teach at that private school. He was my social studies teacher. He was awesome.
My high school was actually a huge shift from middle school. Academically, my high school was the worst in the district, and the place was very poor. The large majority of the population was Hispanic (though we used the term Mexican exclusively). There was another school on the same campus which was more upper-class and much, much whiter, and most of the kids in the AP classes fit the same demographic. Funny thing was, we never really had a racial divide at the school--the white kids tended to be richer and tended to dominate the AP classes, but I never detected any animosity or mistrust between the groups. We were too blended together to see each other as essentially different. It was a very friendly environment in general.
I really think messages like this have particularly nasty premises and lead to pretty awful things.
I dont. I've seen plenty of parents justify keeping poor, disproportionately African American kids out of their nicer, newer schools in order to ensure that their students are receiving the best education their tax dollars can buy. They probably justify it as good parenting. Instead, they treat it as a zero-sum game that inevitably leaves minorities and the poor (those with the least power to wield) perpetually disadvantaged.
Did we read the same thing? NBC is pushing the idea that giving your kids *private school educations* and *tutors in public school* or *community service* perpetuates racism. Just trying to do the right thing for your kid, and literally nothing else.
"Yet, as Hagerman told me, "all of these families in their own ways were participating in the reproduction of racial inequality." Children were sent to private school, or when they went to public school benefited from private tutors or enrichment classes. Even community service can reproduce racist ideas."
NBC is hardly "pushing" the idea. They reported in the publication of a book with a somewhat startling message.
Further, it seems pretty clear to me that the message is true. That in fact everything you've mention in your last couple posts is true:
When you have the kind of bigoted opinions about whites and especially rural or conservative whites that so many major players on the left seem to harbor, it doesn't take long before those nasty opinions turn into skewed judgement and prejudice. I know you won't particularly agree that this is the cause of this latest media scandal, but I think it would be hard to rule out that it doesn't at least play a part.
I mean the anti white kind of stuff never ends in the media. It only gets more mainstream, promoted by ever more "respectable" publications.
"Hagerman's book is a careful, painful and convincing argument that when white people give their children advantages, they are often disadvantaging others. Racism is so hard to overturn, in part, because white people prop it up when they work to make sure their children succeed."
I think Hagerman is more or less correct - and my concurrence is not because I'm racist or, if you prefer, bigoted against white people. I don't see any evidence of bigotry against white people by any "major players on the Left."
Hagerman is talking about systemic racism. It's not personal bigotry or prejudice; it's the societal result of generations of bigotry and prejudice.
Well here in the UK we haven't got so many "generations of bigotory and prejudice". Black people were invited here to work as recently as the 1950's. Many of them did very well. Their children not so much though compared to the generations of children from some other ethnic minority groups who came later.
So what's it down to here in the UK and other parts of Europe? Same ridiculous crime stats, same family breakdown, same lack of achievement in education.
People give their children advantages by being good parents. Hardly a lot to ask and very little to do with racism, systematic or otherwise.
It helps if the playing field is level though. A number of studies in Europe and America have found that if applicants for jobs, housing etc. are perceived to be in some way 'foreign' then they are less likely to be successful.
Apparently there was a vote to ensure government workers get their pay. Republicans voted yes and Democrats voted no. I actually didn't know that, since there wasn't any media coverage of it. Funny that they missed that one! I'm sure it wouldn't be front page news that day if positions were reversed.
I expected better of Ocasio Cortez than to vote no on this but eh. Sticking it to the Republicans means more than sticking to your principles I guess.
I don't think public education is as bad as its reputation
I learned nothing during my time in public school other than how to do drugs and throw a punch, but I went to a city school. The public school in the next town over actually produced well adjusted individuals.
I really think messages like this have particularly nasty premises and lead to pretty awful things.
I dont. I've seen plenty of parents justify keeping poor, disproportionately African American kids out of their nicer, newer schools in order to ensure that their students are receiving the best education their tax dollars can buy. They probably justify it as good parenting. Instead, they treat it as a zero-sum game that inevitably leaves minorities and the poor (those with the least power to wield) perpetually disadvantaged.
Did we read the same thing? NBC is pushing the idea that giving your kids *private school educations* and *tutors in public school* or *community service* perpetuates racism. Just trying to do the right thing for your kid, and literally nothing else.
"Yet, as Hagerman told me, "all of these families in their own ways were participating in the reproduction of racial inequality." Children were sent to private school, or when they went to public school benefited from private tutors or enrichment classes. Even community service can reproduce racist ideas."
NBC is hardly "pushing" the idea. They reported in the publication of a book with a somewhat startling message.
Further, it seems pretty clear to me that the message is true. That in fact everything you've mention in your last couple posts is true:
When you have the kind of bigoted opinions about whites and especially rural or conservative whites that so many major players on the left seem to harbor, it doesn't take long before those nasty opinions turn into skewed judgement and prejudice. I know you won't particularly agree that this is the cause of this latest media scandal, but I think it would be hard to rule out that it doesn't at least play a part.
I mean the anti white kind of stuff never ends in the media. It only gets more mainstream, promoted by ever more "respectable" publications.
"Hagerman's book is a careful, painful and convincing argument that when white people give their children advantages, they are often disadvantaging others. Racism is so hard to overturn, in part, because white people prop it up when they work to make sure their children succeed."
I think Hagerman is more or less correct - and my concurrence is not because I'm racist or, if you prefer, bigoted against white people. I don't see any evidence of bigotry against white people by any "major players on the Left."
Hagerman is talking about systemic racism. It's not personal bigotry or prejudice; it's the societal result of generations of bigotry and prejudice.
Well here in the UK we haven't got so many "generations of bigotory and prejudice". Black people were invited here to work as recently as the 1950's. Many of them did very well. Their children not so much though compared to the generations of children from some other ethnic minority groups who came later.
So what's it down to here in the UK and other parts of Europe? Same ridiculous crime stats, same family breakdown, same lack of achievement in education.
People give their children advantages by being good parents. Hardly a lot to ask and very little to do with racism, systematic or otherwise.
It helps if the playing field is level though. A number of studies in Europe and America have found that if applicants for jobs, housing etc. are perceived to be in some way 'foreign' then they are less likely to be successful.
Name-blind applications are one way of ensuring that applicants can at least get as far as the interview stage.
Unless their last name is Lopez! As a conservative my thinking is none of that should matter. The best applicant should get the job regardless of background. I'm enough of a realist to see that that is only the case if the person hiring is unbiased though. Therein lies the rub...
Edit: Whoops, I guess name-blind means not seeing the last name. Sorry about that. I agree that would be preferable...
I don't think public education is as bad as its reputation
I learned nothing during my time in public school other than how to do drugs and throw a punch, but I went to a city school. The public school in the next town over actually produced well adjusted individuals.
So I think it really depends on your location.
I did alright with public education even though It was in the rural Chesaning Michigan School District. Other than a little bias against science due to more of a focus on farming, it was pretty good overall. I got my love of science from my chemistry teacher who was awesome!
Apparently there was a vote to ensure government workers get their pay. Republicans voted yes and Democrats voted no. I actually didn't know that, since there wasn't any media coverage of it. Funny that they missed that one! I'm sure it wouldn't be front page news that day if positions were reversed.
I expected better of Ocasio Cortez than to vote no on this but eh. Sticking it to the Republicans means more than sticking to your principles I guess.
Either you are aware this joke of a joint resolution ONLY seeks to pay the Homeland Security department while explicitly ignoring all the others and you just want to make it seem like it does something else, or you don't know. Nor do we have any mention of the fact that the Democrats have passed NINE bills to reopen to government since the chamber shifted hands and the Mitch McConnell hasn't even held a goddamn up or down vote on ANY of them. Scalise's tweet is mealy-mouthed horseshit. So yes, by all means introduce something that pays one specific group of people in the government (the only ones most Republicans care about, incidentally) and leaves the rest to rot while we continue with this absurdity that was started by ONE man who was scared of Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh. What a joke.
The House passed a bipartisan bill to fund the government. The Senate voted on that bill 100-0. Not 80-20, not 90-10, but UNANIMOUSLY. Everything was set to go, everyone was going home for the holidays with a functional country. But literally overnight, Trump gets freaked out by a couple of comments in right-wing media, and torpedoes the entire goddamn thing at the last second. Which, incidentally, he also did over a year ago when he could have had 5x as much wall funding as he is asking for now for Dreamer protections. Again, a done deal that everyone actually serious about getting something done thought was in the bank. Then they walk into the meeting where it was supposed to happen and Stephen Miller and Tom Cotton have gotten in Trump's ear. No deal. Now we are back at the same place AGAIN.
He had his fucking wall money. He had $25 billion of it on a silver platter. All he had to do was sign off on making sure people who were brought here as children with no agency (because we care about children, right??) could stay in this country if they continued to abide by rules that most felons on parole would find draconian. But nope, that wasn't acceptable. No compromise was acceptable. It's either everything he wants without question with no concessions, or no deal will be made. Christ almighty, he could have had ANYTHING he wanted for two years if he had even the slightest ounce of the negotiating tactics he claims to have. And he walked away with absolutely nothing. And now that the Democrats won an election to take the House based almost entirely on GOP incompetence, we are supposed to pretend they give a shit about governing. No one buys this argument (well, people do, but not nearly enough of them to make a difference compared to the vast majority that don't) because as stupid as the public can be, they aren't quite dumb enough to wrap their heads around the idea that the pro-government party is in favor of shut-downs and the anti-government party isn't. End of story. Trump and the GOP will never win this fight. It goes against the very basic understanding the public has about the two parties in the first place. They have never won a government shutdown argument with the public, and they never will. Because they have spent 35 years telling everyone it's the enemy.
Apparently there was a vote to ensure government workers get their pay. Republicans voted yes and Democrats voted no. I actually didn't know that, since there wasn't any media coverage of it. Funny that they missed that one! I'm sure it wouldn't be front page news that day if positions were reversed.
I expected better of Ocasio Cortez than to vote no on this but eh. Sticking it to the Republicans means more than sticking to your principles I guess.
Meh. It's just political gamesmanship. A show vote, much like what will happen in the Senate tomorrow with each vote scheduled, and destined to fail. This doesnt move the needle. Neither do all the votes to open the government by the Democrats in the house either.
Apparently there was a vote to ensure government workers get their pay. Republicans voted yes and Democrats voted no. I actually didn't know that, since there wasn't any media coverage of it. Funny that they missed that one! I'm sure it wouldn't be front page news that day if positions were reversed.
I expected better of Ocasio Cortez than to vote no on this but eh. Sticking it to the Republicans means more than sticking to your principles I guess.
Meh. It's just political gamesmanship. A show vote, much like what will happen in the Senate tomorrow with each vote scheduled, and destined to fail. This doesnt move the needle. Neither do all the votes to open the government by the Democrats in the house either.
It is not a bill to fund the government. It is a bill to fund the Department of Homeland Security. It isn't even technically a bill at all. I've read the damn thing at least 10 times front to back and unless I am missing something that is buried in indecipherable legalize in Section 3, I see nothing here that doesn't pertain to only one specific department. None of the others are even mentioned. That the Hill article doesn't mention this or even provide any links to the damn thing at all is reflected in the comment section, where not a SINGLE person even seems to be discussing what the article is ostensibly supposed to be about. You know what, I give in. The media DOES suck, but for all the opposite reasons some people think it does, or at least for different ones.
Apparently there was a vote to ensure government workers get their pay. Republicans voted yes and Democrats voted no. I actually didn't know that, since there wasn't any media coverage of it. Funny that they missed that one! I'm sure it wouldn't be front page news that day if positions were reversed.
I expected better of Ocasio Cortez than to vote no on this but eh. Sticking it to the Republicans means more than sticking to your principles I guess.
Either you are aware this joke of a joint resolution ONLY seeks to pay the Homeland Security department while explicitly ignoring all the others and you just want to make it seem like it does something else, or you don't know. Nor do we have any mention of the fact that the Democrats have passed NINE bills to reopen to government since the chamber shifted hands and the Mitch McConnell hasn't even held a goddamn up or down vote on ANY of them. Scalise's tweet is mealy-mouthed horseshit. So yes, by all means introduce something that pays one specific group of people in the government (the only ones most Republicans care about, incidentally) and leaves the rest to rot while we continue with this absurdity that was started by ONE man who was scared of Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh. What a joke.
The House passed a bipartisan bill to fund the government. The Senate voted on that bill 100-0. Not 80-20, not 90-10, but UNANIMOUSLY. Everything was set to go, everyone was going home for the holidays with a functional country. But literally overnight, Trump gets freaked out by a couple of comments in right-wing media, and torpedoes the entire goddamn thing at the last second. Which, incidentally, he also did over a year ago when he could have had 5x as much wall funding as he is asking for now for Dreamer protections. Again, a done deal that everyone actually serious about getting something done was in the bank. Then they walk into the meeting where it was supposed to happen and Stephen Miller and Tom Cotton have gotten in Trump's ear. No deal. Now we are back at the same place AGAIN.
He had his fucking wall money. He had $25 billion of it on a silver platter. All he had to do was sign off on making sure people who were brought here as children with no agency (because we care about children, right??) could stay in this country if they continued to abide by rules that most felons on parole would find draconian. But nope, that wasn't acceptable. No compromise was acceptable. It's either everything he wants without question with no concessions, or no deal will be made. Christ almighty, he could have had ANYTHING he wanted for two years with if he had even the slightest ounce of the negotiating tactics he claims to have. And he walked away with absolutely nothing. And now that the Democrats won an election to take the House based almost entirely on GOP incompetence, we are supposed to pretend they give a shit about governing. No one buys this argument (well, people do, but not nearly enough of them to make a difference compared to the vast majority that don't) because as stupid as the public can be, they aren't quite dumb enough to wrap their heads around the idea that the pro-government party is in favor of shut-downs and the anti-government party isn't. End of story. Trump and the GOP will never win this fight. It goes against the very basic understanding the public has about the two parties in the first place. They have never won a government shutdown argument with the public, and they never will. Because they have spent 35 years telling everyone it's the enemy.
I listened to the Rush Limbaugh show literally one day before Trump did his about-face so I'm actually pretty certain that radio had a major influence on Trump's decision. I told my dad the day after Christmas that this shutdown would be a long one. He thought the Dems would cave in a few days at best. I guess I'm a prophet...
Apparently there was a vote to ensure government workers get their pay. Republicans voted yes and Democrats voted no. I actually didn't know that, since there wasn't any media coverage of it. Funny that they missed that one! I'm sure it wouldn't be front page news that day if positions were reversed.
I expected better of Ocasio Cortez than to vote no on this but eh. Sticking it to the Republicans means more than sticking to your principles I guess.
Either you are aware this joke of a joint resolution ONLY seeks to pay the Homeland Security department while explicitly ignoring all the others and you just want to make it seem like it does something else, or you don't know. Nor do we have any mention of the fact that the Democrats have passed NINE bills to reopen to government since the chamber shifted hands and the Mitch McConnell hasn't even held a goddamn up or down vote on ANY of them. Scalise's tweet is mealy-mouthed horseshit. So yes, by all means introduce something that pays one specific group of people in the government (the only ones most Republicans care about, incidentally) and leaves the rest to rot while we continue with this absurdity that was started by ONE man who was scared of Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh. What a joke.
The House passed a bipartisan bill to fund the government. The Senate voted on that bill 100-0. Not 80-20, not 90-10, but UNANIMOUSLY. Everything was set to go, everyone was going home for the holidays with a functional country. But literally overnight, Trump gets freaked out by a couple of comments in right-wing media, and torpedoes the entire goddamn thing at the last second. Which, incidentally, he also did over a year ago when he could have had 5x as much wall funding as he is asking for now for Dreamer protections. Again, a done deal that everyone actually serious about getting something done was in the bank. Then they walk into the meeting where it was supposed to happen and Stephen Miller and Tom Cotton have gotten in Trump's ear. No deal. Now we are back at the same place AGAIN.
He had his fucking wall money. He had $25 billion of it on a silver platter. All he had to do was sign off on making sure people who were brought here as children with no agency (because we care about children, right??) could stay in this country if they continued to abide by rules that most felons on parole would find draconian. But nope, that wasn't acceptable. No compromise was acceptable. It's either everything he wants without question with no concessions, or no deal will be made. Christ almighty, he could have had ANYTHING he wanted for two years with if he had even the slightest ounce of the negotiating tactics he claims to have. And he walked away with absolutely nothing. And now that the Democrats won an election to take the House based almost entirely on GOP incompetence, we are supposed to pretend they give a shit about governing. No one buys this argument (well, people do, but not nearly enough of them to make a difference compared to the vast majority that don't) because as stupid as the public can be, they aren't quite dumb enough to wrap their heads around the idea that the pro-government party is in favor of shut-downs and the anti-government party isn't. End of story. Trump and the GOP will never win this fight. It goes against the very basic understanding the public has about the two parties in the first place. They have never won a government shutdown argument with the public, and they never will. Because they have spent 35 years telling everyone it's the enemy.
I listened to the Rush Limbaugh show literally one day before Trump did his about-face so I'm actually pretty certain that radio had a major influence on Trump's decision. I told my dad the day after Christmas that this shutdown would be a long one. He thought the Dems would cave in a few days at best. I guess I'm a prophet...
They would have caved 4-8 years ago. It's no longer 4-8 years ago. Your dad is used to a generation of Democrats who have been cowered in mortal fear of right-wing media. Those days are mercifully, at long last, over.
Apparently there was a vote to ensure government workers get their pay. Republicans voted yes and Democrats voted no. I actually didn't know that, since there wasn't any media coverage of it. Funny that they missed that one! I'm sure it wouldn't be front page news that day if positions were reversed.
I expected better of Ocasio Cortez than to vote no on this but eh. Sticking it to the Republicans means more than sticking to your principles I guess.
Either you are aware this joke of a joint resolution ONLY seeks to pay the Homeland Security department while explicitly ignoring all the others and you just want to make it seem like it does something else, or you don't know. Nor do we have any mention of the fact that the Democrats have passed NINE bills to reopen to government since the chamber shifted hands and the Mitch McConnell hasn't even held a goddamn up or down vote on ANY of them. Scalise's tweet is mealy-mouthed horseshit. So yes, by all means introduce something that pays one specific group of people in the government (the only ones most Republicans care about, incidentally) and leaves the rest to rot while we continue with this absurdity that was started by ONE man who was scared of Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh. What a joke.
The House passed a bipartisan bill to fund the government. The Senate voted on that bill 100-0. Not 80-20, not 90-10, but UNANIMOUSLY. Everything was set to go, everyone was going home for the holidays with a functional country. But literally overnight, Trump gets freaked out by a couple of comments in right-wing media, and torpedoes the entire goddamn thing at the last second. Which, incidentally, he also did over a year ago when he could have had 5x as much wall funding as he is asking for now for Dreamer protections. Again, a done deal that everyone actually serious about getting something done was in the bank. Then they walk into the meeting where it was supposed to happen and Stephen Miller and Tom Cotton have gotten in Trump's ear. No deal. Now we are back at the same place AGAIN.
He had his fucking wall money. He had $25 billion of it on a silver platter. All he had to do was sign off on making sure people who were brought here as children with no agency (because we care about children, right??) could stay in this country if they continued to abide by rules that most felons on parole would find draconian. But nope, that wasn't acceptable. No compromise was acceptable. It's either everything he wants without question with no concessions, or no deal will be made. Christ almighty, he could have had ANYTHING he wanted for two years with if he had even the slightest ounce of the negotiating tactics he claims to have. And he walked away with absolutely nothing. And now that the Democrats won an election to take the House based almost entirely on GOP incompetence, we are supposed to pretend they give a shit about governing. No one buys this argument (well, people do, but not nearly enough of them to make a difference compared to the vast majority that don't) because as stupid as the public can be, they aren't quite dumb enough to wrap their heads around the idea that the pro-government party is in favor of shut-downs and the anti-government party isn't. End of story. Trump and the GOP will never win this fight. It goes against the very basic understanding the public has about the two parties in the first place. They have never won a government shutdown argument with the public, and they never will. Because they have spent 35 years telling everyone it's the enemy.
I listened to the Rush Limbaugh show literally one day before Trump did his about-face so I'm actually pretty certain that radio had a major influence on Trump's decision. I told my dad the day after Christmas that this shutdown would prophet.I one. He thought the Dems would cave in a few days at best. I guess I'm a prophet...
They would have caved 4-8 years ago. It's no longer 4-8 years ago.
I know that because I'm a pretty good poker player. If you don't have a hand you either fold or bluff. Bluffing requires the illusion that you may have a good hand. Trump had neither a good hand or even the illusion of a good one. He's going all-in on nothing when the opponents know he has nothing. That's a recipe for getting taken to the cleaners. Art of the Deal... bullshit!
Apparently there was a vote to ensure government workers get their pay. Republicans voted yes and Democrats voted no. I actually didn't know that, since there wasn't any media coverage of it. Funny that they missed that one! I'm sure it wouldn't be front page news that day if positions were reversed.
I expected better of Ocasio Cortez than to vote no on this but eh. Sticking it to the Republicans means more than sticking to your principles I guess.
Nope. This wasn't a bill to end the shutdown; it only refers to funding the Department of Homeland Security. It was introduced by the Democratic representative Lucille Roybal-Allard in addition to several other Democratic measures to fund government workers:
Today, Democrats are bringing forward six conference reports negotiated last December when Republicans controlled the House, Senate, and the White House. If members of the Republican Party are serious about governing with us for the betterment of all Americans, then they should vote for these six conference reports and reopen the agencies covered by those bills.
In addition, Chairwoman-designate Roybal-Allard is bringing forward a Continuing Resolution for the Department of Homeland Security through February 28. This legislation will ensure that DHS is open and its employees are paid while President Trump and Congress negotiate border security and immigration policy.
The legislation, which passed in a 234-180 vote and would fund the government through Sept. 30, is the 10th clean-funding measure that Democrats have voted on to end the partial government shutdown, with most of them passing in the chamber.
Ten Republicans joined Democrats in voting for the latest measure. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (N.Y.) was the lone Democrat to vote against the bill.
GOP Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick (Pa.), Jaime Herrera Beutler (Wash.), Will Hurd (Texas), John Katko (N.Y.), Adam Kinzinger (Ill.), Mike Simpson (Idaho), Chris Smith (N.J.), Elise Stefanik (N.Y.), Fred Upton (Mich.) and Greg Walden (Ore.) voted with Democrats for the measure.
Democrats advanced the latest measure, introduced by House Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.), in an attempt to place pressure on GOP lawmakers to break with President Trump’s call to provide funding for a wall along the southern border.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has refused to bring forward House-passed bills for a vote in the upper chamber unless they are part of a deal between President Trump and congressional Democrats to end the government shutdown.
So GOP Congressman Steve Scalise is misrepresenting this bill to make it look like Democrats are voting against ending the shutdown. In reality, Democrats have been pushing forward bills to end the shutdown multiple times since it first began... and this partial resolution itself was also introduced by Democrats.
Apparently there was a vote to ensure government workers get their pay. Republicans voted yes and Democrats voted no. I actually didn't know that, since there wasn't any media coverage of it. Funny that they missed that one! I'm sure it wouldn't be front page news that day if positions were reversed.
I expected better of Ocasio Cortez than to vote no on this but eh. Sticking it to the Republicans means more than sticking to your principles I guess.
Either you are aware this joke of a joint resolution ONLY seeks to pay the Homeland Security department while explicitly ignoring all the others and you just want to make it seem like it does something else, or you don't know. Nor do we have any mention of the fact that the Democrats have passed NINE bills to reopen to government since the chamber shifted hands and the Mitch McConnell hasn't even held a goddamn up or down vote on ANY of them. Scalise's tweet is mealy-mouthed horseshit. So yes, by all means introduce something that pays one specific group of people in the government (the only ones most Republicans care about, incidentally) and leaves the rest to rot while we continue with this absurdity that was started by ONE man who was scared of Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh. What a joke.
The House passed a bipartisan bill to fund the government. The Senate voted on that bill 100-0. Not 80-20, not 90-10, but UNANIMOUSLY. Everything was set to go, everyone was going home for the holidays with a functional country. But literally overnight, Trump gets freaked out by a couple of comments in right-wing media, and torpedoes the entire goddamn thing at the last second. Which, incidentally, he also did over a year ago when he could have had 5x as much wall funding as he is asking for now for Dreamer protections. Again, a done deal that everyone actually serious about getting something done was in the bank. Then they walk into the meeting where it was supposed to happen and Stephen Miller and Tom Cotton have gotten in Trump's ear. No deal. Now we are back at the same place AGAIN.
He had his fucking wall money. He had $25 billion of it on a silver platter. All he had to do was sign off on making sure people who were brought here as children with no agency (because we care about children, right??) could stay in this country if they continued to abide by rules that most felons on parole would find draconian. But nope, that wasn't acceptable. No compromise was acceptable. It's either everything he wants without question with no concessions, or no deal will be made. Christ almighty, he could have had ANYTHING he wanted for two years with if he had even the slightest ounce of the negotiating tactics he claims to have. And he walked away with absolutely nothing. And now that the Democrats won an election to take the House based almost entirely on GOP incompetence, we are supposed to pretend they give a shit about governing. No one buys this argument (well, people do, but not nearly enough of them to make a difference compared to the vast majority that don't) because as stupid as the public can be, they aren't quite dumb enough to wrap their heads around the idea that the pro-government party is in favor of shut-downs and the anti-government party isn't. End of story. Trump and the GOP will never win this fight. It goes against the very basic understanding the public has about the two parties in the first place. They have never won a government shutdown argument with the public, and they never will. Because they have spent 35 years telling everyone it's the enemy.
I listened to the Rush Limbaugh show literally one day before Trump did his about-face so I'm actually pretty certain that radio had a major influence on Trump's decision. I told my dad the day after Christmas that this shutdown would prophet.I one. He thought the Dems would cave in a few days at best. I guess I'm a prophet...
They would have caved 4-8 years ago. It's no longer 4-8 years ago.
I know that because I'm a pretty good poker player. If you don't have a hand you either fold or bluff. Bluffing requires the illusion that you may have a good hand. Trump had neither a good hand or even the illusion of a good one. He's going all-in on nothing when the opponents know he has nothing. That's a recipe for getting taken to the cleaners. Art of the Deal... bullshit!
I don't even like talking like this in the current situation where people are working without getting paid, which is just the ultimate absurdity, but as long as we are on the topic, Trump tried bluff Pelosi today by saying he was going to show up for the State of the Union anyway. And she very quickly called and raised him and said "no, actually you aren't, I meant what I said". And, lo and behold, Trump tonight completely backed down. And this is why I think there is some truth to why he won't attack her like everyone else. He knows he is outmatched and has nothing by a 4 and a 9 in his hand.
Apparently there was a vote to ensure government workers get their pay. Republicans voted yes and Democrats voted no. I actually didn't know that, since there wasn't any media coverage of it. Funny that they missed that one! I'm sure it wouldn't be front page news that day if positions were reversed.
I expected better of Ocasio Cortez than to vote no on this but eh. Sticking it to the Republicans means more than sticking to your principles I guess.
Nope. This wasn't a bill to end the shutdown; it only refers to funding the Department of Homeland Security. It was introduced by the Democratic representative Lucille Roybal-Allard in addition to a different Democratic bill to end the shutdown:
Today, Democrats are bringing forward six conference reports negotiated last December when Republicans controlled the House, Senate, and the White House. If members of the Republican Party are serious about governing with us for the betterment of all Americans, then they should vote for these six conference reports and reopen the agencies covered by those bills.
In addition, Chairwoman-designate Roybal-Allard is bringing forward a Continuing Resolution for the Department of Homeland Security through February 28. This legislation will ensure that DHS is open and its employees are paid while President Trump and Congress negotiate border security and immigration policy.
The legislation, which passed in a 234-180 vote and would fund the government through Sept. 30, is the 10th clean-funding measure that Democrats have voted on to end the partial government shutdown, with most of them passing in the chamber.
Ten Republicans joined Democrats in voting for the latest measure. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (N.Y.) was the lone Democrat to vote against the bill.
GOP Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick (Pa.), Jaime Herrera Beutler (Wash.), Will Hurd (Texas), John Katko (N.Y.), Adam Kinzinger (Ill.), Mike Simpson (Idaho), Chris Smith (N.J.), Elise Stefanik (N.Y.), Fred Upton (Mich.) and Greg Walden (Ore.) voted with Democrats for the measure.
Democrats advanced the latest measure, introduced by House Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.), in an attempt to place pressure on GOP lawmakers to break with President Trump’s call to provide funding for a wall along the southern border.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has refused to bring forward House-passed bills for a vote in the upper chamber unless they are part of a deal between President Trump and congressional Democrats to end the government shutdown.
So GOP Congressman Steve Scalise is misrepresenting this bill to make it look like Democrats are voting against ending the shutdown. In reality, Democrats have been pushing forward bills to end the shutdown multiple times since it first began... and this partial resolution itself was also introduced by Democrats.
I'm a Conservative and I agree that the Democratic Party has little to nothing to do with this shutdown. As I said earlier, a good poker player would have folded this hand...
It's fine. I was only 90% sure I was correct because I am not a Capitol Hill staffer, though after spending the last 45 minutes reading that thing I feel like I could probably be one. I was searching for ANY indication there was something buried in there that paid all federal workers and couldn't for the life of me find the wording that would lead me to believe so. Granted, I was looking so hard because I didn't want be totally wrong, but I digress........
Why doesn't the article from The Hill even mention what is actually in what the Republicans added on?? They are a news outlet that is supposed to be the exact place you go for inside baseball, sausage being made coverage, and the first paragraph completely misrepresents the substance of it. And, again, look at the comment section of that article. No one is arguing about what the Republicans or Democrats put forth. It's just thousands of primal screams who could have clicked on any random article and wrote the same things.
Apparently there was a vote to ensure government workers get their pay. Republicans voted yes and Democrats voted no. I actually didn't know that, since there wasn't any media coverage of it. Funny that they missed that one! I'm sure it wouldn't be front page news that day if positions were reversed.
I expected better of Ocasio Cortez than to vote no on this but eh. Sticking it to the Republicans means more than sticking to your principles I guess.
Either you are aware this joke of a joint resolution ONLY seeks to pay the Homeland Security department while explicitly ignoring all the others and you just want to make it seem like it does something else, or you don't know. Nor do we have any mention of the fact that the Democrats have passed NINE bills to reopen to government since the chamber shifted hands and the Mitch McConnell hasn't even held a goddamn up or down vote on ANY of them. Scalise's tweet is mealy-mouthed horseshit. So yes, by all means introduce something that pays one specific group of people in the government (the only ones most Republicans care about, incidentally) and leaves the rest to rot while we continue with this absurdity that was started by ONE man who was scared of Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh. What a joke.
The House passed a bipartisan bill to fund the government. The Senate voted on that bill 100-0. Not 80-20, not 90-10, but UNANIMOUSLY. Everything was set to go, everyone was going home for the holidays with a functional country. But literally overnight, Trump gets freaked out by a couple of comments in right-wing media, and torpedoes the entire goddamn thing at the last second. Which, incidentally, he also did over a year ago when he could have had 5x as much wall funding as he is asking for now for Dreamer protections. Again, a done deal that everyone actually serious about getting something done was in the bank. Then they walk into the meeting where it was supposed to happen and Stephen Miller and Tom Cotton have gotten in Trump's ear. No deal. Now we are back at the same place AGAIN.
He had his fucking wall money. He had $25 billion of it on a silver platter. All he had to do was sign off on making sure people who were brought here as children with no agency (because we care about children, right??) could stay in this country if they continued to abide by rules that most felons on parole would find draconian. But nope, that wasn't acceptable. No compromise was acceptable. It's either everything he wants without question with no concessions, or no deal will be made. Christ almighty, he could have had ANYTHING he wanted for two years with if he had even the slightest ounce of the negotiating tactics he claims to have. And he walked away with absolutely nothing. And now that the Democrats won an election to take the House based almost entirely on GOP incompetence, we are supposed to pretend they give a shit about governing. No one buys this argument (well, people do, but not nearly enough of them to make a difference compared to the vast majority that don't) because as stupid as the public can be, they aren't quite dumb enough to wrap their heads around the idea that the pro-government party is in favor of shut-downs and the anti-government party isn't. End of story. Trump and the GOP will never win this fight. It gogoodidIsnst the very basic understanding the public has about the two parties in the first place. They have never won a government shutdown argument with the public, and they never will. Because they have spent 35 years telling everyone it's the enemy.
I listened to the Rush Limbaugh show literally one day before Trump did his about-face so I'm actually pretty certain that radio had a major influence on Trump's decision. I told my dad the day after Christmas that this shutdown would prophet.I one. He thought the Dems would cave in a few days at best. I guess I'm a prophet...
They would have caved 4-8 years ago. It's no longer 4-8 years ago.
I know that because I'm a pretty good poker player. If you don't have a hand you either fold or bluff. Bluffing requires the illusion that you may have a good hand. Trump had neither a good hand or even the illusion of a good one. He's going all-in on nothing when the opponents know he has nothing. That's a recipe for getting taken to the cleaners. Art of the Deal... bullshit!
I don't even like talking like this in the current situation where people are working without getting paid, which is just the ultimate absurdity, but as long as we are on the topic, Trump tried bluff Pelosi today by saying he was going to show up for the State of the Union anyway. And she very quickly called and raised him and said "no, actually you aren't, I meant what I said". And, lo and behold, Trump tonight completely backed down. And this is why I think there is some truth to why he won't attack her like everyone else. He knows he is outmatched and has nothing by a 4 and a 9 in his hand.
I'd love to take Trump on in poker. Easiest way to become a millionaire I can think of...
Apparently there was a vote to ensure government workers get their pay. Republicans voted yes and Democrats voted no. I actually didn't know that, since there wasn't any media coverage of it. Funny that they missed that one! I'm sure it wouldn't be front page news that day if positions were reversed.
I expected better of Ocasio Cortez than to vote no on this but eh. Sticking it to the Republicans means more than sticking to your principles I guess.
Either you are aware this joke of a joint resolution ONLY seeks to pay the Homeland Security department while explicitly ignoring all the others and you just want to make it seem like it does something else, or you don't know. Nor do we have any mention of the fact that the Democrats have passed NINE bills to reopen to government since the chamber shifted hands and the Mitch McConnell hasn't even held a goddamn up or down vote on ANY of them. Scalise's tweet is mealy-mouthed horseshit. So yes, by all means introduce something that pays one specific group of people in the government (the only ones most Republicans care about, incidentally) and leaves the rest to rot while we continue with this absurdity that was started by ONE man who was scared of Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh. What a joke.
The House passed a bipartisan bill to fund the government. The Senate voted on that bill 100-0. Not 80-20, not 90-10, but UNANIMOUSLY. Everything was set to go, everyone was going home for the holidays with a functional country. But literally overnight, Trump gets freaked out by a couple of comments in right-wing media, and torpedoes the entire goddamn thing at the last second. Which, incidentally, he also did over a year ago when he could have had 5x as much wall funding as he is asking for now for Dreamer protections. Again, a done deal that everyone actually serious about getting something done was in the bank. Then they walk into the meeting where it was supposed to happen and Stephen Miller and Tom Cotton have gotten in Trump's ear. No deal. Now we are back at the same place AGAIN.
He had his fucking wall money. He had $25 billion of it on a silver platter. All he had to do was sign off on making sure people who were brought here as children with no agency (because we care about children, right??) could stay in this country if they continued to abide by rules that most felons on parole would find draconian. But nope, that wasn't acceptable. No compromise was acceptable. It's either everything he wants without question with no concessions, or no deal will be made. Christ almighty, he could have had ANYTHING he wanted for two years with if he had even the slightest ounce of the negotiating tactics he claims to have. And he walked away with absolutely nothing. And now that the Democrats won an election to take the House based almost entirely on GOP incompetence, we are supposed to pretend they give a shit about governing. No one buys this argument (well, people do, but not nearly enough of them to make a difference compared to the vast majority that don't) because as stupid as the public can be, they aren't quite dumb enough to wrap their heads around the idea that the pro-government party is in favor of shut-downs and the anti-government party isn't. End of story. Trump and the GOP will never win this fight. It goes against the very basic understanding the public has about the two parties in the first place. They have never won a government shutdown argument with the public, and they never will. Because they have spent 35 years telling everyone it's the enemy.
I listened to the Rush Limbaugh show literally one day before Trump did his about-face so I'm actually pretty certain that radio had a major influence on Trump's decision. I told my dad the day after Christmas that this shutdown would prophet.I one. He thought the Dems would cave in a few days at best. I guess I'm a prophet...
They would have caved 4-8 years ago. It's no longer 4-8 years ago.
I know that because I'm a pretty good poker player. If you don't have a hand you either fold or bluff. Bluffing requires the illusion that you may have a good hand. Trump had neither a good hand or even the illusion of a good one. He's going all-in on nothing when the opponents know he has nothing. That's a recipe for getting taken to the cleaners. Art of the Deal... bullshit!
I don't even like talking like this in the current situation where people are working without getting paid, which is just the ultimate absurdity, but as long as we are on the topic, Trump tried bluff Pelosi today by saying he was going to show up for the State of the Union anyway. And she very quickly called and raised him and said "no, actually you aren't, I meant what I said". And, lo and behold, Trump tonight completely backed down. And this is why I think there is some truth to why he won't attack her like everyone else. He knows he is outmatched and has nothing by a 4 and a 9 in his hand.
More like a 4 of diamonds and a 9 of hearts with an Ace, King, Queen of spades flop...
Apparently there was a vote to ensure government workers get their pay. Republicans voted yes and Democrats voted no. I actually didn't know that, since there wasn't any media coverage of it. Funny that they missed that one! I'm sure it wouldn't be front page news that day if positions were reversed.
I expected better of Ocasio Cortez than to vote no on this but eh. Sticking it to the Republicans means more than sticking to your principles I guess.
Nope. This wasn't a bill to end the shutdown; it only refers to funding the Department of Homeland Security. It was introduced by the Democratic representative Lucille Roybal-Allard in addition to a different Democratic bill to end the shutdown:
Today, Democrats are bringing forward six conference reports negotiated last December when Republicans controlled the House, Senate, and the White House. If members of the Republican Party are serious about governing with us for the betterment of all Americans, then they should vote for these six conference reports and reopen the agencies covered by those bills.
In addition, Chairwoman-designate Roybal-Allard is bringing forward a Continuing Resolution for the Department of Homeland Security through February 28. This legislation will ensure that DHS is open and its employees are paid while President Trump and Congress negotiate border security and immigration policy.
The legislation, which passed in a 234-180 vote and would fund the government through Sept. 30, is the 10th clean-funding measure that Democrats have voted on to end the partial government shutdown, with most of them passing in the chamber.
Ten Republicans joined Democrats in voting for the latest measure. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (N.Y.) was the lone Democrat to vote against the bill.
GOP Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick (Pa.), Jaime Herrera Beutler (Wash.), Will Hurd (Texas), John Katko (N.Y.), Adam Kinzinger (Ill.), Mike Simpson (Idaho), Chris Smith (N.J.), Elise Stefanik (N.Y.), Fred Upton (Mich.) and Greg Walden (Ore.) voted with Democrats for the measure.
Democrats advanced the latest measure, introduced by House Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.), in an attempt to place pressure on GOP lawmakers to break with President Trump’s call to provide funding for a wall along the southern border.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has refused to bring forward House-passed bills for a vote in the upper chamber unless they are part of a deal between President Trump and congressional Democrats to end the government shutdown.
So GOP Congressman Steve Scalise is misrepresenting this bill to make it look like Democrats are voting against ending the shutdown. In reality, Democrats have been pushing forward bills to end the shutdown multiple times since it first began... and this partial resolution itself was also introduced by Democrats.
I'm a Conservative and I agree that the Democratic Party has little to nothing to do with this shutdown. As I said earlier, a good poker player would have folded this hand...
I mean, he HAD the wall (or, at least the funding for it, eminent domain lawsuits and the Rio Grande is gonna stop his wall no matter what). We didn't want to give it to him, but full protection for the Dreamers had Democrats on board. It's what is called a compromise. And they were willing to do it. Lindsey Graham was putting it together with Dick Durbin before Graham lost his mind. But they couldn't even stomach the idea that children who were brought here as BABIES would get amnesty, and even then only by following very, very strict rules. It was a no-brainer. But this Administration isn't just catering to the fringe right, it IS the fringe right. FOX News is literally running the country, and not just hypothetically. Bill Shine is the Communications Director, and he was Roger Ailes' right-hand man.
So where's the correction on getting the shutdown bill totally wrong while pretending that Republicans were wanting to end the shutdown? Maybe an apology? You think we'll get one? Scalise?
Apparently there was a vote to ensure government workers get their pay. Republicans voted yes and Democrats voted no. I actually didn't know that, since there wasn't any media coverage of it. Funny that they missed that one! I'm sure it wouldn't be front page news that day if positions were reversed.
I expected better of Ocasio Cortez than to vote no on this but eh. Sticking it to the Republicans means more than sticking to your principles I guess.
Either you are aware this joke of a joint resolution ONLY seeks to pay the Homeland Security department while explicitly ignoring all the others and you just want to make it seem like it does something else, or you don't know. Nor do we have any mention of the fact that the Democrats have passed NINE bills to reopen to government since the chamber shifted hands and the Mitch McConnell hasn't even held a goddamn up or down vote on ANY of them. Scalise's tweet is mealy-mouthed horseshit. So yes, by all means introduce something that pays one specific group of people in the government (the only ones most Republicans care about, incidentally) and leaves the rest to rot while we continue with this absurdity that was started by ONE man who was scared of Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh. What a joke.
The House passed a bipartisan bill to fund the government. The Senate voted on that bill 100-0. Not 80-20, not 90-10, but UNANIMOUSLY. Everything was set to go, everyone was going home for the holidays with a functional country. But literally overnight, Trump gets freaked out by a couple of comments in right-wing media, and torpedoes the entire goddamn thing at the last second. Which, incidentally, he also did over a year ago when he could have had 5x as much wall funding as he is asking for now for Dreamer protections. Again, a done deal that everyone actually serious about getting something done was in the bank. Then they walk into the meeting where it was supposed to happen and Stephen Miller and Tom Cotton have gotten in Trump's ear. No deal. Now we are back at the same place AGAIN.
He had his fucking wall money. He had $25 billion of it on a silver platter. All he had to do was sign off on making sure people who were brought here as children with no agency (because we care about children, right??) could stay in this country if they continued to abide by rules that most felons on parole would find draconian. But nope, that wasn't acceptable. No compromise was acceptable. It's either everything he wants without question with no concessions, or no deal will be made. Christ almighty, he could have had ANYTHING he wanted for two years with if he had even the slightest ounce of the negotiating tactics he claims to have. And he walked away with absolutely nothing. And now that the Democrats won an election to take the House based almost entirely on GOP incompetence, we are supposed to pretend they give a shit about governing. No one buys this argument (well, people do, but not nearly enough of them to make a difference compared to the vast majority that don't) because as stupid as the public can be, they aren't quite dumb enough to wrap their heads around the idea that the pro-government party is in favor of shut-downs and the anti-government party isn't. End of story. Trump and the GOP will never win this fight. It goes against the very basic understanding the public has about the two parties in the first place. They have never won a government shutdown argument with the public, and they never will. Because they have spent 35 years telling everyone it's the enemy.
I listened to the Rush Limbaugh show literally one day before Trump did his about-face so I'm actually pretty certain that radio had a major influence on Trump's decision. I told my dad the day after Christmas that this shutdown would prophet.I one. He thought the Dems would cave in a few days at best. I guess I'm a prophet...
They would have caved 4-8 years ago. It's no longer 4-8 years ago.
I know that because I'm a pretty good poker player. If you don't have a hand you either fold or bluff. Bluffing requires the illusion that you may have a good hand. Trump had neither a good hand or even the illusion of a good one. He's going all-in on nothing when the opponents know he has nothing. That's a recipe for getting taken to the cleaners. Art of the Deal... bullshit!
I don't even like talking like this in the current situation where people are working without getting paid, which is just the ultimate absurdity, but as long as we are on the topic, Trump tried bluff Pelosi today by saying he was going to show up for the State of the Union anyway. And she very quickly called and raised him and said "no, actually you aren't, I meant what I said". And, lo and behold, Trump tonight completely backed down. And this is why I think there is some truth to why he won't attack her like everyone else. He knows he is outmatched and has nothing by a 4 and a 9 in his hand.
More like a 4 of diamonds and a 9 of hearts with an Ace, King, Queen of spades flop...
Honestly, the one Texas Hold 'em session I won at a bar once (back when the whole World Series of Poker thing was all the rage) was because I was too much of a novice at the game to have any tells. I never really knew what kind of situation I was in other than what I myself was holding, so it was probably impossible to read me. I got the feeling at the table that serious players are really annoyed by novice ones because they can't pinpoint them in the time they have to do so. Anyway, I was surprised the other weekend when I ran across a Texas Hold'em tournament on TV (and even noticed Phil Hellmuth is still making the rounds). There was a time when Phil Ivey and Johnny Chan were some of the most recognizable stars in the world to 20-30 year old males in the first decade of the 2000s.
Apparently there was a vote to ensure government workers get their pay. Republicans voted yes and Democrats voted no. I actually didn't know that, since there wasn't any media coverage of it. Funny that they missed that one! I'm sure it wouldn't be front page news that day if positions were reversed.
I expected better of Ocasio Cortez than to vote no on this but eh. Sticking it to the Republicans means more than sticking to your principles I guess.
Nope. This wasn't a bill to end the shutdown; it only refers to funding the Department of Homeland Security. It was introduced by the Democratic representative Lucille Roybal-Allard in addition to a different Democratic bill to end the shutdown:
Today, Democrats are bringing forward six conference reports negotiated last December when Republicans controlled the House, Senate, and the White House. If members of the Republican Party are serious about governing with us for the betterment of all Americans, then they should vote for these six conference reports and reopen the agencies covered by those bills.
In addition, Chairwoman-designate Roybal-Allard is bringing forward a Continuing Resolution for the Department of Homeland Security through February 28. This legislation will ensure that DHS is open and its employees are paid while President Trump and Congress negotiate border security and immigration policy.
The legislation, which passed in a 234-180 vote and would fund the government through Sept. 30, is the 10th clean-funding measure that Democrats have voted on to end the partial government shutdown, with most of them passing in the chamber.
Ten Republicans joined Democrats in voting for the latest measure. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (N.Y.) was the lone Democrat to vote against the bill.
GOP Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick (Pa.), Jaime Herrera Beutler (Wash.), Will Hurd (Texas), John Katko (N.Y.), Adam Kinzinger (Ill.), Mike Simpson (Idaho), Chris Smith (N.J.), Elise Stefanik (N.Y.), Fred Upton (Mich.) and Greg Walden (Ore.) voted with Democrats for the measure.
Democrats advanced the latest measure, introduced by House Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.), in an attempt to place pressure on GOP lawmakers to break with President Trump’s call to provide funding for a wall along the southern border.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has refused to bring forward House-passed bills for a vote in the upper chamber unless they are part of a deal between President Trump and congressional Democrats to end the government shutdown.
So GOP Congressman Steve Scalise is misrepresenting this bill to make it look like Democrats are voting against ending the shutdown. In reality, Democrats have been pushing forward bills to end the shutdown multiple times since it first began... and this partial resolution itself was also introduced by Democrats.
I'm a Conservative and I agree that the Democratic Party has little to nothing to do with this shutdown. As I said earlier, a good poker player would have folded this hand...
I mean, he HAD the wall (or, at least the funding for it, eminent domain lawsuits and the Rio Grande is gonna stop his wall no matter what). We didn't want to give it to him, but full protection for the Dreamers had Democrats on board. It's what is called a compromise. And they were willing to do it. Lindsey Graham was putting it together with Dick Durbin before Graham lost his mind. But they couldn't even stomach the idea that children who were brought here as BABIES would get amnesty, and even then only by following very, very strict rules. It was a no-brainer. But this Administration isn't just catering to the fringe right, it IS the fringe right. FOX News is literally running the country, and not just hypothetically. Bill Shine is the Communications Director, and he was Roger Ailes' right-hand man.
Not even Fox News, it's Limbaugh and Coulter (probably more Coulter since she's female and thus shamed him more). I listen to Limbaugh so I know what he said. It was the fastest about-face in history on Trump's part. I even predicted the shut down to my family a couple of days after. It was nauseatingly predictable as was the result, a bloody nose, unless the Dems concede for no other reason than to save people's paychecks. Honestly, my opinion of the Democrats would go up if they conceded this time but they have absolutely no political reason to (which, incidentally, would be the exact reason my opinion of them would go up).
Edit: Folding a winning for hand solely for helping others is an unbelievably selfless act. Don't underestimate what that might accomplish in the long run...
Apparently there was a vote to ensure government workers get their pay. Republicans voted yes and Democrats voted no. I actually didn't know that, since there wasn't any media coverage of it. Funny that they missed that one! I'm sure it wouldn't be front page news that day if positions were reversed.
I expected better of Ocasio Cortez than to vote no on this but eh. Sticking it to the Republicans means more than sticking to your principles I guess.
Nope. This wasn't a bill to end the shutdown; it only refers to funding the Department of Homeland Security. It was introduced by the Democratic representative Lucille Roybal-Allard in addition to a different Democratic bill to end the shutdown:
Today, Democrats are bringing forward six conference reports negotiated last December when Republicans controlled the House, Senate, and the White House. If members of the Republican Party are serious about governing with us for the betterment of all Americans, then they should vote for these six conference reports and reopen the agencies covered by those bills.
In addition, Chairwoman-designate Roybal-Allard is bringing forward a Continuing Resolution for the Department of Homeland Security through February 28. This legislation will ensure that DHS is open and its employees are paid while President Trump and Congress negotiate border security and immigration policy.
The legislation, which passed in a 234-180 vote and would fund the government through Sept. 30, is the 10th clean-funding measure that Democrats have voted on to end the partial government shutdown, with most of them passing in the chamber.
Ten Republicans joined Democrats in voting for the latest measure. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (N.Y.) was the lone Democrat to vote against the bill.
GOP Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick (Pa.), Jaime Herrera Beutler (Wash.), Will Hurd (Texas), John Katko (N.Y.), Adam Kinzinger (Ill.), Mike Simpson (Idaho), Chris Smith (N.J.), Elise Stefanik (N.Y.), Fred Upton (Mich.) and Greg Walden (Ore.) voted with Democrats for the measure.
Democrats advanced the latest measure, introduced by House Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.), in an attempt to place pressure on GOP lawmakers to break with President Trump’s call to provide funding for a wall along the southern border.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has refused to bring forward House-passed bills for a vote in the upper chamber unless they are part of a deal between President Trump and congressional Democrats to end the government shutdown.
So GOP Congressman Steve Scalise is misrepresenting this bill to make it look like Democrats are voting against ending the shutdown. In reality, Democrats have been pushing forward bills to end the shutdown multiple times since it first began... and this partial resolution itself was also introduced by Democrats.
I'm a Conservative and I agree that the Democratic Party has little to nothing to do with this shutdown. As I said earlier, a good poker player would have folded this hand...
I mean, he HAD the wall (or, at least the funding for it, eminent domain lawsuits and the Rio Grande is gonna stop his wall no matter what). We didn't want to give it to him, but full protection for the Dreamers had Democrats on board. It's what is called a compromise. And they were willing to do it. Lindsey Graham was putting it together with Dick Durbin before Graham lost his mind. But they couldn't even stomach the idea that children who were brought here as BABIES would get amnesty, and even then only by following very, very strict rules. It was a no-brainer. But this Administration isn't just catering to the fringe right, it IS the fringe right. FOX News is literally running the country, and not just hypothetically. Bill Shine is the Communications Director, and he was Roger Ailes' right-hand man.
Not even Fox News, it's Limbaugh and Coulter (probably more Coulter since she's female and thus shamed him more). I listen to Limbaugh so I know what he said. It was the fastest about-face in history on Trump's part. I even predicted the shut down to my family a couple of days after. It was nauseatingly predictable as was the result, a bloody nose, unless the Dems concede for no other reason than to save people's paychecks. Honestly, my opinion of the Democrats would go up if they conceded this time but they have absolutely no political reason to (which, incidentally, would be the exact reason my opinion of them would go up).
Pelosi said either yesterday or today that if the employees can be successfully leveraged as hostages now then they are basically hostages forever, and that Trump (if successful) will pull this bullshit every chance he gets from here on out. Is she wrong about that?? I have a feeling even alot of conservatives are bristling at the idea that people work and aren't getting paid for it. What is more fundamental than that?? Not the hardcore anti-government types (who seem to think no government jobs should exist AT ALL), but enough (maybe 10%) to see his approval ratings continue to plummet. And could it be clearer he doesn't give a shit about them?? Does anyone actually think he does?? He has been stiffing workers his entire life. Of course he doesn't care if they aren't getting paid. The guy was running a scam "University" that was clearly designed to prey on people who didn't have alot of money to begin with. He bankrupted multiple businesses, leaving god knows how much collateral damage in his wake while himself leaving without a scratch. He's a predator.
Comments
Many of them did very well.
Their children not so much though compared to the generations of children from some other ethnic minority groups who came later.
So what's it down to here in the UK and other parts of Europe?
Same ridiculous crime stats, same family breakdown, same lack of achievement in education.
People give their children advantages by being good parents. Hardly a lot to ask and very little to do with racism, systematic or otherwise.
Edit: I personally think the asshole percentage is roughly the same for every race, color, religion, background, income level, or political affiliation.
The private school went from Montessori (which is rich people talk for kindergarten) to 12th grade. It was very much about college prep. Kids used to joke that people who graduated either went to Harvard or an insane asylum. Kinda grim considering we were like 13.
Fun fact: Rick Riordan used to teach at that private school. He was my social studies teacher. He was awesome.
https://www.google.co.jp/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/dec/03/whats-in-a-name-how-mystery-shopping-studies-show-bias
Name-blind applications are one way of ensuring that applicants can at least get as far as the interview stage.
I expected better of Ocasio Cortez than to vote no on this but eh. Sticking it to the Republicans means more than sticking to your principles I guess.
Text of Bill
https://rules.house.gov/sites/democrats.rules.house.gov/files/BILLS-116hjres31.pdf
Voting Record
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2019/roll043.xml
So I think it really depends on your location.
Trump says he will not give State of the Union until after shutdown ends
https://www.yahoo.com/gma/trump-notifies-pelosi-hes-honoring-invitation-deliver-state-174506041.html?.tsrc=notification-brknewsEdit: Whoops, I guess name-blind means not seeing the last name. Sorry about that. I agree that would be preferable...
The House passed a bipartisan bill to fund the government. The Senate voted on that bill 100-0. Not 80-20, not 90-10, but UNANIMOUSLY. Everything was set to go, everyone was going home for the holidays with a functional country. But literally overnight, Trump gets freaked out by a couple of comments in right-wing media, and torpedoes the entire goddamn thing at the last second. Which, incidentally, he also did over a year ago when he could have had 5x as much wall funding as he is asking for now for Dreamer protections. Again, a done deal that everyone actually serious about getting something done thought was in the bank. Then they walk into the meeting where it was supposed to happen and Stephen Miller and Tom Cotton have gotten in Trump's ear. No deal. Now we are back at the same place AGAIN.
He had his fucking wall money. He had $25 billion of it on a silver platter. All he had to do was sign off on making sure people who were brought here as children with no agency (because we care about children, right??) could stay in this country if they continued to abide by rules that most felons on parole would find draconian. But nope, that wasn't acceptable. No compromise was acceptable. It's either everything he wants without question with no concessions, or no deal will be made. Christ almighty, he could have had ANYTHING he wanted for two years if he had even the slightest ounce of the negotiating tactics he claims to have. And he walked away with absolutely nothing. And now that the Democrats won an election to take the House based almost entirely on GOP incompetence, we are supposed to pretend they give a shit about governing. No one buys this argument (well, people do, but not nearly enough of them to make a difference compared to the vast majority that don't) because as stupid as the public can be, they aren't quite dumb enough to wrap their heads around the idea that the pro-government party is in favor of shut-downs and the anti-government party isn't. End of story. Trump and the GOP will never win this fight. It goes against the very basic understanding the public has about the two parties in the first place. They have never won a government shutdown argument with the public, and they never will. Because they have spent 35 years telling everyone it's the enemy.
Meh. It's just political gamesmanship. A show vote, much like what will happen in the Senate tomorrow with each vote scheduled, and destined to fail. This doesnt move the needle. Neither do all the votes to open the government by the Democrats in the house either.
Pelosi’s Latest Genius Move Adds Progressives To Oversight Who Will Make Trump Miserable
https://www.politicususa.com/2019/01/22/pelosis-latest-genius-move-adds-progressives-to-oversight-who-will-make-trump-miserable.html?fbclid=IwAR1NXBaGInVsA8Gv4eI7HOwDfv7LJjb0E49aQyxxFOKWRDya1krkjAzzFUMMore Americans now see Mueller probe as justified, CBS News poll finds
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cbs-news-poll-most-americans-now-see-mueller-probe-as-justified/?fbclid=IwAR2XbFY_6TFNDcnr6xL6vunTHuDQCjZfJ87BIytfgii4BngHlTtLxwI1TmsThey would have caved 4-8 years ago. It's no longer 4-8 years ago. Your dad is used to a generation of Democrats who have been cowered in mortal fear of right-wing media. Those days are mercifully, at long last, over.
In addition, Chairwoman-designate Roybal-Allard is bringing forward a Continuing Resolution for the Department of Homeland Security through February 28. This legislation will ensure that DHS is open and its employees are paid while President Trump and Congress negotiate border security and immigration policy.
The actual, full bill (rather than this partial resolution tacked on top) is the eighth that Democrats have introduced to end the shutdown.
Ten Republicans joined Democrats in voting for the latest measure. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (N.Y.) was the lone Democrat to vote against the bill.
GOP Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick (Pa.), Jaime Herrera Beutler (Wash.), Will Hurd (Texas), John Katko (N.Y.), Adam Kinzinger (Ill.), Mike Simpson (Idaho), Chris Smith (N.J.), Elise Stefanik (N.Y.), Fred Upton (Mich.) and Greg Walden (Ore.) voted with Democrats for the measure.
Democrats advanced the latest measure, introduced by House Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.), in an attempt to place pressure on GOP lawmakers to break with President Trump’s call to provide funding for a wall along the southern border.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has refused to bring forward House-passed bills for a vote in the upper chamber unless they are part of a deal between President Trump and congressional Democrats to end the government shutdown.
So GOP Congressman Steve Scalise is misrepresenting this bill to make it look like Democrats are voting against ending the shutdown. In reality, Democrats have been pushing forward bills to end the shutdown multiple times since it first began... and this partial resolution itself was also introduced by Democrats.
I don't even like talking like this in the current situation where people are working without getting paid, which is just the ultimate absurdity, but as long as we are on the topic, Trump tried bluff Pelosi today by saying he was going to show up for the State of the Union anyway. And she very quickly called and raised him and said "no, actually you aren't, I meant what I said". And, lo and behold, Trump tonight completely backed down. And this is why I think there is some truth to why he won't attack her like everyone else. He knows he is outmatched and has nothing by a 4 and a 9 in his hand.
Why doesn't the article from The Hill even mention what is actually in what the Republicans added on?? They are a news outlet that is supposed to be the exact place you go for inside baseball, sausage being made coverage, and the first paragraph completely misrepresents the substance of it. And, again, look at the comment section of that article. No one is arguing about what the Republicans or Democrats put forth. It's just thousands of primal screams who could have clicked on any random article and wrote the same things.
I mean, he HAD the wall (or, at least the funding for it, eminent domain lawsuits and the Rio Grande is gonna stop his wall no matter what). We didn't want to give it to him, but full protection for the Dreamers had Democrats on board. It's what is called a compromise. And they were willing to do it. Lindsey Graham was putting it together with Dick Durbin before Graham lost his mind. But they couldn't even stomach the idea that children who were brought here as BABIES would get amnesty, and even then only by following very, very strict rules. It was a no-brainer. But this Administration isn't just catering to the fringe right, it IS the fringe right. FOX News is literally running the country, and not just hypothetically. Bill Shine is the Communications Director, and he was Roger Ailes' right-hand man.
Honestly, the one Texas Hold 'em session I won at a bar once (back when the whole World Series of Poker thing was all the rage) was because I was too much of a novice at the game to have any tells. I never really knew what kind of situation I was in other than what I myself was holding, so it was probably impossible to read me. I got the feeling at the table that serious players are really annoyed by novice ones because they can't pinpoint them in the time they have to do so. Anyway, I was surprised the other weekend when I ran across a Texas Hold'em tournament on TV (and even noticed Phil Hellmuth is still making the rounds). There was a time when Phil Ivey and Johnny Chan were some of the most recognizable stars in the world to 20-30 year old males in the first decade of the 2000s.
Edit: Folding a winning for hand solely for helping others is an unbelievably selfless act. Don't underestimate what that might accomplish in the long run...
Pelosi said either yesterday or today that if the employees can be successfully leveraged as hostages now then they are basically hostages forever, and that Trump (if successful) will pull this bullshit every chance he gets from here on out. Is she wrong about that?? I have a feeling even alot of conservatives are bristling at the idea that people work and aren't getting paid for it. What is more fundamental than that?? Not the hardcore anti-government types (who seem to think no government jobs should exist AT ALL), but enough (maybe 10%) to see his approval ratings continue to plummet. And could it be clearer he doesn't give a shit about them?? Does anyone actually think he does?? He has been stiffing workers his entire life. Of course he doesn't care if they aren't getting paid. The guy was running a scam "University" that was clearly designed to prey on people who didn't have alot of money to begin with. He bankrupted multiple businesses, leaving god knows how much collateral damage in his wake while himself leaving without a scratch. He's a predator.