July 29, 20223 yr The goon squad does not like to be called out on the, blatant, cynical, politicking. VanHammersly quoted you in a topic: Support the Troops (the GOP way) 7 minutes ago Paul852 quoted you in a topic: Support the Troops (the GOP way) 17 minutes ago DEagle7 quoted you in a topic: Support the Troops (the GOP way) 1 hour ago barho quoted you in a topic: Support the Troops (the GOP way) 1 hour ago Toastrel quoted you in a topic: Support the Troops (the GOP way) 1 hour ago Dave Moss reacted to a post in a topic Support the Troops (the GOP way) 1 hour ago Paul852 quoted you in a topic: Support the Troops (the GOP way) 1 hour ago Gannan quoted you in a topic: Support the Troops (the GOP way) 1 hour ago Dave Moss reacted to a post in a topic Lia Thomas - Penn Swimmer - TransCVON 1 hour ago VanHammersly quoted you in a topic: Support the Troops (the GOP way) 2 hours ago
July 29, 20223 yr Author 5 minutes ago, The_Omega said: The goon squad does not like to be called out on the, blatant, cynical, politicking. VanHammersly quoted you in a topic: Support the Troops (the GOP way) 7 minutes ago Paul852 quoted you in a topic: Support the Troops (the GOP way) 17 minutes ago DEagle7 quoted you in a topic: Support the Troops (the GOP way) 1 hour ago barho quoted you in a topic: Support the Troops (the GOP way) 1 hour ago Toastrel quoted you in a topic: Support the Troops (the GOP way) 1 hour ago Dave Moss reacted to a post in a topic Support the Troops (the GOP way) 1 hour ago Paul852 quoted you in a topic: Support the Troops (the GOP way) 1 hour ago Gannan quoted you in a topic: Support the Troops (the GOP way) 1 hour ago Dave Moss reacted to a post in a topic Lia Thomas - Penn Swimmer - TransCVON 1 hour ago VanHammersly quoted you in a topic: Support the Troops (the GOP way) 2 hours ago How can I save face for being caught in another series of lies? Welcome to step 1 of the zuker method.
July 29, 20223 yr 14 minutes ago, The_Omega said: The goon squad does not like to be called out on the, blatant, cynical, politicking. VanHammersly quoted you in a topic: Support the Troops (the GOP way) 7 minutes ago Paul852 quoted you in a topic: Support the Troops (the GOP way) 17 minutes ago DEagle7 quoted you in a topic: Support the Troops (the GOP way) 1 hour ago barho quoted you in a topic: Support the Troops (the GOP way) 1 hour ago Toastrel quoted you in a topic: Support the Troops (the GOP way) 1 hour ago Dave Moss reacted to a post in a topic Support the Troops (the GOP way) 1 hour ago Paul852 quoted you in a topic: Support the Troops (the GOP way) 1 hour ago Gannan quoted you in a topic: Support the Troops (the GOP way) 1 hour ago Dave Moss reacted to a post in a topic Lia Thomas - Penn Swimmer - TransCVON 1 hour ago VanHammersly quoted you in a topic: Support the Troops (the GOP way) 2 hours ago Why defend your lies when you can play the victim? You're a F'ing joke.
July 29, 20223 yr 14 minutes ago, The_Omega said: The goon squad does not like to be called out on the, blatant, cynical, politicking. I linked the bill and amendments. Again, point out exactly where the added slush funds you're so worked up about. Shouldn't be hard with proper use of the search function. Unless of course you're full of crap...again.
July 29, 20223 yr 7 minutes ago, DEagle7 said: I linked the bill and amendments. Again, point out exactly where the added slush funds you're so worked up about. Shouldn't be hard with proper use of the search function. Unless of course you're full of crap...again. Werd
July 29, 20223 yr 4 minutes ago, Bacarty2 said: "400 billion dollars in unrelated spending" - seems kinda important
July 29, 20223 yr Holy ish, you can tell the ishlib crew has taken some lumps recently with how desperate they are for this "win."
July 29, 20223 yr 2 minutes ago, Bacarty2 said: have you tried bringing up jan 6th? have you posted your home address yet ?
July 29, 20223 yr Author 1 minute ago, Bacarty2 said: have you tried bringing up jan 6th? Have you tried showing the alleged extra stuff the House slipped in? https://rules.house.gov/bill/117/hr-3967-sa I'll help. Here are the four amendments slipped in by the Republicans. 1 Version 1 Budd (NC) Republican Requires the Secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs to delay enrollment dates outlined in Section 103 if VA wait times increase by 20 percent or more during the relevant two year period. Submitted 2 Version 1 Roy (TX) Republican Provides that the Secretary shall remove an illness from a presumption of service connection previously established pursuant to a regulation issued under subsection (a) if there is a lack of evidence establishing a positive association between the illness and the toxic exposure. Submitted 3 Version 1 Roy (TX) Republican Provides that all of the funding appropriated under this act shall be unobligated amounts available under COVID relief funds. Submitted 4 Version 1 Bost (IL), Roy (TX) Republican Limits the Cost of War Toxic Exposure Fund to $116.8 billion over 10 years. Prevents the Fund from converting up to $396.6 billion of existing, already appropriated VA health care costs from discretionary to mandatory. Submitted
July 29, 20223 yr Just now, Alpha_TATEr said: have you posted your home address yet ? Oh that reminds me, I meant to sign up ol Bacarty for some mailing lists I think he'd be interested in. BRB.
July 30, 20223 yr 15 hours ago, Paul852 said: Seriously, who is feeding you this nonsense? MAGA Facebook groups.
July 30, 20223 yr 10 hours ago, DEagle7 said: Don't F with Stewart So basically Ted Cruz is playing the part of Zuker. Claiming there's 400 billion in pork. When asked to show where that is, they can't.
July 30, 20223 yr 31 minutes ago, Gannan said: So basically Ted Cruz is playing the part of Zuker. Claiming there's 400 billion in pork. When asked to show where that is, they can't. All while amplify the voice of a much much more effective/passionate/intelligent speaker in Stewart and painting a target on his own back. Cruz either buys into his own BS or is even dumber than I thought.
July 31, 20223 yr The CVON goon squad will never not fall for it. Useful idiots all. Except maybe for DEagle7. Probably not an idiot. Just a cynical party hack.
July 31, 20223 yr Author 2 hours ago, The_Omega said: The CVON goon squad will never not fall for it. Useful idiots all. Except maybe for DEagle7. Probably not an idiot. Just a cynical party hack. Oh you mean the changes made in the Senate that the GOP originally voted for, but now vote against?
July 31, 20223 yr 6 hours ago, The_Omega said: The CVON goon squad will never not fall for it. Useful idiots all. Except maybe for DEagle7. Probably not an idiot. Just a cynical party hack. Slush fund. Social Security is running low and they're looking for a new ho.
July 31, 20223 yr On 7/29/2022 at 11:38 AM, DEagle7 said: Here's the bill with all listed amendments https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3967 Point to all this added money. We'll wait. On 7/29/2022 at 1:05 PM, DEagle7 said: I linked the bill and amendments. Again, point out exactly where the added slush funds you're so worked up about. Shouldn't be hard with proper use of the search function. Unless of course you're full of crap...again. The issue is in how the spending is classified. By making it mandatory spending, it opens up $400B in future discretionary spending. Essentially it becomes a potential Trojan horse/poison pill to $400B in discretionary spending on future, unrelated programs. The fact that the bill does not add this spending in the present is irrelevant to this accounting procedure’s potential for future abuse. The solution is pretty straight forward: make it discretionary spending. That way Democrats can’t be accused of trying to use sick veterans as a shield for pork and Republicans don’t have an excuse to not vote for it if they do, in fact, support it. I think most Americans would agree that we should help veterans who were exposed to toxins from burn pits but also not use sick veterans as a vehicle to spend nearly half a trillion dollars on things completely unrelated to veterans. I think you’d agree with that, right?
July 31, 20223 yr It really doesn’t make sense for any politician to be against any kind of spending, especially when you can just print money, so people need to ask themselves why Republicans would want to stop this if the reason is not actually due to concerns over inflation
July 31, 20223 yr 3 hours ago, TEW said: The issue is in how the spending is classified. By making it mandatory spending, it opens up $400B in future discretionary spending. Essentially it becomes a potential Trojan horse/poison pill to $400B in discretionary spending on future, unrelated programs. The fact that the bill does not add this spending in the present is irrelevant to this accounting procedure’s potential for future abuse. The solution is pretty straight forward: make it discretionary spending. That way Democrats can’t be accused of trying to use sick veterans as a shield for pork and Republicans don’t have an excuse to not vote for it if they do, in fact, support it. I think most Americans would agree that we should help veterans who were exposed to toxins from burn pits but also not use sick veterans as a vehicle to spend nearly half a trillion dollars on things completely unrelated to veterans. I think you’d agree with that, right? Eh that's a bit misleading. So basically none of the money in this bill can be used for anything other than burn pit victims, we agree on that. The additional discretionary spending only factors in if 1) the VA requests moving a portion of their current funding into this mandatory fund and 2) Congress approves the transfer. At that point the amount of funding transfered to this mandatory fund (which has to be related to treating burn out victims) would be opened up in the discretionary spending budget, but would still be subject to the appropriations process which is debated/voted on. So basically this "unrelated spending" is hypothetical, would be undoubtedly much less than 400 billion, and would still require Senate approval for funding. It's also worth pointing out that the fund was still classified as mandatory when the Senate originally voted on and passed the bill back in June. This is 100% a retaliatory partisan move by Toomey/Cruz etc which is unfortunately exactly why this spending has to be classified as mandatory. So those jackals can't use dying vets as a Fing bargaining chip every single year. They pulled this same BS with 9/11 first responders and I cannot possibly emphasize enough how infuriating it was to watch a family member get sicker and sicker as McConnell dragged his feet on the funding as a political ploy.
August 1, 20223 yr 51 minutes ago, DEagle7 said: Eh that's a bit misleading. So basically none of the money in this bill can be used for anything other than burn pit victims, we agree on that. The additional discretionary spending only factors in if 1) the VA requests moving a portion of their current funding into this mandatory fund and 2) Congress approves the transfer. At that point the amount of funding transfered to this mandatory fund (which has to be related to treating burn out victims) would be opened up in the discretionary spending budget, but would still be subject to the appropriations process which is debated/voted on. So basically this "unrelated spending" is hypothetical, would be undoubtedly much less than 400 billion, and would still require approval for funding. It's also worth pointing out that the fund was still classified as mandatory when the Senate originally voted on and passed the bill back in June. This is 100% a retaliatory partisan move by Toomey/Cruz etc which is unfortunately exactly why this spending has to be classified as mandatory. So those jackals can't use dying vets as a Fing bargaining chip every single year. They pulled this same BS with 9/11 first responders and I cannot possibly emphasize enough how infuriating it was to watch a family member get sicker and sicker as McConnell dragged his feet on the funding as a political ploy. The point of making it mandatory is to avoid the appropriations process — good in theory from a practical view since the spending is essentially agreed upon by everyone and it just takes up more time for what is basically a rubber stamp issue. But in doing so, you’re basically left with a bunch of cash that can be spent on anything. And let’s not act like Democrats haven’t used this trick before, so to say that it’s 100% a retaliatory partisan move is just wrong, and likely motivated by partisan sentiments of your own. Again, the GOP is on record as saying they want to sign the bill with this mechanism fixed. And with that fix, we could avoid what everyone says they want to avoid — pork spending. So who is playing partisan ball here? If Democrat’s motives are so pure, just fix the mechanism and it can be passed into law. Or maybe there is another motive…
Create an account or sign in to comment