Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

The triumph of President Joe Biden and healing the nation


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Dargo said:

Btw, and regarding this whole "healing the nation" thing that Biden is now saddled with.

Sorry folks, but this isn't going to happen, and ya know WHY?

Well, it's because there are SO damn many dyed-in-the-wool Trump supporters in this country who are SO freakin' clueless that they're using the excuse that "Biden doesn't deserve it because he, the Democratic party AND the mainstream media 'hated' him SO much that they didn't allow him to do his job."

MAN, can you freakin' BELIEVE these damn people and the "logic" they're using and how THEY can't seem to get it through THEIR damn heads that it was DONALD freakin' TRUMP, a man who PERSONIFIED  the very word "hate" and aggressively introduced it at an accelerated rate into the political realm, AND who because from day one didn't show ANY damn signs of civility, being able to listen to others and THEIR points-of-view and a whole host of OTHER other negative behaviors which he exhibited while in office, IS the very damn reason why HE doesn't and never did "deserve" any respect...PERIOD!!!!

(...I swear to God...the lack of understanding, and ESPECIALLY the lack of understanding the concept of LOGICAL & CRITICAL THINKING, sure seems like it's dwindling as fast in this country as is the coming day when we thankfully will no longer be hearing of and reading of Donald Trump sending HIS DISRESPECTFUL damn little tweets from the Oval Office SO often filled with hateful language)

The Trumpers have a limited influence. They are replaced by powerful Democrats and by the next generation of Republicans who will do better.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, TopBilled said:

The Trumpers have a limited influence. They are replaced by powerful Democrats and by the next generation of Republicans who will do better.

TB, you have NO idea how much I'd now like to post the definition of the word "naivete" here.

(...but because I don't know how to put one of those little accent marks over the last 'e' in that word, I'll refrain from doing so)

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Dargo said:

TB, you have NO idea how much I'd now like to post the definition of the word "naivete" here.

(...but because I don't know how to put one of those little accent marks over the last 'e' in that word, I'll refrain from doing so)

I don't think I am being naive. I am just choosing not to despair.

Trump will die at some point and the ones following him now will have moved on to another false prophet.

In the meantime the Republican party will have to rebalance itself. A new, more informed generation will be the ones to do that. If they don't all become Democrats. :) 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, TopBilled said:

I don't think I am being naive. I am just choosing not to despair.

Trump will die at some point and the ones following him now will have moved on to another false prophet.

In the meantime the Republican party will have to rebalance itself. A new, more informed generation will be the ones to do that. If they don't all become Democrats. :) 

I would like to hope you are correct.  Perhaps the truth lies somewhere between your view and Dargo's.  

There was a post on this forum where one of the Koch brothers regrets their great financial and other support for the Tea Party because it led to Trump.  Personally I think it goes back to Nixon and Reagan, but regardless the Republican Party has been drifting into its current direction for a long time.  They have just about insured that even the moderates must adhere to the base party line if they wish to stay in office.

Perhaps if the very wealthy, business people and corporations that have funded the current Republican Party became more discriminating in who they support, it might help.  

However, that does not mean that the Dems do not need to moderate their own positions while trying to work with Republicans.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, TopBilled said:

I don't think I am being naive. I am just choosing not to despair.

Trump will die at some point and the ones following him now will have moved on to another false prophet.

In the meantime the Republican party will have to rebalance itself. A new, more informed generation will be the ones to do that. If they don't all become Democrats. :) 

Well, I've never said that you weren't the type o' guy epitomized by the image shown on the left side of the following graphic here, kid!...

glasshalfemptyhalffull.jpg

BUT, allow me to remind you here that even these "future Republicans" of which you speak, will STILL mostly adhere to something which also applies to the above graphic.

(...and NOT that they'll necessarily be people with the thought of that glass being "half EMPTY", but really MORE being people with the thought of, "HEY! Who's been drinking out of MY glass?!")

LOL

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ElCid said:

I would like to hope you are correct.  Perhaps the truth lies somewhere between your view and Dargo's.  

There was a post on this forum where one of the Koch brothers regrets their great financial and other support for the Tea Party because it led to Trump.  Personally I think it goes back to Nixon and Reagan, but regardless the Republican Party has been drifting into its current direction for a long time.  They have just about insured that even the moderates must adhere to the base party line if they wish to stay in office.

Perhaps if the very wealthy, business people and corporations that have funded the current Republican Party became more discriminating in who they support, it might help.  

However, that does not mean that the Dems do not need to moderate their own positions while trying to work with Republicans.

Excellent post!

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Dargo said:

Well, I've never said that you weren't the type o' guy epitomized by the image shown on the left side of the following graphic here, kid!...

glasshalfemptyhalffull.jpg

BUT, allow me to remind you here that even these "future Republicans" of which you speak, will STILL mostly adhere to something which also applies to the above graphic.

(...and NOT that they'll necessarily be people with the thought of that glass being "half EMPTY", but really MORE being people with the thought of, "HEY! Who's been drinking out of MY glass?!")

LOL

Just remember, the glass is refillable to full.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, ElCid said:

Just remember, the glass is refillable to full.

Uh-huh, and THEN as I recall from my high school Physics class, it won't spill over because of "surface tension"!

(...so what's your point here, Cid???) ;)

LOL

Link to post
Share on other sites

Today's article is from The Guardian:

Joe Biden administration: president-elect assembles a diverse cabinet

Joe Biden is piecing together what he has promised to be a diverse cabinet, with Michele Flournoy reportedly top choice for US defence secretary and Susan Rice considered a frontrunner for secretary of state.

Flournoy was previously a senior defense adviser in Bill Clinton and Barack Obama’s administrations and is considered a political moderate. Since leaving government she has been involved in various consultancy roles around military contracts.

The appointment, if confirmed by the US Senate, would end a tumultuous period under Donald Trump, who has had five male defense secretaries during his presidency. The latest, Mark Esper, was unceremoniously fired on Monday for, among other issues, disagreeing with the president over the use of force against civilian protesters.

If she did become America’s first female defense secretary, Flournoy would potentially be faced with the task of deploying the military to distribute a Covid-19 vaccine. It’s likely she would seek to rebuild the US’ international reputation, telling a conference in March that “it’s going to take a lot of work over a number of years to recover that trust and that standing."

Rice, who served as national security adviser and ambassador to the United Nations in the Obama administration, is seen as a safe pick for the state department, although some Republicans may object to her over what they consider misleading statements over the 2012 attack on a US consulate in Libya which killed four Americans.

Questioned while on a bicycle ride on Saturday, Biden confirmed that he was getting closer to picking a cabinet that will face steep challenges once the president-elect enters the White House on 20 January.

A largely uncontrolled spread of Covid-19 is tearing across the country, with a record number of daily cases recorded on Friday. A Biden administration will have to somehow tame the pandemic while crafting a response to the economic fallout that has cost millions of jobs, likely in the face of Republican opposition in the senate.

Pete Buttigieg, the former mayor of South Bend, Indiana who became an effective campaigner for Biden after he dropped his own presidential ambitions, could be in line for a job, perhaps as ambassador to the United Nations.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Dargo said:

Uh-huh, and THEN as I recall from my high school Physics class, it won't spill over because of "surface tension"!

(...so what's your point here, Cid???) ;)

LOL

The glass can be refilled, so doesn't really matter if it is half full or half empty.😀

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, TopBilled said:

I see it as broadening inclusion.

Is there a reason you are singling out the LGBTQ groups in your question, instead of making your question about Middle Eastern groups and North African groups?

You might be missing(or assuming ) something.  My mention of LGBTQ groups is response to all the nonsense I've heard from dimwits about "Gay Rights" and such.  As if sexual orientation really matters in the case of constitutional rights of tax paying American citizens.  Because NOTHING in the U.S. constitution states that those rights should only be extended to heterosexuals.   OR white people.  OR men.  And I also took exception to those dunces who actually believed and preached that "Gay marriage" would forever destroy "traditional" marriage.  But none of them could intelligently explain to me how Frank and Jim getting married will keep Tom and Nancy from having a traditional marriage.  :)

And besides....   My post was in response to the last paragraph of your post earlier that day in which  you brought up "the needs of LGBTQ groups" and made no mention of North African  groups or Middle Eastern groups.   But if you're referring to people of those groups who are grouped that way due to ancestral heritage but are now tax-paying American citizens, well then THEY TOO are entitled to those constitutional rights.

Sepiatone

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Sepiatone said:

You might be missing(or assuming ) something.  My mention of LGBTQ groups is response to all the nonsense I've heard from dimwits about "Gay Rights" and such.  As if sexual orientation really matters in the case of constitutional rights of tax paying American citizens.  Because NOTHING in the U.S. constitution states that those rights should only be extended to heterosexuals.   OR white people.  OR men.  And I also took exception to those dunces who actually believed and preached that "Gay marriage" would forever destroy "traditional" marriage.  But none of them could intelligently explain to me how Frank and Jim getting married will keep Tom and Nancy from having a traditional marriage.  :)

And besides....   My post was in response to the last paragraph of your post earlier that day in which  you brought up "the needs of LGBTQ groups" and made no mention of North African  groups or Middle Eastern groups.   But if you're referring to people of those groups who are grouped that way due to ancestral heritage but are now tax-paying American citizens, well then THEY TOO are entitled to those constitutional rights.

Sepiatone

To be clear, I did not bring up the needs of LGBTQ groups. That was part of an article I posted, which placed LGBTQ groups alongside North African groups and Middle Eastern groups as under-represented Americans that will gain broader representation on the census surveys in 2030.

You must have missed this paragraph a bit higher in the article where it says:

Here are two specific policy proposals that could change how LGBTQ people and people with roots in the Middle East or North Africa can identify themselves for the next census and future federal surveys, and could give policymakers and researchers better insight into the U.S. population.

Anyway I just wondered why you honed in on the LGBTQ part instead of commenting about all three of those marginalized groups. It seemed like you might have been singling out the LGBTQ people in the article because of a backlash. Is it because you don't like gay people getting the rights and privileges they've been denied? That's what I was wondering...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Went to an independent hardware store yesterday.  As I came out a Trump supporter got out of his pick-up with a TRUMP 2020 tailgate wrap on it.  As he walked nearby he asked how I was doing, so I responded Better since the election.  He asked if I really meant that and that Trump was going to win because election is not over.  Couldn't resist, so I replied He's a loser and as the guy walked into the store, he replied "Baby Killers."

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ElCid said:

Went to an independent hardware store yesterday.  As I came out a Trump supporter got out of his pick-up with a TRUMP 2020 tailgate wrap on it.  As he walked nearby he asked how I was doing, so I responded Better since the election.  He asked if I really meant that and that Trump was going to win because election is not over.  Couldn't resist, so I replied He's a loser and as the guy walked into the store, he replied "Baby Killers."

El Cid, you live Dangerously--

But that makes you my hero!

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Princess of Tap said:

El Cid, you live Dangerously--

But that makes you my hero!

Yeah, I had second thoughts afterward.  But he was at least 15-20 feet away and was heading into the store as I was heading toward my truck.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If it's water, the glass is half full. If it's vodka, it's half empty. 

I noticed a small Trump sticker on the side of a free standing U.S.P.S. mailbox the other

day. Have to see how long it stays there.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Vautrin said:

If it's water, the glass is half full. If it's vodka, it's half empty. 

I noticed a small Trump sticker on the side of a free standing U.S.P.S. mailbox the other

day. Have to see how long it stays there.

Seen some wearing the mandated covid mask like a chin guard.  Is it half on or half off?

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, hamradio said:

Seen some wearing the mandated covid mask like a chin guard.  Is it half on or half off?

Either way, it wouldn't go do much good. I get a kick out of those gaiters that some people

wear. They don't look very comfortable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

From the Washington Post:

Obama’s advice to Trump? ‘It’s time for you’ to concede to Biden.

Former president Barack Obama got straight to the point during his interview with “60 Minutes” that aired on Sunday night: It is time for President Trump to concede, he said.

“A president is a public servant. They are temporary occupants of the office, by design,” Obama told correspondent Scott Pelley. “And when your time is up, then it is your job to put the country first and think beyond your own ego, and your own interests, and your own disappointments.”

“My advice to President Trump is, if you want at this late stage in the game to be remembered as somebody who put country first, it’s time for you to do the same thing,” Obama said.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, TopBilled said:

Anyway I just wondered why you honed in on the LGBTQ part instead of commenting about all three of those marginalized groups. It seemed like you might have been singling out the LGBTQ people in the article because of a backlash. Is it because you don't like gay people getting the rights and privileges they've been denied? That's what I was wondering...

Well now, WHOM isn't reading what?

Clearly there's nothing in the quoted content you used seven(or eight) posts ago to indicate a dislike by me of gay people being afforded the constitutional rights  every other tax paying( and not even necessarily then) American citizen has no need to lobby for.  As for the others, I did mention that if those other groups mentioned were American citizens that too were being denied their rights due to who or what they were otherwise then they too already deserved those rights. 

Sepiatone

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Sepiatone said:

Well now, WHOM isn't reading what?

Clearly there's nothing in the quoted content you used seven(or eight) posts ago to indicate a dislike by me of gay people being afforded the constitutional rights  every other tax paying( and not even necessarily then) American citizen has no need to lobby for.  As for the others, I did mention that if those other groups mentioned were American citizens that too were being denied their rights due to who or what they were otherwise then they too already deserved those rights. 

Sepiatone

Until you realize that some LGBTQ people do need to lobby for equal consideration, we will never be able to have a fair or comprehensive discussion here. 

As for the other groups, you say "if" as in IF they are being denied rights. Biden and others feel they have been denied rights and that is why they will push for broader inclusion. There is no  doubt, no "if" about it, as far as some people are concerned.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • TopBilled changed the title to The triumph of President Joe Biden and healing the nation

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
© 2021 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...