The Biden-Harris Administration

caseyedwards

Well-Known Member
Messages
18,629
There isn’t some Russian of comparable stature she could have been traded for? You have to go with international terrorist merchant of death? Especially because it’s possible his connections will be used in Ukraine war
 

tony

The older, the crankier
Messages
14,134
There isn’t some Russian of comparable stature she could have been traded for? You have to go with international terrorist merchant of death? Especially because it’s possible his connections will be used in Ukraine war
It's sad that some people feel the need to shit on good news
I think it's fair game to question how someone with a marijuana offense is being equated to the Russian 'Merchant of Death' who is now free.

People can applaud the Biden Admin efforts while still questioning the logic of how they came to this IMO.
 

DFJ

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,741
Fair questions all around. But Russia said it's this deal or nothing. What was the WH to do? Say no thanks, you can send her back to that penal colony? Putin knows what he had. I think his Russian buddy was sentenced to 25 years, of which he has served 15 (please correct me if I'm wrong).

I still think it is very good news.
 

ballettmaus

Well-Known Member
Messages
17,853
My guess is, it was either this or concessions with regards to Ukraine (either stop support or lift sanctions).
 

SkateSand

Cat Servant
Messages
2,005
I wonder if this release with help from the Saudis is related to the Biden administration not pursuing action against the Saudi prince re the murder of the journalist.
 

Dobre

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,694
It's an awful thing, for sure, to release a man who likely contributed to the deaths of many; however, I am grateful to live in a country where 1 (comparatively innocent) life is valued so highly.

(I hope people have learned from her experience because I doubt there will be a mutual push for the next U.S. hostage Putin arrests, now that everyone is or should be aware of the current state of the political climate).
 

MacMadame

Doing all the things
Messages
52,301
(I hope people have learned from her experience because I doubt there will be a mutual push for the next U.S. hostage Putin arrests, now that everyone is or should be aware of the current state of the political climate).
She really did have bad timing.
 

once_upon

Enough
Messages
24,916
I think it will be a really good thing to change the primary calendar. I doubt its feasible but it would be ideal to have it be different every presidential election year so that different portions of the electorate are given a voice.

I think that the Iowa caucuses skewed things way liberal and if they succeed in getting South Carolina first its going to seriously change that. It definitely will improve things if there's a new calendar however it falls out by requiring candidates to address different constituencies than they have in the past when they spent so many months in Iowa before the primary season began.
Iowa caucus are really not the way to start the process-I dont think it necessarily always skewed liberal. Iowa as a whole is not a Democratic population base - except for college areas (Iowa City, Ames, Cedar Falls, parts of Des Moines) But caucuses are stupid overall. Unless you like rank voting or are really committed to the process to stay until a "winner" is decided.

As someone who lived in both Iowa and Nebraska the amount of money spent and the number of political candidates running around the state is astronomical.
 

DORISPULASKI

Watching submarine races
Messages
13,323
What she has achieved is avoiding being primaried by progressives when she goes for re-election in 2024., which she surely would have been. It was a good survival move for her.

If she wants to keep committee assignments, she will probably caucus with Democrats.

Here's her committees and subcommittees.
Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs ›
Subcommittee on Government Operations and Border Management (Chair)

Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Spending Oversight

Banking, Housing, & Urban Affairs ›
Subcommittee on National Security and International Trade and Finance

Subcommittee on Securities, Insurance, and Investment

Commerce, Science, & Transportation ›
Subcommittee on Aviation Safety, Operations, and Innovation (Chair)

Subcommittee on Communications, Media, and Broadband

Subcommittee on Tourism, Trade, and Export Promotion

Subcommittee on Space and Science

Veterans' Affairs ›
 

ballettmaus

Well-Known Member
Messages
17,853
Hope she has work lined up for when her term ends.
I'm reading a lot of speculation that this is all about avoiding a primary and strong-arming Democrats into supporting her or risk splitting the vote and handing a win to Republicans. Given how close it was in Arizona, Democrats can't afford to split the vote and I fear her strategy is going to work.
 
D

Deleted member 221

Guest
Yeah, vote for the party who wants to take away your rights. That makes sense.

The party whose support just codified your rights into law. LGBTQ+ rights will be a non-issue in future elections.

Well, maybe T rights will, but the left is so looney on those that LGB, Q, and + may well side with the Republicans. Here’s hoping. :cheer: :cheer2:
 

Aussie Willy

Hates both vegemite and peanut butter
Messages
26,324
Yeah, vote for the party who wants to take away your rights. That makes sense.
Yes because if they get the chance, the Republicans would repeal this at the first opportunity. They ain't gonna give up.

If I was LGBTQI there is no way I would put my faith in Republicans to protect my rights.

That some voted to make SMS legal might be more representative that some of them got the message from the midterms that batsh*t crazy don't cut it and people see right through what it represents.
 

caseyedwards

Well-Known Member
Messages
18,629
The bill would not exist without Democrats let alone have been brought up for a vote.
So many republicans supported it in house and senate im not sure about that! All senate republicans voted for Mike lees version of the bill.
 
Last edited:

ballettmaus

Well-Known Member
Messages
17,853
So many republicans supported it in house and senate im not sure about that!
:rofl:
All senate republicans voted for Mike lees version of the bill.
When did Mike Lee introduce a bill? Because for this bill, he only introduced an amendment and as far as I know, the Senators would have supported his amendment, not the bill itself and that amendment would actually have prevented action against entities that discriminate against same-sex couples. (So, of course, Republicans voted for that. They won't let an opportunity pass to help their oh-so-Christian voters discriminate against LGBTQ).
 

Users who are viewing this thread

  • Top
    Do Not Sell My Personal Information