Posts
Obviously-Confused doesn't think the amount asked for is the point of the argument because she doesn't think. She has no concept of how much money the Democrats are asking for and believes the propaganda they're putting out there that it's going to cost "zero" dollars. AOC also believes talking about the amount would make the Democrats look bad, and on that point, she's right. But so would the notion that it would cripple our economy and ruin the economy of future generations.
“The head of your caucus, the progressive caucus, was on another network this morning and Rep. Jayapal [she's the one that looks like a Señor Wences hand puppet] said $1.5 trillion is just too small,” host Margaret Brennan said. “That’s the number that Senate moderates, Joe Manchin in particular, want to get down to. President Biden, according to our reporting from Ed O’Keefe, our correspondent, says you’re going to have to settle for about $2 trillion. Is that an acceptable ceiling for you?”
“So here’s where I think the problem is,” Obviously-Confused began. “It’s that when we talk about top line numbers, there’s a lot that is hidden in that discussion. And so the reason why this conversation shouldn’t be about numbers, but it should be about what substantive programs are willing to be excluded or that–”
“That’s coming from the White House,” Brennan interjected half intelligently.
“Yeah, but the White House isn’t making the demands to exclude universal childcare or universal pre-K,” the halfwit responded. “The budget bill that House progressives are trying to fight for, the Biden Build Back Better agenda, includes universal pre-K, free community college, expansion of Medicare; we’re fighting for expansion of Medicaid. And these are the things that we are saying, in addition to the very real climate threat that we have, emissions reductions, are worth standing up for.”
“So here’s where I think the problem is,” Obviously-Confused began. “It’s that when we talk about top line numbers, there’s a lot that is hidden in that discussion. And so the reason why this conversation shouldn’t be about numbers, but it should be about what substantive programs are willing to be excluded or that–”
“That’s coming from the White House,” Brennan interjected half intelligently.
* * *
Why not subscribe to Brain Flushings and check out the ads on these pages. It costs nothing to subscribe and it's worth every penny. And remember, every time you click on an ad, you help in the fight against the tech giants.
* * *
“Yeah, but the White House isn’t making the demands to exclude universal childcare or universal pre-K,” the halfwit responded. “The budget bill that House progressives are trying to fight for, the Biden Build Back Better agenda, includes universal pre-K, free community college, expansion of Medicare; we’re fighting for expansion of Medicaid. And these are the things that we are saying, in addition to the very real climate threat that we have, emissions reductions, are worth standing up for.”
And the money for these projects isn't remotely covered by the billionaires and [make-believe] trillionaires the left now pretends exists. If they handed all their money they make annually to the government in taxes, it still wouldn't cover the cost of this bill, not to mention all the hidden things inside of it.
Why should people be forced to fund things they morally object to like abortion or transgender ball-removing surgeries, for example? There is nothing about socialism that is moral, but it sounds as if it is.
