Jump to content
Head Coach Openings 2024 ×
  • Current Donation Goals

    • Raised $2,716 of $3,600 target

Open Club  ·  46 members  ·  Free

OOB v2.0

The Joe Biden Presidency Thread


swordfish

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, DanteEstonia said:

Again, I read about Mr. Robert's actions regarding the West Coast Hotel vs. Parrish case so no, I didn't.

IMHO what he did was unethical, regardless of his political motivations.  

You may be a fan of 'the ends always justify the means'.  I'm not.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Biden's Coronavirus Relief Package Has Almost Nothing to Do With the Coronavirus: https://reason.com/2021/02/18/bidens-coronavirus-relief-package-has-almost-nothing-to-do-with-the-coronavirus/

Quote

Over and over again, President Joe Biden has pitched his $1.9 trillion stimulus plan as vital to restoring a struggling American economy and recovering from the pandemic. Many households are struggling, he tweeted earlier this month, with desperate Americans wondering how they are going to eat. "That's why I'm urging Congress to pass the American Rescue Plan and deliver much-needed relief." Time, he has insisted, is of the essence. "We don't have a second to waste when it comes to delivering the American people the relief they desperately need. I'm calling on Congress to act quickly and pass the American Rescue Plan." 

The fiscal response,  he has argued, must be commensurate to the crisis at hand. "Now is the time we should be spending," he said at a CNN town hall this week. "Now is the time to go big." 

Biden has certainly gone big. His $1.9 trillion deficit-funded plan would be among the largest stimulus/relief packages in history. But much of the spending he has proposed would do little or nothing to help actually struggling Americans. Instead, the plan is padded with non-urgent, pre-existing Democratic policy priorities that have, at most, only tangential relationship to the crisis at hand. 

Take schooling, for example. The mass closure of schools has caused immeasurable chaos and frustration for families across the country, especially those with working parents, and it has set back educational advancement for children, especially in lower-income families with fewer resources or alternatives. Beyond the disruptions to family schedules and educational achievement, there is mounting evidence that school closures, in combination with other forms of isolation stemming from the pandemic, have taken a dark toll on student mental health. In the Las Vegas area, schools finally reopened following a rash of suicides in which 18 students took their own lives. 

Biden ran on reopening most schools for in-person instruction within a hundred days—a promise his administration has both walked back and then kinda-sorta attempted to un-walk back. But reopening, he has insisted, is conditioned on schools obtaining sufficient funding in a relief package. Accordingly, his plan includes about $128 billion for K-12 schooling "for preparation for, prevention of, and response to the coronavirus pandemic or for other uses allowed by other federal education programs," as part of a $170 billion boost in education-related spending.

This is a dubious argument on its face, considering that private schools have largely reopened, as have public schools in some states, such as Florida, that have pushed for faster and more widespread reopenings. 

But even if you think substantial additional funding is strictly necessary for rapid reopening, there's a problem: The vast majority of the relief plan's money for schools wouldn't be spent in the current fiscal year, or even next year. Previous coronavirus relief and congressional spending bills have already included more than $100 billion in funding for schools. But according to the Congressional Budget Office, "most of those funds remain to be spent."

As a result, just $6 billion would be spent in the 2021 fiscal year, which runs through September. Another $32 billion would be spent in 2022, and the rest by 2028. Biden is insisting that schools must reopen soon—and also that the only way for them to reopen is to authorize more than $120 billion in spending, most of which wouldn't roll out for years. It doesn't make much sense. 

Similarly, Biden's plan calls for $350 billion to backstop state budgets, which were projected to be down as much as 8 percent overall this year. Yet according to The Wall Street Journal, total revenues were down just 1.6 percent for the 2020 fiscal year, and 18 states ended the year with above-projection revenue. As Reason's Christian Britschgi noted last week, Biden's plan would disburse money to every state—including California, which is set for a $15 billion surplus. Previous coronavirus relief bills, meanwhile, have already doled out $300 billion to bolster state budgets. The billions in extra funding Biden's plan would deliver to soaring state budgets would, in all likelihood, not be spent this coming year. So much for not having a second to waste. 

There's more like this peppered throughout Biden's pandemic relief plan. Biden and his communications team raise the issue of food insecurity—then insist that checks should go to a two-earner family with stable jobs making $120,000 a year in a city with a roughly $40,000 annual median income for couples.

This is despite the fact that the average couple with comparable six-figure earnings has experienced no unusual job loss and has piled up record levels of personal savings. Even if the goal is just to pump more money into the economy, these checks wouldn't, for the most part, be spent. They'd just add to the savings. 

As the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB) notes, half the spending in the coronavirus relief plan would go toward such poorly targeted measures. The plan also includes expansions to Obamacare subsidies and would hike the federal minimum wage to $15 an hour—in 2025. Ultimately, the hike would cost jobs rather than preserve them. But raising the federal minimum wage has been a Democratic policy priority for years, so it got stuffed into the relief bill grab bag. 

How much of this alleged coronavirus relief plan is actually related to the coronavirus?  According to CRFB, just 1 percent of the relief plan's spending would go toward vaccines, and just 5 percent would go toward pandemic-related public health needs. Meanwhile, 15 percent of the spending—about $300 billion—would be spent on long-standing policy priorities that are not directly related to the current crisis. 

Biden keeps insisting that time is of the essence, that massive federal spending is urgently needed to speed America's recovery from its coronavirus-induced health and economic downturn. But the practical details of his plan say otherwise. The president's relief plan is an object lesson in non-urgent, non-vital policymaking. Biden is pitching a coronavirus relief package that has very little to do with coronavirus relief.

It's just Biden trying to put lipstick on a pig,  where coronavirus is the lipstick.

 

Edited by Muda69
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9300987/Rand-Paul-likens-gender-surgery-genital-mutilation-exchange-trans-nominee-HHS-deputy.html

Rand Paul compares gender change surgery for minors to genital mutilation in furious exchange with Biden's transgender pick for assistant HHS secretary

Rand Paul angrily confronted Joe Biden's pick for assistant secretary for Health and Human Services on Thursday, likening gender changes surgeries to genital mutilation and pushing the transgender nominee on if they would allow minors to decide if they want to go on hormones to stop puberty.

'We should be outraged that someone is talking to a three-year-old about changing their sex,' Paul said of Rachel Levine, a transgender woman Biden picked to help head up HHS.

Paul, who was a practicing ophthalmologist before becoming a U.S. senator, likened transgender minors starting on transitioning treatments to genital mutilation, blaming the increasing rates of trans-identified youth on 'the social pressure to conform.'

'Genital mutilation has been nearly universally condemned,' Paul began in his line of questioning of Levine.

'Most genital mutilation is not typical performed by force,' he continued in an opening monologue. 'But, as [the World Health Organization] notes, that by social convention, social norm, the social pressure to conform, to do what others do and have been doing, as well as the need to be accepted socially and the fear of being rejected by the community.'

'American culture is now normalizing the idea that minors can be given hormones to prevent their biological development of their secondary sexual characteristics,' Paul continued as Levine appeared before the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee for her confirmation hearing on Thursday.

'Dr. Levine, you have supported allowing minors to be given hormone blockers to prevent them from going through puberty, as well as surgical destruction of a minor's genitalia,' the Kentucky Republican senator pointed out. 'Do you believe minors are capable of making such a life changing decision of changing one's sex?'

Levine thanked the senator for his 'interest' in transgender medicine, calling it 'a very complex and nuanced field with robust research and standards of care that have been developed' over time.

'If I'm fortunate enough to be confirmed, I will look forward to working with you and your office and coming to your office to discuss the particulars of the standards of care for transgender medicine,' Levine said.

Levine, a pediatrician, is currently secretary of the Pennsylvania Department of Health and rose to prominence in the midst of the coronavirus pandemic. She was nominated to become Biden's assistant secretary of HHS. If confirmed, she would act as HHS secretary nominee Xavier Becerra's deputy.

Becerra currently serves as attorney general for California.

During the hearing Thursday, Levine did not address the substance of Paul's questions at any points regarding transgender healthcare decisions in cases with minors.

'Let it go into the record that the witness refused to answer the question,' Paul said of Levine. 'The question is a very specific one: should minors be making these momentous decisions?'

'For most of the history of medicine, we wouldn't let you have a cut sewn up in the ER [without parental consent],' he lamented. 'But you're willing to let a minor take things that prevent their puberty, and you think they get that back?'

'You give a woman testosterone enough that she grows a beard, you think she's going to go back looking like a woman when you stop the testosterone? You have permanently changed them. Infertility is another problem,' Paul said.

Levine appeared before the Senate panel alongside Surgeon General nominee Vivek Murthy for a dual confirmation hearing.

'According to the WHO, genital mutilation is recognized internationally as a violation of human right. Genital mutilation is considered particularly egregious because because, as the WHO notes, it is nearly always carried out on minors and is a violation of the rights of children,' Paul continued in likening putting children on hormones to castration and female circumcision.

'I'm alarmed that you're not saying they should be prevented from making decisions to amputate their breasts or genitalia,' Paul said during the heated exchange between him and Levine. 'We have always said that minors do not have full rights—will you make a more firm decision on whether or not minors should be involved in these decisions?'

Levine reiterated that transgender medicine is 'a very complex and nuanced field,' but refused to directly answer whether minors should be able to make medical decisions based on changing their sex.

No doubt this is "very complex and nuanced"......but the inability of this individual to be able to articulate a position on this in unacceptable.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, DanteEstonia said:

The next time I have issues with my teeth, I shall call Rand Paul.

So you are saying Mr. Paul shouldn't have an opinion when it comes to offering gender altering medicines and surgeries to minors? If that is so then exactly who in Congress should have an opinion, only those who are sex change "experts"?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Absurd Criticism of Rand Paul’s Rachel Levine Questioning

https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/02/the-absurd-criticism-of-rand-pauls-rachel-levine-questioning/

Quote

Yesterday, I noted on the Corner the perplexing reaction (from all the usual suspects) to Senator Rand Paul’s entirely legitimate line of questioning aimed at Rachel Levine, Biden’s pick for assistant health secretary. The absurd headlines and “hot takes” keep on coming.

“Exchange between GOP senator, transgender nominee draws fire from Democrats,” reports the Washington Post. “Rand Paul’s ignorant questioning of Rachel Levine showed why we need her in government,” opines a writer for the same publication.

“1st transgender nominee deflects inflammatory questions from GOP senator,” reports ABC News. “Rand Paul Launches Into Transphobic Rant Against Trans Nominee,” opines The Daily Beast.

 

“Rachel Levine Responds to Rand Paul About Transgender Medicine,” reports the New York Times, neglecting to mention that Levine’s “response” was one of sheer evasion.

Talk about burying the lede. Contrary to what progressive pundits insist, the real story of interest here is not Levine’s transgender status, but rather the fact that Levine refused to answer a crucial and highly topical question related to child welfare.

Here’s the real story. What Senator Paul asked and what Levine refused to answer was this: “Do you believe that minors are capable of making such a life-changing decision as changing one’s sex?” And this, “Do you support the government’s intervening to override the parent’s consent to give a child puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and/or amputation surgery of breasts and genitalia?”

 

As Senator Paul referenced, these are the very same questions that appeared before the High Court in England and Wales last year. In his questioning of Levine, Senator Paul cited the plaintiff in that case, Keira Bell:

I would hope that you would have compassion for Keira Bell, who’s a 23-year-old girl who was confused with her identity. At 14, she read on the internet about something about transsexuals and she thought, “Well, maybe that’s what I am.” She ended up getting these puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, she had her breasts amputated.

But here’s what ultimately she says now, and this is a very insightful decision from someone who made a mistake, but was led to believe this was a good thing by the medical community.

I made a brash decision as a teenager, as a lot of teenagers do, trying to find confidence and happiness, except now the rest of my life will be negatively affected,” she said, adding that the medicalized gender transitioning was a very temporary superficial fix for a very complex identity issue.

Having reviewed the evidence from all sides, the judges in Bell’s case concluded that it was “highly unlikely that a child aged 13 or under would be competent to give consent to the administration of puberty blockers,” adding that it was also “doubtful that a child aged 14 or 15 could understand and weigh the long-term risks and consequences of the administration of puberty blockers.”

Accordingly, the court ordered a National Health Service moratorium on the use of puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones for gender-dysphoric young people.

Got that New York Times, et al.? The Keira Bell decision happened in Enlightened, secular Britain — and at the behest of impartial and liberal-minded judges. Unfortunately, in the absence of a similar judicial intervention — or indeed of a centralized health-care system — the situation in the United States is far more out of control.

There are currently 40+ transgender-youth clinics (and counting) in the United States, according to the Human Rights Campaign. The largest transgender-youth clinic in Los Angeles saw more than 1,000 patients in 2019; the youngest patient was four years old. And the director of that clinic has admitted to personally recommending double mastectomies for “probably about 200” adolescent females, a decision she has justified by the argument that “they don’t identify as girls,” thus breast removal is actually “chest reconstruction.” Similarly, a study entitled “Age Is Just a Number,” published in 2017 in the Journal of Sexual Medicine, reveals that eleven out of the 20 surgeons interviewed admitted to having performed vaginoplasty — that is, castration followed by the inversion of the penis to form a pseudo-vaginal canal — “1 to 20” times on males under the age of 18.

If the British judges think that minors can’t consent to taking drugs and hormones to halt puberty, how likely is it that a minor can consent to having his or her sexual organs removed or mutilated?

Here’s another question worth pondering: If the Democratic nominee for assistant health secretary won’t answer basic questions related to child welfare — and the liberal media and political class won’t hold that nominee to account — how likely is it that this dangerous ideological agenda is about to get worse?

Very likely.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/25/2021 at 10:56 PM, DanteEstonia said:

The next time I have issues with my teeth, I shall call Rand Paul.

Doesn't common sense tell you he would do better with your eyes than your teeth???  Well, you are DE after all, I shouldn't assume common sense grows in your garden......

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/26/2021 at 4:56 AM, Muda69 said:

So you are saying Mr. Paul shouldn't have an opinion when it comes to offering gender altering medicines and surgeries to minors?

Since Dr. Paul has a medical license, in ophthalmology, his "opinion" borders on the practice of medicine outside the scope of his license. 

  • Disdain 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Biden orders airstrikes in Syria, retaliating against Iran-backed militias: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/biden-airstrikes-syria-retaliating-against-iran-backed-militias-n1258912

Quote

President Joe Biden on Thursday ordered airstrikes on buildings in Syria that the Pentagon said were used by Iranian-backed militias, in retaliation for rocket attacks on U.S. targets in neighboring Iraq.

The strikes killed at least 22 people, London-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said on Friday, citing unconfirmed local reports.

Pentagon press secretary John Kirby portrayed the bombing in eastern Syria as carefully calibrated, calling it “proportionate” and “defensive.”

Kirby told reporters Friday the bombing caused “casualties” but said it was too early to say precisely how many militia fighters might have been killed or wounded.

“We have preliminary indications of casualties on site, I'm not going to go any further than that,” Kirby said.

The operation was the first known use of military force by the Biden administration, which has for weeks emphasized plans to focus more on challenges posed by China.

The president’s decision appeared aimed at sending a signal to Iran and its proxies in the region that Washington would not tolerate attacks on its personnel in Iraq, even at a sensitive diplomatic moment.

Looks like we have another War President,  like Mr. Obama before him.    And "defensive" my ass.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, DanteEstonia said:

Since Dr. Paul has a medical license, in ophthalmology, his "opinion" borders on the practice of medicine outside the scope of his license. 

I personally don't think one needs a medical degree for the topic he was addressing with the nominee.  In my "bigotted" eyes there are but 2 biological genders until your no longer a minor.....

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://nypost.com/2021/03/02/biden-removes-mention-of-dr-seuss-from-read-across-america-day/

President Biden apparently removed mentions of Dr. Seuss from “Read Across America Day” amid scrutiny about the alleged “racial undertones” in the whimsical tales for children.

“Read Across America Day,” founded by the National Educational Association in 1998 as a way to promote children’s reading, is even celebrated on the author’s March 2 birthday.

In his presidential proclamation, Biden noted that “for many Americans, the path to literacy begins with story time in their school classroom,” USA Today reported.

But unlike his two predecessors, former Presidents Donald Trump and Barack Obama, Biden did not mention Dr. Seuss.

The move comes as Dr. Seuss’ work has generated controversy following a study highlighting a lack of diversity among the author’s characters.

“Of the 2,240 (identified) human characters, there are forty-five characters of color representing 2% of the total number of human characters,” according to a 2019 study from the Conscious Kid’s Library and the University of California that examined 50 of Dr. Seuss’ books.

Last week, a Virginia school district ordered its teachers to avoid “connecting Read Across America Day with Dr. Seuss,” because of recent research that have “revealed strong racial undertones” in many of the author’s books.

Really?  Cancelling Dr. Suess because of diversity?  I mean - the actual purpose of the day was to recognize the beloved children's author.  Now he's a pariah? 

Gotta be Trump's fault.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, swordfish said:

“Of the 2,240 (identified) human characters, there are forty-five characters of color representing 2% of the total number of human characters,” according to a 2019 study from the Conscious Kid’s Library and the University of California that examined 50 of Dr. Seuss’ books.

I’m getting tired of reading stories almost every day that make me involuntarily exclaim — in a voice that sounds remarkably like my father’s — “you have got to be kidding me!” I mean, I thought “quotas” were stupid and largely counterproductive when used in education admissions and employment. But in literature? 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

MSM - Oh - it's just ol' Uncle Joe....Nevermind.....

https://nypost.com/2021/03/04/biden-tells-nasa-engineer-indian-americans-are-taking-over-the-country/

Joltin’ Joe is back.

President Biden on Thursday made one of his most head-turning comments since being sworn in when he told an Indian American aerospace engineer that immigrants from the subcontinent are “taking over” the US.

“It’s amazing. Indian-descent Americans are taking over the country — you, my vice president, my speechwriter,” Biden told Swati Mohan, NASA’s guidance and controls operations lead for the Mars Perseverance rover landing.

Biden made the seemingly tone-deaf effort at levity before telling the NASA group that diversity in the US allows for the betterment of “every single solitary culture.”

he president said, “One of the reasons why we’re such an incredible country is we’re such a diverse country. We bring the best out of every single solitary culture in the world, here in the United States of America, and we give people an opportunity to let their dreams run forward.”

Biden, 78, concluded his webcast remarks by describing himself as “like a poor relative … when I’m invited, I show up.”

“So be careful. You know the poor relatives, they show up. They stay longer than they’re supposed to. I’m one of those kind of guys,” he said.

As a presidential candidate last year, Biden struggled with controversial remarks about ethnic minorities.

In May, Biden walked back comments telling voters they “ain’t black” if they supported a candidate other than him.

He said in August that blacks are less diverse thinkers than Hispanics.

Florida Republican Sen. Marco Rubio humorously suggested Thursday that Biden should “seek training on unconscious bias” after he used the word “Neanderthal” on Wednesday to criticize Republican Govs. Greg Abbott of Texas and Tate Reeves of Mississippi for ending COVID-19 mask mandates.

Vice President Kamala Harris’ mother was born in Chennai, India, and she’s the first non-white vice president since Native American Charles Curtis, who held the office from 1929 to 1933.

 

image.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remove the Fences Surrounding the Capitol and Send the National Guard Home Now

https://reason.com/2021/03/04/capitol-building-riot-national-guard-fences-remove/

Quote

Congress canceled Thursday's legislative session and sent lawmakers home due to an alleged threat against the Capitol from right-wing agitators. Now the Capitol Police want the National Guard to continue providing security for another two months.

Frankly, this is absurd. While some desperate remnants of QAnon will probably continue chatting online about restoring former President Donald Trump to his throne, the likelihood of another attack is virtually nonexistent. Even the intelligence sources who noted the possibility of the attack did not think it would actually happen, and described the chatter as more "aspirational" than operational. It's a big country, and there will often be some crazy person somewhere making idle threats online; the business of Congress should not come to a screeching halt every time this happens.

While the National Guard's presence in Washington, D.C., was unfortunately justified in the immediate aftermath of the January 6 riots, it is long past time to send the troops home. They should take their barricades with them, too: Barbed wire fences surround not just the Capitol building but several city blocks in the Capitol Hill area. They are both an appalling symbol of authoritarianism—the Capitol is supposed to the people's house, but right now the people can't get anywhere near it—as well as a massive inconvenience for those who live nearby.

I am one such resident. In the days following the Capitol riot, armed guards shut down the street in front of my apartment building and patrolled the sidewalk in front of it. Many small businesses, already reeling from pandemic-related lockdowns, were forced to close their doors and board up their windows in case the rioters returned for President Joe Biden's inauguration. Most of those businesses are open once again, but the military occupation—including the long stretches of barbed wire fencing—have remained in place for weeks.

I witnessed the horrifying attack on the Capitol, and thus I understand why the National Guard was summoned in response to inadequate security measures. But the threat is clearly over. What happened on January 6 was a black swan event: It was difficult to predict and prepare for, because the reality of a sitting president calling on supporters to march to the Capitol and prevent the vice president from certifying the results of an election was completely without precedent. But that was what happened: Trump lied to his followers about the results of the election, encouraged them to take bold and strong action, and then they stormed the building.

But it's precisely because Trump's reckless comments were inextricably linked with what transpired that it's not likely to happen again: Trump is no longer in D.C., stoking the fury of a right-wing mob.

It is sadly common for the U.S. government to make permanent various ill-advised safety requirements following an unanticipated calamity. Two decades after 9/11, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is still patting down airline passengers and making them remove their belts and shoes, even though there's no evidence whatsoever that these costly inconveniences make air travel safer. (To take just one example, undercover agents were able to successfully smuggle weapons past the TSA some 95 percent of the time.)

The military occupation of Washington, D.C., must not become another permanent national security fixture. The Capitol building is one of the most enduring symbols of U.S. freedom and democracy—of the idea that the American people are ultimately in charge of their own government. To encircle it forever with the sort of defenses befitting a maximum-security prison would be psychologically scarring, as well as ridiculously expensive and unnecessary.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.foxnews.com/media/washington-post-fawning-bidens-stimulus-shower

The Washington Post fawned over President Biden’s stimulus package with a glowing headline that read to critics like a partisan press release more than a serious news story.

The Post story, "Biden stimulus showers money on Americans, sharply cutting poverty in defining move of presidency,"  celebrated the $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief bill that passed on party lines Saturday in the Democratic-controlled Senate. When billionaire Jeff Bezos’ newspaper tweeted the headline from its verified account, it was immediately met with criticism.

"North Korea is asking you to tone it down a bit," political pundit Stephen L. Miller joked.

"Hey, check it out. Joe Biden ended poverty," podcaster Gerry Callahan joked. "The guy is amazing!"

The Post eventually altered the headline to, "Biden stimulus showers money on Americans, sharply cutting poverty and favoring individuals over businesses," but the original version is still available via internet archive database. 

The widely panned phrasing about the package being a "defining move" of Biden’s presidency is now removed from the Post's website. 

The Washington Post did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Amazing - "Joe Biden ended poverty......" "Showers money  on Americans"

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, swordfish said:

Amazing - "Joe Biden ended poverty......" "Showers money  on Americans"

 

 

Yeah, and who is stuck repaying that "free" money?  Primarily our children and grandchildren.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our President referring to the 4- Star Army General who is now the Secretary of Defense and the Pentagon (his office):  "The guy that runs that outfit over there"  (SMH)

Yeah......Just wondering (not "if", but "when")........

SF noticed the first rumblings of a President Harris in the MSM back in January.....

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/532213-are-we-allowed-to-whisper-about-the-transition-to-president-harris

And now today:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/03/08/daily-202-kamala-harris-is-playing-an-unusually-large-role-shaping-bidens-foreign-policy/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, swordfish said:

Our President referring to the 4- Star Army General who is now the Secretary of Defense and the Pentagon (his office):  "The guy that runs that outfit over there"  (SMH)

Yeah......Just wondering (not "if", but "when")........

SF noticed the first rumblings of a President Harris in the MSM back in January.....

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/532213-are-we-allowed-to-whisper-about-the-transition-to-president-harris

And now today:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/03/08/daily-202-kamala-harris-is-playing-an-unusually-large-role-shaping-bidens-foreign-policy/

Yep, I'll be shocked if Mr. Biden lasts as president through the end of 2021.  The man's mental faculties are simply not up to the task.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...