d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Political & Religious Debate > Official Joe Biden 2020 Thread
Prev16416426436446451037Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
Member
Posts: 35,291
Joined: Aug 17 2004
Gold: 12,730.67
Sep 8 2021 01:40pm
Quote (ofthevoid @ Sep 8 2021 12:27pm)
Didn't we just literally have a discussion about unity or lack there of and how you're upset republicans aren't embracing Biden but now are doing a 180 in a phone booth and justifying these cleansings?


That's your interpretation of what I said and a rather poor one at that. There's a big difference between "embracing someone" and being happy that it's not worse. Some of these people absolutely deserve to be fired and I'm sure others don't. This is pretty inconsequential though in the grand scheme of things and isn't worth discussing. Every President, including Biden, has had much more controversial firings.

Quote (Goomshill @ Sep 8 2021 12:27pm)
If a president runs on an antifa platform and wins an election and has the support of half the country then the next president should probably listen to what antifa has to say, whether he chooses to heed any of it or not.
When a president goes out of his way to quash even the mere appearance of bipartisanship in ceremonial roles, its a pretty bad sign for the administration's supposed commitment to unity


I did not go through the entire list but I think its' entirely appropriate to fire some of like like Gorka, Conway, etc. Those people are spectacular pieces of shit and should be no where near government related functions ever again. Firing someone like McMaster is questionable and petty IMO. Perhaps they thought it'd be easier to just fire all of them but as you said, none of this really matters. This isn't going to be the straw that breaks the camel's back when it comes to the unity argument.
Member
Posts: 50,906
Joined: Jan 20 2010
Gold: 5,836.00
Sep 8 2021 01:49pm
Quote (thundercock @ Sep 8 2021 02:40pm)
That's your interpretation of what I said and a rather poor one at that. There's a big difference between "embracing someone" and being happy that it's not worse. Some of these people absolutely deserve to be fired and I'm sure others don't. This is pretty inconsequential though in the grand scheme of things and isn't worth discussing. Every President, including Biden, has had much more controversial firings.

I did not go through the entire list but I think its' entirely appropriate to fire some of like like Gorka, Conway, etc. Those people are spectacular pieces of shit and should be no where near government related functions ever again. Firing someone like McMaster is questionable and petty IMO. Perhaps they thought it'd be easier to just fire all of them but as you said, none of this really matters. This isn't going to be the straw that breaks the camel's back when it comes to the unity argument.


Its nothing but petty and vindictive. Even Trump had no problems letting pretty much all the Obama nominees stick through three years, why should he care. There's a few apolitical military suits on this list and then some officials like spicer and conway who can certainly articulate the previous administration's positions. Not only that, but because no president has actually tried to be this brazenly petty before, its untested legal grounds. The statute that creates these boards doesn't provide for any mechanism to fire them and its never been sorted out in the courts because nobody ever cared. Its like if Biden tried to retroactively un-pardon the turkeys that Trump picked last thanksgiving. The Biden administration is already citing the precedent in the SCOTUS decision that knocked down Elizabeth Warren's executive-but-not-executive-beholden CFPB as unconstitutional, and maybe that could be applied here to the president's picks (but half are from congress so I'm not sure that even works). They'd spend far more money litigating these ceremonial advisory board kerfuffle than they'd ever spend reimbursing Sebastian Gorka for his travel expenses.

At the end of the day, its like an administration runs on a platform of 'unity' and then starts burning 'unity' in effigy and tearing down statues of 'unity'. Its not actually changing any policy or affecting how the government works, its just spite at this point

This post was edited by Goomshill on Sep 8 2021 01:51pm
Member
Posts: 49,289
Joined: Jun 18 2006
Gold: 11.77
Sep 8 2021 01:52pm
Biden doesn't support fake unity. He uses the bully pulpit to speak in a unified way, he pursues major policy initiatives that are broadly popular, he seeks compromise when possible(infrastructure), but he's not going to pretend we still live in an era where the opposition are respectable people. The guy he beat tried to steal the election... the popular figures in the GOP supported him doing that. Removing these assclowns from mostly irrelevant boards is playing nice.
Member
Posts: 50,906
Joined: Jan 20 2010
Gold: 5,836.00
Sep 8 2021 01:54pm
Quote (IceMage @ Sep 8 2021 02:52pm)
Biden doesn't support fake unity. He uses the bully pulpit to speak in a unified way, he pursues major policy initiatives that are broadly popular, he seeks compromise when possible(infrastructure), but he's not going to pretend we still live in an era where the opposition are respectable people. The guy he beat tried to steal the election... the popular figures in the GOP supported him doing that. Removing these assclowns from mostly irrelevant boards is playing nice.


so 'unity' was really just shorthand for 'unilateralism'?
I guess that was just Biden's stutter again
Member
Posts: 61,688
Joined: Mar 14 2006
Gold: 28.77
Sep 8 2021 01:58pm
Quote (Goomshill @ Sep 8 2021 12:54pm)
so 'unity' was really just shorthand for 'unilateralism'?
I guess that was just Biden's stutter again



Why are you complaining? Biden is a fantastic Republican president.
Member
Posts: 54,180
Joined: May 26 2005
Gold: 4,945.67
Sep 8 2021 02:01pm
Quote (IceMage @ 8 Sep 2021 21:52)
Biden doesn't support fake unity. He uses the bully pulpit to speak in a unified way, he pursues major policy initiatives that are broadly popular, he seeks compromise when possible(infrastructure), but he's not going to pretend we still live in an era where the opposition are respectable people. The guy he beat tried to steal the election... the popular figures in the GOP supported him doing that. Removing these assclowns from mostly irrelevant boards is playing nice.


So... what would unity look like to you, given this environment? Do you want to see Republicans rolling over and completely submitting to the Democratic agenda in order to atone for the "sins" of the Trump era before actual unity becomes an option again?
Member
Posts: 35,291
Joined: Aug 17 2004
Gold: 12,730.67
Sep 8 2021 02:02pm
Quote (Black XistenZ @ Sep 8 2021 01:01pm)
So... what would unity look like to you, given this environment? Do you want to see Republicans rolling over and completely submitting to the Democratic agenda in order to atone for the "sins" of the Trump era before actual unity becomes an option again?


The infrastructure bill
Member
Posts: 61,688
Joined: Mar 14 2006
Gold: 28.77
Sep 8 2021 02:03pm
Quote (Black XistenZ @ Sep 8 2021 01:01pm)
So... what would unity look like to you, given this environment? Do you want to see Republicans rolling over and completely submitting to the Democratic agenda in order to atone for the "sins" of the Trump era before actual unity becomes an option again?


What alternate reality do you live in? Republicans have full control right now. The "Democrats" are just a fake front to push the Republican agenda with a rainbow veneer to keep liberals from getting uppity.
Member
Posts: 50,906
Joined: Jan 20 2010
Gold: 5,836.00
Sep 8 2021 02:04pm
Quote (thundercock @ Sep 8 2021 03:02pm)
The infrastructure bill


The democrats can't even get unity in their party on it. They can't even agree on Republicans about what "infrastructure" is, since it looks a whole lot like 3.5 trillion dollars worth of social programs
Member
Posts: 54,180
Joined: May 26 2005
Gold: 4,945.67
Sep 8 2021 02:06pm
Quote (thundercock @ 8 Sep 2021 22:02)
The infrastructure bill


Are you talking about the "infrastructure as in roads and bridges"-bill which was passed by the Senate with bipartisan(!!) support and is currently held up by the Dem-controlled House?
Or are you talking about the "infrastructure as in 'slush fund for social spending that we label infrastructure coz that term polls better'"-bill which Democrats are currently trying to unilaterally ram through via reconciliation?

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Sep 8 2021 02:08pm
Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List
Prev16416426436446451037Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll