The Trump team needs to keep their word and prove they’re as serious about governing as they are campaigning. Good for this mayor looking out for her constituents. Maybe if Kamala won she wouldn’t be as vocal about it, maybe not. Either way people shouldn’t still be living in damn tents.
The New Lounge
- Thread starter hpnole
- Start date
They should refer to it as the three state solution, since the Palestinians already have one state: Jordan. Created out of historical Palestine after WW2, 3 x larger than the state of Israel.
Whatever the “solution” is called, it’s dead in the water.
The irony of Oct 7 is most of the victims of the kibbutzim and music festival would have bent over backwards to make a peace deal. Far from being hawkish Zionists, they could only be called Zionists in the strictest sense of the word, that they believe they have a right to exist and that Israel has a right to exist.
Israelis realized what they’ve denied for too long on Oct 7: their enemies want all Jews dead. Left wing, right wing, centrist. In Israel, in America, in Europe.
Failed bus attacks this week, timer set for am instead of pm, would have killed hundreds of Israelis. Barely made the news here. Time for them to move on, most are from Egypt or Jordan originally anyway. It’s a myth that they’ve been there that long. Read Mark Twains account of Palestine in the 1870s It was a barren wasteland until the Jews began returning in the 1880s due to Russian pogroms
I hope Trump hasn't dropped the ball on the citizens of WNC. I had a guy in my shop this morning who's been a part of a clean up group. He made a comment that he's seen signs from FEMA notifying the citizens that anyone that was initially declined for assistance to reach back out to them.
Also the situation in WNC is nothing like the fires of California. You could stand there and show 5 houses burning, but some of these folks in the mountains are at really hard places to get to.
A local news interviewed State Rep Greene, west of Asheville district, said his home was destroyed and FEMA cut him a check for less than 15k. Unless his home was actually valued at just 30k, FEMA seems to have disregarded their 50% rule. I think 42k for direct home repair/ new home costs is the max iirc
These numbers need a drastic upgrade. You can’t get a mobile home for that amt now.
1.6 billion was allocated in Jan, but I’m not sure it’s been approved to start cutting checks.
That rule doesn't mean FEMA pays for 50% of a home rebuilds it's a regulation that determines whether a damaged home needs to be brought up to current flood codes. If repairs cost 50% or more of the homes pre-damage value, it has to be rebuilt to meet those standards.
As for FEMA assistance, its not meant to cover full rebuilds like insurance would. The Individual Assistance program provides limited funds for temporary housing and essential repairs, but it wont replace a destroyed home. You’re correct that the max grant for housing assistance is around $42K, but most people receive much less. Thats why private insurance, especially flood insurance, is so important. FEMAs role is to help people get back on their feet, not to fully rebuild homes. A state representative should know that, and telling people otherwise sets them up for tremendous disappointment.
As for FEMA assistance, its not meant to cover full rebuilds like insurance would. The Individual Assistance program provides limited funds for temporary housing and essential repairs, but it wont replace a destroyed home. You’re correct that the max grant for housing assistance is around $42K, but most people receive much less. Thats why private insurance, especially flood insurance, is so important. FEMAs role is to help people get back on their feet, not to fully rebuild homes. A state representative should know that, and telling people otherwise sets them up for tremendous disappointment.
Firing is a good start. They need to refund taxpayer money for every second wasted on their personal depravities when they were on the clock. Make an example out of these clowns
Thanks for that info.
I could see how a state rep might be a little off with his understanding of federal regulations, and how he could be emotionally distraught and a bit further off when it involves his own home.
I don't like private, for-profit insurance for necessities, like healthcare and home ownership. I'd like to see govt -- though not necessarily the feds -- in charge of all of that. I know that's not entirely practical or feasible.
Based on current info, firing seems appropriate. That's probably all the example you're going to get, though.
Because I think this administration is kneejerk and impulsive, though, and because I can see how a legitimate job task related to sexual orientation, etc, could appropriately slip into some such discussion, I will hold back on full condemnation for now.
This is a perfect description before his one debate of every msm outlet not named Fox or Newsmax.
And it should be why EVERYONE knows how dishonest our media has been. But for some reason, it's still not enough for some sheep out here.
That’s a fair point. It’s an awful situation, and I can understand how someone dealing with that kind of personal loss might not have all the details straight. Still, when misinformation spreads, it only adds to people’s frustration and can slow down the overall recovery effort. Elected representatives, in particular, have a duty to provide accurate information to their constituents. If that doesn’t happen, it creates false expectations and makes an already difficult situation even worse.
FEMA isn’t there to make people or communities whole, it’s meant to provide temporary assistance to cover essential needs until other resources, including private insurance, savings, and state/local programs, can take over. Many people misunderstand this, leading to frustration when they expect more than FEMA is designed to provide.
I see where you’re coming from on private insurance. It’s frustrating when essential needs are tied to for-profit systems, especially when people who follow the rules can still end up struggling after a disaster. I am by no means saying that I support the way the system is currently set up, but it is the system in place.
Except that Tapper's interview with Lara Trump is from 2020 and his book is coming out in May of 2025.
Did President Biden get worse during that time?
You're missing the point. Of course he got worse. That's what naturally happens. But his mind was on a decline since before the 2020 election, and any of us right of center knew this. Plain and simple the man was never fit, and his Presidency was a sham show.
But the party YOU SUPPORT spent the first 3 and a half years praising how sharp Biden was, even raving about how prepared he was for the debate with Trump. Less than a minute into that debate, every democrat got egg on their face.
The left finally got what they had coming to them. Your party's own arrogance is what did them in. It's not even fitting to say democrats are out of touch with reality.
In 2020 it was reasonable to believe his stutter was the bulk of it. Biden beat Trump handily in both of the 2020 Presidential debates. The left surely ignored some signs of what was to come, and the right surely latched onto them hyperbolically.
President Biden got some good things done during his one term. The stance that he is a humble genius negotiator who works behind closed doors and the stance that he was a shadow President are both ridiculous.
Nothing went right for Dems in 2024. President Biden never should have been permitted to run again and there should have been a robust primary. The arrogance and disconnect within the Democratic Party had a lot to do with it. The same traits within the GOP will contribute to their next face plant, as well.
That tweet is not a good way to make whatever you think is the point. That's what I commented on before. Tapper didn't do some quick flip-flop. The difference was 4+ years. The problem with using something deceptive like that is that it ruins your point because the example isn't valid from the jump. Think of times when the left does it and you know this to be true.
I don't regret any of my 3 votes for the people running against President Trump. I have regrets about the 2016 and 2024 campaigns, and the results were humbling, but it hasn't shaken my beliefs whatsoever.
This is the only part of your post that I can agree with. But even then, you're either A - too dense, B - in denial, or C - lying, about the true condition of Biden. He was never fit. Never. He just went from Bad to Awful quicker than they had hoped for. America was starting to wake up during his term, in large part due to other avenues of social media. The nail in the coffin was his disastrous debate. Your party's media were left with their pants down, and had no defense for what the country saw.
The fact that you can even defend the time frame of 2021-mid 2024 is worse than sad.
Ah, yes, what I was afraid you'd say, unfortunately. I took a chance, but you confirmed who you are yet again. You never have had any respect for anything that diverges from your personal worldview. I will repeat, this time w/ a MLU and middle finger attached, "I have regrets about the 2016 and 2024 campaigns, and the results were humbling, but it hasn't shaken my beliefs whatsoever."
This is why you can’t take the left seriously. They have no problem being intellectually dishonest to try and prove their point. There’s not one person on Earth who actually thinks Biden has a stutter or has ever had one. But this is how they roll.
There are some people like this on the right. No doubt. But it seems every single person on the left has no problem lying.
"There are witnesses who attest to Biden's childhood stutter. As documented in Jules Witcover's 2010 biography, Joe Biden: A Life of Trial and Redemption, several neighborhood friends recall Biden's stutter during his youth."
Story about it from 2008
And from 2011
Here, I'll repeat myself, editing out all the triggering parts: "In 2020 it was reasonable to believe his stutter was the bulk of it... The left surely ignored some signs of what was to come... President Biden never should have been permitted to run again... The arrogance and disconnect within the Democratic Party had a lot to do with it."
Last edited:
The left intentionally kept Biden hidden even as far back as 2019. He was already showing signs of mental decline. It got worse, as anyone knew it would. The stutter excuse is just that.
What the left did during his presidency will be remembered as one of the most evil acts done to its citizens.
What the left did during his presidency will be remembered as one of the most evil acts done to its citizens.
Why don’t you link some video evidence of this supposed stutter before his 70s. Is the story that he had a childhood stutter, it disappeared, and then reappeared in his 70s?
Anyone with any amount of common sense could tell Biden was mentally declining and fast. I also thought that he wasn’t physically fit to be president in 2020. I remember telling my wife that I would be shocked if he made it past a year with his presidency. His decline is the sole reason they kept him hidden as much as they did.
Here's a video posted 8 years ago where he's talking about it at an event specifically for it. He was still VP at the time of the recording and not running for President.
Look, when my first kid was born in 2001, there were still valid concerns about whether vaccines caused autism. We did a delayed schedule vaccinating her as a result. Years later, it was completely and utterly debunked. But in 2001, we didn't know.
Same with Biden. He absolutely does have a stutter. Whether its reemergence is a sign of his clear mental decline or not, I couldn't tell you, but it's undeniable that he has always had a stutter, and regardless of what we think we know in retrospect, it wasn't unreasonable to think it was just a stutter in 2020.
If so, it was coming from the top, and there was credible evidence passed down to the rank-and-file left. I, personally, had nothing to do w/ any cover-up and I have no shame for what I believed then.
Playing the averages, it's easy to predict significant decline in President Trump over the course of this term. He'll be 82+ at the end of his term -- older than President Biden was when he left office. Do I get credit if I were to predict it now based off of nothing but playing the averages? Are you going to admit fault then for defending his competence now, when many on the left have been pointing to his mental decline since his first term?
Dattier, that’s not what I’m asking for. I’m asking for a video of him actually stuttering. Not one of him obviously giving examples of how he used to stutter. And if you don’t have any that’s fine. I just want to make sure I understand your stance.
Your stance is that he had a stutter as a kid, it disappeared for 50-60 years, and then reappeared in his 70s? I just want to be clear.
Your stance is that he had a stutter as a kid, it disappeared for 50-60 years, and then reappeared in his 70s? I just want to be clear.
I suspect it's going to be difficult to find a lot of video of him from before C-Span, and like movies from the '50s, the bad stuff never makes it all the way to DVD. Sen Biden stumbling over his words in the 1980s might not have been a great soundbite back then, and I would hope you would forgive the Democratic Party of the 1980s for not anticipating this request in 2025. That wasn't a great decade for them, either.
I have no confidence that you understand or want to understand my stance. I think whatever I say, you're going to try to manipulate it. But I'll try anyway...
* Contrary to what you said, Biden does have a stutter and has had it since childhood.
* That he developed tools for overcoming it does not negate that it was real and always there.
* There is evidence of this stutter documented in writing as far back as 2010, at least, when he was in his 60s, not running for President.
* Stating in 2020 that he has a stutter is backed by a lifetime of facts.
* Attributing his speaking gaffes to his stutter in 2020 was reasonable.
* Questioning if the reemergence of his stutter was a sign of cognitive decline in 2020 was also reasonable.
* Denying in 2024 that he has had significant cognitive decline is an untenable position.
Yes, not telling the truth* 100% of the time means he tells the truth 0% of the time.
(*not a concession of any lie you allege he told)
Y'all remember those "choose your own adventure" books from when you were a kid? I had one about football once where it used actual, historical NFL games and asked you to make coaching decisions about what to do in a given situation. I remember one -- I think it involved the Vikings and Cowboys -- where you had to decide whether to go for it on 4th down or kick (punt or FG, I don't recall). The "right" choice was to kick, and the book told you you made the right choice... before revealing that the kick ended up being blocked and returned for a touchdown anyway.
My point is that what is reasonable or "correct" in the moment does not always work out, and when it doesn't work out, it does not necessarily impugn how reasonable the original choice was.
That's why I have no regret about my 3 votes for the candidates running against Trump.
It's why I have no shame over believing Biden to be competent at the beginning of his Presidential term.
It's why I think we should be gracious and forgiving of college loans people took out at the age of 18 in a culture that insisted they had to go to college.
It's why I think "don't have sex unless you're ready to be a parent" is a stupid argument.
It's why I don't hold the slow response to the early AIDS epidemic against President Reagan as much as my students and bio kids do today.
It's why I don't hold it against Presidents Washington and Jefferson that they enslaved people.
It's why I welcome conservatives to the right side of history when they become LGBTQIAQAUCF+ advocates... only after someone close to them comes out.
It's why I forgive President Trump for some of his slow response to COVID in 2020 when dealing with a once-in-a-lifetime pandemic.
It's why I don't hold it against Dr. Fauci that he shared the most up-to-date info with us or consider it scandalous that he may have contradicted himself later in light of even newer info.
It's why I have no shame over trusting msm much more in 2016 than I do now, or still trusting them more than any of y'all do.
My point is that what is reasonable or "correct" in the moment does not always work out, and when it doesn't work out, it does not necessarily impugn how reasonable the original choice was.
That's why I have no regret about my 3 votes for the candidates running against Trump.
It's why I have no shame over believing Biden to be competent at the beginning of his Presidential term.
It's why I think we should be gracious and forgiving of college loans people took out at the age of 18 in a culture that insisted they had to go to college.
It's why I think "don't have sex unless you're ready to be a parent" is a stupid argument.
It's why I don't hold the slow response to the early AIDS epidemic against President Reagan as much as my students and bio kids do today.
It's why I don't hold it against Presidents Washington and Jefferson that they enslaved people.
It's why I welcome conservatives to the right side of history when they become LGBTQIAQAUCF+ advocates... only after someone close to them comes out.
It's why I forgive President Trump for some of his slow response to COVID in 2020 when dealing with a once-in-a-lifetime pandemic.
It's why I don't hold it against Dr. Fauci that he shared the most up-to-date info with us or consider it scandalous that he may have contradicted himself later in light of even newer info.
It's why I have no shame over trusting msm much more in 2016 than I do now, or still trusting them more than any of y'all do.
I gave a specific and important example of the kind of lies that he tells. I didn't say that everything he says is a lie. Sorry that hurt your ego, somehow.Yes, not telling the truth* 100% of the time means he tells the truth 0% of the time.
(*not a concession of any lie you allege he told)
I respect your rights to not have shame for having some of those feelings. A
Especially in your reasoning for voting against Trump. It's some of your defense of those feelings that I don't respect. But it is your right, so...
What I’m getting ready to say is no personal attack on Dattier. He just so happens to be a prime example of why the left and the right can’t have healthy discourse more times than not. They are speaking two different languages.
From personal experience and what I’ve observed, the left will purposely argue in bad faith to prove their point. Some on the right do as well sometimes, but it seems literally everyone on the left does this.
My point in bringing this up is that I think this is what has led to the division we have in this country. Up until about 10 or so years ago, the left seemed to argue in good faith. It’s unfortunate because we used to be able to have civil discourse around politics. Now the left is so cholk-full of lies from the msm, they have to go overboard defending them.
From personal experience and what I’ve observed, the left will purposely argue in bad faith to prove their point. Some on the right do as well sometimes, but it seems literally everyone on the left does this.
My point in bringing this up is that I think this is what has led to the division we have in this country. Up until about 10 or so years ago, the left seemed to argue in good faith. It’s unfortunate because we used to be able to have civil discourse around politics. Now the left is so cholk-full of lies from the msm, they have to go overboard defending them.
