Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
If there will be enough vaccine by the end of May to vaccinate everyone...
Comments
-
I’m not sure where you’re getting some of your numbers, but “Nancy” agreed to a 1.9t price tag not 900b. So no in fact she didn’t settle for what she could’ve had before and the Reps did move closer to the Dems numbers. So in other words both sides moved. Your alternative facts don’t help your case.SFGbob said:
Now who is engaging in revisionist history? And by "both sides moving" you mean Nancy agreeing to the already established $908 Billion bill after the election. Could Nancy have gotten that $908 Billion before the election, yes or no? Could the Republicans have gotten that $908 Billion before the election? You talked out your ass, take the L.Duckwithabone said:
The Dems were pretty clear in this case that they felt the relief support needed to be as big as they could make it and it would in fact be hurtful to pass something too small that only passed the buck for a future round of relief. They went big, the Reps predictably said no. Have things changed and the relief has changed, yes. And the point is? It’s really simple, both sides stood their idealogical ground and played chicken and nothing got done. Then the ground shifted and both sides have moved in response. It’s stupid DC at work. It’s not an evil plot.SFGbob said:
Really? Politicians on both sides played politics!!!! Shocking. Only a firmly biased perspective can ignore the fact that Pelosi herself said she was now willing to accept the "bipartisan" $908 Billion bill, that could have been passed before the election, now that Biden had won the Presidency.Duckwithabone said:
Well you certainly cherry-picked a quote from that article. Read the whole thing and it basically says both sides played politics. Only a firmly biased perspective can read that whole article and come away thinking it was all the Dems fault a relief bill wasn’t passed. But you’re free to be wrong in your view.SFGbob said:
The bill the Rats were pushing was a lot like the bill they are trying to pass now. Billions for programs that had nothing to do with Covid relief. If you're talking specifically about getting money out to people then yes Pelosi is to blame and the only people engaging in revisionist history are the people who deny this.Duckwithabone said:Was this before or after the Republicans failed to agree to a bill proposed by the Dems? No what I am saying is the inept response by the government really fell on both sides. To state that the blame for the failed government response lies with one side is revisionist history. Both sides played politics with the issues.
After Biden won Nancy agreed to a smaller relief bill that she could of had prior to the election. Before accusing others of engaging in revisionist history may be best for you to actually learn some history.
For months, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi held the line against a pared-down stimulus plan to prop up the coronavirus-hobbled economy. She insisted that Democrats needed to go big or stay stalled, arguing that this wasn’t the time for stopgaps or patchwork solutions.
On Friday, that changed. The most powerful woman in Washington stepped to the podium and told reporters on Capitol Hill that House Democrats were ready to accept something closer to the bipartisan $908 billion spending plan as a down payment on follow-up legislation to come next year. The slimmed-down spending — which is still larger than the entire Obama-era economic stimulus plan of 2009 — could be paired with a must-pass, $1.4 trillion government funding measure that faces an end-of-week deadline.
What changed? Two things, said the Speaker. A vaccine appears nearing delivery. And Joe Biden won the White House.
https://time.com/5918603/nancy-pelosi-coronavirus-relief-deal/
Who was stopping that $908 Billion from coming to a vote in the House, Mr. Revisionist history? -
The fact that you have your head up your ass isn't helping you. The bill that Nancy was holding up prior to the election was the one the Senate passed in December and that Trump signed into law on December 28th 2020. We're not talking about the $1.9 Trillion dollar cluster fuck they passed last week.Duckwithabone said:
I’m not sure where you’re getting some of your numbers, but “Nancy” agreed to a 1.9t price tag not 900b. So no in fact she didn’t settle for what she could’ve had before and the Reps did move closer to the Dems numbers. So in other words both sides moved. Your alternative facts don’t help your case.SFGbob said:
Now who is engaging in revisionist history? And by "both sides moving" you mean Nancy agreeing to the already established $908 Billion bill after the election. Could Nancy have gotten that $908 Billion before the election, yes or no? Could the Republicans have gotten that $908 Billion before the election? You talked out your ass, take the L.Duckwithabone said:
The Dems were pretty clear in this case that they felt the relief support needed to be as big as they could make it and it would in fact be hurtful to pass something too small that only passed the buck for a future round of relief. They went big, the Reps predictably said no. Have things changed and the relief has changed, yes. And the point is? It’s really simple, both sides stood their idealogical ground and played chicken and nothing got done. Then the ground shifted and both sides have moved in response. It’s stupid DC at work. It’s not an evil plot.SFGbob said:
Really? Politicians on both sides played politics!!!! Shocking. Only a firmly biased perspective can ignore the fact that Pelosi herself said she was now willing to accept the "bipartisan" $908 Billion bill, that could have been passed before the election, now that Biden had won the Presidency.Duckwithabone said:
Well you certainly cherry-picked a quote from that article. Read the whole thing and it basically says both sides played politics. Only a firmly biased perspective can read that whole article and come away thinking it was all the Dems fault a relief bill wasn’t passed. But you’re free to be wrong in your view.SFGbob said:
The bill the Rats were pushing was a lot like the bill they are trying to pass now. Billions for programs that had nothing to do with Covid relief. If you're talking specifically about getting money out to people then yes Pelosi is to blame and the only people engaging in revisionist history are the people who deny this.Duckwithabone said:Was this before or after the Republicans failed to agree to a bill proposed by the Dems? No what I am saying is the inept response by the government really fell on both sides. To state that the blame for the failed government response lies with one side is revisionist history. Both sides played politics with the issues.
After Biden won Nancy agreed to a smaller relief bill that she could of had prior to the election. Before accusing others of engaging in revisionist history may be best for you to actually learn some history.
For months, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi held the line against a pared-down stimulus plan to prop up the coronavirus-hobbled economy. She insisted that Democrats needed to go big or stay stalled, arguing that this wasn’t the time for stopgaps or patchwork solutions.
On Friday, that changed. The most powerful woman in Washington stepped to the podium and told reporters on Capitol Hill that House Democrats were ready to accept something closer to the bipartisan $908 billion spending plan as a down payment on follow-up legislation to come next year. The slimmed-down spending — which is still larger than the entire Obama-era economic stimulus plan of 2009 — could be paired with a must-pass, $1.4 trillion government funding measure that faces an end-of-week deadline.
What changed? Two things, said the Speaker. A vaccine appears nearing delivery. And Joe Biden won that White House.
https://time.com/5918603/nancy-pelosi-coronavirus-relief-deal/
Who was stopping that $908 Billion from coming to a vote in the House, Mr. Revisionist history?
Congress passes legislation with $900 billion in coronavirus relief and $1.4 trillion to fund the government through Sept. 30.
The measure includes a $300 per week federal unemployment supplement, $284 billion in Paycheck Protection Program loans, $600 direct payments and $8 billion for Covid-19 vaccine distribution, among many other provisions.
The aid comes after months of delays, and Democrats have called for another package when President-elect Biden takes office in the new year.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/21/congress-to-pass-coronavirus-stimulus-and-government-funding-bill.html
What Nancy and the Rats passed out of the House in December for Covid relief was $900B. That was a number she could have gotten prior to the November election. Gawd I hate when ignorant people try to correct me when I know they have their fucking heads up their asses.
The only person here who has been engaging in revisionist history is fucking you. Now if you want to just plead to being an ignorant motherfucker who is running their mouth without knowing the facts the judges will allow for that. -
Lol did you forget your original poast to start this whole thread, or every righties poast following that all complaining about the current relief bill? We’ve been talking about that bill the entire time. Sorry if you forgot that, maybe it’s time for you to take your L so you can focus on bitching about other self-righteous concerns.SFGbob said:
The fact that you have your head up your ass isn't helping you. The bill that Nancy was holding up prior to the election was the one the Senate passed in December and that Trump signed into law on December 28th 2020. We're not talking about the $1.9 Trillion dollar cluster fuck they passed last week.Duckwithabone said:
I’m not sure where you’re getting some of your numbers, but “Nancy” agreed to a 1.9t price tag not 900b. So no in fact she didn’t settle for what she could’ve had before and the Reps did move closer to the Dems numbers. So in other words both sides moved. Your alternative facts don’t help your case.SFGbob said:
Now who is engaging in revisionist history? And by "both sides moving" you mean Nancy agreeing to the already established $908 Billion bill after the election. Could Nancy have gotten that $908 Billion before the election, yes or no? Could the Republicans have gotten that $908 Billion before the election? You talked out your ass, take the L.Duckwithabone said:
The Dems were pretty clear in this case that they felt the relief support needed to be as big as they could make it and it would in fact be hurtful to pass something too small that only passed the buck for a future round of relief. They went big, the Reps predictably said no. Have things changed and the relief has changed, yes. And the point is? It’s really simple, both sides stood their idealogical ground and played chicken and nothing got done. Then the ground shifted and both sides have moved in response. It’s stupid DC at work. It’s not an evil plot.SFGbob said:
Really? Politicians on both sides played politics!!!! Shocking. Only a firmly biased perspective can ignore the fact that Pelosi herself said she was now willing to accept the "bipartisan" $908 Billion bill, that could have been passed before the election, now that Biden had won the Presidency.Duckwithabone said:
Well you certainly cherry-picked a quote from that article. Read the whole thing and it basically says both sides played politics. Only a firmly biased perspective can read that whole article and come away thinking it was all the Dems fault a relief bill wasn’t passed. But you’re free to be wrong in your view.SFGbob said:
The bill the Rats were pushing was a lot like the bill they are trying to pass now. Billions for programs that had nothing to do with Covid relief. If you're talking specifically about getting money out to people then yes Pelosi is to blame and the only people engaging in revisionist history are the people who deny this.Duckwithabone said:Was this before or after the Republicans failed to agree to a bill proposed by the Dems? No what I am saying is the inept response by the government really fell on both sides. To state that the blame for the failed government response lies with one side is revisionist history. Both sides played politics with the issues.
After Biden won Nancy agreed to a smaller relief bill that she could of had prior to the election. Before accusing others of engaging in revisionist history may be best for you to actually learn some history.
For months, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi held the line against a pared-down stimulus plan to prop up the coronavirus-hobbled economy. She insisted that Democrats needed to go big or stay stalled, arguing that this wasn’t the time for stopgaps or patchwork solutions.
On Friday, that changed. The most powerful woman in Washington stepped to the podium and told reporters on Capitol Hill that House Democrats were ready to accept something closer to the bipartisan $908 billion spending plan as a down payment on follow-up legislation to come next year. The slimmed-down spending — which is still larger than the entire Obama-era economic stimulus plan of 2009 — could be paired with a must-pass, $1.4 trillion government funding measure that faces an end-of-week deadline.
What changed? Two things, said the Speaker. A vaccine appears nearing delivery. And Joe Biden won that White House.
https://time.com/5918603/nancy-pelosi-coronavirus-relief-deal/
Who was stopping that $908 Billion from coming to a vote in the House, Mr. Revisionist history?
Congress passes legislation with $900 billion in coronavirus relief and $1.4 trillion to fund the government through Sept. 30.
The measure includes a $300 per week federal unemployment supplement, $284 billion in Paycheck Protection Program loans, $600 direct payments and $8 billion for Covid-19 vaccine distribution, among many other provisions.
The aid comes after months of delays, and Democrats have called for another package when President-elect Biden takes office in the new year.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/21/congress-to-pass-coronavirus-stimulus-and-government-funding-bill.html
What Nancy and the Rats passed out of the House in December for Covid relief was $900B. That was a number she could have gotten prior to the November election. Gawd I hate when ignorant people try to correct me when I know they have their fucking heads up their asses.
The only person here who has been engaging in revisionist history is fucking you. Now if you want to just plead to being an ignorant motherfucker who is running their mouth without knowing the facts the judges will allow for that. -
No we haven't you fucking moron. Initially were were talking about the $1.9 Trillion relief bill and then the conversation shifted to the bill Nancy held up prior to the election. That relief bill was the one that was passed in December and was signed into law by Trump. The $1.9 Trillion that was passed by the House last week isn't what @Bendintheriver was referring when he said:Duckwithabone said:
Lol did you forget your original poast to start this whole thread, or every righties poast following that all complaining about the current relief bill? We’ve been talking about that bill the entire time. Sorry if you forgot that, maybe it’s time for you to take your L so you can focus on bitching about other self-righteous concerns.SFGbob said:
The fact that you have your head up your ass isn't helping you. The bill that Nancy was holding up prior to the election was the one the Senate passed in December and that Trump signed into law on December 28th 2020. We're not talking about the $1.9 Trillion dollar cluster fuck they passed last week.Duckwithabone said:
I’m not sure where you’re getting some of your numbers, but “Nancy” agreed to a 1.9t price tag not 900b. So no in fact she didn’t settle for what she could’ve had before and the Reps did move closer to the Dems numbers. So in other words both sides moved. Your alternative facts don’t help your case.SFGbob said:
Now who is engaging in revisionist history? And by "both sides moving" you mean Nancy agreeing to the already established $908 Billion bill after the election. Could Nancy have gotten that $908 Billion before the election, yes or no? Could the Republicans have gotten that $908 Billion before the election? You talked out your ass, take the L.Duckwithabone said:
The Dems were pretty clear in this case that they felt the relief support needed to be as big as they could make it and it would in fact be hurtful to pass something too small that only passed the buck for a future round of relief. They went big, the Reps predictably said no. Have things changed and the relief has changed, yes. And the point is? It’s really simple, both sides stood their idealogical ground and played chicken and nothing got done. Then the ground shifted and both sides have moved in response. It’s stupid DC at work. It’s not an evil plot.SFGbob said:
Really? Politicians on both sides played politics!!!! Shocking. Only a firmly biased perspective can ignore the fact that Pelosi herself said she was now willing to accept the "bipartisan" $908 Billion bill, that could have been passed before the election, now that Biden had won the Presidency.Duckwithabone said:
Well you certainly cherry-picked a quote from that article. Read the whole thing and it basically says both sides played politics. Only a firmly biased perspective can read that whole article and come away thinking it was all the Dems fault a relief bill wasn’t passed. But you’re free to be wrong in your view.SFGbob said:
The bill the Rats were pushing was a lot like the bill they are trying to pass now. Billions for programs that had nothing to do with Covid relief. If you're talking specifically about getting money out to people then yes Pelosi is to blame and the only people engaging in revisionist history are the people who deny this.Duckwithabone said:Was this before or after the Republicans failed to agree to a bill proposed by the Dems? No what I am saying is the inept response by the government really fell on both sides. To state that the blame for the failed government response lies with one side is revisionist history. Both sides played politics with the issues.
After Biden won Nancy agreed to a smaller relief bill that she could of had prior to the election. Before accusing others of engaging in revisionist history may be best for you to actually learn some history.
For months, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi held the line against a pared-down stimulus plan to prop up the coronavirus-hobbled economy. She insisted that Democrats needed to go big or stay stalled, arguing that this wasn’t the time for stopgaps or patchwork solutions.
On Friday, that changed. The most powerful woman in Washington stepped to the podium and told reporters on Capitol Hill that House Democrats were ready to accept something closer to the bipartisan $908 billion spending plan as a down payment on follow-up legislation to come next year. The slimmed-down spending — which is still larger than the entire Obama-era economic stimulus plan of 2009 — could be paired with a must-pass, $1.4 trillion government funding measure that faces an end-of-week deadline.
What changed? Two things, said the Speaker. A vaccine appears nearing delivery. And Joe Biden won that White House.
https://time.com/5918603/nancy-pelosi-coronavirus-relief-deal/
Who was stopping that $908 Billion from coming to a vote in the House, Mr. Revisionist history?
Congress passes legislation with $900 billion in coronavirus relief and $1.4 trillion to fund the government through Sept. 30.
The measure includes a $300 per week federal unemployment supplement, $284 billion in Paycheck Protection Program loans, $600 direct payments and $8 billion for Covid-19 vaccine distribution, among many other provisions.
The aid comes after months of delays, and Democrats have called for another package when President-elect Biden takes office in the new year.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/21/congress-to-pass-coronavirus-stimulus-and-government-funding-bill.html
What Nancy and the Rats passed out of the House in December for Covid relief was $900B. That was a number she could have gotten prior to the November election. Gawd I hate when ignorant people try to correct me when I know they have their fucking heads up their asses.
The only person here who has been engaging in revisionist history is fucking you. Now if you want to just plead to being an ignorant motherfucker who is running their mouth without knowing the facts the judges will allow for that.
Forget the first week of biden's presidency. The Reps had a large bill before congress months ago and pelosi decided to table it and let the little people suffer. She did it for one reason only and that was to keep Trump from getting a win.
That was the post you responded to dipshit, and he is specifically referring to the bill Pelosi tabled "months ago" when Trump was still in office. Take the fucking L dumbass. Or keep digging, you're only exposing yourself as an even bigger fool with every response.
What's fucking hilarious is you started this thread talking about revisionist history when you've created this entire false reality. There was no revisionist history, there was just you dancing around with your head up your ass. -
The best help they can get is to re-open the economy. If $1400 is the only thing that separates you from the abyss, you might just as well jump in now and get it over with.TheKobeStopper said:It’s the beginning of March, people need help now. Do you not understand the concept of time?
-
In other words if I can keep digging I might reach you. You’re playing serious mental gymnastics which is only leaving you sucking your own mental dick. Follow the thread. My initial comment was “retelling of history” or in other words revisionist history because the other doog made a comment about Pelosi holding off on a bill in order to help Trump lose. But what this story clearly leaves out is Pelosi trying to get a bill passed before that which was shot down by the Republicans, Mitch said it was a no go. So in fact Pelosi did try to pass a major relief bill which supposedly would’ve have stopped people from suffering and ignoring that detail is revisionist history.SFGbob said:
No we haven't you fucking moron. Initially were were talking about the $1.9 Trillion relief bill and then the conversation shifted to the bill Nancy held up prior to the election. That relief bill was the one that was passed in December and was signed into law by Trump. The $1.9 Trillion that was passed by the House last week isn't what @Bendintheriver was referring when he said:Duckwithabone said:
Lol did you forget your original poast to start this whole thread, or every righties poast following that all complaining about the current relief bill? We’ve been talking about that bill the entire time. Sorry if you forgot that, maybe it’s time for you to take your L so you can focus on bitching about other self-righteous concerns.SFGbob said:
The fact that you have your head up your ass isn't helping you. The bill that Nancy was holding up prior to the election was the one the Senate passed in December and that Trump signed into law on December 28th 2020. We're not talking about the $1.9 Trillion dollar cluster fuck they passed last week.Duckwithabone said:
I’m not sure where you’re getting some of your numbers, but “Nancy” agreed to a 1.9t price tag not 900b. So no in fact she didn’t settle for what she could’ve had before and the Reps did move closer to the Dems numbers. So in other words both sides moved. Your alternative facts don’t help your case.SFGbob said:
Now who is engaging in revisionist history? And by "both sides moving" you mean Nancy agreeing to the already established $908 Billion bill after the election. Could Nancy have gotten that $908 Billion before the election, yes or no? Could the Republicans have gotten that $908 Billion before the election? You talked out your ass, take the L.Duckwithabone said:
The Dems were pretty clear in this case that they felt the relief support needed to be as big as they could make it and it would in fact be hurtful to pass something too small that only passed the buck for a future round of relief. They went big, the Reps predictably said no. Have things changed and the relief has changed, yes. And the point is? It’s really simple, both sides stood their idealogical ground and played chicken and nothing got done. Then the ground shifted and both sides have moved in response. It’s stupid DC at work. It’s not an evil plot.SFGbob said:
Really? Politicians on both sides played politics!!!! Shocking. Only a firmly biased perspective can ignore the fact that Pelosi herself said she was now willing to accept the "bipartisan" $908 Billion bill, that could have been passed before the election, now that Biden had won the Presidency.Duckwithabone said:
Well you certainly cherry-picked a quote from that article. Read the whole thing and it basically says both sides played politics. Only a firmly biased perspective can read that whole article and come away thinking it was all the Dems fault a relief bill wasn’t passed. But you’re free to be wrong in your view.SFGbob said:
The bill the Rats were pushing was a lot like the bill they are trying to pass now. Billions for programs that had nothing to do with Covid relief. If you're talking specifically about getting money out to people then yes Pelosi is to blame and the only people engaging in revisionist history are the people who deny this.Duckwithabone said:Was this before or after the Republicans failed to agree to a bill proposed by the Dems? No what I am saying is the inept response by the government really fell on both sides. To state that the blame for the failed government response lies with one side is revisionist history. Both sides played politics with the issues.
After Biden won Nancy agreed to a smaller relief bill that she could of had prior to the election. Before accusing others of engaging in revisionist history may be best for you to actually learn some history.
For months, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi held the line against a pared-down stimulus plan to prop up the coronavirus-hobbled economy. She insisted that Democrats needed to go big or stay stalled, arguing that this wasn’t the time for stopgaps or patchwork solutions.
On Friday, that changed. The most powerful woman in Washington stepped to the podium and told reporters on Capitol Hill that House Democrats were ready to accept something closer to the bipartisan $908 billion spending plan as a down payment on follow-up legislation to come next year. The slimmed-down spending — which is still larger than the entire Obama-era economic stimulus plan of 2009 — could be paired with a must-pass, $1.4 trillion government funding measure that faces an end-of-week deadline.
What changed? Two things, said the Speaker. A vaccine appears nearing delivery. And Joe Biden won that White House.
https://time.com/5918603/nancy-pelosi-coronavirus-relief-deal/
Who was stopping that $908 Billion from coming to a vote in the House, Mr. Revisionist history?
Congress passes legislation with $900 billion in coronavirus relief and $1.4 trillion to fund the government through Sept. 30.
The measure includes a $300 per week federal unemployment supplement, $284 billion in Paycheck Protection Program loans, $600 direct payments and $8 billion for Covid-19 vaccine distribution, among many other provisions.
The aid comes after months of delays, and Democrats have called for another package when President-elect Biden takes office in the new year.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/21/congress-to-pass-coronavirus-stimulus-and-government-funding-bill.html
What Nancy and the Rats passed out of the House in December for Covid relief was $900B. That was a number she could have gotten prior to the November election. Gawd I hate when ignorant people try to correct me when I know they have their fucking heads up their asses.
The only person here who has been engaging in revisionist history is fucking you. Now if you want to just plead to being an ignorant motherfucker who is running their mouth without knowing the facts the judges will allow for that.
Forget the first week of biden's presidency. The Reps had a large bill before congress months ago and pelosi decided to table it and let the little people suffer. She did it for one reason only and that was to keep Trump from getting a win.
That was the post you responded to dipshit, and he is specifically referring to the bill Pelosi tabled "months ago" when Trump was still in office. Take the fucking L dumbass. Or keep digging, you're only exposing yourself as an even bigger fool with every response.
What's fucking hilarious is you started this thread talking about revisionist history when you've created this entire false reality. There was no revisionist history, there was just you dancing around with your head up your ass.
If you truly want to see heads up asses I suggest you take a step back from this place and look at it. This doogville vacuum is so far up its own ass you guys sit around here, pretty much all day as far as I can tell, and tug each other off. This board is the political equivalent of dawgman. Just a bunch doogs filling each other up with a steady diet of delusion. Spare yourself now and walk away.
Edit: Simply because you’re really struggling with this I am referring to the bill passed by Pelosi and the house Dems in May. Wellllllllll before the much debated tabeled bill in the fall. -
So not only are you a liar, you’re also a fucking moron. You should have just told me this at the outset. Could have saved us both a bunch of time.Duckwithabone said:
In other words if I can keep digging I might reach you. You’re playing serious mental gymnastics which is only leaving you sucking your own mental dick. Follow the thread. My initial comment was “retelling of history” or in other words revisionist history because the other doog made a comment about Pelosi holding off on a bill in order to help Trump lose. But what this story clearly leaves out is Pelosi trying to get a bill passed before that which was shot down by the Republicans, Mitch said it was a no go. So in fact Pelosi did try to pass a major relief bill which supposedly would’ve have stopped people from suffering and ignoring that detail is revisionist history.SFGbob said:
No we haven't you fucking moron. Initially were were talking about the $1.9 Trillion relief bill and then the conversation shifted to the bill Nancy held up prior to the election. That relief bill was the one that was passed in December and was signed into law by Trump. The $1.9 Trillion that was passed by the House last week isn't what @Bendintheriver was referring when he said:Duckwithabone said:
Lol did you forget your original poast to start this whole thread, or every righties poast following that all complaining about the current relief bill? We’ve been talking about that bill the entire time. Sorry if you forgot that, maybe it’s time for you to take your L so you can focus on bitching about other self-righteous concerns.SFGbob said:
The fact that you have your head up your ass isn't helping you. The bill that Nancy was holding up prior to the election was the one the Senate passed in December and that Trump signed into law on December 28th 2020. We're not talking about the $1.9 Trillion dollar cluster fuck they passed last week.Duckwithabone said:
I’m not sure where you’re getting some of your numbers, but “Nancy” agreed to a 1.9t price tag not 900b. So no in fact she didn’t settle for what she could’ve had before and the Reps did move closer to the Dems numbers. So in other words both sides moved. Your alternative facts don’t help your case.SFGbob said:
Now who is engaging in revisionist history? And by "both sides moving" you mean Nancy agreeing to the already established $908 Billion bill after the election. Could Nancy have gotten that $908 Billion before the election, yes or no? Could the Republicans have gotten that $908 Billion before the election? You talked out your ass, take the L.Duckwithabone said:
The Dems were pretty clear in this case that they felt the relief support needed to be as big as they could make it and it would in fact be hurtful to pass something too small that only passed the buck for a future round of relief. They went big, the Reps predictably said no. Have things changed and the relief has changed, yes. And the point is? It’s really simple, both sides stood their idealogical ground and played chicken and nothing got done. Then the ground shifted and both sides have moved in response. It’s stupid DC at work. It’s not an evil plot.SFGbob said:
Really? Politicians on both sides played politics!!!! Shocking. Only a firmly biased perspective can ignore the fact that Pelosi herself said she was now willing to accept the "bipartisan" $908 Billion bill, that could have been passed before the election, now that Biden had won the Presidency.Duckwithabone said:
Well you certainly cherry-picked a quote from that article. Read the whole thing and it basically says both sides played politics. Only a firmly biased perspective can read that whole article and come away thinking it was all the Dems fault a relief bill wasn’t passed. But you’re free to be wrong in your view.SFGbob said:
The bill the Rats were pushing was a lot like the bill they are trying to pass now. Billions for programs that had nothing to do with Covid relief. If you're talking specifically about getting money out to people then yes Pelosi is to blame and the only people engaging in revisionist history are the people who deny this.Duckwithabone said:Was this before or after the Republicans failed to agree to a bill proposed by the Dems? No what I am saying is the inept response by the government really fell on both sides. To state that the blame for the failed government response lies with one side is revisionist history. Both sides played politics with the issues.
After Biden won Nancy agreed to a smaller relief bill that she could of had prior to the election. Before accusing others of engaging in revisionist history may be best for you to actually learn some history.
For months, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi held the line against a pared-down stimulus plan to prop up the coronavirus-hobbled economy. She insisted that Democrats needed to go big or stay stalled, arguing that this wasn’t the time for stopgaps or patchwork solutions.
On Friday, that changed. The most powerful woman in Washington stepped to the podium and told reporters on Capitol Hill that House Democrats were ready to accept something closer to the bipartisan $908 billion spending plan as a down payment on follow-up legislation to come next year. The slimmed-down spending — which is still larger than the entire Obama-era economic stimulus plan of 2009 — could be paired with a must-pass, $1.4 trillion government funding measure that faces an end-of-week deadline.
What changed? Two things, said the Speaker. A vaccine appears nearing delivery. And Joe Biden won that White House.
https://time.com/5918603/nancy-pelosi-coronavirus-relief-deal/
Who was stopping that $908 Billion from coming to a vote in the House, Mr. Revisionist history?
Congress passes legislation with $900 billion in coronavirus relief and $1.4 trillion to fund the government through Sept. 30.
The measure includes a $300 per week federal unemployment supplement, $284 billion in Paycheck Protection Program loans, $600 direct payments and $8 billion for Covid-19 vaccine distribution, among many other provisions.
The aid comes after months of delays, and Democrats have called for another package when President-elect Biden takes office in the new year.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/21/congress-to-pass-coronavirus-stimulus-and-government-funding-bill.html
What Nancy and the Rats passed out of the House in December for Covid relief was $900B. That was a number she could have gotten prior to the November election. Gawd I hate when ignorant people try to correct me when I know they have their fucking heads up their asses.
The only person here who has been engaging in revisionist history is fucking you. Now if you want to just plead to being an ignorant motherfucker who is running their mouth without knowing the facts the judges will allow for that.
Forget the first week of biden's presidency. The Reps had a large bill before congress months ago and pelosi decided to table it and let the little people suffer. She did it for one reason only and that was to keep Trump from getting a win.
That was the post you responded to dipshit, and he is specifically referring to the bill Pelosi tabled "months ago" when Trump was still in office. Take the fucking L dumbass. Or keep digging, you're only exposing yourself as an even bigger fool with every response.
What's fucking hilarious is you started this thread talking about revisionist history when you've created this entire false reality. There was no revisionist history, there was just you dancing around with your head up your ass.
If you truly want to see heads up asses I suggest you take a step back from this place and look at it. This doogville vacuum is so far up its own ass you guys sit around here, pretty much all day as far as I can tell, and tug each other off. This board is the political equivalent of dawgman. Just a bunch doogs filling each other up with a steady diet of delusion. Spare yourself now and walk away.
Edit: Simply because you’re really struggling with this I am referring to the bill passed by Pelosi and the house Dems in May. Wellllllllll before the much debated tabeled bill in the fall. -
I didn’t realize you needed the damn thing spelled out for you.SFGbob said:
So not only are you a liar, you’re also a fucking moron. You should have just told me this at the outset. Could have saved us both a bunch of time.Duckwithabone said:
In other words if I can keep digging I might reach you. You’re playing serious mental gymnastics which is only leaving you sucking your own mental dick. Follow the thread. My initial comment was “retelling of history” or in other words revisionist history because the other doog made a comment about Pelosi holding off on a bill in order to help Trump lose. But what this story clearly leaves out is Pelosi trying to get a bill passed before that which was shot down by the Republicans, Mitch said it was a no go. So in fact Pelosi did try to pass a major relief bill which supposedly would’ve have stopped people from suffering and ignoring that detail is revisionist history.SFGbob said:
No we haven't you fucking moron. Initially were were talking about the $1.9 Trillion relief bill and then the conversation shifted to the bill Nancy held up prior to the election. That relief bill was the one that was passed in December and was signed into law by Trump. The $1.9 Trillion that was passed by the House last week isn't what @Bendintheriver was referring when he said:Duckwithabone said:
Lol did you forget your original poast to start this whole thread, or every righties poast following that all complaining about the current relief bill? We’ve been talking about that bill the entire time. Sorry if you forgot that, maybe it’s time for you to take your L so you can focus on bitching about other self-righteous concerns.SFGbob said:
The fact that you have your head up your ass isn't helping you. The bill that Nancy was holding up prior to the election was the one the Senate passed in December and that Trump signed into law on December 28th 2020. We're not talking about the $1.9 Trillion dollar cluster fuck they passed last week.Duckwithabone said:
I’m not sure where you’re getting some of your numbers, but “Nancy” agreed to a 1.9t price tag not 900b. So no in fact she didn’t settle for what she could’ve had before and the Reps did move closer to the Dems numbers. So in other words both sides moved. Your alternative facts don’t help your case.SFGbob said:
Now who is engaging in revisionist history? And by "both sides moving" you mean Nancy agreeing to the already established $908 Billion bill after the election. Could Nancy have gotten that $908 Billion before the election, yes or no? Could the Republicans have gotten that $908 Billion before the election? You talked out your ass, take the L.Duckwithabone said:
The Dems were pretty clear in this case that they felt the relief support needed to be as big as they could make it and it would in fact be hurtful to pass something too small that only passed the buck for a future round of relief. They went big, the Reps predictably said no. Have things changed and the relief has changed, yes. And the point is? It’s really simple, both sides stood their idealogical ground and played chicken and nothing got done. Then the ground shifted and both sides have moved in response. It’s stupid DC at work. It’s not an evil plot.SFGbob said:
Really? Politicians on both sides played politics!!!! Shocking. Only a firmly biased perspective can ignore the fact that Pelosi herself said she was now willing to accept the "bipartisan" $908 Billion bill, that could have been passed before the election, now that Biden had won the Presidency.Duckwithabone said:
Well you certainly cherry-picked a quote from that article. Read the whole thing and it basically says both sides played politics. Only a firmly biased perspective can read that whole article and come away thinking it was all the Dems fault a relief bill wasn’t passed. But you’re free to be wrong in your view.SFGbob said:
The bill the Rats were pushing was a lot like the bill they are trying to pass now. Billions for programs that had nothing to do with Covid relief. If you're talking specifically about getting money out to people then yes Pelosi is to blame and the only people engaging in revisionist history are the people who deny this.Duckwithabone said:Was this before or after the Republicans failed to agree to a bill proposed by the Dems? No what I am saying is the inept response by the government really fell on both sides. To state that the blame for the failed government response lies with one side is revisionist history. Both sides played politics with the issues.
After Biden won Nancy agreed to a smaller relief bill that she could of had prior to the election. Before accusing others of engaging in revisionist history may be best for you to actually learn some history.
For months, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi held the line against a pared-down stimulus plan to prop up the coronavirus-hobbled economy. She insisted that Democrats needed to go big or stay stalled, arguing that this wasn’t the time for stopgaps or patchwork solutions.
On Friday, that changed. The most powerful woman in Washington stepped to the podium and told reporters on Capitol Hill that House Democrats were ready to accept something closer to the bipartisan $908 billion spending plan as a down payment on follow-up legislation to come next year. The slimmed-down spending — which is still larger than the entire Obama-era economic stimulus plan of 2009 — could be paired with a must-pass, $1.4 trillion government funding measure that faces an end-of-week deadline.
What changed? Two things, said the Speaker. A vaccine appears nearing delivery. And Joe Biden won that White House.
https://time.com/5918603/nancy-pelosi-coronavirus-relief-deal/
Who was stopping that $908 Billion from coming to a vote in the House, Mr. Revisionist history?
Congress passes legislation with $900 billion in coronavirus relief and $1.4 trillion to fund the government through Sept. 30.
The measure includes a $300 per week federal unemployment supplement, $284 billion in Paycheck Protection Program loans, $600 direct payments and $8 billion for Covid-19 vaccine distribution, among many other provisions.
The aid comes after months of delays, and Democrats have called for another package when President-elect Biden takes office in the new year.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/21/congress-to-pass-coronavirus-stimulus-and-government-funding-bill.html
What Nancy and the Rats passed out of the House in December for Covid relief was $900B. That was a number she could have gotten prior to the November election. Gawd I hate when ignorant people try to correct me when I know they have their fucking heads up their asses.
The only person here who has been engaging in revisionist history is fucking you. Now if you want to just plead to being an ignorant motherfucker who is running their mouth without knowing the facts the judges will allow for that.
Forget the first week of biden's presidency. The Reps had a large bill before congress months ago and pelosi decided to table it and let the little people suffer. She did it for one reason only and that was to keep Trump from getting a win.
That was the post you responded to dipshit, and he is specifically referring to the bill Pelosi tabled "months ago" when Trump was still in office. Take the fucking L dumbass. Or keep digging, you're only exposing yourself as an even bigger fool with every response.
What's fucking hilarious is you started this thread talking about revisionist history when you've created this entire false reality. There was no revisionist history, there was just you dancing around with your head up your ass.
If you truly want to see heads up asses I suggest you take a step back from this place and look at it. This doogville vacuum is so far up its own ass you guys sit around here, pretty much all day as far as I can tell, and tug each other off. This board is the political equivalent of dawgman. Just a bunch doogs filling each other up with a steady diet of delusion. Spare yourself now and walk away.
Edit: Simply because you’re really struggling with this I am referring to the bill passed by Pelosi and the house Dems in May. Wellllllllll before the much debated tabeled bill in the fall. -
Oh really?Duckwithabone said:
That’s an interesting retelling of history.Bendintheriver said:
Forget the first week of biden's presidency. The Reps had a large bill before congress months ago and pelosi decided to table it and let the little people suffer. She did it for one reason only and that was to keep Trump from getting a win. People could have had checks back in August. By stalling they got pork bailouts for the rat states who are fiscally irresponsible and checks for things like bridges and rail systems that no one will use. Not to mention hurting Trump.SFGbob said:
If this was truly about helping people who need it, Congress could have passed a bill with the support of the GOP Biden's first week in office.Bob_C said:
Get the checks out there then, what is stopping that from happening?TheKobeStopper said:It’s the beginning of March, people need help now. Do you not understand the concept of time?
Why do you have to be dishonest to be a liberal?Duckwithabone said:
Well you certainly cherry-picked a quote from that article. Read the whole thing and it basically says both sides played politics. Only a firmly biased perspective can read that whole article and come away thinking it was all the Dems fault a relief bill wasn’t passed. But you’re free to be wrong in your view.SFGbob said:
The bill the Rats were pushing was a lot like the bill they are trying to pass now. Billions for programs that had nothing to do with Covid relief. If you're talking specifically about getting money out to people then yes Pelosi is to blame and the only people engaging in revisionist history are the people who deny this.Duckwithabone said:Was this before or after the Republicans failed to agree to a bill proposed by the Dems? No what I am saying is the inept response by the government really fell on both sides. To state that the blame for the failed government response lies with one side is revisionist history. Both sides played politics with the issues.
After Biden won Nancy agreed to a smaller relief bill that she could of had prior to the election. Before accusing others of engaging in revisionist history may be best for you to actually learn some history.
For months, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi held the line against a pared-down stimulus plan to prop up the coronavirus-hobbled economy. She insisted that Democrats needed to go big or stay stalled, arguing that this wasn’t the time for stopgaps or patchwork solutions.
On Friday, that changed. The most powerful woman in Washington stepped to the podium and told reporters on Capitol Hill that House Democrats were ready to accept something closer to the bipartisan $908 billion spending plan as a down payment on follow-up legislation to come next year. The slimmed-down spending — which is still larger than the entire Obama-era economic stimulus plan of 2009 — could be paired with a must-pass, $1.4 trillion government funding measure that faces an end-of-week deadline.
What changed? Two things, said the Speaker. A vaccine appears nearing delivery. And Joe Biden won the White House.
https://time.com/5918603/nancy-pelosi-coronavirus-relief-deal/
FFS, educate yourself before showing your lying ass on a thread. Pelosi not only blocked it in August of last year she also stalled it for three months and then tabled it in December. The heartless bitch let the private sector unemployed starve. Then the bitch passes a bill that rewards federal works and not the private sector. No federal workers have lost their jobs! Somehow you rats justify this bullshit and then you come on here and lie like a rug.
From that well known Conservative rag The New York Times:
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/08/us/politics/nancy-pelosi-coronavirus-relief.html
Pelosi Is Playing Hardball on Coronavirus Relief. She Thinks She’ll Win.
Emboldened by Republican divisions and a favorable political landscape, the speaker is refusing to agree to a narrow relief measure, unbothered by charges that she is an impediment to a deal.
-
@Duckwithabone can you please go play in traffic or get the delta variant or something or not whatever.Duckwithabone said:
I didn’t realize you needed the damn thing spelled out for you.SFGbob said:
So not only are you a liar, you’re also a fucking moron. You should have just told me this at the outset. Could have saved us both a bunch of time.Duckwithabone said:
In other words if I can keep digging I might reach you. You’re playing serious mental gymnastics which is only leaving you sucking your own mental dick. Follow the thread. My initial comment was “retelling of history” or in other words revisionist history because the other doog made a comment about Pelosi holding off on a bill in order to help Trump lose. But what this story clearly leaves out is Pelosi trying to get a bill passed before that which was shot down by the Republicans, Mitch said it was a no go. So in fact Pelosi did try to pass a major relief bill which supposedly would’ve have stopped people from suffering and ignoring that detail is revisionist history.SFGbob said:
No we haven't you fucking moron. Initially were were talking about the $1.9 Trillion relief bill and then the conversation shifted to the bill Nancy held up prior to the election. That relief bill was the one that was passed in December and was signed into law by Trump. The $1.9 Trillion that was passed by the House last week isn't what @Bendintheriver was referring when he said:Duckwithabone said:
Lol did you forget your original poast to start this whole thread, or every righties poast following that all complaining about the current relief bill? We’ve been talking about that bill the entire time. Sorry if you forgot that, maybe it’s time for you to take your L so you can focus on bitching about other self-righteous concerns.SFGbob said:
The fact that you have your head up your ass isn't helping you. The bill that Nancy was holding up prior to the election was the one the Senate passed in December and that Trump signed into law on December 28th 2020. We're not talking about the $1.9 Trillion dollar cluster fuck they passed last week.Duckwithabone said:
I’m not sure where you’re getting some of your numbers, but “Nancy” agreed to a 1.9t price tag not 900b. So no in fact she didn’t settle for what she could’ve had before and the Reps did move closer to the Dems numbers. So in other words both sides moved. Your alternative facts don’t help your case.SFGbob said:
Now who is engaging in revisionist history? And by "both sides moving" you mean Nancy agreeing to the already established $908 Billion bill after the election. Could Nancy have gotten that $908 Billion before the election, yes or no? Could the Republicans have gotten that $908 Billion before the election? You talked out your ass, take the L.Duckwithabone said:
The Dems were pretty clear in this case that they felt the relief support needed to be as big as they could make it and it would in fact be hurtful to pass something too small that only passed the buck for a future round of relief. They went big, the Reps predictably said no. Have things changed and the relief has changed, yes. And the point is? It’s really simple, both sides stood their idealogical ground and played chicken and nothing got done. Then the ground shifted and both sides have moved in response. It’s stupid DC at work. It’s not an evil plot.SFGbob said:
Really? Politicians on both sides played politics!!!! Shocking. Only a firmly biased perspective can ignore the fact that Pelosi herself said she was now willing to accept the "bipartisan" $908 Billion bill, that could have been passed before the election, now that Biden had won the Presidency.Duckwithabone said:
Well you certainly cherry-picked a quote from that article. Read the whole thing and it basically says both sides played politics. Only a firmly biased perspective can read that whole article and come away thinking it was all the Dems fault a relief bill wasn’t passed. But you’re free to be wrong in your view.SFGbob said:
The bill the Rats were pushing was a lot like the bill they are trying to pass now. Billions for programs that had nothing to do with Covid relief. If you're talking specifically about getting money out to people then yes Pelosi is to blame and the only people engaging in revisionist history are the people who deny this.Duckwithabone said:Was this before or after the Republicans failed to agree to a bill proposed by the Dems? No what I am saying is the inept response by the government really fell on both sides. To state that the blame for the failed government response lies with one side is revisionist history. Both sides played politics with the issues.
After Biden won Nancy agreed to a smaller relief bill that she could of had prior to the election. Before accusing others of engaging in revisionist history may be best for you to actually learn some history.
For months, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi held the line against a pared-down stimulus plan to prop up the coronavirus-hobbled economy. She insisted that Democrats needed to go big or stay stalled, arguing that this wasn’t the time for stopgaps or patchwork solutions.
On Friday, that changed. The most powerful woman in Washington stepped to the podium and told reporters on Capitol Hill that House Democrats were ready to accept something closer to the bipartisan $908 billion spending plan as a down payment on follow-up legislation to come next year. The slimmed-down spending — which is still larger than the entire Obama-era economic stimulus plan of 2009 — could be paired with a must-pass, $1.4 trillion government funding measure that faces an end-of-week deadline.
What changed? Two things, said the Speaker. A vaccine appears nearing delivery. And Joe Biden won that White House.
https://time.com/5918603/nancy-pelosi-coronavirus-relief-deal/
Who was stopping that $908 Billion from coming to a vote in the House, Mr. Revisionist history?
Congress passes legislation with $900 billion in coronavirus relief and $1.4 trillion to fund the government through Sept. 30.
The measure includes a $300 per week federal unemployment supplement, $284 billion in Paycheck Protection Program loans, $600 direct payments and $8 billion for Covid-19 vaccine distribution, among many other provisions.
The aid comes after months of delays, and Democrats have called for another package when President-elect Biden takes office in the new year.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/21/congress-to-pass-coronavirus-stimulus-and-government-funding-bill.html
What Nancy and the Rats passed out of the House in December for Covid relief was $900B. That was a number she could have gotten prior to the November election. Gawd I hate when ignorant people try to correct me when I know they have their fucking heads up their asses.
The only person here who has been engaging in revisionist history is fucking you. Now if you want to just plead to being an ignorant motherfucker who is running their mouth without knowing the facts the judges will allow for that.
Forget the first week of biden's presidency. The Reps had a large bill before congress months ago and pelosi decided to table it and let the little people suffer. She did it for one reason only and that was to keep Trump from getting a win.
That was the post you responded to dipshit, and he is specifically referring to the bill Pelosi tabled "months ago" when Trump was still in office. Take the fucking L dumbass. Or keep digging, you're only exposing yourself as an even bigger fool with every response.
What's fucking hilarious is you started this thread talking about revisionist history when you've created this entire false reality. There was no revisionist history, there was just you dancing around with your head up your ass.
If you truly want to see heads up asses I suggest you take a step back from this place and look at it. This doogville vacuum is so far up its own ass you guys sit around here, pretty much all day as far as I can tell, and tug each other off. This board is the political equivalent of dawgman. Just a bunch doogs filling each other up with a steady diet of delusion. Spare yourself now and walk away.
Edit: Simply because you’re really struggling with this I am referring to the bill passed by Pelosi and the house Dems in May. Wellllllllll before the much debated tabeled bill in the fall.
