DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Biden/Harris Administration

The real difference with Biden vs Trump with Putin is. Putin has real political and personal dirt on Trump not on Biden. Leverage is a big deal to Putin. Always has been.

Maybe. Maybe it is the other way around.

Biden didn't take Putin's word over our intelligence community in an international news conference and go into some rant about his political opponents.

Yeah, and I bet you are planning on a trek to DC for the RE-coronation of Trump as El Presidente for Life in August also,, Right

Evidently you know more about it than I, so you are more likely.

I don't pay attention to Trump stuff, I have my focus on the people in charge.

Maybe you should try that.

LOL That's not what you were saying that caused me to respond the way I did. You may want to keep your stories straight.

j/c...

Jc

Right now opposing media outlets are going back and forth over Biden’s presence overseas and such, as well as this voting rights issue.

Right now, I have no complaints with Biden. He’s actually the complete opposite of “basement” joe and is out in front, gaffes and all. Cool.

But my problem right now? That’s with VP Harris. Or should I say state AG Harris, the one most liberals and black Americans despised. Where there hell is she? She should be leading the charge for a lot of the criminal justice/law enforcement policies. And yet, the exact opposite has happened that conservatives claimed:

It’s Biden out in front and the administration is trying to hide Harris from the spot light. Even taking into account the right wing slant against her, that border Situation was straight up embarrassing. And then her comments in front of the media when pressed on it makes me wish Biden would’ve choose warren or Yang. Biden is getting zero help from Harris and it’s ticking me off.

OR!
Now hear me out here because I haven't been following any of this.

Let me propose a question of reality. What if consider for just a second, that the reason Biden is very aged and near Senile is because the plan all along is (Spock is controlling the landing party), Harris is the driving force behind policy, yet Biden, is a Face by which to propose some policies that would be better received because of general perceptions.
Now, That would mean, She is kind of hiding out, just outside of the spotlight, of her own accord, and using Him as a shield so to speak, not a litteral shield, but to deflect criticism of her decisions.

The Only thing I can ...Really know, and others should understand to, (sadly), from the Top of any admin. in 2021 that;
The actions are going to tell the real story.

Therefore, and understand, All---- of the Words, and Videos' and endless explanations that they will give you, from your media, our media, our competiting medias, they are all bull, meant to distract, confuse, and placate, +disorganize anything that even begins to be opposition or questioning.

Even if it were as simple as if the President came into your home one night and said very sternly, "give me your pillow!"
And then there were 300 human speakers, and flashy lights, and smoke and music shows, and 45 minutes of off topic commercials, and days of dialog on Syria and abortion and those crazy other siders
all taking place right inside your bedroom,

eeehhhJust to make sure nobody would allow anybody to give any serious
I mean any serious thought to anyone in your room

eeeh who just might, eeeh just may feel like saying umm,

(What the $&*@!#! are you doing with my pillow I'm sleeping on that thing!!!)

Now those people are nuts: didn't they see the 45 human talkers and the flashing lights,
( I know, crazies huh?)

... Cough,
-----
What I meant to say was, Maybe she's out of the spotlight from her own doing.
But really I have no idea.

Trump is in charge. In charge of the Republican party. Maybe you should be paying attention.

She's just doing what every other VP (with the possible exception of Cheney) in my lifetime has done. Pretty much nothing except agree with everything the president's doing. We should go back to the FF days where the guy who came in second in the presidential election was named VP.

If you think Biden it senile because of speech patterns, then you know nothing of stuttering.. He's fought the stutter all his life.. Now he devotes some time to help other with that particular affliction.

The only thing trump could to is assist people with their CLD (Constant Lying Disorder).

LOl...do you talk about Trump in your sleep?

Can you have a conversation without talking about the guy?

Right?!

Sleepy Joe cannot. complete. a sentence. He loses his mind shortly after the verb... It's not "stuttering".

But, but... Trump, Trump, Trump!

Trump is headed to the border next week to diss the Democrats. Maybe if you don't want him talked about you should tell him to shut the hell up.

He's still the leader of the party you support. Maybe you should help fix that instead of pointing fingers at everyone else.

Somebody needs to go to the border. And when Texas starts soliciting money to build their own damn wall, you can bet I will send money. I will do the same for New Mexico, and AZ as well if they decide to do the same.

California...I guess I would, but that will never happen there until some people get their minds right.

Donald? Is that you?

Biden/Harris Administration =

Trump built an actual 52 miles of border wall (fence) in areas it never existed before in four years. You're buying into a fantasy. There are over 600 miles of missing, physical border protection in just one stretch of the border in Texas alone.

You do understand that a wall is solid and a fence isn't, right? Words do have definitions.

You're buying into what makes you "feel good" rather than reality. My suggestion is if you really want to help Abbott build that wall you set up a trust fund. Because it will take years and years to come to fruition.

He will be dead and gone before that ever happens. So you're going to have to hope that every governor after him supports building that wall too. And with the changing demographics in Texas, I wouldn't count on that.

It's hilarious that you support the state of Texas spending 250 million towards a border wall when they can't even keep their utilities up and running. I guess it's all about priorities.

Awe, you are so special. That's what people try to indicate any time we have an administration that tries to help all Americans.

... at a time when companies are struggling as they are to fill open jobs.

There's a difference between discussing Trumps current activity and having an unhealthy obsession with mentioning him in every single thread.

In a thread about Biden, where all you do is bring up Trump, puts you in the latter.

It's not about Texas. It is about the United States.

As for the actual amount of border to be secured, it really doesn't have to be the entire border. There are natural crossing points that make sense. In some areas, desert acts as your fence. If the nearest town is 40 miles away, people aren't going to cross there. Those can easily be patrolled by a chopper and current means.

What I don't get is why you and others seem intent on viewing people like me as being afraid of people entering the country, or somehow don't like Hispanics. Speaking for myself, that isn't the case. Not even close. If the problem was Canadians rushing over the border, I'd feel the same way.

I resent you feeling that way. My question to you and others is why do you and others turn your head to illegals entering the country? You don't see that as a problem and don't want to stop that from happening? If it is OK there, why not everywhere? Just let anybody in? Why is walking across the border different than being smuggled in by the boatload, or flying in from parts unknown? How about you and some others answer some of those questions in actual dialogue rather than turn it on me, or republicans, or Trump or whatever, whoever? How does a persons first act upon entering the country be illegal and ok to overlook?

So, keep your focus on me and your perception of me hating these people rather than keeping your eye on the ball. That isn't productive or solve a damn thing.

I'd be thrilled if we weren't talking about walls, fences, or anything like that, but the reality you mentioned dictates that we must.

It is what it is, Roy.

Unlike you and others I don't hide what he's done... and I won't let you forget it.

BY the way, Trump is still taking about Clintons emails...

IMO, the root causes of the US's illegal alien issue is a combination of the situations in countries in Central America as well as our own messed up immigration process. No amount of (or lack of) walls/fences/etc is going to make a significant dent in the issue until we start going after root cause. Many many administrations have come and gone without really doing much to enact real change (despite a LOT of rhetoric), and this current admin doesn't seem to be breaking from that playbook, from what I've seen.

So while some want to wring their hands about whether a wall or a fence or a patrol should be protecting this or that portion of the border (or not), I think that conversation is only going to be so productive in terms of addressing the real issue.

Tangent: when the "WE'RE GOING TO BUILD A WALL" boondoggle was first being conceived, I remember that lawmakers on both sides were asking whether he meant an actual physical wall, or deploying various resources (automated surveillance, beefed up patrols, etc) in order to better secure portions of the border, as the situation and surrounding environment deemed appropriate. Some lawmakers even asked this is an 'out' for Trump... as it was well-known that a massive wall along the entire southern border was laughably impractical.

If you have a spine speak out against him. Help insure he is no longer the head of the republican party. Shut him the hell up. As long as he's relevant he will be talked about. I hold no power. But if you think this man can continue to spread lies, create havoc and control the republican party and everyone should just shut the hell up, you are the one who is blind.

He has divided this nation like no other. He is a fear monger and a grifter who holds great influence. I understand that you and your ilk would love people to stop pointing out how he controls what used to be the grand old party, but that BS isn't going to work.

You may wish to read my post again. I never said ANY of the things you're accusing me of.

I said it's not or never has been a wall, it's a fence. Which it is. I pointed out that only 52 miles of wall had been built where none existed before. I pointed out that it would take years upon years to accomplish it. That the voting demographics in Texas were changing.

Yet you go off on some diatribe about things not only that I never said, but never even suggested. Triggered much?

Woosh.

I never said he shouldn't be discussed. I'm simply pointing out that you and the rest of the liberals on this board hijack EVERY thread to talk about him. This just proves the unhealthy obsession you have with Trump. He lives rent free in your head.

Me and my ilk? Sounds like you think I'm some hardcore Trump supporter. Since you claim facts matter, please show me the posts I've made where I support Trump.

It seems as though you think you're qualified to psychoanalyze people. I highly doubt that. Maybe you should stick with your own profession.

What he does is newsworthy. It's worthy of of discussion. We've witnessed what happens when people sit by and say nothing. We've witnessed lie after lie and it continues. Maybe you should be focusing more on that.

One thing I can insure you of. As long as he controls the Republican party my comments, nor those of many others will stop. The fact you ignore them is not my issue.

You either help address the problem or you're part of the problem. Your choice.

I'll tell you the same thing I told 40¢: send your hard-earned cash with my approval and blessing. Better that a fool be separated from his money by choice than my tax dollars go to such a hare-brained idea.

If you and 40 wish to spend your money on a futile and largely symbolic act, knock yourselves out. It will make you feel better (even if it won't work), I'll get a chuckle, and it won't cost me a dime to get my entertainment.

I might question your choice in entertainment, but I understand your position. There is a lot of money I don't like our tax money going towards, and in the past some has stopped going in directions that I disapproved, so I get your approval.

Seriously buddy, I really do.

Biden land management pick called for population control in master’s thesis

By Samuel Chamberlain

June 24, 2021

Tracy Stone-Manning, President Joe Biden’s Bureau of Land Management nominee, once argued overpopulation is an issue in the United States.


President Biden’s pick to run the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) argued in her graduate thesis nearly three decades ago that Americans should have no more than two children and claimed allowing livestock to graze on public land was “destroying the West.”

Tracy Stone-Manning was already under fire from Republicans for her links to a so-called “tree-spiking” operation to sabotage logging efforts in Idaho in the late 1980s. Stone-Manning eventually agreed to testify against two people involved in the eco-terrorist operation in exchange for immunity from prosecution.

Stone-Manning’s thesis, which she used to obtain a Master’s degree in environmental science from the University of Montana and was first reported on by the Daily Caller, was formatted as eight PSAs dealing with environmental issues including logging, mining and overpopulation. The idea, she wrote, was that the environmental movement needed “advertising’s ubiquitous power … to capture mainstream America.”

One of the ads features an image of a toddler with the caption: “Can you find the environmental hazard in this photo?”

“That’s right, it’s the cute baby,” the ad reads. “Americans believe overpopulation is only a problem somewhere else in the world. But it’s a problem here too.”

“When we overpopulate, the earth notices it more,” the ad concluded. “Stop at two. It could be the best thing you do for the planet.”

Stone-Manning’s thesis also included a TV ad script in which a woman mulls having a third child.
Tracy Stone-Manning would control livestock grazing on 155 million acres of federal land if nominated.
Tracy Stone-Manning would control livestock grazing on 155 million acres of federal land if confirmed.
Rod Lamkey – CNP / MEGA

“I know it would be my third baby, but there’s not a population problem here like in Africa or India,” the woman says. “Besides, smart people like Bob and me should be the people having kids.” Her musings are followed by a montage of traffic, pollution and environmental disasters, over which a voiceover would urge viewers to “do the truly smart thing [and] stop at one or two kids.”

“The point is a simple one,” Stone-Manning wrote. “Harshly, the ads say that the earth can’t afford Americans. More softly, they ask people to think about how their family planning choices affect the planet.”

The proposal is an echo of Communist China’s “one-child policy,” which was in effect for 35 years before it was scrapped in 2015.
see also

Former Obama official calls on Biden nominee to pull out over tree-spiking case

Another ad focused on livestock overgrazing on public land, saying: “If you saw what ‘real food’ does to our public land, you’d have a cow.”

“Most likely, the grasses won’t grow back, because the topsoil took flight,” she wrote. “Worse still, the government encourages this destruction. It charges ranchers under $2 a month to graze each cow and its calf on public land — your land … A mere 3 [percent] of America’s beef comes off public lands. We are desertifying the West for a pittance of our diet.”

If Stone-Manning is confirmed, she will lead an agency that manages livestock grazing on 155 million acres of federal land, according to the BLM website.

Republicans have lined up against Stone-Manning’s nomination over her link to the “tree-spiking” effort. Former BLM Director Robert Abbey, who headed the agency between 2009 and 2012, has also said she should withdraw her nomination.

So far, Biden is standing by his choice.

“Tracy Stone-Manning is a dedicated public servant who has years of experience and a proven track record of finding solutions and common ground when it comes to our public lands and waters,” the White House said in a statement to Fox News Tuesday. “She is exceptionally qualified to be the next Director of the Bureau of Land Management.”


https://nypost.com/2021/06/24/biden-admin-pick-called-for-population-control-in-masters-thesis/

This is great news! Thanks fish, we could use some population control in those red states.

No smack talk in this comment...as far as the administration, I have always liked Joe Biden to a degree. He has always struck me as at least a reasonable person even if I might have disagreed with his point of view.

However, it is fairly apparent he is starting to lose his faculties to some degree. Sad to see and I hope he can last the next 3 years because if not, we have real problems.

I have never really paid much attention to VP Harris. I really had no reason to do so. But now as VP is is very apparent to me she just isn't qualified to be President. She just looks lost as VP. This isn't about her politics. She just doesn't seem like she is very decisive and looks to be running scared.

I hope we never have to turn to her leadership because it looks like it would be a big leadership void.

I agree on Harris. Now, I caveat that with the fact she hasn't been in six months yet, and VP's aren't exactly known to be the face of the administration.

However, in the areas where I have seen her speak or address issues, I do have concerns regarding her ability to lead and provide direction.

Now, that perception could change, like I said, but the current baseline does not make me feel great.

Other than Cheney, I haven't actually seen a vice president try to step into the limelight. Usually they stay pretty much in the background and support the president. So I actually don't see that as anything unusual.

Her lack of experience leaves some concern. But then we've seen presidents elected with less government experience than she has get elected and the same people who seem concerned now didn't seem concerned then.

I understand why people feel the need to question what she would bring to the table if for some reason she had to be named president. Not actually knowing the answer to such a question can certainly cause doubt.

Her role as of now is to be in a support role, not as the leader. Much like yourself I have no idea how she would do as president. I too have questions about that. But knowing what her role is as of now helps me understand that she backs up the president, not leads.

j/c...

I don't have a problem with that. It's the right thing to do.

NPR is the new KGB.