#46 President Joe Biden

Halifax2TheMax said:

mace1229 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Mace brought up housing, food, gas as essential as if in his typical “gee why doesn’t someone do something about those things” in the context of Brandon reducing insulin costs by two thirds through a major piece of legislation, legislation not supported by many repubs, by the way, that impacted Medicare and thus trickled down to all Americans dependent on insulin to survive, in a lame attempt to be critical of Brandon and dem policies. It, IMHO, was a dumb attempt at a knock on a policy that clearly has a positive outcome for millions of Americans. Couldn’t he have celebrated that accomplishment?

So let me ask, would you right leaning folks on here be agreeable to dems or repubs introducing legislation that reduces the cost of “essentials” like food, housing and gas or inflation by two thirds for a portion of Americans, and by extension, many more?

Mace also chose California as his example so I’ll tell you what Tennessee did to solve their homelessness. They made it illegal to “camp” in public rights of way like under overpasses, medians, wooded areas, parks, etc. I suppose three hots and a cot is housing.

There is an ignore feature if you’re scared to share your thoughts or don’t like comments. I suggest you use it (general you). Sorry, not sorry that trying to understand where the fuck someone is coming from is such a pain for some. Maybe think before you hit send as I wonder if anyone doesn’t understand my position and needs me to clarify? Carry on.

I didn’t bring it up. That’s what made it weird you wouldn’t let it go for something I didn’t bring up in the first place.

You brought it up after it was brought up. For fucks sake.

static111 said:

mace1229 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

mace1229 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Mace brought up housing, food, gas as essential as if in his typical “gee why doesn’t someone do something about those things” in the context of Brandon reducing insulin costs by two thirds through a major piece of legislation, legislation not supported by many repubs, by the way, that impacted Medicare and thus trickled down to all Americans dependent on insulin to survive, in a lame attempt to be critical of Brandon and dem policies. It, IMHO, was a dumb attempt at a knock on a policy that clearly has a positive outcome for millions of Americans. Couldn’t he have celebrated that accomplishment?

So let me ask, would you right leaning folks on here be agreeable to dems or repubs introducing legislation that reduces the cost of “essentials” like food, housing and gas or inflation by two thirds for a portion of Americans, and by extension, many more?

Mace also chose California as his example so I’ll tell you what Tennessee did to solve their homelessness. They made it illegal to “camp” in public rights of way like under overpasses, medians, wooded areas, parks, etc. I suppose three hots and a cot is housing.

There is an ignore feature if you’re scared to share your thoughts or don’t like comments. I suggest you use it (general you). Sorry, not sorry that trying to understand where the fuck someone is coming from is such a pain for some. Maybe think before you hit send as I wonder if anyone doesn’t understand my position and needs me to clarify? Carry on.

I didn’t bring it up. That’s what made it weird you wouldn’t let it go for something I didn’t bring up in the first place.

You brought it up after it was brought up. For fucks sake.

But then you brought it up after I brought it up when someone else brought it up.

I don't know why you are still trying. I would have called it a wash by now.

mace1229 said:

static111 said:

mace1229 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

mace1229 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Mace brought up housing, food, gas as essential as if in his typical “gee why doesn’t someone do something about those things” in the context of Brandon reducing insulin costs by two thirds through a major piece of legislation, legislation not supported by many repubs, by the way, that impacted Medicare and thus trickled down to all Americans dependent on insulin to survive, in a lame attempt to be critical of Brandon and dem policies. It, IMHO, was a dumb attempt at a knock on a policy that clearly has a positive outcome for millions of Americans. Couldn’t he have celebrated that accomplishment?

So let me ask, would you right leaning folks on here be agreeable to dems or repubs introducing legislation that reduces the cost of “essentials” like food, housing and gas or inflation by two thirds for a portion of Americans, and by extension, many more?

Mace also chose California as his example so I’ll tell you what Tennessee did to solve their homelessness. They made it illegal to “camp” in public rights of way like under overpasses, medians, wooded areas, parks, etc. I suppose three hots and a cot is housing.

There is an ignore feature if you’re scared to share your thoughts or don’t like comments. I suggest you use it (general you). Sorry, not sorry that trying to understand where the fuck someone is coming from is such a pain for some. Maybe think before you hit send as I wonder if anyone doesn’t understand my position and needs me to clarify? Carry on.

I didn’t bring it up. That’s what made it weird you wouldn’t let it go for something I didn’t bring up in the first place.

You brought it up after it was brought up. For fucks sake.

But then you brought it up after I brought it up when someone else brought it up.

I don't know why you are still trying. I would have called it a wash by now.

At this point its entertainment. Hopefully you didn't think that was a serious response by me.

Halifax2TheMax said:

mace1229 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

mace1229 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Mace brought up housing, food, gas as essential as if in his typical “gee why doesn’t someone do something about those things” in the context of Brandon reducing insulin costs by two thirds through a major piece of legislation, legislation not supported by many repubs, by the way, that impacted Medicare and thus trickled down to all Americans dependent on insulin to survive, in a lame attempt to be critical of Brandon and dem policies. It, IMHO, was a dumb attempt at a knock on a policy that clearly has a positive outcome for millions of Americans. Couldn’t he have celebrated that accomplishment?

So let me ask, would you right leaning folks on here be agreeable to dems or repubs introducing legislation that reduces the cost of “essentials” like food, housing and gas or inflation by two thirds for a portion of Americans, and by extension, many more?

Mace also chose California as his example so I’ll tell you what Tennessee did to solve their homelessness. They made it illegal to “camp” in public rights of way like under overpasses, medians, wooded areas, parks, etc. I suppose three hots and a cot is housing.

There is an ignore feature if you’re scared to share your thoughts or don’t like comments. I suggest you use it (general you). Sorry, not sorry that trying to understand where the fuck someone is coming from is such a pain for some. Maybe think before you hit send as I wonder if anyone doesn’t understand my position and needs me to clarify? Carry on.

I didn’t bring it up. That’s what made it weird you wouldn’t let it go for something I didn’t bring up in the first place.

You brought it up after it was brought up. For fucks sake.

But then you brought it up after I brought it up when someone else brought it up.

I’d still like to know what solutions the political party you most closely identify with has for your “essentials,” seeing how you don’t seem to believe reducing insulin costs was worthy. I guess CA repubs protecting religion is a sound policy goal. Wow.

See I brought it up again because I’m trying to understand where you’re coming from as a conservative or repub. You rooting for Deathsantis? Think he’ll lower the costs of those “essentials?”

I won’t wait for some convoluted answer that’s as clear as mud but I expect some poster’s seeming ability to get you.

mace1229 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

mace1229 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

mace1229 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Mace brought up housing, food, gas as essential as if in his typical “gee why doesn’t someone do something about those things” in the context of Brandon reducing insulin costs by two thirds through a major piece of legislation, legislation not supported by many repubs, by the way, that impacted Medicare and thus trickled down to all Americans dependent on insulin to survive, in a lame attempt to be critical of Brandon and dem policies. It, IMHO, was a dumb attempt at a knock on a policy that clearly has a positive outcome for millions of Americans. Couldn’t he have celebrated that accomplishment?

So let me ask, would you right leaning folks on here be agreeable to dems or repubs introducing legislation that reduces the cost of “essentials” like food, housing and gas or inflation by two thirds for a portion of Americans, and by extension, many more?

Mace also chose California as his example so I’ll tell you what Tennessee did to solve their homelessness. They made it illegal to “camp” in public rights of way like under overpasses, medians, wooded areas, parks, etc. I suppose three hots and a cot is housing.

There is an ignore feature if you’re scared to share your thoughts or don’t like comments. I suggest you use it (general you). Sorry, not sorry that trying to understand where the fuck someone is coming from is such a pain for some. Maybe think before you hit send as I wonder if anyone doesn’t understand my position and needs me to clarify? Carry on.

I didn’t bring it up. That’s what made it weird you wouldn’t let it go for something I didn’t bring up in the first place.

You brought it up after it was brought up. For fucks sake.

But then you brought it up after I brought it up when someone else brought it up.

I’d still like to know what solutions the political party you most closely identify with has for your “essentials,” seeing how you don’t seem to believe reducing insulin costs was worthy. I guess CA repubs protecting religion is a sound policy goal. Wow.

See I brought it up again because I’m trying to understand where you’re coming from as a conservative or repub. You rooting for Deathsantis? Think he’ll lower the costs of those “essentials?”

I won’t wait for some convoluted answer that’s as clear as mud but I expect some poster’s seeming ability to get you.

I have to admit, I do admire your creative way of reaching to these conclusions.
I was going to copy and paste all of the times I said I am glad they cap medicine because it is too expensive. But decided not to. I've said it probably 5 times. But I will if you can quote where I said repubs protecting religion is a sound goal. That came out of nowhere, who was talking about protecting or not protecting religion?
Closest thing to that was you took one line from a website I linked to answer your question "protect faith-based organizations that provide shelter and fund local government efforts to increase shelter capacity" and asked me what "protecting faith based organizations" means. I said it probably means offering financial support to organizations like a church that provide shelters and food to homeless. And why not? If a church is willing to use their facility to feed homeless, why not provide some aide in that?
I look forward to your newest creative interpretation. 

Halifax2TheMax said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

mace1229 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

mace1229 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Mace brought up housing, food, gas as essential as if in his typical “gee why doesn’t someone do something about those things” in the context of Brandon reducing insulin costs by two thirds through a major piece of legislation, legislation not supported by many repubs, by the way, that impacted Medicare and thus trickled down to all Americans dependent on insulin to survive, in a lame attempt to be critical of Brandon and dem policies. It, IMHO, was a dumb attempt at a knock on a policy that clearly has a positive outcome for millions of Americans. Couldn’t he have celebrated that accomplishment?

So let me ask, would you right leaning folks on here be agreeable to dems or repubs introducing legislation that reduces the cost of “essentials” like food, housing and gas or inflation by two thirds for a portion of Americans, and by extension, many more?

Mace also chose California as his example so I’ll tell you what Tennessee did to solve their homelessness. They made it illegal to “camp” in public rights of way like under overpasses, medians, wooded areas, parks, etc. I suppose three hots and a cot is housing.

There is an ignore feature if you’re scared to share your thoughts or don’t like comments. I suggest you use it (general you). Sorry, not sorry that trying to understand where the fuck someone is coming from is such a pain for some. Maybe think before you hit send as I wonder if anyone doesn’t understand my position and needs me to clarify? Carry on.

I didn’t bring it up. That’s what made it weird you wouldn’t let it go for something I didn’t bring up in the first place.

You brought it up after it was brought up. For fucks sake.

But then you brought it up after I brought it up when someone else brought it up.

LMAO

ROTFLMAO!

mace1229 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

mace1229 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

mace1229 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Mace brought up housing, food, gas as essential as if in his typical “gee why doesn’t someone do something about those things” in the context of Brandon reducing insulin costs by two thirds through a major piece of legislation, legislation not supported by many repubs, by the way, that impacted Medicare and thus trickled down to all Americans dependent on insulin to survive, in a lame attempt to be critical of Brandon and dem policies. It, IMHO, was a dumb attempt at a knock on a policy that clearly has a positive outcome for millions of Americans. Couldn’t he have celebrated that accomplishment?

So let me ask, would you right leaning folks on here be agreeable to dems or repubs introducing legislation that reduces the cost of “essentials” like food, housing and gas or inflation by two thirds for a portion of Americans, and by extension, many more?

Mace also chose California as his example so I’ll tell you what Tennessee did to solve their homelessness. They made it illegal to “camp” in public rights of way like under overpasses, medians, wooded areas, parks, etc. I suppose three hots and a cot is housing.

There is an ignore feature if you’re scared to share your thoughts or don’t like comments. I suggest you use it (general you). Sorry, not sorry that trying to understand where the fuck someone is coming from is such a pain for some. Maybe think before you hit send as I wonder if anyone doesn’t understand my position and needs me to clarify? Carry on.

I didn’t bring it up. That’s what made it weird you wouldn’t let it go for something I didn’t bring up in the first place.

You brought it up after it was brought up. For fucks sake.

But then you brought it up after I brought it up when someone else brought it up.

I’d still like to know what solutions the political party you most closely identify with has for your “essentials,” seeing how you don’t seem to believe reducing insulin costs was worthy. I guess CA repubs protecting religion is a sound policy goal. Wow.

See I brought it up again because I’m trying to understand where you’re coming from as a conservative or repub. You rooting for Deathsantis? Think he’ll lower the costs of those “essentials?”

I won’t wait for some convoluted answer that’s as clear as mud but I expect some poster’s seeming ability to get you.

I have to admit, I do admire your creative way of reaching to these conclusions.
I was going to copy and paste all of the times I said I am glad they cap medicine because it is too expensive. But decided not to. I've said it probably 5 times. But I will if you can quote where I said repubs protecting religion is a sound goal. That came out of nowhere, who was talking about protecting or not protecting religion?
Closest thing to that was you took one line from a website I linked to answer your question "protect faith-based organizations that provide shelter and fund local government efforts to increase shelter capacity" and asked me what "protecting faith based organizations" means. I said it probably means offering financial support to organizations like a church that provide shelters and food to homeless. And why not? If a church is willing to use their facility to feed homeless, why not provide some aide in that?
I look forward to your newest creative interpretation. 

mrussel1 said:

Gern Blansten said:

mrussel1 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

mace1229 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

mace1229 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Mace brought up housing, food, gas as essential as if in his typical “gee why doesn’t someone do something about those things” in the context of Brandon reducing insulin costs by two thirds through a major piece of legislation, legislation not supported by many repubs, by the way, that impacted Medicare and thus trickled down to all Americans dependent on insulin to survive, in a lame attempt to be critical of Brandon and dem policies. It, IMHO, was a dumb attempt at a knock on a policy that clearly has a positive outcome for millions of Americans. Couldn’t he have celebrated that accomplishment?

So let me ask, would you right leaning folks on here be agreeable to dems or repubs introducing legislation that reduces the cost of “essentials” like food, housing and gas or inflation by two thirds for a portion of Americans, and by extension, many more?

Mace also chose California as his example so I’ll tell you what Tennessee did to solve their homelessness. They made it illegal to “camp” in public rights of way like under overpasses, medians, wooded areas, parks, etc. I suppose three hots and a cot is housing.

There is an ignore feature if you’re scared to share your thoughts or don’t like comments. I suggest you use it (general you). Sorry, not sorry that trying to understand where the fuck someone is coming from is such a pain for some. Maybe think before you hit send as I wonder if anyone doesn’t understand my position and needs me to clarify? Carry on.

I didn’t bring it up. That’s what made it weird you wouldn’t let it go for something I didn’t bring up in the first place.

You brought it up after it was brought up. For fucks sake.

But then you brought it up after I brought it up when someone else brought it up.

LMAO

ROTFLMAO!

STBROTFLMAO!

PMP!1

Okay I'm out.  I don't know what this means.  

Gern Blansten said:

mrussel1 said:

Gern Blansten said:

mrussel1 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

mace1229 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

mace1229 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Mace brought up housing, food, gas as essential as if in his typical “gee why doesn’t someone do something about those things” in the context of Brandon reducing insulin costs by two thirds through a major piece of legislation, legislation not supported by many repubs, by the way, that impacted Medicare and thus trickled down to all Americans dependent on insulin to survive, in a lame attempt to be critical of Brandon and dem policies. It, IMHO, was a dumb attempt at a knock on a policy that clearly has a positive outcome for millions of Americans. Couldn’t he have celebrated that accomplishment?

So let me ask, would you right leaning folks on here be agreeable to dems or repubs introducing legislation that reduces the cost of “essentials” like food, housing and gas or inflation by two thirds for a portion of Americans, and by extension, many more?

Mace also chose California as his example so I’ll tell you what Tennessee did to solve their homelessness. They made it illegal to “camp” in public rights of way like under overpasses, medians, wooded areas, parks, etc. I suppose three hots and a cot is housing.

There is an ignore feature if you’re scared to share your thoughts or don’t like comments. I suggest you use it (general you). Sorry, not sorry that trying to understand where the fuck someone is coming from is such a pain for some. Maybe think before you hit send as I wonder if anyone doesn’t understand my position and needs me to clarify? Carry on.

I didn’t bring it up. That’s what made it weird you wouldn’t let it go for something I didn’t bring up in the first place.

You brought it up after it was brought up. For fucks sake.

But then you brought it up after I brought it up when someone else brought it up.

LMAO

ROTFLMAO!

STBROTFLMAO!

PMP!1

Okay I'm out.  I don't know what this means.  

The next logical step after rolling on the floor and laughing your ass off

pooping
my
pants

Halifax2TheMax said:

mace1229 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

mace1229 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

mace1229 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Mace brought up housing, food, gas as essential as if in his typical “gee why doesn’t someone do something about those things” in the context of Brandon reducing insulin costs by two thirds through a major piece of legislation, legislation not supported by many repubs, by the way, that impacted Medicare and thus trickled down to all Americans dependent on insulin to survive, in a lame attempt to be critical of Brandon and dem policies. It, IMHO, was a dumb attempt at a knock on a policy that clearly has a positive outcome for millions of Americans. Couldn’t he have celebrated that accomplishment?

So let me ask, would you right leaning folks on here be agreeable to dems or repubs introducing legislation that reduces the cost of “essentials” like food, housing and gas or inflation by two thirds for a portion of Americans, and by extension, many more?

Mace also chose California as his example so I’ll tell you what Tennessee did to solve their homelessness. They made it illegal to “camp” in public rights of way like under overpasses, medians, wooded areas, parks, etc. I suppose three hots and a cot is housing.

There is an ignore feature if you’re scared to share your thoughts or don’t like comments. I suggest you use it (general you). Sorry, not sorry that trying to understand where the fuck someone is coming from is such a pain for some. Maybe think before you hit send as I wonder if anyone doesn’t understand my position and needs me to clarify? Carry on.

I didn’t bring it up. That’s what made it weird you wouldn’t let it go for something I didn’t bring up in the first place.

You brought it up after it was brought up. For fucks sake.

But then you brought it up after I brought it up when someone else brought it up.

I’d still like to know what solutions the political party you most closely identify with has for your “essentials,” seeing how you don’t seem to believe reducing insulin costs was worthy. I guess CA repubs protecting religion is a sound policy goal. Wow.

See I brought it up again because I’m trying to understand where you’re coming from as a conservative or repub. You rooting for Deathsantis? Think he’ll lower the costs of those “essentials?”

I won’t wait for some convoluted answer that’s as clear as mud but I expect some poster’s seeming ability to get you.

I have to admit, I do admire your creative way of reaching to these conclusions.
I was going to copy and paste all of the times I said I am glad they cap medicine because it is too expensive. But decided not to. I've said it probably 5 times. But I will if you can quote where I said repubs protecting religion is a sound goal. That came out of nowhere, who was talking about protecting or not protecting religion?
Closest thing to that was you took one line from a website I linked to answer your question "protect faith-based organizations that provide shelter and fund local government efforts to increase shelter capacity" and asked me what "protecting faith based organizations" means. I said it probably means offering financial support to organizations like a church that provide shelters and food to homeless. And why not? If a church is willing to use their facility to feed homeless, why not provide some aide in that?
I look forward to your newest creative interpretation. 

1. Can you tell me if the CA repub talking points memo on policy has made it to any legislation in the legislature or been inserted into a bill and debated? Or passed as law? On one hand, you have Brandon with a major legislative accomplishment and the other, nothing but talking points. Seems you prefer talking points or everything has to be solved, your “essentials,” to give credit. Reminds me of the gun debate.

2. Why not? Separation of church and state, a fundamental right being trampled and probably, like you and abortion or birth control, I don’t want my tax dollars supporting a cult (religion).

3. Hows that for creative interpretation? LOL.