No he did not ...... that was Newsweek
you should quit dropping Acid ........
Kamala Harris
- Thread starter PJay
- Start date
No he did not ...... that was Newsweek
you should quit dropping Acid ........
PsyOps
Pixelated
Funny... you gave me a hard time for invoking Hillary in one of my posts as having nothing to do with the discussion, and now you're doing the same thing by invoking Obama, as if that has anything to do with discussion.
Like I said, they would have impeached him over improperly making a peanut butter and jelly sandwich.
The pattern I see is, democrats on a constant warpath to get Trump out of the White House. And they have failed at every attempt. The other pattern I have seen is democrats not only casting Trump as every evil thing under the sun, but also those who support him - voter - THE PEOPLE!
I get you... You feel it's your duty to convince us that Trump isn't worthy to be President; completely ignoring that decision was made in 2016. And when Trump is reelected, it will be the same - that is who the country decided they want for president. You refuse to accept that as how our process works. Well, you have failed to convince anyone. And that's because your tactics are childish and, quite honestly, suck. You're a typical liberal who feels that attacking one's character and person, calling them a bunch of names, and placing them in categories of evil intentions is a means to win your argument. That will fail every time.
How Kamala Harris blocked a hospital rescue to help SEIU
One way to fill in the gap is to inspect Ms. Harris’s record as California’s Attorney General, and one revealing episode is the way she used her power to blow up a deal to rescue struggling Catholic hospitals.
The saga started in 2014 when for-profit Prime Healthcare Services made an $843 million bid for six insolvent hospitals operated by the Catholic Daughters of Charity Health System. The hospitals had been bleeding cash for years due to inflexible labor contracts and miserly Medicaid payments.
One way to fill in the gap is to inspect Ms. Harris’s record as California’s Attorney General, and one revealing episode is the way she used her power to blow up a deal to rescue struggling Catholic hospitals.
The saga started in 2014 when for-profit Prime Healthcare Services made an $843 million bid for six insolvent hospitals operated by the Catholic Daughters of Charity Health System. The hospitals had been bleeding cash for years due to inflexible labor contracts and miserly Medicaid payments.
Former Obama speechwriter mocks mainstream media's 'hilarious' push to call Kamala Harris 'moderate'
"It was hilarious to me that she's being called in all of this coverage a 'moderate.' Like, 'Joe Biden has found a fellow moderate or centrist,'" Favreau began. "She supports something extremely close to Medicare-for-all, which [Sen.] Bernie Sanders acknowledged in his statement supporting her. She's for the Green New Deal. She has one of the most liberal records in the U.S. Senate!"
"If you want to call Kamala Harris' record in the Senate and the policies that she's supporting now 'centrist' or 'moderate,' great!" Favreau continued. "If that's where the Overton window has moved, then congratulations to all the progressive activists because you have f---in' moved the s--- out of that window! That supporting the Green New Deal and basically Medicare-for-all is now moderate and centrist! Fantastic!"
"It was hilarious to me that she's being called in all of this coverage a 'moderate.' Like, 'Joe Biden has found a fellow moderate or centrist,'" Favreau began. "She supports something extremely close to Medicare-for-all, which [Sen.] Bernie Sanders acknowledged in his statement supporting her. She's for the Green New Deal. She has one of the most liberal records in the U.S. Senate!"
"If you want to call Kamala Harris' record in the Senate and the policies that she's supporting now 'centrist' or 'moderate,' great!" Favreau continued. "If that's where the Overton window has moved, then congratulations to all the progressive activists because you have f---in' moved the s--- out of that window! That supporting the Green New Deal and basically Medicare-for-all is now moderate and centrist! Fantastic!"
Second Amendment activist Colion Noir claims Harris hiding gun confiscation plans behind 'fancy words'
Noir told "Tucker Carlson Tonight" Thursday that Harris' past statements show she is not "inherently anti-gun," she just wants them in the hands of government agents rather than civilians.
In September 2019, while she was still running for president, Harris told NBC's "The Tonight Show" that she supports a "mandatory buyback" of high-caliber, semi-automatic firearms that are often dubbed "assault weapons."
Noir told "Tucker Carlson Tonight" Thursday that Harris' past statements show she is not "inherently anti-gun," she just wants them in the hands of government agents rather than civilians.
In September 2019, while she was still running for president, Harris told NBC's "The Tonight Show" that she supports a "mandatory buyback" of high-caliber, semi-automatic firearms that are often dubbed "assault weapons."
Joe Biden Alienated Black Voters by Choosing Kamala Harris
The latest Rasmussen poll found that a third of black likely voters said they are “less likely” to vote for Biden after the Harris pick, while a third said they were “more likely” to do so, and another third either said the VP pick will have no impact or their votes or that they weren’t sure what impact it will have.
About a quarter (24 percent) of all likely voters said Biden’s VP pick would make them more likely to vote for the Democrats in November, while another quarter (24 percent) said it will make them less likely to vote for Biden. Half (50 percent) said Harris would make no impact on their vote.
The vast majority of likely Democratic voters (76 percent) said they had a favorable opinion of Harris, with 48 percent calling their opinion of her “very favorable.” Only 18 percent had an unfavorable view.
While Harris proved polarizing among black voters, black voters (37 percent) proved more likely than white voters (28 percent) to hold a “very favorable” opinion of the senator.
The latest Rasmussen poll found that a third of black likely voters said they are “less likely” to vote for Biden after the Harris pick, while a third said they were “more likely” to do so, and another third either said the VP pick will have no impact or their votes or that they weren’t sure what impact it will have.
About a quarter (24 percent) of all likely voters said Biden’s VP pick would make them more likely to vote for the Democrats in November, while another quarter (24 percent) said it will make them less likely to vote for Biden. Half (50 percent) said Harris would make no impact on their vote.
The vast majority of likely Democratic voters (76 percent) said they had a favorable opinion of Harris, with 48 percent calling their opinion of her “very favorable.” Only 18 percent had an unfavorable view.
While Harris proved polarizing among black voters, black voters (37 percent) proved more likely than white voters (28 percent) to hold a “very favorable” opinion of the senator.
Kamala Harris Proposes Housing Plan Where Everybody Gets Free 10'x10' Room And Three Meals A Day
“Truly, I can think of no better place for these people to be contained - er I mean to live!” said Kamala Harris, smiling and taking pictures outside the facility. “No one is more deserving of going to the big house.”
babylonbee.com
Of Course Kamala Harris Supports Gun Confiscation
Take this USA Today factcheck headlined “Kamala Harris didn’t say she’d send police to take firearms via executive order.” You may notice the highly narrow specificity of this debunking. It’s a little game political media like to play — the Associated Press miraculously ran almost an identical piece on the same day — in which reporters take a hyperbolic backbencher’s comments or a misleading social-media post — in this case, a Facebook post that is “gaining traction” — and use it as a strawman to deceive voters about one of the controversial positions of their favored politician.
While USA Today is correct that Harris has never explicitly maintained that she would sign an executive order to “send police” to break down your door, she is the first person to be on a major presidential ticket in American history who openly supports gun confiscation. Whether she promised to implement those plans through legislation or via executive order is also, at best, opaque, despite factcheckers’ efforts to claim otherwise.
[clip]
Here’s a fact check: Police would almost certainly be sent to homes of Americans to take guns if a “mandatory buyback” program were instituted. AR-15s aren’t “on the streets.” They are hardly ever used in crimes at all. The vast majority of AR-15s are in homes — somewhere around 15-20 million of them, depending on what arbitrary designation Democrats use to define “assault weapon.”
By implement, I mean compel. A “mandatory buyback” would mean the police coming to plenty of doors, because in the United States there will almost certainly be a great pushback against such authoritarianism, even if Harris could get away with it.
Once the state is permitted to ban guns over their aesthetics — since AR-15s share the mechanics of many other firearms — it will almost certainly be empowered to ban any semi-automatic gun. This is the ultimate goal of these incremental efforts to inhibit and eliminate gun ownership.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/08/of-course-kamala-harris-supports-gun-confiscation/#
Take this USA Today factcheck headlined “Kamala Harris didn’t say she’d send police to take firearms via executive order.” You may notice the highly narrow specificity of this debunking. It’s a little game political media like to play — the Associated Press miraculously ran almost an identical piece on the same day — in which reporters take a hyperbolic backbencher’s comments or a misleading social-media post — in this case, a Facebook post that is “gaining traction” — and use it as a strawman to deceive voters about one of the controversial positions of their favored politician.
While USA Today is correct that Harris has never explicitly maintained that she would sign an executive order to “send police” to break down your door, she is the first person to be on a major presidential ticket in American history who openly supports gun confiscation. Whether she promised to implement those plans through legislation or via executive order is also, at best, opaque, despite factcheckers’ efforts to claim otherwise.
[clip]
Here’s a fact check: Police would almost certainly be sent to homes of Americans to take guns if a “mandatory buyback” program were instituted. AR-15s aren’t “on the streets.” They are hardly ever used in crimes at all. The vast majority of AR-15s are in homes — somewhere around 15-20 million of them, depending on what arbitrary designation Democrats use to define “assault weapon.”
By implement, I mean compel. A “mandatory buyback” would mean the police coming to plenty of doors, because in the United States there will almost certainly be a great pushback against such authoritarianism, even if Harris could get away with it.
Once the state is permitted to ban guns over their aesthetics — since AR-15s share the mechanics of many other firearms — it will almost certainly be empowered to ban any semi-automatic gun. This is the ultimate goal of these incremental efforts to inhibit and eliminate gun ownership.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/08/of-course-kamala-harris-supports-gun-confiscation/#
PJay
Well-Known Member
They are always twisted.
Joe Biden Has Found His Neoliberal Match in Kamala Harris
We may well look back on the path it took to get here as a preview of what’s to come should Biden win. This year’s VP-selection process was particularly chaotic, with different, opposing factions — from Biden insiders to progressive activists to Democratic officials to groups of major donors — jostling for influence and nudging, even threatening, Biden to make their preferred choice.
Eager contenders would rise to the top, meet privately with Biden, appear on TV with him, fundraise desperately for his campaign, then suddenly fall out of favor. Sometimes he would cruelly dash their hopes live on TV; sometimes they would sink under a hail of leaks meant to undermine them. Through this shambolic process, Biden ultimately blew at least three of his own self-imposed deadlines.
This was far from unique to the VP search. Biden has long had a reputation for lacking discipline and being indecisive, something he carried over to the current campaign, nearly sabotaging himself before he began with a late start that saw him miss out on top hires. Even the Times can barely find the euphemisms to garnish these flaws, referring to his “nonlinear decision-making processes” and “habit of extending deadlines in a way that leaves some Democrats anxious and annoyed.”
We may well look back on the path it took to get here as a preview of what’s to come should Biden win. This year’s VP-selection process was particularly chaotic, with different, opposing factions — from Biden insiders to progressive activists to Democratic officials to groups of major donors — jostling for influence and nudging, even threatening, Biden to make their preferred choice.
Eager contenders would rise to the top, meet privately with Biden, appear on TV with him, fundraise desperately for his campaign, then suddenly fall out of favor. Sometimes he would cruelly dash their hopes live on TV; sometimes they would sink under a hail of leaks meant to undermine them. Through this shambolic process, Biden ultimately blew at least three of his own self-imposed deadlines.
This was far from unique to the VP search. Biden has long had a reputation for lacking discipline and being indecisive, something he carried over to the current campaign, nearly sabotaging himself before he began with a late start that saw him miss out on top hires. Even the Times can barely find the euphemisms to garnish these flaws, referring to his “nonlinear decision-making processes” and “habit of extending deadlines in a way that leaves some Democrats anxious and annoyed.”
