That's what I'm saying.
To many focus on one or the other
United States 2024: United States Senate Dicussion Thread
- Thread starter 49ersfootball
- Start date
To many focus on one or the other
49ersfootball
Well-known member
Your thoughts on Senator Cornyn seeking reelection to 5th term in 2026 ? From what I've heard, Paxton is poised to launch primary challenge against him down here in my home state.
strunkenwhite
Well-known member
Cornyn's not that old by the skewed standard of the US Senate, so it's no surprise that he's uninterested in stepping aside for Paxton. I think Paxton will have an uphill battle trying to unseat him in the primary. But does that mean Paxton is planning to give someone else his AG position in the 2026 election? Or can he run for both at once? If the latter, it would be funny if someone primaried him while he's trying to primary someone else.
I'm a BIG fan of Cornyn getting kicked out of office. He's a RINO that needs to go.
49ersfootball
Well-known member
Paxton will be poised to launch primary challenge against Senator Cornyn in 2026.
As for who'll succeed Paxton as TX State Attorney General in 2026: I think one of the Justices of the TX Supreme Court will probably run.
49ersfootball
Well-known member
That doesn't change anything about my statement. I've wanted him gone for decades.
49ersfootball
Well-known member
You must have a personal vendetta against Cornyn LOL.
Blasterbot
Well-known member
Because the America last policies are always both Fuck us domestically and Foreign nations need our money more than us so shut up while we print more money. people have been getting screwed over for a long time and that means they want the domestic issues solved. the foreign policies are at best negotiable for them and usually are something that they don't know much about beyond what the news is blasting in their face at that moment.
And focusing to much in domestic makes you weaker on the international stage hurting our economy....
Blasterbot
Well-known member
yeah and ignoring the domestic to send money overseas makes us brittle and weak hurting us internationally and domestically. so people prioritize what they care about. and at this point? that is Immigration and the economy as the number 1 and 2 issues. so those who speak about that will get more support. and when push comes to shove the base would when forced to pick between good on those two things but bad on foreign policy? they choose the priority.
49ersfootball
Well-known member
The US will be the No. 1 superpower in the world.
Personal...no. I've never met him.
I've seen him make too many decisions which give up on promises he's made in order to gain favor from the left and/or the establishment.
mrttao
Well-known member
actually:
1. the USA govt does not print money. if biden wants 1 billion printed for ukraine, it is created digitally by the federal reserve, a named list of oligarch owned banks who digitally create the money at behalf of the govt, and then loan the money they just created to the govt.
2. when the USA oligarchs print money, they are causing global inflation not only USA inflation. unlike every other country who only causes inflation for itself.
this is because of the petrodollar. all worldwide currencies are pegged to the dollar in this way.
and when someone tries to break away from it (ex: kaddafi) the usa kills him
You as a USA commoner get stolen from, so does every other commoner in the entire world.
technically the lesser oligarchs (those who don't own federal reserve banks shares) get stolen from as well. but they overall make money than they lose since inflation raises the value of their owned realestate while lowering effective salaries of the commoners working for their businesses.
technically speaking, russian commoners are helping pay for ukraine.
Vyor
My influence grows!
A lot of said equipment we already have just... laying around rotting.
That shit does have a shelf life, after all.
prinCZess
Warrior, Writer, Performer, Perv
For accuracy's sake, 'a lot' here meaning roughly 70% of the monetary value sent was weapons and equipment*. That's a bit deceptive though as it wasn't until the April 2024 aid package that the US was imposing any kind of spending direction on the financial aid that was being sent so the proportions prior to that assuredly change (most prominent impacting that bars on it's being spent on non-emergency usages such as teacher salaries or pensions...the latter of which is probably the most concerning since we have entire states of examples here in the US of how those systems get gamed and manipulated and Ukraine undoubtedly approaches California or New York in its scale of corruption). Which I don't think is a thing anybody wants to defend and shouldn't have been happening from the beginning, but took until 2 years in for anyone in Congress to get to trying to wall-off from that kind of unaccountable divergence.
*One could probably quibble over the accuracy of Pentagon budgeting and valuation on these things, as we saw with repeated 'Hey, we totally 'found' more equipment we can send under this priority because our valuations were off', but whatever. Call that wastage under the bridge.
That also ignoring the corruption within Ukraine in regards to both financial aid and weapons and equipment shipments themselves--which in combination with Pentagon ineptitude/incapability to account for things is totally unknowable but, considering Ukraine's repeated oustings over corruption within their government and military, are for-sure a thing. Alongside question of whether the right stuff is being sent (Javelin's seem to have been unquestionably helpful. Bradley's as well. Abrams? Either lack of numbers or the sheer divide in tank doctrine makes that aid seem like it'd have been more useful in monetary form so more drones could be bought or something...Expand that across all US aid).
That ALSO ignoring the more general piss-poor US administration handling/push for aid with its clown-show procession of 'We'll send bullets but not explosive...I guess we'll send explosives, but not artillery...We'll send artillery, but not HIMARS...We'll send HIMARS but not tanks...We'll send tanks (well, mostly Bradleys) but not F-16s...' and, of course, the US' administration pants-on-head retarded insistence Ukraine not actually fight a war with the weapons we're sending them to fight a war with.
This isn't a direct 'cost' objection, but it deserves and needs to be raised because it has undoubtedly produced wasted money and time on the US side--ignoring all the absolute fucking and life-losing it does to the Ukrainians actually expected to do shit. The US could be NOT dicking-up for a change by just letting Ukraine fight a war against Russia for us, and the current people in the administration can't even do that much and insist on trying to convince them not to damage oil refineries for what seems to be not damaging poll numbers with higher gas prices.
...
Main point of all this being the money being spent is absolutely worthy of question. It would be even if the administration had a track record of judicious overseas spending and no questionable Ukraine ties. This administration has both of those things.
US citizens bought it.
We should, at very least, have right of first refusal when the government goes to dispose of it. Ukraine can beat us at the auction-block.
/sarcasm
...
Maybe...
Gotta love the blocks by Senators in upping the ante
49ersfootball
Well-known member
United States Senator Steve Daines (R-MT) has blocked the nomination of Danna Jackson, a Native American woman, who was nominated by President Joe Biden for a federal district judgeship, from consideration by the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Here's some details of why Daines is blatantly blocking Jackson:
Biden nominated Jackson back in April. Since then, Daines has held out the possibility of blocking Jackson's nomination because, according to the Senator, Biden "failed to seriously consult with me prior to making this nomination" but that he would evaluate her background & record to see if she was "the right fit for Montana."
Rachel Demke, a spokesperson for Daines, said in a statement released last Wednesday that the Senator reviewed 15 applications to fill the vacancy for the federal court in MT. Daines complains that the White House "never sought out his advice or choosing their nominee."
"Senator Daines believes confirming federal judges with lifetime tenure is among the most important decisions he will make and that these individuals must be trusted to not legislate from the bench and protect the Montana way of life," she said.
The White House fired back on Thursday. White House spokesperson Andrew Bates said in a statement that Daines' team interviewed Jackson more than six months ago, but Daines refused to meet with her.
"This claimed lack of consultation seems to be little more than pretext, and it's shameful that Senator Daines is depriving Montana of the talents of a principled, fair, and impartial jurist like Danna Jackson, who would make history as Montana's first Native American federal judge," Bates said.
Republican Senator Blocks the Nomination of the First Native American to Serve as Federal Judge in Montana
Here's some details of why Daines is blatantly blocking Jackson:
Biden nominated Jackson back in April. Since then, Daines has held out the possibility of blocking Jackson's nomination because, according to the Senator, Biden "failed to seriously consult with me prior to making this nomination" but that he would evaluate her background & record to see if she was "the right fit for Montana."
Rachel Demke, a spokesperson for Daines, said in a statement released last Wednesday that the Senator reviewed 15 applications to fill the vacancy for the federal court in MT. Daines complains that the White House "never sought out his advice or choosing their nominee."
"Senator Daines believes confirming federal judges with lifetime tenure is among the most important decisions he will make and that these individuals must be trusted to not legislate from the bench and protect the Montana way of life," she said.
The White House fired back on Thursday. White House spokesperson Andrew Bates said in a statement that Daines' team interviewed Jackson more than six months ago, but Daines refused to meet with her.
"This claimed lack of consultation seems to be little more than pretext, and it's shameful that Senator Daines is depriving Montana of the talents of a principled, fair, and impartial jurist like Danna Jackson, who would make history as Montana's first Native American federal judge," Bates said.
Republican Senator Blocks the Nomination of the First Native American to Serve as Federal Judge in Montana
mrttao
Well-known member
finally republicans are learning to fight back
Republicans should flatly state that NO nominations will pass ANY committee till all charges against Trump are dropped, and the people who perpetrated this travesty of Justice are unemployed and disbarred.