Biden / Harris Focused Discussion

[Edge-]

Up until just *seconds* before the release of the January jobs report, Fox News was giddy with anticipation of massive job loss...

Vid in link.

Guess Fox hates people having jobs huh? The sycophants who watch were cheering with them, so them saying they want what is best for U.S. is bullcrap.

I have nothing further to add. Except that it's weird seeing Fox News root for Americans to suffer with a bad jobs report. That's unamerican.

[DarkTZeratul]

At least Sean Spicer seems to be taking it on the chin:

[Edge-]

At least Sean Spicer seems to be taking it on the chin:

At least he's got a ton of practice at that.

[Nurasu]

Up until just *seconds* before the release of the January jobs report, Fox News was giddy with anticipation of massive job loss...

Vid in link.

Guess Fox hates people having jobs huh? The sycophants who watch were cheering with them, so them saying they want what is best for U.S. is bullcrap.

Psaki should do a reverse conference and just grill Doocy the whole time about his faulty narrative.

[Edge-]

https://thehill.com/policy/energy-en...ota-in-mineral

The Biden administration has decided that contested minerals beneath a portion of the Missouri River belong to three tribal nations, and not the state of North Dakota.

The legal opinion from Interior Department solicitor Bob Anderson on Friday backing the three tribes represents a turn from the Trump administration, which had backed North Dakota's claims to the materials.

“My decision today upholds decades of existing precedent holding that the Missouri riverbed belongs to the Mandan, Hidatsa, and Arikara (MHA) Nation,” Anderson said in a statement.

In some good news, the Biden administration is siding with local tribal groups in a legal battle over rights to minerals in North Dakota. This follows the Biden administration withdrawing Trump-era legal opinions that argued that the minerals belonged to the state of North Dakota.

Anderson, in the opinion, cited an 1851 treaty and subsequent executive orders saying that the tribes’ territory surrounded the Missouri River.

I'm always a big fan of the US upholding its treaty agreements with native peoples, something that the US government has historically (and still) largely fuckin sucks at.

- - - Updated - - -

https://www.politifact.com/article/2...es-credit-inf/

Republicans keep taking credit for Democratic accomplishments. Democrats really need to up their messaging game and send folks in Florida premade "thank you" notes to send to Democrats for passing the legislation with a specific callout of Republican Reps./Senators from the state that voted against it.

https://www.newsweek.com/texas-rep-t...rrible-1676089

And another, first it was Florida Senator Rick Scott, now TX Rep. Ronny Jackson - yes the former doctor to Trump.

In an email to supporters, Jackson shared a Wichita Falls Times Record News article touting the "instrumental" role that he and Republican Senator Ted Cruz of Texas played in funding the Red River Chloride Control Project, which aims to remove salt from water flowing into a Texas lake that is used as a source for drinking water. However, funding for the project is coming from President Joe Biden's bipartisan infrastructure bill—which was signed into law last year despite Jackson voting against it and denouncing it as "terrible."

Democrats really need to get on printing out millions of thank you cards with reminders of how these folks Reps/Senators voted on the bill, and who is actually responsible for negotiating and passing it.

Spoilers: It wasn't any Republicans.

Thanks, Biden!

[Zan15]

Up until just *seconds* before the release of the January jobs report, Fox News was giddy with anticipation of massive job loss...

Vid in link.

Guess Fox hates people having jobs huh? The sycophants who watch were cheering with them, so them saying they want what is best for U.S. is bullcrap.

Strange how now they are all pushing the ADP report as more accurate than the DOL report.

Well, that's till you tell them that in Dec the official report was +199k and ADP was +807k. ADP was even higher than the adjusted dec amount in the latest report.
Funny how they never mentioned that last month on fox.

[Kaleredar]

Strange how now they are all pushing the ADP report as more accurate than the DOL report.

Is it though?

Remember, for these folks all of the numbers under Obama were fake, until Trump took office, then they were real.

Clearly, they're all back to being fake again! So the only people to trust is a second-hand source from a company that oversees some fraction of America's payroll history.

[Edge-]

https://thehill.com/regulation/labor...ction-projects

The executive order will require the use of PLAs on federal construction projects above $35 million, and it directs the Department of Labor and Office of Management and Budget to lead a training strategy for the nearly 40,000-person contracting workforce on the implementation of the new policy.

New EO: Any government construction contract over $35M will require project labor agreements, which means more support for union labor. Biden is still deeply flawed, but he's delivering on some promises and trying. Not succeeding all the time but hey, I'll take the occasional win over never winning.

[Flarelaine]

https://thehill.com/regulation/labor...ction-projects


New EO: Any government construction contract over $35M will require project labor agreements, which means more support for union labor. Biden is still deeply flawed, but he's delivering on some promises and trying. Not succeeding all the time but hey, I'll take the occasional win over never winning.

And especially over never trying, I assume.

[Milchshake]

And especially over never trying, I assume.

I would be wary of saying "never trying". It plays into the hands of Reactionaries that have being derailing progress for ever.

The executive order builds on an order issued by former President Obama in 2009 to use project labor agreements for federal construction projects.

• Sorry kids, but progress is just going to be a longterm grind.
• Why would people reflexively repeat these reactionary positions ....

[TexasRules]

Interesting Joe Biden article

https://tylerpaper.com/opinion/remem...cdb5cac9b.html

Biden and his fellow Democrats filibustered her nomination, along with several other Bush circuit court nominees, all of whom had majority support in the Senate. Columnist Robert Novak called it “the first full-scale effort in American history to prevent a president from picking the federal judges he wants.” Democrats argued that she was out of the legal mainstream, but Republicans responded that she had written more majority opinions than any other justice on the California Supreme Court — and she was reelected with 76% of the vote, the highest percentage of all the justices on the ballot.

When Democrats derailed her nomination, Bush renominated her in 2005. Brown was eventually confirmed by a vote of 56 to 43 — after Democrats released her and several other Bush nominees in exchange for Republican agreement not to eliminate the filibuster for judicial nominations. Biden voted a second time against her nomination. He never explained why, if Brown was so radical, Democrats let her through but killed 10 other Bush nominees.

The following month, when Justice Sandra Day O’Connor announced her retirement, Brown was on Bush’s shortlist to replace her. She would have been the first Black woman ever nominated to serve as an associate justice of the Supreme Court. But Biden appeared on CBS’s “Face the Nation” to warn that if Bush nominated Brown, she would face a filibuster. “I can assure you that would be a very, very, very difficult fight and she probably would be filibustered,” Biden said. Asked by moderator John Roberts “Wasn’t she just confirmed?,” Biden replied that the Supreme Court is a “totally different ballgame” because “a circuit court judge is bound by stare decisis. They don’t get to make new law.”

So when the filibuster was in place, Biden said he would filibuster a black woman for the supreme court that had just been elected to be a circuit court judge because the supreme court is a totally different ball game. DC Circuit Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson had been the first name thrown out that Biden would nominate for the supreme court. So Biden will get credit for getting the first black woman to be on the supreme court after getting credit for stopping the first black woman previously...even though both were circuit judges.

[Milchshake]

Interesting Joe Biden article

https://tylerpaper.com/opinion/remem...cdb5cac9b.html



So when the filibuster was in place, Biden said he would filibuster a black woman for the supreme court that had just been elected to be a circuit court judge because the supreme court is a totally different ball game. DC Circuit Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson had been the first name thrown out that Biden would nominate for the supreme court. So Biden will get credit for getting the first black woman to be on the supreme court after getting credit for stopping the first black woman previously...even though both were circuit judges.

Sorry dear, but your author is just a bog standard conservative hack.

Marc “Waterboard All The Brutes” Thiessen, for some reason, still has a no-think sinecure with the Washington Post, and he believes he has discovered a “gotcha”:

President Biden wants credit for nominating the first Black woman to the Supreme Court. But here is the shameful irony: As a senator, Biden warned President George W. Bush that if he nominated the first Black woman to serve on the Supreme Court, he would filibuster and kill her nomination.

This isn’t the laziest levels of irony, and there’s certainly no shame involved, but carry on:

The story begins in 2003, when Bush nominated Judge Janice Rogers Brown to serve on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. The D.C. Circuit is considered the country’s second-most important court, and has produced more Supreme Court justices than any other federal court. Brown was immediately hailed as a potential Supreme Court nominee. She was highly qualified, having served for seven years as an associate justice of the California Supreme Court — the first Black woman to do so. She was the daughter and granddaughter of sharecroppers, and grew up in rural Alabama during the dark days of segregation, when her family refused to enter restaurants or theaters with separate entrances for Black customers. She rose from poverty and put herself through college and UCLA law school as a working single mother. She was a self-made African American legal star. But she was an outspoken conservative — so Biden set out to destroy her.

1. Being rejected for a lifetime appointment as an Article III judge isn’t being “destroyed,”
2. Biden, like most Democrats, opposed Brown because she’s a massive kook who thinks the Constitution enacted Ms. Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged. But, yes, thanks for establishing that it’s only Republicans who believe in what they claim to think “identity politics” is.

Things get even dumber from here:

When Democrats derailed her nomination, Bush renominated her in 2005. Brown was eventually confirmed by a vote of 56 to 43 — after Democrats released her and several other Bush nominees in exchange for Republican agreement not to eliminate the filibuster for judicial nominations. Biden voted a second time against her nomination. He never explained why, if Brown was so radical, Democrats let her through but killed 10 other Bush nominees.

So, the Democrat Party let Brown through after all, because they got completely rolled by Republicans by the Gang of 14 deal, agreeing to allow votes on judicial nominations in exchange for an empty promise Republicans never honored? What even is the argument here anymore?

But this is my favorite bit:

The following month, when Justice Sandra Day O’Connor announced her retirement, Brown was on Bush’s shortlist to replace her. She would have been the first Black woman ever nominated to serve as an associate justice of the Supreme Court. But Biden appeared on CBS’s “Face the Nation” to warn that if Bush nominated Brown, she would face a filibuster. “I can assure you that would be a very, very, very difficult fight and she probably would be filibustered,” Biden said. Asked by moderator John Roberts “Wasn’t she just confirmed?,” Biden replied that the Supreme Court is a “totally different ballgame” because “a circuit court judge is bound by stare decisis. They don’t get to make new law.”

What Biden threatened was unprecedented. There has never been a successful filibuster of a nominee for associate justice in the history of the republic. Biden wanted to make a Black woman the first in history to have her nomination killed by filibuster. Bush eventually nominated Samuel A. Alito Jr.

But stanning the guy who cut his teeth lying in defense of torture and the Iraq War. We're doubting your Genuine Concern.

[Belize]

https://tylerpaper.com/opinion/remem...cdb5cac9b.html

Where do you find these tabloid backwater websites

[Poopymonster]

Where do you find these tabloid backwater websites

Texas.

/10backwaterwebsites.

[Edge-]

Interesting Joe Biden article

Miss me with the continued performative faux-outrage from conservatives. Thanks.

[Endus]

Miss me with the continued performative faux-outrage from conservatives. Thanks.

Reminder that they're trying to hold you to a heavily-skewed interpretation of "consistency", when their own lack of consistency is not a flaw, but a virtue to them.

He doesn't give a shit about the inconsistency. He's hoping you might be confused into tripping over your own ethical principles. They're just weaponizing your own principles against you, knowing you can't return fire because they lack any principles to attack in such a way.

[Edge-]

Reminder that they're trying to hold you to a heavily-skewed interpretation of "consistency", when their own lack of consistency is not a flaw, but a virtue to them.

Same shit with Garsetti, Newsom, and now Abrams. Imagine being forced to apologize for an impromptu photo in front of kids after she had been masked when around them, distanced when reading without a mask, and is fully vaccinated and regularly tested.

The media buying into this faux outrage seems to make conservatives think this faux outrage has credibility, and not that media are just looking for clicks because for-profit media necessarily ends with clickbait and yellow journalism.

[Endus]

Same shit with Garsetti, Newsom, and now Abrams. Imagine being forced to apologize for an impromptu photo in front of kids after she had been masked when around them, distanced when reading without a mask, and is fully vaccinated and regularly tested.

The media buying into this faux outrage seems to make conservatives think this faux outrage has credibility, and not that media are just looking for clicks because for-profit media necessarily ends with clickbait and yellow journalism.

The media, frankly, are being fucking morons in the name of false "neutrality". I really think they legitimately don't get it. Falling for a bad-faith attack like this means you're either complicit or gullible as fuck.

[Edge-]

The media, frankly, are being fucking morons in the name of false "neutrality". I really think they legitimately don't get it. Falling for a bad-faith attack like this means you're either complicit or gullible as fuck.

Lots at play here - the return of the "journalist personality" and folks trying to build their brand (often at the behest of the outlet), a huge need to drive traffic for clicks since sub revenue is hard to come by and ads don't pay shit, managing editors and publisher giving garbage direction to journalists who can't really do anything about it if they want to keep their job, an increase in untrained "journalists", the aforementioned "appeal to neutrality" that has absolutely no place in journalism etc.

But most of it filters directly back to for-profit media necessarily resulting in yellow journalism as we've seen in the past. It has to for the sake of the bottom line and continued growth - because if you're not growing you're dying. And the trends set by these outlets set the standard for online journalism in general, with many not-for-profit outlets following suite. Thankfully we've still got some great ones like Propublica who don't lean on this shit, but they're the exception rather than the rule : /

[Xyonai]

The media, frankly, are being fucking morons in the name of false "neutrality". I really think they legitimately don't get it. Falling for a bad-faith attack like this means you're either complicit or gullible as fuck.

The Faux neutrality and the desperate need for civility feels by design. Corporate media isn't as down with Fascism and naked bullshittery as Right Wing media, but it still benefits from a status quo that they don't want challenged, so they can't be seen as 'too hard' on right wing lunatics out of fear of Moderates moving further left and Lefties becoming further radicalized.