Tangent Thread - P&R Edition

Decoy73 said:
If it happens in everything, name some examples.
Click to expand...
You can’t possibly be serious…….

The term is Quid Pro Quo.

-A politician selecting a donor to hold an office

-the son of a vice president holding job he’s not qualified for

-the appointment of a person to a board that will make problems “go away”.  Political hire.

-Going with a TikTok ban because your silicon Valley donors tell you that’s what you should do

-Making a donation to an org to get off naughty list or avoid confrontation 

I’m not on expert in things political, but I have a hard time believing the governor can pull/reduce/alter funding on his own.  If it’s like most other things, it requires bills and approvals.  Also known as “checks and balances”.  
 

If he introduces funding cuts because he doesn’t like choices they are making….so what?  They’d still need to be approved.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
gobiggergoredder said:
You can’t possibly be serious…….

The term is Quid Pro Quo.

-A politician selecting a donor to hold an office

-the son of a vice president holding job he’s not qualified for

-the appointment of a person to a board that will make problems “go away”.  Political hire.

-Going with a TikTok ban because your silicon Valley donors tell you that’s what you should do

-Making a donation to an org to get off naughty list or avoid confrontation 

I’m not on expert in things political, but I have a hard time believing the governor can pull/reduce/alter funding on his own.  If it’s like most other things, it requires bills and approvals.  Also known as “checks and balances”.  
 

If he introduces funding cuts because he doesn’t like choices they are making….so what?  They’d still need to be approved.
Click to expand...
you mean like Jared and Ivanka..??  correct..??  Thanks for blinking that "selective" eye...    :blink:  

 
twofittyonred said:
you mean like Jared and Ivanka..??  correct..??  Thanks for blinking that "selective" eye...    :blink:  
Click to expand...
you can use whatever example you want.  It changes nothing and just proves the point.  Thanks for playing.

edit:  If you think I’m picking sides (R or D), you may want to look at Ricketts TikTok comments.  I’m an independent.  You’re attempting to shift the focus of the discussion away from the content.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
gobiggergoredder said:
You can’t possibly be serious…….

The term is Quid Pro Quo.

-A politician selecting a donor to hold an office

-the son of a vice president holding job he’s not qualified for

-the appointment of a person to a board that will make problems “go away”.  Political hire.

-Going with a TikTok ban because your silicon Valley donors tell you that’s what you should do

-Making a donation to an org to get off naughty list or avoid confrontation 

I’m not on expert in things political, but I have a hard time believing the governor can pull/reduce/alter funding on his own.  If it’s like most other things, it requires bills and approvals.  Also known as “checks and balances”.  
 

If he introduces funding cuts because he doesn’t like choices they are making….so what?  They’d still need to be approved.
Click to expand...
I'm familiar with the term.  IIRC a recent POTUS was impeached for such a thing.  @twofittyonred called it criminal and you mocked him for it.  You seem to want to rationalize it because it's widespread.  

 
Decoy73 said:
I'm familiar with the term.  IIRC a recent POTUS was impeached for such a thing.  @twofittyonred called it criminal and you mocked him for it.  You seem to want to rationalize it because it's widespread.  
Click to expand...
Why the two of you continue to deflect is beyond me.  
 

What crime has been committed?  Because you don’t like “how life works” doesn’t make it a crime.  

Side note:  an impeachment is not a criminal trial.  It’s a political side show.  And to go even further, I believe the two impeachments were “abuse of power” & “incitement of an insurrection”.  I believe the backbone of the abuse of power was around alleged Russian influence in election.  Neither were upheld by the Senate.

 
gobiggergoredder said:
Why the two of you continue to deflect is beyond me.  
 

What crime has been committed?  Because you don’t like “how life works” doesn’t make it a crime.  

Side note:  an impeachment is not a criminal trial.  It’s a political side show.  And to go even further, I believe the two impeachments were “abuse of power” & “incitement of an insurrection”.  I believe the backbone of the abuse of power was around alleged Russian influence in election.  Neither were upheld by the Senate.
Click to expand...
Not to get into politics, I agree this isn't the place.

But regarding the bold: the first was "abuse of power" because he allegedly threatened to withhold aide from Ukraine unless the new president there promised to open an investigation into the POTUS' political rivals.

 
Lorewarn said:
I am offended that my post, noble in its nature to respect the thread topic, got moved into the tangent thread. It's a thankless job telling all the dummies to knock it off.
Click to expand...


I do appreciate your effort.  It just wouldn't have made any sense to leave it where it was, with all the context missing.

 
Lorewarn said:
I am offended that my post, noble in its nature to respect the thread topic, got moved into the tangent thread. It's a thankless job telling all the dummies to knock it off.
Click to expand...
I think you’re right.  I just have a strong opinion on people presenting their opions as facts.

Politics are trash.  But saying something is criminal because you don’t like how sausage is made is lazy and stupid.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top