Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
Wild that they continue to pretend like $100 million is a lot of money, when the President of the United States literally just created a slush fund that's worth like 20x that.
With the former going to feeding women and infants in need, and the latter going to violent jan 6 felons.
They're accidentally giving the game away. People are starting to put these numbers in perspective and realize every single "we can't afford that" claim has been utter horse shit
Yeah but this was ONE HUNDRED million!
The slush fund was only ONE POINT EIGHT billion.
https://www.sierraclub.org/coal/how-trump-admin-giving-your-money-away-fossil-fuel-companies
The Trump admin has also paid to date $338M of Americans' money to keep coal fired electricity generation plants running, some of which are broken down through the duration of the so-called "emergency". Yet the Republican-controlled Congress hasn't lifted a finger to stop Trump for an expense that's triple the amount here.
WIC = Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children
Republicans: Cut funding for food assistance programs for poor pregnant women and children!
Also Republicans: Why aren't women having as many babies now?
No, no, no, you misunderstand. Republicans want wealthy white women to be forced to have children. They want poor women, children, and men of all races to drop dead as soon as possible.
I think that the current Republicans in power would be okay with poor white women having babies. They just don't want the government to fund anything except (1) wars in countries with natural resources that they can exploit and (2) private corporations in which they own stakes.
The US Republican Party: "Once your children are born, fuck 'em"
"If you're pre-born, you're fine; if you're pre-schooled, you're fucked. Conservatives don't give a shit about you until you reach military age. Then they think you are just fine. Just what they've been looking for.
Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers."
-George Carlin
He got it wrong, a lot of them like them in between as long as they're on an island waiting for them.
Nah, that was covered:
if you're pre-schooled, you're fucked.
This statement right here is Exhibit A for why we need distinct words for figuratively and literally.
Five Republicans voted against the bill, while Democratic Representatives Donald Davis, Adam Gray, Vicente Gonzalez, and Marie Glusenkamp Perez voted for it, ensuring it passed the chamber.
North Carolina, California, Texas, and Washington. Wild
As a Washington resident, that worthless curr has been disappointing me at every turn. Any chance there is to step across the aisle, she does it. She's our version of Fetterman.
They probably thought they were voting to strip women, infants, and children. As in, make them all naked.
Let's just make one big fat headline to list the very few things this government does NOT strip funding for.
Israel.
I'd say the military-industrial complex plus big tech, both of which surely include Israel.
WIC sounds too close to woke, so it has to go.
-- magamushbrainz
The christian party.