The Rose Garden and White House happenings: Listening to voters’ concerns
I know right? Trump is a whiny little two-year old - certainly the whiniest guy I've ever seen - but the Trumpists can't see what is right in front of their faces.
BG9 said:
mtierney said:
Months of distraction, whining and road blocking hurts America more than putting on our collective big boy pants and helping this administration succeed. If it fails, we will all be damaged.
The biggest whiner I've seen so far is Trump with his constant whining Tweets.
....
mtierney said:
for starters:
there are hundreds of positions in government changeover which remain unfilled. Those qualified to take these jobs cannot get approved due to Party infighting. Juvenile and self destructive behavior.
We citizens can help by telling politicians to just do their jobs. Sore losers are tiresome.
You are clearly confusing this administration and the previous administration.
we have similarly thinking federal governments, that believe they can run lean departments so they don't replace personnel as they leave, encourage early retirement, slash funding by up to 35% over 3-4 years...And then a series of (to be expected) natural disasters hits. Not only is coordination of recovery services subsequently a mess (federally funded), it's tediously slow, soul-crushing and community destroying. So an Inquiry is held to investigate. Meanwhile, farmers and young people suicide at an alarming rate. Roads go unrepaired. Domestic/partner violence escalates, fuelled by substance abuse - however the federally funded programs to tackle these (because people move, and use false names etc) have been eradicated, and there are no safe houses anymore; even the emergency service personnel are victims to abuse, suicide and unprovoked attacks both on callouts and within hospitals.
And suddenly, after 7-15 years of successive 'lean governments' the message starts to sink in - you have to invest in social capital because "roads, rates, rubbish" might look like local government business and "farms, education and health" like State business, but actually safety, wellbeing and connection are everyone's concern, starting from the top.
(The funny thing for me is that our federal govt is so busy refusing to fund recovery from Cyclone Debbie - it's federal roads, national parks, federal infrastructure like regional airports and sea ports that's affected the most. If the people who live there aren't working and producing, no taxes flow to the Tax Office. Their MPs are in power not in Opposition!)
mtierney said:
the Times reported what!?
https://mobile.nytimes.com/201...
Trump feels that Maggie Haberman covers him fairly, which is why he's happy to talk to her and calls her with information.
Why don't we (the public) ever see his more pleasant side? What does he hope to gain by always being so surly and belligerent in public? Maybe we liberals wouldn't fear/despise him so much if he weren't always so nasty.
mtierney, what did you think of Shepard Smith's rant about the White House to Chris Wallace on Fox News? I don't see how those two can continue to work there.
Why is it lie after lie after lie? ... The deception, Chris, is mind-boggling. And there are still people who are out there who believe we’re making it up. And one day they’re gonna realize we’re not and look around and go, Where are we, and why are we getting told all these lies?
mtierney said:
Months of distraction, whining and road blocking hurts America more than putting on our collective big boy pants and helping this administration succeed. If it fails, we will all be damaged.
Why should we want the administration to succeed, given the pretty much horrible policies they want to implement? So far, I've heard of very little coming out of this administration that I don't want to fail.
um, what exactly do you want them to succeed at?
The gutting of the dept of education?
The gutting of EPA regulations that keep our water and air clean?
The gutting of the State Department so that we no longer have international power?
Taking away health insurance from 20+ million people?
I can go on, of course.
Which one of those do you want them to succeed at?
mtierney said:
Months of distraction, whining and road blocking hurts America more than putting on our collective big boy pants and helping this administration succeed. If it fails, we will all be damaged.
Putting aside the significant elements of Trump team ineptitude and lack of planning that have contributed to the slow pace of staffing - as discussed in articles quoted above but which don't fit your theme so you don't mention them - is the staffing problem obstructing any significant item of the Trump agenda? The Wall? Tariffs? Tax reform? A new health insurance law? Please explain. I mean, the guy's the greatest knee jerk blamer in the history of the office yet I don't recalling him blaming his failings to date on empty job slots at the Department of State (which he wants to shrink anyway)
mtierney said:
for starters:
there are hundreds of positions in government changeover which remain unfilled. Those qualified to take these jobs cannot get approved due to Party infighting. Juvenile and self destructive behavior.
We citizens can help by telling politicians to just do their jobs. Sore losers are tiresome.
Yeah you're right. I intended to quote mtierney and something went wrong. Please ignore. I'll edit the post.
drummerboy said:
I think we're confused.
What?
jimmurphy said:
drummerboy said:
yeah. whatever happened to that "peace dividend" after the Cold War ended?
dave said:
It's even easier than that. Stop spending so much on weapons and spend more on the health and education of your own people. Duh.
That is the very definition of the Peace Dividend. Devoting resources for the benefit of society.
Are you enjoying your Medicare coverage?
there is vacant and there is vacant..,
From a Politico item a couple of months ago..
"Having a high number of unfilled positions across federal agencies is not a catastrophic risk in the short term, experts say, because while political appointees await Senate confirmation, the administration has the power to appoint acting individuals to executive agency roles.
In other words, while the positions are unfilled, they are not vacant and are almost always occupied by career people who are chosen by the president from a narrowly-defined pool of individuals, while the president's nominee is vetted by the Senate.
But experts warn the greatest risk in unfilled roles lies in handling crisis situations or enacting long-term policies."
Having a businessman in the Oval Office" - especially one who has zero chance for bipartisan cooperation, means it is a different process. DJT is learning on the job. In the best interest of our country, everyone better suck it up and find a way to work together.
You should have quoted more of the article, which clearly blamed Trump for failing to nominate people for the vast majority of open positions and also for alienating Republicans who might be available to fill positions. Indeed, the article noted that at the time 22 of the 24 people he put up were confirmed.
Also, there is vacant and mentally vacant. In the past, Trump has blamed Democrats for blocking positions for which he failed to nominate people, like ambassador to Britain.
mtierney said:
there is vacant and there is vacant..,
From a Politico item a couple of months ago..
"Having a high number of unfilled positions across federal agencies is not a catastrophic risk in the short term, experts say, because while political appointees await Senate confirmation, the administration has the power to appoint acting individuals to executive agency roles.
In other words, while the positions are unfilled, they are not vacant and are almost always occupied by career people who are chosen by the president from a narrowly-defined pool of individuals, while the president's nominee is vetted by the Senate.
But experts warn the greatest risk in unfilled roles lies in handling crisis situations or enacting long-term policies."
Having a businessman in the Oval Office" - especially one who has zero chance for bipartisan cooperation, means it is a different process. DJT is learning on the job. In the best interest of our country, everyone better suck it up and find a way to work together.
And a lot of positions that don't require Senate approval remain unfilled, for instance much of the State Dept.
mtierney said:
there is vacant and there is vacant..,
From a Politico item a couple of months ago..
From an article in today's NYT:
President Trump has filled far fewer top jobs in cabinet or cabinet-level agencies than President Barack Obama had at this point in his presidency.
This is largely because Mr. Trump has been exceptionally slow in nominating people to serve in leadership positions below the secretary level, according to a New York Times analysis. Mr. Trump has announced 36 percent of these positions, compared with 78 percent for Mr. Obama over the same period.
“It’s always been slow, but Trump is running at a subglacial speed,” said Paul C. Light, a professor at New York University who specializes in political appointments.
The White House says Senate Democrats are to blame for the vacancies, and it is true they have used obstruction tactics to delay the confirmation of some nominees. David Malpass, for example, still has not been confirmed even though he was nominated in March for the Treasury’s under secretary for international affairs.
On average, however, among the group included in The Times’s analysis, Mr. Trump’s nominees have only taken nine days longer to be confirmed than Mr. Obama’s.
It is also true that Mr. Trump has taken longer to nominate these senior officials. Many departments have only one confirmed position — the top job. Ten of the 15 cabinet agencies are operating without a deputy secretary, the second highest job in an agency. Several nominations for the No. 2 spots did not happen until after Mr. Trump was in office for 100 days, and some have yet to be announced.
“Yes, delay tactics are slowing down the process, but President Trump should have more nominees in the pipeline,” said Anne Joseph O’Connell, a law professor at the University of California, Berkeley, who specializes in political staffing of federal agencies.
If only:
busi·ness·like
ˈbiznəsˌlīk/
adjective
adjective: businesslike; adjective: business-like
(of a person) carrying out tasks efficiently without wasting time or being distracted by personal or other concerns; systematic and practical.
mtierney said:
for starters:
there are hundreds of positions in government changeover which remain unfilled. Those qualified to take these jobs cannot get approved due to Party infighting. Juvenile and self destructive behavior.
We citizens can help by telling politicians to just do their jobs. Sore losers are tiresome.
This is not the fault of the 'losers' if you're talking about the Democrats. Yes, it is partly 'party infighting', but it's the GOP that isn't united. They have the presidency and the majority in both houses, so that's where to cast blame for inaction.
I've been avoiding arguing in this tread. But the following will likely not generate a response, so I won't be arguing. 
But I'd just like to say that anyone who may have to be concerned about the expense of long-term end of life care should be grateful for all of the "sore losers" who are putting pressure on elected officials to preserve Medicaid.
If Trump "succeeds" at passing Trumpcare and Medicaid is cut, people who need long-term nursing care will be wiped out financially (that is, if they can even afford it).
ml1 said:
I've been avoiding arguing in this tread. But the following will likely not generate a response, so I won't be arguing.
But I'd just like to say that anyone who may have to be concerned about the expense of long-term end of life care should be grateful for all of the "sore losers" who are putting pressure on elected officials to preserve Medicaid.
If Trump "succeeds" at passing Trumpcare and Medicaid is cut, people who need long-term nursing care will be wiped out financially (that is, if they can even afford it).
It may happen another way and another time, but Trumpcare is dead for now.
ridski said:
It may happen another way and another time, but Trumpcare is dead for now.
Thanks in large part to the "sore losers"
Trump on Afghanistan today: "I want to find out why we've been there for 17 years."
Maybe he could go interview some Afghani survivors of that dismal failure.
dave23 said:
Trump on Afghanistan today: "I want to find out why we've been there for 17 years."
Yes, why?
lord_pabulum said:
dave23 said:
Trump on Afghanistan today: "I want to find out why we've been there for 17 years."
Yes, why?
Because we don't learn from history.
mtierney said:
MOL already does just this...
https://www.facebook.com/marie...
The post you've pasted here doesn't seem to be public.
slight thread drift: have you seen this report? (The one referred to within the article, where only Putin's translator was present, breaking protocol? Note that this isn't a nicety, it's actually a way to verify information integrity. )
http://www.abc.net.au/news/201...
Edited to correct grammar
For Sale
-
REVO luggage $100
More info
Garage Sales
-
Huge Garage Sale Sale Date: May 4, 2024
More info
Free Items
Rentals
Advertisement
oh look. You have told us the opposite of the truth once again.