Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy
No. of Recommendations: 4
No. of Recommendations: 4
No. of Recommendations: 0
Supposedly they are doing construction of additional white house security "features" below ground. I suspect it will stand, but be redecorated into something more tasteful and less gaudy.
Alan
No. of Recommendations: 6
Sweet!
The rapist/pedophile gets a Ballroom! Look out ladies.
Meanwhile Americans continue to suffer...
US job growth in February has been revised down from an initially reported -92,000 jobs to a total loss of -133,000 jobs.
This marks the biggest monthly US job loss since December 2020.
No. of Recommendations: 6
Keep in mind, this is just a planning commission approval.
It does nothing to address the judge’s order. Congress still hasn’t approved funding for the building.
—Peter
No. of Recommendations: 2
It does nothing to address the judge’s order. Congress still hasn’t approved funding for the building.
The GOP will pass the Senate plan to fund DHS. That will be a bill that clears the 60 vote threshold.
After that, they can use budget reconciliation in the Senate and in that case they don't need 60 votes. Merely 51, which they have.
The House will slip in $1.00 for the ballroom 'with the balance of funding to be provided by private donations, managed by the executive branch'. All the lawsuits and delays disappear at that point.
I'd love for someone to explain why we should continue to host state dinners and important diplomatic functions outside under a tent and in the mud.
No. of Recommendations: 4
I'd love for someone to explain why we should continue to host state dinners and important diplomatic functions outside under a tent and in the mud.
Because it is President Trump’s idea to to bring dignitaries out from the rain and mud
to entertain in a lovely ballroom American style..TDS sick people says nono.
No. of Recommendations: 10
I'd love for someone to explain why we should continue to host state dinners and important diplomatic functions outside under a tent and in the mud.
We don't have to. But that's up to Congress to decide. If Congress doesn't allocate funds for something, it doesn't matter whether that's a good idea or a bad idea - they haven't allocated the funds, and the President doesn't just get to decide that he gets to ignore that. Similarly, if Congress hasn't authorized the acceptance of outside funds for something like this, it doesn't matter whether that's a good idea or a bad idea - they haven't authorized the alternative funding mechanism, and the President doesn't get to just decide that he gets to ignore that.
No. of Recommendations: 4
Because it is President Trump’s idea to to bring dignitaries out from the rain and mud
to entertain in a lovely ballroom American style..TDS sick people says nono.
Pretty much. This same mentality basically would also leave the wing demolished and a construction eyesore in place for years.
No. of Recommendations: 4
We don't have to. But that's up to Congress to decide. If Congress doesn't allocate funds for something, it doesn't matter whether that's a good idea or a bad idea - they haven't allocated the funds, and the President doesn't just get to decide that he gets to ignore that. Similarly, if Congress hasn't authorized the acceptance of outside funds for something like this, it doesn't matter whether that's a good idea or a bad idea - they haven't authorized the alternative funding mechanism, and the President doesn't get to just decide that he gets to ignore that.
So the Executive branch gets zero say in how any of the Executive branch's property, building and assets is decided. That's certainly one way to look at it. Or one could argue that renovations are a routine function of any entity that manages PPE (Property, plants and equipment) as a part of normal asset management.
It's amazing how quickly the democrats rally around the "the Constitution" when their guy isn't in office but then turn around rally around "I've got a phone and a pen, and if Congress won't act, I will" when their guy is.
Objections to the ballroom and event space renovations are largely asinine.
No. of Recommendations: 19
So the Executive branch gets zero say in how any of the Executive branch's property, building and assets is decided. That's certainly one way to look at it. Or one could argue that renovations are a routine function of any entity that manages PPE (Property, plants and equipment) as a part of normal asset management.
Hardly. The executive branch has a lot of say in how the U.S. government's property, building and assets are decided - because Congress has provided for that in statute. And they provide a budget for managing U.S. government property, all over the country and the world. Congress has authorized routine functions to operate and maintain property.
What Congress has not provided for is funding (either direct appropriation or authorized outside sources) for this project.
I mean, think about it in terms of what you described. Suppose you own a building, and have retained an asset management company. You obviously will delegate to that asset management company the ability to do routine repairs, maintenance, and ordinary upkeep - but you won't have given them the right to tear down 30% of your apartment building and build something twice the size, right? That's something that you would say is a decision that you get to make, not the asset management company.
It's amazing how quickly the democrats rally around the "the Constitution" when their guy isn't in office but then turn around rally around "I've got a phone and a pen, and if Congress won't act, I will" when their guy is.
No more amazing than how quickly the Republicans criticize the "if Congress won't act, I will" when their guy isn't in office, but then turn around and rally around acting without approval when their guy is. It's a common feature of politics.
Objections to the ballroom and event space renovations are largely asinine.
They're not. This is Congress' call, not the President's - for a lot of very good reasons.
No. of Recommendations: 4
Because it is President Trump’s idea to to bring dignitaries out from the rain and mud
to entertain in a lovely ballroom American style..TDS sick people says nono.
Pretty much. This same mentality basically would also leave the wing demolished and a construction eyesore in place for years.
Ah, now I see. In nitwitville, the timeline for starting this urgent national project begins AFTER Trump bulldozed the White House just because he fucking felt like it, and whaddaya gonna do about it now, losers?
Crikey but you people are cult-stroked.
John Waters, everybody's favorite weird director, carried a sign at the No Kings protests last weekend that was just perfect:
TRUMP RUINED BAD TASTE
No. of Recommendations: 17
I'd love for someone to explain why we should continue to host state dinners and important diplomatic functions outside under a tent and in the mud.
I'd love for you to explain why the President should ignore laws on the books after having sworn an oath to the Constitution, and why "We the People" should allow him to repeatedly do so, and why you're a fan of both. Please answer all three separately. Thank you for your attention to this matter.
No. of Recommendations: 5
Objections to the ballroom and event space renovations are largely asinine.
LOL...it's the ludicrous gilded ballroom that is asinine.
No. of Recommendations: 5
Supposedly they are doing construction of additional white house security "features" below ground.
sanomarker: 'They' will use "necessary security and military upgrades & modifications" to shift construction costs onto the taxpayers backs.
No. of Recommendations: 5
Sweet!
The rapist/pedophile gets a Ballroom! Look out ladies.
aka, "The PedoPalace"
No. of Recommendations: 4
sanomarker: 'They' will use "necessary security and military upgrades & modifications" to shift construction costs onto the taxpayers backs.
That is my suspicion as well: shift the actual cost on to the Defense budget, by claiming a defense use for the building, so those several hundred Million supposedly "donated", go directly into Trump the Incredible's pocket.
Steve
No. of Recommendations: 6
I'd love for someone to explain why we should continue to host state dinners and important diplomatic functions outside under a tent and in the mud.
I already explained that to you, mud is just hyperbole. I lived in a place that would put up a huge tent structure for functions. I explained how I wandered into it a few times - it helped if you wore a Tuxedo. It was actually great because you could put up an open air concert there too. Tom Jones was there for a birthday bash. Beach Boys played, The Bangles. It was big, and if you got tired of the tent structure you could wander the waterfront. The tent structure they had was absolutely magnificent on the inside. Tent structures would be just fine for all those functions.
No. of Recommendations: 1
"The PedoPalace"
Uh, which one(s)? Spankee knows so many....
