• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.
  3. Please note there is a new rule regarding the posting of videos. It reads, "Post a summary of the videos you post . An exception can be made for music videos.". Unless you are simply sharing music, please post a summary, or the gist, of the video you wish to share.
  4. There have been some changes in the Life Stages section involving the following forums: Roaring 20s, Terrific Thirties, Fabulous Forties, and Golden Eagles. They are changed to Gen Z, Millennials, Gen X, and Golden Eagles will have a slight change.
  5. CF Staff, Angels and Ambassadors; ask that you join us in praying for the world in this difficult time, asking our Holy Father to stop the spread of the virus, and for healing of all affected.

Wolf Blitzer to Nancy Pelosi: Why Won’t You Take Trump Up On Stimulus?

Discussion in 'General Politics' started by GOD Shines Forth!, Oct 13, 2020.

  1. GOD Shines Forth!

    GOD Shines Forth! My Weakness for His Strength Supporter

    +800
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Private
    Whew boy! Just the other day Jake Tapper experienced a glitch in the Matrix, defending the Republicans' CONSTITUTIONAL right to appoint ACB to the SC. Now we have Wolf Blitzer almost pleading with Nancy Pelosi to take Trump up on his latest stimulus offer:

    PELOSI INTERVIEW GETS HEATED: YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT



    Pelosi had the chutzpah to tell Blitzer he was an apologist for the....wait for it...REPUBLICANS! What’s going on here, Wolf, am I dreamin'?
     
    We teamed up with Faith Counseling. Can they help you today?
  2. DavidPT

    DavidPT Well-Known Member

    +1,200
    United States
    Christian
    Married

    If Trump loses the election, eventually CNN will lose a good portion of whatever viewership it presently has. Before Trump came on the scene, there were literally ppl who had zero interest in politics whatsoever. I should know, because I'm one of them. If Trump were to lose the election, so would ppl, like me, eventually lose interest in politics altogether. And since CNN has basically become a network covering mostly politics, why would persons, like me, even care to tune into it all once Trump is no longer President? Biden is ultra boring, and so is Harris. Trump isn't.
     
    Last edited: Oct 14, 2020
  3. St_Worm2

    St_Worm2 Member Supporter

    +41,416
    United States
    Calvinist
    Married
    Hello @God Shines Forth!, the very same kind of thing happened awhile back during a George Stephanopoulos interview with our Speaker. She repeated a lie about President Trump (that had been created by Adam Schiff) as if it was the truth, and Stephanopoulos called her on it during the interview, and just like the Wolf Blitzer interview above, so was none too happy about it.

    I know she is pretty old (in her 80's if memory serves), but something else happened during a Stephanopoulos interview just a few days ago that actually has me worried for her (she appears to freeze about 1 min 38 sec into the interview below, right after George speaks again, and then her brain reboots and she starts over, like the first part of the interview that she'd just participated in never happened :eek:)


    --David
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • List
  4. miamited

    miamited Ted Supporter

    +4,752
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    Hi GSF,

    I listened to the report. Speaker Pelosi says the main issue in accepting what the president's team has laid on the table, is how the $1.8T will be spent. She does, however, bring up some good arguments concerning other issues that the president's proposal doesn't offer. While everyone would enjoy spending a $1,200 stimulus check. How far does that really go in sustaining a family for a month...two months...six months? She makes the point that she'd like to get a bill passed that will not only give families some small amount of walking around money right now, but also have provisions for other expenses that, especially young families, also have in dealing with this crisis.

    If you got $1,200 today, how long would that pay your rent, buy your groceries and pay your utilities? I don't know where you live, but having lived for quite a while in Miami, Fl, I can tell you that $1,200 wouldn't even cover one month's rent for most people. Let alone provide food and utilities for a family. The other issue, and I have discussed this with my son, is that not everyone needs this $1,200. My son's job moved him to work from home, but he hasn't missed a fairly decent paycheck since all of this started. He makes good money working for a fairly stable company and his expenses have actually been reduced because he doesn't have to drive to work every day. He doesn't have to buy lunch at a restaurant or on-site cafeteria. If he had children of age, his only child is a 4 month old newborn, he wouldn't need child care because he's home all the time.

    So here he is, making good money, always making good money throughout all of this, and why does he need a $1,200 stimulus check (although his was actually only $600 because of his income level). He does agree with me. So, I think there are some bugs to be worked out.

    Yes, we certainly need to identify those people who have been affected financially by this crises, and for those people, any stimulus should give them enough financial aid to really sustain them for the long haul. Many people have been out of work now for 5 months. The whole reason we're here is that the first stimulus didn't provide enough help for those specific families.

    So in closing, I'll ask you, just as speaker Pelosi asked Wolfe: Do you know what's in the president's stimulus bill and how it's going to be spent and who is going to go to? Is Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos going to get a stimulus check? What about those who have kept their jobs and are still working and have been working throughout all of this. Will they be getting a stimulus check? If so; why?

    Just throwing around this seemingly yuge amount of money, $1.8T, didn't work for the long haul unemployed last time for very long and probably isn't going to work well for the long haul unemployed this time. I'm retired. My income's fairly stable. What do I need a stimulus check for? But I got one!

    Just for numbers, the unemployment rate is sitting right about 8%. It was 3.5% before the pandemic. Do you know how many people that is that really need the help? However, there is a bright side. It used to be nearly 14% and so a lot of people have returned to work in some capacity. But as the speaker points out, if your school district isn't having in school attendance, how does a working parent provide for them?

    God bless,
    Ted
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Useful Useful x 1
    • List
  5. dqhall

    dqhall Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,610
    United States
    Christian
    Single
    Why didn’t Trump agree to the Democrats compromise stimulus plan? Mitch said it would be up for negotiation after the election, then Congress left for a recess.
     
  6. Dave G.

    Dave G. Well-Known Member

    +4,221
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    Because the Dems always but always stuff their bills with pork spending for liberal organizations or arts or whatever, that has nothing to do with the issue at hand. Always have always will. Then cry they need more money for the people.
     
  7. Hazelelponi

    Hazelelponi Well-Known Member Supporter

    +5,652
    United States
    Baptist
    Married
    Mrs. Pelosi spoke about child care, well if someone's not working they don't need child care in a stimulus package.

    My husband is unemployed; his unemployment ran out now, but with the last stimulus package he was getting unemployment + extra that came from the federal government so his income wasn't much below what he was earning...

    That targeted those who were directly affected by COVID business closings, not everyone in the country even though everyone got a check for 1200 which was used for an economic stimulus.

    Expanded unemployment, tax garnishment relief and more is what these stimulus packages help with.

    Also, small business owners get help as well (or got help this probably ended at the same time unemployment did) in order they don't have to close their doors when life goes back to normal after the pandemic is over (via vaccine etc)

    Pelosi seems to resent help for small businesses or affected businesses, and wants to add in things that are completely unnecessary, like child care.

    If she signed on to what's being offered, it actually would help to do things like expand unemployment for a while longer... right now those who are unemployed due to COVID aren't getting anything, and haven't since July.

    She's opposing real help for affected individuals because she can't load it up with unnecessary pork.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • List
  8. miamited

    miamited Ted Supporter

    +4,752
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    Hi hazelelponi,

    Thanks for your response:
    Which is why the stimulus package needs to be more than just a $1,200 check. What about the scenario where parents are working, or out looking for work, but the children are in an area where they still haven't gone back to school room classes? I'm getting emails at least every other day that a new case has been identified in my children's school. Every time they identify someone, then all of that students close desk mates are put on 2 week quarantine at home. Who's at home to take care of these children for the two weeks? Who pays for someone to be at home with them while they're quarantined? It's an extra expense made necessary by the pandemic and a pandemic stimulus package should give some consideration for just such a scenario. I'm telling you, two, three times a week I'm getting these emails and they all end with: "If your child is identified as at risk through close contact, you will be notified by phone call from the school administrator" So far, all those parents who have been personally notified that their child was in close proximity, are 'required' to keep their child quarantined at home for 2 weeks.

    Yes, there are people out of work that need help financially, but there are also people at work who may find themselves needing additional financial support. I think that's what speaker Pelosi is talking about. This issue is more than just, "Well, let's just send everybody a check!" Further, if a breadwinner is out of work, $1,200 just isn't going to cut it to keep the family rolling along for the next 4-5 months. That's literally what one would call a drop in the bucket. Now, because so many families can't pay their living expenses, landlords are getting jammed up and the courts are telling them that they can't evict past due tenants during this time.

    I've been a landlord for 30 years and it isn't a real money maker for most of the mom and pop landlords. How do they go 5 months making mortgage payments for a property that they're not getting income for? They need financial assistance and $1,200 isn't going to help them for 4-5 months either.

    So, there are all sorts of scenarios where people today need financial assistance based solely on actions created by this health pandemic. Mailing $1,200 checks to half of the nation that doesn't need any assistance and the other half that needs a lot more than that, honestly doesn't 'fix' the problem.

    You then wrote:
    I'm listening. What are those 'unnecessary pork' additions? Do you know what the president's plan is? I mean the complete nuts and bolts of the plan? Do you know what speaker Pelosi's plan is? The nuts and bolts of her plan? I'm listening.

    God bless,
    Ted
     
  9. miamited

    miamited Ted Supporter

    +4,752
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    Hi all,

    Two people have commented in this thread that the Democrats always load their spending bills with pork. Now, I don't follow the daily workings of the government enough to know whether or not that is a problem or whether or not it is a problem more associated with one party over the other. However, I do know that 'generalizations' are rarely true in all cases.

    So, I'm putting it out there. Let's get specific with the bills that both sides are proposing to alleviate the financial suffering of the nation. What is the pork in both bills? What are the differences between the two bills. What are speaker Pelosi's hold backs concerning the president's plan and what is the president's hold back concerning the speaker's plan. After all, we all know that both sides have drawn up financial aid bills to accommodate this crises. It's only been a week since Trump said he wasn't going to do any more work on a stimulus package and 'ordered' Republicans to quit trying to negotiate a bill in the legislature. Now, all of sudden, he's got this 'magic' bill all ready to go and wants to harangue the Democrats about not passing it.

    One thing I do know. One thing that I have learned in these last 3.5 years under the leadership of Trump. His proposals are rarely well thought out. Despite his insistence that he's smarter than everyone else, the evidence shows that he usually isn't and seems to abhor taking any sound advice from people who are more knowledgeable on a subject than he is.

    So, any taker?

    God bless,
    Ted
     
  10. Arc F1

    Arc F1 Let the righteous man arise from slumber Supporter

    +1,781
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    It's property tax season. That 1200 sure would help.

    A wise move would be one of the parties saying fine let's just approve payments for the people and work the rest out later. It's obvious that we aren't the priority.
     
  11. GOD Shines Forth!

    GOD Shines Forth! My Weakness for His Strength Supporter

    +800
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Private
    Hi Ted, thanks for your comments. You are very good at substance with most of your posts. I'm reading this thread backwards so I saw a later post of yours first, which suggested an honest side-by-side of the parties' bills. Can we ever know the truth from the DC Labyrinth? I doubt it. I admit initially finding this fascinating to watch from a media angle. Nancy seemed flummoxed that Wolf was challenging her. So much theater going on it is hard to get to the truth.
     
  12. GOD Shines Forth!

    GOD Shines Forth! My Weakness for His Strength Supporter

    +800
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Private
    I saw that "freeze". My thought was that she heard something in her earpiece that threw her off?
     
  13. miamited

    miamited Ted Supporter

    +4,752
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    Hi david,

    I listened to your video evidence. Can you be more specific about the 'lie' that she said about Trump that George 'called her on'? The only question that I heard George ask her was about taking the weapons she had mentioned out of her quiver. He asked: "But to be clear you're not taking any arrows out of your quiver? You're not ruling anything out?"

    As far as her being 'stuck', I think there was a problem with a computer and she may not have heard what George said. So, she seemed to not address his question. However, she did, in the very beginning of the interview mention having weapons in their quiver and she wasn't going to discuss them. So, even had George's question been heard by her, she likely would have just responded with something like, "That's right." She is not taking any of the arrows out of the quiver at this point and she isn't ruling anything out."

    However, as to her being called out for some lie she spoke concerning Trump, I didn't see any question from George or statement of correction or clarification made. Perhaps you'd humor me and give me the time mark.

    God bless,
    Ted
     
  14. Hazelelponi

    Hazelelponi Well-Known Member Supporter

    +5,652
    United States
    Baptist
    Married
    On the 9th the GOP compromised on a stimulus package that is 1.8 Trillion dollars, which according to the GOP includes money to the states (300 billion) for unemployment compensation, and help for small businesses though I admit not knowing all the fine print, along with the economic stimulus checks of 1200...

    It's not all the Dems are asking, which is 2.2 Trillion and includes things like childcare, according to Pelosi, but it's not nothing either.

    We also have to look at the fact cities and businesses are beginning to open back up, so less is needed than back in May, although some is most certainly, and the GOP proposal doesn't sound like a bad compromise.

    If Congress can't get together in the Spirit of compromise for the good of the people, and hammer out a more in-depth stimulus package later, then people just sit with nothing and it's not their fault all this is happening, and for all intents and purposes the GOP is trying to find a middle ground here, and the dems in congress saying my way or nothing.

    As a beside, enjoying the conversation with you, thank you as well.
     
  15. miamited

    miamited Ted Supporter

    +4,752
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    Hi hazelelponi,

    Thanks for your response:
    Congress probably can. I'm not sure this is about Congress not being able to hammer out a stimulus package. I think this is about the president trying to 'be' Congress. A week ago the full legislature was working on a stimulus package. Trump swooped in and said, "STOP!!!" So, all the Republicans pulled back.

    From what I'm finding, there are actually three proposals going. Trump's, which seems to just be about sending out a check to everyone. McConnell's, who wants to fund payroll assistance with no personal checks. Pelosi's, which wants checks, childcare and a couple of other helps.

    Stimulus package negotiations: A three-way battle of wills. What's happening today

    White House's $1.8 trillion stimulus package offer: Everything in it, including a $1,200 check

    According to what I'm reading in these articles, it really isn't just the Democrats that are holding the stimulus up. The second article claims that McConnell doesn't see anything happening before the election. It also states that the general consensus among Republican legislators is that they don't want to spend over $1T for a stimulus package. So, from what I'm reading, even if the bill is taken up for a vote, it might not pass because it's not what either side wants...but it's what the president wants.

    So, despite Wolfe's position that speaker Pelosi is the one holding up the stimulus, that may not actually be true.

    God bless,
    Ted
     
  16. Hazelelponi

    Hazelelponi Well-Known Member Supporter

    +5,652
    United States
    Baptist
    Married

    I think the president wants to keep the numbers low for now, while still offering help, likely same with McConnell..

    There is criticism from the electorate on overspending - I'm huge on fiscal responsibility/ fiscal conservatism myself - the COVID expenditures is something beyond anything this country can actually afford, we are throwing around trillions like water..

    While understandably people need relief, the government imposed all this on us to begin with, it is to them to make sure they didn't just create a two class state (extremely wealthy and extremely poor)..

    So I think during an election there is a balance they want to strike that holds a middle ground here, while on the other side the dems see no amount of money to be enough, even though both sides often spend irresponsibly..

    There's just a line that must be walked here, and when no one is willing to give a little to the other side, it doesn't work in Congress. But Trump approved the 1.8 T, so there's that. I do see that as a middle ground here...
     
  17. St_Worm2

    St_Worm2 Member Supporter

    +41,416
    United States
    Calvinist
    Married
    Hi Ted, the video I posted was from about a week ago, but I posted that one because I was worried about her health (because of the somewhat extreme "senior moment" that she had during that broadcast).

    The repeated lie happened back during the time that the Ukrainian mess was all we were hearing about on the news. In it, she claims that Trump said something, and George interrupts her and said, "no, he didn't" (then it went back and forth a bit, but George was correct). It's almost like she'd heard the lie told so often that she had begun to believe it was true. I'll look for the video and pass it along when I find it.

    Sorry about the confusion!

    --David
     
  18. St_Worm2

    St_Worm2 Member Supporter

    +41,416
    United States
    Calvinist
    Married
    I hope that's all it was!! My question is why did she act like she was starting the interview over again (almost like it never happened)?

    --David
     
  19. jgarden

    jgarden Senior Veteran

    +3,048
    Methodist
    1) No Supreme Court Justice in the history of the nation has been nominated after July in an Election year in an effort not to "politicize" appointments to the 3rd branch of government!

    2) In 2016, the Republican Senate refused to even meet with President Obama's Supreme Court nominee, Merrick Garland, because they claimed justices couldn't be appointed in an Election year - the opposite argument they're currently forwarding 4 years later!

    3) Pelosi and the House Democrats passed an extension of the federal benefit to unemployed families and placed it on McConnell's desk at the end of May. It was ignored until the end of July largely because there was no popular support among Senate Republicans!

    4) Pelosi had been negotiating with the White House, but this President nixed any deal immediately after leaving the hospital - only to flip-flop by claiming that he now favoured an even larger stimulus package than was being discussed!

    5) The erratic behaviot of this President, the reluctance of Senate Republicans and the GOP version of the stimulus package that favors of business and corporations, at the expense of unemploted Americans and their families, have made meaningful negotiations virtually impossible!

    6) Currently the GOP Senate and this President are on opposite ends of the spectrum in terms of the cost associated with a 2nd stimulus package, with the House Democrats caught in the middle - with all these competing groups and priorities in an Election year, the political landscape can literally change by the minute!
     
    Last edited: Oct 14, 2020
  20. hislegacy

    hislegacy This is me.

    +9,007
    United States
    Charismatic
    Married
    US-Others
    You are not dreaming. What is happening is becoming so obvious, even the media is beginning to ask questions. Nancy has a record of this type of reply when asked a question that flies against her narrative. Her Press conferences and interviews almost never have challenging questions put to her. When it does happen, she get's rattled as demonstrated.
     
Loading...