General Discussion

Celerity

(50,973 posts)

7. My OP is more about ownership and origin of the $3.5 trillion figure, as some are trying to spin

Mon Oct 4, 2021, 04:10 PM

Oct 2021

it as a crazy 'progressives gone wild' agenda, in order to be able to falsely claim it (the original $3.5 trillion proposal) cannot be legimately called Biden's agenda. Then the false-framers can have a go at the progs for being 'purists' and even more so, then false-frame them as the the actual obstructionists, barriers for Biden. It is a disingenuous attempt at inventing a cleavage that does not exist. Falsely separate the progs from Biden's agenda and then take hatchets to them.

When Biden says 'I wrote it' Biden is using figurative speech to claim ownership, not claiming that he crossed every single 'i' and dotted every 't' physically in the massive proposal.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

16 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Definitive debunking today by Biden himself of the false claims by some here that the $3.5 trillion [View all] Celerity Oct 2021 OP

Go Joe Go Champp Oct 2021 #1

THESE DIDN'T COME FROM, GOD LOVE THEM, BERNIE SANDERS, AOC, OR ANYBODY ELSE. I WROTE THEM. BeckyDem Oct 2021 #2

Thank you President Biden for making it crystal clear it was YOUR agenda and funding level. bluewater Oct 2021 #10

i can't see the forest for the trees... stillcool Oct 2021 #3

I could be mistaken gratuitous Oct 2021 #4

My OP is more about ownership and origin of the $3.5 trillion figure, as some are trying to spin Celerity Oct 2021 #7

+1000 bluewater Oct 2021 #8

Oh, absolutely gratuitous Oct 2021 #12

This (see below) is not the point at all for any of my OP: Celerity Oct 2021 #14

The Press, Ma'am, Has Been Absurdly Amusing On This The Magistrate Oct 2021 #5

+1 Sir Celerity Oct 2021 #13

"the Progressive caucus is providing the muscle for President Biden" bluewater Oct 2021 #15

That's why they are emphasizing a shorter time frame. halfulglas Oct 2021 #6

Yes, a shorter timeframe with the same per annum spend and most programmes intact is the Celerity Oct 2021 #11

some of these projects have long time lines. mopinko Oct 2021 #16

Thank you for calling out those who are trying to re-write history bluewater Oct 2021 #9