Jon Stewart Criticizes Senators Who Voted Against Toxic Burn Pit Bill

[NotJtbny]

How do you expect someone to share it when they have yet to update both the proposal and the amendments? Clearly something changed to have over a dozen politicians change their mind between one day and another.

Both sides have a proven track record of doing this. They can give you a bowl of brown with goo with sprinkles on it and tell you it's ice cream all they want, but I'm going to stop and take a sniff to make sure it's not crap before I just jump in and start eating up what they're giving me. I can always decide to eat it later once I discover it is what they say it is.

What changed was pressure. That's it. The Bill has been out there for anyone to read - it's 4 pages long. I don't blame anyone for be skeptical on anything Congress does - they are mostly rats BUT what I do expect is those who chime in to do a bit of research instead of parroting one sided talking points especially when it comes to issues like this.

To attack Jon Stewart on THIS particular issue is just plain wrong. ITT many have been either deliberately obtuse or just ignorant and I simply don't get it. I'm not even going to dive into IDs reply because, as usual, it's a rant that has nothing to do with this particular issue other than he's smelled some bad stuff too and includes another picture of himself because that is supposed to prove something I guess? IDK.

And of course instead of those (including you) saying "you know what on this issue Stewart was right and I was wrong" the excuses and deflections start flying because, god forbid, a side one thinks is "destroying the country" is doing something that actually matters so it must be nefarious.

And of course I'll get attacked because I guess I'm a dirty liberal or whatever other stupid label they can think of. If I'm wrong I'll fuking own it because I try real hard not to be so blinded that I must, despite evidence, stand my ground. I'm not perfect but I at least try which is much more than I can say about many.

The bill has passed so thats all that matters to me.

JTBNY, here’s some intelligence for you sir.

Private entities that are vetted can do the best for vets, not your silly bills from congress.

Shhh adults talking here. Back to the kiddy table.

[mtpockets]

[induced_drag]

To attack Jon Stewart on THIS particular issue is just plain wrong. ITT many have been either deliberately obtuse or just ignorant and I simply don't get it. I'm not even going to dive into IDs reply because, as usual, it's a rant that has nothing to do with this particular issue other than he's smelled some bad stuff too and includes another picture of himself because that is supposed to prove something I guess? IDK.

And of course instead of those (including you) saying "you know what on this issue Stewart was right and I was wrong" the excuses and deflections start flying because, god forbid, a side one thinks is "destroying the country" is doing something that actually matters so it must be nefarious.

I am sorry, but there are very few things can be looked at in 'black and white'. I have stated what my issues are with Stewart. I dont need someone to lecture me about supporting our vets or how voting against this is NOT supporting vets. It is that gross over-simplification that makes arguments like his work. And unfortunately what makes politicians cave into pressure and vote for something that they have true concern with otherwise. Because the general public wont read past the first line. They will forward their Stewart vid to everyone they know. They will 'like' it and build the wave of pressure without ever understanding the actual objections posed by others.

Much like all the arguments roe v wade, I think very few even try to understand the big picture. So the 'victory' is had. And my guess is the vast majority of it will be wasted on people who are not truly 'disabled'. We can all cheer at a system ripe with waste and a culture of spending every dollar they can get and make no attempt to even save or your budget will be cut for following years. Does not matter to me if it is about vets, or babies. I am not going to be made to feel guilty for wanting to understand the accounting behind something. And I am sad that those who might have had true objection to it, caved.

One of the things I have always like about Rand Paul. Certainly not one that has ever been afraid to vote 'no' on principle.

This is what is 'wrong' wilt bill like this. ']presumption of service connection' So 100,000's if not millions now disabled with ailments that they would have had and would have no connection with their service.
And the backlash he gets for suggesting that the govt should not be paying for disability in connection with things not related to service. Why is that such a bad thing to say?

https://www.newsweek.com/rand-paul-v...-video-1730284

[Corbi]

Just like the general population has it's share of losers, @ssholes, degenerates, etc so does that section of the population who are vets. Not everyone of them is some honorable person that all of us needs to bow down and kiss their asses because of a job they had. I'm not saying our country doesn't need to do a better job at healthcare for vets but waving the flag isn't a get out of jail free card that absolves them of any & all responsibility for issues they have brought upon themselves.

[LWW]

Shhh adults talking here. Back to the kiddy table.

You are just mad because what did I tell you earlier? I said the tides would turn and look, I was right.

Your dumb, you were all fuking worried saying “oh this is so important, blah blah, if you were as smart as I thought you might of been you’d KNOWN that this was a game and a media political game at that.

They passed the bill, now stop crying. Now go see if this is going be legit or mis managed like everything else gubmit does.

[ljimd]

The bill has passed so thats all that matters to me.

Me too.

[mtpockets]

[induced_drag]

Yea....this is actually really bad law. Did some reading of actual bill. It essentially gives a blank check to anyone that has ever served. It removed the requirements for there to be any connection or proof that whatever ailment you have was indeed related to exposure. So if you were serving and during that time someone burned something, and later on you develop some disease.... BOOM, you get disability. If you die, your spouse gets survivor benefits. In the past 70% of claims for disability were disapproved because the mil argued there was no connection. This swings the pendulum the opposite direction and now people will be coming out of the wood work to get their 'disability'.

This is really not good and to say we are just going to assume that any ailment you get is a result of the fact that you served where we burned stuff. TOTALLY disregarding natural occurrences in disease outside exposures...etc. Now EVERYONE is automatically disabled and the govt writes them or their spouse a check. Shoot my buddy got colon cancer at 50. He is retired mil. He should get in disability. Oh wait, he already is...well now he should get double disability.

This is just stupid and attempting to shame people because they wanted it to be under congressional approval for funding with required passage every year (so people can keep an eye on it). Nope...it just gets approved now with no votes. We own it now.

There...that is my problem with this legislation. Just because you served in the mil, you dont get a blank check the rest of your life if you happen to come down with any ailment that many other people do every day. Your service (most of which was volunteer) does not entitle you to that. Sorry.

[NotJtbny]

You are just mad because what did I tell you earlier? I said the tides would turn and look, I was right.

Your dumb, you were all fuking worried saying “oh this is so important, blah blah, if you were as smart as I thought you might of been you’d KNOWN that this was a game and a media political game at that.

They passed the bill, now stop crying. Now go see if this is going be legit or mis managed like everything else gubmit does.

You're.

(not reading your wall of text, ID)

[induced_drag]

(not reading your wall of text, ID)

CRIBBS
I read some of actual bill. NOTHING to celebrate.

Perhaps before you celebrate, take a deep dive into what this bill says.

[x-trainer ben]

You're.

(not reading your wall of text, ID)

No offense, but this line baffles me, "wall of text".
4 short paragraphs?
This website is one of the only ones that i am aware of that says.... did not read.

[LWW]

You're.

(not reading your wall of text, ID)

That’s all you got, grammerly.

You took the bait in the other thread too, the one called “grave danger”. Don’t you feel foolish.......

[Karl_Hungus]

No offense, but this line baffles me, "wall of text".
4 short paragraphs?
This website is one of the only ones that i am aware of that says.... did not read.

ID was making valid points and provided an interesting perspective that contrasted with some of the other views expressed in this thread. JTBNY, given that this is a discussion forum, explaining why ID is wrong would be more interesting than simply informing us that his posts are not worth reading.

I often lurk in threads like this because I am genuinely interested in learning something from the contrasting perspectives (srs).

[GrouchyUSMC]

What changed was pressure. That's it. The Bill has been out there for anyone to read - it's 4 pages long. I don't blame anyone for be skeptical on anything Congress does - they are mostly rats BUT what I do expect is those who chime in to do a bit of research instead of parroting one sided talking points especially when it comes to issues like this.

To attack Jon Stewart on THIS particular issue is just plain wrong. ITT many have been either deliberately obtuse or just ignorant and I simply don't get it. I'm not even going to dive into IDs reply because, as usual, it's a rant that has nothing to do with this particular issue other than he's smelled some bad stuff too and includes another picture of himself because that is supposed to prove something I guess? IDK.

And of course instead of those (including you) saying "you know what on this issue Stewart was right and I was wrong" the excuses and deflections start flying because, god forbid, a side one thinks is "destroying the country" is doing something that actually matters so it must be nefarious.

And of course I'll get attacked because I guess I'm a dirty liberal or whatever other stupid label they can think of. If I'm wrong I'll fuking own it because I try real hard not to be so blinded that I must, despite evidence, stand my ground. I'm not perfect but I at least try which is much more than I can say about many.

The bill has passed so thats all that matters to me.

Where did I attack Jon Stewart? Clearly you're confusing me with someone else.

[mtpockets]

That’s all you got, grammerly.

[induced_drag]

No offense, but this line baffles me, "wall of text".
4 short paragraphs?
This website is one of the only ones that i am aware of that says.... did not read.

I get it. When people are frustrated, sometimes they just want to vent. This place sees a lot of that. Get pissed off, come over here and type some stuff that makes you feel better, (often attacking others who hold different viewpoints than yours), and then just disengage since you now have gotten your satisfaction. It happens more often than not. There is no desire to really communicate, nor understand.

I dont get it either. I actually make an attempt to communicate with others that feel differently than I do. I will argue and support my case, and I hope at best they do the same for theirs. It forces me to understand the issues better. As I mentioned, I would truly identify as libertarian. But I could almost never vote democrat. In my real life, I seek out those with opposing views to try to understand them. I have found almost 100% that very few democrats truly understand the details and specifics of the issues and agendas they 'support'. It is almost all based on 'feeling good', but totally lacking in connection with facts and actual outcomes. I find this interesting and still search out for the democrat who can argue and support the logic behind many of the left's agendas.

Sad thing is many repubs are the same. BUT, ideas of fascial responsibility (either personal or at a federal level) are easier to grasp and understand vs social equality or any of the other very gray platforms that the left is built upon. So I dare hazard to say that those on the Right have a far greater understanding what their vote is going towards.

Just an observation and yes, possibly an over-simplification, but it is a very strong pattern which I have seen my entire life.

[NotJtbny]

No offense, but this line baffles me, "wall of text".
4 short paragraphs?
This website is one of the only ones that i am aware of that says.... did not read.

Mainly because he rambles/rants. He will pepper in some good arguments but will also divert the discussion to other issues. Then post a pic of something unrelated. When ID uses brevity I try to respond but HE has to also not ignore the points being made like he (to me) seems to do. I have no problem with him personally regardless of the names he's caledl me

ID was making valid points and provided an interesting perspective that contrasted with some of the other views expressed in this thread. JTBNY, given that this is a discussion forum, explaining why ID is wrong would be more interesting than simply informing us that his posts are not worth reading.

I often lurk in threads like this because I am genuinely interested in learning something from the contrasting perspectives (srs).

BS Karl. I already did that a few times. He's more interested in arguing his points while ignoring any of mine. I laid out my argument already ITT.

Do better than sniping my comments would you? Maybe contribute to the discussion at hand. I hold you in high esteem but you've gotten into this habit.

[Kraken]

I think you all know why these bills get voted against; they use emotional issues to hide the evil they have elsewhere in the bill. Then, when someone votes against it, they’re a horrible person because they didn’t want to help the veterans.

Womens rights bill was the same. Was it really about womens rights? Infrastructure bill being proposed now is another wealth transfer bill involving people, not infrastructure.

[induced_drag]

Mainly because he rambles/rants. He will pepper in some good arguments but will also divert the discussion to other issues. Then post a pic of something unrelated. When ID uses brevity I try to respond but HE has to also not ignore the points being made like he (to me) seems to do. I have no problem with him personally regardless of the names he's caledl me

I tend to think 'big picture' on many issues. Without insulting you, all but the most myopic can see that most things are not cut and dry, good and bad. However this bill and even your arguments against people that switched their votes was/is quite 'simple'. I am sorry, but I am unable to adopt the simplicity with which you look at this issue. If that is as 'deep' as you go, you will likely look at me as 'rambling' or 'ranting' as you put it. I'd like to think you are smarter than that, but I really dont know you.

[azzspankr]

Democrats politicians: Let’s pretend we’re upset about a bill helping veterans suffering from burn pit injuries while deployed in combat areas.

Reasonable person: Why are you adding 400 billion dollars of unrelated spending to the bill?

Democrat activists: You Republicans are racist for asking questions.

Reasonable person: Why am I racist for asking the question? Can we just create a bill without attaching unrelated spending?

Jon Stewart: Republicans are racist and they don’t care about veterans.

CNN: Republicans are being racist by pointing out that Democrats added unrelated 400 billion dollars to a bill that has nothing to do with the burn pit bill for veterans.

CNN: Don’t forgot to get vaccinated because of you don’t you will be adding to climate change.

Nailed it.

[x-trainer ben]

ID was making valid points and provided an interesting perspective that contrasted with some of the other views expressed in this thread. JTBNY, given that this is a discussion forum, explaining why ID is wrong would be more interesting than simply informing us that his posts are not worth reading.

I often lurk in threads like this because I am genuinely interested in learning something from the contrasting perspectives (srs).

This is what we used to do all over the site at 1 time; then some folks took it personally in other sections and we are where we are now.

[x-trainer ben]

Mainly because he rambles/rants. He will pepper in some good arguments but will also divert the discussion to other issues. Then post a pic of something unrelated. When ID uses brevity I try to respond but HE has to also not ignore the points being made like he (to me) seems to do. I have no problem with him personally regardless of the names he's caledl me



BS Karl. I already did that a few times. He's more interested in arguing his points while ignoring any of mine. I laid out my argument already ITT.

Do better than sniping my comments would you? Maybe contribute to the discussion at hand. I hold you in high esteem but you've gotten into this habit.

Gotcha, it is a very common thing that happens on the site though.
You make a point and crickets, unless they revert to name calling.
"ignore the points being made like he (to me) seems to do."

[LWW]

Mainly because he rawmbles/rants.

BS Karl. I already did that a few times. He's more interested in arguing his points while ignoring any of mine. I laid out my argument already ITT.

Do better than sniping my comments would you? Maybe contribute to the discussion at hand. I hold you in high esteem but you've gotten into this habit.

Oh you poor fella.

I bet you make your rolling oppenants wear MAGA hats, lol.

[NotJtbny]

I tend to think 'big picture' on many issues. Without insulting you, all but the most myopic can see that most things are not cut and dry, good and bad. However this bill and even your arguments against people that switched their votes was/is quite 'simple'. I am sorry, but I am unable to adopt the simplicity with which you look at this issue. If that is as 'deep' as you go, you will likely look at me as 'rambling' or 'ranting' as you put it. I'd like to think you are smarter than that, but I really dont know you.

Without insulting you, I'd argue that being able to look at each issue individually is a skill one might want to develop.

Oh you poor fella.

I bet you make your rolling oppenants wear MAGA hats, lol.

Opponents***

Good grief you're an idiot.

Gotcha, it is a very common thing that happens on the site though.
You make a point and crickets, unless they revert to name calling.
"ignore the points being made like he (to me) seems to do."

I do try and respond to all but I seem to hold a much different view on some issues here and because of that its usually more replies than I can handle. If an on topic reply is a good counter argument I'll look and think about it, even research if myself before I counter. The name calling doesn't bother me in the least. I know who I am and I also know that the majority of the time those words wouldn't be said in person.

[induced_drag]

Without insulting you, I'd argue that being able to look at each issue individually is a skill one might want to develop.

.

OK this makes it easy. Since you have the ability to look at this in such a focused manner, tell me what is in this bill (that was not already available to veterans) that you are so much in support of. This obviously bothered you that some might not vote for this. What specifically is so 'good' about this bill?

[Mark1T]

Are we talking about the new bill? Without injecting politics into it, I do not like it because history and basic economics tells us that raising taxes in a recessionary period is a mistake. Although, I have no problem with the largest corporations being taxed the 15%.

Also, the hiring of 87,000 IRS agents is anti-business and no matter which side of the aisle you reside on, you will get audited and more than once. The IRS will become a weapon against the people. Not to mention, it is a fact that the IRS also very recently purchased millions of dollars worth of ammunition. They will be targeting small businesses and the Middle Class, because this demographic cannot afford to defend themselves. They will not be increasingly going after the wealthy, unless there is obvious fraud, because the wealthy can afford to defend themselves. Truth.

As for money to go toward environmental goals, I call BS. Look at Europe. They went through it and are paying for it with super increase in energy. Germany went green and failed bigly and now going back to fossil fuels.

[mtpockets]

[GrouchyUSMC]

Also, the hiring of 87,000 IRS agents is anti-business and no matter which side of the aisle you reside on, you will get audited and more than once. The IRS will become a weapon against the people. Not to mention, it is a fact that the IRS also very recently purchased millions of dollars worth of ammunition. They will be targeting small businesses and the Middle Class, because this demographic cannot afford to defend themselves. They will not be increasingly going after the wealthy, unless there is obvious fraud, because the wealthy can afford to defend themselves. Truth.

Many people are underestimating the significance of this. They are literally more than doubling the amount of IRS agents. Federal agencies have already been weaponized in the past to use against political opponents and those they have a problem with. It doesn't bode well for the American people.

[bustasinclair]

Many people are underestimating the significance of this. They are literally more than doubling the amount of IRS agents. Federal agencies have already been weaponized in the past to use against political opponents and those they have a problem with. It doesn't bode well for the American people.

I'm a CPA and now own my own CPA Firm. The agents they are hiring is VERY much needed! For over two years now, we have been virtually unable to get any resolution to our clients' tax issues/problems due to low numbers of agents. We have approximately 75 clients with IRS resolution issues and some of them date as far back as 2016. Most days you cannot even get through their phone lines and the days you do, you will wait on hold for two or three hours or more.

Does this also mean more audits? Maybe, but with all of the new programs, i.e. PPP loans, EIDL loans, Employee Retention Credits, etc., more agents are needed. If you do get audited, it's usually due to crossing the line. Simple solution, don't cheat on your taxes. I'm representing a few clients under audit right now and it's a mixed bag. I have one dental client who is being massacred due to questionable bookkeeping and lack of receipts and one construction client who kept his receipts and is actually looking at a clean audit. It's pretty simple really.

You guys are only listening to a particular news network and parroting their talking points IMO.

[Kraken]

The IRS is fast becoming a fascist arm of the regime.