

The Big Beautiful Bill is moving $ out of the US treasury to benefit the wealthiest individuals and to corporate shareholders - at the expense of the 99% of Americans who are not multi-millionaires. Trump and the Republicans are baldly lying to cover their crimes, AGAIN. Not a surprise at all ~
https://www.rawstory.com/trump-tax/
Wednesday’s Tax Day was supposed to be a big PR boon for Trump, in which he touts his “no taxes on tips” and other ersatz tax “cuts” for average working Americans (while hiding that his Big Ugly bill actually gave most of its benefits to the wealthy and big corporations, and paid for them by taking money from Medicaid and food stamps and other programs the working class and poor rely on).
Consider that before Miller ordered the Internal Revenue Service to give ICE officials the addresses of people subject to deportation, undocumented immigrants had been paying roughly $60 billion annually in federal taxes, much of it going into Social Security and Medicare — programs from which they don’t benefit.
Now, tax experts fear many immigrants won’t file returns, and those who formerly had their taxes withheld in every paycheck will shift into under-the-table jobs. The Yale Budget Lab, a nonpartisan research center, projected lost tax revenue of about $300 billion over a decade.
Pardons for a price with the criminal Trump regime. This is just one vomitrocious and recent example.
https://www.propublica.org/article/joseph-schwartz-trump-pardon-skyline-nursing-home-patients
I don't know where on the political spectrum, this 'creator' aligns himself with - but I've been watching him since the afternoon of September 10th, 2025. He's very invested in the Trump Admin BS and the FBIs invented 'story' and has a lot of videos about that day and alleged players involved.
Quote by Frank
Generalisations and assumptions, (you have done so with your label, 'rational'), are always going to be made and used until one drills down to specifics. Specifics best dealt with by those who have the knowledge and wisdom to do so with out too tainted an agenda. Reasoned legislation may then follow.
Until then, one can encourage debate as well as expression of emotion as has clearly occurred here in this forum. For reasoned debate, polarity has to be recognised and attempts to understand such differences in such a complex issue.
In a democratic country, where the once the unimaginable election of a black president has taken place one would have thought some change would have happened with regards to this issue in over 15 years, unless the majority are not as you say, 'rational'.
It is not suggested to be just a numbers game.
The fact is, that as a result the only change is a note in history of another shooting, and subsequent loss of life. Any apparent lessons seem lost.
And, eleven years later:

Quote by noll
I'd say that those are all examples of your checks and balances failing.
This just didn't happen overnight, Noll. It's been coming on since Reagan destroyed the long established (1949) FAIRNESS DOCTRINE in 1987.
[Lifted from Wikipedia]
Key events leading to its end include:
* 1987 FCC Vote: In August 1987, the FCC, under new chairman, Dennis Patrick, voted 4-0 to abolish the Fairness Doctrine, concluding that the rise of cable television and other media outlets had made the "scarcity" argument for regulation - obsolete.
* Reagan's Vote: Before the FCC vote, the Democrat-controlled Congress passed legislation (the Fairness in Broadcasting Act of 1987) that would have codified the doctrine into federal law. President Reagan vetoed this bill, stating that the content-based regulation by the federal government was "antagonistic to the freedom of expression guaranteed by the First Amendment".
Consequences
The repeal is often linked to the subsequent rise of highly partisan talk radio and cable news networks in the late 1980s and 1990s. While the Fairness Doctrine applied only to broadcast licenses (not cable networks like Fox News or MSNBC), its absence is seen as having lowered overall industry standards for balanced reporting, contributing to greater political polarization in U.S. media.
Quote by David_LeRoy
We’ve got a demagogue on her hands and due to a combination of factors, from inflation, driven by Covid and the blame that that was put on the Biden administration, the Progressive’s not backing Harris because they weren’t happy with her support for Palestine, and immigration issues similar to what you see in much of Europe and the reaction to it real loud a group of extremist to take power in the countryThis isn’t over yet
I suppose it depends upon where you've dredged up your information, but this is the first time I've heard that Progressive Liberals didn't vote for Harris because she supports the Palestinians - when in my experience and (sources I dredged up) that is entirely 180 degrees NOT the case.
I've lost a handful of online Lush friends here because I've proposed that the current regime leading Israel needs to be put on trial at The Hague for the genocide they've inflicted upon GAZA since the early 1990s. I was immediately called an anti-semite who must love Hamas and Hezbollah. And that has never been a belief I've held or expressed. That entire region needs to see zero bloodshed, zero genocide, zero aerial bombing runs, zero missile launches/retaliation.
And Bibi is a war criminal and he's all for retaliation as well as instigation. Motherfucker.
https://thirdnarrative.org/is-it-possible-to-progressive-and-pro-israel/