1410

Congress voted against funding a cure for cancer just to block a win for Biden (www.usatoday.com)

submitted 3 months ago by homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

160 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Even though this would be a win for all Americans – and humanity – it apparently did not outweigh the politics of making a Democrat look good. This is the definition of party over country.

I'm a doctor.So is my mother. When she got cancer, I realized how little that mattered.

Republicans have stated budget cuts need to be made with an ever-growing debt. But where was this attitude when tax cuts for the wealthy were on the table in 2017? They don’t have to look at patients in the eye and break the devastating news that they have cancer. They don’t have to treat cancers that block intestines or drown a patient’s lungs in fluid.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] sparkle@lemm.ee 9 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

The stuff passed during Nixon's presidency was mostly not bad, because he had a progressive congress and knew it was good for his public image if he went along with their stuff (and took credit for their successes), but Nixon realized Southern Strategy, and his presidency perhaps marked the start of descent into incivility and absurdity in politics. He was a piece of shit in every regard imaginable, but he wasn't an obstructionist afaik.

Reagan is where policy took a SHARP dive, straight into the ground. He was the next step which was allowed by Nixon turning national politics into a rapid-fire shit-spewing competition.

[-] thatKamGuy@sh.itjust.works 3 points 3 months ago

I won’t necessarily speaking on policy, but more-so as a time-frame of when certain lines were crossed.

With Nixon, the Nixon Goes to China moment could be argued was the point in time which ultimately lead to massive off-shoring/out-sourcing that gutted America’s manufacturing industries and set the middle-class on its downward spiral.

Then there was his prolonging of the Vietnam War for his political benefit, at the cost of needless soldiers lives.

Then there’s the whole Watergate fiasco, which directly led to the founding of Fox News.

[-] postmateDumbass@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago

Calling opening relations with China as a negative is a bad take.

The companies that sold out the skeleton of the USA, by screwing the employees to pay shareholders and executives, are to blame for the current situation.

Was the EPA also a negative move to you?

this post was submitted on 30 Jul 2024

1410 points (98.4% liked)

politics

19097 readers

1727 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News