Funky Winkerbean said:

---

How about Massie be a leader and develop a solution and get it passed. *****ing is doing zero to get this budget problem solved. Tearing down others to benefit himself is childish and bush league.

---

Massie is right. You're just repeating a Trump line.do you have any idea what Massie has put forth?

I'm interested in "passed". We've run out of time for good intentions.

Jet White said:

---

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

Quote:

---

You can do an awful lot with a reconciliation bill is the point

---

We can only do what will pass through Congress, and they quickly punted the $9B cuts in the proposal. Blaming Trump is misplaced.

---

The meaningless $9B recession bill is separate. Also, Trump called the budget bill "one of the top 10 bills of all time", not hours ago. Sounds like he's extremely pleased with it.

---

And it was immediately shot down. Everyone is clamoring for more cuts, but if they won't cut $9B how do you propose more cuts to get passed? What is your solution?

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

Jet White said:

---

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

Quote:

---

You can do an awful lot with a reconciliation bill is the point

---

We can only do what will pass through Congress, and they quickly punted the $9B cuts in the proposal. Blaming Trump is misplaced.

---

The meaningless $9B recession bill is separate. Also, Trump called the budget bill "one of the top 10 bills of all time", not hours ago. Sounds like he's extremely pleased with it.

---

And it was immediately shot down. Everyone is clamoring for more cuts, but if they won't cut $9B how do you propose more cuts to get passed? What is your solution?

---

I know they won't cut more. They are cowards or comply don't care. I'm not the one here pretending they are going to cut $2 trillion after Trump leaves office and they are likely out of power when they can't even muster $10 billion today when they have power. Can you imagine holding that opinion with a straight face? Haven't you been one of those claiming this bill is going to cut $2 trillion?

I'm simply saying the bill doesn't do a single substantive thing thing to address our most pressing problem. You have been pretending otherwise all day.

Then why all of the opposition against Trump? For today and the type of bill it is, it's a great bill.

Quote:

---

For today and the type of bill it is, it's a great bill.

---

What does this mean? What makes this bill great? Please, enlighten us.

So getting something "passed" is the threshold of what's good? What if it's a terrible bill? Did any representatives actually read through it. Do we know what's in it?


Crazy idea. Do nothing. No more dollars approved for spending. No more debt allowed.

Jet White said:

---

Quote:

---

For today and the type of bill it is, it's a great bill.

---

What does this mean? What makes this bill great? Please, enlighten us.

---

It codifies Funky's tax cuts to be paid by future generations of Americans.

Jet White said:

---

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

Jet White said:

---

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

Quote:

---

You can do an awful lot with a reconciliation bill is the point

---

We can only do what will pass through Congress, and they quickly punted the $9B cuts in the proposal. Blaming Trump is misplaced.

---

The meaningless $9B recession bill is separate. Also, Trump called the budget bill "one of the top 10 bills of all time", not hours ago. Sounds like he's extremely pleased with it.

---

And it was immediately shot down. Everyone is clamoring for more cuts, but if they won't cut $9B how do you propose more cuts to get passed? What is your solution?

---

I know they won't cut more. They are cowards or comply don't care. I'm not the one here pretending they are going to cut $2 trillion after Trump leaves office and they are likely out of power when they can't even muster $10 billion today when they have power. Can you imagine holding that opinion with a straight face? Haven't you been one of those claiming this bill is going to cut $2 trillion?

I'm simply saying the bill doesn't do a single substantive thing thing to address our most pressing problem. You have been pretending otherwise all day.

---

I figured out whats at play here. Rather than engage in any meaningful conversation on the topic, its just about calling Trump supporters cultist sycophants, susplaining that you cannot see that Trump really is a bad orange man, and telling you they are way upset that we didn't cut trillions and mocking any attempts to cut billions.

They then end with lying that the bill does nothing substantive... other than tax cuts, border security and over a trillion cut to mandatory spending.

They blindly side with any derogatory attack on Trump with "see, I told you so, Trump is nothing but a lying grifter who has relations with Putin and diddles kids on Epstein Island."

To see this on full display, visit their usual forum after an Aggie football loss. Same derangement on display. It is sad, and it is completely unhelpful to an actual discussion.

I am simply saying that the chicken littles are quite the brigade and any chance to scream the sky is falling... I mean Orange Man Bad! is never lost on them.

Bunk Moreland said:

---

Jet White said:

---

Quote:

---

For today and the type of bill it is, it's a great bill.

---

What does this mean? What makes this bill great? Please, enlighten us.

---

It codifies Funky's tax cuts to be paid by future generations of Americans.

---

If you cut taxes, that is revenue not coming in (not factoring in growth). If you do not have enough money you can do two things, borrow or cut spending.

Has a lib EVER proposed doing the latter in response to tax cuts? No, well then I guess you saddle future Americans with debt.

Libs could just say we will have to cut programs with all these tax cuts for the rich. Do they? Nah, that doesn't play well. Instead, like the CBO, they count tax cuts as deficit and a need to borrow more.

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

Quote:

---

You can do an awful lot with a reconciliation bill is the point

---

We can only do what will pass through Congress, and they quickly punted the $9B cuts in the proposal. Blaming Trump is misplaced.

---

Well at least you admit this is about Trump not being able to get a decent bill passed and not because the bill isn't able to do a lot more. Trump has chosen to focus on other issues like the tax cuts and other spending as his priority and not the cuts. It has cost him Elon Musk's support. Hope it was worth it.

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

aggie93 said:

---

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

Quote:

---

The main issue is MAGA is not a fiscally conservative movement, it is a populist one

---

As another poster pointed out, populism is literally "by the people ". Is that an issue now?

---

Didn't say it was an issue, just pointing out facts. Trump is a populist not a conservative. A populist shifts views based on a pragmatic view of what they think the people want or need. A conservative believes in a set of ideology and principles. "By the people" can also mean whatever the hell you want it to mean, that's the beauty of it, at least for the populist because essentially anything they do can be justified by it.

---

It's literally exactly what you said.

---

I'm simply stating what Trump is for good or bad. I personally don't like Populists because they are typically a cult of personality. You can't truly be a Populist and a Conservative. Trump holds many positions that aren't conservative and that's fine, it just is what he is. The good generally outweighs the bad to me. I just am not blind to the flaws.

Quote:

---

because they are typically a cult of personality.

---

You can say that again man. That's coming through crystal clear right about now.

flown-the-coop said:

---

aggie93 said:

---

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

Quote:

---

The main issue is MAGA is not a fiscally conservative movement, it is a populist one

---

As another poster pointed out, populism is literally "by the people ". Is that an issue now?

---

Didn't say it was an issue, just pointing out facts. Trump is a populist not a conservative. A populist shifts views based on a pragmatic view of what they think the people want or need. A conservative believes in a set of ideology and principles. "By the people" can also mean whatever the hell you want it to mean, that's the beauty of it, at least for the populist because essentially anything they do can be justified by it.

---

Nice made up definition of a populist. People vote for a populist agenda and a candidate who reflect that. In the US, every POTUS who wins the popular vote could be called a populist. It is our only nationwide office we vote on and which is why the FF intended it to be both powerful and held in check (via impeachment, re-election, etc and not lawfare / biased judiciary).

Trump actually is conservative in many areas, many areas he is not. But people like to shove labels on things where it doesn't quite work then get frustrated when the label they applied to Trump doesn't jive with their own beliefs of what a conservative is.

Of the people - We determined out government by voting on the US Constitution and subsequent amendments and ultimately hold the power to change government or form a new one (I am all for invoking this)

By the people - our elected officials are in theory ordinary citizens, not royalty; we vote, select folks to represent us;

For the people - government should exist for the benefit of the people, not itself.

Populus means people. Ignoring the people is what has left us with a deep state, mostly coastal, mostly elitist ruling class - on both sides of the aisle.

---

Nice lecture on how elections work and about what "populus" means even though that has nothing to do with the point. Here is the textbook definition which is pretty much spot on with what I said:

Quote:

---

A person, especially a politician, who strives to appeal to ordinary people who feel that their concerns are disregarded by established elite groups.

---

That is certainly who Trump is and that's fine. It's just not the same as being a conservative.

aggie93 said:

---

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

Sid Farkas said:

---

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

How about Massie be a leader and develop a solution and get it passed. *****ing is doing zero to get this budget problem solved. Tearing down others to benefit himself is childish and bush league.

---

Being a leader means standing on principle. Massie is consistently spot on about government spending. The white house should've worked with him on developing the BBB. They didn't...and he is opposed to it. It's no secret what he wants.

---

What managers in your world hang on to positions because of how good their ideas are? Zero. It's past time to expect results out of 13 year congressman.

---

Do you understand how Congress works? A Congressman has 1 vote. Massie makes strong arguments and speaks rationally. He isn't like Bernie just proposing complete pie in the sky impossible solutions and raising money off of it. He would love to be in that room going line by line on budget items and helping to find smart ways to make reductions and spend money but they won't let him in the rooms that matter.

This thread is actually a perfect example btw. Massie rightly points out that Johnson can fire the head of the CBO and replace him. That's a constructive solution to the problem. Yet Johnson ignores that advice and attacks Massie and gets folks like you to pile on instead of addressing why he won't just fire the guy. The reality is he won't because he is afraid to and by not doing so it gives him something he can complain about.

Massie actually wants to solve problems but he's honest about what the problems are. Now you may not agree with his solutions and that's fine but he has many solutions both big and small that would make a real difference. It's staggering to me how Trump attacks him harder than anyone else in the GOP in the House yet then tries to claim he supports the same issues.

---

Heineken-Ashi said:

---

aggie93 said:

---

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

Sid Farkas said:

---

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

How about Massie be a leader and develop a solution and get it passed. *****ing is doing zero to get this budget problem solved. Tearing down others to benefit himself is childish and bush league.

---

Being a leader means standing on principle. Massie is consistently spot on about government spending. The white house should've worked with him on developing the BBB. They didn't...and he is opposed to it. It's no secret what he wants.

---

What managers in your world hang on to positions because of how good their ideas are? Zero. It's past time to expect results out of 13 year congressman.

---

Do you understand how Congress works? A Congressman has 1 vote. Massie makes strong arguments and speaks rationally. He isn't like Bernie just proposing complete pie in the sky impossible solutions and raising money off of it. He would love to be in that room going line by line on budget items and helping to find smart ways to make reductions and spend money but they won't let him in the rooms that matter.

This thread is actually a perfect example btw. Massie rightly points out that Johnson can fire the head of the CBO and replace him. That's a constructive solution to the problem. Yet Johnson ignores that advice and attacks Massie and gets folks like you to pile on instead of addressing why he won't just fire the guy. The reality is he won't because he is afraid to and by not doing so it gives him something he can complain about.

Massie actually wants to solve problems but he's honest about what the problems are. Now you may not agree with his solutions and that's fine but he has many solutions both big and small that would make a real difference. It's staggering to me how Trump attacks him harder than anyone else in the GOP in the House yet then tries to claim he supports the same issues.

---

---

He's consistently offered solutions. You can not like the solutions all you want, and more power to you to argue against them. But to say he doesn't offer solutions is just a bald faced lie.

Yea, I care not about whether things are conservative per someone's definition.

Call me preservative, cause I want to see America last a few more years and conservatives tossing up bush mccains and mittens wasn't doing it for a lot of us.

flown-the-coop said:

---

Yea, I care not about whether things are conservative per someone's definition.

Call me preservative, cause I want to see America last a few more years and conservatives tossing up bush mccains and mittens wasn't doing it for a lot of us.

---

Preserving... ever growing government.

Say what you want about McCain and Romney, but at least Bush had more cajones than Trump. He was the last president to try to address entitlements. He lost his way after 9/11, but he's better than Trump ever has been, and that's not meant as a defense of Bush.

flown-the-coop said:

---

Yea, I care not about whether things are conservative per someone's definition.

Call me preservative, cause I want to see America last a few more years and conservatives tossing up bush mccains and mittens wasn't doing it for a lot of us.

---

Simply being the GOP nominee doesn't make someone conservative and Bush, McCain, and Romney certainly weren't.

Words do mean things. It's certainly your right not to care I suppose but it makes rational debate difficult.

Why do we elect ball-less leaders (outside of Trump) to these important position? The dems put ball busters in these positions who will step on you neck to get what they want. We **** around until nothing gets done then idiot squishy middle voters will vote dem in the midterms.

He lost his way 8 months into office but he had canines?

All bush did was funnel trillions to the war machine. I actually appreciate his leadership AFTER 09/11 but post presidency he has sat idly by fiddling whilst we burned.

aggie93 said:

---

flown-the-coop said:

---

Yea, I care not about whether things are conservative per someone's definition.

Call me preservative, cause I want to see America last a few more years and conservatives tossing up bush mccains and mittens wasn't doing it for a lot of us.

---

Simply being the GOP nominee doesn't make someone conservative and Bush, McCain, and Romney certainly weren't.

Words do mean things. It's certainly your right not to care I suppose but it makes rational debate difficult.

---

You statement would indicate that most in the GOP and the last 4 nominees were not conservative. That jives with what we both are saying.

The GOP is not a party of conservatives. It's the party that conservatives generally belong to.

Have to expand the party or lose elections. But so many here believe an ultra conservative e is electable. Hint… they aren't.

Bush? The clown that gave us No Child Left Behind? The TSA? Medicare Part D? Who wanted to give illegals asylum until voters raised holy hell?

That Bush? He was much to the left of Trump, no matter what lies he told.

Problem is CBO says tax cuts don't generate any revenue.

That's false and has been proven false twice now.

It's like they went to the local 3rd grade and got one of the students to design this CBO model.

Bunk Moreland said:

---

Jet White said:

---

Quote:

---

For today and the type of bill it is, it's a great bill.

---

What does this mean? What makes this bill great? Please, enlighten us.

---

It codifies Funky's tax cuts to be paid by future generations of Americans.

---

Tax cuts raise revenue. Why would anyone pay? IT'S MORE MONEY.

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

Bush? The clown that gave us No Child Left Behind? The TSA? Medicare Part D? Who wanted to give illegals asylum until voters raised holy hell?

That Bush? He was much to the left of Trump, no matter what lies he told.

---

Correct, people still think Bush was conservative?

Science Denier said:

---

Bunk Moreland said:

---

Jet White said:

---

Quote:

---

For today and the type of bill it is, it's a great bill.

---

What does this mean? What makes this bill great? Please, enlighten us.

---

It codifies Funky's tax cuts to be paid by future generations of Americans.

---

Tax cuts raise revenue. Why would anyone pay? IT'S MORE MONEY.

---

They do raise revenue, buit only up to a point.

flown-the-coop said:

---

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

I consider myself to be an "extreme conservative ", but I'm wise enough to know this bill isn't intended to be the big blow to debt. The big blow should come after midterms because the economy and the electorate won't like it.

---

I give you credit for the admission but real extremist do not believe in compromise and most certainly are not wise.

I think it is great for people to have these notions of no government debt, balanced budgets, and the like. If you painted them a true picture of what that makes the next 20 years look like for them and their families, they would whistle a difference tune.

Many of them know their desires will never happen. But it scores them message board slaphappy points to cry about it and how everyone they ever trusted or supported is a failure and only the their current love affair (Paul, Massie, Mittens, McCain, etc) guy, who will never reach a full party nomination, can save us.

I pity them as their dreams will never be realized, but its equally comforting to know that the nightmare-ish results from their utopia will equally never be realized.

---

Please describe in detail the nightmarish results for my family over the next 20ish years if entitlements are eliminated today?

10s of millions suddenly on the streets and hungry? Should work out just fine.

Do you realize how many people receive some form of government assistance? The numbers are astronomical.

I don't condone it, it's simply reality. So yes, it you ended all entitlements tomorrow we would look like post apocalypse for 20 years.

flown-the-coop said:

---

10s of millions suddenly on the streets and hungry? Should work out just fine.

Do you realize how many people receive some form of government assistance? The numbers are astronomical.

I don't condone it, it's simply reality. So yes, it you ended all entitlements tomorrow we would look like post apocalypse for 20 years.

---

I said for my family. I have lived in third world locations before and know how to securely move around.

Tom Fox said:

---

flown-the-coop said:

---

10s of millions suddenly on the streets and hungry? Should work out just fine.

Do you realize how many people receive some form of government assistance? The numbers are astronomical.

I don't condone it, it's simply reality. So yes, it you ended all entitlements tomorrow we would look like post apocalypse for 20 years.

---

I said for my family. I have lived in third world locations before and know how to securely move around.

---

Good for Tom Fox.

So you want America to be a 3rd world country because YOU think the government spends too much.

I believe you have served and I appreciate that. But let's bring this back to reality.

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

The one wrinkle of reconciliation is you can’t make “discretionary cuts” (eg the bureaucracy) just mandatory (eg food stamp reform).

Discretionary cuts happen through a separate process known as “rescissions” (also 50 votes).

BBB was designed by President Trump and his allies…

— Stephen Miller (@StephenM) June 4, 2025

---

Thank you for pointing out that this is Trump's garbage from start to finish - not a product of an ineffective Congress.

flown-the-coop said:

---

10s of millions suddenly on the streets and hungry? Should work out just fine.

Do you realize how many people receive some form of government assistance? The numbers are astronomical.

I don't condone it, it's simply reality. So yes, it you ended all entitlements tomorrow we would look like post apocalypse for 20 years.

---

So you are avoiding a nightmarish scenario for the leeches.

The only down side to my utopia is as you pointed out, there are more takers than makers here now and it cannot pass at the ballot box. So it will not happen, but it would be phenomenal for this country to starve off its leeches.

But stop with the you are so wrong about how great the country would be for the makers if you actually got your wish.

I've lived in Baghdad, Djibouti and Mexico City.

flown-the-coop said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

flown-the-coop said:

---

10s of millions suddenly on the streets and hungry? Should work out just fine.

Do you realize how many people receive some form of government assistance? The numbers are astronomical.

I don't condone it, it's simply reality. So yes, it you ended all entitlements tomorrow we would look like post apocalypse for 20 years.

---

I said for my family. I have lived in third world locations before and know how to securely move around.

---

Good for Tom Fox.

So you want America to be a 3rd world country because YOU think the government spends too much.

I believe you have served and I appreciate that. But let's bring this back to reality.

---

Again, you said that "I" the extremist would Individually regret my decision if my utopia came to fruition.

Why would I regret keeping almost $200k a year in tax savings for my family?

You should have left your argument to it will never happen and you are correct, but don't tell me that my ideals and principles would result in something worse than we have now, because it wouldn't.

You are not protecting us from ourselves.

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

You are moving the goalposts. This bill makes cuts, that is fact. The cuts everyone wants (me included) cannot happen in this type of bill. Fact.

---

This bill can make non-discretionary cuts, right? I want that! The discretionary cuts will be a drop in the bucket. I'll take those too, but that's not where we can make the bulk of the progress.

This is a now or never situation. Our margins in Congress may be thin, but we're looking at a 2 year window (less now) that we probably won't see again for a generation.

You miss 100% of the shots you don't take.