Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

PigeonsArePopular t1_jcy6byh wrote

Reply to comment by Groundbreaking_War52 in Bidens to host 'Ted Lasso' cast to promote mental health by Luka77GOATic

Get back to me if that happens. Seriously.

−9

Groundbreaking_War52 t1_jcy7g4c wrote

From the original story:

>Biden has previously called on lawmakers in both parties to expand resources to fight the “mental health crisis” in the nation as part of his “ unity agenda.” His administration has surged funding to bolster the 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline and expand school-based mental health professionals.

21

PigeonsArePopular t1_jcy8bvs wrote

Why wait until his party has lost control of Congress? This show has been on for years.

−9

vasya349 t1_jcydbc9 wrote

Notably Biden got like two trillion dollars in spending new spending authorized during that two year period. You’re being obnoxiously contrarian for no reason.

15

PigeonsArePopular t1_jcyjanl wrote

Dodged the question, why wait?

How much toward health care, social services, mental health?

Cite a source!

0

vasya349 t1_jcykwy2 wrote

Do it yourself lol

6

PigeonsArePopular t1_jcynems wrote

Where I am from, those making claims bear the burden of proof, see

1

vasya349 t1_jcynkzb wrote

Where I’m from, we don’t entertain people not acting in good faith.

4

PigeonsArePopular t1_jcyntyx wrote

Sounds like ad hominem because you can't back up your claim

2

vasya349 t1_jcynzp0 wrote

You don’t know what ad hominem means.

2

PigeonsArePopular t1_jcyozm4 wrote

Against the person, you intimated I am not acting in good faith, whatever that means in this context, that's against me, not my argument QED

5

vasya349 t1_jcysmjn wrote

This has to be satire…

4

PigeonsArePopular t1_jcyy0xt wrote

No, ad hominem is speech that addresses the identity of the speaker (like if their faith is good or bad, again, whatever that could possibly mean here) and in that sense could even be complimentary

"A person as beautiful as you should come up with a better argument than that" for example

2

Groundbreaking_War52 t1_jcybgsj wrote

The additional funding has been a priority for the life of his administration. They are probably using the premiere of the final season as an opportunity to maximize attention on the issue.

Also, this sub is called Uplifting News - you lost?

12

PigeonsArePopular t1_jcyjl53 wrote

Might as well be called comforting and delusional spin when it comes to this story

Maximize attention = an ad for a TV show

How about maziming some concrete benefits for the unwell? Off the table huh

2

Dorocche t1_jcyl4vc wrote

His party hasn't had control of Congress since 2009 because of the filibuster. Not for big important things like fixing the healthcare system, anyway.

1

PigeonsArePopular t1_jcynnam wrote

No, the rules which allow the procedural fillibuster are set by a simple majority, which the dems had in both houses. QED, they could have passed anything they wanted.

Dems love to tie themselves up in knots as some kind of auto-kinbaku and proclaim they are helpless, just helpless! The parliamentarian said we can't! etc

This is an ad for a TV show, sucker

1