Vichy Democrats. Collaborators. Enemies.
this post was submitted on 17 Jan 2026
82 points (97.7% liked)
Pravda News!
184 readers
333 users here now
founded 2 months ago
MODERATORS
The accusations in the title are not borne out in the source.
You're a fucking dumbass piece of shit that put Trump in office.
You’re a fucking dumbass piece of shit that put Trump in office.
Not very civil, Mx. Democrat.
With only a few notable exceptions, there is no meaningful left vs. right in American politics.
The meaningful division is wealthy and empowered few vs. oppressed and exploited many.
And virtually all high-ranking Democrats are, alongside Republicans, on the side of the few, against the many.
Class war isn't a future possibility - it's a current reality. The wealthy and empiwered few, along with their allies, tools and proxies, are already fighting it, and winning.
DNC is gop lite, dinos, while GOP is just the alt right. they all have the same goals. the DNC allows a bone to be thrown once in a while but never enought o demand more change.
As long as it doesn't interfere with monied interests.
whatever AIPAC demands, or billionaire interests. cant have thier HEalthcare be completely free otherwise the dnc lose thier only bargaining chip at being elected. culture war serves both gop and DNC funny enough. remember when luigi got shot, even walz was chiding against it, i suspect thats why his inaction in minnesota.
or billionaire interests. cant have thier HEalthcare be completely free otherwise the dnc lose thier only bargaining chip at being elected
So they're not supposed to want to improve healthcare?
That wasn't the point being made. The Democrats won't let healthcare be free. If they did, they would no longer be able to dangle it in front of us to keep convincing us the Democrats are a "working class" party. It's a scheme to get re-elected and keep the facade of "Liberal Democracy", nothing more.
Yeah we can look at Biden's presidency and Trump's and see that they're exactly the same.
Fuck "both sides" morons, you don't care about liberal policies.
exactly the same
Fuck your strawman.
FFS - look at the article. That's 153 Democrats voting with the Republicans. 153 Democrats on the side of the weslthy and empowered few.
Nobody said a fucking word about "exactly the same."
If you had a valid point, you could make it honestly. You don't, so you can't.
When are you "both sides" fucks going to start telling the truth?
This is a budget bill providing funding for government services. No policy mentioned.
Absolutely no justification to state it "opposes Palestinian statehood". This is just to make phoney fucking progressives feel better about abandoning Palestinians to "stick to it the man" and let Trump win. No, you're still fucking monsters. Again, it funds the State Department, it does not specify policy.
No text in the bill about "eliminating DEI" or "funding Christian nationalism".
This post is political rhetoric brought you by the dumbasses who have brought about two Trump presidencies. Proving, without a doubt, that they don't actually care about these issues.
You can click the link and read the thread, which explains everything. Then you could go read the text of the bill, which is indeed full of clauses that support "Israel" and oppose/limit Palestinian statehood.
Or you can continue to seethe about how people don't want to vote for the 99% hitler party, especially when it supports the things the 100% hitler party does.
I wonder if the Palestinian child on the other end of the missile cares if it was sent by a Democrat or Republican president.
Funny that you leave the Israel bit out of your post:
- Line 8110‑8122: "(c) Israel.--Of the funds appropriated by this Act under the heading 'Foreign Military Financing Program', not less than $3,300,000,000 shall be available for grants only for Israel: ... grants made available for Israel under this heading shall, as agreed by the United States and Israel, be available for advanced weapons systems, of which not less than $250,300,000 shall be available for the procurement in Israel of defense articles and defense services, including research and development."
- The $3.3 billion is part of the Foreign Military Financing Program.
- The bill explicitly states funds are for "advanced weapons systems."
- Disbursement must occur within 30 days of enactment.
Absolutely no justification to state it “opposes Palestinian statehood”. This is just to make phoney fucking progressives feel better about abandoning Palestinians to “stick to it the man” and let Trump win. No, you’re still fucking monsters. Again, it funds the State Department, it does not specify policy.
- Line 7777‑7782: "Sec. 7037. (a) Limitation on Assistance.--None of the funds appropriated under titles III through VI of this Act may be provided to support a Palestinian state unless the Secretary of State determines and certifies to the appropriate congressional committees that..."
- Line 8234‑8250: "None of the funds appropriated under the heading 'National Security Investment Programs' in this Act may be made available for assistance for the Palestinian Authority, if after the date of enactment of this Act-- (I) the Palestinians obtain the same standing as member states or full membership as a state in the United Nations or any specialized agency thereof outside an agreement negotiated between Israel and the Palestinians..."
- The restriction applies only to specific funding headings (titles III‑VI and 'National Security Investment Programs'), not all U.S. assistance.
- A waiver is available if the Secretary of State certifies that a waiver is in the national security interest.
- The bill also includes a separate limitation on supporting a Palestinian state absent certification of conditions.
- See also Section 7037 (lines 7777‑7810) for additional statehood conditions.
Funny you don't mention China in your post:
- Line 8588‑8598: "Countering prc influence fund.--Of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act under the headings 'National Security Investment Programs', 'International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement', 'Nonproliferation, Anti‑terrorism, Demining and Related Programs', and 'Foreign Military Financing Program', not less than $400,000,000 shall be made available for a Countering PRC Influence Fund to counter the influence of the Government of the People's Republic of China and the Chinese Communist Party and entities acting on their behalf globally..."
- The fund is explicitly named "Countering PRC Influence Fund."
- Up to 10% may be held in reserve for unanticipated opportunities.
- Funds may be transferred among specified headings.
Cutting or restricting money to the UN, specifically Peacekeeping:
- Line 4411‑4415: Appropriates $1,389,152,000 for "Contributions to International Organizations" (includes UN regular budget).
- Line 4439‑4442: Appropriates $1,230,667,000 for "Contributions for International Peacekeeping Activities."
- Line 4423‑4425: Requires notification and offsetting decrease for any UN action to increase funding for any UN program.
- Line 4430‑4433: Prohibits funds for U.S. share of interest costs on loans incurred after 1984.
- Additional peacekeeping conditions in lines 4443‑4465.
Funny you don't mention the Pro-Life protections either:
- Line 2830‑2835: Hyde Amendment restrictions: No funds shall be used to pay for an abortion, except where the life of the mother is endangered, or pregnancy results from rape or incest.
- Line 3410: Prohibition on requiring coverage of abortion or abortion‑related services.
- Line 4041‑4042: Exception for life of mother or rape/incest.
- Line 4834‑4847: Restrictions on funding for coercive abortion, prohibition against abortion as a method of family planning.
- Line 4891: Requirement to provide information about all pregnancy options.
- Line 6412‑6431: Prohibition on funding for abortions and involuntary sterilization.
- Line 6770: Preservation of existing statutory prohibitions against abortion.
- Line 9770: UNFPA does not fund abortions.
- These provisions are standard riders in annual appropriations bills.
- They restrict the use of U.S. funds for abortion‑related activities both domestically and internationally.
- Multiple sections throughout the bill reinforce abortion funding restrictions.
The "Christian Nationalism" section is likely related to this. Do you really think these fucking shitheads would write "Christian Nationalism" in a budget appropriations document?
- Line 7241‑7244: "not less than $40,000,000 shall be made available for international religious freedom programs" under headings 'National Security Investment Programs' and 'Democracy Fund'.
- Line 9198‑9199: "$15,000,000 shall be made available for democracy and religious freedom programs for Nicaragua."
- Line 4707‑4713: Funding for United States Commission on International Religious Freedom.
- Line 7254‑7259: Humanitarian assistance for persecuted religious minorities. -Section 7033 (lines 7234‑7260) outlines the International Religious Freedom Office and programs.
This might be a generous interpretation, but considering Christian Nationalists currently run the government, what could religious freedom mean?
"eliminating DEI" is the only unverified claim, but these others are pretty damning already.
But go ahead, keep voting blue no matter who.
We aren't voting hard enough, we need to vote harder
I'm so fucking ready to vote. I'd vote right now if I could!
I'm so ready to vote I'm holding an election right now, we just elected my cat high warlord of the apartment
Ranked Choice Voting!! I really don’t see a path forward without a major overhaul of the entire system.
Ranked choice voting would be a modification of the current system.
AIPAC CONTROLS most of the DNC and some of the gop which are mostly controlled by putin, and billionaires.
Tell me more.
"Nothing is ever the fault of Americans."
Democrats can never fail, they can only be failed.
some of the gop
Who the FUCK do you think you're kidding? Most of the DNC and "some" of the GOP.
Overturn Citizens United and watch the Democrats become a true People's party again
I don't think so. Who is going to over turn it, the Democrats? The Republicans?
It's a fucking Supreme Court decision, genius.
Yes, you are making my point for me. People who say things like "we just have to over turn citizens united" are either ignorant of the magnitude of the task they're invoking, or simply echoing a sentiment they heard else where and moving on.
We're going to have the current supreme court for a good 30 years going forward (baring every one of them walking in front of a bus). That's 30 more years of iron clad support for citizens united. Since citizens united, the entire landscape of politics has changed. Both parties receive unfathomable amounts of money every year, and these are the people who ultimately select the members of the supreme court.
So how exactly does one "over turn" citizens united, when the entire political system is built around citizens united? How do you "get money out of politics" when it is the engine that drives politics?
Damn, it's a good thing the people on the supreme court weren't appointed by members of either party, all of which are incentivized to appoint people who will preserve Citizens United.