RJ

BST Users
  • Content count

    25,744
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

About RJ

  • Rank
    Way too many!
  • Birthday 05/06/1939

Converted

  • Interests (Hobbies, favorite activities, etc.):
    Fishing, hunting, writing
  • What I do for a living:
    retired

Profile Fields

  • Gender
    Male
  1. Schoolies in the Spring and Summer a 20# mono Berkley Big Game is my choice 5 foot straight leader is sufficent to catch Schoolies and Larger Stripe Bass.
  2. Jim are you on Cape Cod? I thought I spotted you driving a Lexus at the round about on 28 and turning into Stage Harbor Road yesterday?
  3. Semper Fi Brother! My best time was spent in Mike Co.3/5, 2nd Platoon, Squad Leader First Marine Division and 3rd Marine Division.1959 -1961.
  4. I'm here til June 6, 2020 and I'll be leaving the Cape with a new Ribb Rake for my Clamming Partner. I have two of my own and JB finally wore out his not a Ribb Rake! RJ
  5. If it wasn't for Trump the Red States would have doubled the deaths! Killer Coumo's mandate to send infected victims to Nursing Homes. Caused 1700 deaths. Even worse in PA, the Govenor followed Killer Coumo's knee jerk and the Nursing Homes hit 3,000 deaths! The Woman who runs the PA Health Commision, moved her Mother and sent her to a Hotel! Show me a red state that isn't corrupt. As for the need of money the Blue states should heed this advice from the Bible "As you effen sow, So you shall effen Reap!" The Pay for Play Crowd is Red with the blood of the people they work for! Quit your whining!
  6. heyblueyou can make one with a bandana. Or the Dollar Tree 2 mico towels for $1.00 they give you double layers of protection. The Fishing sun protection tube's are sufficent. I have 4 , all different colors. Your toilet whine is making you look very small indeed. Recon the Food & Dollar stores to see if they have TP, Pt and Kleenex on the shelve. The trucks have caught up with the demand! the Stores let you take 2 four roll Pkg's, 2 Paper towels and 2 boxes of tissues for your tookus, hands and leaky nose.
  7. Is that a prayer or a bad wish?
  8. Back in the 60's I went to the University of Baltimore Night Classes. Going home, I walked down the middle of the street to the parking garage to make sure it wasn't stolen of striped. i carried a aluminum Soft Ball Bat over my right shoulder. The infamous "BLOCK" wasn't far away. The Harbor and the Ball Field wasn't there in 1966. Now you can become a target if you wander a coup;e of blocks away from the Harbor!
  9. Max, You are pissing up the wrong Rope! Dreaming he should have a heart attack is really effen up you Karma! Take two asprins and take a nap!
  10. Agree or Disagree! Slow Joe is attacking President Trump because of the low numbers in the Food Stamp issue. Yahoo News - Biden says U.S. doesn't have a food shortage problem, 'we have a leadership problem' David Knowles Yahoo News May 19, 2020, 7:53 PM EDT Joe Biden during a Yahoo News virtual town hall with chef José Andrés. Former Vice President Joe Biden on Tuesday said that America has “a leadership problem,” about food and nutrition in the face of the pandemic that has crippled the food distribution network. “We don’t have a food shortage problem, we have a leadership problem,” Biden said during a Yahoo News virtual town hall on food security issues that also featured chef and food activist José Andrés. Biden, the presumptive Democratic nominee for president who will face Trump in the general election in November, blasted his Republican rival for proposing cuts to food stamps in his 2021 budget. “First of all, the president should stop trying to cut the SNAP program, which is essentially the food stamp program. In the middle of this crisis he is, in fact, cutting food stamps. He wants to cut access to food stamps, or SNAP, as it’s known as.” Under fire from Democratic critics, the Trump administration announced last month that it would delay imposing strict work requirements for those seeking food stamps. Andrés is a native of Spain who lives in the United States who besides running restaurants in several cities has become an activist for food stamps and nutrition. He said food was an integral part of America’s national security. “We need to begin taking food seriously,” he said. “Food needs to be treated as a national security issue. We need a national director of food and nutrition … part of the National Security Council.” As for the federal government’s stimulus efforts thus far to help those who most need it, Biden said he was not impressed. “All the money that the Congress has passed to help people in this dire need is not going to the right people,” Biden said. “It’s not getting to those mom-and-pop stores. It’s not getting to people who need to be able to pay workers to stay on the payroll. It’s not getting to people who need relief and so it’s just not being done very well at all.” Biden faulted the administration for not taking aggressive action to move food from farms to consumers. "We have plenty of food, it’s being plowed under,” he said. “The president could have ordered the government to buy food from farmers and send it to food banks.” Biden lauded food service workers who were “taking chances on their lives to make sure that we ... have the ability to eat, the ability to be able to continue to survive.” “They are the soul of America,” Biden said. END With Millions of Americans out of work, the Food Stamp will not be eliminated! Joe isn’t in the same time frame we are!
  11. That would be a 30-06 Both the 308 are 30 caliber rounds. Originally Military Rounds. The 03 is for 1903 the year the Springfield Armory Began manufacturing The Springfield For the Army and Marine Corps! This caliber Killed our enemies in to the 1997. WW 1 the 30-06 round became the leading big game caliber. A 06 173 grain bullet was capable of hitting targets out to 1200 yards. That was the 1,000 yard competition rifle bullet for America. The 308 replaced it when the Military adopted the .308 for the M-14 Rifle. it matched the NATO caliber, My deer gun is a customised 03-A3 30-06 Springfield Star Grade Rifle. I bought in Okinawa in 1960 when I was on the 3 Marine Div. Rifle Team. I paid the Rifle Team Armorer's to cut & crown the barrel and put a streamlined front sight on the barrel, and bend the bolt action lever so I could equip the gun with a scope. I ordered a rough one piece stock of California Walnut from Roberts Stocks. I sanded and oiled the stock and had the armor glass bed it to fine tune the accuracy. I harvested over 100 deer in the 59 years I have had the Gun. NY, PA, VT and VA. I use federal 150 grain bullets for hunting deer. In the years I served with the Marine Corps Reserve I shot the Mi Grand at Camp Smith NYNG Range in Peekskill, NY. and shot the course twice with the Semi M1 and then my Bolt Action Custom Rifle. Expert in both!
  12. His Gym isn't open to the General Public. The Gym Customers are Club Members! They pay for the pleasure of working out to keep Fit. I hope he takes the Gov. to court.
  13. A case of lethal powered TDS! This SOL'er is miles past the Point of No Return.
  14. The Left Is What It Once Loathed What is the Left, then? Mostly a Jacobin party that operates ad hoc, without principle, or consistency. By Victor Davis Hanson • May 17, 2020 Great America Compare the current progressive view about civil liberties against the old liberal positions of the past. Surveillance and spying on U.S. citizens? Remember liberal Senator Frank Church of Idaho and his 1975 post-Watergate select Senate investigative committee? It found the CIA, FBI, and NSA improperly over three decades had tapped into the phones of Americans, opened their mail, and worked with telecommunications companies to monitor the data of supposedly suspect politicians, actors, celebrities, and political activists. “Collusion” with the communists and the Russians was often the pretense to surveil American citizens. Consider Church either a bastion of civil liberties protection or a dangerous firebrand who weakened the CIA and FBI. But the point is that the Left’s position had once mostly been that the government’s unelected deep-state intelligence officers simply had too much power to trust. Indeed, the ACLU was outraged at what the committee revealed. Church was deified as a liberal hero uncovering government abuse. About the worst thing a government could do, liberals reminded us, was to spy on its own citizens. Then we were also warned that the scandal was the result of the government, for over 30 years, targeting mostly liberals on grounds of trumped-up suspicions that they were sympathetic to Communism in general and the Soviet Union in particular. Yet in addition, the Left argued that the state had no business spying on any American at all, unless it had a certified warrant and ample criminal cause—or we found ourselves in a war with enemies at home among us. And now? Russia is no longer a global Communist superpower rival. Yet the Obama Administration’s CIA, NSA, and FBI were every bit as obsessed with Vladimir Putin as had the old Right worried about Leonid Brezhnev—as if a contemporary kleptocratic thug lording over a failed and shrinking state posed the same existential dangers as a Communist dictator reigning over a huge postwar empire dedicated to destroying the free world. Actually, at the behest of then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the U.S. earlier had reached out to Putin in a naïve, flawed “reset” appeasement that failed. So, the Obama Administration’s about-face obsession with Putin the monster always was largely a convenient gambit of wanting to destroy the Trump campaign, transition, and presidency. No Drama? Not Exactly Barack Obama’s 21st-century intelligence hierarchs and their minions systematically outdid Richard Nixon’s plumbers, spooks, and spies. Obama appointees and loyalists surveilled American citizens, doctored or destroyed evidence, and monitored their communications. They deceived FISA courts to justify such illegal surveillance, set perjury ambushes to snare perceived political opponents, and used informants to spy on political enemies. They leaked classified information to damage opponents, paid foreign nationals during a political campaign to gather dirt on a presidential candidate, and repeatedly either flat out lied under oath to Congress or on hundreds of occasions claimed they “could not remember” when asked factual questions. What was the alleged justification to justify such extralegal extremism? The Steele dossier? Contemporary progressivism is an illiberal abettor of unconstitutional operations that are state-sanctioned rather than merely rogue. It has been discredited. Now the author confesses that he destroyed evidence from his “sources” such as they ever were. Even the anti-Trump FBI fired him as a contracting source of information. No matter. Steele nevertheless was praised by the Left for speaking truth to power. If collusion is defined as hiring foreigners to work with Russians to warp a U.S. election, then Christopher Steele is your man—and Hillary Clinton your ground zero. Steele is a British subject, who was hired by Clinton—albeit through the protective tripartite firewall of Fusion GPS, Perkins-Coie law firm, and the DNC—to use foreign and mostly Russian rumors and hearsay to find dirt on her political opponent. And after she lost the election, her fraudulent opposition research dossier was shopped about by the U.S. government, whose various agencies used it to attempt first to destroy Donald Trump’s presidential transition and then his presidency. The hacked DNC Russian emails released by Russian operatives? The investigation mysteriously—on the DNC prompt—was outsourced by a toadyish FBI to CrowdStrike, a firm that now confesses it never could prove Russia’s culpability for the theft. So much for the seeded ruse that CrowdStrike had stepped in to get to the bottom of Russian hackers in a way the FBI could not. And the Clinton email trove? Half of what was subpoenaed was more or less destroyed by Clinton operatives. Those who investigated her illegal use of a private server to communicate government information either were compromised by Clinton-related campaign donations or Obama’s Department of Justice directives to rebrand the whitewash as a mere inquiry rather than a serious investigation. Illegitimate Pretexts, Outrageous Criminality Were not the FISA warrants approved by federal justices then proof of legitimate suspicion of Russian collusion? The inspector general says no. He found that some documental information was altered by an FBI lawyer while the claims of the FBI and House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) that the dossier was incidental and not essential to the warrants were as fraudulent as the dossier itself. Andrew McCabe testified that without the Steele dossier there would not have been warrants granted. But did not the government have legitimate reasons to indict Michael Flynn? Released documents instead show the FBI and Justice Department wished to find ways either to force Flynn to resign, to be found guilty under an ossified Logan Act, or to ambush him in a perjury trap. He pleaded guilty to making false statements to federal agents only after being pressured by threats of federal prosecution of his own son, and exaggerated claims that his testimony—whose summaries were doctored by FBI operatives and then disappeared entirely—did not match the transcript of his surveilled call. How about the 22-month Mueller investigation? After nearly $40 million in investigatory costs, it found no collusion and no actionable presidential obstruction of the non-crime of collusion. It did, however, fire for bias and unprofessional behavior two of its top lawyers and investigators, the FBI paramours Lisa Page and Peter Strzok—although Mueller himself deceived the media about their departures by staggering them and initially disguising their relationship. Mueller, remember, was the sort of congressional witness that his own committee likely would have called in to set a perjury trap, given he claimed under oath to know little of Fusion GPS and the Steele dossier, the linchpins of his own prior two years of investigation. But did not the heads of some of our most important government agencies tell us that Russian collusion and Trump’s role as a “Russian asset” justified such surveillance? Hardly. Congressional testimony showed that the leadership of the FBI and some in the Justice Department were systematically claiming that they had no evidence of supposed Trump-Russian collusion, even as they hit the airwaves insisting on what they had denied when pressed under oath and for the legal record. Apparently, the FBI and Justice Department modus operandi was that lying under oath could become iffy but lying to CNN and MSNBC was simply adjusting to what such networks routinely do themselves—and pay ex-government officials to master. The response of the Left to all this was not to help ferret out, in Frank Church or Sam Ervin style, outrageous government criminality, but to defend it, to contextualize it, and even to applaud it. The Left perhaps never has been worried about government illegal monitoring, surveillance, and disruption after all—only that it had once, prior to the Obama administration, been directed against liberal targets. Or, the Left itself has changed and believes now that the proverbial administrative state is replete with liberals and progressives—remember Lois Lerner at the IRS, the architects of “Fast and Furious,” or the henchmen that concocted the jailed videomaker ruse as the cause of the Benghazi mess?—and thus a helpful vehicle to accelerate needed social agendas without the worry of legislative impediments. In other words, contemporary progressivism is an illiberal abettor of unconstitutional operations that are state-sanctioned rather than merely rogue. The Fourth Estate, Race, and Sex? A free watchdog press? Again, hardly. According to early liberal monitoring of presidential news coverage, roughly 93 percent of the news has been anti-Trump. The media by its own admissions—remember the editorialization from those like Jorge Ramos, Jim Rutenberg, or Christiane Amanpour?—believes it cannot be disinterested, given the alleged existential threat Donald Trump supposedly poses to America. Race? The Left sanctions racial separatism, even to the extent of marking off racially exclusive spaces on campus or allowing students to veto roommates on the basis of their race. Feminism and Sexual Harassment and Assault? It depends. Statutes of limitations and he said/she said evidence are of no importance if it means stopping a conservative Supreme Court judge, but they most certainly do apply if they impair a Democratic presidential candidacy. What is the Left, then? Mostly a Jacobin party that operates ad hoc, without consistency. Its two guiding principles are now reduced to simple agendas. One, nothing matters unless one has power. The means to obtain it are always after the fact justified by the supposedly noble ends they once served. And two, what exactly are those noble ends? Or what unites the Google and Facebook zillionaires, the full professor of English, the Washington Post senior editor, Barack Obama, George Soros, the head of a major network, Harvey Weinstein, Robert De Niro, or Don Lemon? It is a desire to sound off about mandated equality, but only as long as one has the resources to be unaffected by the necessary consequences of one’s loud egalitarian advocacy. As a general rule, the more one is insulated from the downside of one’s abstract progressivism, the louder and more vehemently he expresses it. Move Nancy Pelosi’s palazzo to sit on the border, subject Bill Gates to Bernie Sanders’s wealth tax and his envisioned 70 percent income tax rate, have Dianne Feinstein or Gavin Newsom live in an inner-city neighborhood or make NBA stars follow Chinese rules of collective bargaining and state-mandated compensation, or subject Samantha Power, Bruce Ohr, John Brennan, and Andrew McCabe to federal indictments, and Barack Obama to the sort of impeachment charade we witnessed months ago, and we would not have what is now the progressive party. END I suspect the TDS Crowd on SOL wouldn’t read Victor Davis Hanson’s “Truth to Power” outline of how low and depraved a political party’s destruction can go. I am hopeful some serving democrats realizing that they need to boot the direction their Party is going. Nancy Pelosi's 3 Trillion dollar Democrat "Wish List" of trying to get the tax payers money to help drag America Down to the level of a Third World existence. The Vote in the house and in the Senate by middle ground Democrats against the spending bill. Nancy and Schumer are distraught and lashing their moderate's break in their ranks. They hate the fact those moderates are going with the red states. RJ
  15. Biden and making things better? OMG! SUNDAY NY TIMES Biden is seeking Ideas that will make everything better. It’s about time he came out of the cellar! Seeking: Big Democratic Ideas That Make Everything Better By the end of primary season, the Democratic Party had all but settled on a conventional center-left agenda. But the pandemic is forcing the Biden campaign and other leaders to redraw plans for 2021. By Alexander Burns May 17, 2020 NY Times Sunday Edition More than 36 million Americans are suddenly unemployed. Congress has allocated $2.2 trillion in aid, with more likely to be on the way as a fight looms over government debt. Millions more people are losing their health insurance and struggling to take care of their children and aging relatives. And nearly 90,000 are dead in a continuing public health catastrophe. This was not the scenario Joseph R. Biden Jr. anticipated confronting when he competed for the Democratic nomination on a conventional left-of-center platform. Now, with Mr. Biden leading President Trump in the polls, the former vice president and other Democratic leaders are racing to assemble a new governing agenda that meets the extraordinary times — and they agree it must be far bolder than anything the party establishment has embraced before. So far, neither Mr. Biden nor Mr. Trump has defined in itemized terms what an agenda for the first 100 days of a new presidency in the coronavirus era might look like. But on the Democratic side, far more than within the Republican Party, there is an increasingly clear sense of the nature and scale of the goals a new administration would pursue. Mr. Biden’s campaign has been rapidly expanding its policy-drafting apparatus, with the former vice president promising on Monday to detail plans for “the right kind of economic recovery” within weeks. He has already effectively shed his primary-season theme of restoring political normalcy to the country, replacing it with promises of sweeping economic change. “the right kind of economic recovery” within weeks? On Wednesday, Mr. Biden signaled anew that he was willing to reopen his policy platform, announcing six policy task forces — covering issues including health care, climate and immigration, as well as the economy — that combine his core supporters with left-wing allies of Senator Bernie Sanders, his vanquished primary opponent. This is the 3 time he has announced his 6 policies without putting those policies on the internet. The formation of those committees was aimed in part at easing divisions between Democrats that are already flaring on subjects like the size of a potential infrastructure bill and the intractable issue of health care. Despite having dashed Mr. Sanders’s populist insurgency in the primary, Mr. Biden is still facing loud calls from his party’s activist wing to adopt ideas he has firmly resisted, like single-payer health care. “single-payer health care?” Loser! But in several areas there are already strong signs of consensus within Mr. Biden’s party, as once-cautious electoral and legislative tacticians shed their opposition to huge price tags and disruptive change amid a crisis that has melted traditional obstacles to government action. Democratic leaders say that if they hold power next January, they must be prepared to move to pump trillions more into the economy; enact infrastructure and climate legislation far larger than they previously envisioned; pass a raft of aggressive worker-protection laws; expand government-backed health insurance and create enormous new investments in public-health jobs, health care facilities and child care programs. Rut Row! Here we go again? Discussions are also underway, some of them involving Republicans, about policies that would ban stock buybacks and compel big corporations to share more of their profits with workers. That Ain’t Gonna Happen! And there is more to come: Interviews with more than a dozen influential lawmakers, union leaders, think tank experts and advisers to Mr. Biden and other senior Democrats revealed an intensifying set of deliberations in the Zoom meetings of Mr. Biden’s campaign, the skeletally staffed offices of Capitol Hill, and a web of conference calls and email chains initiated by powerful Democratic interest groups. Across all of them, there is a sense that Democrats must use the next six months — with an unpredictable campaign still in progress — to prepare to act swiftly in case they get the chance. “There is a recognition that this event is more transformative than 2008, more transformative than 9/11, more transformative than the fall of the Berlin Wall,” said Senator Mark Warner of Virginia, a centrist Democrat. Senator Mark Warner of Virginia, left, said that Democratic moderates had recognized the transformative impact of the coronavirus. Credit...Gabriella Demczuk for The New York Times The party’s moderates, Mr. Warner said, had begun to think “exponentially bigger” about a legislative vision for overhauling the economy. Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, who since ending her presidential campaign has laid out an array of plans for countering the pandemic, said she saw a widening recognition within her party that it faced “a big moment that we must meet with big ideas.” Ms. Warren, who has recently spoken several times about policy with Mr. Biden, said she believed the former vice president saw the moment in similarly urgent terms. “The coronavirus has pushed to the front the need for real change,” said Ms. Warren, a contender to be Mr. Biden’s running mate. “Families need more economic security and we need an economy over all that has more resilience and more protection built in for helping each other in a time of crisis.” For Mr. Biden and other leaders of the Democratic establishment, a difficult balancing act still awaits, as they navigate competing pressures from their party’s left flank and the middle-of-the-road voters Mr. Biden is determined to court in the general election. If the current political mood and conditions of the country seems ready-made for promises of dramatic change, that does not necessarily mean most voters are hungering for the same wish list as the ideological left. You Got that Right, the ideological left is the enemy As Mr. Biden surely knows from his years as vice president — most of all the battle over the Affordable Care Act — voters who demand new policies from the government in one moment may not patiently endure the disruptions and unintended consequences that tend to accompany structural change, particularly in times of economic hardship. “GOOBLEY ****” Yet Mr. Biden has plainly changed his outlook on the mission he would pursue in office: As a newly announced presidential candidate last year, Mr. Biden presented himself as a tinkerer under whom “nothing would fundamentally change.” That spirit was absent from a speech Mr. Biden delivered this month from his porch in Delaware, telling voters that his aim was “not just to rebuild the economy, but to transform it.” The task of reimagining the economy is in many respects an unlikely one for Mr. Biden, whose driving interests for most of his career were foreign affairs and criminal justice. His most prominent stint as an economic leader came as vice president, when the Obama administration shepherded a reeling financial sector back to functionality and imposed new regulations on Wall Street — but stopped well short of seeking to overhaul the nature of the American private sector and rewrite the rules of the workplace. Mr. Biden earned praise for his high-profile role overseeing the distribution of a $787 billion economic stimulus program. But the Recovery Act has come to be seen by many Democrats as something of a cautionary tale about governing in a recession: a law that stitched up a tattered economy but failed to spur a strong comeback, leading to deep electoral losses for the party. It is a scenario Democratic leaders are determined not to repeat, particularly progressives who have long faulted the Obama administration for paring back the stimulus in the hope of winning Republican support. Many of Mr. Biden’s close advisers are veterans of the Obama administration with similar political scars from the last recession. But the Biden campaign has also begun to recruit and corral scores of other Democratic experts into a web of advisory groups aimed at generating policy faster and with greater ambition. Stef Feldman, Mr. Biden’s policy director, said much of the campaign’s energy was devoted to mapping out a “quick slate of executive actions” to address pandemic conditions and carry out other aspects of Mr. Biden’s agenda. But Mr. Biden is also soliciting input from a range of party luminaries outside his campaign, some of whom described him as eager for new ideas. “I think that he wants to work and support working families, and I think he’s interested in hearing programs and thinking outside the box as far as what needs to be developed to achieve that goal,” said Lee Saunders, president of the government workers’ union Afscme, who has spoken several times recently with Mr. Biden. Separate from the Biden campaign, about three dozen influential figures at labor unions, think tanks and other progressive institutions have convened a weekly virtual meeting ­— known as the Friday Morning Group — with the same goal, according to multiple participants who spoke about the sessions on the condition of anonymity. Among its motivating forces is a view that liberal Democrats failed in the last recession to take the initiative in specifying plans for achieving large-scale change. This convening of progressive minds, one of several brainstorming-and-planning initiatives underway in Washington, has mulled a range of policy options, including mainstream proposals like major new spending on public health and child care and less widely supported options like creating a universal basic income or offering a federal jobs guarantee. Mary Kay Henry, the president of the Service Employees International Union, said that “we don’t want to stand for any short-term fixes when we need a total overhaul.” Credit...Ethan Miller/Getty Images Mary Kay Henry, president of the Service Employees International Union, which represents more than a million health care workers, said she had briefed Democratic lawmakers in both the House and Senate about her organization’s view that it was time to “change the rules of the economy for the long term,” including a powerful expansion of the rights and employment benefits of lower-income workers. “We don’t want to stand for any short-term fixes when we need a total overhaul,” said Ms. Henry, who has also been in touch with the Biden campaign. Hanging over Mr. Biden’s plans will be uncertainty about elections for the House and Senate that will determine whether Mr. Biden would have cooperative Democratic majorities or face opposition from a Republican-held Senate aligned with conservative business interests. Mr. Trump, who has said little about his goals for another term, has begun accusing Democrats of imperiling an economic recovery by proposing new regulations and taxes. For now, however, the political atmosphere seems to be one of demand for more aggressive action: One Democratic group, Navigator Research, that has been conducting daily polling on the pandemic, found large majorities of voters concerned that the government would do too little to help people and eager for the government to do more, even if it cost a lot of money. Jake Sullivan, one of Mr. Biden’s closest policy advisers, said the former vice president had not shed the underlying view of the American economy that defined his candidacy for much of the last year, when Mr. Biden rejected calls for his party to embrace the agenda of democratic socialism. But, he said, the external circumstances facing a potential Biden administration were different now. “We are going to have to do more, push further, be more creative coming out of this once-in-a-century pandemic — no doubt about it,” Mr. Sullivan said. According to several aides, Mr. Biden is expected to produce detailed plans for funding health care jobs and green infrastructure, and initiatives to rebuild the domestic manufacturing of critical supplies and help Americans who lost jobs in the most devastated industries find lasting employment. In his speech on the economy this month, Mr. Biden also said he wanted to “insist that big corporations, which we’ve bailed out twice in 12 years, set up and take responsibility for their workers and their communities” — a striking flash of populist sentiment that Mr. Biden has not yet translated fully into policy. Senator Michael Bennet of Colorado, a moderate Democrat who also ran for president last year, said he hoped Mr. Biden would embrace policies that would shift wealth and economic power away from the extremely rich and toward workers and middle-class people hit hardest by the pandemic. Mr. Bennet, who has proposed a range of tax and health benefits for low- and middle-income households, said he saw a window for action that did not exist during the last recession. “I think there was not the same recognition, 10 years ago, that there is today, that we’ve had 50 years of an economy that only works for people at the very top,” Mr. Bennet said, adding with blunt impatience: “I think a decade of not achieving the stuff we need to achieve is probably enough.” End Imagine That! The Dems had 8 years to achieve something! What were their best achievements during the Obama/Biden Administration? The last dozen paragraphs has the Dems admitting they screwed up with the poor showing of the Obama/Biden Administration. The DNC is going to need a Miracle from Heaven! Whoops! Most of them do not believe in God!