Image 01 Image 03

Gaslighting Biden White House Calls COVID Bill With Zero GOP Support “Bipartisan”

Gaslighting Biden White House Calls COVID Bill With Zero GOP Support “Bipartisan”

There is strong voter support for “a” coronavirus relief package, so it’s “bipartisan” legislation. Or something.

Democrats love to redefine words to suit their purposes, and the latest example of this from the Biden White House is a doozy.  They are reportedly calling the Democrat-only support for Biden’s $1.9 trillion COVID (aka the Pelosi Payoff) bill “bipartisan.”

Both Democrats and Republicans have long abused the word, of course. Legislation passed with a mere handful of—or even only one or two—opposition party votes is hailed as “bipartisan” because politicians understand that a good segment of the American people prefer legislation that is not rammed through by one party.

The Biden White House is taking this one step further.  Now, apparently, “bipartisan” means without a single member of the GOP supporting the legislation . . . just polling showing that some GOP mayors, “officials outside Washington,” and voters do support it.

NBC News reports (archive link):

In a bid to align his unity pitch with his pursuit of a bold agenda, President Joe Biden has been selling his $1.9 trillion Covid-19 package as bipartisan.

But that message crashed into a hard reality early Saturday morning when the House passed the bill — without a single Republican vote.

In recent weeks, Biden’s chief of staff Ron Klain has marshaled the White House messaging apparatus to make the case that the president’s aid package is bipartisan, not because any GOP lawmakers have signed on, but because polls show it has support from a large majority of the public, and because some Republican mayors and officials outside Washington have backed it.

The bill now heads to the Senate, where it also lacks GOP support.

Lacking GOP support doesn’t mean, according to the Biden White House, that it’s a partisan bill being shoved through by one party.

Just ask White House chief of staff, Ron Klain.

The support for “a” Wuhan coronavirus relief package cited by ABC News is not support for Biden’s $1.9 trillion boondoggle.  Even if it were, American voters do not vote on legislation; their elected representatives do.  And not one GOP representative voted for it in the House, and it seems unlikely a single GOP senator will, either.

These people are shameless . . . and counting on uninformed voters buying their gaslighting lies.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


If we had a functioning press, they wouldn’t be able to get away with this kind of outright lie.


    Paul in reply to irv. | February 27, 2021 at 6:17 pm

    If we had a functioning press, this senile old grifter would never have been “elected.”

    We do have a functioning press.

    Unfortuately, it is functioning like Joseph Goebell’s press.

    George_Kaplan in reply to irv. | February 28, 2021 at 6:18 am

    According to the NYT the GOP aren’t relevant in passing bipartisan bills. All that’s required for a bill to be bipartisan is a majority of American voters – possibly including a majority of Republican voters. Thus so long as gun control measures or legislative relief to Dreamers can be shown to be popular, bills pushing such agendas are bipartisan regardless of Republican opposition.

    Then again the NYT also believe Biden’s call for unity means draining the partisan (GOP?) poison from the body politic and ending ideological (right-wing?) extremism.

Don’t bet against Mittens not voting for it…

How far can they stretch a green-back? A post-mortem regret for Planned Parent/hood, denial and stigmatization of early, low-risk, effective treatments that mitigated disease progression, hospitalization, excess deaths, and collateral damage.

Ohio Historian | February 27, 2021 at 6:43 pm

As anyone with two brain cells to rub together could tell Biden, the bipartisan part of the vote was AGAINST the bill. In fact, if there were two more Democrats that had sense instead of Pelosi’s promises, it never would have passed the House.

Cognitive decline puts it mildly for Biden.

    henrybowman in reply to Ohio Historian. | February 27, 2021 at 10:20 pm

    You all misunderstand. “Bipartisan” here doesn’t mean that both parties approve of the bill… it is a statement that the bill is so perfect that both parties SHOULD approve it.

    You know, just like “common sense gun laws” are written to appeal to everybody who doesn’t know a single actual thing about guns or gun crime.

Communists and Socialists.

JusticeDelivered | February 27, 2021 at 7:13 pm

Without Trump, there would not be any vaccine today, it would have been 3-4 years. Rub their noses in it.

I wonder if he ever used cadaver grafts as a source of “plugs”. Nah, probably not with actual knowledge of the source.

Imagine, what if the pope challenged O’Biden to “duke it out” behind the gym? Who might prevail?

Who? At a guess, SATAN would prevail. Besides, the pope has good hats and probably wrote his own term papers.

It could be that the demented communist pedophile is simply too stupid to understand what the world bipartisan means.

They have different definition of bipartisan than us.

Ours is something that is agreeable to both sides likely with both sides being about equal in crafting it.

Theirs is we are reasonable perfect people and everything we do is moderate and bipartisan you oppose our reasonable bipartisan moderation therefore you are a hack and an extremist perhaps a dangerous one and insane to.

biden* has a long, very long history of lying. So why is anyone surprised at another lie?
Now if he told the truth I’m sure the earth would stand still.

Now, now, the Dems just know that a lot of GOPers would happily vote for the bill if only they weren’t being bullied by a bunch of us right wing extremists, so that makes it bipartisan.

Actually I’m sure it IS bipartisan.

They have a couple of the piece of shit RINO Senators lined up to give them the ‘bipartisan’ cover. They just forgot that they needed to vote first.

Does anybody doubt for a second that RINO trash like Romney are going to not only vote for it but make a sanctimonious speech about how their ‘conscience demands’ that they ‘help suffering Americans’?

Take note, fellow LIists:

1) The now-in-power Lefty-Dems are continually playing off the GOP congressional conference against their voting constituents, kissing up to one or the other to disparage, marginalize, and do their best to hurt the efforts and effect of the related other or the one in the end — ie, before the midterm, and later the presidential election.

If this is sound, the tactic’s key purpose would likely be, I would guess, to dramatically discern the will of the Republican constituent base and cut it away from the voting behavior of their congressional delegation in both chambers.

Isolate the elected, voting delegates from their base. It seems plain enough.

2) At the same time, the overarching issue here, or elephant in the room, as it were, is the $1,400 — the “$2,000” promise made in GA is simply another verbal deceit the Party of Wilson will have to spin clean on another day) — Nancy is dangling before all eligible Americans (and illegal entrants) — sheer duplicity, wholesale dishonesty, and outright cynical demagoguery be damned, along with the fiscal vitality of the United States and the dollar’s value in relation to the high risk of inflation and the world financial order.

It’s just that friends take care of friends, (including undocumented, non-taxpaying, non-citizen, future Lefty-Dem voters so newly welcome), all at citizen/taxpayers’ expense.

(As Nancy may have expressed to her fellow CCP-owned comrade and husband one night at the dinner table, in front of their $25,000 ‘fridge, “Well, somebody’s gotta cover the cost of, say, our fine collection of ice cream in the freezer, and it sure as hell won’t be us!” her special Catholic sentiment revealing itself so clearly, and fraudulently.)

3) If such a maneuver at this point in the PPP game isn’t about worshipping at the altar of Divide & Rule,* I don’t understand the time-tested, Philippian/Machiavellian doctrine at all.
“Tradition attributes the origin of the motto to Philip II of Macedon [father, in case you’re unaware, of Alexander the Great]: Greek: διαίρει καὶ βασίλευε — transliterated as diaírei kài basíleue — in Ancient Greek, meaning “divide and rule” . . . Machiavelli advises [the power-lusting “Prince{-ss}”] that this act should be achieved either by making him[/her] suspicious of his[/her] men in whom [s]he trusted, or by giving him[/her] cause that [s]he has to separate his[/her] forces, and, because of this, become weaker.”

The gendered writing cited has here been edited to meet the apparent fact that The Speaker seems to have followed and adopted this ancient military/political maxim to tortuous, painful, wishful effect, thus far.