(06-19-2020 12:22 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(06-19-2020 12:19 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  No surprise here....
As I said in another post, Black Lives Matter needs to be labeled a domestic terrorist organization. They are no different from the KKK or any other hate group.

I read earlier today that over 2/3 of Americans support BLM. Now that Americans see the true mission of that twisted organization, watch their support plummet.

This news coming out can’t help The Democrats plan to use BLM to galvanize black support.

You'd have to first start by actually labeling the KKK as a domestic terrorist organization.

Unlike BLM, the KKK is toothless. Nobody cares about them, and leftists that keep bringing them up are being completely disingenuous.

(06-19-2020 12:22 PM)Bronco14 Wrote:  Anyone can go to the BLM website & click a few pages to find out their endgame goals are Marxism

Yep. It's all right there. Disturbing stuff.

(06-20-2020 11:14 AM)GrayBeard Wrote:  So wait...the Anti-Fascists (Antifa) is rioting with the Marxist/Fascists. Oh that is rich.

Strange bedfellows. This should show how much of a threat Trump is to both organizations.

(06-20-2020 11:22 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-20-2020 12:03 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  Well...This backs up Bret Weinstein's comments on JRE about BLM being in aligned with other elements including anarchists. Is there an organization to all of this that we are being slow to understand?

Yes and the money is coming from the same sources in did for the Black Panthers and Weather Underground in the late 60's, Communist China and Georgia Soros among others. The link between Bernadine Dohrn and Bill Ayers who mentored Barrack Obama and these movements is unmistakable.

The great crime of Richard Nixon (and then Ford) was not Watergate, but the failure to prosecute the criminals who posed as Viet Nam War protestors but which received funding from enemies of the state to carry out violent acts.

The mood at the time was to bury the past and quickly move on so some of these extremely dangerous radicals were able to move into the mainstream and into education and keep their propaganda against the U.S. flowing. Had we ended them then, much of this would not be happening now.

It was tough for Nixon to play the China Card and go after Maoist funded revolutionaries at the same time. Ditto for H.W. Bush, Clinton, W. Bush, and Obama who was cozy with them from the start.

I really have not delved into this much..but..I have no doubt there is money behind this from powerful sources. Soros is a puzzling one to me in regard to the lack of journalistic investigation of his influence. Im guessing that he has most of them in his pocket?

if this is the agenda of the democratic party, why the need to disrupt the campaigns of the bern?

(06-21-2020 09:02 AM)Lush Wrote:  if this is the agenda of the democratic party, why the need to disrupt the campaigns of the bern?

Because ANTIFA and BLM claim Marxism but are actually Fascist which is why the Corporations fund them.

Bernie is actually a Communist/Socialist and no friend of large Corporate power structures.

It is the odd situation where those who want a True Republic actually have the same Anti-trust interests or anti-conglomerate interests as true Socialists/Communists even though we would differ on absolutely everything else.

When you marry Corporate Money to mob rule you have fascism. When it is elected as was Hitler and it seizes power and changes government structure as it tried to do under Obama and more subtly under previous Republican and Democrat presidents (Bushes and Clinton) you get the Gestapo controlling things for corporate interest and that is what is actually called the "Deep State" today. You have the appearance of normalcy, but the system has been altered to form an enforcement state this time by regulations and executive orders. But definitely outside of the balanced power structure of SCOTUS/CONGRESS/POTUS and coopting any or all of those branches and ignoring the ones not controlled and enforcing rule through the national police state. Think Waco, Ruby Ridge, and Elian Gonzales under Clinton. IRS targeting under Obama.

(06-21-2020 10:47 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-21-2020 09:02 AM)Lush Wrote:  if this is the agenda of the democratic party, why the need to disrupt the campaigns of the bern?

Because ANTIFA and BLM claim Marxism but are actually Fascist which is why the Corporations fund them.
Bernie is actually a Communist/Socialist and no friend of large Corporate power structures.
It is the odd situation where those who want a True Republic actually have the same Anti-trust interests or anti-conglomerate interests as true Socialists/Communists even though we would differ on absolutely everything else.
When you marry Corporate Money to mob rule you have fascism. When it is elected as was Hitler and it seizes power and changes government structure as it tried to do under Obama and more subtly under previous Republican and Democrat presidents (Bushes and Clinton) you get the Gestapo controlling things for corporate interest and that is what is actually called the "Deep State" today. You have the appearance of normalcy, but the system has been altered to form an enforcement state this time by regulations and executive orders. But definitely outside of the balanced power structure of SCOTUS/CONGRESS/POTUS and coopting any or all of those branches and ignoring the ones not controlled and enforcing rule through the national police state. Think Waco, Ruby Ridge, and Elian Gonzales under Clinton. IRS targeting under Obama.

I think the elephant in the room that keeps getting ignored is the massive transfer of power from congress to the various alphabet soup executive agencies, run by nameless, faceless, unelected, and unaccountable bureaucrats. FDR started this with the great depression (which his policies arguably prolonged) and WWII (which his policies obviously won). But we basically fought poverty with socialism/communism and then fought fascism with fascism. There's a reason why FDR had a lot of captains of industry of his day come to work in government. They solidified their power base. And that transfer has continued to this day.

And congress does not want to restrain or reverse it. Why not? Easy. Congress has an incredibly cushy lifestyle, particularly after they've been there a few years. If they had to take votes on issues, they might offend their base and get bounced out. But they simply enact a law to pass the ball to some agency, go home and say, "Look, we solved the problem," and have no accountability for what actually gets done. So they get re-elected. It's a game and they know it, and they play it well.

(06-21-2020 11:39 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(06-21-2020 10:47 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-21-2020 09:02 AM)Lush Wrote:  if this is the agenda of the democratic party, why the need to disrupt the campaigns of the bern?

Because ANTIFA and BLM claim Marxism but are actually Fascist which is why the Corporations fund them.
Bernie is actually a Communist/Socialist and no friend of large Corporate power structures.
It is the odd situation where those who want a True Republic actually have the same Anti-trust interests or anti-conglomerate interests as true Socialists/Communists even though we would differ on absolutely everything else.
When you marry Corporate Money to mob rule you have fascism. When it is elected as was Hitler and it seizes power and changes government structure as it tried to do under Obama and more subtly under previous Republican and Democrat presidents (Bushes and Clinton) you get the Gestapo controlling things for corporate interest and that is what is actually called the "Deep State" today. You have the appearance of normalcy, but the system has been altered to form an enforcement state this time by regulations and executive orders. But definitely outside of the balanced power structure of SCOTUS/CONGRESS/POTUS and coopting any or all of those branches and ignoring the ones not controlled and enforcing rule through the national police state. Think Waco, Ruby Ridge, and Elian Gonzales under Clinton. IRS targeting under Obama.

I think the elephant in the room that keeps getting ignored is the massive transfer of power from congress to the various alphabet soup executive agencies, run by nameless, faceless, unelected, and unaccountable bureaucrats. FDR started this with the great depression (which his policies arguably prolonged) and WWII (which his policies obviously won). But we basically fought poverty with socialism/communism and then fought fascism with fascism. There's a reason why FDR had a lot of captains of industry of his day come to work in government. They solidified their power base. And that transfer has continued to this day.

And congress does not want to restrain or reverse it. Why not? Easy. Congress has an incredibly cushy lifestyle, particularly after they've been there a few years. If they had to take votes on issues, they might offend their base and get bounced out. But they simply enact a law to pass the ball to some agency, go home and say, "Look, we solved the problem," and have no accountability for what actually gets done. So they get re-elected. It's a game and they know it, and they play it well.

Yep, I was speaking more in enforcement terms, but you are talking about the process for daily functioning, but yes they are all part of the same structure which is unelected and outside of the structures most believe are in charge. Nothing illustrates this quite as clearly as the resistance to Trump. The process has had to out itself to try to thwart him, but how many people actually see it for what it is? I always hope many, but I am afraid it is way fewer. And therein lies the inability for the election of people committed to reforming the current structure to be more in line with that desired by the founders.

(06-21-2020 12:07 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-21-2020 11:39 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(06-21-2020 10:47 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-21-2020 09:02 AM)Lush Wrote:  if this is the agenda of the democratic party, why the need to disrupt the campaigns of the bern?

Because ANTIFA and BLM claim Marxism but are actually Fascist which is why the Corporations fund them.
Bernie is actually a Communist/Socialist and no friend of large Corporate power structures.
It is the odd situation where those who want a True Republic actually have the same Anti-trust interests or anti-conglomerate interests as true Socialists/Communists even though we would differ on absolutely everything else.
When you marry Corporate Money to mob rule you have fascism. When it is elected as was Hitler and it seizes power and changes government structure as it tried to do under Obama and more subtly under previous Republican and Democrat presidents (Bushes and Clinton) you get the Gestapo controlling things for corporate interest and that is what is actually called the "Deep State" today. You have the appearance of normalcy, but the system has been altered to form an enforcement state this time by regulations and executive orders. But definitely outside of the balanced power structure of SCOTUS/CONGRESS/POTUS and coopting any or all of those branches and ignoring the ones not controlled and enforcing rule through the national police state. Think Waco, Ruby Ridge, and Elian Gonzales under Clinton. IRS targeting under Obama.

I think the elephant in the room that keeps getting ignored is the massive transfer of power from congress to the various alphabet soup executive agencies, run by nameless, faceless, unelected, and unaccountable bureaucrats. FDR started this with the great depression (which his policies arguably prolonged) and WWII (which his policies obviously won). But we basically fought poverty with socialism/communism and then fought fascism with fascism. There's a reason why FDR had a lot of captains of industry of his day come to work in government. They solidified their power base. And that transfer has continued to this day.
And congress does not want to restrain or reverse it. Why not? Easy. Congress has an incredibly cushy lifestyle, particularly after they've been there a few years. If they had to take votes on issues, they might offend their base and get bounced out. But they simply enact a law to pass the ball to some agency, go home and say, "Look, we solved the problem," and have no accountability for what actually gets done. So they get re-elected. It's a game and they know it, and they play it well.

Yep, I was speaking more in enforcement terms, but you are talking about the process for daily functioning, but yes they are all part of the same structure which is unelected and outside of the structures most believe are in charge. Nothing illustrates this quite as clearly as the resistance to Trump. The process has had to out itself to try to thwart him, but how many people actually see it for what it is? I always hope many, but I am afraid it is way fewer. And therein lies the inability for the election of people committed to reforming the current structure to be more in line with that desired by the founders.

I'm ready for somebody to run against this. I'm ready for somebody to say, "Congress critters have to live by the same rules as everybody else, same health care, same retirement plan, same rules as the rest of us. And they have to take accountability for overseeing the role of nameless, faceless, unelected, and unaccountable bureaucrats in screwing the American people." The way to get money out of government is to get government out of the money business--determining winners and losers in the economy. It's not congress or the white house where corporate America lobbies and exerts overly massive influence. It's at places like OSHA and EPA and so forth.

I think it will have to be republicans, because democrats are too firmly enmeshed in every level of the Deep State. I think they could win elections based on that, but they would be fighting a 100-mph headwind in implementing it.

(06-21-2020 12:23 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(06-21-2020 12:07 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-21-2020 11:39 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(06-21-2020 10:47 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-21-2020 09:02 AM)Lush Wrote:  if this is the agenda of the democratic party, why the need to disrupt the campaigns of the bern?

Because ANTIFA and BLM claim Marxism but are actually Fascist which is why the Corporations fund them.
Bernie is actually a Communist/Socialist and no friend of large Corporate power structures.
It is the odd situation where those who want a True Republic actually have the same Anti-trust interests or anti-conglomerate interests as true Socialists/Communists even though we would differ on absolutely everything else.
When you marry Corporate Money to mob rule you have fascism. When it is elected as was Hitler and it seizes power and changes government structure as it tried to do under Obama and more subtly under previous Republican and Democrat presidents (Bushes and Clinton) you get the Gestapo controlling things for corporate interest and that is what is actually called the "Deep State" today. You have the appearance of normalcy, but the system has been altered to form an enforcement state this time by regulations and executive orders. But definitely outside of the balanced power structure of SCOTUS/CONGRESS/POTUS and coopting any or all of those branches and ignoring the ones not controlled and enforcing rule through the national police state. Think Waco, Ruby Ridge, and Elian Gonzales under Clinton. IRS targeting under Obama.

I think the elephant in the room that keeps getting ignored is the massive transfer of power from congress to the various alphabet soup executive agencies, run by nameless, faceless, unelected, and unaccountable bureaucrats. FDR started this with the great depression (which his policies arguably prolonged) and WWII (which his policies obviously won). But we basically fought poverty with socialism/communism and then fought fascism with fascism. There's a reason why FDR had a lot of captains of industry of his day come to work in government. They solidified their power base. And that transfer has continued to this day.
And congress does not want to restrain or reverse it. Why not? Easy. Congress has an incredibly cushy lifestyle, particularly after they've been there a few years. If they had to take votes on issues, they might offend their base and get bounced out. But they simply enact a law to pass the ball to some agency, go home and say, "Look, we solved the problem," and have no accountability for what actually gets done. So they get re-elected. It's a game and they know it, and they play it well.

Yep, I was speaking more in enforcement terms, but you are talking about the process for daily functioning, but yes they are all part of the same structure which is unelected and outside of the structures most believe are in charge. Nothing illustrates this quite as clearly as the resistance to Trump. The process has had to out itself to try to thwart him, but how many people actually see it for what it is? I always hope many, but I am afraid it is way fewer. And therein lies the inability for the election of people committed to reforming the current structure to be more in line with that desired by the founders.

I'm ready for somebody to run against this. I'm ready for somebody to say, "Congress critters have to live by the same rules as everybody else, same health care, same retirement plan, same rules as the rest of us. And they have to take accountability for overseeing the role of nameless, faceless, unelected, and unaccountable bureaucrats in screwing the American people." The way to get money out of government is to get government out of the money business--determining winners and losers in the economy. It's not congress or the white house where corporate America lobbies and exerts overly massive influence. It's at places like OSHA and EPA and so forth.

I think it will have to be republicans, because democrats are too firmly enmeshed in every level of the Deep State. I think they could win elections based on that, but they would be fighting a 100-mph headwind in implementing it.

I'm a go for all of that!

Good discussion, Owl. I've been concerned about that issue for years. Nobody talks about it and the problem just grows. Add in that rules have been put in place to where it becomes almost impossible to fire people from the bureaucracies. Allowing government workers to unionize was one of the biggest mistakes made at the Federal level. Bureaucrats are the true power in our government and have the ability to slow walk and impede policies put into place by an administration.

I agree that a politician could run against this but if he/she won, then what? Kind of hard to stop something by yourself. Members of Congress have for far too long abdicated their responsibilities and farmed out their work to others. They are unlikely to want to reverse that and have to actually work for the people.

Not sure what the answer is to this problem.

(06-21-2020 01:25 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  Good discussion, Owl. I've been concerned about that issue for years. Nobody talks about it and the problem just grows. Add in that rules have been put in place to where it becomes almost impossible to fire people from the bureaucracies. Allowing government workers to unionize was one of the biggest mistakes made at the Federal level. Bureaucrats are the true power in our government and have the ability to slow walk and impede policies put into place by an administration.
I agree that a politician could run against this but if he/she won, then what? Kind of hard to stop something by yourself. Members of Congress have for far too long abdicated their responsibilities and farmed out their work to others. They are unlikely to want to reverse that and have to actually work for the people.
Not sure what the answer is to this problem.

Thanks.

Here's my three-part approach:

1) Subject every new rule-making to congressional review and consent--automatically if the economic impact is more than some number (say, $1 billion), and otherwise by petition of 20% of combined membership of congress;
2) Subject every agency and every regulation it has issued to sunset review every 10 years, at each 10-year anniversary year of its creation; and
3) Replace the adjudication of disputes from a hearing before an administrative law judge (ALJ) who reports ultimately to the executive director of the agency with either a) an independent office of ALJs within the executive branch, like Texas and Oregon, or preferably b) separate Article III administrative law courts within each judicial district, like Europe.

(06-21-2020 01:38 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Here's my three-part approach:

1) Subject every new rule-making to congressional review and consent--automatically if the economic impact is more than some number (say, $1 billion), and otherwise by petition of 20% of combined membership of congress;
2) Subject every agency and every regulation it has issued to sunset review every 10 years, at each 10-year anniversary year of its creation; and
3) Replace the adjudication of disputes from a hearing before an administrative law judge (ALJ) who reports ultimately to the executive director of the agency with either a) an independent office of ALJs within the executive branch, like Texas and Oregon, or preferably b) separate Article III administrative law courts within each judicial district, like Europe.

As the rules and regulations put into place by these bureaucracies are essentially law, some process is needed to reign them in and make the agencies issuing them accountable. I think your 3 point approach would be a great start.

On #2, who should do the sunset review? Should that be done by the House?

(06-21-2020 01:46 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  

(06-21-2020 01:38 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Here's my three-part approach:
1) Subject every new rule-making to congressional review and consent--automatically if the economic impact is more than some number (say, $1 billion), and otherwise by petition of 20% of combined membership of congress;
2) Subject every agency and every regulation it has issued to sunset review every 10 years, at each 10-year anniversary year of its creation; and
3) Replace the adjudication of disputes from a hearing before an administrative law judge (ALJ) who reports ultimately to the executive director of the agency with either a) an independent office of ALJs within the executive branch, like Texas and Oregon, or preferably b) separate Article III administrative law courts within each judicial district, like Europe.

As the rules and regulations put into place by these bureaucracies are essentially law, some process is needed to reign them in and make the agencies issuing them accountable. I think your 3 point approach would be a great start.
On #2, who should do the sunset review? Should that be done by the House?

Both houses of congress for 1 and 2.