What Do We Do Now About Our Government?

[Deranged Rhino]

2 hours ago, KRC said:

Taking John Adams' lead, let talk about what we can do to fix the problems in our government. As the OP, I will set the ground rules .

 

Without blaming a political party or any specific politician, how do we fix the systemic issues that have put us in the situation we are in right now? There have been obvious failures on multiple levels that never should have happened. Can it be fixed or are we too far gone? We are still waiting on Barr and Durham to see if any unelected officials will be held accountable. We still have the matter of elected official accountability which is also underway. Other than voting people out of office to handle the elected official problem, how do we address the unelected official part of the problem?

 

What is the over/under on how fast someone will break the rules.

 

 

As long as the people remember they have a voice and a responsibility to hold our elected (and unelected) officials to account, we are not too far gone. The moment the people begin to accept that they are serfs to the political class willingly is the day we're done. And we are right on that razor's edge, with 21st century Stalinsts (who occupy both sides of the aisle) trying their best to push us over the edge. 

 

It's up to us, the people, to make sure that doesn't happen. That starts with voting and being involved, of course, but extends to doing more discerning when it comes to our information consumption -- especially on matters of politics and state.

 

What's the saying, we're always one generation away from losing our freedom? We have to start taking that seriously as a people, and hold the political class to account -- especially when the control systems in the media and establishment class are screaming at us not to. 

[Tiberius]

17 minutes ago, RochesterRob said:

  I know that it pained you greatly to make that statement.  Have a cookie.

You probably believe that. 

[3rdnlng]

59 minutes ago, KRC said:

 

I am a gun guy. I prefer the firing squad.

 

 

 

I completely agree. Freedom is not free of pain. It is better than the alternative.

 

 

 

I agree again. The legislative branch has spent too much time abdicating their responsibilities to the executive and judicial branches. The executive has too quickly overreached because the legislative branch has failed to do their jobs and they want to get their agenda through. Get proper checks and balances in place and do your damn job.

Oh, the irony that we're dealing with. The executive branch has been gaining more power over the last few decades and the legislative branch hasn't put up much of a fight over it. Trump comes along and wants to adhere to the constitution (ie. codify DACA into law) by telling Congress to do their job and they claim he is abusing his power and obstructing Congress on matters that are made up. The eight years of Obama were chock full of pushing Executive Orders, making up mountains of regulations and naming Czars to lead agencies so that they didn't need to pass muster in the Senate. 

[Foxx]

an office of oversight, outside of the government apparatus, would go a long way towards restoring faith in our elite, both elected and appointed. having government operated offices of oversight is simply not ideal due to the obvious conflict of interest that it presents.

Edited December 12, 2019 by Foxx

[row_33]

realize that lefties have given up the class struggle and care only about POWER in any conceivable way in family, church, school, government, riding the subway

 

you can't argue with them because truth and logic mean nothing, they have no concept of history or morals, all they care about is POWER

 

so judge accordingly when trying to reason with them, avoid it at all costs if possible...

 

 

[John Adams]

42 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

Oh, the irony that we're dealing with. The executive branch has been gaining more power over the last few decades and the legislative branch hasn't put up much of a fight over it. 

 

Congress's ineffectiveness is mostly due to the unwillingness to work together across the aisle. Biden, McCain, Boehner to pick a few hot button names from this board could do it. The current group lacks the political skill and backbone. Hell, one of the landmark pieces of legislation in the Civil Rights Act was passed because Johnson, a 100% racist SOB, made it happen by twisting a lot of arms, but those arms could still be twisted in that era.

 

Contrast them with:

 

Mitch McConnell, "The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president." Obama ramming though the ACA with a Congress following the marching orders that  "elections have consequences. Pelosi impeachment. Etc. 

 

It's hard to be effective at pushing back, let alone writing helpful legislation, when you can't work across a party line. That doesn't mean it's going to be clean and kumbaya in Congress--but a two-party Congress won't get it's mojo back unless the parties stop demonizing each other and show America it can still do good work.  

 

8 minutes ago, row_33 said:

realize that lefties have given up the class struggle and care only about POWER in any conceivable way in family, church, school, government, riding the subway

 

you can't argue with them because truth and logic mean nothing, they have no concept of history or morals, all they care about is POWER

 

so judge accordingly when trying to reason with them, avoid it at all costs if possible...

 

 

 

BUZZ! Take it to another thread. That's not the intent here. Plus, go fix your own broken country. 

Edited December 12, 2019 by John Adams

[Nanker]

Could outlawing Political National Committees work?
 

 

Nah, fuggettaboudit.  

2 minutes ago, John Adams said:

 

Congress's ineffectiveness is mostly due to the unwillingness to work together across the aisle. Biden, McCain, Boehner to pick a few hot button names from this board could do it. The current group lacks the political skill and backbone. Hell, one of the landmark pieces of legislation in the Civil Rights Act was passed because Johnson, a 100% racist SOB, made it happen by twisting a lot of arms, but those arms could still be twisted in that era.

 

Contrast them with:

 

Mitch McConnell, "The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president." Obama ramming though the ACA with a Congress following the marching orders that  "elections have consequences. Pelosi impeachment. Etc. 

 

It's hard to be effective at pushing back, let alone writing helpful legislation, when you can't work across a party line. That doesn't mean it's going to be clean and kumbaya in Congress--but a two-party Congress won't get it's mojo back unless the parties stop demonizing each other and show America it can still do good work.  

 

 

BUZZ! Take it to another thread. That's not the intent here. Plus, go fix your own broken country. 

And to think this all started with a cigar, a BJ, and a blue dress while the Pope was in Cuba visiting with Fidel. 

[Foxx]

3 minutes ago, Nanker said:

Could outlawing Political National Committees work?
 

 

Nah, fuggettaboudit.  

i say we outlaw lobbyists as well.

[John Adams]

2 minutes ago, Nanker said:

Could outlawing Political National Committees work?
 

 

I'd like open primaries, but that's a state issue. I registered D for the first time so I could vote in this primary. Registered R last time to vote in the R primary. But it's ***** annoying to have to switch back and forth like my say as a registered I doesn't matter. 

 

- Get rid of gerrymandering, which could help people live with the "other" instead of segregating voting blocks. 

 

1 minute ago, Foxx said:

i say we outlaw lobbyists as well.

 

I hate a lobbyist too, but there are some reasons for them that make sense. Take some group affected by a health issue. As individuals, it's hard to get heard. Hire a lobbyist and they might get someone's ear. 

 

This is one of those freedom ain't free things to me. I think a better way to skin this cat is to try to get elected officials to sign a pledge not to take meetings or money from lobbyists. 

[3rdnlng]

10 minutes ago, John Adams said:

 

Congress's ineffectiveness is mostly due to the unwillingness to work together across the aisle. Biden, McCain, Boehner to pick a few hot button names from this board could do it. The current group lacks the political skill and backbone. Hell, one of the landmark pieces of legislation in the Civil Rights Act was passed because Johnson, a 100% racist SOB, made it happen by twisting a lot of arms, but those arms could still be twisted in that era.

 

Contrast them with:

 

Mitch McConnell, "The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president." Obama ramming though the ACA with a Congress following the marching orders that  "elections have consequences. Pelosi impeachment. Etc. 

 

It's hard to be effective at pushing back, let alone writing helpful legislation, when you can't work across a party line. That doesn't mean it's going to be clean and kumbaya in Congress--but a two-party Congress won't get it's mojo back unless the parties stop demonizing each other and show America it can still do good work.  

 

 

BUZZ! Take it to another thread. That's not the intent here. Plus, go fix your own broken country. 

You only quoted part of a thought.

[Foxx]

16 minutes ago, John Adams said:

... I hate a lobbyist too, but there are some reasons for them that make sense. Take some group affected by a health issue. As individuals, it's hard to get heard. Hire a lobbyist and they might get someone's ear. 

 

This is one of those freedom ain't free things to me. I think a better way to skin this cat is to try to get elected officials to sign a pledge not to take meetings or money from lobbyists. 

nope, sorry but do you honestly think having elected officials to swear not to take money is going to actually happen? i mean, sure they may swear not to but you can't actually believe they won't, at least i hope you wouldn't anyways. this is how we got where we are in the first place.

 

i agree that there are groups and individuals who need to be heard. however... this is why we have a House of Representatives, to, represent. the. people., period. they have gotten so far away from what was intended it's not funny. the whole current system of a lobbyist needs to change. just a thought but, we can start by having forums where the elected Representatives can/have to attend and hear the concerns of groups and individuals... i know, we can call them Town Halls. what a great ***** idea! additionally, they should be required to hear them on a bi-monthly schedule if not monthly.

Edited December 12, 2019 by Foxx

[John Adams]

5 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

You only quoted part of a thought.

 

Because the remainder was the partisan crap KRC was hoping to avoid. If you're going to use examples, try some from both sides. 

3 minutes ago, Foxx said:

nope, sorry but do you honestly think having elected officials to swear not to take money is going to actually happen? i mean, sure they may swear not to but you can't actually believe they won't, at least i hope you wouldn't anyways. this is how we got where we are in the first place.

 

No, but people who get busted breaking pledges like that usually pay the consequences. 

[3rdnlng]

2 minutes ago, John Adams said:

 

Because the remainder was the partisan crap KRC was hoping to avoid. If you're going to use examples, try some from both sides. 

Was I wrong?

[KRC]

Looks like this is devolving to partisan BS. Take that crap to another thread, you degenerates. ?

[Foxx]

2 minutes ago, John Adams said:

... No, but people who get busted breaking pledges like that usually pay the consequences. 

did you read the Panama Papers?

[John Adams]

1 minute ago, 3rdnlng said:

Was I wrong?

 

No, but I beat you to it citing Obama's overreach. That's not the point. Discuss how we all can help solve the problem for America.

 

KRC said maybe.. "Don't point a finger until you realize three are pointing back at you." This is not meant to be a partisan hackery thread. 1 or 2 threads already here for partisan BS. Go find them and roll around. 

[Foxx]

1 minute ago, John Adams said:

 

No, but I beat you to it citing Obama's overreach. That's not the point. Discuss how we all can help solve the problem for America.

 

KRC said maybe.. "Don't point a finger until you realize three are pointing back at you." This is not meant to be a partisan hackery thread. 1 or 2 threads already here for partisan BS. Go find them and roll around. 

it's not your thread to police. 

[John Adams]

Just now, Foxx said:

it's not your thread to police. 

 

Thanks for policing me. 

 

It's our thread, our board, our country, our planet to improve. 

[3rdnlng]

3 minutes ago, John Adams said:

 

No, but I beat you to it citing Obama's overreach. That's not the point. Discuss how we all can help solve the problem for America.

 

KRC said maybe.. "Don't point a finger until you realize three are pointing back at you." This is not meant to be a partisan hackery thread. 1 or 2 threads already here for partisan BS. Go find them and roll around. 

Horseshit. It's funny how anyone who disagrees with you gets labeled a "partisan". 

[RochesterRob]

14 minutes ago, John Adams said:

 

No, but I beat you to it citing Obama's overreach. That's not the point. Discuss how we all can help solve the problem for America.

 

KRC said maybe.. "Don't point a finger until you realize three are pointing back at you." This is not meant to be a partisan hackery thread. 1 or 2 threads already here for partisan BS. Go find them and roll around. 

  But I beat to you that in terms of pointing out examples help clarify points and eliminate unwanted speculation.  You brought fair criticism to yourself based on your numerous prior posts.  Anyways, some of us are discussing the topic without partisanship.  Civics classes all 4 years of high school.  Yay or nay?