PDA

View Full Version : Who rules America?



Mainecoons
08-13-2014, 08:02 AM
This comes as no surprise to me.


A shattering new study by two political science professors has found that ordinary Americans have virtually no impact whatsoever on the making of national policy in our country. The analysts found that rich individuals and business-controlled interest groups largely shape policy outcomes in the United States.This study should be a loud wake-up call to the vast majority of Americans who are bypassed by their government. To reclaim the promise of American democracy, ordinary citizens must act positively to change the relationship between the people and our government
The new study, with the jaw-clenching title of "Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens," is forthcoming in the fall 2014 edition of Perspectives on Politics. Its authors, Martin Gilens of Princeton University and Benjamin Page of Northwestern University, examined survey data on 1,779 national policy issues for which they could gauge the preferences of average citizens, economic elites, mass-based interest groups and business-dominated interest groups. They used statistical methods to determine the influence of each of these four groups on policy outcomes, including both policies that are adopted and rejected.

Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/civil-rights/214857-who-rules-america#ixzz3AHDf10uz

Cigar
08-13-2014, 08:22 AM
Who ever has the money and or power

Mister D
08-13-2014, 08:23 AM
Who ever has the money and or power

lol

Alyosha
08-13-2014, 08:25 AM
Voting changes nothing. Fear changes a lot.

Chris
08-13-2014, 08:40 AM
Who ever has the money and or power

Better put, whoever has the money and/or votes buys political favors. From link: "The analysts found that when controlling for the power of economic elites and organized interest groups, the influence of ordinary Americans registers at a "non-significant, near-zero level.""

Libhater
08-13-2014, 08:42 AM
Those ordinary Americans who feel and realize they have no power are massing together at a grassroots level to form what we in the real world would call the Tea Party Express.

Alyosha
08-13-2014, 08:45 AM
Those ordinary Americans who feel and realize they have no power are massing together at a grassroots level to form what we in the real world would call the Tea Party Express.

No. They allowed the nutballs to ruin their brand.

Chris
08-13-2014, 08:50 AM
Tea Party Express is national, it's not grassroots. Per the OP link: "Ordinary citizens in recent decades have largely abandoned their participation in grassroots movements. Politicians respond to the mass mobilization...."

Common Sense
08-13-2014, 08:52 AM
Lobbyists....

You could try to change your lobbyist laws...unfortunately those laws would probably be written by lobbyists (like most of the other ones).

Common Sense
08-13-2014, 08:53 AM
Tea Party Express is national, it's not grassroots. Per the OP link: "Ordinary citizens in recent decades have largely abandoned their participation in grassroots movements. Politicians respond to the mass mobilization...."

Not to mention it's supported by two of the biggest lobbyists in the nation.

Alyosha
08-13-2014, 08:55 AM
Tea Party Express is national, it's not grassroots. Per the OP link: "Ordinary citizens in recent decades have largely abandoned their participation in grassroots movements. Politicians respond to the mass mobilization...."

Doesn't matter. The brand is ruined.

Alyosha
08-13-2014, 08:56 AM
Lobbyists....

You could try to change your lobbyist laws...unfortunately those laws would probably be written by lobbyists (like most of the other ones).

And you can outlaw pot and people won't smoke it. :rollseyes:

Chris
08-13-2014, 08:56 AM
Not to mention it's supported by two of the biggest lobbyists in the nation.

Tea Party Express is a PAC. So who are these two lobbyists?

1751_Texan
08-13-2014, 08:57 AM
lol

Jews?

Chris
08-13-2014, 08:57 AM
Doesn't matter. The brand is ruined.

By Dems and Reps.

Libhater
08-13-2014, 08:58 AM
Tea Party Express is national, it's not grassroots. Per the OP link: "Ordinary citizens in recent decades have largely abandoned their participation in grassroots movements. Politicians respond to the mass mobilization...."

The Tea Party will remain a grassroots organization so long as they don't officially present themselves as a political party the way the dems and repubs have done. I belong to two such Tea Party grassroots groups in my Palm Beach Florida county.

Alyosha
08-13-2014, 08:59 AM
By Dems and Reps.

But still ruined...

Chris
08-13-2014, 09:03 AM
The Tea Party will remain a grassroots organization so long as they don't officially present themselves as a political party the way the dems and repubs have done. I belong to two such Tea Party grassroots groups in my Palm Beach Florida county.

But Tea Party Express is not grassroots.

Chris
08-13-2014, 09:04 AM
But still ruined...

Even in the confusion between Tea Parties and Tea Party Express.

Common Sense
08-13-2014, 09:07 AM
Tea Party Express is a PAC. So who are these two lobbyists?

They aren't the Pepsi brothers...


My issues isn't even just with the Koch brothers. There are plenty of other elites and special interest groups pouring money into these groups. They don't do it for "freedom" they do it because they want to save their corporations money. They want to engineer a political outcome that serves their interests. There's nothing inherently wrong with that, but hiding in the shadows and pretending it's in support of the little guy is disingenuous at best.

Matty
08-13-2014, 09:07 AM
And who exactly was it who promised to rid DC of the lobbyists? Yep, you guessed it. It was the lying Obama. :)

Libhater
08-13-2014, 09:12 AM
But Tea Party Express is not grassroots.

Whatever you say.

grassroots: society at the local level as distinguished from the centers of political leadership

Cigar
08-13-2014, 09:12 AM
Those ordinary Americans who feel and realize they have no power are massing together at a grassroots level to form what we in the real world would call the Tea Party Express.


Ordinary Americans are Brown

http://people.ucls.uchicago.edu/~snekros/2008-9%20webquests/products3/native_american.jpg (http://people.ucls.uchicago.edu/~snekros/2008-9%20webquests/products3/index.html)

Common Sense
08-13-2014, 09:12 AM
And who exactly was it who promised to rid DC of the lobbyists? Yep, you guessed it. It was the lying Obama. :)

Lobbyists do serve a purpose. I don't think he ever said he would "get rid of them".

He did make changes that no one else seemed willing to make.

Even one of those executive orders that everyone hates so much...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/former-white-house-lawyer-defends-obama-limits-on-lobbying-hints-at-possible-changes/2014/03/23/c84e28da-aeb6-11e3-96dc-d6ea14c099f9_story.html

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Ethics-Commitments-By-Executive-Branch-Personnel

countryboy
08-13-2014, 09:13 AM
No. They allowed the nutballs to ruin their brand.
Not that I believe a single thing the fake persona has to say. But it wasn't "nutballs" who ruined the Tea Party brand, it was progressive infiltrators along with the MSM who tainted the brand. Of course a gullible populace plays no small part either.

Chris
08-13-2014, 09:14 AM
They aren't the Pepsi brothers...


My issues isn't even just with the Koch brothers. There are plenty of other elites and special interest groups pouring money into these groups. They don't do it for "freedom" they do it because they want to save their corporations money. They want to engineer a political outcome that serves their interests. There's nothing inherently wrong with that, but hiding in the shadows and pretending it's in support of the little guy is disingenuous at best.

First off, the Koches gave less than a million to the Tea Party Express: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/09/behind-the-curtain-exclusive-the-koch-brothers-secret-bank-96669.html


They don't do it for "freedom" they do it because they want to save their corporations money. They want to engineer a political outcome that serves their interests.

Freedom has long been the stated interest of the Koches.


There's nothing inherently wrong with that, but hiding in the shadows and pretending it's in support of the little guy is disingenuous at best.

Their contributions are out in the open. Took me seconds to find it.

Common Sense
08-13-2014, 09:14 AM
Not that I believe a single thing the fake persona has to say. But it wasn't "nutballs" who ruined the Tea Party brand, it was progressive infiltrators along with the MSM who tainted the brand. Of course a gullible populace plays no small part either.

No, no...it had nothing to do with the racists and the crazies. It was "infiltrators". Yeah, must be.

Alyosha
08-13-2014, 09:15 AM
Not that I believe a single thing the fake persona has to say. But it wasn't "nutballs" who ruined the Tea Party brand, it was progressive infiltrators along with the MSM who tainted the brand. Of course a gullible populace plays no small part either.

With out giving the Dems ammo they would have had nothing to fire. They needed to shut up their freaks and didn't.

Chris
08-13-2014, 09:15 AM
Whatever you say.

grassroots: society at the local level as distinguished from the centers of political leadership

Sorry, but it was you said the Tea Party Express was grassroots when it's a national organization, a national PAC. That's not local.

Alyosha
08-13-2014, 09:16 AM
No, no...it had nothing to do with the racists and the crazies. It was "infiltrators". Yeah, must be.

I do agree with you, but they did also have people pretend to be Tea Partiers to make them look bad, as well.

Alyosha
08-13-2014, 09:16 AM
Lobbyists do serve a purpose. I don't think he ever said he would "get rid of them".

He did make changes that no one else seemed willing to make.

Even one of those executive orders that everyone hates so much...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/former-white-house-lawyer-defends-obama-limits-on-lobbying-hints-at-possible-changes/2014/03/23/c84e28da-aeb6-11e3-96dc-d6ea14c099f9_story.html

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Ethics-Commitments-By-Executive-Branch-Personnel


All smoke and mirrors. What did it really change?

Common Sense
08-13-2014, 09:16 AM
First off, the Koches gave less than a million to the Tea Party Express: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/09/behind-the-curtain-exclusive-the-koch-brothers-secret-bank-96669.html



Freedom has long been the stated interest of the Koches.



Their contributions are out in the open. Took me seconds to find it.

There is a lot more money being donated than is openly seen. There are other ways to contribute beyond direct contributions.

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-10-25/koch-brothers-caught-up-in-california-crackdown-on-hiden-political-donors

Cigar
08-13-2014, 09:19 AM
And who exactly was it who promised to rid DC of the lobbyists? Yep, you guessed it. It was the lying Obama. :)


http://thepoliticalcarnival.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/obstruction-gop-2.jpg (http://thepoliticalcarnival.net/2012/08/23/gop-plot-to-obstruct-obama-aide-in-bed-with-gop-lover-how-do-we-get-a-stimulus-deal-reply-baby-theres-no-deal/)

Common Sense
08-13-2014, 09:19 AM
All smoke and mirrors. What did it really change?

It made one key change. It disallowed lobbyists to work for those they lobbied for a period of two years. It also disallowed appointees who become lobbyists to lobby the Obama admin.

It certainly pissed them off...so it had some effect. But you're right, it was not a fundamental change.

countryboy
08-13-2014, 09:20 AM
No, no...it had nothing to do with the racists and the crazies. It was "infiltrators". Yeah, must be.
So you fell for the ruse too, eh? I rest my case.

Alyosha
08-13-2014, 09:20 AM
There is a lot more money being donated than is openly seen. There are other ways to contribute beyond direct contributions.

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-10-25/koch-brothers-caught-up-in-california-crackdown-on-hiden-political-donors

They are not alone. I'm tired of the Kochs being the example. What about Gates, Soros, and Buffett? Other than talking up a nice game what have they accomplished for the little guy? I see them playing with their tax liability and using nonprofits to insert their products in global markets but not much else.

Ransom
08-13-2014, 09:21 AM
Voting changes nothing. Fear changes a lot.

So, voting Obama in changed nothing?

Common Sense
08-13-2014, 09:22 AM
So you fell for the ruse too, eh? I rest my case.

Do you have any proof that they were just infiltrators, or is it just a hunch?

Alyosha
08-13-2014, 09:22 AM
It made one key change. It disallowed lobbyists to work for those they lobbied for a period of two years. It also disallowed appointees who become lobbyists to lobby the Obama admin.

It certainly pissed them off...so it had some effect. But you're right, it was not a fundamental change.

Big deal. I ask you what did it really change? Do you think that they truly stopped anything at all? No one smokes pot, either, I guess.

countryboy
08-13-2014, 09:22 AM
With out giving the Dems ammo they would have had nothing to fire. They needed to shut up their freaks and didn't.
The "freaks", including our fake persona right here, were never a part of the movement to begin with. That's the point.

countryboy
08-13-2014, 09:24 AM
I do agree with you, but they did also have people pretend to be Tea Partiers to make them look bad, as well.
Ayup, hater is a fine example. I've been to a few Tea Party rallies and have never witnessed any racist bullshit. It's a lie.

Alyosha
08-13-2014, 09:24 AM
Do you have any proof that they were just infiltrators, or is it just a hunch?


http://youtu.be/odefl7xLGvc

Alyosha
08-13-2014, 09:25 AM
The "freaks", including our fake persona right here, were never a part of the movement to begin with. That's the point.

Michelle Bachman isn't?

Common Sense
08-13-2014, 09:26 AM
They are not alone. I'm tired of the Kochs being the example. What about Gates, Soros, and Buffett? Other than talking up a nice game what have they accomplished for the little guy? I see them playing with their tax liability and using nonprofits to insert their products in global markets but not much else.

They're certainly not innocent when it comes to lobbying...

Gates in particular is pretty open about what he lobbies for...and you can't really fault his and his wife's foundation. They do a lot of good around the world.

countryboy
08-13-2014, 09:27 AM
Do you have any proof that they were just infiltrators, or is it just a hunch?
Do you have any proof they weren't, or is it just a "hunch"? :rolleyes:

Alyosha
08-13-2014, 09:28 AM
They're certainly not innocent when it comes to lobbying...

Gates in particular is pretty open about what he lobbies for...and you can't really fault his and his wife's foundation. They do a lot of good around the world.

So it's a coincidence that they own Big Pharm stock and push vaccines for everything? Really?

Chris
08-13-2014, 09:28 AM
There is a lot more money being donated than is openly seen. There are other ways to contribute beyond direct contributions.

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-10-25/koch-brothers-caught-up-in-california-crackdown-on-hiden-political-donors


No mention of Tea Party Express there or even Tea Parties.

Nor does any of that say the Koches aren't interested in freedom.

Try again.

Chris
08-13-2014, 09:28 AM
http://thepoliticalcarnival.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/obstruction-gop-2.jpg (http://thepoliticalcarnival.net/2012/08/23/gop-plot-to-obstruct-obama-aide-in-bed-with-gop-lover-how-do-we-get-a-stimulus-deal-reply-baby-theres-no-deal/)

Conveniently forgets Senate obstructionism.

Common Sense
08-13-2014, 09:29 AM
Do you have any proof they weren't, or is it just a "hunch"? :rolleyes:

You made the allegation, the burden of proof is on you. Alyosha contributed for you. But that's different than your allegations of the nuts among the TP being infiltrators.

Chris
08-13-2014, 09:30 AM
They're certainly not innocent when it comes to lobbying...

Gates in particular is pretty open about what he lobbies for...and you can't really fault his and his wife's foundation. They do a lot of good around the world.

Interesting you choose to believe what the Gates say but not the Koches. Not partisan, are you.

Chris
08-13-2014, 09:31 AM
You made the allegation, the burden of proof is on you. Alyosha contributed for you. But that's different than your allegations of the nuts among the TP being infiltrators.

Just as the burden of proof is on you to back your assertions. Good, we're getting somewhere.

Common Sense
08-13-2014, 09:31 AM
No mention of Tea Party Express there or even Tea Parties.

Nor does any of that say the Koches aren't interested in freedom.

Try again.

You claimed they donated very little and that all their donations were open. They're not. The TP Express is just one TP group. They aren't "the" Tea Party.

Alyosha
08-13-2014, 09:33 AM
You claimed they donated very little and that all their donations were open. They're not. The TP Express is just one TP group. They aren't "the" Tea Party.

Do you believe that all of Soros's donations are in the open? By the way did I mention I have magical powers? It's true. Believe me.

Chris
08-13-2014, 09:37 AM
You claimed they donated very little and that all their donations were open. They're not. The TP Express is just one TP group. They aren't "the" Tea Party.

Yes, I claimed they donated less than a million to the Tea Party Express. You claimed more. Your link didn't support that.

Yes, they aren't really Tea Party.

Now to your claim about Tea Party Express....

Common Sense
08-13-2014, 09:39 AM
Do you believe that all of Soros's donations are in the open? By the way did I mention I have magical powers? It's true. Believe me.

Like I said, both sides do it. Some more malicious than others.

This is a bit outdated, but it's an interesting comparison.

https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2010/09/opensecrets-battle-koch-brothers/

Can you cure a receding hairline?

Common Sense
08-13-2014, 09:40 AM
Yes, I claimed they donated less than a million to the Tea Party Express. You claimed more. Your link didn't support that.

Yes, they aren't really Tea Party.

Now to your claim about Tea Party Express....

I didn't claim more. I claimed that much of the money donated to Tea Party groups is hidden or channeled through other groups. You mentioned TP Express...not me.

Alyosha
08-13-2014, 09:42 AM
Like I said, both sides do it. Some more malicious than others.

This is a bit outdated, but it's an interesting comparison.

https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2010/09/opensecrets-battle-koch-brothers/

Can you cure a receding hairline?

I think that you see only the malice of one side.

countryboy
08-13-2014, 09:44 AM
You made the allegation, the burden of proof is on you. Alyosha contributed for you. But that's different than your allegations of the nuts among the TP being infiltrators.
Oh please, it's all over the internet and no big secret. The left has a long history of staging incidences of bigotry.

Mainecoons
08-13-2014, 09:45 AM
Lobbyists....

You could try to change your lobbyist laws...unfortunately those laws would probably be written by lobbyists (like most of the other ones).

As long as politicians have to raise vast sums of money to run for office, the people with the vast sums of money are going to call the shots.

Chris
08-13-2014, 09:47 AM
I didn't claim more. I claimed that much of the money donated to Tea Party groups is hidden or channeled through other groups. You mentioned TP Express...not me.

Ah, but you did. I posted specifically about the Tea Party Express:


Tea Party Express is national, it's not grassroots. Per the OP link: "Ordinary citizens in recent decades have largely abandoned their participation in grassroots movements. Politicians respond to the mass mobilization...."

And you commented:


Not to mention it's supported by two of the biggest lobbyists in the nation.

It there refers to Tea party Express.

But it's pointless to argue with partisan obfuscation.

Alyosha was right, the Tea Parties' brand has been trashed by partisans.

Chris
08-13-2014, 09:50 AM
As long as politicians have to raise vast sums of money to run for office, the people with the vast sums of money are going to call the shots.

As long as government grows it will increasingly be the source of favors sought by political rent seekers. That's the ultimate goal.

Common Sense
08-13-2014, 09:55 AM
I think that you see only the malice of one side.

I do think one side is more malicious than the other...yes.

When I see one side funding immigration reform, criminal justice reform, rights for persons with disabilities and fighting AIDS at home and abroad, quite openly. When I also see the other side supporting lobbying efforts to change tax codes, opposing climate change legislation, abolishing medicare, repealing minimum wage laws etc... Yeah, I see a clear difference. I know it's not that black and white, but there is a trend.

donttread
08-13-2014, 09:56 AM
This comes as no surprise to me.

We didn't need a study to tell us that and sadly those who do won't believe it because the Donkephant tells them not to


[/FONT][/COLOR]

Alyosha
08-13-2014, 09:58 AM
I do think one side is more malicious than the other...yes.

When I see one side funding immigration reform, criminal justice reform, rights for persons with disabilities and fighting AIDS at home and abroad, quite openly. When I also see the other side supporting lobbying efforts to change tax codes, opposing climate change legislation, abolishing medicare, repealing minimum wage laws etc... Yeah, I see a clear difference. I know it's not that black and white, but there is a trend.

Ok, you asserted... Did you know the Kochs donate to gay marriage causes, yes or no?

Did you know the Kochs donated to change drug laws and remove minimum mandatory sentencing? Yes/no

Did you know the Kochs donate to university programs and science departments?

Did you know they gave millions to the free island project?

yes or no?

countryboy
08-13-2014, 09:59 AM
I do think one side is more malicious than the other...yes.

When I see one side funding immigration reform, criminal justice reform, rights for persons with disabilities and fighting AIDS at home and abroad, quite openly. When I also see the other side supporting lobbying efforts to change tax codes, opposing climate change legislation, abolishing medicare, repealing minimum wage laws etc... Yeah, I see a clear difference. I know it's not that black and white, but there is a trend.
Thank you for confirming your partisan hackery. :wink:

Chris
08-13-2014, 10:02 AM
I do think one side is more malicious than the other...yes.

When I see one side funding immigration reform, criminal justice reform, rights for persons with disabilities and fighting AIDS at home and abroad, quite openly. When I also see the other side supporting lobbying efforts to change tax codes, opposing climate change legislation, abolishing medicare, repealing minimum wage laws etc... Yeah, I see a clear difference. I know it's not that black and white, but there is a trend.

In short your malice is merely like and dislike.

Common Sense
08-13-2014, 10:08 AM
Ok, you asserted... Did you know the Kochs donate to gay marriage causes, yes or no?

Did you know the Kochs donated to change drug laws and remove minimum mandatory sentencing? Yes/no

Did you know the Kochs donate to university programs and science departments?

Did you know they gave millions to the free island project?

yes or no?

Like I said, it's not black and white. Both groups do support philanthropic activities.

I don't think the Koch brothers are evil...I just don't agree with much of their political stances. But yes, there are areas I do agree with.

Common Sense
08-13-2014, 10:08 AM
Thank you for confirming your partisan hackery. :wink:

Hi Kettle...

Alyosha
08-13-2014, 10:08 AM
In short your malice is merely like and dislike.

Its also ignorant of facts.


http://t.mediaite.com/mediaite/#!/entry/david-koch-supports-gay-marriage-pot-legalization-and-ending-wars,50410fc8444f67894744357e

Common Sense
08-13-2014, 10:09 AM
Its also ignorant of facts.


http://t.mediaite.com/mediaite/#!/entry/david-koch-supports-gay-marriage-pot-legalization-and-ending-wars,50410fc8444f67894744357e (http://t.mediaite.com/mediaite/#%21/entry/david-koch-supports-gay-marriage-pot-legalization-and-ending-wars,50410fc8444f67894744357e)

Did I say they didn't?

"It"...gee, thanks.

Alyosha
08-13-2014, 10:10 AM
Like I said, it's not black and white. Both groups do support philanthropic activities.

I don't think the Koch brothers are evil...I just don't agree with much of their political stances. But yes, there are areas I do agree with.

You are pro gay marriage, so are they.

You are pro legalization, so are they.

You are pro immigration, so are they.

You are anti war, so are they.

You are pro free trade, so are they.

Aside from Keystone what do they do, specifically that you don't like?

Alyosha
08-13-2014, 10:11 AM
Did I say they didn't?

"It"...gee, thanks.

"It's" referring to the statement.

Alyosha
08-13-2014, 10:13 AM
Gates hypocrisy

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/12/gates-foundations-24-most-egregious-investments

Chris
08-13-2014, 10:18 AM
Gates hypocrisy

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/12/gates-foundations-24-most-egregious-investments


Uhoh, Walmart....


What gets me though is all the donations and lobbying are perfectly legal, even it, er, common accepts that. The crime is politicians and government accepting it in exchange for political favors. Look at Ex-Im, supported by both Dems and Reps, with on;y Tea Party and libertarian types wanting to end that cronyism.

Common Sense
08-13-2014, 10:18 AM
You are pro gay marriage, so are they.

You are pro legalization, so are they.

You are pro immigration, so are they.

You are anti war, so are they.

You are pro free trade, so are they.

Aside from Keystone what do they do, specifically that you don't like?

You like to assume a lot.

I have issues with free trade.

I'm pro decriminalization, not legalization (not of everything).

I'm for justified war.

I'm not against Keystone.

The things they are for that I don't agree with were listed...but here are some more...

“We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”

We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”

“We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”

“We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”

“We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”

“We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”

We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”

“We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”

“We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”

“We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”

“We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”

“We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”

“We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”

We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”

Captain Obvious
08-13-2014, 10:30 AM
This comes as no surprise to me.




[/FONT][/COLOR]

Something I've been saying all along, btw.

So you know it has to be accurate.

Alyosha
08-13-2014, 10:36 AM
You like to assume a lot.

I have issues with free trade.

I'm pro decriminalization, not legalization (not of everything).

I'm for justified war.

I'm not against Keystone.

The things they are for that I don't agree with were listed...but here are some more...

“We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”

We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”

“We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”

“We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”

“We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”

“We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”

We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”

“We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”

“We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”

“We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”

“We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”

“We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”

“We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”

We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”

Me, too. The EPA has been worthless to effect real change. The laws are designed for the rich to worm around. Welfare spends as much on administrative costs as it does on the poor with no measurable results in ending poverty. The FDA has made cronyism an art form...

just because people don't feel government is the solution to the problems doesn't mean we ignore them or don't want to fix them. Can you understand that?

Matty
08-13-2014, 10:39 AM
Lobbyists do serve a purpose. I don't think he ever said he would "get rid of them".

He did make changes that no one else seemed willing to make.

Even one of those executive orders that everyone hates so much...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/former-white-house-lawyer-defends-obama-limits-on-lobbying-hints-at-possible-changes/2014/03/23/c84e28da-aeb6-11e3-96dc-d6ea14c099f9_story.html

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Ethics-Commitments-By-Executive-Branch-Personnel



Bull patties


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hdX5dSlLaYg

Jets
08-13-2014, 11:10 AM
Follow the money trail. Special interests will always out bid the average voter. Its like a permanent auction.

Chris
08-13-2014, 11:23 AM
Follow the money trail. Special interests will always out bid the average voter. Its like a permanent auction.


Good government wouldn't be for sale.

Jets
08-13-2014, 11:24 AM
Good government wouldn't be for sale.

And theres the rub!

Chris
08-13-2014, 11:35 AM
And theres the rub!

Or the Unicorn Governance (http://thepoliticalforums.com/search.php?searchid=1166904).

PolWatch
08-13-2014, 11:43 AM
Some folks seem to say that the dems use victim status to gain votes (war against women, etc.). This thread seems to be saying that the tea party has been victimized by the dems planting nut jobs saying outlandish things (Bachmann ?) to make them look bad. The repubs seem to be saying that the dems are planting the rumor of calls for impeachment (Palin ?) to get campaign money. Doesn't it look like the repub and/or tea party is using the same 'victim' techniques to gain support/sympathy?

Chris
08-13-2014, 11:59 AM
Some folks seem to say that the dems use victim status to gain votes (war against women, etc.). This thread seems to be saying that the tea party has been victimized by the dems planting nut jobs saying outlandish things (Bachmann ?) to make them look bad. The repubs seem to be saying that the dems are planting the rumor of calls for impeachment (Palin ?) to get campaign money. Doesn't it look like the repub and/or tea party is using the same 'victim' techniques to gain support/sympathy?

Not so sure saying the Tea Parties brand has been hijacked, ruined Alyosha said, implies being victims. Just time to move on.

Peter1469
08-13-2014, 04:22 PM
Until the Tea Party(ies) and OWS started, a much larger number of Americans did want anything to do with policy making, other than voting every now and then. They wanted to be left alone.

Captain Obvious
08-13-2014, 04:23 PM
Until the Tea Party(ies) and OWS started, a much larger number of Americans did want anything to do with policy making, other than voting every now and then. They wanted to be left alone.

Still do for the most part.

Don
08-13-2014, 04:38 PM
http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/18864-lawless-billionaire-club-behind-green-scam-senate-study-finds

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/18896-big-media-journalists-exposed-in-secret-progressive-network

Bob
08-13-2014, 04:58 PM
No. They allowed the nutballs to ruin their brand.

What makes you claim that about the tea party?

Peter1469
08-13-2014, 05:14 PM
Still do for the most part.

Well OWS folded like a cheap chair....

Captain Obvious
08-13-2014, 05:15 PM
Well OWS folded like a cheap chair....

Yeah. Bitching for the sake of bitching.

But it's a great example of the ordinary voter. Gets pissed off, doesn't understand the reason, bitches, votes the same douchebags in next term.

... ohh, look - the new IPad is out.

Peter1469
08-13-2014, 05:18 PM
Yeah. Bitching for the sake of bitching.

But it's a great example of the ordinary voter. Gets pissed off, doesn't understand the reason, bitches, votes the same douchebags in next term.

... ohh, look - the new IPad is out.

They understood enough to realize the dem establishment was in the corp pocket- that is what took the wind out of their sails.