White Nationalist Epithet Is A Smear

[bripat9643]

Trump is appealing to the very rational human self-interest of putting the welfare of oneself and ones' family, community and country ahead of that of foreign nations.

The Progs do the reverse. They insist that we harm ourselves in order to support total strangers that hate us.

Isn’t it crazy that millions of Americans want to harm themselves and their loved ones so they can support criminals? That must blow your mind

The progressives in question, put their idea of "fairness" ahead of the rights of American citizens.



They consider NATIONALISM to be a bad thing, and FAIRNESS, ie treating the "refugess" who have more need, generously at the expense of Americans who have so much more and are just being greedy in their desire to keep it.


They see NATIONALISM as the OPPOSITE of INTERNATIONALISM, or GLOBALISM,


and side with outsiders against their fellow Americans.

That’s a distorted narrative but I think you know that. They don’t side with outsiders over Americans, they side with plenty of million of other Americans who believe in helping people in need no matter where they are from. It’s a simple concept called compassion

Call it compassion or fairness, in their mind it trumps the Rights and interests of Americans.


That is the opposite of Nationalism.


And they viciously smear anyone that dares disagrees with them.

I just don’t agree with you premise. It can snowball into so many different areas to show how wrong it is. Why do we let special ed kids in school when they bring down the rest of the kids and soak up much of the resources? Why do we take care of the elderly and disabled andnpoor who can’t afford to take care of themselves? I can go on and on. But we do these things because American values aren’t those of selfishness and greed for many... they represent care and compassion and charity and caring for our neighbors. Many see that as a core principle and not applying solely to Americans

What you describe is theft, plain and simple.

 

[boedicca]

Then most liberals are nuts for supporting their leadership that do want open borders.

I agree but unfortunately with our stupid two party system we are left with two choices most of the time and not many are single issue voters

Kumbaya. Although there are quite a few single issue voters on both sides (Abortion for example is a third rail both pro and against).

Yeah that’s one of the funny ones... you’d think the progressive party that promotes more government control would be the party promoting government regulation of abortions and the Republican Party of limited government and personal freedom would be the party pushing a women’s freedom of choice. But I guess each party has those elements that go against their core ideology.

The establishment parties are the Permanent Bipartisan Fusion Party. The GOP is just the LITE version of the Dems in most aspect. Both support Big Government.

The real contest in the U.S is between Those Who Want To Control Everyone and Those Who Want To Be Left Alone.

As hard as the partisans like to paint it there is never going to be a an all or nothing situation. Our system will always be a balance between free market capitalism, regulation and government programs. If we can stop playing the demonization games and work together to best operate and invest then we might actually get things back on track. There are just way too many lies being spewed by both sides

I disagree. Our system includes free markets under a Rule of Law. Rule of Law doesn't mean unelected bureaucrats making up regulations at the behest of lobbyists in order to control markets and crush their competition. If something is important enough for the government to oversee, Congress should pass an appropriately written law with details on what the law covers. The regulatory process is captive to those it regulates, so we should eliminate the role of regulatory bureaucrats in writing de facto laws outside of Congressional approval.

 

[Slade3200]

Isn’t it crazy that millions of Americans want to harm themselves and their loved ones so they can support criminals? That must blow your mind

The progressives in question, put their idea of "fairness" ahead of the rights of American citizens.



They consider NATIONALISM to be a bad thing, and FAIRNESS, ie treating the "refugess" who have more need, generously at the expense of Americans who have so much more and are just being greedy in their desire to keep it.


They see NATIONALISM as the OPPOSITE of INTERNATIONALISM, or GLOBALISM,


and side with outsiders against their fellow Americans.

That’s a distorted narrative but I think you know that. They don’t side with outsiders over Americans, they side with plenty of million of other Americans who believe in helping people in need no matter where they are from. It’s a simple concept called compassion

Horseshit.

For example, compassion for the muzzie savages is no reason to bring them here. We can provide them with food and housing in refugee camps near where they currently live

Wow, I actually agree with you. In fact a big part of the Dems immigration plan is aid to thebproblem areas to try and plug the leak at it’s source. If the Partisans weren’t such babies they could probably find agreement in that area. Not many liberals want open borders despite your propaganda

Bullshit. They want to import more Democrats. There is absolutely no reason we need to import these "refugees" to America. None.

I see you lap up the talking points like a good little puppet. Haha

 

[Slade3200]

I agree but unfortunately with our stupid two party system we are left with two choices most of the time and not many are single issue voters

Kumbaya. Although there are quite a few single issue voters on both sides (Abortion for example is a third rail both pro and against).

Yeah that’s one of the funny ones... you’d think the progressive party that promotes more government control would be the party promoting government regulation of abortions and the Republican Party of limited government and personal freedom would be the party pushing a women’s freedom of choice. But I guess each party has those elements that go against their core ideology.

The establishment parties are the Permanent Bipartisan Fusion Party. The GOP is just the LITE version of the Dems in most aspect. Both support Big Government.

The real contest in the U.S is between Those Who Want To Control Everyone and Those Who Want To Be Left Alone.

As hard as the partisans like to paint it there is never going to be a an all or nothing situation. Our system will always be a balance between free market capitalism, regulation and government programs. If we can stop playing the demonization games and work together to best operate and invest then we might actually get things back on track. There are just way too many lies being spewed by both sides

That's total ******* bullshit because until FDR there was absolutely zero regulation on the federal level. The Founding Fathers also never envisioned government programs that wrote checks to people for nothing in return. Wefare isn't an "investment" anymore than lighting money on fire is an investment.

Zero regulation? You sure about that genius?

 

[Slade3200]

I agree but unfortunately with our stupid two party system we are left with two choices most of the time and not many are single issue voters

Kumbaya. Although there are quite a few single issue voters on both sides (Abortion for example is a third rail both pro and against).

Yeah that’s one of the funny ones... you’d think the progressive party that promotes more government control would be the party promoting government regulation of abortions and the Republican Party of limited government and personal freedom would be the party pushing a women’s freedom of choice. But I guess each party has those elements that go against their core ideology.

The establishment parties are the Permanent Bipartisan Fusion Party. The GOP is just the LITE version of the Dems in most aspect. Both support Big Government.

The real contest in the U.S is between Those Who Want To Control Everyone and Those Who Want To Be Left Alone.

As hard as the partisans like to paint it there is never going to be a an all or nothing situation. Our system will always be a balance between free market capitalism, regulation and government programs. If we can stop playing the demonization games and work together to best operate and invest then we might actually get things back on track. There are just way too many lies being spewed by both sides

I disagree. Our system includes free markets under a Rule of Law. Rule of Law doesn't mean unelected bureaucrats making up regulations at the behest of lobbyists in order to control markets and crush their competition. If something is important enough for the government to oversee, Congress should pass an appropriately written law with details on what the law covers. The regulatory process is captive to those it regulates, so we should eliminate the role of regulatory bureaucrats in writing de facto laws outside of Congressional approval.

I agree for the most part. Elected officials do need some breathing room to operate which includes deciding how different systems are regulated but anything major that effects markets should be done through our legal system

 

[boedicca]

Kumbaya. Although there are quite a few single issue voters on both sides (Abortion for example is a third rail both pro and against).

Yeah that’s one of the funny ones... you’d think the progressive party that promotes more government control would be the party promoting government regulation of abortions and the Republican Party of limited government and personal freedom would be the party pushing a women’s freedom of choice. But I guess each party has those elements that go against their core ideology.

The establishment parties are the Permanent Bipartisan Fusion Party. The GOP is just the LITE version of the Dems in most aspect. Both support Big Government.

The real contest in the U.S is between Those Who Want To Control Everyone and Those Who Want To Be Left Alone.

As hard as the partisans like to paint it there is never going to be a an all or nothing situation. Our system will always be a balance between free market capitalism, regulation and government programs. If we can stop playing the demonization games and work together to best operate and invest then we might actually get things back on track. There are just way too many lies being spewed by both sides

I disagree. Our system includes free markets under a Rule of Law. Rule of Law doesn't mean unelected bureaucrats making up regulations at the behest of lobbyists in order to control markets and crush their competition. If something is important enough for the government to oversee, Congress should pass an appropriately written law with details on what the law covers. The regulatory process is captive to those it regulates, so we should eliminate the role of regulatory bureaucrats in writing de facto laws outside of Congressional approval.

I agree for the most part. Elected officials do need some breathing room to operate which includes deciding how different systems are regulated but anything major that effects markets should be done through our legal system

It's more than markets, bub.

Unelected people should not be writing laws. Period.

One reason why the scope of government has bloated up all out of proportion is that Congress has written vague bloated "laws", and handed them over to the Exec Branch regulatory bodies to develop the details. This is not consistent with "consent of the governed" by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[bripat9643]

Kumbaya. Although there are quite a few single issue voters on both sides (Abortion for example is a third rail both pro and against).

Yeah that’s one of the funny ones... you’d think the progressive party that promotes more government control would be the party promoting government regulation of abortions and the Republican Party of limited government and personal freedom would be the party pushing a women’s freedom of choice. But I guess each party has those elements that go against their core ideology.

The establishment parties are the Permanent Bipartisan Fusion Party. The GOP is just the LITE version of the Dems in most aspect. Both support Big Government.

The real contest in the U.S is between Those Who Want To Control Everyone and Those Who Want To Be Left Alone.

As hard as the partisans like to paint it there is never going to be a an all or nothing situation. Our system will always be a balance between free market capitalism, regulation and government programs. If we can stop playing the demonization games and work together to best operate and invest then we might actually get things back on track. There are just way too many lies being spewed by both sides

That's total ******* bullshit because until FDR there was absolutely zero regulation on the federal level. The Founding Fathers also never envisioned government programs that wrote checks to people for nothing in return. Wefare isn't an "investment" anymore than lighting money on fire is an investment.

Zero regulation? You sure about that genius?

The Sherman Anti-trust act was passed in 1890. The first case prosecuted under it was in 1899. So until 1899, there was no regulation of private firms by the federal government.

 

[Slade3200]

Yeah that’s one of the funny ones... you’d think the progressive party that promotes more government control would be the party promoting government regulation of abortions and the Republican Party of limited government and personal freedom would be the party pushing a women’s freedom of choice. But I guess each party has those elements that go against their core ideology.

The establishment parties are the Permanent Bipartisan Fusion Party. The GOP is just the LITE version of the Dems in most aspect. Both support Big Government.

The real contest in the U.S is between Those Who Want To Control Everyone and Those Who Want To Be Left Alone.

As hard as the partisans like to paint it there is never going to be a an all or nothing situation. Our system will always be a balance between free market capitalism, regulation and government programs. If we can stop playing the demonization games and work together to best operate and invest then we might actually get things back on track. There are just way too many lies being spewed by both sides

I disagree. Our system includes free markets under a Rule of Law. Rule of Law doesn't mean unelected bureaucrats making up regulations at the behest of lobbyists in order to control markets and crush their competition. If something is important enough for the government to oversee, Congress should pass an appropriately written law with details on what the law covers. The regulatory process is captive to those it regulates, so we should eliminate the role of regulatory bureaucrats in writing de facto laws outside of Congressional approval.

I agree for the most part. Elected officials do need some breathing room to operate which includes deciding how different systems are regulated but anything major that effects markets should be done through our legal system

It's more than markets, bub.

Unelected people should not be writing laws. Period.

One reason why the scope of government has bloated up all out of proportion is that Congress has written vague bloated "laws", and handed them over to the Exec Branch regulatory bodies to develop the details. This is not consistent with "consent of the governed" by any stretch of the imagination.

I understand what your saying in principle but I don’t think that’s a possibility given the enormity of our system. You really trust politicians to make all the operational and regulatory decisions for the various government agencies? Agencies are already inefficient enough... I don’t see adding more red tape as something that will help the situation. I do agree with you in part though, just think there needs to be a healthy balance

 

[boedicca]

The establishment parties are the Permanent Bipartisan Fusion Party. The GOP is just the LITE version of the Dems in most aspect. Both support Big Government.

The real contest in the U.S is between Those Who Want To Control Everyone and Those Who Want To Be Left Alone.

As hard as the partisans like to paint it there is never going to be a an all or nothing situation. Our system will always be a balance between free market capitalism, regulation and government programs. If we can stop playing the demonization games and work together to best operate and invest then we might actually get things back on track. There are just way too many lies being spewed by both sides

I disagree. Our system includes free markets under a Rule of Law. Rule of Law doesn't mean unelected bureaucrats making up regulations at the behest of lobbyists in order to control markets and crush their competition. If something is important enough for the government to oversee, Congress should pass an appropriately written law with details on what the law covers. The regulatory process is captive to those it regulates, so we should eliminate the role of regulatory bureaucrats in writing de facto laws outside of Congressional approval.

I agree for the most part. Elected officials do need some breathing room to operate which includes deciding how different systems are regulated but anything major that effects markets should be done through our legal system

It's more than markets, bub.

Unelected people should not be writing laws. Period.

One reason why the scope of government has bloated up all out of proportion is that Congress has written vague bloated "laws", and handed them over to the Exec Branch regulatory bodies to develop the details. This is not consistent with "consent of the governed" by any stretch of the imagination.

I understand what your saying in principle but I don’t think that’s a possibility given the enormity of our system. You really trust politicians to make all the operational and regulatory decisions for the various government agencies? Agencies are already inefficient enough... I don’t see adding more red tape as something that will help the situation. I do agree with you in part though, just think there needs to be a healthy balance

Central planning ALWAYS fails. Our federal government suffers from Extreme Scope Creep. Most regulations could be gotten rid of with the only result being a big sigh of relief for the burden being lifted. If it is important enough for the poer of the Federal Government to be applied, then it is important enough for Congress to write and pass a proper law, with the Exec Branch then responsible purely for enforcement (not inventing the details).

I'll also note that most of what DC does is transfer income and wealth from some citizens to other people (citizens and non). That is not what The Constitution was designed to enable the Feds to do.

 

[Slade3200]

Yeah that’s one of the funny ones... you’d think the progressive party that promotes more government control would be the party promoting government regulation of abortions and the Republican Party of limited government and personal freedom would be the party pushing a women’s freedom of choice. But I guess each party has those elements that go against their core ideology.

The establishment parties are the Permanent Bipartisan Fusion Party. The GOP is just the LITE version of the Dems in most aspect. Both support Big Government.

The real contest in the U.S is between Those Who Want To Control Everyone and Those Who Want To Be Left Alone.

As hard as the partisans like to paint it there is never going to be a an all or nothing situation. Our system will always be a balance between free market capitalism, regulation and government programs. If we can stop playing the demonization games and work together to best operate and invest then we might actually get things back on track. There are just way too many lies being spewed by both sides

That's total ******* bullshit because until FDR there was absolutely zero regulation on the federal level. The Founding Fathers also never envisioned government programs that wrote checks to people for nothing in return. Wefare isn't an "investment" anymore than lighting money on fire is an investment.

Zero regulation? You sure about that genius?

The Sherman Anti-trust act was passed in 1890. The first case prosecuted under it was in 1899. So until 1899, there was no regulation of private firms by the federal government.

Did firms pay taxes? Were they allowed to kill, steal, and extort?

 

[Slade3200]

As hard as the partisans like to paint it there is never going to be a an all or nothing situation. Our system will always be a balance between free market capitalism, regulation and government programs. If we can stop playing the demonization games and work together to best operate and invest then we might actually get things back on track. There are just way too many lies being spewed by both sides

I disagree. Our system includes free markets under a Rule of Law. Rule of Law doesn't mean unelected bureaucrats making up regulations at the behest of lobbyists in order to control markets and crush their competition. If something is important enough for the government to oversee, Congress should pass an appropriately written law with details on what the law covers. The regulatory process is captive to those it regulates, so we should eliminate the role of regulatory bureaucrats in writing de facto laws outside of Congressional approval.

I agree for the most part. Elected officials do need some breathing room to operate which includes deciding how different systems are regulated but anything major that effects markets should be done through our legal system

It's more than markets, bub.

Unelected people should not be writing laws. Period.

One reason why the scope of government has bloated up all out of proportion is that Congress has written vague bloated "laws", and handed them over to the Exec Branch regulatory bodies to develop the details. This is not consistent with "consent of the governed" by any stretch of the imagination.

I understand what your saying in principle but I don’t think that’s a possibility given the enormity of our system. You really trust politicians to make all the operational and regulatory decisions for the various government agencies? Agencies are already inefficient enough... I don’t see adding more red tape as something that will help the situation. I do agree with you in part though, just think there needs to be a healthy balance

Central planning ALWAYS fails. Our federal government suffers from Extreme Scope Creep. Most regulations could be gotten rid of with the only result being a big sigh of relief for the burden being lifted. If it is important enough for the poer of the Federal Government to be applied, then it is important enough for Congress to write and pass a proper law, with the Exec Branch then responsible purely for enforcement (not inventing the details).

I'll also note that most of what DC does is transfer income and wealth from some citizens to other people (citizens and non). That is not what The Constitution was designed to enable the Feds to do.

You're right that deregulation can have positive effects. But also lack of regulation in other areas can be disastrous. Look what happened with the mortgage industry 10 years ago. The founders also weren’t dealing with corporations that had such massive control over the lives and well being of our people and environment.

I’m with you on making smart changes to our buerocracy which is overbloated, corrupt and inefficient in many areas.

 

[boedicca]

I disagree. Our system includes free markets under a Rule of Law. Rule of Law doesn't mean unelected bureaucrats making up regulations at the behest of lobbyists in order to control markets and crush their competition. If something is important enough for the government to oversee, Congress should pass an appropriately written law with details on what the law covers. The regulatory process is captive to those it regulates, so we should eliminate the role of regulatory bureaucrats in writing de facto laws outside of Congressional approval.

I agree for the most part. Elected officials do need some breathing room to operate which includes deciding how different systems are regulated but anything major that effects markets should be done through our legal system

It's more than markets, bub.

Unelected people should not be writing laws. Period.

One reason why the scope of government has bloated up all out of proportion is that Congress has written vague bloated "laws", and handed them over to the Exec Branch regulatory bodies to develop the details. This is not consistent with "consent of the governed" by any stretch of the imagination.

I understand what your saying in principle but I don’t think that’s a possibility given the enormity of our system. You really trust politicians to make all the operational and regulatory decisions for the various government agencies? Agencies are already inefficient enough... I don’t see adding more red tape as something that will help the situation. I do agree with you in part though, just think there needs to be a healthy balance

Central planning ALWAYS fails. Our federal government suffers from Extreme Scope Creep. Most regulations could be gotten rid of with the only result being a big sigh of relief for the burden being lifted. If it is important enough for the poer of the Federal Government to be applied, then it is important enough for Congress to write and pass a proper law, with the Exec Branch then responsible purely for enforcement (not inventing the details).

I'll also note that most of what DC does is transfer income and wealth from some citizens to other people (citizens and non). That is not what The Constitution was designed to enable the Feds to do.

You're right that deregulation can have positive effects. But also lack of regulation in other areas can be disastrous. Look what happened with the mortgage industry 10 years ago. The founders also weren’t dealing with corporations that had such massive control over the lives and well being of our people and environment.

I’m with you on making smart changes to our buerocracy which is overbloated, corrupt and inefficient in many areas.

When regulations go bad, it's because what is Good For Some is Not Good For All.

The mortgage industry was about privatizing profit (good for some) and socializing risk (not good for all). If we only had laws that were good for all, there would be far fewer of them and we would live in a freer society. And by free, I do not mean anarchy. I mean within a proper Rule of Law in place of the Grift of the Connected.

 

[Correll]

Trump is appealing to the very rational human self-interest of putting the welfare of oneself and ones' family, community and country ahead of that of foreign nations.

The Progs do the reverse. They insist that we harm ourselves in order to support total strangers that hate us.

Isn’t it crazy that millions of Americans want to harm themselves and their loved ones so they can support criminals? That must blow your mind

The progressives in question, put their idea of "fairness" ahead of the rights of American citizens.



They consider NATIONALISM to be a bad thing, and FAIRNESS, ie treating the "refugess" who have more need, generously at the expense of Americans who have so much more and are just being greedy in their desire to keep it.


They see NATIONALISM as the OPPOSITE of INTERNATIONALISM, or GLOBALISM,


and side with outsiders against their fellow Americans.

That’s a distorted narrative but I think you know that. They don’t side with outsiders over Americans, they side with plenty of million of other Americans who believe in helping people in need no matter where they are from. It’s a simple concept called compassion

Call it compassion or fairness, in their mind it trumps the Rights and interests of Americans.


That is the opposite of Nationalism.


And they viciously smear anyone that dares disagrees with them.

I just don’t agree with you premise. It can snowball into so many different areas to show how wrong it is. Why do we let special ed kids in school when they bring down the rest of the kids and soak up much of the resources? Why do we take care of the elderly and disabled andnpoor who can’t afford to take care of themselves? I can go on and on. But we do these things because American values aren’t those of selfishness and greed for many... they represent care and compassion and charity and caring for our neighbors. Many see that as a core principle and not applying solely to Americans

Exactly. Not solely, or even primarily applying to Americans, even though it is American tax money and American government programs.


Nothing in NATIONALISM, requires one to be against compassion and charity.


But, Compassion begins at home. There are tens of millions of AMERICANS, that need the resources and jobs that these migrants want to access to improve their lives.



As AMERICANS, they have a right to expect that AMERICA policy is crafted to serve them FIRST.


As AMERICANS, the rest of US, AMERICANS, should feel a bond of nationalistic loyalty to them, as our fellow AMERICANS.


"Compassion" carried too far, is no virtue.

 

[boedicca]

Isn’t it crazy that millions of Americans want to harm themselves and their loved ones so they can support criminals? That must blow your mind

The progressives in question, put their idea of "fairness" ahead of the rights of American citizens.



They consider NATIONALISM to be a bad thing, and FAIRNESS, ie treating the "refugess" who have more need, generously at the expense of Americans who have so much more and are just being greedy in their desire to keep it.


They see NATIONALISM as the OPPOSITE of INTERNATIONALISM, or GLOBALISM,


and side with outsiders against their fellow Americans.

That’s a distorted narrative but I think you know that. They don’t side with outsiders over Americans, they side with plenty of million of other Americans who believe in helping people in need no matter where they are from. It’s a simple concept called compassion

Call it compassion or fairness, in their mind it trumps the Rights and interests of Americans.


That is the opposite of Nationalism.


And they viciously smear anyone that dares disagrees with them.

I just don’t agree with you premise. It can snowball into so many different areas to show how wrong it is. Why do we let special ed kids in school when they bring down the rest of the kids and soak up much of the resources? Why do we take care of the elderly and disabled andnpoor who can’t afford to take care of themselves? I can go on and on. But we do these things because American values aren’t those of selfishness and greed for many... they represent care and compassion and charity and caring for our neighbors. Many see that as a core principle and not applying solely to Americans

Exactly. Not solely, or even primarily applying to Americans, even though it is American tax money and American government programs.


Nothing in NATIONALISM, requires one to be against compassion and charity.


But, Compassion begins at home. There are tens of millions of AMERICANS, that need the resources and jobs that these migrants want to access to improve their lives.



As AMERICANS, they have a right to expect that AMERICA policy is crafted to serve them FIRST.


As AMERICANS, the rest of US, AMERICANS, should feel a bond of nationalistic loyalty to them, as our fellow AMERICANS.


"Compassion" carried too far, is no virtue.

Indeed. "Compassion" carried to far is just narcissistic virtue signaling.

 

[deanrd]

Kumbaya. Although there are quite a few single issue voters on both sides (Abortion for example is a third rail both pro and against).

Yeah that’s one of the funny ones... you’d think the progressive party that promotes more government control would be the party promoting government regulation of abortions and the Republican Party of limited government and personal freedom would be the party pushing a women’s freedom of choice. But I guess each party has those elements that go against their core ideology.

The establishment parties are the Permanent Bipartisan Fusion Party. The GOP is just the LITE version of the Dems in most aspect. Both support Big Government.

The real contest in the U.S is between Those Who Want To Control Everyone and Those Who Want To Be Left Alone.

As hard as the partisans like to paint it there is never going to be a an all or nothing situation. Our system will always be a balance between free market capitalism, regulation and government programs. If we can stop playing the demonization games and work together to best operate and invest then we might actually get things back on track. There are just way too many lies being spewed by both sides

That's total ******* bullshit because until FDR there was absolutely zero regulation on the federal level. The Founding Fathers also never envisioned government programs that wrote checks to people for nothing in return. Wefare isn't an "investment" anymore than lighting money on fire is an investment.

Zero regulation? You sure about that genius?

He is telling you he misses the good old days when the elderly ate cat food.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I agree for the most part. Elected officials do need some breathing room to operate which includes deciding how different systems are regulated but anything major that effects markets should be done through our legal system

It's more than markets, bub.

Unelected people should not be writing laws. Period.

One reason why the scope of government has bloated up all out of proportion is that Congress has written vague bloated "laws", and handed them over to the Exec Branch regulatory bodies to develop the details. This is not consistent with "consent of the governed" by any stretch of the imagination.

I understand what your saying in principle but I don’t think that’s a possibility given the enormity of our system. You really trust politicians to make all the operational and regulatory decisions for the various government agencies? Agencies are already inefficient enough... I don’t see adding more red tape as something that will help the situation. I do agree with you in part though, just think there needs to be a healthy balance

Central planning ALWAYS fails. Our federal government suffers from Extreme Scope Creep. Most regulations could be gotten rid of with the only result being a big sigh of relief for the burden being lifted. If it is important enough for the poer of the Federal Government to be applied, then it is important enough for Congress to write and pass a proper law, with the Exec Branch then responsible purely for enforcement (not inventing the details).

I'll also note that most of what DC does is transfer income and wealth from some citizens to other people (citizens and non). That is not what The Constitution was designed to enable the Feds to do.

You're right that deregulation can have positive effects. But also lack of regulation in other areas can be disastrous. Look what happened with the mortgage industry 10 years ago. The founders also weren’t dealing with corporations that had such massive control over the lives and well being of our people and environment.

I’m with you on making smart changes to our buerocracy which is overbloated, corrupt and inefficient in many areas.

When regulations go bad, it's because what is Good For Some is Not Good For All.

The mortgage industry was about privatizing profit (good for some) and socializing risk (not good for all). If we only had laws that were good for all, there would be far fewer of them and we would live in a freer society. And by free, I do not mean anarchy. I mean within a proper Rule of Law in place of the Grift of the Connected.

White nationalist is not a ‘smear.’

It is an accurate and appropriate term assigned to a rightist whose speech and actions are that of a bigot, racist, nativist, and hatemonger – all of which is unpatriotic and un-American.

Conservatives who are not bigots, racists, nativists, or hatemongers are not referred to as white nationalists.

This isn’t difficult to understand.

 

[Correll]

It's more than markets, bub.

Unelected people should not be writing laws. Period.

One reason why the scope of government has bloated up all out of proportion is that Congress has written vague bloated "laws", and handed them over to the Exec Branch regulatory bodies to develop the details. This is not consistent with "consent of the governed" by any stretch of the imagination.

I understand what your saying in principle but I don’t think that’s a possibility given the enormity of our system. You really trust politicians to make all the operational and regulatory decisions for the various government agencies? Agencies are already inefficient enough... I don’t see adding more red tape as something that will help the situation. I do agree with you in part though, just think there needs to be a healthy balance

Central planning ALWAYS fails. Our federal government suffers from Extreme Scope Creep. Most regulations could be gotten rid of with the only result being a big sigh of relief for the burden being lifted. If it is important enough for the poer of the Federal Government to be applied, then it is important enough for Congress to write and pass a proper law, with the Exec Branch then responsible purely for enforcement (not inventing the details).

I'll also note that most of what DC does is transfer income and wealth from some citizens to other people (citizens and non). That is not what The Constitution was designed to enable the Feds to do.

You're right that deregulation can have positive effects. But also lack of regulation in other areas can be disastrous. Look what happened with the mortgage industry 10 years ago. The founders also weren’t dealing with corporations that had such massive control over the lives and well being of our people and environment.

I’m with you on making smart changes to our buerocracy which is overbloated, corrupt and inefficient in many areas.

When regulations go bad, it's because what is Good For Some is Not Good For All.

The mortgage industry was about privatizing profit (good for some) and socializing risk (not good for all). If we only had laws that were good for all, there would be far fewer of them and we would live in a freer society. And by free, I do not mean anarchy. I mean within a proper Rule of Law in place of the Grift of the Connected.

White nationalist is not a ‘smear.’

It is an accurate and appropriate term assigned to a rightist whose speech and actions are that of a bigot, racist, nativist, and hatemonger – all of which is unpatriotic and un-American.

Conservatives who are not bigots, racists, nativists, or hatemongers are not referred to as white nationalists.

This isn’t difficult to understand.

It is also not true.


The current tactic form the Left is to pretend the Nationalist, is inherently linked to the term "White Nationalist" for vague reasons.


It is pure grade A bullshit.


Your claim otherwise is vile.

 

[bripat9643]

The establishment parties are the Permanent Bipartisan Fusion Party. The GOP is just the LITE version of the Dems in most aspect. Both support Big Government.

The real contest in the U.S is between Those Who Want To Control Everyone and Those Who Want To Be Left Alone.

As hard as the partisans like to paint it there is never going to be a an all or nothing situation. Our system will always be a balance between free market capitalism, regulation and government programs. If we can stop playing the demonization games and work together to best operate and invest then we might actually get things back on track. There are just way too many lies being spewed by both sides

I disagree. Our system includes free markets under a Rule of Law. Rule of Law doesn't mean unelected bureaucrats making up regulations at the behest of lobbyists in order to control markets and crush their competition. If something is important enough for the government to oversee, Congress should pass an appropriately written law with details on what the law covers. The regulatory process is captive to those it regulates, so we should eliminate the role of regulatory bureaucrats in writing de facto laws outside of Congressional approval.

I agree for the most part. Elected officials do need some breathing room to operate which includes deciding how different systems are regulated but anything major that effects markets should be done through our legal system

It's more than markets, bub.

Unelected people should not be writing laws. Period.

One reason why the scope of government has bloated up all out of proportion is that Congress has written vague bloated "laws", and handed them over to the Exec Branch regulatory bodies to develop the details. This is not consistent with "consent of the governed" by any stretch of the imagination.

I understand what your saying in principle but I don’t think that’s a possibility given the enormity of our system. You really trust politicians to make all the operational and regulatory decisions for the various government agencies? Agencies are already inefficient enough... I don’t see adding more red tape as something that will help the situation. I do agree with you in part though, just think there needs to be a healthy balance

The only reason our system is "enormous" is the fact that unelected bureaucrats can make laws without a vote from the legislature. What we need is a much smaller system where the legislature has to vote on all votes and not pass on the responsibility to someone else.

 

[bripat9643]

It's more than markets, bub.

Unelected people should not be writing laws. Period.

One reason why the scope of government has bloated up all out of proportion is that Congress has written vague bloated "laws", and handed them over to the Exec Branch regulatory bodies to develop the details. This is not consistent with "consent of the governed" by any stretch of the imagination.

I understand what your saying in principle but I don’t think that’s a possibility given the enormity of our system. You really trust politicians to make all the operational and regulatory decisions for the various government agencies? Agencies are already inefficient enough... I don’t see adding more red tape as something that will help the situation. I do agree with you in part though, just think there needs to be a healthy balance

Central planning ALWAYS fails. Our federal government suffers from Extreme Scope Creep. Most regulations could be gotten rid of with the only result being a big sigh of relief for the burden being lifted. If it is important enough for the poer of the Federal Government to be applied, then it is important enough for Congress to write and pass a proper law, with the Exec Branch then responsible purely for enforcement (not inventing the details).

I'll also note that most of what DC does is transfer income and wealth from some citizens to other people (citizens and non). That is not what The Constitution was designed to enable the Feds to do.

You're right that deregulation can have positive effects. But also lack of regulation in other areas can be disastrous. Look what happened with the mortgage industry 10 years ago. The founders also weren’t dealing with corporations that had such massive control over the lives and well being of our people and environment.

I’m with you on making smart changes to our buerocracy which is overbloated, corrupt and inefficient in many areas.

When regulations go bad, it's because what is Good For Some is Not Good For All.

The mortgage industry was about privatizing profit (good for some) and socializing risk (not good for all). If we only had laws that were good for all, there would be far fewer of them and we would live in a freer society. And by free, I do not mean anarchy. I mean within a proper Rule of Law in place of the Grift of the Connected.

White nationalist is not a ‘smear.’

It is an accurate and appropriate term assigned to a rightist whose speech and actions are that of a bigot, racist, nativist, and hatemonger – all of which is unpatriotic and un-American.

Conservatives who are not bigots, racists, nativists, or hatemongers are not referred to as white nationalists.

This isn’t difficult to understand.

It's a smear.

 

[bripat9643]

The establishment parties are the Permanent Bipartisan Fusion Party. The GOP is just the LITE version of the Dems in most aspect. Both support Big Government.

The real contest in the U.S is between Those Who Want To Control Everyone and Those Who Want To Be Left Alone.

As hard as the partisans like to paint it there is never going to be a an all or nothing situation. Our system will always be a balance between free market capitalism, regulation and government programs. If we can stop playing the demonization games and work together to best operate and invest then we might actually get things back on track. There are just way too many lies being spewed by both sides

That's total ******* bullshit because until FDR there was absolutely zero regulation on the federal level. The Founding Fathers also never envisioned government programs that wrote checks to people for nothing in return. Wefare isn't an "investment" anymore than lighting money on fire is an investment.

Zero regulation? You sure about that genius?

The Sherman Anti-trust act was passed in 1890. The first case prosecuted under it was in 1899. So until 1899, there was no regulation of private firms by the federal government.

Did firms pay taxes? Were they allowed to kill, steal, and extort?

They didn't pay income taxes. Laws against killing and stealing are not regulations, which are made by bureacrats.