|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On February 12 2025 07:19 brian wrote:These absolute CRIMINALS in the department of education. i got rid of that by the way. you’re welcome. they love me for it. but these democrat run slums in our schools are banning crocs. they have bigger problems, i’ll tell you, we got rid of CRT but they’re still INDOCTRINATING our CHILDREN. the future of america. you’ll never believe it, i’ve never seen anything like it. anyway so these crocs. Tim Croc call me. we’ll figure something out. $2m in $TRUMP with proof of purchase just call my lawyers i’ll have this fixed by friday. it’ll be huge.
Lol, you might get head hunted to help him with his speeches.
On February 12 2025 08:56 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Oh ffs. That's actually pretty interesting to me; my high school students have loved wearing crocs for at least the past decade. They like to buy/wear all different colors, and customize them with different pins/magnets/whatever. It's not a particularly new fad, so I feel like students would have been tripping and hurting themselves for years already (seems like a weird time to decide to start banning them for safety reasons).
I first heard this form a DJ on the radio and she was saying that the first bans were attempted in like 2004 (maybe 2014 lol) but they were challenged and failed. Of all the dangers and problems at schools this seems so low down on the list. People now a days seem to be mad at all the wrong things!
|
I think it is fascinating how the Flim Flam man in the White House is confusing the hell out of his biggest trading partners. He is going to crush Canada during the next USMCA negotiation.
“There’s just so many schools of thought on what he’s trying to accomplish, and I don’t know if anybody 100 per cent knows the end game,” said Savage, now senior counsel at Borden Ladner Gervais.
“For Justin Trudeau to say Donald Trump wants to take over Canada, wants to acquire us because of our critical minerals — that was crazy,” Savage said.
“I can be sure the end game isn’t to start annexing Canada.”
“It’s just hard to know what the end game is,” she said.
If it is about the U.S. raising money in support of tax breaks, Canada’s in trouble because you can’t trade, ally or negotiate out of that, Savage said.
A few weeks ago Justin Trudeau acknowledged Trump is a skilled negotiator.
https://edmontonjournal.com/news/politics/alberta-trump-tariffs-sonya-savage
Despite all the whining coming out of Canada they still have the best access to US Markets of any country in the world.
I think the USA/Trump is using tariffs rather than raising income tax. Trump needs money to fund his dreams... the free ride for Mexico and Canada is over. As a Canadian, I gotta say.. it was fun while it lasted!
JFK Assassination
Florida Rep. Anna Paulina Luna stated she believed there were two shooters. It is pretty obvious there was more than 1 bullet and more than 1 shooter. Anyhow, Really damn cool development.
I believe JFK was murdered for two reasons. #1. he kept turning down "projects" like "Operation Northwoods". #2. I'll discuss later.
Interesting times.
|
I read the article, it’s the most boring op-ed piece. Shit even a dumbass like me pointed out a week or two ago how slugging the American population with a 25-100% sales tax are going to be used cover any shortfalls incurred via cutting the income tax.
The confusion is from this, not because Trump is doing a 5d chess play. Tariffs on shit like energy, potash, steel/aluminium are so stupid from a protectionist and inflationary standpoint that it can only be a huge tax on the American consumer, which in turn curbs demand and harms the Mexican and Canadian economies. Not by growing domestic industry but by shooting yourself in the foot to spite your neighbours.
Now if this was combined with US government investment in domestic high quality steel/aluminium production to replace Canadian clean aluminium, then sure. None of this is going to happen unless some billionaire finds some way to do some self dealing because protecting US industry is not the point of these tariffs.
None of this is really a mystery, they literally said that shit in Project 2025. It’s not hard to put two and two together while everyone is ripping copper wires from the American government right now.
Maybe I can get Sonya Savages’ job, all the article proves to me are that people like her are so far behind that they think they’re actually ahead.
|
On February 12 2025 16:53 Hat Trick of Today wrote:
I read the article, it’s the most boring op-ed piece. Shit even a dumbass like me pointed out a week or two ago how slugging the American population with a 25-100% sales tax are going to be used cover any shortfalls incurred via cutting the income tax.
The confusion is from this, not because Trump is doing a 5d chess play. Tariffs on shit like energy, potash, steel/aluminium are so stupid from a protectionist and inflationary standpoint that it can only be a huge tax on the American consumer, which in turn curbs demand and harms the Mexican and Canadian economies. Not by growing domestic industry but by shooting yourself in the foot to spite your neighbours.
Now if this was combined with US government investment in domestic high quality steel/aluminium production to replace Canadian clean aluminium, then sure. None of this is going to happen unless some billionaire finds some way to do some self dealing because protecting US industry is not the point of these tariffs.
None of this is really a mystery, they literally said that shit in Project 2025. It’s not hard to put two and two together while everyone is ripping copper wires from the American government right now.
Maybe I can get Sonya Savages’ job, all the article proves to me are that people like her are so far behind that they think they’re actually ahead.
Former energy minister for a Canadian province does sound glamorous, but I think you can aim higher. Former PM of the UK is a title held by Lizz Truss and Boris Johnson. Not exactly shining beacons of anything. And President of the USA is a job they have now given twice already to an Orangutan!
|
On February 12 2025 15:44 JimmyJRaynor wrote:I think it is fascinating how the Flim Flam man in the White House is confusing the hell out of his biggest trading partners. He is going to crush Canada during the next USMCA negotiation. Show nested quote +“There’s just so many schools of thought on what he’s trying to accomplish, and I don’t know if anybody 100 per cent knows the end game,” said Savage, now senior counsel at Borden Ladner Gervais. Show nested quote +“For Justin Trudeau to say Donald Trump wants to take over Canada, wants to acquire us because of our critical minerals — that was crazy,” Savage said. Show nested quote +“It’s just hard to know what the end game is,” she said.
If it is about the U.S. raising money in support of tax breaks, Canada’s in trouble because you can’t trade, ally or negotiate out of that, Savage said. A few weeks ago Justin Trudeau acknowledged Trump is a skilled negotiator. https://edmontonjournal.com/news/politics/alberta-trump-tariffs-sonya-savageDespite all the whining coming out of Canada they still have the best access to US Markets of any country in the world. I think the USA/Trump is using tariffs rather than raising income tax. Trump needs money to fund his dreams... the free ride for Mexico and Canada is over. As a Canadian, I gotta say.. it was fun while it lasted!
He is confusing them because he isn't acting rational or smart in any way, shape or form. No one knows what his actual end goal is because his end goal makes no fucking sense.
Just so you get it: That is not a good thing.
|
On February 12 2025 10:17 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2025 09:39 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 12 2025 08:44 Mohdoo wrote:On February 12 2025 08:14 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 12 2025 07:53 Mohdoo wrote:On February 12 2025 03:21 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 12 2025 02:37 Mohdoo wrote:On February 12 2025 01:38 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 12 2025 01:11 Mohdoo wrote:On February 11 2025 23:46 GreenHorizons wrote:
This is a tough 1-2 combo. Schumer preemptively gives up their leverage and Jeffries rationalizes Democrat impotency by saying they have no leverage.
Democrat politicians really don't respect their supporters' intelligence any more than Republicans do. Meanwhile both parties' supporters insist on demonstrating why they shouldn't. While I do legitimately think they are right to point out they have no real power in terms of budgets and whatnot, they can of course be doing civil disobedience kinda things or trying to organize general strikes etc They have power, and they have agency. They will choose to continue using them to give Trump and his fascist agenda support with their votes and rationalizations. Both parties are treating the people that are looking to them for help like oblivious idiots and their supporters are doing nothing but reinforcing that behavior for those political parties. What power? Do you mean legal power? + Show Spoiler + I am saying they have no institutional power because the institutions themselves have been destroyed. Doge, various EOs, and other such things have shown they will simply ignore barriers to their agenda and continue to force people to comply with his demands or fire them. If he wants the department of energy to do something, he will just fire people until they do. So even if democrats have some kinda authority to prevent a vote or something, they will still vote and the bill will be “passed” and the country will operate as if that’s legitimate. That’s why I’m saying they can’t actually stop this budget without physically preventing it. Blocking entryways or whatever is basically all they can do. If they don’t want a tree cut down, they need to physically chain themselves to the tree and hope they don’t just cut them down as well.
I want to be clear I’m not defending democrats here. I see them as a relic that will be replaced soon anyway. I’m just saying I think Trump has enough power over our institutions that the rules and regulations aren’t really a valid means of preventing his agenda. Democrats have power/agency in a variety of capacities legal and beyond, granted their power isn't absolute and they can still lose any particular contest while wielding it. They are continuing to use it to support Trump with votes and rationalizations. That said, it's really directed at their supporters + Show Spoiler +(which I would not be surprised to find you are the next election they tell you to be) . It simply isn't rational to expect supporting Democrats to prevent the clear rise of fascism and slew of constitutional crises we're facing. Democrats are enabling it and their supporters enabling them. Well I didn't vote for Harris and I changed my party affiliation, but it doesn't really matter either way because I live in Oregon and I can suck myself off for taking a stand knowing it will never change anything. I don't plan to vote for democrats again. To be honest, I see the whole focus on democrats as a distraction. Not to say you're trying to divert the conversation, but the current democrat leadership has shown they are totally inept and they will absolutely not be rising against fascism. If we end up saved from fascism, it won't have anything to do with democrats. It will be some other group that emerges. So voting for democrats is kind of a non-thing at this point. Hope you stick with it and find a replacement for your support of Democrats sooner than later. Part of my point is that basically all the other posters (and people beyond this site) who insisted on pushing that people like me should support Democrats, have not abandoned the Democrat party, and their only plan to oppose the rise of fascism is supporting/voting for Democrats (that are supporting Trump's fascist agenda) in a couple years (while making excuses for them/rationalizing their impotence until then), fleeing the country, or joining the fascists. Basically, supporting Democrats and opposing fascism are functionally mutually exclusive. Eh, I think folks saying they'll still vote for democrats haven't really worked through the logic chain yet. + Show Spoiler +If Trump creates a fascist dictatorship of the US --> Opposition leaders will be killed
If opposition leaders know they will be killed --> Democrats will not be opposition leaders
No democrat imagines Schumer or Jeffries risking their lives to stand against fascism. They were not revolutionary politicians. They did not rise through the ranks despite enormous danger simply by being politically active. If a bunch of CIA dudes bust into a hotel to kill some dude, the security guard at the entrance to the hotel is not a "able to defend against the CIA" kinda fighter. He is a security guard and makes sure no one who had too much to drink makes a scene. Schumer/Jeffries are the security guards. They are not special forces. If fascism is defeated, it will be by an entirely different group of people. It will be people who started their whole shpeal knowing they will definitely end up dead. If fascism fully takes hold and someone rises against it, those first couple of leaders are definitely 100% going to be killed. I'm having the experience that they have and are choosing fascism. Right now they are just distracting themselves until they feel more comfortable/less ashamed going back to insisting on supporting Democrats like we haven't been watching them support Trump's fascist agenda. I think its worth remembering: the full-ass implications of the US becoming a fascist dictatorship are so devastating and dreadful most people will not really even look at it until its smashed into their faces. + Show Spoiler + It is horrific and very scary. And so long as there is a glimmer of hope we might all be overreacting and this eventually fades, a very tiny % of people will even entertain the idea. Even if cynical and doomy friends are still kinda joking about it and not expressing any genuine level of concern. It won't be for a while. It's already being smashed in their faces. They are incapable of even identifying what could be smashed in their face to change their mind. Here they are unironically advocating Democrats as the way out of this mess/rationalizing/ignoring their impotence. All while those same Democrat politicians treat them like they are just as oblivious and foolish (or complicit) as Trump supporters/Republicans are for their politicians. As it seems the politicians should based on their behavior.
Like I said, it's a delusional perspective rooted in an ahistorical theory of change (at best).
|
Northern Ireland23702 Posts
On February 12 2025 19:28 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2025 10:17 Mohdoo wrote:On February 12 2025 09:39 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 12 2025 08:44 Mohdoo wrote:On February 12 2025 08:14 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 12 2025 07:53 Mohdoo wrote:On February 12 2025 03:21 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 12 2025 02:37 Mohdoo wrote:On February 12 2025 01:38 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 12 2025 01:11 Mohdoo wrote:
[quote]
While I do legitimately think they are right to point out they have no real power in terms of budgets and whatnot, they can of course be doing civil disobedience kinda things or trying to organize general strikes etc They have power, and they have agency. They will choose to continue using them to give Trump and his fascist agenda support with their votes and rationalizations. Both parties are treating the people that are looking to them for help like oblivious idiots and their supporters are doing nothing but reinforcing that behavior for those political parties. What power? Do you mean legal power? + Show Spoiler + I am saying they have no institutional power because the institutions themselves have been destroyed. Doge, various EOs, and other such things have shown they will simply ignore barriers to their agenda and continue to force people to comply with his demands or fire them. If he wants the department of energy to do something, he will just fire people until they do. So even if democrats have some kinda authority to prevent a vote or something, they will still vote and the bill will be “passed” and the country will operate as if that’s legitimate. That’s why I’m saying they can’t actually stop this budget without physically preventing it. Blocking entryways or whatever is basically all they can do. If they don’t want a tree cut down, they need to physically chain themselves to the tree and hope they don’t just cut them down as well.
I want to be clear I’m not defending democrats here. I see them as a relic that will be replaced soon anyway. I’m just saying I think Trump has enough power over our institutions that the rules and regulations aren’t really a valid means of preventing his agenda. Democrats have power/agency in a variety of capacities legal and beyond, granted their power isn't absolute and they can still lose any particular contest while wielding it. They are continuing to use it to support Trump with votes and rationalizations. That said, it's really directed at their supporters + Show Spoiler +(which I would not be surprised to find you are the next election they tell you to be) . It simply isn't rational to expect supporting Democrats to prevent the clear rise of fascism and slew of constitutional crises we're facing. Democrats are enabling it and their supporters enabling them. Well I didn't vote for Harris and I changed my party affiliation, but it doesn't really matter either way because I live in Oregon and I can suck myself off for taking a stand knowing it will never change anything. I don't plan to vote for democrats again. To be honest, I see the whole focus on democrats as a distraction. Not to say you're trying to divert the conversation, but the current democrat leadership has shown they are totally inept and they will absolutely not be rising against fascism. If we end up saved from fascism, it won't have anything to do with democrats. It will be some other group that emerges. So voting for democrats is kind of a non-thing at this point. Hope you stick with it and find a replacement for your support of Democrats sooner than later. Part of my point is that basically all the other posters (and people beyond this site) who insisted on pushing that people like me should support Democrats, have not abandoned the Democrat party, and their only plan to oppose the rise of fascism is supporting/voting for Democrats (that are supporting Trump's fascist agenda) in a couple years (while making excuses for them/rationalizing their impotence until then), fleeing the country, or joining the fascists. Basically, supporting Democrats and opposing fascism are functionally mutually exclusive. Eh, I think folks saying they'll still vote for democrats haven't really worked through the logic chain yet. + Show Spoiler +If Trump creates a fascist dictatorship of the US --> Opposition leaders will be killed
If opposition leaders know they will be killed --> Democrats will not be opposition leaders
No democrat imagines Schumer or Jeffries risking their lives to stand against fascism. They were not revolutionary politicians. They did not rise through the ranks despite enormous danger simply by being politically active. If a bunch of CIA dudes bust into a hotel to kill some dude, the security guard at the entrance to the hotel is not a "able to defend against the CIA" kinda fighter. He is a security guard and makes sure no one who had too much to drink makes a scene. Schumer/Jeffries are the security guards. They are not special forces. If fascism is defeated, it will be by an entirely different group of people. It will be people who started their whole shpeal knowing they will definitely end up dead. If fascism fully takes hold and someone rises against it, those first couple of leaders are definitely 100% going to be killed. I'm having the experience that they have and are choosing fascism. Right now they are just distracting themselves until they feel more comfortable/less ashamed going back to insisting on supporting Democrats like we haven't been watching them support Trump's fascist agenda. I think its worth remembering: the full-ass implications of the US becoming a fascist dictatorship are so devastating and dreadful most people will not really even look at it until its smashed into their faces. + Show Spoiler + It is horrific and very scary. And so long as there is a glimmer of hope we might all be overreacting and this eventually fades, a very tiny % of people will even entertain the idea. Even if cynical and doomy friends are still kinda joking about it and not expressing any genuine level of concern. It won't be for a while. It's already being smashed in their faces. They are incapable of even identifying what could be smashed in their face to change their mind. Here they are unironically advocating Democrats as the way out of this mess/rationalizing/ignoring their impotence. All while those same Democrat politicians treat them like they are just as oblivious and foolish (or complicit) as Trump supporters/Republicans are for their politicians. As it seems the politicians should based on their behavior. Like I said, it's a delusional perspective rooted in an ahistorical theory of change (at best).
Has Trump winning the election made some flavour of Fascism more likely or not, a satisfactory end to the Gaza conflict more likely or not, etc?
There are plenty here who’ve been critical of Democrats, some of US political structures or electoralism as a sole strategy.
Is it about stopping Fascism, or something else?
|
On February 12 2025 20:55 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2025 19:28 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 12 2025 10:17 Mohdoo wrote:On February 12 2025 09:39 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 12 2025 08:44 Mohdoo wrote:On February 12 2025 08:14 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 12 2025 07:53 Mohdoo wrote:On February 12 2025 03:21 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 12 2025 02:37 Mohdoo wrote:On February 12 2025 01:38 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
They have power, and they have agency. They will choose to continue using them to give Trump and his fascist agenda support with their votes and rationalizations.
Both parties are treating the people that are looking to them for help like oblivious idiots and their supporters are doing nothing but reinforcing that behavior for those political parties. What power? Do you mean legal power? + Show Spoiler + I am saying they have no institutional power because the institutions themselves have been destroyed. Doge, various EOs, and other such things have shown they will simply ignore barriers to their agenda and continue to force people to comply with his demands or fire them. If he wants the department of energy to do something, he will just fire people until they do. So even if democrats have some kinda authority to prevent a vote or something, they will still vote and the bill will be “passed” and the country will operate as if that’s legitimate. That’s why I’m saying they can’t actually stop this budget without physically preventing it. Blocking entryways or whatever is basically all they can do. If they don’t want a tree cut down, they need to physically chain themselves to the tree and hope they don’t just cut them down as well.
I want to be clear I’m not defending democrats here. I see them as a relic that will be replaced soon anyway. I’m just saying I think Trump has enough power over our institutions that the rules and regulations aren’t really a valid means of preventing his agenda. Democrats have power/agency in a variety of capacities legal and beyond, granted their power isn't absolute and they can still lose any particular contest while wielding it. They are continuing to use it to support Trump with votes and rationalizations. That said, it's really directed at their supporters + Show Spoiler +(which I would not be surprised to find you are the next election they tell you to be) . It simply isn't rational to expect supporting Democrats to prevent the clear rise of fascism and slew of constitutional crises we're facing. Democrats are enabling it and their supporters enabling them. Well I didn't vote for Harris and I changed my party affiliation, but it doesn't really matter either way because I live in Oregon and I can suck myself off for taking a stand knowing it will never change anything. I don't plan to vote for democrats again. To be honest, I see the whole focus on democrats as a distraction. Not to say you're trying to divert the conversation, but the current democrat leadership has shown they are totally inept and they will absolutely not be rising against fascism. If we end up saved from fascism, it won't have anything to do with democrats. It will be some other group that emerges. So voting for democrats is kind of a non-thing at this point. Hope you stick with it and find a replacement for your support of Democrats sooner than later. Part of my point is that basically all the other posters (and people beyond this site) who insisted on pushing that people like me should support Democrats, have not abandoned the Democrat party, and their only plan to oppose the rise of fascism is supporting/voting for Democrats (that are supporting Trump's fascist agenda) in a couple years (while making excuses for them/rationalizing their impotence until then), fleeing the country, or joining the fascists. Basically, supporting Democrats and opposing fascism are functionally mutually exclusive. Eh, I think folks saying they'll still vote for democrats haven't really worked through the logic chain yet. + Show Spoiler +If Trump creates a fascist dictatorship of the US --> Opposition leaders will be killed
If opposition leaders know they will be killed --> Democrats will not be opposition leaders
No democrat imagines Schumer or Jeffries risking their lives to stand against fascism. They were not revolutionary politicians. They did not rise through the ranks despite enormous danger simply by being politically active. If a bunch of CIA dudes bust into a hotel to kill some dude, the security guard at the entrance to the hotel is not a "able to defend against the CIA" kinda fighter. He is a security guard and makes sure no one who had too much to drink makes a scene. Schumer/Jeffries are the security guards. They are not special forces. If fascism is defeated, it will be by an entirely different group of people. It will be people who started their whole shpeal knowing they will definitely end up dead. If fascism fully takes hold and someone rises against it, those first couple of leaders are definitely 100% going to be killed. I'm having the experience that they have and are choosing fascism. Right now they are just distracting themselves until they feel more comfortable/less ashamed going back to insisting on supporting Democrats like we haven't been watching them support Trump's fascist agenda. I think its worth remembering: the full-ass implications of the US becoming a fascist dictatorship are so devastating and dreadful most people will not really even look at it until its smashed into their faces. + Show Spoiler + It is horrific and very scary. And so long as there is a glimmer of hope we might all be overreacting and this eventually fades, a very tiny % of people will even entertain the idea. Even if cynical and doomy friends are still kinda joking about it and not expressing any genuine level of concern. It won't be for a while. It's already being smashed in their faces. They are incapable of even identifying what could be smashed in their face to change their mind. Here they are unironically advocating Democrats as the way out of this mess/rationalizing/ignoring their impotence. All while those same Democrat politicians treat them like they are just as oblivious and foolish (or complicit) as Trump supporters/Republicans are for their politicians. As it seems the politicians should based on their behavior. Like I said, it's a delusional perspective rooted in an ahistorical theory of change (at best). + Show Spoiler +Has Trump winning the election made some flavour of Fascism more likely or not, a satisfactory end to the Gaza conflict more likely or not, etc?
There are plenty here who’ve been critical of Democrats, some of US political structures or electoralism as a sole strategy.
Is it about stopping Fascism, or something else?
I don't really even understand what you're trying to say/ask here, or what it has to do with my post you're quoting.
At the core I'm pointing out how supporting Democrats is irrational/delusional/ahistorical. 50 years of voting for Democrats has gotten people the crowning achievement of a healthcare plan that at the start of that 50 years was rejected by Republicans as too far to the right.
Also the pied piper strat with Clinton and the Weekend at Bernie's strat with Biden were 100% Democrat party own goals that gave us at least 2 terms of Trump.
Republicans/Trump/Musk couldn't have been this successful without the help of Democrats like Biden/Clinton and those that supported them.
|
I realised that you can usually find clips of debates from different European parliaments, where members of parliament ask questions directly from ministers. This does not seem that usual in the USA. I assume that is because the president and their cabinet are not members of Congress. Thus, there is no forum for it. Only some hearings seem to allow this, but they are not frequent. This seems to leave questions to the press.
|
German parliament allows it's minority parties to directly ask questions that need to be answered by the ministries in parliament.
It's usually some bureaucrate who answers them, not a secretary/minister.
The answers are handed in and published in writing. The quality of the question is usually off polemic nature, the answer is trying to be as vague as possible - but the general idea is that the current cabinett needs to provide transparency to the parliament.
If you'd do that to "DOGE" dems could ask
"Have the people working for DOGE made copies of governmental records that are non public"
"If yes what records to which extent?"
"If yes where are the copies stored?"
"Have the people working for DOGE currently access to operational live data?"
"Have the people working for DOGE been cleared for their current level of access in the same way the agencies own employees with the same level of access have been? If yes, by whose authority?"
And so on.
In germany answers could be deemed "non-public" - and then would have to be answered to in-parliament leaders of the minority parties - but they need to be answered.
|
On February 12 2025 14:09 Husyelt wrote:bsky.appHey everyone look, the actual deep state, with bonus NKVD vibes. DOGE is going to be attached to every single thing in the government, with a special kommisar to make sure party loyalty remains strong.
Do you believe the OMB and CIGIE are deep state shadow governments?
|
United States41928 Posts
That’s an extremely flawed comparison.
|
On February 12 2025 22:44 KT_Elwood wrote:
German parliament allows it's minority parties to directly ask questions that need to be answered by the ministries in parliament.
It's usually some bureaucrate who answers them, not a secretary/minister.
The answers are handed in and published in writing. The quality of the question is usually off polemic nature, the answer is trying to be as vague as possible - but the general idea is that the current cabinett needs to provide transparency to the parliament.
If you'd do that to "DOGE" dems could ask
"Have the people working for DOGE made copies of governmental records that are non public"
"If yes what records to which extent?"
"If yes where are the copies stored?"
"Have the people working for DOGE currently access to operational live data?"
"Have the people working for DOGE been cleared for their current level of access in the same way the agencies own employees with the same level of access have been? If yes, by whose authority?"
And so on.
In germany answers could be deemed "non-public" - and then would have to be answered to in-parliament leaders of the minority parties - but they need to be answered.
In Finland, there are special parliamentary sessions where MPs can ask questions, and the relevant minister answers them. MPs are also allowed to ask some follow-up questions. These sessions are broadcast publicly. The speaker gets to know the general topics of questions beforehand, but they should stay secret from ministers beforehand. MPs can also submit written questions that need to be answered in 21 days, and the answer is given to every MP. They seem to be public, too. It's hard to say who actually writes the written answers.
|
Yeah I mixed that up, germany has a similar thing. it's called "Fragestunde" in Bundestag, each MP is allowed to hand in up to 2 questions to the cabinet, which need to be answered in person by the secretary or proxy.
The written "Anfragen" are answered in writing, which forces the cabinet to make a statement.
It seems that Trump and Harry Bolz are "above" answering to anybody.
|
Isn't the main difference that in the US policy and laws are supposed to come from Congress and then gets implemented by the cabinet, while in European parliamentary democracies the cabinet sets the policy, writes laws and then parliament votes on them.
In the EU the cabinet is much closer tied to what happens and therefor there is more back and forth between parliament and the cabinet.
This has fallen to the wayside a bit more in recent years in the US because Congress, or more specifically the Republicans, are abdicating their responsibility and are not actually governing so the WH 'has' to step up and do their job for them but that isn't how the system is designed to work.
|
On February 13 2025 00:05 Gorsameth wrote:
Isn't the main difference that in the US policy and laws are supposed to come from Congress and then gets implemented by the cabinet, while in European parliamentary democracies the cabinet sets the policy, writes laws and then parliament votes on them.
In the EU the cabinet is much closer tied to what happens and therefor there is more back and forth between parliament and the cabinet.
This has fallen to the wayside a bit more in recent years in the US because Congress, or more specifically the Republicans, are abdicating their responsibility and are not actually governing so the WH 'has' to step up and do their job for them but that isn't how the system is designed to work.
2008 broke the Rs mentally I think. I think seeing Obama become President just fucking shattered reality throughout that entire cult. Nothing they've done since has made any sense if you don't look at it through the lens of racism. Full stop. They're determined to ruin everyone's lives, including their own, just out of pure spite for ever electing Obama.
If anyone can explain it to me, I'd welcome a PM so as to not muck up the thread. But I just can't understand. You go from Obama to trump and then wonder why this is happening.
|
On February 12 2025 23:05 KwarK wrote:
That’s an extremely flawed comparison.
Yes. You're referring, of course, to that between 1) NKVD and 2) a democratically elected president hiring people to work in government agencies he runs to provide oversight to finances and efficiency, in order to prevent an entrenched class from working against the country's interests vis-a-vis wasting and siphoning money from their fellow citizens and future children ad libitum.
|
United States41928 Posts
On February 13 2025 02:51 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2025 23:05 KwarK wrote:
That’s an extremely flawed comparison. Yes. You're referring, of course, to that between 1) NKVD and 2) a democratically elected president hiring people to work in government agencies he runs to provide oversight to finances and efficiency, in order to prevent an entrenched class from working against the country's interests vis-a-vis wasting and siphoning money from their fellow citizens and future children ad libitum.
That’s an extremely flawed description. I could make an equally rosy description of the NKVD and their perfectly above board efforts to protect the worker’s revolution if you were worth the time.
The argument being made is that you can’t just go “police, secret police, what does it matter, they’re all police, are you against law enforcement, do you support criminals?” They are different, they have different institutional cultures, different levels of politicization, different reasons for their creation, led by career public servants vs party donors, differing accountability.
The OMB is like the police in that it is an institution that serves the public interest rather than the party. DOGE is like the secret police in that it is an arm of the party staffed by party loyalists to be wielded against any the party perceive as politically unreliable.
But of course we all know that DOGE is political, that Elon didn’t get to run it through his career of public service, this is you just engaging in bad faith, as always.
|
United States41928 Posts
For someone who looks at the fucking FEMA and sees a secret conspiracy to push a political agenda through government you’re having a really tough time with DOGE.
|
Northern Ireland23702 Posts
On February 13 2025 00:09 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 13 2025 00:05 Gorsameth wrote:
Isn't the main difference that in the US policy and laws are supposed to come from Congress and then gets implemented by the cabinet, while in European parliamentary democracies the cabinet sets the policy, writes laws and then parliament votes on them.
In the EU the cabinet is much closer tied to what happens and therefor there is more back and forth between parliament and the cabinet.
This has fallen to the wayside a bit more in recent years in the US because Congress, or more specifically the Republicans, are abdicating their responsibility and are not actually governing so the WH 'has' to step up and do their job for them but that isn't how the system is designed to work. 2008 broke the Rs mentally I think. I think seeing Obama become President just fucking shattered reality throughout that entire cult. Nothing they've done since has made any sense if you don't look at it through the lens of racism. Full stop. They're determined to ruin everyone's lives, including their own, just out of pure spite for ever electing Obama. If anyone can explain it to me, I'd welcome a PM so as to not muck up the thread. But I just can't understand. You go from Obama to trump and then wonder why this is happening.
I think racism is a component of it, but it’s part of some much wider malaise.
Including in Europe, where Obama and what his election represented was largely popular.
To me it’s part of some wider wave of shit. Some get swallowed by it, some add to its size and some ride it. Just as I don’t think it’s a wave Trump created as such, I don’t think it’s one Obama did via his election, or really any other singular kind of events.
It also took a while but there was pushes then, and before Obama from some of the grass roots to push the GOP in this kind of direction. That was already there, it just wasn’t as developed. In Obama you also had someone kinda popular enough to triumph anyway.
Finally I guess you add the maturation of the internet news outrage machine that is notably worse now than even the relatively recent Obama years.
People haven’t got stupider, but their views certainly have. Not exclusive to morons, but let’s go with morons. If you’re not that bright, if you broadly just parrot mainstream opinion, you’re at least likely to be in some ballpark of correct, or if not correct, at least within some framework of reasonable disagreement. If you’re not that bright and go to ‘do your own research’, you’re far more likely to just be catastrophically wrong, or inhabiting a different reality altogether.
This isn’t to say that I’m eulogising some great age of veracity, it wasn’t. But the mainstream media, or more accurately a reasonable trust in at least some of it acted as some vague central pole around which discourse happened and gated out some (not all) of the absolute bullshit.
I think this has benefitted MAGA types far more than those on the left of the spectrum. If your underlying desire really is ‘I’m angry at X, someone should fix it’, facts don’t really matter, you just gotta get enough people angry with you, and someone who’ll do what you want.
The left aren’t saints obviously, they aren’t immune. But less susceptible I think it’s fair to say. In a crude sense, they’d prefer not to be angry at x problem they see, they’d prefer the problem fixed and fixed with sensible, evidence-based policy.
To a degree as well it’s somewhat swallowed up ye olde mainstream conservative as well, I’d include them as victims of the shit wave.
I’m not adding a million caveats, so don’t nitpick me too hard folks :p
I think broadly via whatever confluence of factors you’ve got a lot of angry idiots, but while they were always part of the electorate you needed to somewhat placate, they were the fringes. Now that’s almost inverted in some ways.
And what’s more, these people can never be wrong. Ever! Watch it, guara-fucking-tee it. If x Trump policy bombs, it will never be his fault, or theirs for supporting him, some other actor will be inserted.
That’s from me what’s really indicative behaviour of the cult mentality, and why I think it’s perfectly appropriate to call folks cultists.
Sadly I think I’ve a better gauge on why we’re in this sorry mess than suggestions on how to get out of it, but that’s my half a dollar.
I know you said to PM but I think it’s an interesting question that fits the thread’s remit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
