Exiled wrote:I am arguing more from a progressive point of view. The Republican plan is to do nothing or strip whatever decent laws there are in order for their donors to benefit. No, I would like to see the Democrats come back to the people and leave their Wall Street donors. Or, maybe let's make the Democrats and Republicans irrelevant by forming a third political party. If someone would propose medicare for all (70& want this), end the wars and outrageous military spending that goes with it (I think that is a winner too), higher minimum wage (big winner), student loan reform or path to discharge in bankruptcy (big winner among millennials) and truly fight the monopolies (it is about time Google and Facebook had their economic power cut down), this would win in a landslide.
No, it would lose in a landslide. 64% of Americans say military spending is too little or just about right.
70% support medicare for all? Yeah, probably because they didn't understand the question. Once "government controlled healthcare" becomes the official label that percentage will be reduced to 50%.
When "yes we can" becomes "no we can't" ....
It was a silly dream anyway .....
"Religion is about providing human community in the guise of solving problems that don’t exist or failing to solve problems that do and seeking to reconcile these contradictions and conceal the failures in bogus explanations otherwise known as theology." - Kishkumen
“Yes we can” became “No, you won’t” when Republicans decided back in 2008 that political purity was more important than cooperation and that even things previously agreed upon between the two parties needed to be obstructed to prevent Obama from getting anything that could be interpreted as a success, or ‘win’.
How do you suggest the Dems would proceed with a Republican-controlled Senate? And why should not Dems pursue any valid investigations in the midst of that?
canpakes wrote:“Yes we can” became “No, you won’t” when Republicans decided back in 2008 that political purity was more important than cooperation and that even things previously agreed upon between the two parties needed to be obstructed to prevent Obama from getting anything that could be interpreted as a success, or ‘win’.
How do you suggest the Democrats would proceed with a Republican-controlled Senate? And why should not Democrats pursue any valid investigations in the midst of that?
Obama could have ended guantanamo like he promised. He could have prosecuted bankers like Jamie Diamond and Lloyd Blankfein (it took a fraud out of malaysia to finally oust him). However, Holder always had some excuse. Obama could have stayed out of Syria and Libya and Yemen and all of the other unnecessary wars. But his banker buddies at citigroup love war profits. Also, didn't the democrats have all three at one point? What happened then? What is happening in California where all three are controlled by the Democrats? Here in Nevada we just elected a Democrat as governor and now the Democrats control the senate, assembly, and the governorship. What will they propose that the people want? I am hopeful but won't hold my breath as gambling and mining still control the state regardless of who the front men and women are.
We need a third party that will stand up to the donor class.
"Religion is about providing human community in the guise of solving problems that don’t exist or failing to solve problems that do and seeking to reconcile these contradictions and conceal the failures in bogus explanations otherwise known as theology." - Kishkumen
Exiled wrote:I am guessing that Trump took a lot of questionable but maybe legal deductions and perhaps he downplays his wealth for tax purposes. Or perhaps he isn't as wealthy as he brags. Trump lies and exaggerates so much about himself and has done so over the years that he became a brand/myth. Maybe the taxes will expose the myth.
It will be great political theater and a reason to vote democrat, a la Trump is horrible, the true disaster, he is evil and must be stopped, never mind that the Democrats don't really have a legislative agenda that the people want ......
So he's actually poorer that he claims. Or maybe he's wealthier. His tax deductions are questionable, but perhaps legal. Perhaps not. Obviously seeing his tax returns would help resolve the situation.
What I don't understand is how your grading of the Democrats' legislative agenda has anything to do with whether or not Donald Trump broke the law. The issues are not related.
"The great problem of any civilization is how to rejuvenate itself without rebarbarization." - Will Durant "We've kept more promises than we've even made" - Donald Trump "Of what meaning is the world without mind? The question cannot exist." - Edwin Land
MeDotOrg wrote:So he's actually poorer that he claims. Or maybe he's wealthier. His tax deductions are questionable, but perhaps legal. Perhaps not. Obviously seeing his tax returns would help resolve the situation.
What I don't understand is how your grading of the Democrats' legislative agenda has anything to do with whether or not Donald Trump broke the law. The issues are not related.
They are related. There is only so much time and investigations take time away from doing the business of the American people as Clinton reminded us when he was facing stiff opposition due to the Lewinki affair.
"Religion is about providing human community in the guise of solving problems that don’t exist or failing to solve problems that do and seeking to reconcile these contradictions and conceal the failures in bogus explanations otherwise known as theology." - Kishkumen
MeDotOrg wrote:So he's actually poorer that he claims. Or maybe he's wealthier. His tax deductions are questionable, but perhaps legal. Perhaps not. Obviously seeing his tax returns would help resolve the situation.
What I don't understand is how your grading of the Democrats' legislative agenda has anything to do with whether or not Donald Trump broke the law. The issues are not related.
They are related. There is only so much time and investigations take time away from doing the business of the American people as Clinton reminded us when he was facing stiff opposition due to the Lewinki affair.
It appears that you're saying it's an 'either or' situation. Either we do the business of the American people or we investigate Trump. One of the checks and balances of the country Congressional oversight over malfeasance by the Executive branch. Investigating Trump is part of the system of checks and balances. I don't see any reason, for example, while Congress can't work on things like covering preexisting medical conditions and infrastructure rebuilding while at the same time looking into Trump. The Unites States did not grind to a halt during Watergate or Lewinsky scandals.
Where the situation with Trump is different than with Clinton or Nixon is all of the other legal activity that Trump is facing outside of any Congressional investigations. Investigations into his charities, the emoluments lawsuits, tax dodges to avoid inheritance taxes, and campaign finance violations with the McDougal/Daniels payoffs mean that Trump will be fighting legal battles for at least the next few years, regardless of what Congress chooses to investigate.
"The great problem of any civilization is how to rejuvenate itself without rebarbarization." - Will Durant "We've kept more promises than we've even made" - Donald Trump "Of what meaning is the world without mind? The question cannot exist." - Edwin Land
We have 435 Congressmen and 100 Senators. I'm sure the House will figure out how to spare a few bodies for an investigative committee.
- Doc
In the face of madness, rationality has no power - Xiao Wang, US historiographer, 2287 AD.
Every record...falsified, every book rewritten...every statue...has been renamed or torn down, every date...altered...the process is continuing...minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Ideology is always right.
- [while in Paris] he sat out some big events and clashed with allies
- Monday he ended his public day at 10:03 a.m.
- skipp[ed] the Veterans Day trip to Arlington National Cemetery every president since at least John F. Kennedy has made to lay a ceremonial wreath
- On Tuesday, Trump's only public appearance was a brief showing at a Diwali ceremony, and he had Secretary of State Mike Pompeo meet with visiting King Abdullah II of Jordan.
- Trump sent Vice President Mike Pence to the Asia Pacific Economic Conference (APEC) summit typically attended by presidents
- canceled a trip to Colombia
- opted not to visit the U.S. troops he sent to the U.S.-Mexico border to protect a "caravan" he seems to have forgotten about
- "Trump has retreated into a cocoon of bitterness and resentment," the Los Angeles Times reports, citing multiple administration sources.
Word on the street is that the Democrat victories has sent him into a bit of a paranoid tizzy, and the Mueller indictments have him worried about his finances being exposed.
- Doc
In the face of madness, rationality has no power - Xiao Wang, US historiographer, 2287 AD.
Every record...falsified, every book rewritten...every statue...has been renamed or torn down, every date...altered...the process is continuing...minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Ideology is always right.
Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:Word on the street is that the Democrat victories has sent him into a bit of a paranoid tizzy, and the Mueller indictments have him worried about his finances being exposed.
Why that's awful. Do you think the poor man would appreciate it if I sent him an encouraging note on a card with a picture of some adorable little kittens wearing MAGA hats?
===================
I regret suggesting that: I have since found that such noisome images are in fact plastered all over the internet.
Zadok: I did not have a faith crisis. I discovered that the Church was having a truth crisis. Maksutov: That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
