If "the Country is on fire" should the DOJ negotiate with the arsonist?
I personally don't think so, but I'm not one of the millions who voted to drain the swamp without a plan as to what the results would be if we did it.
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
PDXNative1986 · 36-40, MVIP
Trump didn't drain the swanp though, he expanded it into a freaking moat and brought in a few alligators and sharks. His Whitehouse for all intents and purposes was PART of the swamp.
This is what I can't stand in the worst way about politics and also the fact that there are people who would say that this term is "too strong" like the FUCK IT IS it being TRUE doesn't DEPEND on you AGREEING with me in CALLING A SPADE A SPADE but it's called regulatory capture which ALL REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTS DO EVERY TIME THIS NATION ELECTS ONE and that's NOT To say that the democrats never corrupt the regulatory agencies but the republicans ALWAYS DO.
When a COAL LOBBYIST is running the department of energy, THAT IS regulatory capture BY DEFAULT those people are CATEGORICALLLY not qualified for the job and if they ARE given it DOES rise to regulatory capture.
And what is regulatory capture? it's when a public interest regulatory agency is captured for private rather than public interest in order to do the bidding of those pirvate interest rather than what is in the public good.
So if a Coal Lobbyist runs the D.O.E that agency has been captured, and Trump has EXPANDED not DRAINED the swamp.
And he put a coal lobbyist in charge, I would single the pigfucker out but this pattern of letting the foxes run the hen house is TYPICAL of republicans it's what they always do. Nixon did it, Reagan did it , bush sr did it, JR did it and now Trump.
A republican will never truly drain the swamp because it would empty the pocket books of some of their biggest donors.
I actually want to see the swamp of corruption drained. But I am absoutely certain a republican will never do that because it works against their electoral interest.
https://academic.oup.com/oxrep/article-abstract/22/2/203/334718?redirectedFrom=fulltext&login=false
[media=https://youtu.be/ABIFVd_kh1E]
This is what I can't stand in the worst way about politics and also the fact that there are people who would say that this term is "too strong" like the FUCK IT IS it being TRUE doesn't DEPEND on you AGREEING with me in CALLING A SPADE A SPADE but it's called regulatory capture which ALL REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTS DO EVERY TIME THIS NATION ELECTS ONE and that's NOT To say that the democrats never corrupt the regulatory agencies but the republicans ALWAYS DO.
When a COAL LOBBYIST is running the department of energy, THAT IS regulatory capture BY DEFAULT those people are CATEGORICALLLY not qualified for the job and if they ARE given it DOES rise to regulatory capture.
And what is regulatory capture? it's when a public interest regulatory agency is captured for private rather than public interest in order to do the bidding of those pirvate interest rather than what is in the public good.
So if a Coal Lobbyist runs the D.O.E that agency has been captured, and Trump has EXPANDED not DRAINED the swamp.
And he put a coal lobbyist in charge, I would single the pigfucker out but this pattern of letting the foxes run the hen house is TYPICAL of republicans it's what they always do. Nixon did it, Reagan did it , bush sr did it, JR did it and now Trump.
A republican will never truly drain the swamp because it would empty the pocket books of some of their biggest donors.
I actually want to see the swamp of corruption drained. But I am absoutely certain a republican will never do that because it works against their electoral interest.
https://academic.oup.com/oxrep/article-abstract/22/2/203/334718?redirectedFrom=fulltext&login=false
[media=https://youtu.be/ABIFVd_kh1E]
@PDXNative1986 Damn, you're long winded. Forgive for not replying to all of that, but my opinion is that Republicans would be happy to drain the swamp so they could refill it to their liking with more friendly sludge, slime and pests.
The problem is, their reform, much like their populism, is about an inch thick.
The problem is, their reform, much like their populism, is about an inch thick.
PDXNative1986 · 36-40, MVIP
@MistyCee My argument at this point is there's no such animal as Right wing populism, it's phony as all real populism leans left like FDR. If you're a right winger you're for the unearned privileges of the elites. no matter how much you PRETEND to hate the elites.
tucker carlson demonizes the elites but he only things of the "liberal elite" as elite. He pretends to be "man of the people" but he is anything but, he's ONE of the plutocrats, but he's a milionaire doing the bidding of the Murdoch family. Murdochs are Conservative elites.
He is not a solution in any way. their populism is phony and their alleged reform is deform.
This is a populist:
[media=https://youtu.be/D9yoZHs6PsU]
Fox news isn't .
[media=https://youtu.be/iQRwcI0-Nm4]
tucker carlson demonizes the elites but he only things of the "liberal elite" as elite. He pretends to be "man of the people" but he is anything but, he's ONE of the plutocrats, but he's a milionaire doing the bidding of the Murdoch family. Murdochs are Conservative elites.
He is not a solution in any way. their populism is phony and their alleged reform is deform.
This is a populist:
[media=https://youtu.be/D9yoZHs6PsU]
Fox news isn't .
[media=https://youtu.be/iQRwcI0-Nm4]
@PDXNative1986 Honestly, when I think of genuine left wing populists, FDR doesn't come to mind compared to some of his contemporaries:
[media=https://youtu.be/hphgHi6FD8k]
[media=https://youtu.be/hphgHi6FD8k]