How many of you are concerned with governmental excess power?

The government shows its authoritarian might every time it sends troops to wars. Or as they did with the draft. Or shutting down the government. I'm not saying you are wrong - I think it is important that we keep our eyes on potential power grabs. But this certainly isn't the first time we should feel concern.

 

No, that is not my argument. We work toward goals of better behavior, better conduct, better conditions- and every inch of gain improves the quality of our lives. It's not 100% or nothing.

There comes a point in most things- whether its a food you eat or the life you live, where the level of toxic elements present become a serious threat.
Limiting that is what this is about.

 

That potential exists because of the adversarial relationship between parties, where partisan political goals have displaced the duty to the nation among many in congress. When one is willing to sacrifice national good for partisan satisfaction, the entire nation is harmed. We are seeing far too much of that today- and few in congress seem to care.

 

That's pretty much the point.

 

I agree, there is no shortage of long term crackpots in congress with a D after their name who gave up the fight long ago in favor of fattening their wallets. It's obvious that AOC & Co. have already jumped on the gravy train, they make a lot of noise but so far only appeal to the dim witted college crowd. I am worried about the cabal that actively and criminally conspired to unseat the president mentoring those retards.

 

Regarding the class of people we elect, I think we also have to ask about the nature of the people who put them in office. How on earth does any sector of rational citizens choose such marginal, fringe candidates in the first place? It would seem like a kind of IQ test, and they all came in short.

 

I agree, the polarization and ultra high partisanship of today's political era always seems to put party over country. It's the leaders of both parties I hold at fault here. A Lott and Daschle would have never reverted to the nuclear option, neither Mitchell and Dole or even Baker and Byrd. It's partisan leaders like Reid, Schumer and McConnell who place party high above the country.

I have wondered if one of the reason the two major parties have become so partisan is that they're shrinking. In 2006 independents made up 30% of the electorate, today they have grown to 40% plus if one believes Gallup and Pew Research. I think as the two major parties continue to move more and more left and right, the more moderates within them have deserted them. They became more and more ideological and less pragmatic. Litmus test now abound for both. The hard core ideologues is all that left within each.

Respect for each other is gone as is cooperation between them. Today each party views the other as this nation's number one enemy. Not Russia, North Korea, Iran, the debt or even the CoronaVirus. Lott and Daschle respected each other and would work together, ditto Mitchell and Dole, they would compromise and not pull what I deem underhanded shenanigans like the nuclear option.

As long as we're in this very divisive, partisan, polarized political era, I have little hope for our survival as a prosperous, free and secure nation.

 

On this we agree. But that is the nature of government. It will always usurp as much power and authority as the governed will allow it. The biggest problem is that government by its nature is force and force tends over time to lose sight of its limitations which are numerous.

By the way riddle me this, if Trump is just another estabLishment wonk as you say why is the establishment so dead set on getting rid of him that they'll concoct the most grandiose elaborate and suicidally stupid plans to get rid of him?

 

Unfortunately, this is like arguments between small children- At this point, it doesn't matter who started it, it just needs to stop. But- we lack a parent to apply the needed discipline. The founders believed that congress could be trusted to keep it's own house clean and it's integrity intact.... and they trusted that most of us as voters would punish them if they failed to do so. They have failed, and we have failed to apply that punishment, so the abuse continues.

Congress is the only branch of government that operates solely under it's own supervision; they have the power to immediately remove any member deemed unfit (for any reason) with a 2/3 vote. In the last 156 years since the end of the civil war- they have done that TWICE. Only two removals in a century and a half... 535 members. That's real job security- and clearly a license to be as asinine as you wish, without fear.

 

Do you feel the same way about the crooks who gave it to him?

 

True, but I see that the influence of popular culture in elections is waning. The love affair with Hollywood and their ilk is over, even music has become much less political.The former adoring masses are now adults who have discovered that the heady, intoxicating ideals of their youth resulted in the shrinking of their paychecks. Wealth redistribution through confiscatory taxes has become a wake up call for many who struggle in spite of having an education and a good job.I believe that the current crisis will more than anything, illustrate the shortcomings of socialism. The US for however long it takes to recover from this crisis will be propped up in many ways by free stuff from the government but with an enormous price tag. This involves a roll of the dice on whether or not we are able to recover before the money runs out. The bills that are piling up now are mind boggling, the effects of which will no doubt be felt for the rest of this century. As globalism has been destroyed by this great disaster so will interest in alternative forms of governance in America. We have never really strayed far from the tried and true and the sane, rational majority of the electorate will continue to subscribe to that in the voting booth. I see the kooks and the left in general becoming marginalized and hopefully snuffed.

 

I agree. The framers also had a fear of political parties. They called them factions. They were afraid that sooner or later instead of representing the people and putting the country first, it would become sooner or later representing the party and party first. That has come to pass.

I don't know how we're going to get out of this present ultra partisan, polarized era. If we're ever going to get out of it without it being too late.

 

I think a good start would be for everyone to acknowledge that supporters of one party or the other are not enemies. They are not inherently evil. Their view of how the country should be run is different, that's all. In our every day lives we meet/live with people who have different views, but we manage not to make them evil enemies.

 

I'm old enough to remember exactly that. When both parties respected the other and were willing to work with the other. Each recognized the goal of each party was a prosperous, free and secure America. Only the paths getting there was different.

Not so today. Now partisan hacks who can only think about party has taken over the leadership of both. I'll not support either party until this starts to change.

 

There is a huge difference between having different political preferences and having different character values. We are seeing character conflicts today on a major scale- people doing things that say they have no self-respect or integrity to limit their actions, and thereby keep the differences as a negotiation or discussion rather than an adversarial conflict. This conflict is totally adversarial. Adversary as a concept is simply defined- in order for me to win, you must lose.

If we differ as partners (such as passengers on the same troubled airplane) in order for me to win, you must win also- we just differ on how to do it, and need to find mutual ground. BIG difference, and not one that lends itself to negotiation or compromise- it's a question of who loses, because it takes participation of both sides to make a partnership. What we must do now is to find a way to resolve this where everybody doesn't lose- and that does not mean allowing the hostility to succeed or continue.

 

I remember for example when Daschle and Lott would work together, form compromises. The same with Mitchell and Dole. But since McConnell and first Reid and now Schumer, it seems compromise isn't an option on anything. Schumer must stop Trump for doing anything, the same with McConnell vs. Obama. I hope the passage of time has clouded the past. I think whoever, whatever party makes a proposal, it should be considered on its merits, not by who proposed or just to stop anything and everything from the other party or president of the other party. Is that old fashioned? I realize on some issues, compromise is impossible. But I would think on 90% of them, it is if each side is willing.

I suppose this leads us back to public enemy number one.

 

Agreed - Our founders put in safeguards to protect essential liberty/ restrict the power of Gov't./ limit the authority of Gov't - for 200 years Gov't has been trying to get that power back - and it has succeeded.

This is both curious and counter intuitive. It also requires a working and agreed upon definition of what the "Establishment" is so lets begin there.

The Establishment is made up of elite politicians and bureaucrats - at the top of the food chain are the big money influences who pull the strings.

The Establishment however is not some cabal or "star chamber" (although such exist - many in fact). There are many different interests who compete with and are often in conflict with each other. This is what makes our system so insidious.

You will not find the Establishment looking at the areas in which there is conflict - Hot Button issues such as Abortion - Gay Marriage - Guns - the Wall - and so on. These issues are useful in keeping the people divided.

You find the Establishment in the areas in which they agree... where do red and blue agree ?

Do they agree on Russiagate ? "NO NO NO" you say - Russiagate was a which hunt - and you would be correct - on that point Red and Blue disagree.

Where is is that they agree with respect to Russiagate ? There you will find the demon. Both sides maintain the "Russia is Evil" narrative to some degree... especially when it comes to authorizing more defense spending - we need the Russia demon alive to keep padding the pockets of those who own the Military Industrial Complex.

Then there is the agreement on clamping down on freedom of speech - the press - information. Authorization of censorship - spying and other nefarious deeds - o - plenty.

Trump is closely connected the largest of the Establishment interests ... top of the Food Chain - the folks who bailed him out of his bankruptcies - the fellow Trumps daughter dated for a time .. and he appointed one of this fellows henchmen to commerce secretary - quid pro quo ( Wilbur Ross).

Trump yammers on at length about hot button issues - what he does not do is go against the main Establishment agenda items.

 

I agree. It seems like we've gotten to the point where no citizen can be allowed to lose stock value, to lose their job, or to suffer an illness or hardship without the federal government stepping in to "save the day"; and "saving the day" is now costing us trillions of dollars everytime it's supposedly "needed". Who's going to pay for all these multi-trillion dollar expenditures, and who's going to suffer the loss of liberties they incur? In the end, I'm guessing it's going to be "we the people".

 

Yes, everytime we let gov't take away our freedoms, we never fully recover.
I've been against the likes of the PA, FISA, phone records, etc.

This time around, it was State gov'ts taking freedoms away, not the FED Gov't.

 

So you're not heeding any social distancing guidelines then. That's OK. Or are you?

 

Are you following the social distancing guidelines?
Did you hand over your rights so easily?

 

Keeping power to the people?

Who installed the Patriot Act?
I remember then a party was all for it, until the other party took over. The sunset clause expired but the new party renewed it and the party that implemented it, went crazy that the new party didn't give up all that power.
Because neither party will give back power to the people. People should never allow it in the 1st place.
And stuff in the PA is likely what has tRUMP supporters all up in arms.

 

How many of you are concerned with governmental excess power?

The power and size of federal government are my only political concern. But since I can't do anything about it I adapt the best I can.

 

Im still going to work, if thats what you mean. As to the others, my asociality made me social distancing master before it was cool.

 

I mean, do you wear a mask.
Do you wash and sanitize your hands more than before
Do you keep 6 ft away from others.
Limit your trips to stores.