116th Congress

Maryland Rep. Elijah Cummings, the new chairman of the House Oversight Committee, said Trump had “set the tone from the top in his administration that behaving ethically and complying with the law is optional. Ladies and gentlemen, we are better than that.”

In a nod to Trump’s resistance to releasing his tax returns, the bill would require presidents to release at least 10 years’ worth of returns. The bill also would ban executive-branch officials from lobbying their old agency for two years after they leave government and reauthorize and enhance the Office of Government Ethics, which has clashed with Trump.
 
57Brave said:
Maryland Rep. Elijah Cummings, the new chairman of the House Oversight Committee, said Trump had “set the tone from the top in his administration that behaving ethically and complying with the law is optional. Ladies and gentlemen, we are better than that.”

In a nod to Trump’s resistance to releasing his tax returns, the bill would require presidents to release at least 10 years’ worth of returns. The bill also would ban executive-branch officials from lobbying their old agency for two years after they leave government and reauthorize and enhance the Office of Government Ethics, which has clashed with Trump.
Click to expand...

They should add that any candidate on the final ballot must pass a general psych evaluation with the results made public.

Also, a new President must pass a general civics/government knowledge test before allowed to take the oath of office. The test should have a reasonable pass/fail score. The President Elect can take the test up to 3 times before the swearing in on Jan. 20. The information on the test should be renewed each time a new President takes office, according to new statistics, laws, and world situations. Upon winning the election the President Elect would be given the information and allowed to study for the test as needed.

Call these new requirements the Trump tests, but they are basic and absolutely necessary. Any President should be mentally healthy (not a psychopathic narcissist) and willing/able to learn and understand basic pertinent information.
 
Last edited:
57Brave said:
NYT Metro
‏Verified account @NYTMetro

Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@aoc) has

had the uncanny ability for a first-term member of Congress

to push the debate inside the Democratic Party

sharply to the left. Here's why.


https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/13/...rats-congress.html?smid=tw-nytmetro&smtyp=cur
Click to expand...

Of course she does.

She is the oefts Trump.

She's a socialist.

And for some reason, the Democratic party is gonna let a socialist dictate where they go bc she got 15,000 votes in a NYC Congress race.

As an anti-socialat... I love it. Because once they actually have to defend all the nonsense, they literally can't (much like this board)
 
what is there to defend ?

Paul Ryan grew up on Social Security and the middle class was built on the GI Bill.
Socialism doesn't get more --- social

Cleaning up the environment, taking donor monies out of elections, DC statehood and voting rights are hardly "socialism"
Which, (as a Congressperson is what feeds the bulldog), is all she has called for or signed onto.
So far.
She will have a voting record shortly - then we will see just how "socialistic" she is and perhaps you will learn what the word means

Unless you are considering regulating wall street socialism ?


What has been lost since the 1980's is politics is the art of compromise and coalition building
Let's see what she does with that
 
Last edited:
as for now, the article above is correct, mainstream (D) pols and rags have avoided these issues for generations
no more or less

Like 50, I have a wait and see attitude.
But there is no doubting the country is having conversations it hasn't had in a long time


Bear in mind Newt rode Cobb County Georgia into an Ambassadorship to the Vatican no less for his 3rd wife
Is it the fact she is getting more headline than your boy ?
I would not be surprised to at some point see them co sponsoring legislation
 
Last edited:
Having said all of that I find it refreshing an avowed (D) is unapologeticly taking the fight of ideas to (R).
That hasn't happened in a long time

You are all for ideas --- right ?
 
Socialism isn't a new idea is been around for centuries with a 100% failure rate a body count in the hundreds of millions.

Meanwhile, you keep saying nothing has been proposed.

Have you not read the Green New Deal proposal?

The media won't ask her about the details of it... but maybe you should read it, then explain how it's even possible, then explain what.must happen.

I've got news for you... "The rich paying their fair share" ain't gonna cut it
 
57Brave said:
Having said all of that I find it refreshing an avowed (D) is unapologeticly taking the fight of ideas to (R).
That hasn't happened in a long time

You are all for ideas --- right ?
Click to expand...

I love that she is doing this. Bow the country can see how truly bat**** crazy the progressive left is and how disastrous their economic agenda is.
 
[tw]1084603964107173889[/tw]

Not sure why this is being ignored by MSM.

Do we oppose hatred or not?
 
thethe said:
I love that she is doing this. Bow the country can see how truly bat**** crazy the progressive left is and how disastrous their economic agenda is.
Click to expand...

And who knows, maybe eventually we'll be able to differentiate between socialism and communism. Lord knows few people seem to understand that now.
 
Oklahomahawk said:
And who knows, maybe eventually we'll be able to differentiate between socialism and communism. Lord knows few people seem to understand that now.
Click to expand...

Socialism is the prequel to communism.

Destabilize the economy enough with failed policies and inefficient state services and the excuse will be given that the state needs even more power.

We need more capitalism but conservatives need to understand that capitalism needs to have checks to prevent consolidation of wealth as it has. If you eliminate de facto monopolies that we have, prevent them from even forming then more will get to be able to participate in the amazing system and we will never have the trash proposals that we are seeing from the left gain popularity again.
 
thethe said:
Socialism is the prequel to communism.

Destabilize the economy enough with failed policies and inefficient state services and the excuse will be given that the state needs even more power.

We need more capitalism but conservatives need to understand that capitalism just have checks to prevent consolidation of wealth as it has. If you eliminate de facto monopolies that we have and prevent them from even forming more will get to be able to participate in the amazing system and we will never have the trash proposals that we are seeing from the left gain popularity again.
Click to expand...

socialism is NOT the prequel to communism any more than capitalism is the prequel to fascism. Sure both CAN turn out that way but there is no need for this to be the case. I absolutely agree with you about checks on big corporations to keep them from destroying competition (hence the Sherman Anti-Trust Act of 1890) and becoming future Wal-Marts, but how are you gonna sell that to those who believe that there can be no checks or balances in a free market capitalistic system or that would be the very definition to "prequel to communism"??

Socialism is like a medicine, if it's used properly it can and does do positive things for any society that uses it. If and when it's misused or abused in this case then you lead to problems. There's nothing wrong with social programs, but there is something wrong with too many social programs, which is arguably where we're headed now. Of course even though who can identify and blast social programs and social welfare, as it were, typically either can't or won't identify all forms of it.
 
Oklahomahawk said:
socialism is NOT the prequel to communism any more than capitalism is the prequel to fascism. Sure both CAN turn out that way but there is no need for this to be the case. I absolutely agree with you about checks on big corporations to keep them from destroying competition (hence the Sherman Anti-Trust Act of 1890) and becoming future Wal-Marts, but how are you gonna sell that to those who believe that there can be no checks or balances in a free market capitalistic system or that would be the very definition to "prequel to communism"??

Socialism is like a medicine, if it's used properly it can and does do positive things for any society that uses it. If and when it's misused or abused in this case then you lead to problems. There's nothing wrong with social programs, but there is something wrong with too many social programs, which is arguably where we're headed now. Of course even though who can identify and blast social programs and social welfare, as it were, typically either can't or won't identify all forms of it.
Click to expand...

No system becomes straight communism overnight without a violent revolution. Its a gradual process and communism is masked under the guise of socialism. A safety net for those that have put into the system so that they may retire comfortably and those that are unable to physically/mentally work should be in place. All other safety nets should be short term in nature and based on some form of historical contribution into the system.

Everything else is a crutch that prevents growth and invites complacency.

Monopolies and consolidations of wealth are killing how capitalism is viewed and the conservatives/libertarians need to recognize this because the popularity of socialism/communism with the youth of this country is only growing.
 
So how are you gonna check the growth of monopolies and oligopolies without using some form of government control??

Communism sucks and is totally 100% bad. I just wanted to get that out there so I wouldn't be misunderstood. Socialism is NOT all bad or always bad, like medicines it's only bad when it's abused. Where do you think the money for roads, and streets, and bridges, and hospitals, and cops, and firemen, and yes also the Internet comes from?

I know for a fact sturg blasts all forms of welfare, corporate and otherwise. Do you?
 
Oklahomahawk said:
So how are you gonna check the growth of monopolies and oligopolies without using some form of government control??

Communism sucks and is totally 100% bad. I just wanted to get that out there so I wouldn't be misunderstood. Socialism is NOT all bad or always bad, like medicines it's only bad when it's abused. Where do you think the money for roads, and streets, and bridges, and hospitals, and cops, and firemen, and yes also the Internet comes from?

I know for a fact sturg blasts all forms of welfare, corporate and otherwise. Do you?
Click to expand...

I'm against all corporate welfare. Let me take a step back. If the corporate welfare incentives small business development then I'm open to suggestion.

I've noted above I'm fine with some forms of social welfare as some people are born to unfortunate situations and those that have contributed deserve something at the back end for helping the country grow.

I don't believe my check on monopolies is socialistic in nature. I believe its enforcement of capitalism.
 
Last edited:
Oklahomahawk said:
Good on your first paragraph.

How can you check monopolies without getting the government involved?
Click to expand...

There will always be a government and that governments job is to ensure there is competition within the private sector. Again - I think we are dealing with semantics by calling this socialistic in nature as opposed to enforcement of capitalism. I don't care whatever you want to call it as long as we promote private enterprise as means to achieve the American dream then I am happy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top