Who Rules the United States?

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by Merwen, Feb 23, 2017.

  1. Merwen

    Merwen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2014
    Messages:
    11,574
    Likes Received:
    1,731
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The post-election battle for power in the US has reached a fever pitch, and itself become, therefor, a current event. The article on this by Matthew Continetti gives the most complete accounting I have seen thus far for the reasons behind this struggle. Basically, according to Continetti, the elites who had been comfortable in their control of US politics simply cannot believe there is another world view with potential validity equal to their own, and are pulling all the stops to invalidate Trump's reality.

    ... ...

    "The last few weeks have confirmed that there are two systems of government in the United States. The first is the system of government outlined in the U.S. Constitution—its checks, its balances, its dispersion of power, its protection of individual rights. Donald Trump was elected to serve four years as the chief executive of this system. Whether you like it or not.

    The second system is comprised of those elements not expressly addressed by the Founders. This is the permanent government, the so-called administrative state of bureaucracies, agencies, quasi-public organizations, and regulatory bodies and commissions, of rule-writers and the byzantine network of administrative law courts. This is the government of unelected judges with lifetime appointments who, far from comprising the "least dangerous branch," now presume to think they know more about America's national security interests than the man elected as commander in chief.

    For some time, especially during Democratic presidencies, the second system of government was able to live with the first one. But that time has ended. The two systems are now in competition. And the contest is all the more vicious and frightening because more than offices are at stake. This fight is not about policy. It is about wealth, status, the privileges of an exclusive class."
    ...
    ...
    - See more at: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/46484.htm#sthash.p6cDcvjL.gFndQnsl.dpuf
    February 18, 2017 "Information Clearing House" - "WFB"

    I agree with Continetti's analysis. The media and bureaucracies are doing all they can to destroy Trump and his message--especially the one that maybe, after all, we could get along with Russia. A whole world view--and, apparently, a profitable one--has been built around the opposite belief.

    If you can't destroy the message, destroy the messenger, and that is what they all most ardently are trying to do.

    I have been saying for a long time we were being led over a cliff by our treasonous leaders. Trump's destruction is desired so the treasonous economic destruction of our country can continue. IMO too many Americans are still willing to run over that cliff at their behest.
     
    ButterBalls likes this.
  2. zbr6

    zbr6 Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2013
    Messages:
    12,880
    Likes Received:
    7,355
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Throughout all recorded history it has always been only a small few who cause the destruction of entire nations.

    Our radically Leftist, ultra bigoted, and unelected federal court system is the mechanism for our destruction.

    At a certain point we're going to have to deal with these lords the same way as we dealt with the last ones.
     
  3. Surfer Joe

    Surfer Joe Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2008
    Messages:
    24,287
    Likes Received:
    15,352
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Lol...It's not surprising that trump supporters don't have a clue about this.
    Here's your first civics lesson:

    We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

    Don't forget it.
     
  4. Quantum Nerd

    Quantum Nerd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2014
    Messages:
    18,028
    Likes Received:
    23,356
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What do you mean? The elites are now fully in charge of the EPA, the DOE, the Department of education etc. They'll get exactly what they want: Tax cuts for the wealthy and privatization of everything. Trump has just fooled the little guy that those things are actually going to be good for them and anti-elite.

    Obama, btw, was brought down by the shadow system you mention. That's why we don't have the public option in the ACA and health care is a mess, with laws written by and for the insurance industry.

    The same way, the elites will no allow Trump to instate tariffs, which will be bad for them.
     
  5. RedStater

    RedStater Active Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2016
    Messages:
    507
    Likes Received:
    42
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    He addressed "We, the People" in his description of the first system "...outlined in the U.S. Constitution..." - although he didn't come out and say "We, the People".

    Objective analysis should conclude that.

    Yes - We, the People rule the U.S. - but even "We" are limited by our Constitution....and rightly so.

    Long live our Electoral College!
     
  6. garyd

    garyd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    56,574
    Likes Received:
    16,661
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And the little guy will benefit immensely from the fact that he no longer has to worry about the EPA declaring some mud puddle on his property a wet land and ordering him to keep a springtime wet season mosquito bog going 365 days a year. From the availability of more jobs, and better paying jobs. The bureaucracy is not your friend in most respects it's your jailer.
     
  7. The Bear

    The Bear Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2016
    Messages:
    610
    Likes Received:
    461
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Big business,don't fool yourselves into thinking otherwise.
     
  8. AtsamattaU

    AtsamattaU Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2012
    Messages:
    5,123
    Likes Received:
    1,569
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Amazing how the author wants to torpedo the very Constitutional government he claims Trump was elected to serve. That contradiction is enough to reveal his true anti-American desires for what they are.

    If anything is treasonous it's calls to destroy the third branch of our government that was established by the Constitution.
     
  9. lemmiwinx

    lemmiwinx Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2016
    Messages:
    8,069
    Likes Received:
    5,428
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The simplest answer is the two-party elites have ruled the US at least since FDR. They could be could be Dems or 'Pubs, Nancy Pelosi or Newt Gingrich matters not they all work for the same bosses. Trump is like sugar poured in the gas tank to screw up things up.
     
  10. TBryant

    TBryant Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2011
    Messages:
    4,146
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Laws are translated in various ways over time, but are much less malleable than general political sentiment. The federal judges who are in charge of enforcing those laws are placed by elected officials, but are not subject to popular election themselves in order to allow them an apolitical legal perspective.

    I've seen messes on a local level from appointed judges, but they pale in comparison to the problems we have with elected judges who cater to the offices and organizations they depend on for re-election. I don't see this working any better on a federal level, and the likelihood of it being geometrically worse seems almost certain.

    But to answer the OP, the people do. Usually this is in acceptance of the elected official, but when things go too far off the tracks it is completely patriotic for people to organize protest. In fact, its unpatriotic to sit by complacently while the government that represents you is threatened.
     
  11. Shiva_TD

    Shiva_TD Progressive Libertarian Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2008
    Messages:
    45,715
    Likes Received:
    885
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This is absolute nonsense and right-wing BS. The subordinate offices of the executive branch as well as the appointment of judges and authority of the courts is all expressly addressed by the Constitution.

    The courts did not "presume" to know more about the national security of the United States than the president. The courts specifically requested that the "president" present any facts that the (Muslim) travel ban was addressing a threat to the national security and no facts of any kind identifying a danger to the national security were presented before the courts.

    The following is from the federal court decision against the (Muslim) "Travel Ban" in Virginia and it exemplifies exactly what was happening with these federal judges:

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...cee7ce475fc_story.html?utm_term=.14910034e5bf

    The federal judges were "begging" for evidence that the executive order was based upon a national security threat. The Department of Justice didn't even attempt to provide any evidence that a national security threat existed although the law that grants the president the authority to issue the ban requires that the evidence must exist.

    U.S. Code › Title 8 › Chapter 12 › Subchapter II › Part II › § 1182

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1182

    "Whenever the President finds" then the president can impose the ban or restriction and under the law a "finding" is a statement of FACT and not opinion. To issue the travel ban the President was required under the law to have "facts" that allowing people born in the countries noted would be "detrimental" to the United States and the Courts, in fulfilling their enumerated responsibility under Section III of the Constitution to resolve all conflicts under the Law and the Constitution gave the Department of Justice every opportunity to present any "FACTS" that indicated that people born in the countries noted represented a threat to national security or that allowing them into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States.

    The Department of Justice didn't bring a single damn piece of evidence that a national security threat existed or that allowing entry to the United States by people born in these countries "would be detrimental to the interests of the United States" while the plaintiffs presented compelling evidence that the Ban was imposed exclusively based upon "religion" in violation of the First Amendment.

    The fact is that there's no threat based upon the "Muslim religion" or "Nationality" that would support the Muslim Travel Ban which is why the DOJ didn't even attempt to try to establish that the threat existed.

    Just because the President (or Steve Bannon) hates Muslims doesn't provide the "finding" necessary to support the Muslim Travel Ban. The Executive Order did not meet the criteria of the law that requires a "finding" because a "finding" didn't exist and it was an unconstitutional violation of Freedom of Religion protected by the First Amendment.

    The Republicans need to actually read the law and the Constitution, stop propagating this kind of BS, and condemn the Trump administrations action's that are unquestionably based upon racism and religious intolerance.
     
    bois darc chunk likes this.
  12. garyd

    garyd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    56,574
    Likes Received:
    16,661
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The complaint is not limited to the judiciary which long ago quit enforcing the law and started creating it, the primary problem in this even with that is the most of our laws are written not by accountable legislatures but by but almost entirely unaccountable bureaucrats.
     
  13. PARTIZAN1

    PARTIZAN1 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2015
    Messages:
    46,841
    Likes Received:
    18,955
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Contineti's so called "analysis" amounts to the same load of stinking jet propelled constipated conspiracy crap of mythical elites controlling American political/economic system. I call it for what it is -BS!

    So questioning the establishment is now all of a sudden as of Jan 20th "treason" just because Trumpeizdas are sitting in the throne of the Elitist Emperor when on Jan 19th it was still a virtue.

    To question authority I say none shall call it treason, I call it patriotism and virtue.
     
  14. WCH

    WCH Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2017
    Messages:
    196
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Really? No one has contacted me lately for my opinion...on anything. The closest I got was checking some questions on an electronic form.

    Hopefully by the election of a populous candidate, the "People" will have a say once again.
     
  15. Frank

    Frank Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2016
    Messages:
    7,391
    Likes Received:
    1,348
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Of course you do.

    That is one of the pressing dangers to America right now...that people like you think the way people like you think.



    The media...the free press...is reporting what is going on. There is some bias in both directions (depends on the outlet)...there probably will continue to be bias in both directions.

    Donald Trump is doing his best to show that he is not competent for the job...and, YES, the free press is reporting that unseemly display.

    I understand that bothers Trump supporters.

    I find it humorous that it does.




    That seems to be what you are trying to do, Merwen. You do not like that the press and other media are reporting truthfully about Donald Trump's deficiencies...and you are joining Donald Trump in trying to destroy the messengers.

    Egad...Trump's only been in office for a bit over a month.



    Look you into a mirror, Merwen. Stop running off a cliff at the behest of Donald Trump.

    ("Behest" always makes me think of the Estes Kefauver scene from The Godfather II. Thanks for using it.)
     
  16. spiritgide

    spiritgide Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2016
    Messages:
    20,133
    Likes Received:
    16,080
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    If you look at the streets, who do you see disturbing the domestic tranquility? Working to divide the union? Imposing their demands over the liberty of others? Ignoring law, demanding injustice so long as it s by their definition? Whining about the idea that the nation strengthen itself and improve the management of it's government in order to retain the blessings of liberty? Demanding that we give away those things to anyone who wants to take them?

    Look again. It ain't the Trump supporters.
     
  17. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    107,541
    Likes Received:
    34,488
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Jefferson warned about judicial supremacy. We are seeing it in action.
     
  18. PARTIZAN1

    PARTIZAN1 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2015
    Messages:
    46,841
    Likes Received:
    18,955
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    Think you mean "populist" leader but the truth is that Trump is just as much of an elitist as the others but he is from a different faction of elitism.

    Trumpeizda is a showman who talks like a populist but behaves like a Czarist plus he loves him some Russia.
     
  19. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    107,541
    Likes Received:
    34,488
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Maybe you should take your own advice. The court did not even address the law that gives the president plenary power over immigration. Plenary means absolute. The courts decided to second guess national security based on the possibility that a state could suffer financially. There is a reason most of the briefs were supplied by corporations. The countries involved were identified by congress and the previous administration and for very good reasons. You can hardly call it a Muslim ban as it only limits travel of less than 15% of Muslims.

    Another thing that is astounding is that the left really doesn't like the idea that the law actually protects minorities in danger from those 7 majority Muslim countries. The left likes to compare not letting the refugees in to not letting in Jews during WWII. Jews were a persecuted minority during WWII. Muslims are hardly a persecuted minority from those 7 countries.
     
  20. Texas Republican

    Texas Republican Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2015
    Messages:
    28,121
    Likes Received:
    19,405
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What you're missing is that over the years the federal bureaucracy has become a monster. Like a cancer, it is only concerned with its own growth and survival. It ignores the executive and legislative branches. Occasionally, it actually fights with the executive and legislative branches.

    Presidents can try to steer the bureaucracy a little to the left or right, but in the end the bureaucracy will do what it wants to do. It is unelected and unaccountable. And a new president will come along in a few years anyway.
     
  21. TBryant

    TBryant Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2011
    Messages:
    4,146
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    I don't think this is held up by the facts.

    Judges make rulings based on law and then those rulings constitute precedent for future interpretations of those laws, but the laws are created initially by elected legislators. If anyone feels the victim of an unfair ruling they can attempt an appeal, after that you just have to deal with things or make a new and different case to accomplish what you want.

    The recent attacks on the court are nothing short of treason in my view.
     
  22. Merwen

    Merwen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2014
    Messages:
    11,574
    Likes Received:
    1,731
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No one is calling for the destruction of the judiciary---but its biases and shortcomings are certainly being noted.
     
  23. WCH

    WCH Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2017
    Messages:
    196
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Name a POTUS who didn't come from an elitist background? [and get over the unbecoming Russia meme]
     
  24. bois darc chunk

    bois darc chunk Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2015
    Messages:
    8,626
    Likes Received:
    3,490
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The other side of that coin is that the executive and legislative branches are biased and have significant shortcomings, as well. We have three parts to the government, of equal strength, for a reason… balance. While some rail against the judiciary for what they believe was overstepping their Constitutional roles in pushing back on executive orders, others are participating in massive protests in the street or in town hall meetings expressing that the executive and legislative branches are being less than responsive to the electorate's wishes. The vote was not an overwhelming landslide, where most of the country is aligned with broad, sweeping changes. When the executive branch insists on broad sweeping changes anyway, there is going to be pushback.

    No one person rules the United States. No one branch of government rules the United States. Three parts are supposed to work together and keep a check on any one part trying to usurp power from the others. That they are being placed in adversarial roles is a shame, but things are working as intended by the Constitution.
     
  25. Frank

    Frank Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2016
    Messages:
    7,391
    Likes Received:
    1,348
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Amen!

    And something that seems to be forgotten is:

    The way federal judges get to be federal judges...is by having a president nominate (appoint) them...and having the Senate confirm them.
     

Share This Page