A Shining City upon a Hill no more.

Axil · Post by **Axil** » Thu Sep 01, 2011 9:55 pm

A Shining City upon a Hill no more.

http://thepoliticalcarnival.net/2011/08 ... sponsible/

Former GOP Senator Chuck Hagel: Republican Party Has ‘An Astounding Lack Of Responsible Leadership’

Chuck Hagel shares my dismay about the sorry state of the "grand old party" today.

As a Reagan republican, I long for the heady days of the Reagans "Shining City upon a Hilll" uplifting vision of American exceptionalism.

Former GOP Sen. Chuck Hagel (NE) is disappointed and disgusted with his Republican colleagues’ behavior in Congress over the past few months. In an interview with the Financial Times, Hagel blasted GOP leadership for their “irresponsible actions” during the debt ceiling debacle, noting that “I think about some of the presidents we’ve had on my side of the aisle — Ronald Reagan, George Bush Sr., go right through them, Eisenhower — they would be stunned.”

Many old guard Republicans are horrified and dismayed about where the party is going.

TDPerk · Post by **TDPerk** » Fri Sep 02, 2011 1:04 am

"Many old guard Republicans are horrified and dismayed about where the party is going."

If these are the ones who think the definition of compromise is that the left always gets some of what it wants--and then the goalposts get moved--and that such compromise is the highest end of politics...

..then they can go to hell, and no Reagan is not among them, and they are not fit to speak for him.

Axil · Post by **Axil** » Fri Sep 02, 2011 2:30 am

then they can go to hell

Most people want government to work and here is a picture of it in action. This is the reason why your radical political ideology will soon be relegated to the dustbin of history.

The U.S. Congress passed the Tax Reform Act of 1986 (TRA) (Pub.L. 99-514, 100 Stat. 2085, enacted October 22, 1986) to simplify the income tax code, broaden the tax base and eliminate many tax shelters and other preferences. Referred to as the second of the two "Reagan tax cuts" (the Kemp-Roth Tax Cut of 1981 being the first), the bill was also officially sponsored by Democrats, Richard Gephardt of Missouri in the House of Representatives and Bill Bradley of New Jersey in the Senate.

MSimon · Post by **MSimon** » Tue Sep 06, 2011 9:06 am

Government is too big and controls too much of the economy. The TEAs get it.

Here is what Alisa Zinov'yevna Rosenbaum has to say:

"Did you really think we want those laws observed?" said Dr. Ferris. "We want them to be broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against... We're after power and we mean it... There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or objectively interpreted – and you create a nation of law-breakers – and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Reardon, that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with." ('Atlas Shrugged' 1957)

MSimon · Post by **MSimon** » Tue Sep 06, 2011 9:12 am

Why The Rich And Corporations Own Government

That is where government gets a LOT of its money. There is no point in sending lobbyists to Washington if there is no chance for gain/theft.

Why does the government like corporate taxation in particular? It is a stealth sales tax.

choff · Post by **choff** » Tue Sep 06, 2011 9:41 am

That lawsuit over the selective application of the war on drugs to poor/black communities while upscale communites are left untouched is a step in the right direction. If the law is forced to start busting non-minorities they'll spill on the next higher level, all the way up the food chain until the banksters/intel community start getting busted. Somewhere along the line the system will crack. I still don't think legalization is a good idea but as the saying goes, "let justice be done though the heavens should fall."

KitemanSA · Post by **KitemanSA** » Tue Sep 06, 2011 4:13 pm

Why do yo think that the manditory minimum for "crack" is so much higher/hit than coke? They are the same basic drug, but minorities use crack and politicians use coke.

Obvious.

ladajo · Post by **ladajo** » Tue Sep 06, 2011 6:59 pm

I think that the costs go to quality and concentration, vice the customer.

Crack is the fast food coke.
Coke is the gourmet meal.

Either way, they will both kill you, you just get to decide(or not) how much to spend on ruining your life.

choff · Post by **choff** » Wed Sep 07, 2011 4:21 am

If the group of black police officers win the court case over drug war discrimination, the implications will range far and wide. Either the court sets racial quota's for drug busts causing an expansion in the prison population, or allows large scale selective prosecution class action lawsuits against the government, or large scale prison releases of minorities.
Large scale class action lawsuits could bankrupt the government. The same with expansion of the prison population, except the chances of senior government officials and bankers getting busted(masters of the universe) goes up.
Probably a political solution will be found, a general amnesty for incarcerated drug offenders and curtailment of drug enforcement. That may or may not work for a while, depending on drug usage levels.

MSimon · Post by **MSimon** » Mon Sep 12, 2011 3:12 am

ladajo wrote:I think that the costs go to quality and concentration, vice the customer.

Crack is the fast food coke.
Coke is the gourmet meal.

Either way, they will both kill you, you just get to decide(or not) how much to spend on ruining your life.

The dangers of illegal drugs are way over rated. But it is all good. It maintains support for prohibition. And that support is good for police, prison guards, lawyers, politicians AND drug runners.

BTW most of the danger comes from purity problems - look up levamisole and strength problems. There are no manufacturing controls or reliable distributors.

All this will break big time on the national scene when Prohibition - the movie comes out on PBS on 2 Oct.

http://powerandcontrol.blogspot.com/201 ... movie.html

And my friends on the right are in no way prepared for it.

You know the rationale - alcohol prohibition was a miserable failure, but drug prohibition? That can work. For sure. Because - wait for it -

This Time It Is Different

ladajo · Post by **ladajo** » Mon Sep 12, 2011 3:27 am

All this will break big time on the national scene when Prohibition - the movie comes out on PBS on 2 Oct.

We'll see.

I keep a simple outlook. Drugs wreck people. Wrecked people wreck other people. But you already know that as we have been down this road before.

MSimon · Post by **MSimon** » Mon Sep 12, 2011 3:33 am

choff wrote:If the group of black police officers win the court case over drug war discrimination, the implications will range far and wide. Either the court sets racial quota's for drug busts causing an expansion in the prison population, or allows large scale selective prosecution class action lawsuits against the government, or large scale prison releases of minorities.
Large scale class action lawsuits could bankrupt the government. The same with expansion of the prison population, except the chances of senior government officials and bankers getting busted(masters of the universe) goes up.
Probably a political solution will be found, a general amnesty for incarcerated drug offenders and curtailment of drug enforcement. That may or may not work for a while, depending on drug usage levels.

Well not exactly.

http://powerandcontrol.blogspot.com/201 ... icago.html

Money quote:

Defense lawyers say police wouldn't dare treat whites the way they treat blacks.

Which is to say: equal enforcement will end the war. Whites wouldn't stand for it.

http://powerandcontrol.blogspot.com/201 ... votes.html

However, as our research on college drug dealers reveals, the war on drugs in the United States has not been waged with an even hand. Instead, despite the unyielding “zero-tolerance” zealotry accompanying U.S. drug policy, the illicit drug-using and drug-dealing behaviors of the most vulnerable and marginalized members of U.S. society have been more heavily scrutinized by the drug war hawks than similarly illicit behaviors of those with more social, political, and economic capital.

====

Now ladajo - you being a law an order type: don't you think we should be cracking (heh) down on all those white college kids and ruining their lives for using and dealing drugs in college?

By my estimation we could have at least 4 million more in prison if enforcement was equal. Think of it as a jobs program for those not bright enough or with enough money to go to college.

Since use rates do not differ much across economic, social, and racial lines that means we could have 1/3 of white males in (roughly) the 20 to 30 year age bracket being supervised by the criminal justice system. Man can you imagine the jobs and wealth that will create?

Either get serious about turning America into a police state (have you heard about the SWAT raids over deficient student loans) or end it.

I'm going to predict that the Republicans will lose 2012 over this. Why? Well 90% of the papers in America lean left. When they start going after Drug Prohibition as a Racist enterprise who will jump up reliably to support Prohibition? Republicans. And what will they get branded as: Racists.

It is too hilarious to watch.

And I'm betting you are a "Constitutionalist" too:

I never noticed a Prohibition Amendment. Except for Alcohol.

We will be fighting slavery and Jim Crow all over again. And you know who loves moral crusades? Kids.

Just when the Rs have started to gain ground they will lose it over their moral failings. Not fair? Neither is life. Deal.

MSimon · Post by **MSimon** » Mon Sep 12, 2011 4:18 am

ladajo wrote:
All this will break big time on the national scene when Prohibition - the movie comes out on PBS on 2 Oct.
We'll see.

I keep a simple outlook. Drugs wreck people. Wrecked people wreck other people. But you already know that as we have been down this road before.

Uh. There is a police chief who is on the same track but he is of the opinion that it is prohibition doing the wrecking.

http://powerandcontrol.blogspot.com/201 ... worse.html

Don't mind the German subtitles. The interview is in English. He calls the Drug War a "self perpetuating and constantly expanding policy disaster".

Anslinger kept the focus on blacks and Mexicans and used White kids as victims. It was a perfect strategy. Racism was very much alive and overt in the 1930s.

The drug crusaders have followed Anslinger's lead down to this very day.

http://powerandcontrol.blogspot.com/201 ... icago.html

So Drug Prohibition started as a racist enterprise and continues as such to this day. BTW I never noticed a call from you to vastly increase the policing of whites. You are the perfect foil for what is coming. Most of the Right ('cepting the libertarians) fall right in line with you. I can signal the engineer all I want but he insists on going full speed towards the washed out bridge. Too funny. Except the communists will get 4 more years.

Milton Friedman says:

The Drug War is a Socialist Enterprise

You are about to get a belly full. I hope you enjoy it.

I have been warning the right about this political danger for years. They paid no heed.

MSimon · Post by **MSimon** » Mon Sep 12, 2011 4:30 am

If you have the time watch the long video (22 minutes) here:

http://www.pbs.org/kenburns/prohibition ... 2022470300

If you catch some of the asides you will see that Burns aims his movie at Drug Prohibition. But he does not come right out and say it. He says something like "just like the headlines today."

There are also 3 shorts at the site.

MSimon · Post by **MSimon** » Mon Sep 12, 2011 4:38 am

The only proper counter for the right?

"We should treat drug addiction as the medical problem it is."

Seriously ladajo. Are you going to tell me next that the police should be put in charge of eradicating cancer?