Draining The Swamp
POSTED BY: SHINYGOODGUY
UPDATED: Friday, June 13, 2025 02:56
VIEWED: 32850
PAGE 7 of 29
Yes, I have posted there.
SGG
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
JSF,
Let me say this; as I tend to fly by the seat of my pants as I write, I formulated an idea and midstream I realized a completely different response that I did not think of when I began writing.
It ocurred to me that the very thing I was protesting against, I was asking others to do. Namely, to post elsewhere becuase I did not agree with their POV or suggestions within their post. It was strange, because it came to me as I was writing (which happens to me on rare ocassions).
So, my philosophy is "live and let live." If someone cares to post something completely off track from the theme of the thread....Let it be! This site was buiilt becuase we believed in an ideal, a universe, if you will, where one could be free from constricting rules and regs contrary to our pioneering roots.
"Go West, young man"
I am all for continuity, but sometimes, especially if the comment is close to that of the thread, you just have to let it be...
Post to your heart's content, post negative, positive, it doesn't matter. It will all come to a middle at some point. Should you wish to divert attention away, go ahead, it doesn't matter. Each of us will get our moment in the sun and feel accomplishment.
So, if you feel a comment is misplaced or misguided, FEEL FREE...it's all good!
SGG
Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:Quote:
Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
There might be those who think along the lines that one party is the root of all evil. I think that person or persons should be dealt with on an individual basis.
But to try and high-jack a thread because you don't agree with a person's POV; or YOU feel that it doesn't fairly bring into question, or fairly deal, with the topic at hand.....well, I suggest that if it offends your sensibilities to that degree, then, by all means, do not contribute to the thread in question. Boycott the thread, if you will, in protest.
Several here have made contributions that I would consider off-topic, but I have not asked them to leave or refrain from offering responses. Might I suggest that if you feel a response/contribution to this thread is off-topic/not to your liking; then, don't respond to that particular response. That person or persons will get the hint and choose to either stay on topic, or not offer up a response. Again, it is only a suggestion. You can do whatever floats your boat. Actually, I'll change my response in mid-answer: Go ahead, suggest away! Although I don't agree with you that this has become a Greatest Failures TrumpFest; you have every right to try and divert contributions to another thread. FEEL FREE TO DO SO!!!
SGGQuote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
This is turning into a "Trump's Greatest Failures" thread, but we already have one of those http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?bid=18&tid=61905 and I think that title BEST expresses the topic of how people of ALL political persuasions see Trump's greatest failures, so I'm going to put my opinions about Trump's failures in there.
I just want to make a comment to partisans of both stripes here: If you're a partisan - in other words, a die-hard defender of your party, everyone in it, and everything that it does - well I hope that description is enough to make you see the problem with that POV.
But just it case it doesn't, I'm going to beat the point to death a little bit more: You're making the mistake of thinking that just because you think one party is "evil" that must mean that the other party is "good". But these are politicians. I doubt that you can find one honest one in any random set of 100, in either party. I acknowledge that there are a few more "good" politicians in the Democratic Party than in the GOP, but I can name them on the fingers of one hand; they make up a vanishingly small number no matter which party you look at and none of them achieve any significant, systemic, lasting benefit for thNOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Hell just froze over. Again!
Now, about "draining the swamp". What IS "the swamp", anyway? IMHO it's those who represent a particular industry, rotating in and out of government, industry leadership positions, and lobbying. Those who excessively take into account the wishes of the 0.01% over the rest. Those who keep secrets from people so that they don't have a chance of evaluating the policy options before them, and so directing their representatives in government appropriately. in other words, those who do other than honestly and fairly representing/ working for the people who voted for them. SECOND was heading in that direction by suggesting that Presidents come and go, but the Pentagon (and its interests) always remain.- SIGNY
Exactly, in terms of what constitutes "the swamp," my point exactly.
It is my contention that Trump and his cohort, have managed to create their own "swamp" by doing almost exactly what you describe above:
The representation of a "precious" few and misrepresenting themselves as the will of the people. "Rotating" positions much like a game of 3-Card Monte, the old "shell" game where you have to follow the pea and guess under which cup it is; meanwhile, as you stand in the crowd gawking at the shells being craftily manipulated, a pickpocket is going about the crowd slithering in and out of pockets. - SHINY
Quote:I must have a completely cynical view of politics. Trump brings how own swamp with him. BUT. If you looked carefully at the election process, he had to fight the RNC AS WELL AS THE DNC. "Establishment" Republicans were just as reluctant to allow Trump to the ascendancy as Democrats. Even now, the support that Trump has from the GOP is grudging, and Dems downright hate him: he's a DC outsider, an interloper.
..."who represent a particular industry" or group, or way of thinking; always pointing fingers and assigning blame for the woes of that group or "industry." I see the formation of a new "swamp" one that redirects the flow of information, wealth and power - Fake News, Propaganda, the disoulation of the present power grid and the birth of a new sinister and vile corrupt elite. Yes, I fully understand that there exists a power grid that the masses are manipulated by; but the newness of that "new" power structure does not shield it from complete and utter corruption. You are, in effect, rotating out the old and replacing it with the new power base.- SINY
I don't view Trump as an honest, or even competent, politician. But when you bring your own swamp with you, the OLD swampers don't let go of power without a fight.
And what you've been seeing in the press is a huge catfight between the "internationalists" ....
the swamp-creatures who make their money off transnational dealings (who don't have USA interests at heart; they make their $ elsewhere) and those Federal Departments that support them, such as
Banks, hedge-funds, money-laundering banks such Mossack Fonseca, banks of convenience like the Caymans Islands, and other international financial institutions
Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf states, which depend heavily on the petrodollar
Intellectual property (patent and copyright) companies like the tech sector, big pharma, agribusiness GMOs, and the entertainment/recording sector
Transnational manufacturing and companies like Walmart and Apple who distribute Chinese goods made by Foxconn etc.
The secret security state - the CIA, NSA, and State Department - which have spent several lifetimes advancing and protecting the international interests of the wealthy elite
Most of the corporate media, which is owned mostly by foreigners
... versus Trump.
Quote:
A rose by any other name still smells...to borrow a phrase from the Bard.
It is this irony that compelled me to propose this thread. Imagine that Hillary had won. What would you be saying? Pretty much what you saidNOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:Quote:I had conjured "Draining the Swamp" translated to "Trump's Greatest Achievements" and "Trump's Greatest Failures" was the opposite.
Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:Quote:There might be those who think along the lines that one party is the root of all evil. I think that person or persons should be dealt with on an individual basis.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
This is turning into a "Trump's Greatest Failures" thread, but we already have one of those http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?bid=18&tid=61905 and I think that title BEST expresses the topic of how people of ALL political persuasions see Trump's greatest failures, so I'm going to put my opinions about Trump's failures in there.
I just want to make a comment to partisans of both stripes here: If you're a partisan - in other words, a die-hard defender of your party, everyone in it, and everything that it does - well I hope that description is enough to make you see the problem with that POV.
But just it case it doesn't, I'm going to beat the point to death a little bit more: You're making the mistake of thinking that just because you think one party is "evil" that must mean that the other party is "good". But these are politicians. I doubt that you can find one honest one in any random set of 100, in either party. I acknowledge that there are a few more "good" politicians in the Democratic Party than in the GOP, but I can name them on the fingers of one hand; they make up a vanishingly small number no matter which party you look at and none of them achieve any significant, systemic, lasting benefit for the average person anyway. You have to judge the party as a whole.
***
In fact, when I look at every single major problem that the USA has, from ...
staggering wealth inequality to
massive private debt to
potentially unstable banks to
the loss of the petrodollar to
a failed health care policy to
environmental collapse to
loss of manufacturing to
completely unbalanced trade to
illegal immigrants to
disunited public to
loss of commonsense values to
unemployment to
loss of civil liberties to
(add more here) ...
every single problem in the USA was caused by our own politicians.
It wasn't "Democrats" OR "Republicans", it was BOTH of them. Each party, in its own way, got us to this point of failure. Democrats try to put a sweet syrup on their defections while Republicans champion their actions as rightful policy, but in the end it took the combined effort of both parties, working for decades and decades, to get us to this point.
At least, that's how I see it.
But to try and high-jack a thread because you don't agree with a person's POV; or YOU feel that it doesn't fairly bring into question, or fairly deal, with the topic at hand.....well, I suggest that if it offends your sensibilities to that degree, then, by all means, do not contribute to the thread in question. Boycott the thread, if you will, in protest.
Several here have made contributions that I would consider off-topic, but I have not asked them to leave or refrain from offering responses. Might I suggest that if you feel a response/contribution to this thread is off-topic/not to your liking; then, don't respond to that particular response. That person or persons will get the hint and choose to either stay on topic, or not offer up a response. Again, it is only a suggestion. You can do whatever floats your boat. Actually, I'll change my response in mid-answer: Go ahead, suggest away! Although I don't agree with you that this has become a Greatest Failures TrumpFest; you have every right to try and divert contributions to another thread. FEEL FREE TO DO SO!!!
SGG
I am interested in your definition of Establishment, anNOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:You missed a person: Kevin Hassett, the White House’s chief economist, is highly competent and Hassett/Trump's plan to increase wages by $4,000 to $9,000 per worker per year is certain to make America great once tax reform passes. On further inspection that is not true:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
But as a disruptive force against the status quo swamp, he's an EXCELLENT choice, and some of his appointees - Tillerson and Mnuchin (who is a business turnaround expert; he took several failing USA steel companies to success) are even better choices, and I have to give him credit for picking those people.
Trump wants a cut in corporate tax rates from 35 percent to 20 percent, which would cost slightly less than $200 billion a year. Trump’s claim, backed up by his phony economist, is that workers would benefit by $600 billion — or 300 percent of the tax cut! That is $4,000 each for 150 million workers. According to Trump’s man, it could be as much as $1,350 billion gain for workers, or $9,000 each, if everything goes well! (No, it can’t. The only estimate that is correct is the $200 billion a year for Trump and his people.) It is fraud on a grand scale by Trump to increase his personal wealth by lowering his taxes. Criminal fraud cases can be pursued even if the fraud is not successful and nobody is actually harmed. For example, Trump might not get this tax law passed, but the way he goes about his work is criminal fraud.
www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/10/17/lawrence-summers-trumps
-top-economists-tax-analysis-isnt-just-wrong-its-dishonest/
www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2017/10/20/16506256/cea-report-corporate-taxe
s-wages-boost-job-growth
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Apparently the only way you can shoehorn
You missed a person: Kevin Hassett, the White House’s chief economist,- SECONDHAND
You might want to get some counseling for that.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hello, Signym! Are you aware that Trump picked Trump's chief economist? It is also Trump that picked Trump's Secretary of State and Trump's Secretary of Treasury, two that you happen to know the names, but they are no different than his other hundreds of appointees. And Trump's economist and secretaries are doing as Trump would have them do: placing money into Trump's pockets and getting him reelected so that Trump will have 8 years (not just 4) of putting federal money into Trump's pockets. Trump's economist's false promises of an income increase of $9,000 per worker per year is just a scheme to get Trump's business a tax cut. Trump's Treasurer's false promises of a national boom if only the inheritance tax ends is just a different scheme to get Trump's estate into Trump Junior's pockets without paying taxes.
Quote:Tillerson's function is to make sure that Trump's words (which are only for domestic consumption by Trump voters to get him reelected) aren't believed by foreign powers. Trump's mouth starting a war would prevent Trump from being reelected.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:Quote:Apparently the only way you can shoehorn
You missed a person: Kevin Hassett, the White House’s chief economist,- SECONDHANDyoursomeone else's opinion into the discussion is to put words in my mouth. You've got a major obsession going, don't you?
You might want to get some counseling for that.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Hello SECOND!
Originally posted by second:
Hello, Signym! Are you aware that Trump picked Trump's chief economist?
Yeah, I knew, but SO WHAT?
What does that have to do with anything I posted? I already acceded to the fact that Trump brings his own swamp to DC. I've already posted that I didn't expect Trump to be an honest, or even competent, politician. I called him a "loose cannon" many times BEFORE the election, and said that his morals were about on-par with Hillary's (whom, you might have noticed, I despise). There is very little that you could post about Trump that would change my opinion of him because my expectations were already pretty low.
So given all that, why would anyone vote for Trump? I've explained my POV already, so I'll just leave you with that thought.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
You’re wishing death and destruction on America, Signym. A loose cannon bumping back and forth in a storm will smash wooden hull ships and crush the crew. And your complete indifference to Trump's economist and his Treasury Secretary, who you praised in a previous post, spreading lies to support a tax change that benefits Trump is very telling about you.
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:Quote:Hello SECOND!
Originally posted by second:
Hello, Signym! Are you aware that Trump picked Trump's chief economist?
Yeah, I knew, but SO WHAT?
What does that have to do with anything I posted? I already acceded to the fact that Trump brings his own swamp to DC. I've already posted that I didn't expect Trump to be an honest, or even competent, politician. I called him a "loose cannon" many times BEFORE the election, and said that his morals were about on-par with Hillary's (whom, you might have noticed, I despise). There is very little that you could post about Trump that would change my opinion of him because my expectations were already pretty low.
So given all that, why would anyone vote for Trump? I've explained my POV already, so I'll just leave you with that thought.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:It all depends on how happy you were with the status quo, and how healthy - or dangerous- you thought it was for the USA's future.
You’re wishing death and destruction on America, Signym.
Quote:I'm not completely indifferent to what Trump is doing.
And your complete indifference to Trump's economist and his Treasury Secretary, who you praised in a previous post, spreading lies to support a tax change that benefits Trump is very telling about you.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME