Can any American of integrity honestly be against regulation?

[numan]

'
Pious Politician's Creed ---James Russell Lowell, 1848

I do believe the people want
A tax on teas and coffees --
That nuthin' ain't extravygunt,
Purvidin' I'm in office;
Fer I have loved my country since
My eye-teeth filled their sockets,
An' Uncle Sam I reverence · ·
Partic'larly his pockets!

I do believe in special ways
O' prayin' an' convartin';
The bread comes back in many days,
An' buttered, too, fer sartin !!
I mean in preyin' till one busts
On what the Party chooses,
An' in convartin' public trusts
To very privit uses....

I do believe in bein' this
Or that, as it may happen,
One way or t'other handiest is
To catch the people nappin':
It ain't by princerples nor men
My preudent course is steadied --
I scent which pays the best, an' then
Run into it baldheaded!!

I do believe whatever trash
'll keep the people in blindness,
That we the Mexicans can thrash
Right into Brotherly Kindness --
That bombshells, grape, an' powder an' ball
Are good-will's strongest magnets,
That peace, to make it stick at all,
Must be druv in with baynets !!

In short, I firmly do believe
In Humbug, gen'rally,
Fer it's a thing that I perceive
To have a solid value;
This hath my faithful shepherd been,
In pastures sweet hath led me;
An' this'll keep the people green,
To feed as they have fed me!! ....

...I don't believe in princerple,
But oh, I do in interest !!
.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

'
Pious Politician's Creed ---James Russell Lowell, 1848

I do believe the people want
A tax on teas and coffees --
That nuthin' ain't extravygunt,
Purvidin' I'm in office;
Fer I have loved my country since
My eye-teeth filled their sockets,
An' Uncle Sam I reverence · ·
Partic'larly his pockets!

I do believe in special ways
O' prayin' an' convartin';
The bread comes back in many days,
An' buttered, too, fer sartin !!
I mean in preyin' till one busts
On what the Party chooses,
An' in convartin' public trusts
To very privit uses....

I do believe in bein' this
Or that, as it may happen,
One way or t'other handiest is
To catch the people nappin':
It ain't by princerples nor men
My preudent course is steadied --
I scent which pays the best, an' then
Run into it baldheaded!!

I do believe whatever trash
'll keep the people in blindness,
That we the Mexicans can thrash
Right into Brotherly Kindness --
That bombshells, grape, an' powder an' ball
Are good-will's strongest magnets,
That peace, to make it stick at all,
Must be druv in with baynets !!

In short, I firmly do believe
In Humbug, gen'rally,
Fer it's a thing that I perceive
To have a solid value;
This hath my faithful shepherd been,
In pastures sweet hath led me;
An' this'll keep the people green,
To feed as they have fed me!! ....

...I don't believe in princerple,
But oh, I do in interest !!
.

as a liberal you lack the IQ to post a response so instead you post a poem figuring it will somehow make you look intelligent?

See why we say a liberal will be slow?

 

[LogikAndReazon]

Americans need a ton of more regulations and a ton more of noble civil servants to enforce them. For the collective good...............lol

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Americans need a ton of more regulations and a ton more of noble civil servants to enforce them. For the collective good...............lol

but who will regulate the regulators, or is it not necessary because they are saints rather than men??

 

[LogikAndReazon]

Americans need a ton of more regulations and a ton more of noble civil servants to enforce them. For the collective good...............lol

but who will regulate the regulators, or is it not necessary because they are saints rather than men??

Regulatory Czars of course......to ensure every facet of your life meets the govt standard.........

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Americans need a ton of more regulations and a ton more of noble civil servants to enforce them. For the collective good...............lol

but who will regulate the regulators, or is it not necessary because they are saints rather than men??

Regulatory Czars of course......to ensure every facet of your life meets the govt standard.........

where are the liberals telling us who will regulate the regulators?

 

[numan]

where are the liberals telling us who will regulate the regulators?

Well, I am no liberal, of course -- but unlike many so-called "conservatives", I do have the intelligence to understand good ideas, no matter what country they come from.

The pathetically ill-designed and antiquated US Constitution encourages pay-offs, shenanigans, and rule by those with money.

It has no provisions at all by which corruption and malfeasance can be controlled. The legislative branch is composed of unprincipled wheeler-dealers ; the executive branch is essentially ruled by those interests it is supposed to control ; the judicial branch all too often bends to accommodate money and influence rather than justice or law. But what can you expect from judges who either are appointed by untrustworthy politicians, or (even worse) are elected to office by a populace which it is flattery to call childish.

QUIS CUSTODIET CUSTODES?

No one!! And that is a fundamental failure of the US Constitution.

I favor a fourth branch of government which, from the glorious Chinese example, I call a Censorate.

The Imperial Chinese Censorate dates back more than 2200 years, and had an official duty to criticize the acts of the Emperor and investigate official corruption and misgovernment.

Imagine Julian Assange in charge of the FBI and the CIA.... · ·

By the Ming Dynasty, it had become a major government bureau controlled by two chief censors and comprising four subdivisions.

The censors checked important documents, supervised construction projects, reviewed judicial proceedings and kept watch over state property. Agents of the Censorate travelled the Empire, ferreting out cases of subversion and corruption in the State Administration.

The United States has always been a paradise for corruption. It desperately needs an analogue of the Chinese Censorate, independent and uninfluenced by the present three branches of the US government.
.

 

[buckeye45_73]

Fallacy

Crackpot Doom Scandal: "Regulation Caused the Subprime Crisis"

you're right loaning to people who cant afford loans, due to hreat of being sued with discrimination, is a good thing......woooohoooo loand to blacks or we'll label you racist......but dont loan to people who cant afford them........uhhh there is your problem.

 

[buckeye45_73]

where are the liberals telling us who will regulate the regulators?

Well, I am no liberal, of course -- but unlike many so-called "conservatives", I do have the intelligence to understand good ideas, no matter what country they come from.

The pathetically ill-designed and antiquated US Constitution encourages pay-offs, shenanigans, and rule by those with money.

It has no provisions at all by which corruption and malfeasance can be controlled. The legislative branch is composed of unprincipled wheeler-dealers ; the executive branch is essentially ruled by those interests it is supposed to control ; the judicial branch all too often bends to accommodate money and influence rather than justice or law. But what can you expect from judges who either are appointed by untrustworthy politicians, or (even worse) are elected to office by a populace which it is flattery to call childish.

QUIS CUSTODIET CUSTODES?

No one!! And that is a fundamental failure of the US Constitution.

I favor a fourth branch of government which, from the glorious Chinese example, I call a Censorate.

The Imperial Chinese Censorate dates back more than 2200 years, and had an official duty to criticize the acts of the Emperor and investigate official corruption and misgovernment.

Imagine Julian Assange in charge of the FBI and the CIA.... · ·

By the Ming Dynasty, it had become a major government bureau controlled by two chief censors and comprising four subdivisions.

The censors checked important documents, supervised construction projects, reviewed judicial proceedings and kept watch over state property. Agents of the Censorate travelled the Empire, ferreting out cases of subversion and corruption in the State Administration.

The United States has always been a paradise for corruption. It desperately needs an analogue of the Chinese Censorate, independent and uninfluenced by the present three branches of the US government.
.

Those two statments are contradictory, since that's what liberals say about the constitution.......

 

[buckeye45_73]

Well yes, actually, regulation is why the USSR and Red China failed, why so many blacks are in jail, and why we had the Great Depression and current recession, for example. A liberal lacks the IQ to know that regulators need regulators and those regulators need regulators and those regulators need regulators and so on until you have capitalism wherein everyone is a regulator based on the shopping decisions millions of regulator shoppers make every day! It is the most through and effective regulation there is; it's called capitalist regulation. Its why we're the richest people in human history and the world's moral policeman too.

Jefferson said it better than I can:

"Sometimes it is said that man cannot be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the form of kings[regulators] to govern him? Let history answer this question". -Thomas Jefferson

Doesn't the idea of corporate America having unchecked power frighten you? Can you imagine what kind of damage they can do for the sake profit? We need regulation.

Your view is a little radical really. Even Mitt Romney believes regulation is necessary.

So what kind of regulation? Why do you talk in such generalities about unchecked power...I'll trust a corporation over a government...atleast when I call a company they fake like they care....go to the DMV, there is no pretense they care.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Well yes, actually, regulation is why the USSR and Red China failed, why so many blacks are in jail, and why we had the Great Depression and current recession, for example. A liberal lacks the IQ to know that regulators need regulators and those regulators need regulators and those regulators need regulators and so on until you have capitalism wherein everyone is a regulator based on the shopping decisions millions of regulator shoppers make every day! It is the most through and effective regulation there is; it's called capitalist regulation. Its why we're the richest people in human history and the world's moral policeman too.

Jefferson said it better than I can:

"Sometimes it is said that man cannot be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the form of kings[regulators] to govern him? Let history answer this question". -Thomas Jefferson

Doesn't the idea of corporate America having unchecked power frighten you? Can you imagine what kind of damage they can do for the sake profit? We need regulation.

Your view is a little radical really. Even Mitt Romney believes regulation is necessary.

So what kind of regulation? Why do you talk in such generalities about unchecked power...I'll trust a corporation over a government...atleast when I call a company they fake like they care....go to the DMV, there is no pretense they care.

actually if a corporation does not care they go out of business!! Why not read "Good to Great". It is the all time corporate bible!! It is about how companies that care crush the competition. Obviously a company that cares about making Harley Davidson motorcycles, for example, will easily crush and bankrupt a competitor that is only in it for the money! Who would you buy from??? Who would have better products?? Who would care more about product problems??????

 

[tjvh]

I opened this thread with a lot of hope preparing to intellectually argue pro-2nd amendment but was dismayed this is just another pointless thread from a brain dead conservative making retarded points. I'm going to move on now and let this thread die it's natural death.

Jefferson was making a retarded point????

See why we say liberals are so slow, so very very slow??

Hey, you know the deal... Liberals only care about the parts of the Constitution that mesh with their utopian agenda. The rest of it... Not so much.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Doesn't the idea of corporate America having unchecked power frighten you?

too stupidand 1000% liberal!!!!! The only power corporatrions have under capitalism is to go bankrupt if they don't have the best, least expensive products in the world that raise our standard of living the fastest.

You're parroting Marx who died 150 years ago and have no clue whatsoever how brainwashed you are.

 

[buckeye45_73]

I opened this thread with a lot of hope preparing to intellectually argue pro-2nd amendment but was dismayed this is just another pointless thread from a brain dead conservative making retarded points. I'm going to move on now and let this thread die it's natural death.

Jefferson was making a retarded point????

See why we say liberals are so slow, so very very slow??

Hey, you know the deal... Liberals only care about the parts of the Constitution that mesh with their utopian agenda. The rest of it... Not so much.

Uh oh you said utopian, they deny that phrase......it's funny talking to them about it...they act like they've never heard it.

 

[tjvh]

where are the liberals telling us who will regulate the regulators?

Well, I am no liberal, of course -- but unlike many so-called "conservatives", I do have the intelligence to understand good ideas, no matter what country they come from.

The pathetically ill-designed and antiquated US Constitution encourages pay-offs, shenanigans, and rule by those with money.

It has no provisions at all by which corruption and malfeasance can be controlled. The legislative branch is composed of unprincipled wheeler-dealers ; the executive branch is essentially ruled by those interests it is supposed to control ; the judicial branch all too often bends to accommodate money and influence rather than justice or law. But what can you expect from judges who either are appointed by untrustworthy politicians, or (even worse) are elected to office by a populace which it is flattery to call childish.

QUIS CUSTODIET CUSTODES?

No one!! And that is a fundamental failure of the US Constitution.

I favor a fourth branch of government which, from the glorious Chinese example, I call a Censorate.

The Imperial Chinese Censorate dates back more than 2200 years, and had an official duty to criticize the acts of the Emperor and investigate official corruption and misgovernment.

Imagine Julian Assange in charge of the FBI and the CIA.... · ·

By the Ming Dynasty, it had become a major government bureau controlled by two chief censors and comprising four subdivisions.

The censors checked important documents, supervised construction projects, reviewed judicial proceedings and kept watch over state property. Agents of the Censorate travelled the Empire, ferreting out cases of subversion and corruption in the State Administration.

The United States has always been a paradise for corruption. It desperately needs an analogue of the Chinese Censorate, independent and uninfluenced by the present three branches of the US government.
.

I stopped reading after the first five words... I knew the rest of it had to be BS too.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Jefferson was making a retarded point????

See why we say liberals are so slow, so very very slow??

Hey, you know the deal... Liberals only care about the parts of the Constitution that mesh with their utopian agenda. The rest of it... Not so much.

Uh oh you said utopian, they deny that phrase......it's funny talking to them about it...they act like they've never heard it.

yes, the whole idea of liberalism is to create an instant utopia through an all powerful central government. Hitler, Stalin and Mao were always one war or one five year plan away from their respective liberal utopias. This is why our liberals spied for Stalin and gave him the bomb.

 

[beagle9]

Fallacy

Crackpot Doom Scandal: "Regulation Caused the Subprime Crisis"

Who can say with a straight face that Fanny, Freddie, CRA, Fed, SEC, FHA,FDIC, didn't cause the recession when they were 100% regulating the housing industry????????????????

Is it "regulating" or "over seeing" the housing industry & etc. that is being alluded to here ? There is a big difference in the two, where as one who is to regulate, is to then try and control it's unbalanced activity in which could lead to a huge problem or to corruption if not regulated properly.

Over seeing or to over see, well that is more like managing the activity or structural make up of the corporation or government activity and/or entity in question, where as when the process or activity fails, then the over seeing officials are then looked at for the blame and/or are to be held accountable for the failure. Nothing wrong with good and proper regulatory action or regulations, but that should be scrutinized heavily always to, but the over seeing officials are the ones who are to be looked at in the failures when they occur.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Fallacy

Crackpot Doom Scandal: "Regulation Caused the Subprime Crisis"

Who can say with a straight face that Fanny, Freddie, CRA, Fed, SEC, FHA,FDIC, didn't cause the recession when they were 100% regulating the housing industry????????????????

Is it "regulating" or "over seeing" the housing industry & etc. that is being alluded to here ? There is a big difference in the two, where as one who is to regulate, is to then try and control it's unbalanced activity in which could lead to a huge problem or to corruption if not regulated properly.

Over seeing or to over see, well that is more like managing the activity or structural make up of the corporation or government activity and/or entity in question, where as when the process or activity fails, then the over seeing officials are then looked at for the blame and/or are to be held accountable for the failure. Nothing wrong with good and proper regulatory action or regulations, but that should be scrutinized heavily always to, but the over seeing officials are the ones who are to be looked at in the failures when they occur.

dear, Fanny, Freddie, CRA, Fed, SEC, FHA,FDIC all regulated and oversaw in too many ways to count. You regulate and oversee to get a result. In this case everyone who regulated or oversaw did it to get people into homes the Republican free market said they could not afford.

 

[beagle9]

Who can say with a straight face that Fanny, Freddie, CRA, Fed, SEC, FHA,FDIC, didn't cause the recession when they were 100% regulating the housing industry????????????????

Is it "regulating" or "over seeing" the housing industry & etc. that is being alluded to here ? There is a big difference in the two, where as one who is to regulate, is to then try and control it's unbalanced activity in which could lead to a huge problem or to corruption if not regulated properly.

Over seeing or to over see, well that is more like managing the activity or structural make up of the corporation or government activity and/or entity in question, where as when the process or activity fails, then the over seeing officials are then looked at for the blame and/or are to be held accountable for the failure. Nothing wrong with good and proper regulatory action or regulations, but that should be scrutinized heavily always to, but the over seeing officials are the ones who are to be looked at in the failures when they occur.

dear, Fanny, Freddie, CRA, Fed, SEC, FHA,FDIC all regulated and oversaw in too many ways to count. You regulate and oversee to get a result. In this case everyone who regulated or oversaw did it to get people into homes the Republican free market said they could not afford.

The regulation is in place for the over seeing officials to abide by and/or to obey, but when the over seeing group or individual ignores regulation/laws that are already on the books, then it should be jail time baby or some kind of punishment according to the crime that was committed to be waged against them...

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Is it "regulating" or "over seeing" the housing industry & etc. that is being alluded to here ? There is a big difference in the two, where as one who is to regulate, is to then try and control it's unbalanced activity in which could lead to a huge problem or to corruption if not regulated properly.

Over seeing or to over see, well that is more like managing the activity or structural make up of the corporation or government activity and/or entity in question, where as when the process or activity fails, then the over seeing officials are then looked at for the blame and/or are to be held accountable for the failure. Nothing wrong with good and proper regulatory action or regulations, but that should be scrutinized heavily always to, but the over seeing officials are the ones who are to be looked at in the failures when they occur.

dear, Fanny, Freddie, CRA, Fed, SEC, FHA,FDIC all regulated and oversaw in too many ways to count. You regulate and oversee to get a result. In this case everyone who regulated or oversaw did it to get people into homes the Republican free market said they could not afford.

The regulation is in place for the over seeing officials to abide by and/or to obey, but when the over seeing group or individual ignores regulation/laws that are already on the books, then it should be jail time baby or some kind of punishment according to the crime that was committed to be waged against them...

no idea what you are talking about. Does it occur to you to present a concrete example??