The Shadow Government
One thing we can say about Joe Biden - he knows how to play the game and he pays his debts. There is little doubt that Joe Biden ran for the office of president as a moderate and he only had one goal and one use. To get the DNC nomination he made an open deal with Jim Clyburn, who commands black voters in South Carolina, a Faustian deal with Bernie Sanders, who commands a significant part of the far left wing of the democratic party, the social media oligarchs who suppressed news and opinion during the election in his behalf and finally his old mentor Barak Obama. Thus far Biden has delivered. (you thought you were getting a moderate?)
Does anybody remember what Obama wanted from Joe?
It was the placement of the key Obama operative Susan Rice within the Biden Administration. Rice was a member of the advisory council of the Biden-Harris Transition Team. She now leads Biden's White House Domestic Policy Council. Rice as you may recall, played a central role in the Benghazi fiasco and was part of the unmasking of American citizens under the FBI's fraudulent Russia hoax. She lied about both. In the former telling the nation that the assault on an American Embassy was based on a video. In the latter she told us: “I know nothing about this. I was surprised to see the reports.”
Her role here in the Biden Administration is an ideological one. That same race based ideology we witnessed during the Obama presidency.
Yesterday Susan Rice announced that the Biden administration will work to advance "racial justice and equity," adding that building a "more equitable" economy is "essential" to economic growth.
What she obviously means is that equal opportunity is not enough. There must be an equality/"equity" of results.
Therefore as one of the first acts that Rice demands, Joe Biden will soon sign a presidential memorandum to direct the Department of Housing and Urban Development to take steps to act on racially discriminatory federal housing policies that the administrable claims contributed to wealth inequality for generations.
What are these federal housing policies that discriminate?
Aren't there equal policies for all people? Or is this about having different sets of policies for each group?
Do we remember what happened the last time the government tried to equalize results?
It resulted in the Housing/Financial crisis.
Tags
Who is online
70 visitors
The radicals are in charge of the asylum.
That offends you? You are the one who has to explain themselves, not Susan Rice.
Or perhaps you. Where is this discrimination?
You are the one who highlighted the above passage in your article, that you wrote , complaining about the government "ensur(ing) that government resources are reaching Americans of color, and all marginalized communities, rural, urban, disabled, LGBTQ+, religious minorities"
Why would you object to government resources reaching all people?
They are reaching all people. That is why I'm questioning it.
It strikes at the very heart of Trumperism.
Teaching "Critical Race Theory" would do it!
Ever heard of "white grievance" Vic ?
Who are you charging with racism, John?
The Republican Party?
No, John, without them there wouldn't have been a Civil Rights Act in 1964 or a Voting Rights Act in 1965. They were also the party of Lincoln.
So why don't we get back to what Rice is trying to do?
I have posted the article from the Guardian that explains the 1964 Civil Rights Act vote about 10 times over the years, because there is always someone new who says the Republicans wanted the Civil Rights Act more than the Democrats did. I am quite familiar with that situation.
Are you a conservative Vic? Then your group is the one that opposed the Civil Rights Act.
In 1964 the two political parties were not as ideologically rigid as they are today. There were some liberal Republicans, or moderate Republicans, and quite a few southern Democratic conservatives. The Civil Rights Act vote is entirely explained by geography, not political party. Northern moderate Republicans voted for it as did northern liberal Democrats. Southern conservative Democrats and Republican conservatives voted against it.
Of course the situation in the Civil War is not applicable at all. The nature of the two partys has changed. People who are not disingenuous understand that.
Today conservatives fly the confederate flag, not liberals.
Are you saying that there is such a thing as "systemic" racism and inequity. Do you have any credible evidence of this?
Southern segregationists were not Conservatives - they were democrats, as were the secessionists of the 1860's. Conservatives and liberals advanced those Acts, but the democratic party has always been the party of hate, once of Blacks and now of Whites.
The nature of the two partys has changed.
Both political parties have gone through numerous changes.
The GOP began as the party of abolishing slavery, then became the party of investors & bankers, then became the party of Conservatism and now is the Party of the middle class.
The older democratic party was the party of secession, segregation, liberalism and now is the party of progressive dogma, special interests and identity politics.
Get a grip for gods sake.
Everywhere Vic.
Here is a place to start:
Point? Perhaps you should review the question I replied to.
That's an uninformed and small minded interpretation of that statement.
Good article, Vic! Too many people are conflating the definitions of these words and think they're synonyms. They are not.
[deleted]
Sorry it's taken me a few days to add further sources regarding the differences between equality and equity . I got my first Covid vaccine last week and had a few minor side effects.
There are many more, but this should do for now.
[DELETED]
The horror... the horror.
Great analogy - it would be just like announcing we need to bomb Vietnam more!
You and I, nor I would venture to say, EVERYONE here will not live to see the day. You can't just "work" on something that may be engrained in the human psyche. The whole of society needs to change and that is no easy task........no matter who you are. Noble gesture but better men and women have tried. It is a long tough row to hoe. There will always be an element that cannot be changed.
That's true Jim, but I think this about social justice - altering outcomes. The federal government is free of "racism." I have asked people on the left here to show me where the federal government discriminates. They can't answer. One resorts to charging "racism."
Then nothing will change, will it Vic?
Yes, something will change- the Federal government will become more racially unfair in it's efforts to become "racially fair".
Quotas should have nothing to when deciding who is most qualified to do a job. There should be no special appoints awarded to potential hires based on race, religion, or sex.
Thanks for sharing your unfounded proclamation.
Since you are the first to mention 'quotas', please cite which of the EO's mandate them.
making progress towards the full ideals of the US Constitution, oh the republican horror ...
And where are they failing?
Isn't that what Susan Rice is trying to ascertain?
The federal government - where are they failing?
In her speech yesterday , Susan Rice noted that the net wealth of black families in America is 1/10th of the wealth of white families. This is to a great extent a residue of hundreds of years of racism.
Do you object to efforts to being those two figures closer together?
No, she talked about designing government to make sure resources reach all groups. For her to say that she needs to:
1) show us where the government is discriminating
and
2) tell us specifically what does she intend to do.
As I noted in the article: Joe Biden will soon sign a presidential memorandum to direct the Department of Housing and Urban Development to take steps to act on racially discriminatory federal housing policies that the administrable claims contributed to wealth inequality for generations.
What are these racially discriminatory housing policies?
Ok, I don't know if that's true, but I'm going to assume that the average net worth of Black Americans is less than the average net worth of White Americans. I also believe that average is improving over time.
This is to a great extent a residue of hundreds of years of racism.
To some extent John. There is nothing holding Black Americans back now.
Do you object to efforts to being those two figures closer together?
Then you are making my point, are you not? As I said, Susan Rice is not interested in equality of opportunity, she is interested in equity of results. To answer your question, remember John I have no white guilt, I don't believe in restitution, retribution or fixing results.
You mean trying to dredge up instances of imaginary racism and supposed inequities?
That doesn't correlate at all John. There may be individual racism, but there is no evidence of institutionalized racism.
My mistake. I thought you might have read the article.
It helps.
Isn't that what government is supposed to do? Or is it only for the rich, or white, or middle class, or poor, or Wall Street?
Again Biden isn't doing something that wasn't a surprise. He's reinstating a plan from the Obama Admin that Trump killed. This is such a so what moment... Oh my some poor black people might actually be able to get federal housing! Oh no! (smh)
it is known as white grievance and is a key feature of trumpism
You could research it if you were really curious...
Yes, as John said, about 1/10th.
How much MORE time will it take Vic?
To a HUGE extent Vic.
Bullshit.
You seem to have a hang up with Rice. Biden is the POTUS, NOT Rice.
Oh and BTFW, when you can show me that there IS equity in opportunity, we can start talking about equity of results.
Therein lies the rub Vic. Those are the only ways you see to bring 'those two figures closer together'. Luckily, Biden has a better vision.
You and John may want to trot on up to 2019 pre Covid instead of using the figures from 2016
In 2019 the median white household held $188,200 in wealth—7.8 times that of the typical Black household ($24,100; figure 1). It is worth noting that levels of average wealth, which are more heavily skewed by households with the greatest amounts of wealth, are higher: white households reported average wealth of $983,400, which is 6.9 times that of Black households ($142,500; SCF). While median wealth is more reflective of the typical household, the scale of average wealth is indicative of the outsized levels of wealth held by the richest households.
Wow Jim, if we were discussing the 'median' yearly income of Americans, your link may be relevant.
Since we are discussing the gap in WEALTH, it isn't.
SMMFH
From YOUR link:
10 percent [1/10] of 94 trillion is 9.4 trillion...
4.6 trillion is LESS THAN HALF of 9.4, or 1/20th.
So YOUR numbers are WORSE.
Hit it harder.
I'll ask you again - where has the federal government failed to do that?
He's reinstating a plan from the Obama Admin that Trump killed.
Is that it? Please give us the details.
Walt Whitman said "Be curious, not judgmental."
Yes, as John said, about 1/10th.
But neither John nor habitual liar Susan Rice gave us any proof of those estimates.
To a HUGE extent Vic.
Not for today's generation.
Bullshit.
Sorry, but it's true.
Biden is the POTUS, NOT Rice.
You really think Joe Biden is calling the shots?
Oh and BTFW, when you can show me that there IS equity in opportunity,
Equity is Rice's word. There is EQUALITY of opportunity. That has also been a PREFERANCE. You can check with Asian Americans trying to go to Harvard University.
Those are the only ways you see to bring 'those two figures closer together'.
That is a terrible thing to say about Black Americans. They can do it Dulay - they can and have done it!
Point?
You of all people have no room for critiquing others for not providing proof Vic.
Oh and BTFW, Rice didn't mention the wealth gap so there is no reason to cite her.
Bullshit Vic.
It's NOT true Vic. You are delusional if you think that there is equity in our government and/or our society.
Yes. Why don't YOU?
WTF is your point Vic? You're merely deflecting to avoid the question.
No there isn't Vic.
That may be a preference, it isn't a reality.
You mean the suit that Harvard won?
Relevance?
This announcement from Susan Rice is but one example. Take a look at those 35 Executive Orders & actions. Do you think those were Biden's idea? Those were ready to go on day 1. A lot of people were doing some serious planning. How about his proposed immigration bill? The Biden transition team issued a four-page outline of its bill, heavy on a path to citizenship for illegal aliens and light on border security. Plus an immediate 100-day pause on removals! It all comes after Biden immediately halted construction of the border wall. Even Obama built wall. Are we to believe that Biden, who campaigned at a "moderate", has somehow grown more radical than Obama?
Perhaps you should take a look at the big picture. Blacks are only 13.4% of the population or, 22% of what the white population is. 1 divided by .22 = 4.55 Take the 4.6T times 4.55 and you get the equivalent of $20.93T. Therefore, on an equal population basis, it's 22% not 10%
Your comment is not responsive Vic.
Yes. Why don't YOU?
The HORROR!
No. Why do YOU?
So now you want to move the goal posts again.
We are discussing the percentage of WEALTH, NOT population.
First, there is no "shadow government" or "deep state", those who believe in such bullshit are fucking loser conspiracy theorists.
Utter nonsense. She had nothing to do with Benghazi happening, she got blamed for simply stating the fact that multiple embassies had been attacked that day due to a You Tube video and that it was under investigation which was a fact. There was NO improper or illegal unmasking, but some are too fucking stupid to learn the facts.
No, she didn't. Only those same dumb fuck conspiracy theorists imagine she did because they're too stupid to listen to the facts. Oh, and the Russian investigation was warranted, it was not a hoax as those same dumb fuck conspiracy theorists continue to claim, a Republican Senate investigation found clear evidence of numerous ties between the Trump campaign and Russian operatives.
What is interesting is that Hillary Clinton was a private citizen when the Benghazi congressional hearing took place yet today the republican senators are saying that the impeachment of Trump is unconstitutional because he is no longer in office.
Typical hypocritical BS from the right.
I believe it is about different sets of policies for different groups .. special interest is bad, unless it is designed for the side of the marginalized in our country .. or something like that.
I never have understood why sexual discrimination laws did not cover the LBGTQ community - but they did not, so transgender / gay etc have not been recognized by the sexual revolution, so a new revolution is taking place .. race has been / is being marginalized in this nation .. our nation has become tribal in nature - so YES a different set of policies for each group..
The United States has its first woman in the Vice Presidency - yet that is not an all encompassing win for American women, it is a win for Asian American as well as African American women .. I do not claim to understand why being an American is not enough - but I do understand having to put each individual 'tribe' in writing .. too many loops holes are built into our legal system,
I am sure I will be corrected if I am wrong .. yet I do not believe that these problems can be solved through legislation .. yet that is all Americans know is said 'convoluted legislation' and said legislation will never be enough ...... if it was to be 'ever enough' perhaps then this illusive creature called 'comprehensive immigration reform' [whatever the fuck that is] would take place, but it is all to 'hard' soooo elected officials will kick the can down the road and piecemeal as always ... I am going to be 55 very soon, and I have heard about 'comprehensive immigration reform' my whole life...
I am having Obama era administration flash backs as well, apparently it was inevitable - I am still hoping that President Biden will hold to his moderate beliefs and compromise will return to the nations capital .. I will hold my breath for a lil while...
Peace Vic
What makes you believe that? I believe women in general see this as progress. Perhaps not some women who have been indoctrinated, often by religion, that women are supposed to be subservient to men and offer up all headship roles to the men in their lives, but it would seem the majority of women are very supportive of Kamala as VP as 57% of ALL women in this country voted for the Biden/Harris ticket.
Being an American should be enough, the problem is that there are still apparently millions who do not consider women, minorities or lgtbq Americans as American and thus have kept them from being represented for the vast majority of American history. To think it took nearly 240 years for our first black President or female VP is sad and should tell us that something has been broken. Unless we admit that and accept the fact that there have been millions of marginalized Americans simply because of their gender, skin color or sexual orientation, we can't move on, we cannot progress, we cannot overcome this great stumbling block. Some use the term "special interests" as a bad word, as something to be hated, but those are only the ones who relish the status quo which are often those who are currently the beneficiaries of inequity. In reality the largest "special interest" group in America for the last 240 years have been white male Christians with society set up to specifically benefit them, so some who like that status quo, mostly white male Christians, don't want any other special interests rocking their boat thus they fight tooth and nail to preserve the established inequity. Until we rid ourselves of that and dismantle the "white male Christian special interest group" we will never have true equality in our nation. If that special interest was dismantled then we would have no need for any other special interest groups competing for the resources, we would have an actual level playing field where ability, hard work and competence were the primary determinates of success.
Wow ..yeah, okay really? Religion has ZERO to do with my comment .. I find it sad that the division in our nation even exists. I am saddened that race, ethnicity and sexual orientation and / or tribalism are even factors in this great nation .. but it is, and legislation can only go so far to change it .. sadly it is a fantasy that these things can be legislated away...
There was a time when women were united, now we are divided by race/ethnicity/sexual orientation .. I cannot understand a black mothers anxiety when her children leaves home for a night out .. nor the mother of an LBGTQ child etc etc - that is sad, I can feel her pain when he son / daughter is cut down, or goes to prison .. but I have a mixed race son in a dreaded red state like Montana - yet I do not fear anything when it comes to his safety regarding the color of his skin!
Peace out Dismayed!
When haven't they been factors?
While that may be true, legislation sure as hell CAN and HAS made a big fucking dent in it.
Yet ... here we are ... having the same conversation .. big fucking dents indeed...
But why? Is it because you don't walk in their shoes? From the news of the world, I can certainly understand their anxiety and I have 2 white children
I guess I should say the depths of their anxiety .. I have never had to have 'the talk' with my son .. I can understand the concern of having my children away from the nest .. but I am not concerned for my child to be a target based on color or sexual orientation ..
When you claimed Kamala's win "is not an all encompassing win for American women" I was simply pointing out my opinion as to why it isn't seen as a win by some women. Do you disagree that there are some women in America who, often based on headship rules they've been indoctrinated in, believe a woman's place is in the home taking care of children and cleaning the house for their husbands and see women who do not act subserviently to males as sinners?
As do I, though I don't think it's minorities or majority of women who fight for equalities fault.
Again, I agree and sincerely wish the white male Christian tribe would welcome diversity and equality.
True, but is that any reason we should just throw up our hands and give up on equality? As Dr. King said so eloquently, “the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice." Should we give up on justice and equality simply because it takes a long time to achieve it?
That's just a defeatist way of saying "This is hard so I give up". We have seen legislation make huge strides toward justice and equality, we are light years past the division we had just 60 or 70 years ago. Sure, the vestiges of racial division and hate still fester in many corners and pockets of society, but that does not mean the legislation passed over the last 70 years did no good.
There was a time when white Christian women were united and supported by their white Christian male husbands and all was hunky dory for their Leave It To Beaver lives, but that was certainly not true of all women in America.
While only those who have to live in those shoes can truly understand, we can all try to empathize.
That's great, but does that in any way diminish the valid fears of so many other mothers who do not live in your shoes? Should we just take your singular experience and claim racial turmoil and hate defeated? The evidence clearly suggests that is not the experiences of many others, so trying to sweep everyone else's problems under the rug simply because they're not your problems is one of the major reasons why we still have the festering pockets of racism throughout America.
Seriously, our history has a hell of a lot of legislation that took huge strides for equity in this country. Refuse to recognize that if you choose. It would however be obtuse to do so.
Does that mean that we don't have more to do? Why no, NO it doesn't.
Our concern SHOULD be that ANY child is targeted and our goal should be that none are.
For the past 4 years I have heard nothing but Jim Crow .. racism .. systemic racism .. voter suppression etc etc twist and spin the words I typed all you want .. does not change the fact that for the past 4 years most liberals in the nation has seen everything but improvements when it comes to race and special interests...
Yes Dear .. OOOO for fucks sake .. Peace out! I forgot what responding to you was all about!
Maybe you should get out more. There was a hell of a lot MORE being discussed.
I didn't twist your words at all.
Exactly...everything BUT.
[DELETED]
Wow!
2 tickets for 1 comment.
[removed]
I have had that happen before.
Thus the term, white privilege...(and not having an LGBT child)
. Good points.
I am still hoping that President Biden will hold to his moderate beliefs and compromise will return to the nations capital ..
After all those radical EO's & executive actions (the most numerous & aggressive in history) I've lost all hope. Compromise at the capitol is probably even less likely.
Peace Color
really? RADICAL?
You realize that Executive actions are unenforceable, right?
Maybe the most in 3 weeks in modern times but "aggressive"? Laughable.
Sorry to hear that.
Sorry to hear you believe that
But then again not surprised after you wrote this.
Yes land owners and slave owning conservatives
Yes, yes they were, conservative Democrats.
Ok...
Truly laughable . I think you missed your calling.
Maybe not to radicals, but they are radical. 35 executive orders in less than a week. One of them aimed at ending deportations. Good grief!
You realize that Executive actions are unenforceable, right?
I think even Obama was surprised when a judge held up his outrageous DACA order.
Yes land owners and slave owning conservatives
If you don't believe in the Constitution, you can't be a Conservative. It's really simple.
Yes, yes they were, conservative Democrats.
Another history rewrite. Southern democrats were of the same mindset from 1860 - 1960. They still had their cause and it certainly wasn't Conservatism.
Suspending deportations for 100 days except for known criminals and terrorists is neither radical or permanent.
Good grief is right.
Absolutely no need to pay attention to your wild interpretations......
[deleted]
It is against federal law and an agreement made with the Justice Department.
Who made Biden and his handlers King?
Donald J. Trump did. And not to brag, but I helped.
You wish. A federal Judge has ruled otherwise.
Sounds ripe for a legal challenge, lol.
or a new agreement with the new Justice department...
A stay for 14 days...
Link?
Lets release them into to Joe Biden's & Susan Rice's homes. They can reside there.
I had posted this article but was told by somebody that it had already been posted:
"Paxton had also challenged the moratorium on the grounds that it violated an agreement signed by the Trump administration and Texas. The agreement requires the DHS to give notice to states before changing any immigration polices. The Biden administration questioned the validity of the agreements, which was signed just weeks before former President Trump left office.
“The federal government has plenary power over the enforcement of federal immigration law, and an outgoing administration cannot contract away that power for an incoming administration, ” the federal attorneys said in a filing. But Tipton said his decision wasn't based on those contracts."
I'm always happy to enlighten our members.
Gotta love the language Abbott, Patrick & Paxton throw around. “*This* was a seditious left-wing insurrection. And my team and I stopped it.” (for 14 days...)
Abbott issued an EO today against the Biden administrations hostility to Texas by rejoining the Paris Accord and threatened to sue also.
When Abbott was the AG he sued the Obama Administration 31 times.
Paxton sued Obama 17 times
Everyday Texas politics by future GoP POTUS hopefuls.
Interesting read
To do that, you'd have to be enlightened yourself.
Unfortunately, that isn't true since you are intentionally ignoring the clear factual statement from your own link:
Oh and BTFW, you said that the 'agreement' was with the DOJ yet your link states it was with Trump.
I'm still waiting for your link to the federal law...
"Shadow Government?" Absolutely. It is foreign money, mainly Russian and Saudi, infiltrating the American political system and using the GOP for the locations of the back doors.
Disregarding China and Iran again?
Who would those two countries be supporting? Hint it isn't the Republicans.
Of course Democrats love those two countries because of their strong anti Trump stances.
Good.
Because striving to be more equitable is a bad thing?