Comments

Democrat caught speaking her own mind… — 8 Comments

1. I don’t think it’s “speaking her own mind” that upsets them so much as HAVING her own mind in the first place.

2. The needle for Pelosi’s Choice has been swinging back and forth. Apparently it will be harder than I thought for Democrats to abandon impeachment.

   Which is not to say, the die is cast. I suspect the final decision is blowin’ in the wind, i.e. will be based on day-by-day polling and political considerations, like switching from “quid pro quo” to “bribery” as the preferred accusation against Trump.

3. The hounds were let loose and she was quickly tracked down and brought back to the plantation.

4. Let that be a lesson to anybody else that dares think for themselves.

5. Heh. But it’s not funny.

   “Democrat caught speaking.” Shhhhhhhh. Put a cork in it. Shut up. Stop talking. Be quiet. Hush. Zip it. Silence. Clam up you.

   They’ve got no idea what they’re going to do. Apart from panic.

6. The main key to being in her position, is to remember your a collective in which many do the thinking, and all align themselves… this beats other systems, especially those in which the goal is to gather together various positions. it is unnecessary to do so in a collective, at the cost of diversity. a collective is not diverse at all, its homogeneous… in fact, the way they push diversity, you dont get a rainbow you get soviet/nazi steel grey… grey women, grey men..

   The “grey men” of the party bureaucracy, Gilison believed, were to become the future Soviet leaders

   In contrast to fascism, which advocates one-man dominance, Leninism advocates inner-Party democratic collective leadership. Hence, the ideological justification of collective leadership in the Soviet Union was easy to justify. The physical insecurity of the political leadership under Stalin, and the political insecurity that existed during Khrushchev’s reign, strengthened the political leadership’s will to ensure a rule of the collective, and not that of the individual. Collective leadership was a value that was highly esteemed during Stalin and Khrushchev’s reigns, but it was violated in practice

   for what is a body, without a head..
   however, this is why Trump gets such push back, and they feel he is a dictator

   but who cares about a theory of mind in these people, its more fun watching the confused be confused… and the inventive guessing of the unknowing settling on their own wrong reasons absent context and connection to the actual things.

   the Central Committee and not the Politburo was the heart of collective leadership at the national level. At a sub-national level, all Party and Government organs were to work together to ensure collective leadership instead of only the Central Committee. However, as with many other ideological theses, the definition of collective leadership was applied “flexibly to a variety of situations”.

   Making Vladimir Lenin the example of a ruler ruling in favour of a collective can be seen as proof of this “flexibility”.

   In some Soviet ideological drafts, collective leadership can be compared to collegial leadership instead of a leadership of the collective. In accordance with a Soviet textbook, collective leadership was:

   The regular convocations of Party congresses and plenary sessions of the Central Committee, regular meetings of all electoral organs of the party, general public discussion of the major issues of state, economic and party development, extensive consultation with persons employed in various branches of the economy and cultural life….”

   the funniest thing is that you are all mostly soviet and do not know it
   you cant know it as you have nothing to reference to know it
   what are we? we are not what we were, and instead became what we werent
   we no longer can define ourselves in a way, that would say, X does this, Z does not
   we are nothing and everything at once, and so, like a hand, useless without the head, and the head useless without its brain. the body politic requires collective action and someone like Democrat Rep. Brenda Lawrence (Mich.) must not forget, because that which does not operate by collective action and position, is a cancer..
   All of you who dont agree are a cancer, so be warned where this leads
   and all the ‘evidence’ you have spent years exposing discussing things
   yours is not a silent cancer, but a large tumor comparatively, that sees itself as benign.

   at least that’s how they would put it in the old days…
   and we all know what to do about cancers…

   Governing By Committee: Collegial Leadership in Advanced Societies
   Thomas A. Baylis

   Governing by Committee is the first book-length study to examine decision-making among political executives. It examines sixteen advanced Western and Communist states and shows that collegial and semi-collegial patterns are far more common than is generally assumed.

   Contrary to the assertions of Max Weber, Baylis contends that modern bureaucracy, with its growing role in policy-making and its intimate association with neocorporatist forms of interest group representation, offers a particularly congenial setting for collegial leadership.

   A timely study, Governing by Committee opens a new dimension in the comparative study of political executives. But it also complements and contributes to the existing literature on political leadership, decision-making, consociationalism, and neocorporatism. It belongs as well to the still relatively small number of works comparing the politics of advanced Western and Communist states.

   after all… a council or committee is a soviet… so the nyc council is what? and rules by what manner? DNC is a democratic national committee… or soviet… and so, Ms Lawrence must answer what the head says, not what she thinks… a hand is not free to act on its own (except in an odd mental disorder).. and if it did, one would excise it.

   if you know all this, you would see why Bloomberg is OK, and Trump is not..

   the existence of collective leadership was due to the individual Politburo members enhancing their own positions by strengthening the collective. Ellen Jones, an educator, noted how each Politburo member specialised in his own field and acted as that field’s spokesman in the Politburo. Therefore, collective leadership was divided into Party and Government institutional and organisational lines. The dominant faction, Jones believed, acted as a “coalition” government of several social forces. This development led some to believe that the Soviet Union had evolved into neo-corporatism. Some believed Soviet factionalism to be “feudal in character”. Personal relationship were created to ensure service and support. “Personal factionalism”, as Baylis calls it, could either strengthen or weaken the collective leadership’s majority.

   The ordoliberal system of the social market economy in Germany
   The social partnership in Ireland
   The polder model in the Netherlands
   The Rhine model in Switzerland
   The Nordic model in Scandinavia.

   Attempts in the United States to create neo-corporatist capital-labor arrangements were unsuccessfully advocated by Gary Hart and Michael Dukakis in the 1980s. As secretary of labor during the Clinton administration, Robert Reich promoted neo-corporatist reforms

   if you cant identify what your seeing, your going to mischaracterize it
   and that is a fatal flaw
   for now the Chinese are collective corporativist states, as is Russia
   In December 2005, Andrei Illarionov, former economic adviser to Vladimir Putin, claimed that Russia had become a corporativist state.

   note the difference… corporativist vs corporatist

   “veddy interesting………….”

7. Think about it…

   If the unholy alliance of the “Deep State”…

   (I really don’t like that phrase, no matter how descriptive it is. It smacks of conspiracy theorism.)

   … and the MSM can do what they are doing to a sitting elected president, just think of what can do to a mere congresswomen!

8. It is interesting that Lawrence is black, and from a district that is solidly Democrat, not a “swing” district.

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>