FLBear5630 said:you keep missing the point, this is not the Grace Commission, which created a report submitted to GAO. Grace Commission was to find waste to support a reduced income tax rate. This is not, that. In addition, they ended up double counting. But, that is not what is at issue here, just another misdirection.whiterock said:Reagan appointed the Grace Commission to look for ways to cut regulations and by extension the size of government. They did eliminate a lot of regulations. Size of government not so much.. J. Peter Grace was a Republican donor.FLBear5630 said:whiterock said:the cronyism argument is very, very flimsy. Musk and Trump are the furthest thing from cronies. Never done business together. Barely knew one another until Trump got shot. Musk actually supported mostly Democrats and all of Trump's opponents until this election. What part of a guy crossing the aisle (for the right reasons) makes him a crony?FLBear5630 said:I didn't say it wasn't a MAGA issue. I was actually agreeing with you. I know you are conditioned to think I am not agreeing with a MAGA idea, but I am lock step on this one. Not all MAGA ideas are bad, right now just the cronyism is irking me.whiterock said:lol hate to tell you this, but the Greenland kerfuffle is very much a MAGA issue. Straight from the Twitter feed of the big orange guy hisself.....FLBear5630 said:So, does Greenland get Territory status or State? Statehood would not be inconceivable, as it is about the same size of Alaska. In order to get Greenland, I think it would have to get State-status. Or it has the same issues we see in PR and American Samoa.whiterock said:So shallow on so many levels.Redbrickbear said:whiterock said:Realitybites said:
Russia isn't going to invade Greenland.
Wake up.
Russia would most certainly do so if it could.
Yet it can't....that is the whole point
You are fighting a paper tiger
Russia can't beat a local neigbbor....one that its armies can easily drive on paved highways to....much less invade an island 2,000 miles away over the harsh ice filled North Atlantic sea
Its had to basically give up de-facto rule of breakaway provinces like Chechnya and Dagestan to local Muslim warlords/strongmen to keep them inside the official Russian Federation.
Its economy is lack luster and depended on exports of natural resources. (now mostly to China)
Its highly corrupt and has a declining birth rate and high rate of early deaths
Its not the great world power and big threat that you make it out to be
1) Whether they can or not is irrelevant. If THEY think they can, they will try. When they do try, someone has to stop them. Stopping them is invariably more expensive (and risky) than deterring them.
(see Ukraine).
2) Russia thinks they should own/control everything east of Stettin. Always have. Always try. Today is just the most recent incarnation. They will keep pushing until they are knocked flat on their ass. History is very, very clear on that.
3) Whether or not a hostile power is motivated or able to take something of importance to you TODAY or not is not terribly material. At some point, if it's important to you, it will be important to someone else, too. And that someone else will, at some point in time, make a move on it (even if only for the purpose of getting one-up on you, to degrade your position by denying it to you.) Better to get there first, plant the flag, and remove the issue from contention.
4) I don't think the prospect of Russia making a move on a Danish-controlled Greenland is what's driving this issue. The larger problem is the prospect of an independent Greenland. It would be a terribly poor and weak country which would have no alternative but to look to foreign powers for investment and security arrangements. Russia and China would swoop in in a nanosecond, at the invitation of the govt of Greenland, backed by treaty and trade deals, putting us and Nato is a very uncomfortable position. Lest you think this isn't an active issue, look at what China is doing thousands of miles from their shores in the Pacific islands.
Owning Greenland is such a no-brainer. It would strengthen our national security. It's a great resource, an under-developed resource. We definitely should gain control over it if possible, because it makes so much sense. Cheaper, wiser step would be to poke Denmark in the ribs to get more serious about taking better care of its possessions, which is exactly what's happening here. Trump is signaling to them to crap or get off the pot = Denmark flirting with the idea of letting Greenland go, which would be an alarming development for the USA.
Think, man....THINK!
I am all for it. As I have said on other posts, the next step for the US is expansion. With this debt-load, it is the only logical move to increase revenue. Greenland's mineral rights would be worth the investment, not to mention strategically.
On this, and most non-MAGA issues, I agree with you 100%.
Greenland has about 1/15th the population of Alaska. Territory status for sure.
Now, Alberta and Saskatchewan might each come in as states. (wink).
Nothing would make me happier than to not have to clear customs to enter Saskatchewan = best Hungarian Partridge cover in the world.
As for territory, we better do a better job of managing it than we have in Puerto Rico and American Samoa. Guam is pretty good, I did some work there once. They are close enough to Asia to value the US...
You just don't like the idea of a businessman having a say in oversight of bureaucrats. Reagan did exactly what Trump has done - appointed a well-respected entrepreneur to a commission to streamline a bloated bureaucracy.
Who? Who did Reagan appoint that came out in the newspaper and threatened Congressmen who didn't vote his way? Who did Reagan appoint that was getting billions of dollars in Federal Grants and then given the authority to determine what went forward and what didn't?
If you want to look at a President that commented on this type of thing, Eisenhower. Beware the military industrial complex, just replace military with tech...
Nothing remotely inappropriate about having one of the most famous entrepreneurs in history study and make recommendations about regulations. Also, nothing remotely remarkable about donors threatening candidates with primary challenges. I happens at every level of government. I can think of several examples right here in Waco Tx for federal, state, local govt.
We know you like bureaucrats more than businessmen, but please stop shouting at the sky. You'll get a crick in your neck.
I have no problem with DOGE submitting findings, I have said from the beginning it has to be vetted and it cannot just be based on Elon's wants and Vivek's perceptions. But auditing and forcing justifications is not a bad thing based on facts, all facts not just what you want. You seem good with just doing what Elon says.
Peter Grace did not openly threaten Congress in the media to get his way. THAT is the biggest problem I see. This is not about businessmen giving advice to the Executive Branch when asked, that has been part of Governing since Washington. It is the public threatening of elected officials, THAT CAN'T HAPPEN. Trump now has several occasions under his belt showing he does not respect the other Branches of Government, Jan 6th speech (said speech, not riot) and Musk threatening Congress before a vote. You really want to bring the whole thing down, play into China's hand and become a Banana Republic keep going with Musk pullng a public Soros.
I am either shocked I have to explain this to you a CIA vet or you know and are good blowing the whole thing up. This is how PsyOps start deteriorating other Governments using the media, publicly (not privately) threatening officals on votes, and brow beating those that disagree. Keep in mind, it is not the ones that totally disagree that are targeted, it is the ones that in the same camp but are calling things out when they push or cross the lines. Those are the real threats. Tell me I am wrong...
Yelling at the sky??? What the hell else is a political message board at your alma matta for? Of course we are discussing things we disagree with at length. If you want a circle jerk go to the pay Football Board.
You think threats haven't been going on privately previously? Our whole government is storied with backdoor deals and pressures. So privately bullying politicians is OK, just not public. Or maybe you prefer just letting companies and rich dudes buy thier politicians.
