Quid appoints JFKerry has a special climate change envoy. Wondering how much of that Iranian tarmac money ended up in one of his family accounts ? As you know his son Chris Heinz was jointed at the hip with Hunter Biden in all the deals they made peddling their old man's influence.

Last week Lurch was at the World Economic Forum where he said that the US would again join the Paris Climate agreement . But he said by itself it was not enough .He and other globalist socialists have been speaking of a " Great Reset "(I wonder if that comes with a red button?) Basically the Great Reset is the World Economic Forum's attempt to never let a crisis go to waste .

They will seize on the economic crisis resulting from Covid 19 in a Cloward and Piven way to reshape the world economy ;specifically away from capitalism . Lurch said ;“The notion of a reset is more important than ever before,”..... “I personally believe…we’re at the dawn of an extremely exciting time.”

“I personally believe…we’re at the dawn of an extremely exciting time.”I'd certainly agree with that. Exciting in the same sense that earthquakes and tsunamis are exciting. We better get ready to develop some backbone.

I hope Kerry will work towards undoing all the damage Trump has done and made plans to set into motion to despoil our beautiful wilderness and forest areas.

You wingers should relax, catch your breath, and come down off the last few years of hyper foolishness. I know you won't since you and the dufus love a ruckus but that horse is dead for now.

The dems already know they have a huge repub mess to correct, and it's not like they haven't done it before. Yeah Joe was there for that one so not like we aren't in reliable hands.

Not that that reality will stop loony hollering, but who's listening?

I hope Kerry will work towards undoing all the damage Trump has done and made plans to set into motion to despoil our beautiful wilderness and forest areas.

Trump gave his support and blessing to one of the largest conservation initiatives in our time. The bill he signed allocates $9.5 billion to fix crumbling national park infrastructure and permanently funds the Land and Water Conservation Fund . (Great American Outdoors Act ) .

He also last year signed the John D. Dingell Jr. Conservation, Management, and Recreation Act designating 1.3 million acres as wilderness ;expanded several national parks and established 4 new national monuments . That was the first public lands bill passed in a decade ie in the whole reign of the emperor not one pro conservation land management bill was passed .

He also announced that the United States would join the 'One Trillion Trees Initiative 'to plant, conserve, and restore trees on American soil and around the world.

In his 4 years the U.S. had the largest absolute decline of energy-related carbon dioxide emissions of any country in the world. That is due to our greater use of clean American natural gas .

Quid would reverse that gain as well . But he and JFKerry will jet into Davos once a year and pretend they are making a difference.

I doubt any of what you say Tom, but we are seeing the increasing use and development of more clean energy than ever before and not just NG. Oh I forgot, some of you don't have any sun, or wind so all you know is gas.

Maybe we can speak of the good stuff the dufus does when everybody's ears stop ring from the hollering and we recover from his abuses...like lying, cheating, stealing...and general chaos destroying the general peace with his big mouth.

May be a while before the emotional dust settles from his reign of terror.

but we are seeing the increasing use and development of more clean energy than ever before and not just NGThank you for giving Mr. Trump his due credit.


.like lying, cheating, stealing.It never fails to amuse me to listen to a Biden supporter complain about lying, cheating, and stealing.

I'm hearing lefties talking about Quid being a new FDR .I don't see it . The man hasn't the energy . I expect he will try to coast through his 4 years and just pay back his many beneficiaries . But part of his deal to them was that he would appoint radicals like Alejandro Mayorkas who would pretty much leave the border wide open. His Sec State ran cover for Hunter Biden .Records show that Hunter requested a meeting with Anthony Blinken ;serving as Dept Sec State in the emperor's reign during the Burisma deal. But on top of that Blinken is another globalist and an interventionist . He wanted a more active US role in the Syrian civil war .

Energy policies started long before the dufus, and Biden didn't inherit a good economy like the dufus did. I suppose it's your turn to bash the powers that be and that's fair. I enjoyed my turn to bash the powers that be at the time.

I will give him credit He is appointing Janet Yellen as Sec Treasury . I give this credit only because Elizabeth Warren's name was floated for the job.

I'm hearing lefties talking about Quid being a new FDR .I don't see it . The man hasn't the energy . I expect he will try to coast through his 4 years and just pay back his many beneficiaries . But part of his deal to them was that he would appoint radicals like Alejandro Mayorkas who would pretty much leave the border wide open. His Sec State ran cover for Hunter Biden .Records show that Hunter requested a meeting with Anthony Blinken ;serving as Dept Sec State in the emperor's reign during the Burisma deal. But on top of that Blinken is another globalist and an interventionist . He wanted a more active US role in the Syrian civil war .

I can forgive ideology for competence and hawk or no, they do have experience. Forgive e if I'm still thrilled we made the dufus a one term president and have a shot at making turtle face a minority leader.


I will give him credit He is appointing Janet Yellen as Sec Treasury . I give this credit only because Elizabeth Warren's name was floated for the job.

Yellen is infinitely qualified. Attorney General is who I'm waiting to see.

Yellen is infinitely qualified. Attorney General is who I'm waiting to see. I'm betting it will be one of the Russiagate conspirators . Since he is making it a point to checking off the pc boxes it will probably be Sally Yates .

The thing is also he is keeping his powder dry until after the Jan Georgia Senate run off . So far he has appointed former Obot deep state swamp critters . I think his appeasing the All Out Crazies of the party will happen after then

Favoritism, Cronyism, and Nepotism are a fact of life in politics, never more so than the outgoing administration.
Now I wonder how many of Biden's cronies will be indicted for crimes and misdemeanors while pretending to run the country...

Favoritism, Cronyism, and Nepotism are a fact of life in politics,They are a fact of life because people on message boards and elsewhere accept them as a fact of life, and so we don't insist on better.

They are a fact of life because people on message boards and elsewhere accept them as a fact of life, and so we don't insist on better.
What would your ideal government look like?

Now that's a good question. My ideal fed govt. would confine itself to the five purposes outlined in the Preamble. Maintain court systems, domestic peace, national defense, provide for the GENERAL welfare, and preserve the amazing blessings of liberty for our children. We would use at least half of our brain and have balanced budgets. We would have sane tax policies. We would not take money from one American to give to another American who is mentally and physically healthy. Internationally we would largely mind our own business, and we would not waste our money supporting nations who do not spend sufficiently on their own defense.

I guess that's a start. It's at least the major items, or at least I suppose it is.

I'm betting it will be one of the Russiagate conspirators . Since he is making it a point to checking off the pc boxes it will probably be Sally Yates .

The thing is also he is keeping his powder dry until after the Jan Georgia Senate run off . So far he has appointed former Obot deep state swamp critters . I think his appeasing the All Out Crazies of the party will happen after then

Yates is a good pick, but Jeh Johnson would be my choice. Biden appears to go for qualified experienced people and understandable many from The Obama era have his trust and confidence.


Favoritism, Cronyism, and Nepotism are a fact of life in politics, never more so than the outgoing administration.
Now I wonder how many of Biden's cronies will be indicted for crimes and misdemeanors while pretending to run the country...

Speaking of which the dufus better hurry and pardon himself before it's too late.

Now that's a good question. My ideal fed govt. would confine itself to the five purposes outlined in the Preamble. Maintain court systems, domestic peace, national defense, provide for the GENERAL welfare, and preserve the amazing blessings of liberty for our children.

Agree!


We would use at least half of our brain and have balanced budgets. We would have sane tax policies. We would not take money from one American to give to another American who is mentally and physically healthy. Internationally we would largely mind our own business, and we would not waste our money supporting nations who do not spend sufficiently on their own defense.

I guess that's a start. It's at least the major items, or at least I suppose it is.

We booted that guy out! Sorry, but I'll add equality to the list.

I'm all for equality under the law, if that's what you are referring to.

I'm all for equality under the law, if that's what you are referring to.
But we're all not equal.

some are more equal than others, it depends on how many lawyers you can afford

But we're all not equalIf you can identify a specific area where we are not afforded equal protection under law, then I will join with you in calling for change.

Favoritism, Cronyism, and Nepotism are a fact of life in politics, never more so than the outgoing administration.
Now I wonder how many of Biden's cronies will be indicted for crimes and misdemeanors while pretending to run the count

The question is how many will deserve to be indicted .If in fact he picks Sally Yates for Justice Dept then the crooked media will proclaim the whole lot of them saints running the cleanest administration ever . Watching in amusement as the complicit press is orgasmic about how experienced' Quid's cabinet choices are. They have all been in the swamp for decades ;with years of failure, never getting any results or success. All the problems Biden ran on, never got fixed by this bunch.

The question was often asked of both HC and JB, "What have they accomplished?" The answer is generally the chirping of crickets.

If you can identify a specific area where we are not afforded equal protection under law, then I will join with you in calling for change.
I said we're not all equal. And are not considered equal. Big difference from what you said.

I said we're not all equal. And are not considered equal. Big difference from what you said.As I understand it, we are equal in two ways. The D of I says we are all created equal before God. Legally, we are to be afforded equal protection under law. As to the rest of it, I doubt there are any two people on the earth that are completely equal. Lebron James, for instance, is a fantastically more gifted athlete than I am.

As I understand it, we are equal in two ways. The D of I says we are all created equal before God. Legally, we are to be afforded equal protection under law. As to the rest of it, I doubt there are any two people on the earth that are completely equal. Lebron James, for instance, is a fantastically more gifted athlete than I am.
Thus, immigrants' children who are born in this country are also equal under the law. Are their naturalized parents also equal under the law??

They are. The key word, of course, is "naturalized", meaning they have become U.S. citizens.

Quid introduced his national security team today for 45 minutes . Then he walked off the stage without taking any questions from reporters . My God ! He won't even take questions from pom pom waiving cheerleaders . Guessing he will claim he's running a transparent administration .

Might have forgotten what he was doing??

No he just doesn't want to be put on the spot

No he just doesn't want to be put on the spotI think you nailed it.

As I understand it, we are equal in two ways. The D of I says we are all created equal before God. Legally, we are to be afforded equal protection under law.
Why then was there gerrymandering before the November election, polling places were shut down, poll watchers were recruited, mailed-in votes were tossed out, et al?

No he just doesn't want to be put on the spot

I think you nailed it.
Put on the spot about what?

the details, his choices, the appointments he hasn't made yet

https://www.news.com.au/world/north-america/us-politics/joe-biden-interview-us-presidentelect-gets-emotional-in-first-tv-grilling-since-the-election/news-story/f0df0d640558fca22eb3e49e09ce3743

the details, his choices, the appointments he hasn't made yet

The details were in the intros, his choices were present, and he isn't president yet, so no hurry on making appointments.

Why then was there gerrymandering before the November election, polling places were shut down, poll watchers were recruited, mailed-in votes were tossed out, et al?Not sure what that has to do with those immigrant families you mentioned. I would think it would effect a lot of people if it's true. Now if you can find documentation of those things, then I will join you in denouncing them if you will join me in denouncing the insane practice of mass mailouts of ballots which are then mailed back in with very little ability to verify if they are legal votes or not.

Deal?

Not sure what that has to do with those immigrant families you mentioned. I would think it would effect a lot of people if it's true.
Yes, it affected a lot of voters. It had very little to do with immigrant families unless they are brown. Plus, black voters were very much affected.

Now if you can find documentation of those things, then I will join you in denouncing them if you will join me in denouncing the insane practice of mass mailouts of ballots which are then mailed back in with very little ability to verify if they are legal votes or not.
Documentation was on a variety of TV stations and can be found by googling for videos of long lines of voters who stood in line for many hours. And as I've said before, there wasn't mass mail-outs of ballots (to everyone between 2 and 89?). Signatures on those ballots were verified with signatures on file. Many states sent out applications first to registered voters.

The details were in the intros, his choices were present, and he isn't president yet, so no hurry on making appointments.

These were safe appointments meant to not rock the boat until after the Jan 5 runoffs .The Dems have this trojan horse strategery down pat .


Yes, it affected a lot of voters. It had very little to do with immigrant families unless they are brown. Plus, black voters were very much affected.

There was NO gerrymandering before the election Redistricting takes place after the census once every 10 years .Next year comes gerrymandering ;and many states have mandated different methods ;and of course now the courts intervene in redistricting decisions more often

And redistricting cuts both ways. I was once in a safe Republican district represented by one of the statesmen of our time. 20 years ago his district was gerrymandered out of existence and I was added to Elliot Engel's district even though I live on the other side of the Hudson river from where the majority of the district resides . But at least Engel had a solid foreign policy record .
10 years ago I was gerrymandered again and put in lib Nita Lowey's district . Again across the river from the majority of the district .

Engel was primaried out this cycle and now his district will be represented by a radical socialist . Lowey retired this cycle and now starting next year I will be represented by a radical lefty who's accomplishments are that he will be the first Black /Gay member of Congress . wooohoo ... ! I haven't had a representative in 20 years . So maybe I should feel disenfranchised . (and forget NY STATE governance . The Dems have a strangle hold on it . )

Tom you are not suggesting NY is corrupt, are you. Federal elections should be decided on electoral boundries set by a federal agency, not a corrupt state one

boundries set by a federal agency, not a corrupt state oneYeah. There would be no chance of coming across a corrupt federal agency.


Documentation was on a variety of TV stations and can be found by googling for videos of long lines of voters who stood in line for many hours.There have always been areas with long lines, and unless you can show they only existed in lower income areas, then you don't have a case.


And as I've said before, there wasn't mass mail-outs of ballots (to everyone between 2 and 89?). Signatures on those ballots were verified with signatures on file. Many states sent out applications first to registered voters.If I can show otherwise, will you agree to condemn it?

Clete ,you clearly don't get what federalism means . That being said Congress has the authority to make rules that fall within their constitutional boundaries (art 2 sec 4 The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.. ). Congress could use that authority to set some basic rules for the states to operate under . As an example . Congress set the election day. In my view early voting and accepting ballots after the day set by Congress violates the constitution. If Congress wanted an extended election they could write it into the law .They could restrict the use of mail in ballots .
The Constitution mandates a census and reapportionment . It leaves the states to decide how that gets done.

NY State has been corrupt since the days of the Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr duel . They were dueling over local NY politics not national politics . And of course Tammany Hall machine politics in the 19th century was infamous .

Congress set the election day. In my view early voting and accepting ballots after the day set by Congress violates the constitution.Agree completely.

All states are corrupt. It unsurprisingly seems to goes along with the concept of being managed by human beings. Just a matter of degree. True here. True in Australia. True everywhere. That's why they bear watching. What we really lack in that respect is an unbiased, honest, and diligent news media.

Anthony Blinken Quid's pick for Sec State met privately with Hunter Biden twice in 2015 . Did they not discuss Burisma and Hunter's dealings in China ,and Russia and the possible conflicts of interests that created for Quid and JFKerry ? Or is Blinken's appointment the pay back for his silence?

You wingers are in good conspiracy form today, and as usual lacking evidence to support such theories. I get you guys don't trust the system, I have my own doubts, but we disagree on the facts or degree of the accuracy of the facts, and that's a shame. Granted this is a stressful time for everybody given the economy, covid, elections and the usual political antics and spin, and the general words not matching the actions BS that started centuries ago when the founders wrote about all men being equal, but it only applied to a few.

Two and half centuries later we still ain't got it right. So what we're really arguing about is our own failures as a nation. That's not saying much for us, or the rest of the world, but until Scotty beams me up like I been begging for decades now, looks like we're stuck in our own crap.

At least we took the keys away from this dufus and his sycophant butt kissers. Fingers crossed on the next batch of drivers.

Clete ,you clearly don't get what federalism means . That being said Congress has the authority to make rules that fall within their constitutional boundaries (art 2 sec 4 The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.. ). Congress could use that authority to set some basic rules for the states to operate under . As an example . Congress set the election day. In my view early voting and accepting ballots after the day set by Congress violates the constitution. If Congress wanted an extended election they could write it into the law .They could restrict the use of mail in ballots .
The Constitution mandates a census and reapportionment . It leaves the states to decide how that gets done.

NY State has been corrupt since the days of the Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr duel . They were dueling over local NY politics not national politics . And of course Tammany Hall machine politics in the 19th century was infamous .

Oh I know what federalism means and have had the opportunity to observe a different implementation of it which appears to work in a fairer way

Tal ,looking to hitch a ride on the big mother wheel ?

“All men are created equal” in the declaration of independence was not talking about individual equality. That is a utopian concept that can never be achieved . What was really meant was that the American colonists, as a people, had the same rights of self government as other peoples, and could declare independence, and create new governments and assume their "equal station” among other nations.

After the Revolution succeeded, Americans began reading that phrase another way. It became a statement of individual equality that everyone and every member of a deprived group could claim . With each passing generation, our notion of who that statement covers has expanded. It is the striving for equality that has always defined our constitutional creed.....'in order to form a more perfect union' ..... not to form a perfect one.

Tal ,looking to hitch a ride on the big mother wheel ?

“All men are created equal” in the declaration of independence was not talking about individual equality. That is a utopian concept that can never be achieved . What was really meant was that the American colonists, as a people, had the same rights of self government as other peoples, and could declare independence, and create new governments and assume their "equal station” among other nations.

After the Revolution succeeded, Americans began reading that phrase another way. It became a statement of individual equality that everyone and every member of a deprived group could claim . With each passing generation, our notion of who that statement covers has expanded. It is the striving for equality that has always defined our constitutional creed.....'in order to form a more perfect union' ..... not to form a perfect one.

I think it means we come into this world with nothing and we leave the same way, this is the only equality. We have no ineniable rights, only the rights we confer upon ourselves and we have no right to impose these upon others.




At least we took the keys away from this dufus and his sycophant butt kissers. Fingers crossed on the next batch of drivers.

yes and cross your toes too and your legs because you are about to get screwed

I think it means all people are of equal worth before God. It's the great danger of atheism. If humans were not created, then they could not have been created equal. If that is so, then I can claim that my life is of more worth than yours. And if we have no inalienable rights, then our rights can be given or taken away by the government, and we would not be able to mount a moral protest about it.


Two and half centuries later we still ain't got it right.I think we are closer than you think.


At least we took the keys away from this dufus and his sycophant butt kissers.We've just traded one dufus for a super dufus, and put in place a larger group of sycophant butt kissers which will, sadly, include most of the media.

We have no ineniable rights, Wow very European of you . God does grant us rights . Certainly life and liberty and the founders argue for property (later changed to pursuit of happiness. ) No they are not endowed by the state and the state has no right to take them away . The state may have the power . But not the right .

Wow very European of you . God does grant us rights . Certainly life and liberty and the founders argue for property (later changed to pursuit of happiness. ) No they are not endowed by the state and the state has no right to take them away . The state may have the power . But not the right .


Yes, I am a European, an Australian of Irish decent, and I live in a place where we don't have to insist we have rights, since magna carta limited the powers of monarchs and governments

The Magna Carta was a nice start . Still is is a royal carter of rights granted by a king. What a king gives a king can take away. Rights granted by God cannot be taken away by any human.

The Magna Carta was a nice start . Still is is a royal carter of rights granted by a king. What a king gives a king can take away. Rights granted by God cannot be taken away by any human.

Sure they can, have and will be taken away again. Part of man's imperfection...or devious intent for his own purpose?

Sure they can, have and will be taken away again. Part of man's imperfection...or devious intent for his own purpose?That is certainly true. I think the point, however, is that they cannot be rightly and morally taken away.

It may not be right or moral, but done all the time, and the point really is rights are taken away. The debate is does it serve the individual, or collective? The old argument of the needs of the few before the needs of the many. Where is the line drawn?

The Constitution, and in particular the Bill of Rights, are there largely to guarantee individual liberties and to protect both the individual and the states from an oppressive, overly large fed govt.

It can also be said that the Constitution also limits the rights of states to oppress/suppress the rights of individuals which is more an historic fact than the federal government doing so. Indeed it would seem the federal government must in fact be large enough to protect all the people regardless of the states rights.

E Pluribus Unum..."out of many ONE".

It can also be said that the Constitution also limits the rights of states to oppress/suppress the rights of individuals which is more an historic fact than the federal government doing so. Indeed it would seem the federal government must in fact be large enough to protect all the people regardless of the states rights.The fed govt. needs to be in line with the Constitution.

How is it not?

I'll give you one example of the many I can site just in the unconstitutional Federal Government over reach and expansion due to the court's interpretation of the Commerce Clause(Art 1 Sec 8 .....“to regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with Indian Tribes.” ) .

In its original meaning, the clause functioned primarily as a constraint upon state interference in interstate commerce. The original meaning “To regulate” is to “make regular,” that is, to facilitate the free flow of goods, but not, except in cases of danger, to prohibit the flow of any good. The framers were looking to keep states from practicing protectionism inside the country . The sole purpose was to prevent trade wars between states . It was that practice in particular that killed the Articles of Confederation that governed the country before the constitution .

That was the way the courts interpreted the clause for 150 years until United States v. Darby Lumber Co. (1941) and Wickard v. Filburn (1942) . I've mentioned Filburn before . He was growing wheat to feed his own livestock .But Congress had put limits on wheat production in an attempt to manipulate the price . Filburn argued that he was not selling his wheat so it did not come under the law . Heck ;he wasn't even trying to sell it within the state let alone interstate . But SCOTUS decided :Whether the subject of the regulation in question was 'production', 'consumption', or 'marketing' is, therefore, not material for purposes of deciding the question of federal power before us.... But even if appellee's activity be local and though it may not be regarded as commerce, it may still, whatever its nature, be reached by Congress if it exerts a substantial economic effect on interstate commerce and this irrespective of whether such effect is what might at some earlier time have been defined as 'direct' or 'indirect."

So in other words even if his wheat is not to be sold the government can prevent him from growing it because if he had not grown it ;he would've had to purchase it ;and that impacted the price in some bizarre way .That was twisted logic at best and a complete misread of the meaning of the clause .

There have been several court cases misinterpreting the government powers granted in this clause ;almost all the cases resulted in the Federal Government expanding it's powers and the states and individuals losing power .

So when a law was proposed that forced people to purchase healthcare insurance ;Dianne FrankenFeinstein was asked what power does the Federal Government have to do this .Her reply was “Well, I would assume it would be in the Commerce Clause of the Constitution. That’s how Congress legislates all kinds of various programs.”
This restriction on the states has been turned into a grant of broad unlimited Congressional authority.

Another example would be federal funding of public education. This comes as a supposed "blessing" from the feds, but as is always the case, the money is bound up tightly with federal regulations that end up altering the operation of the school. The process of documentation is so extreme that I knew principals who wanted to just refuse the money so as not to have to become so engaged in a mountain of barely understandable paperwork. The feds have no Constitutional authority to fund state operated educational systems.

Another area is federal ownership of land. The feds presently own 27% of our country, amounting to 615 million acres. That is 615 million acres taken out of production, or with limited production due to the usually egregious regulations. For a government that is 30 tril in debt, it's time to start selling some of that land back to private interests.

You make a good case Tomder, but context of the time and a deeper dive into the issue would help...

WICKARD v. FILBURN | FindLaw (https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/317/111.html)

Wickard v. Filburn (1942) – U.S. Conlawpedia (gsu.edu) (http://sites.gsu.edu/us-constipedia/wickard-v-filburn-1942/)

They're long reads but save some typing.

Another example would be federal funding of public education. This comes as a supposed "blessing" from the feds, but as is always the case, the money is bound up tightly with federal regulations that end up altering the operation of the school. The process of documentation is so extreme that I knew principals who wanted to just refuse the money so as not to have to become so engaged in a mountain of barely understandable paperwork. The feds have no Constitutional authority to fund state operated educational systems.

Another area is federal ownership of land. The feds presently own 27% of our country, amounting to 615 million acres. That is 615 million acres taken out of production, or with limited production due to the usually egregious regulations. For a government that is 30 tril in debt, it's time to start selling some of that land back to private interests.

You have made the case several times that funding is not needed so why take the money and subject yourself to onerous conditions if you feel it's unconstitutional? I'm confused as to your point of school funding.

As to private lands did they take it from anybody but the natives?

You have made the case several times that funding is not needed so why take the money and subject yourself to onerous conditions if you feel it's unconstitutional? I'm confused as to your point of school funding.It was not my choice. As a principal, you frequently do what you are told.


As to private lands did they take it from anybody but the natives?That's kind of not the point.

As to private lands did they take it from anybody but the natives?

No each piece of land was either won in wars ;purchased ,or obtained by treaty with France, Spain, Mexico ,England .

But yes that is another example of Federal overreach . It is the Federal Government that has largely kept many tribes in poverty .

All development projects on Indian land must be reviewed and authorized by the government, a process that is notoriously slow and burdensome.

Federal inheritance laws; some dating back to the last century required many Indian lands to be passed in equal shares to multiple heirs. After several generations, these lands have become so fractionated that there are often hundreds of owners per parcel of land . Managing these ownership issues is nearly impossible, so much of the land remains idle.

Federal policies regarding coal destroys one of the biggest economic opportunities in Indian territory . Regulations make it hard for the tribe to capitalize on their natural resources. Why shouldn't the nations be in the coal export business to places like Asia that import coal ?

Royalties of many assets on Indian lands are controlled and managed by Bureau of Indian Affairs . That includes lease negotiations .Frankly ;the government sucks at it .
Unlocking the Wealth of Indian Nations: Overcoming Obstacles to Tribal Energy Development (perc.org) (https://www.perc.org/2014/02/18/unlocking-the-wealth-of-indian-nations-overcoming-obstacles-to-tribal-energy-development/)

Even this settlement severely undervalued the assets
Obama Admin Strikes $3.4B Deal in Indian Trust Lawsuit - NYTimes.com (https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/gwire/2009/12/08/08greenwire-obama-admin-strikes-34b-deal-in-indian-trust-l-92369.html)

We are talking assets in the $ trillions ;not low $ billions . As long as tribes are denied the right to control their own resources, they will remain locked in poverty and dependence.

In my five years working for an indian school system, I observed the largely negative effects of a safety net gone extreme. In their efforts to make sure no one failed, they robbed most of the people of any desire to succeed. For most of the young people, the world was no larger than the borders of the reservation. There was no need to plan for success in life since food, clothing, housing, and med care were all guaranteed. It was as though the government told them, "Don't worry about life. We are going to take care of you." Marriage had become obsolete. The kids spent their time drinking, having sex and babies out of wedlock, watching television, playing sports, or sniffing paint. Our graduation rate was very poor. This was primarily because the government, by making failure unlikely, had made success simply another choice among many.

Hey, that's the same thing you said about black people. I think I'll go with Tom's more nuanced examples of tribes cutting through the regulatory red tape and thriving while raising the level of expertise in areas that benefit them most. The HEARTH ACT as an example. (https://www.bia.gov/bia/ots/hearth)

Hmm you didn't mention that the Choctaw were moving in a good direction.

Federal Register :: HEARTH Act Approval of Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians Regulations (https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2019/04/10/2019-07092/hearth-act-approval-of-mississippi-band-of-choctaw-indians-regulations)

Given the history better late than never? Not like they haven't been kicked in the butt subjugated and oppressed by the white man. Yeah I'm going there.

lol the Hearth act of 2012 . Nice try but it bypasses my central point.
Yes it streamlines some regulatory burden .But not ones that would make a real difference. The act authorizes tribes to execute agricultural and business leases of tribal trust lands for residential, public, religious, educational, recreational or more importantly, alternative and renewable energy purposes without the approval of the U.S. Secretary of the Interior.
So nothing about the mineral resources I mentioned is addressed . In fact it imposes even greater obstacles to effective energy development in Indian Country. You could expect no less from the emperor who promised to bankrupt certain energy industries . Tribal lands are estimated to have 10% of the nation’s traditional energy resources. But they are shut out from exploiting them.

There is a whole other discussion about sovereignty and being compelled to adopt Federal regulatory restraint .

Hmm you didn't mention that the Choctaw were moving in a good direction.My time was back in the early 90's. Things have, perhaps, changed some. The casinos have brought in a bunch of money for sure. But if I'm going to look for info on the Choctaws, I sure won't go to you. You don't know squat about them. I spent five years with them, and you spent five minutes looking up a link. Yeah.

The stumbling block of mineral rights on tribal lands are in the deed holders who can and will nix any agreement for whatever reasons. For example 10 owners of a particular land can be stopped by one from profiting by a lease agreement which from my own experience may not amount to a bonanza by any means. It's as subject to market influences and condition as any capitalist venture.

Conversely those 10 owners could exploit their own resources for their own self interest without big energy as the middle man with the right expertise for a greater long term profit. Many tribes have gone this route and expanded their horizons with options that serve their own needs.

Choctaws want to do fracking . I suspect that would be more valuable to them than casinos and selling tax free tobacco products .


McGirt v. Oklahoma decision Justice Gorsuch wrote ... “On the far end of the Trail of Tears was a promise. Forced to leave their ancestral lands in Georgia and Alabama, the Creek Nation received assurances that their new lands in the West would be secure forever. In exchange for ceding ‘all their land, East of the Mississippi river,’ the U.S. government agreed by treaty that ‘[t]he Creek country west of the Mississippi shall be solemnly guarantied to the Creek Indians.’”

The Indian tribes in Oklahoma want to do fracking .So what prevents them from doing so ? The state of Oklahoma through the governor was granted special regulatory authority over the tribal lands before the ink dried on Gorsuch's decision .EPA grants Stitt request for state oversight on tribal lands (apnews.com) (https://apnews.com/article/us-supreme-court-environment-oklahoma-archive-754444e8b4887f4045c4604248142665)

Choctaws want to do fracking . I suspect that would be more valuable to them than casinos and selling tax free tobacco products .

Totally can agree.


McGirt v. Oklahoma decision Justice Gorsuch wrote ... “On the far end of the Trail of Tears was a promise. Forced to leave their ancestral lands in Georgia and Alabama, the Creek Nation received assurances that their new lands in the West would be secure forever. In exchange for ceding ‘all their land, East of the Mississippi river,’ the U.S. government agreed by treaty that ‘[t]he Creek country west of the Mississippi shall be solemnly guarantied to the Creek Indians.’”

The Indian tribes in Oklahoma want to do fracking .So what prevents them from doing so ? The state of Oklahoma through the governor was granted special regulatory authority over the tribal lands before the ink dried on Gorsuch's decision .EPA grants Stitt request for state oversight on tribal lands (apnews.com) (https://apnews.com/article/us-supreme-court-environment-oklahoma-archive-754444e8b4887f4045c4604248142665)

Ain't that illegal state power grabbing?

Ain't that illegal state power grabbing?

Partly . Could not happen if the EPA did not green light it .

Correct and my guess is they will wait for a new EPA chief. (No pun intended).

You think a Quid EPA will approve fracking on native lands ?

You think a Quid EPA will approve fracking on native lands ?
Who will benefit?

The Indian tribes obviously . Right now they are permitted to make money on casinos ,tax free tobacco ,solar and wind and selling trinkets to tourist gawkers . Follow the discussion . It is about the unconstitutional overreaching power of the Federal government and this is a clear example of it ,

Follow the discussion .
Was just musing on how the government and big corporations will yet again cheat the Native Americans.

You think a Quid EPA will approve fracking on native lands ?

The chances are pretty good it's Federal lands that have a slim chance of bring fracked on or leased for drilling for that matter.

it is not Federal lands . The government just treats it as such . The fact is that 573 sovereign Native American nations have formal nation to nation relationships with the US government .Sovereignty means self governance . The tribes ceded millions of acres of land for the guarantee of self governance on the lands they reside .And it is independent rule that is at the heart of almost every issue concerning native Americans . Yes Quid and JFKerry will most likely adopted the emperor's ban on energy exploration on Federal lands . But it has been established many times the the legal status of the tribal lands is autonomous rule .

Yes please remember that when the federal government took away the lands of the indigenous population that means they have no control over it

You mean like you guys do?

" In Western Australia (https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/western-australia), where mining companies make billion dollar profits exploiting Aboriginal land, the state government says it can no longer afford to “support” the homelands.Vulnerable populations, already denied the basic services most Australians take for granted, are on notice of dispossession without consultation, and eviction at gunpoint. Aboriginal leaders have warned of “a new generation of displaced people” and “cultural genocide”.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/apr/22/by-evicting-the-homelands-australia-has-again-declared-war-on-indigenous-people

it is not Federal lands . The government just treats it as such . The fact is that 573 sovereign Native American nations have formal nation to nation relationships with the US government .Sovereignty means self governance . The tribes ceded millions of acres of land for the guarantee of self governance on the lands they reside .And it is independent rule that is at the heart of almost every issue concerning native Americans . Yes Quid and JFKerry will most likely adopted the emperor's ban on energy exploration on Federal lands . But it has been established many times the the legal status of the tribal lands is autonomous rule .

As you have shown though native sovereignty or autonomy is not always respected. The white man never met a treaty that cannot be broken, changed, or modified for profit. Watching the covid virus run through N. Dakota.

You mean like you guys do?

" In Western Australia (https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/western-australia), where mining companies make billion dollar profits exploiting Aboriginal land, the state government says it can no longer afford to “support” the homelands.Vulnerable populations, already denied the basic services most Australians take for granted, are on notice of dispossession without consultation, and eviction at gunpoint. Aboriginal leaders have warned of “a new generation of displaced people” and “cultural genocide”.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/apr/22/by-evicting-the-homelands-australia-has-again-declared-war-on-indigenous-people

More recently

WA heritage authorities did not know traditional owners were bound by mining giants' gag orders | Indigenous Australians | The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/nov/20/wa-heritage-authorities-did-not-know-traditional-owners-were-bound-by-mining-giants-gag-orders)

What they need to do is put Hunter Biden and Chris Heinz on the tribal council . Problem solved .

More recently

WA heritage authorities did not know traditional owners were bound by mining giants' gag orders | Indigenous Australians | The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/nov/20/wa-heritage-authorities-did-not-know-traditional-owners-were-bound-by-mining-giants-gag-orders)

We had a decision here some years ago called MABO which set the parameters by which native title can be extinguished. WA doesn't seem to follow the principles

I thought your country had laws that prevented public corruption? You have to admit you guys are looking as feckless and incompetent as you have said we are.

I have no doubt you will address these issues that have popped up in your country in the appropriate timely manner as you have other challenges despite being caught off guard.

You have before.

you guys are looking as feckless and incompetent as you have said we are.Yep. Just about right.

I thought your country had laws that prevented public corruption? You have to admit you guys are looking as feckless and incompetent as you have said we are.

.

No law prevents public corruption, but it is prosecuted with rigour when uncovered but we are not incompetent in that prosecution. Appearances are deceiving because all you have is what is reported in the media

I have no doubt you will address these issues that have popped up in your country in the appropriate timely manner as you have other challenges despite being caught off guard.

You have before.

Love you Clete, but I hate it when people nit pick my words and dismiss the rest. So unfair!

Love you Clete, but I hate it when people nit pick my words and dismiss the rest. So unfair!

Don't know what you are saying Tal, appearances are deceiving as I'm sure you have observed locally. Hope you are avoiding CV19 in Texas, media suggests it is bad there. We tend to be teflon coated so it all slides off