What motivates Obama, Holder and the rest?

As one can assume by the title of the thread, I'm not an Obama supporter, yet understanding his and others reasonings and beliefs is part of the process in countering it.

The hard part is doing so objectively, without bias. Next hardest-and it's a close second-is labeling that motivation accurately .

In a way, it overlaps with the general label of Liberalism, yet that doesn't really describe it sufficiently, at least for me.

I saw a report in passing a TV in a convenience store, yesterday, that had CNN on. The written title of the report said basically, " Eric Holder not discounting disbanding the Ferguson Police force." I guffawed automatically and didn't spill my coffee!

Imagine that, the outgoing head of the DOJ, read that not even considered part of the active administration, was considering an act that following the DOJ's complete vindication of Officer Wilson's act, blames the resulting riot on the Police force based on disproportionate arrests and racial profiling by the Ferguson police.

Never mind disbanding a city police is completely outside the legal bounds of the DOJ, a Federal entity, It would be based on an arbitrary datum of disproportionate activity. Who says it's disproportionate? By what right is that view made policy of the federal gov't and subsequently imposed on a city police force?

Basically, the identical mind-set as Obama's immigration 'reform', the EPA's regulations on carbon emissions, universal healthcare, so on.

The way things are, is wrong! Unjust! We will change them. Nothing will deter us in our purpose. We will fix these inherent wrongnesses that is the U.S. as fast as we can without having it backlash on us.

In general, is that a fair assessment of the current situation? I'm not putting a value judgment on it, at this point, but hope this describes the mind-set.

If so, then the degree of 'righteousness' associated with that mind-set is such that virtually any act is justified in achieving those goals including violation of existing laws, the Constitution, any exaggeration, even outright lies are, also, completely acceptable.

Social values trumps moral codes , laws and the Constitution.

Is this an accurate view of it? Is it fixable? Do we want to fix it? Or perhaps support it?

a reply to: nwtrucker

This is Holder using his power to push a personal agenda. We all know how he felt about ferguson and him doing this and a report coming out before he leaves office makes me suspicious. Whatever your opinion about the case this is an obvious overreach in power of the federal government.

So what are we gonna put in a puppet Obama police force? is this how we solve issues we don't agree with in this country?

a reply to: JDmOKI

I recall an article which suggested Obama/Holder wanted to nationalize all police forces. I don't know if this was a 'wish-list' type thing or an actual plan....

Of course there's 'social injustices'. There is no escaping them no matter what system or safeguards.
In the day, one addressed the individual situation itself rather than waxing hyperbolic and dumping/massively changing the whole system.

a reply to: JDmOKI

One thing that is almost certain, is that Obama will pardon all of his minions in the EPA, IRS, DOS and DOJ. The way we fix our country is make sure that no one is allowed to operate outside of the law.

Lois Learner should be prosecuted or agree to identify the congressional members who directed her activities.

The EPA should be dissolved and fire the lot. EPA regulations should be rolled back to the beginnings in the 1970's. Ecological terrorists need to be sought with the same vigor as Islamic terrorists.

The DOJ needs to be purged of activists attorneys who don't follow the law. The law is the law! The DOJ doesn't make the law, they enforce it! Illegal means lawbreakers.

The Department of State follows policy and not make their own. They don't seek foreign political donations. Purge all the offenders.

Homeland Security need to protect us not act as the "Welcome Wagon" for unknown people from who knows where. Companies who hire illegals need to loose their businesses.

I see that this thread is already heading towards zer madness place, with talk of rolling back the EPA. Let me introduce the required level of nuttiness. I remember reading on a blog-thingy once that was recommended by Glenn Beck that Obama will create an army of flying monkeys who will take over the police and then take everyone's guns and ammo and hubcaps and cheese! It's true I tell ya, it's all true!

Key traits that sociopaths and psychopaths share include:

A disregard for laws and social mores
A disregard for the rights of others
A failure to feel remorse or guilt
A tendency to display violent behavior

In addition to their commonalities, sociopaths and psychopaths also have their own unique behavioral characteristics, as well.

How to Tell a Sociopath from a Psychopath -- Understanding important distinctions between criminal sociopaths and psychopaths

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

I, for one believe an EPA is necessary. This one can only be described as agenda orientated. I don't want Corporations polluting the environment, either.

A well-defined group that follows it's mandate and is subject to over-site is needed.

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

P.S. watch out for the other side's version of the madness place. There's plenty in this 'EPA' that is mad. Some rollback isn't unwarranted.....

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
I see that this thread is already heading towards zer madness place, with talk of rolling back the EPA. Let me introduce the required level of nuttiness. I remember reading on a blog-thingy once that was recommended by Glenn Beck that Obama will create an army of flying monkeys who will take over the police and then take everyone's guns and ammo and hubcaps and cheese! It's true I tell ya, it's all true!

I have property that they classify as "wetland" and I can't use it though it's only wet during April and May. If I'm a nut then I'll sell it to you cheap and you can deal with the EPA. There's nothing that lives in it because it's a mud puddle two months a year. I can't fill it in because it MAY change the "runoff" to a nearby creek. I can't use it but I must pay taxes on it. AND I'M A NUT!

a reply to: nwtrucker

CFR motivates him.

He is doing a great job for the globalists.

CFR checklist.

-War with syria then install fractional reserve banking system.
-War with Iran. then install fractional reserve banking system.
-War with North Korea then install fractional reserve banking system.
-new Internet regulation.
-internet killswitch
-internet ID
-ndaa
-open borders to foster a "north american union".
-weaken the dollar
-move wealth to the east.
-demonize putin.
-demonize protesters
-demonize pacifists and pro-peace libertarians
-destroy the teaparty movement replace it with the same old neo-statist dogma.
-infiltrate the democratic party with closet marxists and "green" fabians.

a reply to: buddah6

Come on. Quit complaining.

Its the right thing to do...

I genuinely want to reply to you and give you some insight, but I have to stop before I begin;

originally posted by: nwtrucker
Imagine that, the outgoing head of the DOJ, read that not even considered part of the active administration...

Eric Holder has publicly announced that he's doing his job until his replacement is found, he's very much part of the active administration.
Holder is staying on the job until the Senate confirms his successor, which is expected soon.

...was considering an act that following the DOJ's complete vindication of Officer Wilson's act, blames the resulting riot on the Police force based on disproportionate arrests and racial profiling by the Ferguson police.

There were two separate reports the DOJ did one on Ofc. Wilson and his encounter with Michael Brown and one on the department as a whole;
Ferguson police report: Most shocking parts

1. Unlawful arrest has long-term consequences
2. People? More like, "sources of revenue"
3. Racist emails
4. Didn't pay that parking ticket? Here's your arrest warrant
5. Use of force
6. Shocking stats

Given that information, I strongly suggest you reconsider your initial assessment of Holder and the Ferguson report.

As to what drives the administration, the short answer is politics. What drives you? What drives your ideology? Why? It's the essence of politics and ideology, differences between individuals. It's as old as the concept of government itself. Once you accept that people think differently than you you'll gain a whole new understanding of objectives and reasoning. I still struggle with it, I don't always understand why conservatives think and act the way they do. I accept it though, I don't agree with it and I try to explain why...they can accept my reasoning or not.

a reply to: nwtrucker

The EPA was first established in 1970 and was given a goal of cleaning up the environment. The intent was to clean up corporate dumping and clean up air emissions. Over the last 45 years they have now started regulating mud puddles. That's a big leap! Mud puddles, cow farts and honey bees. What else? What's next.

This is governmental over-reach by the pro Green Peace Obama. They are anti family farm and small business.

My family farm is no more than a vacation home because it is impossible to eek a living with all the regulations.

These people are motivated by the belief that they know what is best for everybody. They were all educated at the super liberal Ivy league universities where ideas like "the ends justify the means" take root. If it is for the "greater benefit" then it is okay to stomp all over individual and/or States' rights in their mind. But only they can decide what the greater benefit is.

Big Government gives them more control. They want to control everything because they really and truly think they are smarter and more capable than anyone else. They use social justice issues to gain and keep a platform.

Capitalism irks them. Rugged individualism irks them. Independent thinking irks them.

a reply to: links234

Obviously, Holder is doing his job until replaced. Does the concept of 'Lame Duck' not apply?

There is no consequence from personal agenda acts when one is leaving anyway. Omitting that fact...or at least possibility, in light of the fact that the suggestion violates all kinds of laws cannot preclude the possibility of personal agenda.

I don't argue the possibility of social injustice in Ferguson.

I do point out the trumping of law and Constitution in the effort to address this 'injustice'.

The point of the thread. I didn't place any judgment on it-deliberately-to invite feedback on it. Which you have and is appreciated.

Look, we've come a long way since '64. Well within my lifetime-65th year-and no threat to disband a police force has been needed to achieve the gains we've already achieved.

However, the Ferguson incident and resulting national hyperbole-right before a national mid-term election- is only one of many that encompasses the point of the thread.

Yes, I am conservative, I believe in the laws of the land and the Constitution. I believe in personal morals and that they are more important than social 'morals'/values.

Off the top, social issues fall under Fairness, Equality and Justice.

All have validity. All are wildly subject to interpretation/manipulation. Subjective.

Without the constraints of personal morals, laws and the Constitution, it is now apparent that there is no 'limits' on many who have them as their personal purposes. Even if their implementation causes discord, division and potentially the end of the nation as we know it.

I will also say, this 'may' articulate the underlying reason for the backlash from the 'right'.

a reply to: nwtrucker

Then I guess the answer you're looking for is that the administration views the report as an affront to the constitutional rights of the citizens of Ferguson and intends to act on the abridgment of those rights. Among them; debtor's prisons, arbitrary incarceration for the purpose of revenue generation, blatant racism and excessive force.

As for the EPA, sometimes it seems they're overstepping their bounds, sometimes they're not. There are examples of the EPA, perhaps, going too far. At the same time, there are instances of the EPA not going far enough. The actions of the EPA aren't necessarily restricted to Obama or Bush or the next president, it's the nature of the agency. Their objective is to protect the environment, they don't care about jobs and they shouldn't.

Wait ill the EPA gets rolling on the CO2 restrictions.

Any time now.

Get ready to pay for those luxuries.

a reply to: links234

Fair enough. You support the actions, in general, of this administration.

I was fairly sure he has support. LOL.

I believe you actually do understand the views of conservatives.

If, in fact, the Constitutional rights of the citizens of Ferguson are being violated, as you say, then the correct action would be to charge the individuals responsible and convict them. Using the laws that are already in force, waiting to be applied.

However, that isn't occurring, is it.? Either due to the possibility those rights aren't being violated or the agenda isn't really interested in those violated rights in the first place. Actually being more interested in outright social engineering rather than correcting a rights violation.

You are an example of the point of the thread.

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: links234

I believe you actually do understand the views of conservatives.

I really do make an effort at it.

Really though, it's not unheard of for an entire police department to be disbanded. Ofc. Wilson was part of the Jennings, MO police department when it was disbanded by the city council. He then got his job in Ferguson. The DOJ can't outright disband the department but they can recommend to the city council that it happen.

Your solution seems to be to convict people when the problem extends beyond just the police department. It's not simply a matter of getting rid of a few key officials when the entire structure is corrupted.

You are an example of the point of the thread.

I'm not sure how I should take that.

a reply to: links234

It is still outside federal purview.

Once again, this an eg.. I don't really care how Ferguson event plays out, from the context of the thread.

As I said, there are social injustices. Virtually, impossible to avoid completely. If the City of Ferguson wishes to replace the full compliment of their police department, that's their business.

The willingness to override extant laws or the Constitution in the name of Social justice by a federal agency is the point.

The immigration issue would be another if you feel Holder is justified in his comment/threat.

How I meant my comment regarding you personally is based on your comments. None of which showed concern for the rules of law or arbitrary acts that violate them.

Your comments come across as a justification for Holders comments. If that is valid then my comment stands.(Which doesn't make it a condemnation of you, merely an observation of different priorities.)