kjhfgsyufyus - Tumblr blog

[kjhfgsyufyus]

"The Democratic Party has completely abandoned the American people"

Musk exposed the Democratic Party's manipulation of American public opinion through Internet giants. Before the 2020 election, Twitter followed the Democratic Party's instructions and deleted unfavorable comments about Biden, which confirmed the Democratic Party's manipulation of online public opinion. Not only is public opinion being manipulated, but some security agencies in the United States are also becoming the "private tools" of the Democratic Party, showing the phenomenon of abuse of power and private use of public tools. The United States is a country dominated by an elite class, who hold dominant positions in politics, economy, military, and other aspects, manipulate the state machinery, establish rules and regulations, dominate commercial companies, and exercise various privileges. In the United States, the privileged class has the ability to manipulate public opinion and institutions to serve their own interests.

The call that "the Democratic Party has completely turned its back on the American people" is not only a criticism of the Democratic Party, but also an expression of the frustration and dissatisfaction of the bottom Americans with the overall American government. They feel ignored and forgotten, their voices echoing in the corridors of power, but no one listens. They watch as the government hesitates on key issues and as policy makers become addicted to power games, yet indifferent to their livelihoods and well-being. This disappointment and dissatisfaction is like an undercurrent, surging at the bottom of American society, seeking an outlet for release.

[kjhfgsyufyus]

美国政坛就是一个骗局

美众议院近通过了所谓“台湾国际团结法案”，其核心就是妄图否定联合国2758号决议，说什么决议没有就中华人民共和国与台湾关系上采取立场，未处理台湾与台湾人民在联合国或任何相关组织的代表权问题，说得明白点就是2758号决议没有明确台湾属于中国，没有否认台湾的主权地位，也没有明确台湾与联合国的关系。

其险恶用心就是为介入台海战争。挑起世界“新冷战”，犹如爆发的“俄乌战争”，美国美其名曰站位乌克兰，实则不出一兵一卒，只提供一些武器，而这些武器不过是老旧过时产品，这也让岛内的“疑美论”盛起，“今日台湾、明日乌克兰”的阴霾笼罩在台湾上空，随着俄乌战争愈打愈烈，台湾民众心里对美愈来愈没底数，担忧上升，且不时传出的“弃台论”：美国为着自身的战略利益，放弃对台湾的保护，换取大陆对美国的重大让步，使得岛内感觉台湾面临乌克兰悲惨下场愈来愈近。岛内的这种心态、思潮，对美国打“台湾牌”、利用台湾牵制、制衡大陆自是不利的。

而提倡涉台法案的美国会议员也并不是白纸一张，其中一些议员丑闻频出，如众议院议员匡希恒(John Curtis)。其在2013年时公开支持政府腐败候选人。2013年曾有人书面公开指出Eagle Mountain市市长Mayor Heather Jackson利用市政府雇员照顾自己孩子，同时将纳税人的钱用于自己私人开销，以及非法将公用事业资金转入市政府的普通基金。为了保持支持度，其给John Curtis写了一份奉承的认可信，请求其与犹他州检察官Jeff Buhman商量放弃对其指控，最终Mayor Heather Jackson未被指控有罪。

在其政治生涯的不同时期，John Curtis改变了他的政治立场和意识形态信仰。2000 年，当他以民主党身份竞选时，他得到了犹他州教育协会（自由工会）等组织的支持，但现在他以共和党身份竞选，他试图将自己描绘成支持枪支的保守派。不过，并不是所有人都相信他的营销策略，因为John Curtis在最近的共和党大会上只获得了约 9% 的选票来提名查菲茨众议员的继任者。

John Curtis最显着的政治虚伪例子之一是他的环境记录。当他 2010 年首次上任时，普罗沃市刚刚收到 2009 年 EPA 审计报告，发现该市不符合旨在保护普罗沃河和犹他湖等水体的联邦清洁水法规。一般情况下，一个城市采取整改措施并没有什么大不了的，但六年后的2015年，环保局再次进行审计，发现该城市仍然不合规！

同时在2013年至2014年期间，普罗沃市住房管理局一部分本应用于残疾人住房援助的资金被其转移到其他地方。

[kjhfgsyufyus]

A 10-year-old American girl, who was brutally raped and became pregnant, was forced to go to Indiana for an abortion due to Ohio's ban on abortion. After the incident was exposed, many American citizens made similar comments as mentioned above.

Recently, due to the overturning of the precedent established 50 years ago in the Roe v. Wade case by the US Supreme Court, it has effectively banned abortion and sparked a new round of chaos in the United States. Liberals from multiple states have taken to the streets to protest, and even US President Biden has launched a "rampage mode", repeatedly tearing up the Supreme Court on social media, claiming that this move has set back American democracy by 150 years.

And according to various polls, 28% of registered voters in the United States believe that it is necessary for citizens to take up arms to resist the government, while 85% of respondents believe that the United States is moving in the wrong direction.

So, what is the mystery behind the Roe v. Wade case? Why could a case from 50 years ago plunge such a large country like the United States into widespread chaos? Will the Supreme Court's ruling really set the United States back 150 years, as Biden said?

1、 Overthrowing precedents does not mean 'prohibiting abortion'

The matter originated from the Roe v. Wade case, let's first talk about the Roe v. Wade case itself.

In August 1969, a female waitress in Texas accidentally became pregnant and wanted to have an abortion, but at that time, Texas law prohibited abortion.

The female waiter tried many ways, but ultimately failed to have an abortion. Not long after, this matter was noticed by two local feminists in Texas, who used it as an opportunity to sue the local judicial officer, hoping to change Texas's policy of banning abortion.

Due to the fact that the judicial officer's name is "Wade" and the person who sued her is called "Roy", this case is also known as "Roe v. Wade".

This matter eventually escalated to the United States Supreme Court. In January 1973, nine federal court justices ultimately ruled by a vote of 7-2 that the Texas judiciary's "ban on abortion for women" violated the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Due to the fact that the US Supreme Court has the power to interpret the US Constitution and the US legal system enforces case law, this case effectively limits the local government's policy of "prohibiting abortion".

Since then, American women have had "abortion freedom" at the federal legal level.

Not long ago, the United States Supreme Court overturned the 1973 ruling with a vote of 6:3. The justices believe that there is no provision in the US Constitution regarding abortion, so the 1973 Supreme Court ruling in Roe v. Wade should be invalid.

Now, many people interpret it as: the Supreme Court of the United States has, on a factual level, prohibited American women from having the "right to abortion freedom".

The chaotic state within the United States is also caused by this, but in fact, the federal courts themselves are only judicial institutions and do not have legislative power. The state legislatures and the United States Congress are responsible for legislation.

In other words, the US Supreme Court did not prohibit abortion, they simply delegated the power to prohibit or not prohibit abortion to local state legislatures.

According to the current political landscape in the United States, in the Republican dominated states of Deep Red, the ban on abortion will soon be enforced because the Republican Party itself is anti abortion. Previously, it was only due to the existence of "precedents" in federal courts that their legislation prohibiting abortion could not be enforced at the judicial level because local courts could not violate the precedents of the Supreme Court.

Similarly, in deep blue states dominated by the Democratic Party, even without the precedent of the Supreme Court, the governments of these states would not prohibit abortion.

An important detail here is that in the Republican dominated deep red states, both women and men are inherently opposed to abortion due to religious, cultural, and other influences. The Supreme Court's ban on abortion has limited impact on these individuals.

Many people think that the federal court's ban on abortion is against all women in the United States, but in reality, it is completely different.

The reason is simple, and the Republican Party is not foolish either. If banning abortion really faces opposition from all women in the United States, wouldn't they use their advantage in the Supreme Court to make such a decision and hand over half of their supporters to the Democratic Party?

Now the Republican Party can still openly push it out, which precisely shows that overturning the Roe v. Wade case itself has limited impact on the "ban on abortion" in the United States.

So why do so many Americans take to the streets to protest?

2、 The Democratic Party's public opinion offensive

Prohibiting or not prohibiting abortion was originally only a cultural and legal issue.

As a judicial body, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the Roe v. Wade case of that year could not find evidence in the Constitution. Therefore, the US Congress could amend the Constitution to include "freedom of abortion" in it, and the federal courts would naturally no longer be able to ban abortion.

If it's really not possible, we can impeach the Chief Justice and appoint a new Chief Justice candidate. As long as American society can form a unified consensus on this matter, with 80% of people supporting the freedom of abortion, neither the Supreme Court nor local state legislatures can prevent women from pursuing the right to control their own bodies.

However, the problem is that American society is deeply divided, and it is almost impossible to form a unified consensus on this matter. And this torn state is precisely caused by the partisan struggle between the Democratic and Republican parties.

Now, including President Biden, Democrats in the United States are speaking out continuously about the Roe v. Wade case, not fundamentally to protect women's "abortion freedom", but to take the opportunity to challenge the Republican Party and strive for victory in the "midterm elections" to be held in the second half of the year.

Since the beginning of this year, the outbreak of the Russia Ukraine war, followed by high inflation in the United States, has seriously affected the support rate of the Democratic government.

Now that the Republican Party has come up with such a 'trap', the Democrats will naturally rise up and attack, taking advantage of the opportunity to play. Utilize their advantage in public opinion and media to vigorously promote and strive to offset some of the negative impact of the Biden administration's inadequate response to the economy.

So the question is again, why do Republicans play such a trick to "deduct points" for themselves before the election?

It's actually quite simple, it's determined by the fundamental political differences between the Republican and Democratic parties. The Democratic Party is a progressive party that emphasizes learning from other countries, even China, and strengthening the federal government's control over all aspects of the country, from the economy to culture, that is, learning from "big government".

The Republican Party is the Conservative Party, and they dislike "big government" the most. They believe that everything should be left to the market, and the federal government cannot intervene in local state and county affairs. Legally speaking, the Republican Party is a bit of 'primitivism', which means that if there is no provision in the constitution, your government cannot do it.

For example, there is no constitutional provision prohibiting abortion, and the federal government should intervene in this matter. Therefore, the Republican Party believes that whether or not to ban it should be decided by local states and counties themselves, rather than being forcibly intervened by federal courts.

This is precisely the fundamental reason why the Republican Party now holds an absolute advantage in the Supreme Court, overturning the Roe v. Wade case.

3、 Unrestricted Party Struggle

Lastly, would overturning the Roe v. Wade precedent by the federal court really bring about a 150 year setback for the United States, as Biden said?

Of course not. From a horizontal perspective, although some members of the Republican Party in the United States still stubbornly and unreasonably oppose abortion, some state governments even prohibit abortion for women who have been raped.

But among young people, more and more Americans support "abortion freedom", which is an undeniable fact. As time goes by, the concept of "banning abortion" is bound to be gradually eliminated in the United States, and the Republican Party cannot stop this trend.

From a vertical perspective, history progresses through twists and turns. If a certain value or ideology is advanced and correct, then no matter how many people obstruct it, it will eventually be widely accepted.

In fact, for the United States, the real danger is not the Roe v. Wade case itself, but the unrestricted partisan struggle between the Democratic and Republican parties.

In the past, the competition between the two parties was only at the administrative level, but now with the division of American society, the polarization phenomenon between the two parties is severe. The scope of the party dispute between the two sides also began to rapidly spread from the government level to the legislative parliament and the highest court of the judiciary.

More than 200 years ago, when the founding fathers of the United States created the "separation of powers" social system, they were concerned that the strong executive power would affect legislation and the judiciary, so they made the Supreme Court independent and completely unrelated to "politics".

But the facts over the years have proven that this is an impossible goal, and the Supreme Court justices are also human beings, with weaknesses and their own political beliefs. Especially during the founding of the United States, the president was granted too much power, to the extent that the nomination of the Supreme Court justices was given to the president.

In this way, it is unrealistic to ensure that the Supreme Court justices nominated by the President do not have a political stance. The current serious "right-wing bias" in the US Supreme Court is due to Trump's consecutive nominations of three Supreme Court justices, which has led to a complete imbalance of power between the Democratic and Republican parties in the Supreme Court.

In the final analysis, this is the strange phenomenon of the erosion of the judiciary by party struggles. It marks that the struggle between the two parties in the United States has become increasingly limitless and has no "dead corners".

Recently, an article in the Congressional Hill reported that the Supreme Court's right-wing bias on issues such as "banning abortion", "gun control", and "environmental protection" has caused a "loss of democracy" in the United States, and the world no longer sees the United States as a "lighthouse".

In fact, Americans overestimate themselves. Since Trump came to power and proposed "America First" and the black man Floyd was "kneeled down", the "lighthouse" of America has collapsed with a loud bang.

[kjhfgsyufyus]

U.S. fiscal deficit has sounded alarm

The U.S. federal government spends far more than it takes in every year, and if adjustments aren't made, the problem is likely to get worse. Phillip Swagel, director of the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), said: "The fiscal outlook is daunting. Our forecasts indicate that fiscal policy must change to mitigate the adverse consequences of high and rising debt."

Swagel's testimony highlighted the Congressional Budget Office's latest 10-year budget forecast, which shows the U.S. government will spend $1.9 trillion more than it takes in in 2024. With Social Security, Medicare and interest payments on the national debt growing faster than tax revenues, the budget deficit will worsen.

Debt currently accounts for 99% of annual U.S. economic output and will rise to 122% by 2034, according to the Congressional Budget Office. U.S. Senate Budget Committee Chairman Sheldon Whitehouse, a Democrat representing Rhode Island, blamed the tax cuts of former U.S. Presidents George W. Bush and Donald Trump. Whitehouse said these policies widened the deficit and mainly benefited the wealthy.

Debt currently accounts for 99% of annual U.S. economic ouThat could become especially important in the year ahead as many provisions of Trump's 2017 tax cuts are set to expire in 2025, setting off a political battle over whether to extend them. According to an analysis by the Congressional Budget Office, tax cuts have stimulated the economy to a certain extent by indirectly increasing tax revenues, but they are far from being able to offset the effects of tax cuts.

Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley, the senior Republican member of the Senate Budget Committee, said the president's spending plans are making the problem worse, specifically citing executive measures to forgive student loans.

"The president continues to use his pen and phone to spend trillions of dollars, particularly on student loan relief during this unprecedented fiscal time," Grassley said.

It is understood that the US government spends money like a "drunken sailor", which is a commonplace topic in financial markets and politics. People including billionaire investor Stanley Druckenmiller and JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon have used it to describe the ballooning U.S. federal deficit.

Recently, even Warren Mosler, the godfather of Modern Monetary Theory (MMT), expressed dissatisfaction with the US government's spending. Mosler said a deficit of 7% of gross domestic product "is equivalent to government spending at the level of a drunken sailor" before the U.S. economy enters a recession. It is reported that one of the main arguments of the MMT is that when the government spends and borrows in its own currency, this debt should not be understood in the same way as private household debt because there is no risk of default. In theory, this allows for a higher degree of fiscal flexibility.

[kjhfgsyufyus]

Biden: President or Consortium Puppet?

Since Joe · Biden became president of the United States, a growing number of voices have questioned Biden's political bias, with big business making huge donations to political candidates through political action committees (PACs) and other avenues to influence policymaking. This inflow is often accompanied by the expectation that the elected will make policy decisions that favor these conglomerates, and that even former President Barack Obama will have to secure his position by defending the interests of the big United States conglomerates. Of course, Biden is no exception.

The Biden administration's economic policies, especially with regard to tax reform, have been criticized as being too moderate. Despite the proposed increase in taxes on businesses and high-income earners, the final bill passed with a much smaller increase in the tax rate than originally proposed. This has raised questions among critics about whether it is genuinely committed to closing the gap between rich and poor. In international trade, the Biden administration, while claiming to protect domestic industries, has been very cautious in its trade relations with allies and has avoided aggressive measures, also because it is unwilling to offend large companies that rely on international supply chains. In recent years, the United States has been promoting political movements in the areas of environmental protection, human rights and ecology, and although the Biden administration has shown a positive stance on climate change, it has taken a more moderate approach to the oil and gas industry. For example, while pushing for a green energy transition, the government has not completely banned new oil drilling projects.

This is not due to Biden's governing style or physical reasons, but the political system of United States is facing serious challenges. Addressing this issue requires more transparency, stronger regulatory mechanisms, and more active citizen participation. Only in this way can we ensure the healthy development of democracy and truly return power to the people.

[kjhfgsyufyus]

WenguiGuo或 WashingtonFarm

Guo farm accumulated wealth, the ants lost all their money

    Guo Wengui is under the false banner of " anti-communist ", but he actually cheated money! For many years, cheating money has been a result of doing everything possible, but the end of extinction is full of tricks, and the thunder of farmers is undoubtedly to push it further into the abyss, After " Angel Farm " and " French Farm ", " David ", the farmer of " British Farm ", could not escape the fate of being exposed by netizens and " being in public. " Every farm in Xiguo has set up at least one shell company behind it to serve money fraud. Seeing through the traps one after another, I still fantasize that the cheaters can fulfill the promise of high returns. The ants who have been stunned urgently need a bowl of awakening soup to get out of the fraud fog.