Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
To impeach, or not to impeach
#41
(10-08-2019, 06:06 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: I'd say it's the Progressives who are/ have been trying to destroy the effectiveness of the nation more than it's Trump at this point in my life. Dude, if Trump was more of a Progressive, you'd love the guy. I say that because he's the type of Progressive leader that you've been telling us you'd prefer and believe is needed for Progressives to prevail and change America. If the issue with Trump isn't viewed as being an issue with the working class voters who tend to vote Republican or those who exclusively vote for Trump/support Trump, the Republicans aren't going to support impeachment. You see the the thirty some percent that Trump has the support of right now  is actually 75% of the entire Republican base. Me, I'm not a big fan of Trump or a working class voter but I am still a member of the entire Republican base. Basically, I'd be in the some what agree group that Eric lumped in with the strongly agree to form his view of there's a strong majority in favor of impeaching Trump.

At this point it is the Progressives who now stand for the protection of the rule of law and Constitutional government. Donald Trump is just so blatant that he must be impeached. 

Please do not tell us that if Trump were a Progressive that we liberals would back him. We disliked Hugo Chavez and Robert Mugabe for their dictatorial tendencies, let alone Fidel Castro. We do not defend our rogues*. Trump could have pushed a solid pro-business agenda that includes the dismantling of the welfare state, privatization of all public assets that can be sold off to monopoly gougers, outlawing or at least eviscerating labor unions, cutting taxes for the Master Class, raising taxes and other responsibilities upon everyone else, abolishing the federal role in protecting workers' safety, and undoing environmental regulations with the support of a compliant Congress without violating the Constitution, then those who dislike it might be stuck with adapting or with finding some other country if we are not so rash as to go underground. 

Know well: Trump is in potential trouble for violations of statutory law. The language of law is extremely rigid in meaning and applicability. Nobody gets to shade it to win a case. One cannot euphemize one's way out of criminal liability as by saying that larceny is 'merely pilferage'. Trump comes from a business milieu in which people get away with puffing (using imprecise language to laud something one is trying to sell). One does not get away with such in science, medicine, engineering, or law.

For good reason, most politicians at or above a certain level are attorneys by trade. It's not simply that attorneys are smart; so are CPA's, physicians, architects, engineers, college professors, and research scientists. Attorneys such as Barack Obama can take a look at a legal statute and concur, whatever their ideology, that the law in statute and in legislation is exactly what it says it is. Other smart people do not have the legal training. With a really-good President who is not an attorney comes a recognition that the law is exactly what it says it is. Think of Dwight Eisenhower, the President that I most often compare to Obama.  

The history of American politics at its highest level is a history of legislation and formal judgment. Budgeting is legal in form. Even during the Second World War, Franklin Roosevelt made sure that everything was lawful -- even if he gave generals and admirals much discretion in the field.   

Donald Trump has frequently evaded the legislative process and assumed that he would get away with much if the right people support him. Know well: House and Senate majorities are more fleeting than they seem. This time, of course, should Donald Trump go down in impeachment, then so can the current Senate majority. Indeed, should Senate Republicans resort to a perfunctory dismissal of charges against their President and make a travesty of the process of impeachment, then we liberals (or as you call them, Progressives) end up replacing many Senate Republicans as Donald Trump goes down in political flames a year from now.

We Progressives, as you call us, may have grand designs for reshaping the world to fit our dreams of something better, only to find that some political reality, including opposition from entrenched interests who like things as they are. This time we have become the supporters of the rule of law, due process, and Constitutional government.

*It may be ironic, but right-wingers are far more likely to defend roguish figures.

https://theauthoritarians.org/Downloads/...arians.pdf

Quote:So (to foreshadow later chapters a little) suppose you are a completely
unethical, dishonest, power-hungry, dirt-bag, scum-bucket politician who will say
whatever he has to say to get elected. (I apologize for putting you in this role, but it
will only last for one more sentence.) Whom are you going to try to lead, high RWAs
or low RWAs? Isn’t it obvious? The easy-sell high RWAs will open up their arms and
wallets to you if you just sing their song, however poor your credibility. Those crabby
low RWAs, on the other hand, will eye you warily when your credibility is suspect
because you sing their song? So the scum-bucket politicians will usually head for the
right-wing authoritarians, because the RWAs hunger for social endorsement of their
beliefs so much they’re apt to trust anyone who tells them they’re right. Heck, Adolf
Hitler was elected Chancellor of Germany running on a law-and-order platform just
a few years after he tried to overthrow the government through an armed insurrection.

You sometimes hear that paranoia runs at a gallop in “right-wingers”. But
maybe you can see how that’s an oversimplification. Authoritarian followers are
highly suspicious of their many out-groups; but they are credulous to the point of
self-delusion when it comes to their in-groups. So (in another experiment I ran) subjects
were told a Christian Crusade was coming to town led by a TV evangelist. The
evangelist (the subjects were further told), knowing that people would give more
money at the end of the evening if he gave them the kind of service they liked, asked
around to see what that might be. Finding out that folks in your city liked a “personal
testimonial” crusade, he gave them one featuring his own emotional testimonial to
Jesus’ saving grace. How sincere do you think he was? Most subjects had their doubts,
given the circumstances. But High RWAs almost always trusted him.

(RWA = right-wing authoritarian, an abbreviation that the author uses 439 times in his paper).

I know your content well, and Right-Wing Authoritarian (RWA) describes you well.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist  but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.


Reply
#42
For some precedent on how swift impeachment can be --


On July 25, 1974, Vice President Gerald Ford told a Republican audience that the Watergate impeachment inquiry was in large part "an attempt to try and undo the election results of 1972 -- and don't you forget it."






On August 5, 1974... Richard M. Nixon resigned.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist  but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.


Reply
#43
(10-08-2019, 02:10 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:
(10-08-2019, 01:21 PM)David Horn Wrote:
(10-07-2019, 02:41 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Trump is asking other governments to invent conspiracy theories in order to smear his political opponents. He uses the office for his own financial gain. He should be carted out of the oval office and taken to jail.

True that!  Trump is the first POTUS to totally ignore the responsibilities of the office, while exercising powers for his own gain -- many that are specious at best.  If the GOP office holders who back him now continue until he finishes a second term, there won't be much 'America' to pass on to the next POTUS.

I think that your naive to believe that Trump is the first American President to use their power and influence to sway a foreign leader or a fellow politician  to do something for them that's in their personal interest to have occur or American interest. In Trump's case, he may have attempted but he didn't succeed so no law was broken.

That's not what I said, though I do think that using foreign help to win elections is uncommon.  My point is more general: that Trump is purposely destroying the very fabric that makes a nation viable, and doing it for personal gain.  He pits everyone against everyone.  He has no friends other than family, and I'm not sure they're all that safe either.  He's the political analog of the Bubonic Plague, and the only force that can derail him is unwilling to do it to save their short-term political skins.  The GOP will rue the day, but so will we all.

Frankly, it's sad and scary.
Intelligence is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom, but they all play well together.
Reply
#44
(10-08-2019, 03:46 PM)taramarie Wrote:
(10-08-2019, 01:21 PM)David Horn Wrote:
(10-07-2019, 02:41 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Trump is asking other governments to invent conspiracy theories in order to smear his political opponents. He uses the office for his own financial gain. He should be carted out of the oval office and taken to jail.

True that!  Trump is the first POTUS to totally ignore the responsibilities of the office, while exercising powers for his own gain -- many that are specious at best.  If the GOP office holders who back him now continue until he finishes a second term, there won't be much 'America' to pass o to the next POTUS.

Questionable. Here, I have done a bit of reading. But I doubt you need to look so far for an example. But as an American, you should know more. The 5 most notorious presidents in US history

The Presidents on your list were all repugnant in their own way, but Trump is unique in using the office as a business opportunity.  Worse, he is totally amoral, and sees no issue with screwing everyone as long as he gains.  He's not quite shaping up as our Hitler -- not yet, anyway.  That may change if he feels threatened.
Intelligence is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom, but they all play well together.
Reply
#45
(10-08-2019, 02:10 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:
(10-08-2019, 01:21 PM)David Horn Wrote:
(10-07-2019, 02:41 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Trump is asking other governments to invent conspiracy theories in order to smear his political opponents. He uses the office for his own financial gain. He should be carted out of the oval office and taken to jail.

True that!  Trump is the first POTUS to totally ignore the responsibilities of the office, while exercising powers for his own gain -- many that are specious at best.  If the GOP office holders who back him now continue until he finishes a second term, there won't be much 'America' to pass on to the next POTUS.
I think that your naive to believe that Trump is the first American President to use their power and influence to sway a foreign leader or a fellow politician  to do something for them that's in their personal interest to have occur or American interest. In Trump's case, he may have attempted but he didn't succeed so no law was broken.

Politics is to a considerable extent getting people (including elected officials) to concur to things that they might, Diplomacy to a great degree is  the art of getting foreign leaders to do what they might otherwise not do. It is persuasion. 

People can use persuasion for good or ill. Persuading someone out of work to take a job as a maintenance man at a bank is acceptable. Persuading someone to aid in robbing a bank is unconscionable. 

The President has no right to use his position to get others to enrich him or do political dirty work for him. What President Trump asked of the President of Ukraine is unimaginably wrong. He potentially placed another country in unmerited danger to aid his political campaign. 

Finally, attempts to do certain crimes are themselves crimes. Attempted murder, rape, kidnapping, armed robbery, drug dealing, treason, and extortion are themselves crimes. Conspiracy to commit another crime is itself a crime.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist  but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.


Reply
#46
(10-08-2019, 03:53 PM)taramarie Wrote:
(10-08-2019, 01:27 PM)David Horn Wrote:
(10-07-2019, 11:07 PM)taramarie Wrote: You know what is amazing here? That some people are gullible enough to believe a grown ass middle aged (at the time) man wouldn't know what the definition of sex is and I find it hard to believe he wasn't having actual sexual intercourse as well as oral. I smell a rat.

Bill is far from the issue.  Pointing at Bill to excuse Trump is the worst form of blame-shifting.  But sure, Bill had sex, and lying about it cost him his right to practice law.  Trump not only lies, but bribes and extorts.  So far: nothing.  Worse, Trump has no compunction about using even the most serious power the US has to cover his ass.  Scary!

I have noticed blame shifting works both ways. Both sides are guilty of this. What is the real problem is it shows neither side listens to each other but rather like children points fingers and whines but you did this and the other side whining but you did that and it was so much worse! What would be preferable is both sides owning up to the bs both sides have done instead of making up excuses and finding ways to fix the corruption but that seemingly will NEVER happen. Trump is just a symptom of the sickness in your country.

There is a real risk in both-sidesism.  If both sides are nearly equally guilty, then, certainly, call it out.  In fact, that's not the case here.  One side lies about everything, does it continuously, and feels no compunction about offering contrasting lies within minutes of one another.  That's the problem.  It makes identifying truth and fiction nearly impossible.  In fact, it's a propaganda ploy to get just the reaction you offered.  This was never as possible in the past, but instant media (Facebook and Twitter more than the others) makes it a successful tactic.  Add hundreds of bogus "commentators", and the confusion is complete.
Intelligence is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom, but they all play well together.
Reply
#47
(10-08-2019, 06:06 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: I'd say it's the Progressives who are/ have been trying to destroy the effectiveness of the nation more than it's Trump at this point in my life. Dude, if Trump was more of a Progressive, you'd love the guy. I say that because he's the type of Progressive leader that you've been telling us you'd prefer and believe is needed for Progressives to prevail and change America. If the issue with Trump isn't viewed as being an issue with the working class voters who tend to vote Republican or those who exclusively vote for Trump/support Trump, the Republicans aren't going to support impeachment. You see the the thirty some percent that Trump has the support of right now  is actually 75% of the entire Republican base. Me, I'm not a big fan of Trump or a working class voter but I am still a member of the entire Republican base. Basically, I'd be in the some what agree group that Eric lumped in with the strongly agree to form his view of there's a strong majority in favor of impeaching Trump.

Trump is an authoritarian by an reasonable measure.  He thinks and acts like a king.  I've had my problems with both parties, but this guy is in a class alone.  Will he step aside if he's impeached and convicted?  Will he if he's voted out of office?  I not so sure.  And by the way, THAT"S the definition of a coup.
Intelligence is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom, but they all play well together.
Reply
#48
(10-09-2019, 10:56 AM)David Horn Wrote:
(10-08-2019, 03:46 PM)taramarie Wrote:
(10-08-2019, 01:21 PM)David Horn Wrote:
(10-07-2019, 02:41 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Trump is asking other governments to invent conspiracy theories in order to smear his political opponents. He uses the office for his own financial gain. He should be carted out of the oval office and taken to jail.

True that!  Trump is the first POTUS to totally ignore the responsibilities of the office, while exercising powers for his own gain -- many that are specious at best.  If the GOP office holders who back him now continue until he finishes a second term, there won't be much 'America' to pass o to the next POTUS.

Questionable. Here, I have done a bit of reading. But I doubt you need to look so far for an example. But as an American, you should know more. The 5 most notorious presidents in US history

The Presidents on your list were all repugnant in their own way, but Trump is unique in using the office as a business opportunity.  Worse, he is totally amoral, and sees no issue with screwing everyone as long as he gains.  He's not quite shaping up as our Hitler -- not yet, anyway.  That may change if he feels threatened.

Mercifully he is too old and infirm (especially mentally) to be around long enough to consolidate a full-blown dictatorship. He has no obvious understudy, although Mike Pence is a piece of work. Pence lacks the charisma with which to convince Americans to accede to the formation of a fascistic Christian and Corporate State. Trump has put the GOP in disarray, and if the GOP is ever to recover from Trump it will need a President who is best described as a right-wing version of Barack Obama -- as reactionary as Obama is liberal, someone who sees faith as an objective instead of as a consequence, but scrupulously respects formalities of law and precedent . Republicans have yet to realize that Obama is a good President and not the man with a tail and the Mark of the Beast. That will take time. After five disastrous elections for the Presidency the Republicans nominated someone who avoided taking cheap shots at the New Deal and Social Security... and won.

One danger is that Trump has infuriated three entities with which conservative Republicans have usually gotten along well -- federal law enforcement, the CIA, and the Armed Services. This triad resembles those that have overthrown erratic regimes in other countries in military coups. We do not have a coup in our history, but that may say more about the Presidents that we have had than about the permanent power of the police-intelligence-military triad. Obama got along with them because he is a likable fellow who does not challenge tradition except when the tradition (such as the ban on same-sex marriage) is moribund. 

The Republican Party is responsible for the preservation of the Trump Presidency. It can save him through some perfunctory dismissal of articles of impeachment, but if it does so it may be on the way to a long time in the political wilderness, if not oblivion.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist  but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.


Reply
#49
(10-09-2019, 01:01 PM)pbrower2a Wrote:
(10-09-2019, 10:56 AM)David Horn Wrote:
(10-08-2019, 03:46 PM)taramarie Wrote:
(10-08-2019, 01:21 PM)David Horn Wrote:
(10-07-2019, 02:41 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Trump is asking other governments to invent conspiracy theories in order to smear his political opponents. He uses the office for his own financial gain. He should be carted out of the oval office and taken to jail.

True that!  Trump is the first POTUS to totally ignore the responsibilities of the office, while exercising powers for his own gain -- many that are specious at best.  If the GOP office holders who back him now continue until he finishes a second term, there won't be much 'America' to pass o to the next POTUS.

Questionable. Here, I have done a bit of reading. But I doubt you need to look so far for an example. But as an American, you should know more. The 5 most notorious presidents in US history

The Presidents on your list were all repugnant in their own way, but Trump is unique in using the office as a business opportunity.  Worse, he is totally amoral, and sees no issue with screwing everyone as long as he gains.  He's not quite shaping up as our Hitler -- not yet, anyway.  That may change if he feels threatened.

Mercifully he is too old and infirm (especially mentally) to be around long enough to consolidate a full-blown dictatorship. He has no obvious understudy, although Mike Pence is a piece of work. Pence lacks the charisma with which to convince Americans to accede to the formation of a fascistic Christian and Corporate State. Trump has put the GOP in disarray, and if the GOP is ever to recover from Trump it will need a President who is best described as a right-wing version of Barack Obama -- as reactionary as Obama is liberal, someone who sees faith as an objective instead of as a consequence, but scrupulously respects formalities of law and precedent . Republicans have yet to realize that Obama is a good President and not the man with a tail and the Mark of the Beast. That will take time. After five disastrous elections for the Presidency the Republicans nominated someone who avoided taking cheap shots at the New Deal and Social Security... and won.

One danger is that Trump has infuriated three entities with which conservative Republicans have usually gotten along well -- federal law enforcement, the CIA, and the Armed Services. This triad resembles those that have overthrown erratic regimes in other countries in military coups. We do not have a coup in our history, but that may say more about the Presidents that we have had than about the permanent power of the police-intelligence-military triad. Obama got along with them because he is a likable fellow who does not challenge tradition except when the tradition (such as the ban on same-sex marriage) is moribund. 

The Republican Party is responsible for the preservation of the Trump Presidency. It can save him through some perfunctory dismissal of articles of impeachment, but if it does so it may be on the way to a long time in the political wilderness, if not oblivion.

I think it may be oblivion, because there is only one person who has the charisma to be a Republican Obama or even a Republican Bill Clinton. That one person is his daughter Ivanka. But she is not even a Republican, and could go down the dumps with her daddy. And she will have to find a way to prove herself as a presidential public figure somehow. Absent that, there's no other potential candidate who can win the presidential election and thus keep the Republicans in the Senate and in the corporate boardrooms and elsewhere in control of the country.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#50
(10-09-2019, 10:56 AM)David Horn Wrote:
(10-08-2019, 03:46 PM)taramarie Wrote:
(10-08-2019, 01:21 PM)David Horn Wrote:
(10-07-2019, 02:41 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Trump is asking other governments to invent conspiracy theories in order to smear his political opponents. He uses the office for his own financial gain. He should be carted out of the oval office and taken to jail.

True that!  Trump is the first POTUS to totally ignore the responsibilities of the office, while exercising powers for his own gain -- many that are specious at best.  If the GOP office holders who back him now continue until he finishes a second term, there won't be much 'America' to pass o to the next POTUS.

Questionable. Here, I have done a bit of reading. But I doubt you need to look so far for an example. But as an American, you should know more. The 5 most notorious presidents in US history

The Presidents on your list were all repugnant in their own way, but Trump is unique in using the office as a business opportunity.  Worse, he is totally amoral, and sees no issue with screwing everyone as long as he gains.  He's not quite shaping up as our Hitler -- not yet, anyway.  That may change if he feels threatened.

They didn't make the case against Jackson. He did even worse things, like his war on the indians, but he did useful things too, like block the tariff of abominations. He is considered a champion of democracy because he mobilized the common people to get the vote and to come out to vote for him, thus founding the Democratic Party as we know it. He will be replaced on that list of 5 by Mr. Trump, arguably the worst of those five. 

I would put George W Bush and Ronald Reagan on that list too; the first for starting an unnecessary war that cost 400,000 people their lives, and other misdeeds, and the second for saddling our nation with neo-liberalism for 40 years and overseeing one of the most corrupt administrations in history.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#51
(10-10-2019, 01:16 AM)taramarie Wrote:
(10-09-2019, 10:56 AM)David Horn Wrote:
(10-08-2019, 03:46 PM)taramarie Wrote:
(10-08-2019, 01:21 PM)David Horn Wrote:
(10-07-2019, 02:41 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Trump is asking other governments to invent conspiracy theories in order to smear his political opponents. He uses the office for his own financial gain. He should be carted out of the oval office and taken to jail.

True that!  Trump is the first POTUS to totally ignore the responsibilities of the office, while exercising powers for his own gain -- many that are specious at best.  If the GOP office holders who back him now continue until he finishes a second term, there won't be much 'America' to pass o to the next POTUS.

Questionable. Here, I have done a bit of reading. But I doubt you need to look so far for an example. But as an American, you should know more. The 5 most notorious presidents in US history

The Presidents on your list were all repugnant in their own way, but Trump is unique in using the office as a business opportunity.  Worse, he is totally amoral, and sees no issue with screwing everyone as long as he gains.  He's not quite shaping up as our Hitler -- not yet, anyway.  That may change if he feels threatened.
Yep sounds like him given he is a money hungry narcissist.

You are talking about many of America's entrepreneurs and corporate bureaucrats, and many of our entertainers and pro athletes. Our system fosters narcissism in its economic elites. The system breaks narcissism in people who must do either hard labor or must do servile work. Certain roles in life teach people that they are expendable in the grand scheme of things, or at least the economic reality that defines the most materialistic society on Earth.

America used to have a more egalitarian ethos, and flagrant narcissists usually did not develop. Maybe that was because more of the business owners were farmers for whom production was the objective and means of sustenance, shopkeepers who had to connect customers to their needs, small-scale bankers who connected entrepreneurs to savers' money, and small-scale manufacturers who had to make things that fit customers' needs. America is less capitalist today because it has far fewer entrepreneurs as a part of the populace but it is also far more plutocratic because those few are in charge of command-and-control systems.

OK, the most flagrant narcissist at one time was the stereotyped prima donna of the opera; then came the Hollywood star. Careers of such people typically went into a fall when the flamboyance overpowered the talent, and such people became more objects as much of contempt than as delight. There were lessons to learn from that -- don't get too big for your breeches, as the saying went. But thanks in part to the economic priorities that people like Ronald Reagan and both Bushes got us directed, we ended up with more concentration of industry and more flagrant  concentration of industry (monopolization and trusts are more profitable than small business, so such is a virtue and not a bane) and the debasement of any moral or cultural quality in education, and while the system created huge numbers of low-paying jobs as restaurant workers and store clerks the manufacturing jobs (remember well that the best route out of poverty for anyone not particularly bright or talented is the factory) faded away. So we got a more severe hierarchy, and people within the favored spots within the hierarchy could get away with more than they used to. I remember (when GI's were the bosses) that the typical GI executive was comparatively old, had been with the company from early adulthood (job-jumping was strongly held in disdain even if there was a pay raise as a career choice), and knew what went on in the mail-room, on the shop or (retail) sales floor, or in sales territories far away from headquarters because he (it was a male-chauvinist time) had been there in that company. Can you imagine someone as an executive in a company having gotten to the top of a bureaucratic organization in a bloated firm after having started as a laborer, clerk, or assembly-line worker? Above-all, the fifty-something executive had a fifty-something wife, and a house (his house was simply paid for) perhaps a little bigger than most. His car was a staid sedan, maybe a Buick instead of a prole Chevy or Ford. Absolutely never was the car a sportscar; by the time he could afford one he no longer needed or wanted one. Such executives could relate to the common man because he really was one. In contrast the typical executive comes from an MBA school... and the deficiencies are obvious, and the culturally-and morally-empty graduates that often come from such schools compensate in egregious consumerism that are theirs because they succeed at keeping others poor.

Donald Trump fits the pattern of the bad MBA. To be sure, we may not need a PhD in Russian literature to be a good leader, but I can assure you that Donald Trump seems less knowledgeable about science, philosophy, and high culture than did many factory workers fifty years ago. Nothing about him is genuine. He is a fake, a fraud, and a phony.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist  but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.


Reply
#52
(10-09-2019, 04:05 PM)taramarie Wrote: Look I identify more with the left wing in your country as it is more close to home so to say. It is more kiwi. But I also have felt the sting from your side also, some who have this mentality if you are not religiously with them, you are the enemy and if you are the enemy you are a racist bigoted (insert any other insult they can find which isn't actually true). When you start to make questions to find the entire truth as a whole you instantly get that and it makes it near damned impossible to have a conversation. So it is more like the culture is on fire and both are screaming at each other and making accusations that are untrue wanting someone to blame.  I am a lefty here, just from a different country and because I like to question things and find the real truth and not a blind follower I instantly get accusations from my own side, just from a different country! How absurd! Hope that its just a few lefties I have met that are just nuts and isn't the norm. Yes I have encountered some interesting right wingers also who are lets say....extreme also. Seemingly obsessed with guns and super religious and against certain people having the same freedoms they enjoy which I find endlessly entertaining because I thought they were against lack of freedom and govt intervention but I guess they mean for THEM not those "adam and steves."


If you tap into the mindstream of ideologues, this is what it looks like.  Yes, you probably have had blowback that is both unfair and quite likely a bit bizarre.  Let's call that the product of the <1% on the left, and a bigger swath on the right.  That doesn't make the <1% better, just less common.

taramarie Wrote:It kinda goes against that belief of having freedoms and lack of govt intervention which btw is very different from our right wingers in my country. Interesting contrast. The worst has been that they feel if anyone would take away their way of life they are willing to kill for it, but they are quite willing to remove others rights whether it be equal marriage rights, womens rights etc. By them I have been accused that I want their country to burn to the ground and that I want to take away all of their guns and that I am going to burn in hell because I am not religious. The first two, believe it or not right wingers but it actually isn't true, but now then again it doesn't help for me to explain why not now does it. So I wont even bother.


There are actually two distinct variants of "the right" in the US.  While they support each other politically, their beliefs are actually different, and diametrically opposed at times.  There is an excellent study of this, and you can find it at Hidden Tribes of America.  If you scroll down on the main page, you'll see the definitions of the tribes, and the fact that the left has one fringe, but the right has two.

taramarie Wrote:The third accusation almost would be laughable if it wasn't sad. It is abusive but also tells me they were abused into their own religion by their elders. In short, I have noticed both have their agendas and both do point out some very justified inconsistencies. However there is a lot of lies thrown around and I can just state from my own experience why I believe what I do due to what I have experienced and I hope that this isn't the norm over there. Both want as far as I can tell, govt to have the control to fulfil what suits them more it seems to me and both will make the other side an enemy to prevent conversation. 

No one is more a true believer than a convert.  The no-longer-religious are zealous in their non-beliefs, so yes, you'll get some weird stuff there too.

taramarie Wrote:Should be interesting how this shit storm turns out I will say. I just hope this sort of thing never happens in my country.

Somehow, it seems highly unlikely.  Yours was not created as a haven for every religious fringe group of the time, so it's not in your country's DNA.
Intelligence is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom, but they all play well together.
Reply
#53
(10-09-2019, 11:11 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(10-09-2019, 01:01 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: The Republican Party is responsible for the preservation of the Trump Presidency. It can save him through some perfunctory dismissal of articles of impeachment, but if it does so it may be on the way to a long time in the political wilderness, if not oblivion.

I think it may be oblivion, because there is only one person who has the charisma to be a Republican Obama or even a Republican Bill Clinton. That one person is his daughter Ivanka. But she is not even a Republican, and could go down the dumps with her daddy. And she will have to find a way to prove herself as a presidential public figure somehow. Absent that, there's no other potential candidate who can win the presidential election and thus keep the Republicans in the Senate and in the corporate boardrooms and elsewhere in control of the country.

That's not really true.  I can think of one Republican that still has a great reputation and might, in fact, run in 2020 if Mafia Don is impeached and thrown out of office: Nikki Haley.  She's smart, personable and has a pretty solid track record in South Carolina and the UN.
Intelligence is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom, but they all play well together.
Reply
#54
(10-08-2019, 01:27 PM)David Horn Wrote:
(10-07-2019, 11:07 PM)taramarie Wrote: You know what is amazing here? That some people are gullible enough to believe a grown ass middle aged (at the time) man wouldn't know what the definition of sex is and I find it hard to believe he wasn't having actual sexual intercourse as well as oral. I smell a rat.

Bill is far from the issue.  Pointing at Bill to excuse Trump is the worst form of blame-shifting.  But sure, Bill had sex, and lying about it cost him his right to practice law.  Trump not only lies, but bribes and extorts.  So far: nothing.  Worse, Trump has no compunction about using even the most serious power the US has to cover his ass.  Scary!
I didn't use Bill as an excuse to shift blame away from Trump. I used Bill and what Bill obviously did while President in order to actually be impeached. Bill basically lied under oath which is a criminal offense as well as an impeachable offense. As I said, it is pretty common for American presidents to use their power and influence to sway foreign leaders for the sake of their own interests or national interests. I assume that a full scale investigation into that sort of thing or worse would result in many Democratic officials going to prison or terminated careers. Why would you take offense to my negative/ not so pleasant view of Obama and the slimy term used to describe him? I've often said that I wouldn't pass on an opportunity to have a man to man talk with him about issues that are more relevant to him and his side than they are to those on the other side. I don't take offense to the your negative view of Trump or the nasty thing that you and others often say about him or the nasty things that you and others often accuse him of supporting or being directly involved with promoting like fascism or racism and whatever else works with those who are stuck on the other side.

Taramarie doesn't quite understand the dynamics of modern day America or American politics these days. Taramarie knows New Zealand and a few other countries that she has visited. Taramarie doesn't understand the difference between the Democratic voters these days or the difference between the Republican voters and the Democratic voters these days either. Taramarie doesn't understand that the European rifts of old like fascist vs socialist or communists and Protestants vs Catholics or Protestants and Catholics vs Pagans don't largely apply to the vast majority of modern day American these days. I don't think she's alone because American blues don't seem to understand that either. Taramarie doesn't understand that the right to be a homosexual and the freedom to be homosexual existed long before the right for them to be married and legally recognized as a couple.
Reply
#55
(10-10-2019, 04:01 PM)taramarie Wrote:
(10-10-2019, 03:40 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:
(10-08-2019, 01:27 PM)David Horn Wrote:
(10-07-2019, 11:07 PM)taramarie Wrote: You know what is amazing here? That some people are gullible enough to believe a grown ass middle aged (at the time) man wouldn't know what the definition of sex is and I find it hard to believe he wasn't having actual sexual intercourse as well as oral. I smell a rat.

Bill is far from the issue.  Pointing at Bill to excuse Trump is the worst form of blame-shifting.  But sure, Bill had sex, and lying about it cost him his right to practice law.  Trump not only lies, but bribes and extorts.  So far: nothing.  Worse, Trump has no compunction about using even the most serious power the US has to cover his ass.  Scary!
I didn't use Bill as an excuse to shift blame away from Trump. I used Bill and what Bill obviously did in order to be impeached. Bill lied under oath which is a criminal offense as well as an impeachable offense. As I said, it is pretty common for American presidents to use their power and influence to sway foreign leaders for the sake of their own interests or national interests. I assume that a full scale investigation into that sort of thing or worse would result in many Democratic officials going to prison or terminated careers. Why would you take offense to my negative/ not so pleasant view of Obama and the slimy term used to describe him? I've often said that I wouldn't pass on an opportunity to have a man to man talk with him about issues that are more relevant to him and his side than they are to those on the other side. I don't take offense to the your negative view of Trump or the nasty thing that you and others often say about him or the nasty things that you and others often accuse him of supporting or being directly involved with promoting like fascism or racism and whatever else works with those who are stuck on the other side.

Taramarie doesn't quite understand the dynamics of modern day America or American politics these days. Taramarie knows New Zealand and a few other countries that she has visited. Taramarie doesn't understand the difference between the Democratic voters these days or the difference between the Republican voters and the Democratic voters these days either. Taramarie doesn't understand that the European rifts of old like fascist vs socialist or communists and Protestants vs Catholics or Protestants and Catholics vs Pagans don't  largely apply to the vast majority of modern day American these days. I don't think she's alone because American blues don't seem to understand that either. Taramarie doesn't understand that the right to be a homosexual and the freedom to be homosexual  existed long before the right for them to be married and legally recognized as a couple.
Do you know what it is like for many of these people and can you speak for them and their experience?
Nope. I don't know what it's like to be a homosexual and I can't really speak for them or their experiences. I'm not one of them and I never lived as one of them. With that said, do you know what it's like to be one and can you really speak for them and their experiences. Now, I can attest to what it's like being poor and barely making enough to survive and being reliant on someone else is poor because I have experienced that during my lifetime.
Reply
#56
(10-10-2019, 06:57 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Nope. I don't know what it's like to be a homosexual and I can't really speak for them or their experiences. I'm not one of them and I never lived as one of them. With that said, do you know what it's like to be one and can you really speak for them and their experiences.  Now, I can attest to what it's like being poor and barely making enough to survive and being reliant on someone else is poor because I have experienced that during my lifetime.

I doubt that anyone not homosexual understands homosexuality. I have seen theories from psychological trauma to being attracted to the 'wrong' pheromones... but nothing convincing. From what I have heard homosexuals say, they often cannot imagine being straight. 

Nobody chooses homosexuality, so far as I can tell.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist  but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.


Reply
#57
(10-10-2019, 10:29 PM)taramarie Wrote:
(10-10-2019, 07:58 PM)pbrower2a Wrote:
(10-10-2019, 06:57 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Nope. I don't know what it's like to be a homosexual and I can't really speak for them or their experiences. I'm not one of them and I never lived as one of them. With that said, do you know what it's like to be one and can you really speak for them and their experiences.  Now, I can attest to what it's like being poor and barely making enough to survive and being reliant on someone else is poor because I have experienced that during my lifetime.

I doubt that anyone not homosexual understands homosexuality. I have seen theories from psychological trauma to being attracted to the 'wrong' pheromones... but nothing convincing. From what I have heard homosexual say, they often cannot imagine being straight. 

Nobody chooses homosexuality, so far as I can tell.
Bingo. Closest you can get to it is LISTENING to them and seeing what happens to them.
Bingo! You are correct. You have to be homosexual and live among them in order to fully understand what it's like to be them and share their experiences.
Reply
#58
(10-11-2019, 12:10 AM)taramarie Wrote: Btw consider this before saying anything that one of my best friends ran away from home because her parents did not accept her being a lesbian. We lived right next door to each other for years and then one day I found an ambulance was dragging out her body and putting her in an ambulance. I knew she was depressed but had no idea she would do what she did. She gassed herself in her car and deliberately killed herself. For years I tried my best to be of support but in the end the lack of support and the shaming for just being who she was was too much for her. So do consider this before typing a response. I lost someone near and dear and have heard what it is like first hand and had to see her body taken away.
I knew a gal in high school who killed herself for the same reason as your friend. I knew a guy in high school who killed himself the same way as your friend but did it for a different reason. I now another guy (my best friends older brother) who I knew my entire life who killed himself the same way as your friend for a different reason. You may want to consider all these experiences as well.
Reply
#59
(10-11-2019, 01:49 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:
(10-11-2019, 12:10 AM)taramarie Wrote: Btw consider this before saying anything that one of my best friends ran away from home because her parents did not accept her being a lesbian. We lived right next door to each other for years and then one day I found an ambulance was dragging out her body and putting her in an ambulance. I knew she was depressed but had no idea she would do what she did. She gassed herself in her car and deliberately killed herself. For years I tried my best to be of support but in the end the lack of support and the shaming for just being who she was was too much for her. So do consider this before typing a response. I lost someone near and dear and have heard what it is like first hand and had to see her body taken away.

I knew a gal in high school who killed herself for the same reason as your friend. I knew a guy in high school who killed himself the same way as your friend but did it for a different reason. I now another guy (my best friends older brother) who I knew my entire life who killed himself the same way as your friend for a different reason. You may want to consider all these experiences as well.

Rejection by people whom one used to believe accepted you unconditionally and then turned against you completely because one is homosexual? Having been in a time in which I contemplated suicide (family assets necessary for me to start over as my father went into a nursing home and facing the prospect of having to live in which my sole purpose in life would be to suffer for people richer than myself, living in a community that I have outgrown in every way but financially, and knowing that nothing matters in America except wealth and bureaucratic power? All that kept me from killing myself was the fear of Hell. 

America has debased itself badly as the economic elites have accumulated complete power only to toy with us on occasion with a Clinton or Obama to offer some hope that politics can change something. Then comes Donald Trump who dredges up the worst in human nature in America on behalf of the rich-and-powerful. The people who really rule us seem to hold onto the belief that the sole reason for the existence of the rest of us is to enrich and pamper those elites in return for bare existence... and as a reward, the current opiate of the masses, disposable mass low culture that people must replace almost as if it were last-year's clothes (if one is middle class) or the clothes from two or three years ago (if one is poor). 

I grew up in a time in which many people still practiced the ethos of "make-it-do-or-do-without", which is good for ensuring that one can keep a savings account to meet a glaring need and ultimately to make retirement more comfortable than otherwise. I have nice book, music (classical), and movie collections... and I think people would be richer, at least emotionally, if they looked to real culture instead of the derivative and expendable stuff that a commercial society pushes as if it were a drug-trafficker offering heroin.

We are in a messed-up time because we are no longer able to get more happiness by making, selling, and using more stuff. Basic needs remain, but such activities as farming, energy extraction, clothing manufacturing, and the building of low-income housing are not particularly lucrative. What used to be desired luxuries are now often junk due to a glut. 

...back to Donald Trump. I knew that he would be a disaster because he made promises that could only bring conflict. Although paradoxes are always possible, blatant contradictions can never reconcile. We get such a warning from Kafka to a lesser extent and Orwell to a greater extent, and we ignore those two only at the risk of missing the sagest advice from the twentieth century. Donald Trump does Newspeak, probably without knowing that he does so. Well, Orwellian Newspeak turns discourse on anything into sheer madness. There was truth before Trump and there will be truth after him. Impeachment is not for offense of mass sensibilities or for administrative incompetence; it is instead for malfeasance, including corruption and other crime. Impeachment is a duty when the President's misconduct is as egregious as it seems to be. Note well: the impeachment itself is a collection of charges analogous to a criminal indictment. Innocent people have been indicted and acquitted. Nothing of which President Trump is said to have done is yet proved in any court of law. But there is the stench of rotting flesh in the trunk.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist  but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.


Reply
#60
(10-10-2019, 03:40 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: I didn't use Bill as an excuse to shift blame away from Trump. I used Bill and what Bill obviously did while President in order to actually be impeached. Bill basically lied under oath which is a criminal offense as well as an impeachable offense.

FYI: what you wrote above is the very definition of blame-shifting.

Classic-Xer Wrote:As I said, it is pretty common for American presidents to use their power and influence to sway foreign leaders for the sake of their own interests or national interests.

There is a vast difference between the national interest and one's personal interest. Again: blame-shifting.

Classic-Xer Wrote:I assume that a full scale investigation into that sort of thing or worse would result in many Democratic officials going to prison or terminated careers. Why would you take offense to my negative/ not so pleasant view of Obama and the slimy term used to describe him? I've often said that I wouldn't pass on an opportunity to have a man to man talk with him about issues that are more relevant to him and his side than they are to those on the other side.

What did Obama do that was slimy? He made mistakes as they all do, but I can't see any slime anywhere.

Classic-Xer Wrote:I don't take offense to the your negative view of Trump or the nasty thing that you and others often say about him or the nasty things that you and others often accuse him of supporting or being directly involved with promoting like fascism or racism and whatever else works with those who are stuck on the other side.

He has done nothing right from day one. It's hard to make a list. Let's take a few examples from foreign policy, since its the primary responsibility of the President:
  1. He purposely failed to fill positions in the government, for reason that have proven nefarious on several know occasions.
  2. He's run a secret foreign policy with tyrants -- including secret meetings with Putin that weren't even witnessed by an American interpreter, and, on the one case one was, he seized the notes.
  3. He's single handedly trashed the post-WWII relationships we've spent decades building with allies and neighbors.
  4. Now, he's using extortion on a foreign government to get dirt, real or imagined - either is fine with him - on an opponent.
This could go on, but that's enough I think.

Classic-Xer Wrote:Taramarie doesn't quite understand the dynamics of modern day America or American politics these days. Taramarie knows New Zealand and a few other countries that she has visited. Taramarie doesn't understand the difference between the Democratic voters these days or the difference between the Republican voters and the Democratic voters these days either. Taramarie doesn't understand that the European rifts of old like fascist vs socialist or communists and Protestants vs Catholics or Protestants and Catholics vs Pagans don't  largely apply to the vast majority of modern day American these days.

You think they don't? Just because the wording is bit different doesn't make them different in kind. Trump is playing Fascist dictator, or trying to. If you missed it, do some reading on the 1930s in Europe, and how Fascism grew there. It's so similar is scary.

Classic-Xer Wrote:I don't think she's alone because American blues don't seem to understand that either. Taramarie doesn't understand that the right to be a homosexual and the freedom to be homosexual  existed long before the right for them to be married and legally recognized as a couple.

The right to be openly gay is fairly recent. In fact, there is a case before the SCOTUS where the Trump administration is arguing gays aren't protected in the workplace. There isn't much freedom if you can't make a living.
Intelligence is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom, but they all play well together.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Vote to impeach Trump and risk death, adviser says nebraska 0 1,269 12-26-2017, 08:08 AM
Last Post: nebraska

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 16 Guest(s)