Politics over Religion at MD&D

[_Meadowchik]

If people came in identical intensities of red and green, I would have a very hard time judging them.

What if one is drowning you and the other wants to eat you for dinner?

[_Choyo Chagas]

If people came in identical intensities of red and green, I would have a very hard time judging them.

What if one is drowning you and the other wants to eat you for dinner?

the usual anti's distortion...


the one is baptizing you - as the whole planet
. .


and the other is praying before dinner
. .

[_Kishkumen]

Outward appearances do mislead. I am going by acts, not the noise. And I have a reserved hope that he will perform "prodigies" (especially considering that he is, possibly, the most resisted President in history).

In this case, they really don't. Nor have you supplied us any evidence that they do. Everything Trump is doing points to his corruption, incompetence, ignorance, bullying, and selfishness. If he had been anything other than that, he might have accomplished more with GOP control of the government. As it is, he is doing immense damage, not only to the Executive Branch in chasing out committed, experienced career civil servants, but also the Judicial Branch, in nominating unqualified judges to the bench.

But the biggest issue for me is Trump's utter contempt for the rule of law, one of the most precious and important traditions of Western civilization. Consider Herodotus' account of Demaratus' words to King Xerxes I before the Battle of Thermopylae:

The same goes for the Spartans. One-against-one, they are as good as anyone in the world. But when they fight in a body, they are the best of all. For though they are free men, they are not entirely free. They accept Law as their master. And they respect this master more than your subjects respect you. Whatever he commands, they do. And his command never changes: It forbids them to flee in battle, whatever the number of their foes. He requires them to stand firm -- to conquer or die.

Our popular culture runs counter to this way of thinking, to be sure. But our government is full of people who have sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution. They take that responsibility seriously, and, unlike Trump, they understand what that means. These are the very people that Trump attacks when they disagree with him and try to hold him accountable for his wrongdoing.

We will be very lucky if Mueller lasts out the FBI investigation into Trump's almost certain crimes involving the Russian government and Russian organized crime (practically one in the same thing). The Right's propaganda machine is working very hard in its transparent and malicious attempts to discredit one of the most upright people in American government to protect the venal interests of those who want to exploit one of the very worst men in American government (Donald J. Trump). It is an effort so vile and dishonorable that it boggles the mind that anyone would attempt it, and yet Fox News, Breitbart, GOP congresspeople, and the White House have thrown all scruples out the window, and they will happily march down to hell with the Donald for a few extra shekels in their bursting coffers.

Any one with any sense or moral probity knows this is true, and you are doing yourself no favors in either ignoring or denying it.

[_Uncle Ed]

Fill in the blank:

One freedom that I have concretely lost since 1960 is: To choose not to be medically insured without prejudice. Oh, and I cannot buy a reasonably priced M1 Garand rifle because His Oness refused to allow them to be imported from S. Korea.

One socialist judge appointed by Obama is: Take your pick! Seriously, do you believe I was referring to some "Socialist Party" appointees? "Socialist" equals Liberal equals Leftist. Obama swung the balance heavily in favor of lefty-liberals like himself, young like himself or even younger: so they could serve for decades to come, and form a pool of leftie-liberal-socialist appointees for the the Supreme Court. Democrats are almost all leftie-liberal-socialists. That way too many Repubs are more that way now is just making the problem of the judiciary taking control of Congress worse.

So, how much, exactly, of what you "know" is even real?

That's a stunning hat you've got on; did it come with that tinfoil or is that an accessory? Now you are trafficking in epistemological conspiracy theories and claiming some kind of high ground: you know the enlightened truth that political narratives are constructed, whereas anyone who asks factual support for your baseless assertions i[s] trapped in false understanding of reality. It's a ploy, so typical of Trump supporters, to disguise ignorance with knowledge. The truth will be apparent to anyone reading this: you just don't know what you're talking about, and so you assume no else possible can either.

I allow that what I "know" is tainted at best and total distortion/lies at worst.

The question is: how does one tell the difference, and can you tell the difference? Doesn't seem so.

I know a leftie-liberal-socialist when I hear/read one. That's good enough. I know that His Oness appointed an over-abundance of them: almost all of his 329 confirmed appointees. That the GOP resorted to blocking the super majority and got the filibuster "rules" changed is hardly all their fault. But again, you want to put the full blame on them.

[_Res Ipsa]

Frankly, your statement that liberal=leftist=socialist should disqualify your political views from any serious consideration. That kind of ignorance is inexcusable, and is a significant source of our current problems.

[_Uncle Ed]

...

No, the problem is that you don’t understand my point. If your response is to say simply, “My brown friends and family prove I am not a racist,” then you don’t understand the issue at all.

You see racism everywhere. Claiming emotional detachment is disingenuous. Nobody here is a Vulcan. We all live too close to the issues, no matter where we live in the US.

So, YOU explain "the issue"; without cutsie resorting to textual flourishes that press into ad hominem, if that is possible.

To me the issue in politics today that dominates isn't racism at all: it is an imbalance of Fed power over States power, which manifests more and more as socialism and fascism (flip sides of the same coin).

Obama is a racist of the first order, who said: “I think there are some particular groups that historically have been underrepresented—like Latinos and Asian-Americans—that represent a larger and larger portion of the population. And so for them to be able to see folks in robes that look like them is going to be important. When I came into office, I think there was one openly gay judge who had been appointed. We’ve appointed ten.”

To deliberately look for a racial mix in the judiciary is propagating racism. It isn't even worthy of the appellation "reverse racism". He just did something worse than what was happening before, during "your" asseted golden age of white privilege of the 60s. He pushed for change instead of letting changes occur in what has been the fairest and most open to opportunity political system in the world. No where near ideal, but still the best: if we could keep the leftie-liberal-socialists out of it. There is nothing good about LLS ideology, not one damn thing. The conflict of DEM and GOP has formed the cutting edge of that ideological war, until recently, when the political machines formed a complicit status quo because they are alike. The voters have tried a different tack. Probably too late.

You see an encroaching under the surface issue that only now has been exposed. Actually, what you see is a very small number of White racists who have gotten vocal lately. There is no huge, growing issue with racism.

But we can of course fail to convince each other. Just know that I flat out deny "the issue". If I have it IDed. You tell me.

[_Uncle Ed]

Outward appearances do mislead. I am going by acts, not the noise. And I have a reserved hope that he will perform "prodigies" (especially considering that he is, possibly, the most resisted President in history).

In this case, they really don't. Nor have you supplied us any evidence that they do. Everything Trump is doing points to his corruption, incompetence, ignorance, bullying, and selfishness. If he had been anything other than that, he might have accomplished more with GOP control of the government. As it is, he is doing immense damage, not only to the Executive Branch in chasing out committed, experienced career civil servants, but also the Judicial Branch, in nominating unqualified judges to the bench.

You are calling Neil Gorsuch unqualified?

When reform is needed the process might get called something like "draining the swamp". And career heads will roll. That the entrenched dominant party resists the interloper is not a surprise: blame his failure to do more on them! They tried for over a hear to kill him off.

His personality, which you cannot refrain from bringing up as some kind of proof of his unfitness, is immaterial vis-a-vis his agenda or his ability. It is only germane when talking about whether he is his own worst enemy. That will affect his ability to get things done, but has nothing to do with "ability" to perceive what ought to be done

But the biggest issue for me is Trump's utter contempt for the rule of law, one of the most precious and important traditions of Western civilization. Consider Herodotus' account of Demaratus' words to King Xerxes I before the Battle of Thermopylae:

The same goes for the Spartans. One-against-one, they are as good as anyone in the world. But when they fight in a body, they are the best of all. For though they are free men, they are not entirely free. They accept Law as their master. And they respect this master more than your subjects respect you. Whatever he commands, they do. And his command never changes: It forbids them to flee in battle, whatever the number of their foes. He requires them to stand firm -- to conquer or die.

Our popular culture runs counter to this way of thinking, to be sure. But our government is full of people who have sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution. They take that responsibility seriously, and, unlike Trump, they understand what that means. These are the very people that Trump attacks when they disagree with him and try to hold him accountable for his wrongdoing.

I accept that you see his confrontations that way. I see a two-part dynamic at work: Trump the thin-skinned reactionary; and The Donald the President. So he muddies the waters by Tweeting responses to make himself feel good. But he does not scorn law or lawmakers. He holds them accountable and expects them to follow through if they agree to work with him.

If you wish to provide specific examples of your rhetorical criticism of the President, I will peruse them

We will be very lucky if Mueller lasts out the FBI investigation into Trump's almost certain crimes involving the Russian government and Russian organized crime (practically one in the same thing).

Trump came into office as a businessman. He has numerous Russian connections. Now those connections have turned political as well. That is the "risk" of electing a billionaire who loves the "art of the deal". That is always his first love and motivation. Winning. The voters,
knowing this about him, hope(d) that the deals he wants to make are good for America.

There was and is no "Russian collusion": only communication between friends and rivals. Like Hillary's emails, this will go nowhere. But the shoe on the other foot is always funny to watch as a game being played by opposed parties.

The Right's propaganda machine is working very hard in its transparent and malicious attempts to discredit one of the most upright people in American government to protect the venal interests of those who want to exploit one of the very worst men in American government (Donald J. Trump). It is an effort so vile and dishonorable that it boggles the mind that anyone would attempt it, and yet Fox News, Breitbart, GOP congresspeople, and the White House have thrown all scruples out the window, and they will happily march down to hell with the Donald for a few extra shekels in their bursting coffers.

Any one with any sense or moral probity knows this is true, and you are doing yourself no favors in either ignoring or denying it.

I know nothing about Mueller. What the so-called conservative Medía has to say about "shady" sides to his career and character have not struck home with me; mainly because I don't trust any of the sources that you mentioned above, least of all Breitbart. Fox is the least egregiously biased, but that's because it drifts both ways, though not as a source of solid journalism, but rather because Fox's conservative ranks are infiltrated by liberals, so there is a lack of consistency in biased (sic) reporting.

[_Chap]

In this case, they really don't. Nor have you supplied us any evidence that they do. Everything Trump is doing points to his corruption, incompetence, ignorance, bullying, and selfishness. If he had been anything other than that, he might have accomplished more with GOP control of the government. As it is, he is doing immense damage, not only to the Executive Branch in chasing out committed, experienced career civil servants, but also the Judicial Branch, in nominating unqualified judges to the bench.

You are calling Neil Gorsuch unqualified?

No. He's calling Petersen unqualified. Obviously. But apparently not to you ... perhaps they did not show this on Fox News?

https://Twitter.com/SenWhitehouse/statu ... 1757838337

[_Uncle Ed]

Frankly, your statement that liberal=leftist=socialist should disqualify your political views from any serious consideration. That kind of ignorance is inexcusable, and is a significant source of our current problems.

Is that so? Then I am open to edumakayshun. Fire away.

If you are going to assert that this kind of conflation of words/terms is only to be avoided by a University Level Education, then you might as well throw in the towel and walk away. The majority of voters in the US are sadly lacking.

I see this as a very facile conflation. LLS are far more overlapping than distinct from one another: popular understanding of those words will sway the real world reactionaries, not some literal/classical definition of them; and then, we also have nuances and more than one definition of the words to contend with.

LLS are allies in every way but name only. Their goals are alike and methodology as well. Who has tended to burn and bust up things and perform actual violence? Not the cons-righties-capitalists. You get one example of a White Nut who drove his car into a bunch of counter protesters. Before that you have dozens of incidents across the country in downtown business districts and on campuses. The losers can't lose maturely and vote next time; they have to "protest", which according to the "rules for radicals" playbook means attack, disrupt, destroy, threaten bodily harm and even kill.

If the LLS methods are taken up by the radical alt-right, why should that be a surprise? Sides in a war always end up resembling each other, even taking up each other's "weapon systems".

The mass of DEMs and GOPs and Indies are peaceful, law abiding and will work fine together through their representatives. But they have to get representatives who work to represent, not push their thrice-be-poxed political machine careers!

[_Uncle Ed]

...

No. He's calling Petersen unqualified. Obviously. But apparently not to you ... perhaps they did not show this on Fox News?

https://Twitter.com/SenWhitehouse/statu ... 1757838337

Ah, that was almost funny. Hey, nobody has to confirm the President's nominees. That's what the system is for. I hope they all do their job.