Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 20, 2018 8:20:40 GMT -5
If the old adage of the fish rotting from the head holds true (and I think it does), the United States is in yuuuuuuuge trouble.
If this were a movie, I would scoff at it as ridiculously over-the-top and unrealistic. The United States could never elect such a maniac as POTUS!
ETA:
I keep going back to this one from yesterday:
Step past the crazy if you can and think about what Trump is actually saying here: he is calling someone who cooperates with law enforcement to out corruption a "RAT." Sure, gangsters and mafiosa and crooks call such people "rats." But the President of the United States?
ETA:
But then, Trump is a man who puts personal loyalty over integrity. (I am not such a person, so I have no sympathy at all for this attitude.) This quote from Art of the Deal tells you quite a bit:
|
|
|
Post by Don on Aug 20, 2018 8:38:21 GMT -5
I thought liberals were for free markets, freedom of religion, free speech etc They used to be. You're livin' in the past, man. Way, way past. People with those beliefs are now known as "classical liberals" or "libertarians." Both the Democrat and Republlcan parties are anything but classic liberals. It's worth noting that classical liberalism arose from The Enlightenment. I see both major parties, as well as those who support them, as anti-enlightenment. They are actively pursuing a return to some modern form of feudalism. They differ only in the Lords and Masters they seek to run their lives for them.
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Aug 20, 2018 9:48:37 GMT -5
I was recently called a "classical liberal" (and not just by NT), and apparently this is now becoming a pejorative term. It's supposedly a dogwhistle to mean you're actually a fascist or something.
|
|
|
Post by Optimus on Aug 20, 2018 11:18:08 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Aug 20, 2018 11:44:17 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by celawson on Aug 20, 2018 12:01:54 GMT -5
He's really not, though. He's saying the 'fake NYT' is implying that McGhan is a rat. Big difference.
I don't have time to comment much this week. Work is very busy and school/high school volleyball starting this week, but I just wanted to say that IMO,
Trump's Tweets are excessive and over the top and too numerous to be appropriate for the POTUS, many are worded in a way that demeans the office, some are just abhorrent no matter how you look at them. HOWEVER......I can agree with the assertions behind a fair number of them, especially with regards to the collusion issue and the media bias issue. And I think more will come out after Mueller is done that backs up a good amount of what Trump is asserting in some Tweets. I'm confident there was corruption on the Democrat's side (Steele dossier, DOJ etc.) through this, and I'm also pretty sure the news media and the investigation are not paying enough attention to that side of things.
I'm sorry if that sets people off, and again, I don't have time to back up what I'm saying today, but there you go.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 20, 2018 13:09:24 GMT -5
No, c.e. Break it down. He's saying Dean was a "RAT." He's saying that because Dean, rather than remaining loyal to Nixon and continuing to hide the corruption in the administration, cooperated with law enforcement to expose it.
Thus, he is saying that someone who does what Dean did -- cooperates with law enforcement to expose corruption rather than remaining "loyal" and continuing to cover it up -- is a RAT. He is saying McGahn is not a RAT because he does not believe McGahn did this -- however, the clear message is that if McGahn did what Dean did, he'd be a RAT in Trump's book. Again, that's how Mafia dons reason.
ETA:
The "Fake New York Times", along with a buttload of other Americans (like me), would regard what Dean did as "the right thing to do" (though of course he was culpable for helping Nixon before that. We'd also regard McGahn as doing the right thing if he cooperated with Mueller to expose corruption in the Trump administration.
They are very far from calling either Dean or McGahn "RATS."
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Aug 20, 2018 13:26:23 GMT -5
Trump's Tweets are excessive and over the top and too numerous to be appropriate for the POTUS, many are worded in a way that demeans the office, some are just abhorrent no matter how you look at them. HOWEVER......I can agree with the assertions behind a fair number of them, especially with regards to the collusion issue and the media bias issue. And I think more will come out after Mueller is done that backs up a good amount of what Trump is asserting in some Tweets. I'm confident there was corruption on the Democrat's side (Steele dossier, DOJ etc.) through this, and I'm also pretty sure the news media and the investigation are not paying enough attention to that side of things. I'm sorry if that sets people off, and again, I don't have time to back up what I'm saying today, but there you go. I've noticed your pattern lately seems to be (Say something I know people will disagree with) "I'm sorry if this sets people off..." Like the fact that you say things people disagree with means you're just triggering a bunch of fragile snowflakes, as opposed to, you know, saying things people disagree with. It's remarkable how thoroughly you are assimilating Trump's mode of discourse even as you decry it. I mean, "the fake NYT"? Really? Media bias? Sure, everyone knows most of the media tends to be left-leaning, and conservatives have been complaining about it since the early 80s (of course, politicians have always complained about unfavorable media coverage). But what Trump is saying is of a completely different caliber - he's actually declaring the media to be The Enemy. Do you think this is a matter for concern?
|
|
|
Post by celawson on Aug 20, 2018 14:04:54 GMT -5
The above quote is from Cass.
************************ Ah. I see you were referring to Dean. Yes, you’re right. And this is another example of him wording a Tweet in a way that demeans the office of POTUS. I don’t agree with him Tweeting about this, but surely there could have been a way to write it that could be respectable and not bring up Dean or the term “rat”. I do think there’s bias against him, but I also think he continues to bring a lot of it onto himself with his behavior.
|
|
|
Post by celawson on Aug 20, 2018 14:06:09 GMT -5
Ooh so weird. I thought I was quoting Cass. I’m on my phone at work and don’t have time to fix it. I haven’t even read Amadan’s post Yet and likely won’t until this evening. But my answer was in reference to Cass. I will fix later.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 20, 2018 14:43:13 GMT -5
Ah. I see you were referring to Dean. Yes, you’re right. And this is another example of him wording a Tweet in a way that demeans the office of POTUS. I don’t agree with him Tweeting about this, but surely there could have been a way to write it that could be respectable and not bring up Dean or the term “rat”. I do think there’s bias against him, but I also think he continues to bring a lot of it into himself wirh his behavior. Again, I'm going to break this down. Let us say that what Trump meant to say was "I encouraged McGahn to talk with Mueller because I am confident that my administration has done nothing wrong. Therefore, I am happy to have him cooperate with the investigation so that we may conclude it to the nation's satisfaction and move forward with important national business." That's more or less what a normal, not-guilty president might say. Only he didn't. He went off on a batshit rant that said what I said it said. First, I think that's precisely what someone with big stuff to hide -- someone very, very afraid -- would do. But take that aside for a minute. Let's say you're right and he doesn't have anything to hide, but nonetheless went off on a batshit rant that makes him look guilty and whackadoodle and brings unnecessary trouble on himself and his administration because that's just his "behavior." THIS IS THE GUY WITH HIS FINGER ON THE NUCLEAR BUTTON. THIS IS THE GUY WHO IS DEALING WITH NORTH KOREA, RUSSIA, OUR ENEMIES, OUR ALLIES. THIS IS THE GUY MEETING ALONE WITH PUTIN, A FORMER KGB AGENT. You think he's fit? Even taking aside my own belief that his corruption runs deep, you think this guy is fit to have our nation in his hands? ETA: Let us imagine for a moment that our nation is attacked -- let's say tomorrow is 9/11. This is the chaotic incoherent ranting unhinged hothead you want handling that situation? Let's say the market crashes a la 2008. This is the guy you want figuring out how to bring the nation out of it? Let's say hostages are taken -- you want this guy handling negotiations with the nation or terrorist group holding them? This guy, who can't write a tweet that isn't unhinged, getting himself further into trouble? Sooner or later, Trump's 3 am phone call will come, because that call always does come. The reason I would have chosen literally any candidate in the field over Trump is because the idea of him handling that crisis terrifies me. TERRIFIES ME. That's why (per one of my earlier posts) I'd take Ted Cruz over Democrat Trump, whatever policies he espoused, whatever judges he promised. Trump is fundamentally, wholly, obviously unfit to handle that 3 am call.
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Aug 20, 2018 15:20:24 GMT -5
Well, Cass, at least he's not a Democrat.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Aug 20, 2018 17:09:55 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Aug 20, 2018 17:42:43 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 20, 2018 18:17:37 GMT -5
The irony is incredibly obvious...and yet seems to fly over the head of the Trump administration and Trump supporters. (insert shruggy guy here)
|
|