Nov 8, 2016 - The lesser of two evils?

Status
Not open for further replies.
You may not think Trump is a fascist, but watch out when the Capital is burning and he declares martial law.

What would you have him do when the Capital starts burning? Fiddle?

I never would have believed you, of all people, would have missed the parallell.

I have no idea what you're talking about. Do tell.

I propose a wager: if Trump declares martial law within one year I buy you a bottle of whatever sort of cheap single malt you swill and if he doesn't the next time there's a secret vote to have me banned you vote nay.
 
You may not think Trump is a fascist, but watch out when the Capital is burning and he declares martial law.

What would you have him do when the Capital starts burning? Fiddle?

I never would have believed you, of all people, would have missed the parallell.

I have no idea what you're talking about. Do tell.

I propose a wager: if Trump declares martial law within one year I buy you a bottle of whatever sort of cheap single malt you swill and if he doesn't the next time there's a secret vote to have me banned you vote nay.

You're on. :woohoo:
 
Wow.....this message board seems to consist of a disproportionate number of conservative minded members. Am I the only blue?

Look, both sides are corrupt in their power hungry pursuits. I believe we can agree there since the title of this thread (created prior to the election) is the lesser of two evils. Perhaps it's because I am not extreme left, that I can see the short comings and falsehood of democrats. I am mostly motivated by total disdain for Trump and his morally bankrupt entourage (admittedly just my opinion).

Hopefully those who are accepting or supportive of this new administration can recognize bad policy, fascism and corruption when and if it takes place. Sometimes, when we are all busy defending "our side" and shaming the other, we fail to hold our own side accountable. Frankly, I am concerned about that.
Nah there are a lot of democrats on the board. They just aren't posting that much on this thread. I'd say a lot of them are like you. I wouldn't call them extreme at all. Most are pretty reasonable. I'd say probably maybe little left of center but definitely not way far to the left

JF and MJ, you both sound quite rational and open-minded in your views, and the main difference I see from the banter on social media is that you both have the skill for self-examination. My question is why is the democratic party (or liberal/left ideology) not having an indepth self-examination on how their party and their world got turned upside down? Instead the focus is self-denial and attacks. To me, a revitalized democratic not to mention mainstream republican party is vital for a better, healthier American democracy. Not sure you would agree with Glenn Greenwald (he has won the Pulitzer Prize) views and from what i can see is more objective, evidence-based journalism. But here it is in case of interest:



The trouble with being the "resistance", a Democrat resisting Trump or Fatah under Arafat resisting Israel) particularly if it is your sole adult identity, is that who you are becomes dependent on the existence in power of what you are resisting. Being for something is harder and much more detailed and nuanced. Not as good for slogans, better for living. It suggests accountability and consequences. I am for the Keystone XL pipeline but not in its original route which imperils the main water supply of the entire state of Nebraska. I am for teacher accountability but not based on common core. My approach is baseline up, and yes there are teachers who are better with gifted students and others who are better with students who struggle. Making things work is hard. Complaining about things not working is easy.
 
Wow.....this message board seems to consist of a disproportionate number of conservative minded members. Am I the only blue?

Look, both sides are corrupt in their power hungry pursuits. I believe we can agree there since the title of this thread (created prior to the election) is the lesser of two evils. Perhaps it's because I am not extreme left, that I can see the short comings and falsehood of democrats. I am mostly motivated by total disdain for Trump and his morally bankrupt entourage (admittedly just my opinion).

Hopefully those who are accepting or supportive of this new administration can recognize bad policy, fascism and corruption when and if it takes place. Sometimes, when we are all busy defending "our side" and shaming the other, we fail to hold our own side accountable. Frankly, I am concerned about that.
Nah there are a lot of democrats on the board. They just aren't posting that much on this thread. I'd say a lot of them are like you. I wouldn't call them extreme at all. Most are pretty reasonable. I'd say probably maybe little left of center but definitely not way far to the left

JF and MJ, you both sound quite rational and open-minded in your views, and the main difference I see from the banter on social media is that you both have the skill for self-examination. My question is why is the democratic party (or liberal/left ideology) not having an indepth self-examination on how their party and their world got turned upside down? Instead the focus is self-denial and attacks. To me, a revitalized democratic not to mention mainstream republican party is vital for a better, healthier American democracy. Not sure you would agree with Glenn Greenwald (he has won the Pulitzer Prize) views and from what i can see is more objective, evidence-based journalism. But here it is in case of interest:



The trouble with being the "resistance", a Democrat resisting Trump or Fatah under Arafat resisting Israel) particularly if it is your sole adult identity, is that who you are becomes dependent on the existence in power of what you are resisting. Being for something is harder and much more detailed and nuanced. Not as good for slogans, better for living. It suggests accountability and consequences. I am for the Keystone XL pipeline but not in its original route which imperils the main water supply of the entire state of Nebraska. I am for teacher accountability but not based on common core. My approach is baseline up, and yes there are teachers who are better with gifted students and others who are better with students who struggle. Making things work is hard. Complaining about things not working is easy.


Agreed. But what is happening is more than complaining, it is the systematic undermining of the institution called the Presidency.
 
Newsflash: the left hates you and everything you stand for. They hate you for who you are, and how you act, and and what you think, and what you believe. If they had their way your ways would not exist. All that the pretense of civility does is make bring their dystopia closer to reality.

Absolutely correct. I work for an organization that is supposed to be the bastion of human rights, tolerance, inclusion and so on. But what I read (my fault I should not be on social media any longer but got on to read post election commentary) from what I thought was people with human decency, is unthinkable. My colleagues are endowed with elite education, coming from elite civil service background, and have turned fascist in my opinion. So while I hold a mirror up to them often, it has no effect, rather it further fuels their hatred. And they are openly hoping some "deplorable" die, and the other day that Tom Brady would suffer a serious injury because he is friends with Trump. Seems there is some sense of relief for me in that the left project got temporarily derailed. Welcome to a brave new world.
 
The trouble with being the "resistance", a Democrat resisting Trump or Fatah under Arafat resisting Israel) particularly if it is your sole adult identity, is that who you are becomes dependent on the existence in power of what you are resisting

Also the trouble is that as Ariel Sharon said "I don't know anyone other than Arafat who has as much civilian Jewish blood on his hands since the time of the Nazis." Whereas Trump, not so much.
 
Welcome to a brave new world.

You have accused me of polemics: I reject that characterization of my politics and anyway to the extent its true consider it a badge of honor. But the most dishonest characterization in politics is the libel of the right - the true right - as fascist and especially in the name of Eric Blair. He had contempt for the left and spent his life in polemicizing against it. Fascism is the policy of the left. You cannot convince me otherwise,
 
Welcome to a brave new world.

You have accused me of polemics: I reject that characterization of my politics and anyway to the extent its true consider it a badge of honor. But the most dishonest characterization in politics is the libel of the right - the true right - as fascist and especially in the name of Eric Blair. He had contempt for the left and spent his life in polemicizing against it. Fascism is the policy of the left. You cannot convince me otherwise,

Not in the least will I. Eric Blair truly described himself as a Tory "Anarchist". An anarchist in the sense that believes in minimal government intervention. The profound message of 1984 was f**k the left/liberals, a message not often picked up. In the world of Oceania, 85% of the population is labelled the proles - the worthless animals and compare it to the inequality data today; 14.9 percent of the population was the outer party members; and .1 percent of the population was the inner party members. Big brother was not created for the proles - they were fed drugs, alcohol, pornography, etc etc. Propaganda was developed for the government machinery - the outer party members, who had to buy into the system so much so that no thought outside it existed - thought crime does not entail death, thought crime is death. What I meant by polemics was the measurement of inequality.
 
Wow.....this message board seems to consist of a disproportionate number of conservative minded members. Am I the only blue?

Look, both sides are corrupt in their power hungry pursuits. I believe we can agree there since the title of this thread (created prior to the election) is the lesser of two evils. Perhaps it's because I am not extreme left, that I can see the short comings and falsehood of democrats. I am mostly motivated by total disdain for Trump and his morally bankrupt entourage (admittedly just my opinion).

Hopefully those who are accepting or supportive of this new administration can recognize bad policy, fascism and corruption when and if it takes place. Sometimes, when we are all busy defending "our side" and shaming the other, we fail to hold our own side accountable. Frankly, I am concerned about that.

JF you may well be right about Trump and his entourage being morally bankrupt. I don't know the man or his entourage personally so I can't argue the point. Although I do know a number of people(male, female, black, white, Hispanic, etc) who do know him and who claim differently. I would tend to side with you though. Having said that, IMO there are few high level politicians who have not sold their soles to get were they are(or have been), and that includes the Clintons. So since I don't know either Clinton or Trump personally, and since I assume they are both morally bankrupt, and since I am a republican, voting for Trump was not all that difficult for me. And now I am going to put my full support behind him, not that I agree with everything he does. I would have done the same for Hillary and I did the same for Obama, even though I didn't vote for him and never thought held him in high regard as a president.

Monte I agree and I know that supporting the president (whoever it may be) is the right, mature approach. I have previously always taken that high road. For me, this individual is different. While you will not find me at any protest or rally, I am awfully pessimistic about this president. Hope I am wrong.
 
Fascism definition as found in Webster's Dictionary below. Not trying to make a point.......just posting so we're all working from a common definition.

Fascism: a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
 
Fascism definition as found in Webster's Dictionary below. Not trying to make a point.......just posting so we're all working from a common definition.

Fascism: a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition

Obviously I'm not trying to make a point either, but imagine how compelling your definition of fascism would have been had you posted it before you labelled all your political opponents as fascists.
 
What I meant by polemics was the measurement of inequality.

And what I meant by polemics is your contempt for how I express my contempt for your leftist beliefs. I'm happy to disagree with you and in the most vociferous of terms. When you however disparage my disparagement of your beliefs, that's where we disagree.
 
Perfect example is today.Betsy DeVos tried entering a public school. Protestors wouldn't let her. If you were so actually interested in the kids well being and think Betsy isn't suitable don't you think you would let her into the school or even encourage it to see the other side ?

Focking disgrace
 
Commentary from a center right friend:

You voted for Trump because Clinton was going to be in Wall Street's pocket. Trump wants to repeal Dodd-Frank and eliminate the Fiduciary Rule, letting Wall Street return to its pre-2008 ways.
You voted for Trump because of Clinton's emails. The Trump administration is running its own private email server.
You voted for Trump because you thought the Clinton Foundation was "pay for play." Trump has refused to wall off his businesses from his administration, and personally profits from payments from foreign governments.
You voted for Trump because of Clinton's role in Benghazi. Trump ordered the Yemen raid without adequate intel, and tweeted about "FAKE NEWS" while Americans died as a result of his carelessness.
You voted for Trump because Clinton didn't care about "the little guy." Trump's cabinet is full of billionaires, and he took away your health insurance so he could give them a multi-million-dollar tax break.
You voted for Trump because he was going to build a wall and Mexico was going to pay for it. American consumers will pay for the wall via import tariffs.
You voted for Trump because Clinton was going to get us into a war. Trump has provoked our enemies, alienated our allies, and given ISIS a decade's worth of recruiting material.
You voted for Trump because Clinton didn't have the stamina to do the job. Trump hung up on the Australian Prime Minister during a 5pm phone call because "it was at the end of a long day and he was tired and fatigue was setting in."
You voted for Trump because foreign leaders wouldn't "respect" Clinton. Foreign leaders, both friendly and hostile, are openly mocking Trump.
You voted for Trump because Clinton lies and "he tells it like it is." Trump and his administration lie with a regularity and brazenness that can only be described as shocking.
Let's be honest about what really happened.
The reality is that you voted for Trump because you got conned. Trump is a grifter and the American people were the mark.
Good luck. We'll all need it.
I'm glad you voted for Trump :)

I'm not going to post it publicly but if you want to embarrass your friend who sent you this shoot me a pm and I will send you a list of things of why the fiduciary rule is complete nonsense and will accomplish nothing and actually make things worse. Perfect example of politicians meddling something they literally have no clue about and not even trying to understand or develop a real solution. And I'm pretty sure your friend sent you a chain email

Dodd Frank I don't really care as much about but it's not getting repealed anyway 0% chance of that happening. Maybe some things get less regulated but that doesn't really have as much to do with me
 
What I meant by polemics was the measurement of inequality.

And what I meant by polemics is your contempt for how I express my contempt for your leftist beliefs. I'm happy to disagree with you and in the most vociferous of terms. When you however disparage my disparagement of your beliefs, that's where we disagree.

Ok lets kiss and make up. Seriously where do we really disagree?
 
Fascism definition as found in Webster's Dictionary below. Not trying to make a point.......just posting so we're all working from a common definition.

Fascism: a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition

Obviously I'm not trying to make a point either, but imagine how compelling your definition of fascism would have been had you posted it before you labelled all your political opponents as fascists.

Point taken.
 
Perfect example is today.Betsy DeVos tried entering a public school. Protestors wouldn't let her. If you were so actually interested in the kids well being and think Betsy isn't suitable don't you think you would let her into the school or even encourage it to see the other side ?

Focking disgrace

The Betsy Devos appointment is a joke. Another example of appointing an individual to head a department that he/she wants to dismantle. Why doesn't he cut to the chase and sign an executive order to dismantle it?

In any event, I agree with you. At this point the most productive approach is to let her into schools and take your best shot at educating her (pun intended) on public education. By the way, I support school choice as long as non-public options are regulated and measured in the same way public school are (too much to ask?).

The good news is that I pulled up the video of Devos trying to enter the school. It looked like a very small group of moron protesters who didn't work at the school.

 
DeVos already has her mind made up and won't be changing as a result of a for-show school visit. That said, trying to block her from the visit is ridiculous.

I am a big fan of watching legislators fleeing their own town hall meetings because they don't have any real answers for angry mobs concerned over loss of health care, though.
 
Perfect example is today.Betsy DeVos tried entering a public school. Protestors wouldn't let her. If you were so actually interested in the kids well being and think Betsy isn't suitable don't you think you would let her into the school or even encourage it to see the other side ?

Focking disgrace

The Betsy Devos appointment is a joke. Another example of appointing an individual to head a department that he/she wants to dismantle. Why doesn't he cut to the chase and sign an executive order to dismantle it?

In any event, I agree with you. At this point the most productive approach is to let her into schools and take your best shot at educating her (pun intended) on public education. By the way, I support school choice as long as non-public options are regulated and measured in the same way public school are (too much to ask?).

The good news is that I pulled up the video of Devos trying to enter the school. It looked like a very small group of moron protesters who didn't work at the school.



"educating her (pun intended) on public education"; because we could all learn something from the quality of D.C. public education. The truth is Democrats almost exclusively in charge of urban areas have been stealing education money for decades and leaving generations of children uneducated and dependent.
 
No matter where it is I go
I shan't find anything so low
So full of hate, ignorance, and rancor,
As the unions spawned by Albert Shanker
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top