It will help if you and jrj will actually read my post. That would require you both to actually respond to what I said instead of reading my thoughts.
Would you be OK with this if the political parties were reversed?
Printable View
I had somewhat of an curious thought this morning.
Trump doesn't really care about many issues. He will pay lip-service to whatever cause of the day suits him the best. Which makes all of this "Big Beautiful Wall" and immigration talk all the more intriguing to me. Why does he keep pushing this issue? I don't think he feels as strongly about it as he is implying.
I was mulling this over this morning when it hit me. It is so obvious.
He doesn't want a wall because of immigration. He wants a wall as a MONUMENT to be remembered by. His own Great Wall Of China.
Trump is the worst . . . but such a truth does not of itself make the Democratic party and its followers above reproach.
OTOH, one should be able to criticize Democrats and liberals without having to preface the criticism by stating that one is not a Trump fan.
Of course I don't believe that. It was a joke. I just never get to say provocative things on here. Earlier I had been listening to a podcast about CPAC and there were a surprising amount of interviews that started with "I'm not a racist, but..." that went on to say incredibly racist things. So when I read your comment that essentially said, I'm not a Trump fan, but..., it reverberated. To be clear, I wasn't at all suggesting that you are a racist. I just have heard a lot of comments that follow the pattern, I'm not a Trump fan, but this is why I like what Trump is doing. That's all.
All right then, you’re back on the Christmas card list. (I was quite sure that you didn’t mean it, and the more I thought about it, I could actually see the satire in your post. Duh. So sorry about that. I’ve known you long enough to know you wouldn’t believe something like that.)
Here’s the problem for a generally conservative person who is not a Breitbart reader or a CPAC devotee. I generally believe in a strong defense, lower taxes, less regulation, an originalist approach to constitutional law, and so forth. I am a moderate on social issues in the mold of Jack Kemp or John Kasich (for the most part). About 70%, if not more, of what happens under a Trump administration is going to be consistent with those beliefs. Do I have to say, “Even though that is exactly what I hoped to see out of any administration, I must not be happy about it, and I refuse to support it, because it came to be under the administration of that man?“
I don’t think you are saying that at all, but your post reminded me of that point of view. I think jrj is saying that, and there are a few others here also seem to see it that way. If someone approves of anything that the Trump administration has done, or object to any over-the-top characterization, either of of the administration or of the president, the speaker is accused of being a sympathizer of, and a fellow-traveler with, Trump. It is kind of a reverse McCarthyism, except Instead of a loyalty oath, we are expected to swear a disloyalty oath. Otherwise we risk being expelled from polite society.
It’s also really a very truncated way of looking at the overall situation. If one believes that Trump is the equivalent of Hitler, then I can at least see the argument. But Trump is not Hitler. To believe so reflects a profound misunderstanding of the history of the Third Reich, and damages the public discourse. Remember, people called Bush Hitler too. And Bush 1. And Reagan.
This is not directed at you, Dwight, you just unintentionally got me started on a rant. Which is now over.
I love the Trump era. It's morning in America again.
Attachment 2360
A diabolical thought:
We know that Russia and Wikileaks interfered with the 2016 election.
Mdme. Chennault's obit yesterday reminded us that she and Nixon interfered with the Paris Peace talks just before the 1968 election to ensure that Nixon would be elected.
Could China ensure Trump's defeat by maintaining tariffs in Trump country?
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DZ9U-dxUMAAkLoB.jpg
Bernie Sanders supporters should be delighted. Trump is doing everything he advocated.
See: Moral licensing
It's like saying "I had that salad for lunch, so I'm good to eat this whole cake for dinner."Quote:
Past good deeds can liberate individuals to engage in behaviors that are immoral, unethical, or otherwise problematic, behaviors that they would otherwise avoid for fear of feeling or appearing immoral.
By stating they're not a racist, their conscience is clear and they can justify their next sentence.
Sequestration was a disaster for the military services. If the increase addresses the problems created by sequestration then it is a good thing. OTOH, the Pentagon has a rep for spending money unwisely. Also, it appears the budget was increased so it could be raided to pay for Trump's wall. That would not be a good thing.
Ordinarily retaliatory tariffs on soybeans would have a negative effect, but I could see Trump, completely & defiantly unconcerned about the long term, simply opening the Treasury to deliver massive checks to soy bean farmers and giving each of them a Cadillac, made with American made steel. Pull it out of the defense budget.
For that matter, don't be surprised if the GOP passes another sizable tax cut *AND* increases spending, with Trump declaring a $2 Trillion deficit necessary to MAGA as America wages economic war against the rest of the world.
It will be interesting to talk to my parents next week when they’re out West visiting from “the soybean capital of the world”. My hometown is entirely dependent on corn and soy processing, but I have know idea how they’re processing this.
From Trump, the master of self-restraint and growth through sacrifice: the pain from China tariffs will make us "much stronger". http://thehill.com/policy/finance/38...-much-stronger
JRJ - remember to remind your parents that "Trade Wars are Good, and Easy to Win", according to the very stable genius.
It appears Mad Dog is now on the chopping block.
https://www.apnews.com/1ee81c8bcba14...chief-of-staff
Quote:
WASHINGTON (AP) — When President Donald Trump made a congratulatory phone call to Russian leader Vladimir Putin, White House chief of staff John Kelly wasn’t on the line.
When Trump tapped John Bolton to be his next national security adviser, Kelly wasn’t in the room.
And when Trump spent a Mar-a-Lago weekend stewing over immigration and trade, Kelly wasn’t in sight.
Kelly, once empowered to bring order to a turbulent West Wing, has receded from view, his clout diminished, his word less trusted by staff and his guidance less tolerated by an increasingly go-it-alone president.
Emboldened in his job, Trump has rebelled against Kelly’s restrictions and mused about doing away with the chief of staff post entirely. It’s all leading White House staffers and Trump allies to believe that Kelly is working on borrowed time.
Politics in the 21st century aren’t turning out the way I hoped they would.
One of the country’s biggest publishers of fake news says he did it for our own good
https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/20...ews:newsletter