(11-26-2019, 06:33 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Ahh, you're typing a lot of words again. There's a very good chance there have been worse characters than Trump occupy the Oval Office; it's just we are more transparent than we have been any time in the past.
An argument with supporting quotation. A standard held to. Not a sound bite. Yes, a lot of words. And here are more.
There is not a very good chance there have been worse characters than Trump serving as president. Until Carter, probably all US presidents were racist, sexist, and homophobic. Washington had slaves. But because the nation has changed, we don't hold Trump to 18th-19th century standards. If he has slaves, we'll judge him more harshly than Washington. If respect for the Constitution and rule of law is the standard, the most like him was Jackson. If integrity of character is the standards, probably Johnson--the first to undergo an impeachment inquiry. NO ONE in the 20th-21st century comes close.
As I have said many times before, defending Trump ALWAYS involves lowering standards of competence and ethical behavior.
Continuing that theme to respond to a couple of points you addressed to Hollo:
1. The "God uses bad men" argument undercuts the message of Jesus and any basis for serious Christian policy. If there is a (Christian) God Who does use bad men, He nevertheless does not tell His flock which ones are really accomplishing His purposes. There is no good theological reason to believe that Christians can combine support for someone like Trump with an effort to live like Christ. Where they have tried in the past, the results have not been good. In any case, in 1776, the US broke with god-appointed rulers in favor of representative government. Let's keep that precedent.
2. "No president can be a saint." This false either/or is another muddle of standards. If a police officer is caught extorting the people he is supposed to protect, or a banker bankrupts his bank, or a teacher lies constantly about historical and political events, or hospital administrator replaces competent nurses and doctors with non-professionals less likely to resist "shadow" administration, or a minister mocks a disabled person and brags about grabbing P--we don't just shrug and say "we can't expect people to be saints." There are real world consequences, which generally involve removing said persons from the positions of trust clearly beyond their capacity.
When a "leader" in the highest office in the land rolls virtually ALL the above-described bad behavior into ONE individual, and someone argues for acceptance of the new status quo because we can't get "saints" and God works through bad men, that is for sure :
What makes challenging Trump more fearful than tolerating/accepting him for people claiming to be conservative and Christian? There is certainly precedent for that in Christian political philosophy, but it is precedent grounded in feudal, not liberal, ideals.
(11-27-2019, 05:29 PM)Dill Wrote: An argument with supporting quotation. A standard held to. Not a sound bite. Yes, a lot of words. And here are more.
There is not a very good chance there have been worse characters than Trump serving as president. Until Carter, probably all US presidents were racist, sexist, and homophobic. Washington had slaves. But because the nation has changed, we don't hold Trump to 18th-19th century standards. If he has slaves, we'll judge him more harshly than Washington. If respect for the Constitution and rule of law is the standard, the most like him was Jackson. If integrity of character is the standards, probably Johnson--the first to undergo an impeachment inquiry. NO ONE in the 20th-21st century comes close.
As I have said many times before, defending Trump ALWAYS involves lowering standards of competence and ethical behavior.
Continuing that theme to respond to a couple of points you addressed to Hollo:
1. The "God uses bad men" argument undercuts the message of Jesus and any basis for serious Christian policy. If there is a (Christian) God Who does use bad men, He nevertheless does not tell His flock which ones are really accomplishing His purposes. There is no good theological reason to believe that Christians can combine support for someone like Trump with an effort to live like Christ. Where they have tried in the past, the results have not been good. In any case, in 1776, the US broke with god-appointed rulers in favor of representative government. Let's keep that precedent.
2. "No president can be a saint." This false either/or is another muddle of standards. If a police officer is caught extorting the people he is supposed to protect, or a banker bankrupts his bank, or a teacher lies constantly about historical and political events, or hospital administrator replaces competent nurses and doctors with non-professionals less likely to resist "shadow" administration, or a minister mocks a disabled person and brags about grabbing P--we don't just shrug and say "we can't expect people to be saints." There are real world consequences, which generally involve removing said persons from the positions of trust clearly beyond their capacity.
When a "leader" in the highest office in the land rolls virtually ALL the above-described bad behavior into ONE individual, and someone argues for acceptance of the new status quo because we can't get "saints" and God works through bad men, that is for sure :
What makes challenging Trump more fearful than tolerating/accepting him for people claiming to be conservative and Christian? There is certainly precedent for that in Christian political philosophy, but it is precedent grounded in feudal, not liberal, ideals.
"No president can be a saint." Sounds like something a moron would say.
(11-26-2019, 06:33 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I understand the Left's tactic of trying to shame those that vote for Trump, but when looking at the candidates you like, do you rate them by how good of a person he/she is.
As I said: Wise people think this way and truthful people admit it. I'd love for a conservative Saint to occupy the Oval Office, but first we have to impeach Trump before we can welcome President Pence.
Candidates have to be good people. Yes. I do rate them like that. And they must also be competent. Good+competent=not incompatible.
The bolded deserves its own post because of the peculiar framing of the Trump question.
As if people should NOT be ashamed not only of voting for Trump, but of continuing to support him as he daily proves his unfitness for office.
The "Left," like 10% of the Republican party and a number of never-Trump conservatives, sincerely think that Trump is actually damaging our government and foreign policy, while unnecessarily fomenting division at home through impulse rage tweets and vulgar, autocratic manner.
Further, because the damage is of the type that people can ordinarily agree on (e.g., spreading the lie that Ukraine, not Russia, hacked the US election; calling women "dogs" on twitter; obstructing an investigation involving national security), Trump and minions must respond by gaslighting, denying facts and creating alternative ones to muddy the political waters, and attacking the free press to poison alternative wells of information. All disagreement, all criticism, is "partisan," not grounded in law and fact--and so we lurch into Constitutional crisis.
So given this context, what is it, really, that you "understand" about efforts to flag and push back against this abuse of power and office? Why does that pushback NOT signal ethical and principled behavior? If it did, you would not be calling it a "leftist tactic," as if "the left" secretly agrees (with you?) that Trump is NOT REALLY ALL THAT BAD. They are just down on the P-grabber for partisan political ends. 300 dead Kurdish allies the day after an impulsive phone call with Erdogan? Extorting Ukraine to get, not dirt on Biden, but an announcement for gaslighting back in the US? The end to political asylum for anyone from a "shithole" country, the use of "fixers" to minimize scandals, the increasing number of ETHICAL career professionals who have resigned under Trump rather than violate the law, along with the Nixon-level arrest rate of his appointees?
"The Left" can't itself feel shame about this? Cannot be re-affirming standards of performance and ethical behavior once agreed upon across the spectrum--but ESPECIALLY BY CONSERVATIVES?
Looks like a kind of triangulation at work here, not only in your statements but those of many on the right, especially those who like to call themselves "independents." Fox has long helped the American right understand that "The Left" (Benghazi! the emails!!) poses great danger to the nation (as it does indeed for the 1%), far more than Trump at present. And now in consequence, criticizing Trump, acknowledging that he really does what he does, doesn't just tar Trump, but the political acumen of an entire party who thought him a great businessman (the tv image) with an extraordinary ability to judge competence in others--the perfect to choice to battle Washington corruption and face down Putin, Xi, and Kim. (Never-Trumpers saw the problem clearly back in 2015. He would bring the GOP a leader no one could defend--and maintain conservative identity. He would destroy the party.)
Very hard now to attack Trump, to recognize what he is, without foregrounding the colossal bad judgment which put him in power and keeps him there, and conversely, without confirming the good judgment of those who weren't fooled by a media image--i.e., "the left."
Unsurprising that now some rightists who occasionally distance themselves from Trump nevertheless feel bound to attack his attackers, continue the Fox view of all political action as partisan all the way down; "tactics" rather than decency explain why the majority of the US objects to Trump's singularly vulgar public persona and his abuse of power.
(11-27-2019, 01:29 AM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: Its crazy when some people I think I knew start regurgitating the same shit spewing out of the lake of poison that me and many others are fully aware of.
If this was a Muslim going on about some shit....
Either way gtfo of here with this religion shit in my government.
Hey, just look at all the good god has done with Satan. Don’t hate the sinner. Hate the sin.
(11-27-2019, 06:43 PM)Dill Wrote: The "Left," like 10% of the Republican party and a number of never-Trump conservatives, sincerely think that Trump is actually damaging our government and foreign policy, while unnecessarily fomenting division at home through impulse rage tweets and vulgar, autocratic manner.
Obviously yoiu don't understand that anyone who criticizes Trump is actually suffering from a mental illness.
One member here used to cite TDS in almost every one of his posts. It was his only explanation since there was no possible logical reason to criticize him.
(11-29-2019, 11:49 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Obviously yoiu don't understand that anyone who criticizes Trump is actually suffering from a mental illness.
One member here used to cite TDS in almost every one of his posts. It was his only explanation since there was no possible logical reason to criticize him.
TDS is the disease that Trump supporters suffer from, not the people who criticize him.
(11-29-2019, 07:26 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: TDS is the disease that Trump supporters suffer from, not the people who criticize him.
No doubt.
All one has to do to prove this fact is see how many threads in this very forum are started by those that support him compared to the number started by those who oppose him.
(11-29-2019, 11:49 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Obviously yoiu don't understand that anyone who criticizes Trump is actually suffering from a mental illness.
One member here used to cite TDS in almost every one of his posts. It was his only explanation since there was no possible logical reason to criticize him.
Nah, TDS is more than just criticizing POTUS, that's just how you view it in your mind.
TDS, would be more like POTUS did something good; IDK, maybe like visiting the Troops over the holidays, and finding fault in that.
All one has to do to prove this fact is see how many threads in this very forum are started by those that support him compared to the number started by those who oppose him.
Those supporters sure are obsessed.
Are diseases often measured by the number of threads on a Bengals message board people suffering from said disease create?
(11-29-2019, 10:56 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: Are diseases often measured by the number of threads on a Bengals message board people suffering from said disease create?
Sure, this board is simply a microcosm of society.
All one has to do to prove this fact is see how many threads in this very forum are started by those that support him compared to the number started by those who oppose him.
Those supporters sure are obsessed.
But isn't the reason for that asymmetry that Trump does and says so many controversial, shady, outrageous or stupid things?
(11-29-2019, 07:26 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: TDS is the disease that Trump supporters suffer from, not the people who criticize him.
I'll admit the Trump haters as a whole would be wise to scale it back a bit, but at the same time you still need to remember that this is the first time we made a point, a specific point, to elect one of the most well known and least liked people in America to be president.
Yes, the vitriol and extreme attitudes regarding Trump on both sides are crazier than ever, but again this is the first time we've elected a celebrity-only non-politician to the white house. We as a country can't elect a man like Trump and then call for civility and reasonability...it's not what we wanted. We wanted someone who will upset people, force his will upon people/countries/leaders, and be a genuine monster in order to (hopefully) benefit us. We got it.
(12-02-2019, 12:54 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I'll admit the Trump haters as a whole would be wise to scale it back a bit, but at the same time you still need to remember that this is the first time we made a point, a specific point, to elect one of the most well known and least liked people in America to be president.
Yes, the vitriol and extreme attitudes regarding Trump on both sides are crazier than ever, but again this is the first time we've elected a celebrity-only non-politician to the white house. We as a country can't elect a man like Trump and then call for civility and reasonability...it's not what we wanted. We wanted someone who will upset people, force his will upon people/countries/leaders, and be a genuine monster in order to (hopefully) benefit us. We got it.
The divide, to me, is that people who criticize Trump (in my totally biased and therefore meaningless opinion) are, generally, being rational.
It is not normal to, as President, call people losers and haters on Twitter.
It is not normal to use Twitter to announce official political business, especially when there is often no follow up on said tweets.
It is not normal to normalize racism and sexism (whether you personally are racist or sexist is not relevant) with your outbursts at people like AOC and Ilhan Omar.
It is not normal to blatantly lie at an unprecedented rate about simple and complicated things.
It is not normal to condemn virtually all media simply because they are reporting things you say and do.
It is not normal to slur, mispronounce and make up words during multiple speeches over the course of your presidency.
It is not normal to act like a narcissist.
It is not normal to call for the imprisonment of your political rivals when no charges have been levied against them, outside of easily debunked conspiracy theories.
It is not normal to alter weather maps just so that you don't have to admit that you tweeted a warning to a state in error.
It is not normal to ask other countries to investigate your political rivals, either on personal phone calls with the President of that country (like he did with Ukraine) or just during a speech or press conference (like he did with China and Russia).
It is not normal to defend these things.
So which group is the one "Suffering from a disease?"
The latest poll for the Communist party nomination in the Union of Soviet California Republics shows Mao Jr aka Joe Biden leading the pack with a double digit lead.
(12-02-2019, 01:07 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: The divide, to me, is that people who criticize Trump (in my totally biased and therefore meaningless opinion) are, generally, being rational.
It is not normal to, as President, call people losers and haters on Twitter.
It is not normal to use Twitter to announce official political business, especially when there is often no follow up on said tweets.
It is not normal to normalize racism and sexism (whether you personally are racist or sexist is not relevant) with your outbursts at people like AOC and Ilhan Omar.
It is not normal to blatantly lie at an unprecedented rate about simple and complicated things.
It is not normal to condemn virtually all media simply because they are reporting things you say and do.
It is not normal to slur, mispronounce and make up words during multiple speeches over the course of your presidency.
It is not normal to act like a narcissist.
It is not normal to call for the imprisonment of your political rivals when no charges have been levied against them, outside of easily debunked conspiracy theories.
It is not normal to alter weather maps just so that you don't have to admit that you tweeted a warning to a state in error.
It is not normal to ask other countries to investigate your political rivals, either on personal phone calls with the President of that country (like he did with Ukraine) or just during a speech or press conference (like he did with China and Russia).
It is not normal to defend these things.
So which group is the one "Suffering from a disease?"
Hmmm, yea it looks less symmetrical when you put it that way. The thing that is frustrating about Trump supporters isn't that they don't admit he's a corrupt person, they just seem to think his particular version of corruption is essential to fixing this country. Well, that's over-simplifying things, but it comes down to not being able to fix a problem you refuse to admit you have.
Or maybe Trump is just what we need and after his 8 years we can find someone just like him to keep us going in the right direction.
(11-30-2019, 01:35 AM)hollodero Wrote: But isn't the reason for that asymmetry that Trump does and says so many controversial, shady, outrageous or stupid things?
Can't u read?!?
Trump visited the troops over the holidays. GOOD THING!
That cancels outrageous, controversial, shady and stupid. Not to mention the risk to national security and damage to foreign policy.
Hard for you TDS types to admit when Trump does something right!
(12-02-2019, 01:35 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Hmmm, yea it looks less symmetrical when you put it that way. The thing that is frustrating about Trump supporters isn't that they don't admit he's a corrupt person, they just seem to think his particular version of corruption is essential to fixing this country. Well, that's over-simplifying things, but it comes down to not being able to fix a problem you refuse to admit you have.
Or maybe Trump is just what we need and after his 8 years we can find someone just like him to keep us going in the right direction.
I think you are right about that, on both (bolded) counts.
Trump is clearly absolved from the usual accountability placed upon public figures.
And part of that is owing to a skewed account of what is wrong with the country and how to fix it.
(12-02-2019, 01:48 PM)Dill Wrote: I think you are right about that, on both (bolded) counts.
Trump is clearly absolved from the usual accountability placed upon public figures.
And part of that is owing to a skewed account of what is wrong with the country and how to fix it.
Is there accountability placed upon public figures? I just don't see that. Politics especially people let their perceptions override the facts, but that's just human nature and I'm sure I do it too.
(11-30-2019, 01:35 AM)hollodero Wrote: But isn't the reason for that asymmetry that Trump does and says so many controversial, shady, outrageous or stupid things?
Of course it is. bfine is just proving my point
(11-29-2019, 11:49 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Obviously yoiu don't understand that anyone who criticizes Trump is actually suffering from a mental illness.
One member here used to cite TDS in almost every one of his posts. It was his only explanation since there was no possible logical reason to criticize him.
It is like saying Bengal fans are mentally ill for talking about losing so much this year. Just go count the number of threads about losing in the main forum.
(12-02-2019, 01:07 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: The divide, to me, is that people who criticize Trump (in my totally biased and therefore meaningless opinion) are, generally, being rational.
It is not normal to, as President, call people losers and haters on Twitter.
It is not normal to use Twitter to announce official political business, especially when there is often no follow up on said tweets.
It is not normal to normalize racism and sexism (whether you personally are racist or sexist is not relevant) with your outbursts at people like AOC and Ilhan Omar.
It is not normal to blatantly lie at an unprecedented rate about simple and complicated things.
It is not normal to condemn virtually all media simply because they are reporting things you say and do.
It is not normal to slur, mispronounce and make up words during multiple speeches over the course of your presidency.
It is not normal to act like a narcissist.
It is not normal to call for the imprisonment of your political rivals when no charges have been levied against them, outside of easily debunked conspiracy theories.
It is not normal to alter weather maps just so that you don't have to admit that you tweeted a warning to a state in error.
It is not normal to ask other countries to investigate your political rivals, either on personal phone calls with the President of that country (like he did with Ukraine) or just during a speech or press conference (like he did with China and Russia).
It is not normal to defend these things.
So which group is the one "Suffering from a disease?"
Very much agreed with you on this partial listing of Trump bad behavior. NOT NORMAL.
So the problem is why so many not only accept this degraded and abnormal behavior, but idolize the source.
Some may be in denial or various states of rationalization ("different" style of governing), but others are full on ok with breaking stuff, as long as its government, "leftists," feminists, and foreign policy (Globalists!). Also, many would (irrationally) dispute items of your list ("Read the transcript").
Trump defenders (not "supporters") don't idolize Trump and claim they don't support him, but their political identity demands a "never-'the-Left'" stance. When forced to choose between publicly and consistently criticizing Trump for the actions you list above, or publicly criticizing "the left" for criticizing those actions, they have to choose the latter. That contributes as much to normalizing Trump behavior as the avid support of Trump supporters.
Whatever measuring stick Trump supporters/defenders are using to measure presidents is broken--or tilted much farther rightward than previously suspected. E.g., who disapproves of or at least consistently under rates the President who led the War of Northern Aggression?
(This neo-confederate tendency would not apply to all the 4Chan nihilists who support Trump or many of coal miners and blue collar laborers who genuinely thought Trump would have their back, or some of the anti-Globalists.)
![[Image: ostrich-hiding-its-head-under-sand-to-pr...d-copy.jpg]](http://euromaidanpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/ostrich-hiding-its-head-under-sand-to-protect-it-from-strong-wind-copy.jpg)
![[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]](https://i.imgur.com/4CV0TeR.png)
![[Image: oN5QAdY.png]](https://i.imgur.com/oN5QAdY.png)
![[Image: bfine-guns2.png]](https://i.ibb.co/YBkDQJV/bfine-guns2.png)
![[Image: ulVdgX6.jpg]](http://i.imgur.com/ulVdgX6.jpg)
