R_D posted a tweet from David Frum in the Trump thread. I disagree 180 degrees with David Frum's take on US Mid-East policy and his support for the nuclear-weapons back affirmative action ethnic cleansing/nation building program which I see as the single, greatest threat to rich western nations and the hegemony that the USA still or perhaps once enjoyed.
But that does not prevent David Frum from making a excellent point about the nature of Trump's 2016 electoral victory. I strongly agree with Frum on that issue and believe that his take is worth discussing as is his take on much domestic policy. Frum worked at one point as a speech writer for former President Bush, Jr.
But then my politics are Neo-Viking constructive engagement whereas it seems most Americans are hopelessly mired in partisan, us-versus-them political attitudes. Those deaf, polarized attitudes are constantly worsening under the influence of the Trump movement.
P.S. David Frum is Jewish. Should that matter when assessing the validity of his 'message'? I sure as hell hope not as I would be intellectually impoverished if I had to shut out all the Jewish-sourced ideas, analysis and thoughts in my head.
snip ... So much for giving a straight answer to a straight question.
Regarding the Frum tweet ... I'm guessing that it is directed at Dershowitz's testimony on the Senate floor where he explained how our Constitution works in matters like we are discussing and that would make it Jew vs Jew if that is the take that concerns you, eh ?
The USA is not a democracy as founded. It is a constitutional representative republic. The Electoral College is a major part of that foundation. It assures that small power centers do not dominate the rest of the country, the way they would most certainly if we used pure democracy as the way to decide our elections and it also helps to guarantee consideration of individual state's rights.
Replace our 18th Century form of government with an even older one, a parliamentary one ? That is going backwards.
If we are going to have any chance of fixing and preserving our country and government, we need TERM LIMITS, STAT ASAP YESTERDAY. I am sick and tired of the case against them. What, we will never find capable people to replace the ones that get moved on ? That is simply bullshit and defeatist. It is the only way to break the death grip of the establishment. And it will lessen the power of the two parties and open the door for 3rd parties, at the very least in the House.
Why are we afraid to do this ? What have we got to lose at this point ?
And here we go, of course Republicans would have to take the house to make this happen, but this is exactly what I was talking about. Do not underestimate the pettiness of both parties. All either party needs is a 2 person cushion and voila. Settle in, until the 2 party system is eradicated this is our life:
Joe Biden Could Be Impeached by GOP Over Ukraine if He Wins, Iowa Senator Says
R_D posted a tweet from David Frum in the Trump thread. I disagree 180 degrees with David Frum's take on US Mid-East policy and his support for the nuclear-weapons back affirmative action ethnic cleansing/nation building program which I see as the single, greatest threat to rich western nations and the hegemony that the USA still or perhaps once enjoyed.
But that does not prevent David Frum from making an excellent point about the nature of Trump's 2016 electoral victory. I strongly agree with Frum on that issue and believe that his take is worth discussing as is his take on much domestic policy. Frum worked at one point as a speech writer for former President Bush, Jr.
But then my politics are Neo-Viking constructive engagement whereas it seems most Americans are hopelessly mired in partisan, us-versus-them political attitudes. Those deaf, polarized attitudes are constantly worsening under the influence of the Trump movement.
P.S. David Frum is Jewish. Should that matter when assessing the validity of his 'message'? I sure as hell hope not as I would be intellectually impoverished if I had to shut out all the Jewish-sourced ideas, analysis and thoughts in my head.
"Republican leaders in Congress believeâand privately sayâthat they fear the country is quickly changing in ways that may soon deprive them of power, and that they must use the power they have now to delay it as long as possible, even by harming the Republic if necessary." - Evan McMullen
To quote Mccartney: "I look around me and I see it isn't so, oh no." They may be correct in that the demographic changes may soon deprive some Republicans of power, but it will also do the same to Democrats. The days of assuming that people will vote by their gender, sexuality and ethnicity only are coming to an end as well. The Democratic party will evolve and quite possibly go away just as the Republican party. I see people becoming truly "woke" in a completely different way than the media portrays in their neatly packed boxes they put us all in. We are going through the growing pains of this process, but will come out hopefully much more fractured than our current political system as people are tiring of only being placed in one of two camps. Trump is a symbol of this, when he is gone hopefully we will never go back to what it was before him. Edit: And for the short term, these Republican senators are really worried about their power in their own districts if they go against their constituents man. They will have to explain how they were complicit in trying to take away their vote and choice on the upcoming Presidential ballot (that is what this almost 4 year process is really about). There are many people who love Trump and don't give a rat's ass about the Republican party and this phenomenon is overlooked by many who do not see it. That is what this vote is really about in a microcosmic sense.
Expediency is what it is. You are just making excuses for it.
Then I will also consider the message itself. The message itself is highly biased, self serving and without any direct source as proof. It is from a died in the wool Never Trumper. Hardly a neutral observer at any level. As biased or as predisposed against Trump as anyone can be.
So there. I have covered both angles of the post and poster in question.
Now what have you to say ?
It's expedient to shoot the messenger instead of the message...
No, not in this case. It is one thing to cite someone that you generally agree with overall. But to cite someone whose's basic overall take on policies you adamantly oppose is an example of expediency, imo. You cannot have it both ways. Try again.
Still refers to the messenger (poster) and not the message. A personal attack in lieu of an argument about the actual quote. And denial, of course.
The word you gave it away.
Expediency is what it is. You are just making excuses for it.
Then I will also consider the message itself. The message itself is highly biased, self serving and without any direct source as proof. It is from a died in the wool Never Trumper. Hardly a neutral observer at any level. As biased or as predisposed against Trump as anyone can be.
So there. I have covered both angles of the post and poster in question.
No, not in this case. It is one thing to cite someone that you generally agree with overall. But to cite someone whose's basic overall take on policies you adamantly oppose is an example of expediency, imo. You cannot have it both ways. Try again.
Still refers to the messenger (poster) and not the message. A personal attack in lieu of an argument about the actual quote. And denial, of course.
No, not in this case. It is one thing to cite someone that you generally agree with overall. But to cite someone whose's basic overall take on policies you adamantly oppose is an example of expediency, imo. You cannot have it both ways. Try again.
Funny, you siding with a 2016 republican *cough* independent candidate for POTUS who is a staunch prolifer and strongly believes in the traditional style marriage between a man and a woman. There is virtually no daylight between him and Mitt Romney btw. How hypocritical convenient of you.
Are his views on social engineering relevant to the quote?
Funny, you siding with a 2016 republican *cough* independent candidate for POTUS who is a staunch prolifer and strongly believes in the traditional style marriage between a man and a woman. There is virtually no daylight between him and Mitt Romney btw. How hypocritical convenient of you.
Are his views on social engineering relevant to the quote?
"Republican leaders in Congress believe—and privately say—that they fear the country is quickly changing in ways that may soon deprive them of power, and that they must use the power they have now to delay it as long as possible, even by harming the Republic if necessary." - Evan McMullen
Funny, you siding with a 2016 republican *cough* independent candidate for POTUS who is a staunch prolifer and strongly believes in the traditional style marriage between a man and a woman. There is virtually no daylight between him and Mitt Romney btw. How hypocritical convenient of you.
"Republican leaders in Congress believeâand privately sayâthat they fear the country is quickly changing in ways that may soon deprive them of power, and that they must use the power they have now to delay it as long as possible, even by harming the Republic if necessary." - Evan McMullen
"Republican leaders in Congress believeâand privately sayâthat they fear the country is quickly changing in ways that may soon deprive them of power, and that they must use the power they have now to delay it as long as possible, even by harming the Republic if necessary." - Evan McMullen
My statement represents gloating to you ? No gloating here. There was no dancing bananas. You must have me mistaken for someone else.
I have carefully refrained from making any claims of any victory or how this would impact things going forward.
I have stuck to how I feel that this was an effort to impeach Trump since before he took the oath of office. That this was an impeachment looking for a reason.
Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong about what I said above.
Let me try to understand your thinking on this. You believe there has been an effort to impeach Trump since before he took office, an effort constantly and continually looking for a reason to impeach. And because of this effort Trump should get a pass on misconduct that otherwise would be grounds for impeachment?
I was going to make an edit to my above statement regarding Scott's reference to the Rubio rule about how it seems to have applied to Clinton as well. Clinton's actual crime was perjury.
Yes it has been well established that the campaign to impeach Trump began at the very least within minutes of him taking the oath of office if not sooner. The 2018 election was all about flipping the House for the specific purpose of impeaching Trump.
But to answer your question ... You believe that Trump's references to Biden with Ukraine refer to the 2020 election. Please correct me if I'm wrong. I believe that they refer to the 2016 election. Because you believe that his remarks are towards 2020, it is misconduct. I believe that they are in regards to the 2016 election and are therefore justified. I also believe that the only reason Biden decided to run for POTUS this year was an attempt to cut short any investigations directed at him, a la the precedent created by Hillary in 2016.
He wasn't acquitted, you have to have a trial to be acquitted and a trial requires witnesses and documents. Even the "witches" of 1692 Salem had a trial for fucks sake. He will, however, always be an impeached president. IMPOTUS
We accepted the electoral college's decision to install him, it was painful. It was unbelievable. Of course he had lots of help and still lost the majority, and yet we accepted defeat and hoped we were all wrong.
But we weren't. He has always been and will always be a cheat, a liar, and a fraud.
I'm not sure America can recover from this betrayal by the republicans.
I got the hell outta there while I could...
God bless America.
Aw thanks. Some of us aren't leaving but speaking for myself I peek around outside the envelope and feel pretty good about our chances outside of what amounts to squabbling government institutions and the ubiquitous mocking defeatist socializing of opinion feeding webwide drum pounding and hand wringing.
He wasn't acquitted, you have to have a trial to be acquitted and a trial requires witnesses and documents. Even the "witches" of 1692 Salem had a trial for fucks sake. He will, however, always be an impeached president. IMPOTUS
We accepted the electoral college's decision to install him, it was painful. It was unbelievable. Of course he had lots of help and still lost the majority, and yet we accepted defeat and hoped we were all wrong.
But we weren't. He has always been and will always be a cheat, a liar, and a fraud.
I'm not sure America can recover from this betrayal by the republicans.
. All either party needs is a 2 person cushion and voila. Settle in, until the 2 party system is eradicated this is our life:
