POTUS: 45.37: The Earth is Flat and the Babies Are Crying

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: POTUS: 45.37: The Earth is Flat and the Babies Are Crying

Brent has explicitly stated that it makes him sick on more than one occasion. Why some of you continue to ignore those statements, is beyond me.

Of course he has. No one said he didn't. Then he said this, "Back in 1800, did you really need to hear an argument AGAINST slavery?

Remember when everyone DID think the earth was flat? Any reason to hear some lunatic say the earth is round? "

I rest my case.

[Kepler]

Re: POTUS: 45.37: The Earth is Flat and the Babies Are Crying

Yes, but.

Many of these people want to be treated like they are at the adult's table. Yet more and more, you question them on pretty simple items, and they can't come up with a decent answer, or some kind of deflection to make you *think* that they might have an opinion.

This is where brent and drew are- you are really not sure how they feel about this, as they are bothered by the coverage, and would like to see both sides more. So they are like Arron Burr- they will swing to whoever is running the country- no opinion is better than one that could make you a target.

Then there are people who put targets onto others, based on X reasons. Yet when someone they support should get that same target, they hesitate- no idea why. This is joe. It's not as if he's not posted moral outrage issues before- he's done it plenty of times. It's that this time, the "outrage" is pretty darned silent on a nurf toss issue. So what does he really stand for? Dunno anymore.

Anyway, my point is that for some people, I'm not sure putting the raw effort into finding the issue is worth it. We see too many people attack "political correctness" as they think they are being attacked, when the reality of being "politically correct" is to just not be an ******* to everyone. Be nice and respectful, and others will do the same to you. So the people who can't get it into their heads that they are just like everyone else, regardless of their skin color or where they come from- I'm happy leaving them at the kids table.

This is a big issue. This is an issue you can't hide from. This is supporting or condemning our government from taking kids from their parents, regardless of the crime. And not having a plan to reunite them.

There's no gray area of "yes, but" here.

I mostly agree. My difference in approach comes from a few points of disagreement.

In my opinion:

1. There's always a gray area. Find the most moral and justified war we ever fought and I'll find you cases of us incinerating babies with firebombs. The mistake reactionaries make is that there are moral absolutes. There aren't. All moral judgments are contextual.

2. Talking to people and asking their opinion is a way to help them confront things they are hiding from. If you say "THOU ARST A HARLOT BECAUSE..!" you lose them immediately. If you say "So, what was going through your mind when you decided to pull that train of 36 frat boys and a moose? I'm just curious." you get them thinking.

3. Plus, their answer tells you something new to your experience, assuming you haven't made it with a moose. Now, I'm not sure it's going to be that educational or edifying but hey, you never know.

4. We do have to live with one another when this is all over. In 1 year, or 10, or 100, we're going to win. The species is gradually getting up from the mud and filth and reaching towards the stars. Only a handful of the monsters who actually worked in the camps will go to the Stupid Nuremberg Trials. The rest will be reabsorbed back into civil society. How they deNazify will be up to them, but how we are capable of allowing them back into society will be up to us. The addict gets another chance after he detoxes. In New York you can be a new man.

[SJHovey]

Re: POTUS: 45.37: The Earth is Flat and the Babies Are Crying

I'm angry. I hope Brent and SJ and joe are angry too. I've asked them how they feel and how they reconcile their support for the regime and the party that has done this, because I am curious. I also think they have the right to tell their story (or, for that matter, to be silent and deal with their own inner voices).

This isn't a courtroom. I want to know how they feel because they aren't stupid and they aren't monsters, so I want to know how they can, in my mind, enable monsters -- not just enable them before in the abstract when it was potentiality, but now, after it's happening, when they can see it in the flesh. Imagine if Hannah Arendt had gotten to talk to Good Germans in the 1930s. She wouldn't have been doing history, then, but anthropology.

This is important way beyond this case. It's how evil works its will using a population that is for the most part not monstrous. Here we have a real life case of terrible things that are happening because not terrible people are telling themselves it's OK. I want to know how that's happening, because it could also happen to you and me.

I want to understand a sickness because I don't want to get sick.

First, I'm curious why people think I support this regime? I've certainly made it clear that I lean more conservative than a lot of posters here. But as first noted on election morn, I did not vote for Trump and never had any intention of voting for Trump. People quickly took my refusal to vote for HRC as quasi-support for Trump, and apparently that has stuck. But there has been very, very little that has been done by this administration that I support. I didn't have any objection to Gorsuch. I didn't have any objection to Trump at least meeting with the North Korean dictator since I don't think communication is ever a bad thing. But I'd be hard pressed to think of anything else they've done that I really support.

That said, I've been trying to think about why I feel so differently about the idea of listening to what everyone has to say, no matter how crazy or evil we might think they are. I'm not sure I have an answer, but this is the best that I can come up with.

I have strong confidence in my own personal ability to read something or listen to someone and decide if it's just complete b.s. Thus, I have no fear if you want to put some person on tv who is going to claim the space landing was faked, the Sandy Hook shooting never happened, or FEMA will be setting up camps at your local WalMart. Listen, I've had personal business with FEMA and they couldn't set up a camp at a KOA without help. If David Duke comes on tv and starts talking about the evil of mixing the races, my reaction is, "let him talk." Me, I'm flipping stations.

Because of that confidence in myself, I tend to extend that same confidence to everyone else. Unless demonstrated otherwise, I've just always assumed everyone here, all of my friends and work acquaintances, as well as strangers, have that same ability. Thus, I have always tended to err on the side of "let 'em speak." I like when the nuts get a chance to publicly speak. It helps me identify who the crazies are.

So now I'm sure that some of you will ask why I'm not on here railing against Trump or his administration if they've done very little with which I agree. Fair question. The answer is basically I'm not much of a "me too" poster.

I don't post here nearly as often as many of you. If six posters come to this Board and post "I'm really angry they canceled Dexter," you almost certainly won't see me come here and post "me too" or "I'm really angry they canceled Dexter." I consider that to be a waste of my time.

I tend to post in the following instances. First, when I'm asked a question directly, such as Kep's post seems to do. Second, if I disagree with the group think on a subject. Third, if I think there is a view point on a subject that is being ignored, or is important to add. Fourth, if I think someone's point or an article or something else is being misrepresented by a poster.

Candidly, everything else bores me. It's part of the reason I like posting in the political threads, because I don't tend to think the same way about some of the issues as the group, so it gives me more of a chance to disagree.

[Kepler]

Re: POTUS: 45.37: The Earth is Flat and the Babies Are Crying

First, I'm curious why people think I support this regime?

My impression is you tend to be an apologist for Republican positions in general. I'm sure there are cases in which you diverge from the party, but on a board with dozens of regular political posters about the deepest I ever go with another poster is a very high level perception of where they are coming from.

Put it this way -- there are a few posters here who surprise me with their stance on a new issue, whereas most posters are not at all surprising. I am, for example, an example of a non-surprising poster. You seem to me to be one, too.

That doesn't at all mean you're a Dumpy. To be frank, I wouldn't be wasting my time with you if you were. But he's not a deal breaker for you -- you seem to be OK with the GOP riding along with him as long as he's driving you in the general direction you want to go. That's what I want to ask you about. Now that the stench from the body in the trunk is undeniable, why isn't the GOP's cynicism a deal breaker for you by now?

I'm curious because although you certainly operate from different premises than mine, with you being a righty and me being a lefty, you do seem to think in much the way I do -- caring about being rational, for example. I want to know what's going on in your head because I may face a similar moral dilemma someday and I don't want to (IMO) fail the way you did. I want to be able to stand up and tell my side to go f-ck itself if it is doing something horrific. I want to know what's stopping you from doing so. I really mean it. I'm using you as my own teachable moment.

[SJHovey]

Re: POTUS: 45.37: The Earth is Flat and the Babies Are Crying

I want to know what's going on in your head because I may face a similar moral dilemma someday and, not to be too frank, I don't want to fail the way you did.

Man, you really know how to suck up to a guy.

I tend to view Trump like a kidney stone. He's incredibly painful. But sooner or later he'll pass and I'll be rid of him. I'm hoping he doesn't cause permanent damage, but it's something I want to monitor.

I tend to give Republicans in Congress a pass on their refusal to impeach Trump, or even be critical of him, because I understand they have to play the political game themselves. They have to put themselves in the best position to try to keep their own jobs, and sometimes that means just trying to keep your head low and out of the shooting. Other than the tax cut, they haven't really given him much, legislatively.

I have a lot of faith in our government institutions, and their ability to withstand even a clown like Trump. I tend to think the Presidency and the Republic will still be standing even after he is gone. Yeah, there will be some mending of fences that will have to go on with allies. Yeah, someone should get us back into the Iran deal or the climate accord. But we'll survive Donald Trump.

Frankly, I don't tend to get too worked up over much of anything, so that may be part of the "problem" with me, too.

[jerphisch]

Re: POTUS: 45.37: The Earth is Flat and the Babies Are Crying

Brent has explicitly stated that it makes him sick on more than one occasion. Why some of you continue to ignore those statements, is beyond me.

First, I'm curious why people think I support this regime?

The very simple answer to these is that there is always a but. It makes me sick, but...

Nothing is being ignored. When you start qualifying the it makes me sick, well, does it really?

[Kepler]

Re: POTUS: 45.37: The Earth is Flat and the Babies Are Crying

Cheesehead Dumpies have a sad.

And who’s the No. 1 importer of Wisconsin cheese? The same country that is the No. 1 buyer of Iowa pork: Mexico. Donald Trump’s trade war is going to have a profound impact on American cheese, pork, and soybeans. Retaliatory tariffs from Mexico, Europe, and China will be hitting Trump country with precision. Nevertheless, despite it all, those farmers are still supporting Donald Trump.

[Kepler]

Re: POTUS: 45.37: The Earth is Flat and the Babies Are Crying

I have a lot of faith in our government institutions, and their ability to withstand even a clown like Trump.

Our institutions don't work automatically -- they don't "save" us; we have to save them.

When Dump attacks the free press that's an attack on all of us, left or right, who believe in democracy. It's an attack on an open society, civil liberties, and the rule of law.

I can't tell you to get excited about that, but I'm not sure what can get you excited if that doesn't bother you. Maybe one of my guys doing it will. Because if Dump keeps going like this he's destroying our system for everyone, and the next guy who walks through that door onto the ruins might be Kepler on Steroids.

[SJHovey]

Re: POTUS: 45.37: The Earth is Flat and the Babies Are Crying

Our institutions don't work automatically -- they don't "save" us; we have to save them.

When Dump attacks the free press that's an attack on all of us, left or right, who believe in democracy. It's an attack on an open society, civil liberties, and the rule of law.

I can't tell you to get excited about that, but I'm not sure what can get you excited if that doesn't bother you. Maybe one of my guys doing it will. Because if Dump keeps going like this he's destroying our system for everyone, and the next guy who walks through that door onto the ruins might be Kepler on Steroids.

Again, here is where I view it slightly differently than you. I personally believe that Trump's "attacks" on the press have been at least marginally beneficial to our country. I'll acknowledge that there exists a percentage of our populace that takes him at his word that the press can't be trusted. But even more importantly I think his attacks have revitalized a press that honestly had grown a little stagnant and spoonfed.

I don't think he can effectively attack the press. He calls them names. He threatens them. Yeah, he may pick and choose who gets to come to one of his meetings, but he isn't hindering the press in the least.

If he tried to pass legislation or issued an executive order that limited press freedoms in the country, I'd be at the head of the line protesting. But all he has really done is pick a war of words with people who buy ink by the barrel.

[SJHovey]

Re: POTUS: 45.37: The Earth is Flat and the Babies Are Crying

The very simple answer to these is that there is always a but. It makes me sick, but...

Nothing is being ignored. When you start qualifying the it makes me sick, well, does it really?

What exactly has my "but" been?

With respect to the incarceration of the children and their families, I stated my opposition. I did add a "but" that indicated I was opposed to all limitations on immigration into this country. Is that the "but" that causes you to think I've fallen in line with Trump?

My opposition was stated simply and clearly. I think incarcerating and separating these people is wrong. Most of you think that because I didn't write it, "OMG!! F##K TRUMP!! F$$K PENCE!!! WHAT ABOUT THE BABIES?!?!?!?! KILL ALL THE NAZI'S!!#!##!#!" that I didn't sufficiently oppose it.

[jerphisch]

Re: POTUS: 45.37: The Earth is Flat and the Babies Are Crying

What exactly has my "but" been?

A sampling...

But I waded into this s h ! t show of a thread that you've created to say that I agree with the NYT. That throwing gasoline on the fire by tossing terms like "nazi" and "concentration camp" around like they are wooden nickels is not going to solve problems, and in fact it is going to make it more difficult to solve them. Trump screams like a lunatic. Screaming like a lunatic back at him is not the solution.

There is a lot of bad bs going on this country, and many things we need to change. But that kind of talk is not persuading me that I need to join your camp.

But you know as well as I do that the term "concentration camp" evokes a very specific reaction since World War II, and that's why people are using that term. It's used for the same reason that the term nazi is used.

That said, I'm curious what you and others think should be done with these kids under the law as it currently exists.
1. Incarcerate them with their parents and a whole lot of additional unrelated adults until they can be returned home?
2. Left to roam the streets until their parents are processed and ready to be returned home?
3. Placed in thousands of yet to be identified foster homes?
4. Placed in one of tens of thousand of individual holding cells built just for families (that have yet to be constructed)?
5. Have someone just literally walk them back across the border?
6. Some other great idea that you have?

I blame every single one of you who don’t agree with my position that the US borders should be open to whoever wants to come here.

So to summarize, it's mostly some form of "but your whining is even worse than locking kids up." With a side of "but what else could be done." And a little "but really it's your fault" for dessert.

[5mn_Major]

Re: POTUS: 45.37: The Earth is Flat and the Babies Are Crying

Again, here is where I view it slightly differently than you. I personally believe that Trump's "attacks" on the press have been at least marginally beneficial to our country. I'll acknowledge that there exists a percentage of our populace that takes him at his word that the press can't be trusted. But even more importantly I think his attacks have revitalized a press that honestly had grown a little stagnant and spoonfed.

100% Disagree. Not really sure how you could even reach that conclusion.

First, the press on all fronts if anything becomes more political and petty rather than less. He's trolling and if anything, they're taking the bait - and the quality of reporting suffers. When they reply, he takes the bait - rinse, repeat. Every other president has treated that as their responsibility - which it needs to be due to free press.

Second, your completing ignoring the impact on the third of Americans who gives him undue credit. That group hears the media is wrong at its core and believes it. For them then, it doesn't matter what's said by those outlets. Ultimately, whatever Trump says becomes Gospel.

[burd]

Re: POTUS: 45.37: The Earth is Flat and the Babies Are Crying

Again, here is where I view it slightly differently than you. I personally believe that Trump's "attacks" on the press have been at least marginally beneficial to our country. I'll acknowledge that there exists a percentage of our populace that takes him at his word that the press can't be trusted. But even more importantly I think his attacks have revitalized a press that honestly had grown a little stagnant and spoonfed.

I don't think he can effectively attack the press. He calls them names. He threatens them. Yeah, he may pick and choose who gets to come to one of his meetings, but he isn't hindering the press in the least.

If he tried to pass legislation or issued an executive order that limited press freedoms in the country, I'd be at the head of the line protesting. But all he has really done is pick a war of words with people who buy ink by the barrel.

There may be some truth to that, hovey, but here's my concern. Trump was chosen by one of our two major political parties to represent its interests in the campaign, and he won. Despite the fact that he lies openly and constantly and foments, intentionally or not, the growth of right wing hate groups, he continues to have the support of nearly every major player in his party. I heard the results of a study today (on NPR) that of the people who voted for him in either a primary or the general, well over 90% would vote for him again. Liberals are often castigated for failing to understand Trump voters and why they voted for him, and they are warned that until they do, they will continue to lose elections.

Well, it may be that Trump has no policy objectives, only impulses, and that he only serves his own ego. But he has shown from the start a plan to create in the American public a belief that the news we receive through all but a few sources is fake and cannot be believed. He has been methodical about that. You say this is harmless and that it may even be having a revitalizing effect on the press. But it appears, at least, that this distrust is shared by those who continue to support him--those same people liberals seem unable to understand. Even assuming that the press is being revitalized (and I disagree with that), what good is a revitalized press if the public refuses to to believe what it publishes? If that happens, then Justice Holmes' famous words that "the best test of truth is the power of thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market" is just more fake news.

I don't know--something like that.

[SJHovey]

Re: POTUS: 45.37: The Earth is Flat and the Babies Are Crying

A sampling...



So to summarize, it's mostly some form of "but your whining is even worse than locking kids up." With a side of "but what else could be done." And a little "but really it's your fault" for dessert.

Oh, nonsense. I wasn't comparing your whining to locking kids up. Your whining just sucks, whether you're whining about this or anything else.

I think my questions were legitimate ones. I know my answer. My answer is we shouldn't be stopping them at all, we should just be letting them in. But I had, and have, a genuine curiosity about what you think we should do with people we capture if you don't want to let them all in. I never did get an answer to my question, by the way.

[SJHovey]

Re: POTUS: 45.37: The Earth is Flat and the Babies Are Crying

There may be some truth to that, hovey, but here's my concern. Trump was chosen by one of our two major political parties to represent its interests in the campaign, and he won. Despite the fact that he lies openly and constantly and foments, intentionally or not, the growth of right wing hate groups, he continues to have the support of nearly every major player in his party. I heard the results of a study today (on NPR) that of the people who voted for him in either a primary or the general, well over 90% would vote for him again. Liberals are often castigated for failing to understand Trump voters and why they voted for him, and they are warned that until they do, they will continue to lose elections.

Well, it may be that Trump has no policy objectives, only impulses, and that he only serves his own ego. But he has shown from the start a plan to create in the American public a belief that the news we receive through all but a few sources is fake and cannot be believed. He has been methodical about that. You say this is harmless and that it may even be having a revitalizing effect on the press. But it appears, at least, that this distrust is shared by those who continue to support him--those same people liberals seem unable to understand. Even assuming that the press is being revitalized (and I disagree with that), what good is a revitalized press if the public refuses to to believe what it publishes? If that happens, then Justice Holmes' famous words that "the best test of truth is the power of thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market" is just more fake news.

I don't know--something like that.

I don't know that I said Trump's attacks on the media were harmless. At least that wasn't my intent. What I said was that they have been marginally beneficial. What I intended by that, although I could have admittedly written it better, is that the net effect has been beneficial. While certain people have been persuaded to not believe what they read, having a more active, a more angry and frankly a much more energized news media has produced a larger benefit.

I saw or read something a few weeks ago, and I'm not sure I can put my hands on it at this point, about the number of eyeballs that are hitting on things like the NYT or WPo websites, and how since the election of Trump traffic has increased dramatically. I think that is good. It can't hurt people to read news, even if they are inclined to not believe it. I'd rather have them reading it and not believing it than not reading it at all. I have a faith, be it misguided or not, that sooner or later telling people the truth sinks in.