Authoritarianism Is Not Confined To One Political Party

[skeeter]

Yeah! Making an assumption that thinking is involved is clueless!

Hilarious.

Look I'm sorry the election didn't work out the way you wanted. Its pretty clear to all here you've been abnormally effected by it.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

I guess the series of ill-conceived and poorly executed Executive Orders aren't enough for you guys....

Just because an Executive Order is "ill-conceived and poorly executed" doesn't make it unconstitutional or an abuse of power.  Honestly, which specific order do you think qualifies as exceeding his reasonable authority as President?  The immigration orders are all being issued pursuant to express delegations of power by Congress.  The President is supposed to make those kind of decisions -- it's expressly build right into the law.

Not to mention his various threats of imposing taxes (over which he has no control, btw...).

Has he ever said that he's going to do it without Congress?  Isn't that usually implied?

[r9etb]

Just because an Executive Order is "ill-conceived and poorly executed" doesn't make it unconstitutional or an abuse of power.  Honestly, which specific order do you think qualifies as exceeding his reasonable authority as President?  The immigration orders are all being issued pursuant to express delegations of power by Congress.  The President is supposed to make those kind of decisions -- it's expressly build right into the law.

It's not the constitutionality of the thing, it's the way he did it -- just imposed it without warning or preparation -- which speaks to a way of thinking and behaving that is consistent with his behavior all along.  The man is a bully.  He speaks and acts in authoritarian ways.  In the realm of Executive Orders he's behaving precisely as Obama did, even on the same subjects -- and we were correctly pissed at Obama when he did it.

Has he ever said that he's going to do it without Congress?  Isn't that usually implied?

The wording he used was, as I recall it, "I'm going to impose a border tax."  And the context in which he said it, was in the form of a threat.  Similar to his threat to UC Berkely concerning removal of federal funds in response to the riots there.   

The problem I have with some on this thread, is that they seem to believe that "authoritarianism" only counts if the Supreme Court can rule on it.  But here we have a president who continually deals in threats and insults.  What are we to say and do about such a man?

[Doug Loss]

Hilarious.

Look I'm sorry the election didn't work out the way you wanted. Its pretty clear to all here you've been abnormally effected by it.

Skeet, Maj. Bill, I'm with you on this.  Trump wasn't my choice either, but all these folks whining about his authoritarianism without being able to point to actual authoritarian actions strike me as unwilling to look at things at all objectively.  Folks, if you have to denigrate him, do so for things he does, not for what your fevered imaginations come up with.  I plan to do that, to keep an eye on what he does and congratulate or condemn him for those actions accordingly.

[Doug Loss]

It's not the constitutionality of the thing, it's the way he did it -- just imposed it without warning or preparation -- which speaks to a way of thinking and behaving that is consistent with his behavior all along.  The man is a bully.  He speaks and acts in authoritarian ways.  In the realm of Executive Orders he's behaving precisely as Obama did, even on the same subjects -- and we were correctly pissed at Obama when he did it.

The wording he used was, as I recall it, "I'm going to impose a border tax."  And the context in which he said it, was in the form of a threat.  Similar to his threat to UC Berkely concerning removal of federal funds in response to the riots there.   

The problem I have with some on this thread, is that they seem to believe that "authoritarianism" only counts if the Supreme Court can rule on it.  But here we have a president who continually deals in threats and insults.  What are we to say and do about such a man?

Keep an eye on what he actually does and not on what we imagine he'll do?  Not cry about his "tone?"

[r9etb]

Keep an eye on what he actually does and not on what we imagine he'll do?  Not cry about his "tone?"

What he actually does....

Like, threaten people and organizations? He already does that.  A president's threats aren't like yours, Doug: they actually matter. 

Like, belittle and threaten to ignore judges whose rulings he doesn't like?  He does that, too.  What does that suggest about his respect for the rule of law?

Whether you like it or not, Doug, the man's a bully, and he's been behaving that way.  You might be comfortable with that, but you probably shouldn't be.

[Doug Loss]

What he actually does....

Like, threaten people and organizations? He already does that.  A president's threats aren't like yours, Doug: they actually matter. 

Like, belittle and threaten to ignore judges whose rulings he doesn't like?  He does that, too.  What does that suggest about his respect for the rule of law?

Whether you like it or not, Doug, the man's a bully, and he's been behaving that way.  You might be comfortable with that, but you probably shouldn't be.

Those are all things he said, not things he did.  As for his respect for the rule of law, did he ignore the judges stay and take action to make it ineffective?  He did not.  Really, is this so hard to understand?  Yes, he's bombastic.  But you have a lot more work to do to show he's breaking the law rather than just complaining about it loudly than you have heretofore done.

[r9etb]

Those are all things he said, not things he did.  As for his respect for the rule of law, did he ignore the judges stay and take action to make it ineffective?  He did not.  Really, is this so hard to understand?  Yes, he's bombastic.  But you have a lot more work to do to show he's breaking the law rather than just complaining about it loudly than you have heretofore done.

Surely you're not suggesting that his behavior has no consequences, and that his threats and insults have no meaning or consequences?  This is the President of the United States we're talking about, not some all-caps schmo on an internet discussion forum. 

Among other things, the way he behaves affects what he can get done, and his relations with Congress and foreign leaders.  His behavior affects diplomacy and foreign policy: can allies or negotiating partners rely on him to behave responsibly?  Rightly or wrongly, his lack of respect affects how judges rule in cases in which he's involved, and it's an indicator of how much he himself respects (or not) the rule of law.  His behavior can throw gas on fires, or create a calm space in which things can get done -- and his preference seems to be to toss gas.


You can ignore all that if you like, Doug.

[skeeter]

Skeet, Maj. Bill, I'm with you on this.  Trump wasn't my choice either, but all these folks whining about his authoritarianism without being able to point to actual authoritarian actions strike me as unwilling to look at things at all objectively.  Folks, if you have to denigrate him, do so for things he does, not for what your fevered imaginations come up with.  I plan to do that, to keep an eye on what he does and congratulate or condemn him for those actions accordingly.

Reasonable. I'll be doing the same.

[r9etb]

Reasonable. I'll be doing the same.

So.... Are you willing to call him out for, say, threats that he makes?

Or is that not an "action" in your book?

[Doug Loss]

Surely you're not suggesting that his behavior has no consequences, and that his threats and insults have no meaning or consequences?  This is the President of the United States we're talking about, not some all-caps schmo on an internet discussion forum. 

Among other things, the way he behaves affects what he can get done, and his relations with Congress and foreign leaders.  His behavior affects diplomacy and foreign policy: can allies or negotiating partners rely on him to behave responsibly?  Rightly or wrongly, his lack of respect affects how judges rule in cases in which he's involved, and it's an indicator of how much he himself respects (or not) the rule of law.  His behavior can throw gas on fires, or create a calm space in which things can get done -- and his preference seems to be to toss gas.


You can ignore all that if you like, Doug.

And again, you talk and talk about how he talks, not what he does.  Do you not see the fundamental difference between those two things?  It's clear to me.  Not ignoring anything; more seeing things you refuse to look at.

[r9etb]

And again, you talk and talk about how he talks, not what he does.  Do you not see the fundamental difference between those two things?  It's clear to me.  Not ignoring anything; more seeing things you refuse to look at.

I see presidential threats as "doing things."  I guess you don't.

[driftdiver]

Surely you're not suggesting that his behavior has no consequences, and that his threats and insults have no meaning or consequences?  This is the President of the United States we're talking about, not some all-caps schmo on an internet discussion forum. 

Among other things, the way he behaves affects what he can get done, and his relations with Congress and foreign leaders.  His behavior affects diplomacy and foreign policy: can allies or negotiating partners rely on him to behave responsibly?  Rightly or wrongly, his lack of respect affects how judges rule in cases in which he's involved, and it's an indicator of how much he himself respects (or not) the rule of law.  His behavior can throw gas on fires, or create a calm space in which things can get done -- and his preference seems to be to toss gas.


You can ignore all that if you like, Doug.

@r9etb I watch Asian news stations a fair amount.   They recognize that Trump is lacking charm and manners certainly.   They also recognize that he's not a pushover.   I'm glad we're not letting mexico push us around anymore.

Its no surprise that he's acting this way.  I am surprised that the people he's nominated are as good as they are.

[skeeter]

So.... Are you willing to call him out for, say, threats that he makes?

Or is that not an "action" in your book?

I'll wince when he says stupid things or things I disagree with.

I'll be willing to give him credit when he does the right thing and recognize how much worse things could've been had Clinton won.

Honestly I don't understand the unwillingness of some here to acknowledge some of the very good stuff thats been happening in DC lately. All they wanna do is kvetch and snipe. I'm done with that, its over.

[r9etb]

I'll wince when he says stupid things or things I disagree with.

I'll be willing to give him credit when he does the right thing and recognize how much worse things could've been had Clinton won.

Honestly I don't understand the unwillingness of some here to acknowledge some of the very good stuff thats been happening in DC lately. All they wanna do is kvetch and snipe. I'm done with that, its over.

Most of us, me included, do acknowledge the good things he's done.

Unfortunately, his reprehensible behavior is not something I'm going to defend.  His behavior is not just self-defeating, it's also damaging to the country.  And if you and others won't acknowledge the bully-boy authoritarianism that marks his behavior, then that's a problem, too.

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

Most of us, me included, do acknowledge the good things he's done.

Unfortunately, his reprehensible behavior is not something I'm going to defend.  His behavior is not just self-defeating, it's also damaging to the country.  And if you and others won't acknowledge the bully-boy authoritarianism that marks his behavior, then that's a problem, too.

Yeah the problem is that when I agree with Trump I really have nothing to add to what other's have said, so I'll make a thumbs up or something. It doesn't get nearly the attention, or have nearly the volume, than the many times I disagree with Trump.

[skeeter]

Most of us, me included, do acknowledge the good things he's done.

Unfortunately, his reprehensible behavior is not something I'm going to defend.  His behavior is not just self-defeating, it's also damaging to the country.  And if you and others won't acknowledge the bully-boy authoritarianism that marks his behavior, then that's a problem, too.

Alright. But implying those with whom you have a difference are fascists is intellectually lazy.

Of course if your goal is to provoke, then full speed ahead.

[r9etb]

Alright. But implying those with whom you have a difference are fascists is intellectually lazy.

Of course if your goal is to provoke, then full speed ahead.

Oh, come now,  You're no snowflake, so stop acting like one.

[EasyAce]

I am totally psychic. Bow before the "Amazing Carnac".

 

[Smokin Joe]

From the article:

The mainstreaming of that notion really began in earnest during the Clinton administration, continued apace
under George W. Bush (after how many on the right and not enough on the left had been ripping Clinton
for it?), ramped up further under His Excellency Obama (after how many on the left and not enough on
the right bitched about Bush doing it?), and now we have Donaldus Minimus, too, behaving like an elected
monarch (yes, the left bitches about it, but how come more on the right don't, especially when they're
supposed to be the ones so big on properly-balanced government?), only too eager (it often seems)
to wield the excessive executive power bequeathed him. What a surprise. He rarely if ever spoke in terms of
reducing government in fact or in powers.

Hayfoot!, strawfoot!, down the road to totalitarianism...

[skeeter]

Oh, come now,  You're no snowflake, so stop acting like one.

The snowflake thing is getting real old. Call me a fascist on the 'net and you'll get a retort.

[skeeter]

At least once today, you:

1. Thought you were hungry.
2. Thought about pooping.

 

I am totally psychic. Bow before the "Amazing Carnac".

[r9etb]

The snowflake thing is getting real old. Call me a fascist on the 'net and you'll get a retort.

Silly skeeter.  I didn't call you a fascist.  But I did point out that one of your comments had a whiff of "at least the trains run on time" to them.  And it did.  You were making excuses for continual bad behavior on the basis of a few things you like.

That doesn't make you a fascist.  But it could make you an enabler if you keep it up.

[skeeter]

That doesn't make you a fascist.  But it could make you an enabler if you keep it up.