Author Topic: WSJ: The Cheap Moralizing of Never Trump  (Read 70400 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Norm Lenhart

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6,773
Re: WSJ: The Cheap Moralizing of Never Trump
« Reply #350 on: October 20, 2016, 06:09:41 pm »
Sure.  But the fact is that everybody stumbles.  Everybody.  And in the case of Trump vs. Clinton, "trying to do what's right" can be difficult to discern.

And again: while there are those who may meet that description, most do not.  They're trying to do the right thing in a situation where "right" is hard to figure out.  You're apparently lumping everybody into the same hole, regardless of how they've arrived at their position.

That sounds like a recipe for a very sterile life.  And the Norm Lenhart Political Party will have at most a single member.

What if they don't think you're an idiot?  What if they just disagree with you about something?

Actually I live a great life and in fact, it's only gotten better as time passes in almost every way. It got massively better several years ago when I rid myself from two faced hypocrites.

People disagree with me all the time. i don't think I'm some special repository of knowledge that's never wrong about anything. And I'm fully ready to, and have, admitted when I was wrong. But the topic at hand isn't whose baseball team is better or how to best make Spaghetti. We are talking about serious right/wrong/good/evil stuff. And it's not a matter of opinion for you or I. It's a matter of core and very fundamental issues.

Trumps record is out there and has been out there. If Hillary got hit by one of the bullets she dodged over Bosnia or had never been born to begin with, Donald Trump would still be who and what he is. Her evil does not lessen his and vise versa.

In order to vote or support Trump, one cannot pick and choose. This isn't a case of he did something stupid or terrible as a teenager and then got his life straightened out. This is a case of a fully grown man who acts like a very screwed up teenager, that spent his entire life doing and actively funding pretty much the bucket list of people and things conservatism and people of faith abhor.

Again, Hillary's evil/idiocy is NOT RELEVANT TO ANY OF IT outside the fact Trump FUNDED HER. Besides that they are two seperate entities.

Now all of this is known. It is CERTAINLY know to people on political forums and by most of the world outside America. If it is not known, then ignorant people should abstain from voting altogether. But people DO know what he is.

BECAUSE they know what he is they have to make a choice. To empower him or not. Whenthey empower him with their online support, their door to door support, their phone/text support, they are in fact empowering everything he is. They can SAY what they want. But there is no magic spell or operation to separate every person's individual pick and choose desires from Donald Trump. When he goes to DC, he is the same guy that sexually assaults women he thinks is his personal star powered right.

Again, HILLARY has ZERO to do with any of this.

So when they send Donald to DC, they send him knowing he lies. That he sexually assaults. That he has no idea what he's doing economically. that he has no idea about foreign policy. that he has no idea how the military works. That he encourages violence from his minions. That his minions includes white supremacists and overt racists he refuses to disavow.

Again, Hillary has nothing to do with any of that.

So here we are with a completely inept man that thinks women are his personal sexual outlet, that is ignorant of both the constitution and the core principles of religious and press freedom, that has his personal interpretation of gun rights, whose immigration plans shift with popular opinion, not law...


And people that say YUP! I will vote for that man! are not situational ethicists?

Fair enough. they are outright evil.



Offline Emjay

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,687
  • Gender: Female
  • Womp, womp
Re: WSJ: The Cheap Moralizing of Never Trump
« Reply #351 on: October 20, 2016, 06:15:13 pm »
If the NeverTrumpers elect Hillary I am done with politics. Under a president Hillary there is no point in voting or donating to her opposition. She will weaponize the entire federal government against conservatives and there is not a damn thing that can be done to stop her once she becomes president. So yeah, you elect her you deal with her.

If only you had been 'done with politics' before you helped nominate the only person in the known universe that Hillary could defeat.  And defeat easily.

So, don't even try to blame the Never Trumpers.
Against stupidity, the Gods themselves contend in vain.

Offline r9etb

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,467
  • Gender: Male
Re: WSJ: The Cheap Moralizing of Never Trump
« Reply #352 on: October 20, 2016, 06:16:12 pm »
Actually I live a great life and in fact, it's only gotten better as time passes in almost every way. It got massively better several years ago when I rid myself from two faced hypocrites.

I'll take your word for it.

I'd just point out that, in all those words you just typed out, you demonstrated no sense of understanding or sympathy. 

Quote
Again, HILLARY has ZERO to do with any of this.

For most of the people you're calling evil (without any personal knowledge of their particular situations), she has everything to do with it.

That's wrong.

Offline Luis Gonzalez

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,641
  • Gender: Male
    • Boiling Frogs
Re: WSJ: The Cheap Moralizing of Never Trump
« Reply #353 on: October 20, 2016, 06:23:36 pm »
If the NeverTrumpers elect Hillary I am done with politics. Under a president Hillary there is no point in voting or donating to her opposition. She will weaponize the entire federal government against conservatives and there is not a damn thing that can be done to stop her once she becomes president. So yeah, you elect her you deal with her.

Most pundits agree that Trump's last chance to win the election lives or dies with the Florida vote.

I'm in Florida.

I'm not voting for Hillary but I'm not voting for Trump either.

Politics will miss you.
"Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, i have others." - Groucho Marx

Offline Norm Lenhart

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6,773
Re: WSJ: The Cheap Moralizing of Never Trump
« Reply #354 on: October 20, 2016, 06:29:14 pm »
I'll take your word for it.

I'd just point out that, in all those words you just typed out, you demonstrated no sense of understanding or sympathy. 

For most of the people you're calling evil (without any personal knowledge of their particular situations), she has everything to do with it.

That's wrong.

She has NOTHING to do with it. She didn't make Trump what he is. She is not the only option other than trump. No one has a gun to their head. If they do, they put it there and that's their problem.

No. I have ZERO sympathy. None for anyone that refuses to see the reality of a situation and chooses evil intentionally regardless of anything else. I understand the situation as it is. I am not inventing excuses as to why one evil must be empowered so that another evil is not.

Offline r9etb

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,467
  • Gender: Male
Re: WSJ: The Cheap Moralizing of Never Trump
« Reply #355 on: October 20, 2016, 06:34:18 pm »
She has NOTHING to do with it. She didn't make Trump what he is. She is not the only option other than trump. No one has a gun to their head. If they do, they put it there and that's their problem.

No. I have ZERO sympathy. None for anyone that refuses to see the reality of a situation and chooses evil intentionally regardless of anything else. I understand the situation as it is. I am not inventing excuses as to why one evil must be empowered so that another evil is not.

Sigh.  If you took a moment to understand, you'd see that Hillary Clinton has a whole lot to do with the choices people are making.

You claim to know it all.  Perhaps you do.  But not everybody has your knowledge of good and evil.  Some people see the problem differently than you do.

And you're calling them all evil.

Which says more about you, than it does about them.

Offline Norm Lenhart

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6,773
Re: WSJ: The Cheap Moralizing of Never Trump
« Reply #356 on: October 20, 2016, 06:39:11 pm »
Sigh.  If you took a moment to understand, you'd see that Hillary Clinton has a whole lot to do with the choices people are making.

You claim to know it all.  Perhaps you do.  But not everybody has your knowledge of good and evil.  Some people see the problem differently than you do.

And you're calling them all evil.

Which says more about you, than it does about them.
Actually if you actually read my post you will see that there is a full paragraph stating clearly that I do not claim to know it all, nor do I believe I am free from error. So I am not sure why you would post that.

Are they empowering evil or not? Thats the only question here. Why isn't an issue. they are or they are not. Which are they doing?

Again, I don't remotely care what it says about me.

Offline r9etb

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,467
  • Gender: Male
Re: WSJ: The Cheap Moralizing of Never Trump
« Reply #357 on: October 20, 2016, 06:44:56 pm »
Actually if you actually read my post you will see that there is a full paragraph stating clearly that I do not claim to know it all, nor do I believe I am free from error. So I am not sure why you would post that.

Because everything else you've written says pretty much the opposite.

Quote
Are they empowering evil or not? Thats the only question here. Why isn't an issue. they are or they are not. Which are they doing?
Again, I don't remotely care what it says about me.

You vastly oversimplify the issue, so of course you come up with a simplistic global condemnation.

And you really ought to care what people think about you.  For example, this exchange has made me begin to wonder if it's worth the effort of reading your posts.  You'll reach nobody if your default setting is "judgmental prig."

geronl

  • Guest
Re: WSJ: The Cheap Moralizing of Never Trump
« Reply #358 on: October 20, 2016, 06:47:46 pm »
No you're not, no conservative would ever help elect Hillary Clinton, no, not ever.

we're not supporting Hillary or her friend, supporter and donor.

geronl

  • Guest
Re: WSJ: The Cheap Moralizing of Never Trump
« Reply #359 on: October 20, 2016, 06:51:03 pm »
Can you imagine the disgust that a great man like Donald has for those who fail him? They should look into Donald's eyes on their "Trump as George Washington" memes they post or his visage on their Trump commemorative plates and wither under his steely gaze!

Wither!

In SHAME!

The shame of failing Donald.


Trump might even have a book ghost-written about how he was failed, titled "The Losers and I". This after he spends the next year or so praising President Hillary and yukking it up with Bill Clinton on the golf courses.

Offline Norm Lenhart

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6,773
Re: WSJ: The Cheap Moralizing of Never Trump
« Reply #360 on: October 20, 2016, 06:51:24 pm »
Because everything else you've written says pretty much the opposite.

You vastly oversimplify the issue, so of course you come up with a simplistic global condemnation.

And you really ought to care what people think about you.  For example, this exchange has made me begin to wonder if it's worth the effort of reading your posts.  You'll reach nobody if your default setting is "judgmental prig."

That would be your opinion. You are completely entitled to it.

I don't oversimplify anything I am getting to the core issue rather dancing around it like many with excuses to find that one special excuse that absolves them of facing up to what they are actually doing.

I honestly don't care if anyone reads my posts, puts me on ignore or anything else. I'm not in this to be famous, popular or even liked. Ill write about what I see, what I know and people can either accept it, engage me on it, or ignore it and me altogether.

I hope they read and consider my points, but I'm not going to alter delivery of them in any way to make them more palatable. If people want to read the words rather than the person behind them, thats great. If people reject them and myself, I'm good with that too.
« Last Edit: October 20, 2016, 06:52:11 pm by Norm Lenhart »

Offline Suppressed

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,921
  • Gender: Male
    • Avatar
Re: WSJ: The Cheap Moralizing of Never Trump
« Reply #361 on: October 20, 2016, 06:52:17 pm »
You don't understand how much pressure a female is under in a male dominated career to handle these incidents "gracefully".
@ConstitutionRose

You're assuming I don't understand.  I contend that I do.  I've seen firsthand the effects on women from being put in bad positions...in fact, long ago, I went to the Board of Directors of my employer's company and worked (successfully) to get the Publisher of my newspaper (my boss at the time) removed from his position because of the abuse of his position toward female staff!  Please don't think I'm clueless on this issue.

This is in some ways similar to those who excuse Bill Clinton because Monica gave consent.  We can't assume that consent in a power environment is fine.

My point is not that Donald Trump is a paradigm of how to interact with women.  I'm not saying he respects women.  I'm not saying that women are not put in bad situations by him.

What I'm saying is that with his words, he never admitted to those things.  Just because I loathe the creep, I'm not going to claim that his words stated something they didn't just by reading in more than explicitly there.

Quote
I am no feminist.  I find these easily offended young ladies who whimper over every masculine display embarrassing.  Neither should I have to suffer unwelcome touching of my person simply because I am female and the male has a position superior to mine.

I have a great deal of respect for you, and agree that nobody should have to suffer such offenses against their person.  Like I said before, I hold that belief strongly enough to put my job on the line, losing several (what I thought were) friendships.
« Last Edit: October 20, 2016, 06:52:54 pm by Suppressed »
+++++++++
“In the outside world, I'm a simple geologist. But in here .... I am Falcor, Defender of the Alliance” --Randy Marsh

“The most effectual means of being secure against pain is to retire within ourselves, and to suffice for our own happiness.” -- Thomas Jefferson

“He's so dumb he thinks a Mexican border pays rent.” --Foghorn Leghorn

Offline r9etb

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,467
  • Gender: Male
Re: WSJ: The Cheap Moralizing of Never Trump
« Reply #362 on: October 20, 2016, 06:55:28 pm »
I don't oversimplify anything I an getting to the core issue rather dancing around it like many with excuses to find that one special excuse that absolves them of facing up to what they are actually doing.

And that's precisely where you're wrong, both factually and morally. 

You are stoutly refusing to allow for other people's points of view, and their rationales for decisions with which you disagree.  You have set yourself up as the sole arbiter of right and wrong, good and evil.

Quote
I hope they read and consider my points, but I'm not going to alter delivery of them in any way to make them more palatable.

Why should they, when you're unwilling to consider any point of view other than your own?  It's like talking to a deaf cat.

Have a nice day.

Offline Norm Lenhart

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6,773
Re: WSJ: The Cheap Moralizing of Never Trump
« Reply #363 on: October 20, 2016, 07:04:51 pm »
And that's precisely where you're wrong, both factually and morally. 

You are stoutly refusing to allow for other people's points of view, and their rationales for decisions with which you disagree.  You have set yourself up as the sole arbiter of right and wrong, good and evil.

Why should they, when you're unwilling to consider any point of view other than your own?  It's like talking to a deaf cat.

Have a nice day.

And you as well.

Silver Pines

  • Guest
Re: WSJ: The Cheap Moralizing of Never Trump
« Reply #364 on: October 20, 2016, 07:11:20 pm »
@Suppressed

Quote
There have been times in my life when I've touched a woman intimately.  And I don't ever recall asking for permission.

Have you walked up to strange women and grabbed their genitals?  Because that's the issue here, no matter how strenuously you try to deflect. 

 
Quote
You sound like these SJWs who want a consent form filled out, when in the real world consent is often granted without a form or verbal request.

Yeah, that's right.  My crotch is fair game for any dirty old man who wants to walk up to me and touch it.  How dare I get the idea that my private areas are just that, right?  Damned feminist SJW!

You know what you sound like?  Every contemptible, despicable stereotype put forth by women on the left.

I
Quote
f no non-verbal consent was granted, then it was sexual assault.  But the only bit of information pro-or-con that we have about consent was that he said that they let him do it.  So there's no evidence that he was saying, "I force myself on unconsenting women."

He was bragging that they DO consent!

Then why did Rudy Giuliani, former prosecutor, admit that it was, indeed, sexual assault?   

Quote
No, I don't assume anything.  This is exactly where the difference is.  I'm saying we can't assume a specific meaning to what he said, since it's ambiguous.  It could have been either.

There's no need to assume anything when his own words are on tape.

Quote
On the other hand, you're making the assumption of the worst-case scenario.

I don't have to when I heard what he said on tape. 

Quote
So it's okay to grab a woman and kiss her without consent, but grabbing the crotch is where the line is drawn?  Interesting worldview you have.

Well, first of all, acknowledging that a woman's genitals are not part of the public domain is not a "worldview."  It's common decency.  Isn't it?

Secondly, I don't know why you would say that's "interesting".  Kissing is not sex.  And I don't believe most states consider kissing to legally count as sexual assault. 

Thirdly, yes, that IS where the line is drawn.  Halfway reasonable people understand that.  Why don't you?

Quote
Yes, intimate areas are required for sexual assault,

If you acknowledge as much, why did you question where the line was drawn?

Quote
but that doesn't mean that one can grab a woman off the street and forcibly kiss her (unless it's V-E Day).

Most men wouldn't do it, I expect.  But you're trying to deflect again.  Kissing is not the issue.


Quote
And you left out that he said that he questioned whether Trump had done things.

Of course he said that.  How is he. a former prosecutor, going to say, yes, Trump is guilty of those things and I'm going to continue to support him?  He had no choice but to admit that the behavior was sexual assault.

Quote
But that would ruin your narrative that Giuliani is claiming Trump admitted to sexual assault.  Let's remember, that was your original contention...that Trump had admitted to sexual assault.

No, let's remember that you and maybe a couple of lapdogs in Trump's camp are about the only people in the country twisting yourselves into pretzels to portray Trump as innocent.  It's generally acknowledged that yes, Trump did those things---because Trump's words were taken at face value.  The only way you can try to justify him is to mischaracterize what he said and add in a healthy dose of "what-ifs."

Won't work.

Quote
[/b]And I questioned it.  He did no such thing.  He gave an ambiguous statement that you choose to interpret one way.  If there was consent to the touching, it is not sexual abuse (NYS legal term for sexual assault), by statute.  (Note, I'm not a lawyer.)
[/quote]

Ambiguous...LOL.

There's no need for interpretation when the words are clear, and Trump's were.

I have to say, I find it really interesting that you're so insistent on defending his actions.

Silver Pines

  • Guest
Re: WSJ: The Cheap Moralizing of Never Trump
« Reply #365 on: October 20, 2016, 07:17:55 pm »
@Suppressed

No excuses for sexual predation.

But you're the one who is saying that Donald Trump is admitting to being an abuser.  I say he admits no such thing.

@Suppressed

You, Sean Hannity, and Jerry Falwell, Jr. 

Here's the tenth woman to come forward against Trump.  He walked up to her, grabbed her arm and her breast, and when she recoiled, said, "Don't you know who I am?"

Clearly just another SJW who doesn't understand that he never did those things, or something...


https://twitter.com/ReutersLive/status/789130431622881280


Offline Norm Lenhart

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6,773
Re: WSJ: The Cheap Moralizing of Never Trump
« Reply #366 on: October 20, 2016, 07:18:13 pm »
@Suppressed

Have you walked up to strange women and grabbed their genitals?  Because that's the issue here, no matter how strenuously you try to deflect. 

 
etc...

We must also consider that Trump said "I moved on her like a bitch". A bitch is generally a term for female breeding animals. So basically Trump is implying that he approached these women with his tail raised and his vagina presented.

Takes all kinds I guess ;)

Offline musiclady

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 22,682
Re: WSJ: The Cheap Moralizing of Never Trump
« Reply #367 on: October 20, 2016, 07:19:10 pm »
BRAVA @CatherineofAragon !!

And THANK you!!
Character still matters.  It always matters.

I wear a mask as an exercise in liberty and love for others.  To see it as an infringement of liberty is to entirely miss the point.  Be kind.

"Sometimes I think the Church would be better off if we would call a moratorium on activity for about six weeks and just wait on God to see what He is waiting to do for us. That's what they did before Pentecost."   - A. W. Tozer

Use the time God is giving us to seek His will and feel His presence.

Silver Pines

  • Guest
Re: WSJ: The Cheap Moralizing of Never Trump
« Reply #368 on: October 20, 2016, 07:33:40 pm »
We must also consider that Trump said "I moved on her like a bitch". A bitch is generally a term for female breeding animals. So basically Trump is implying that he approached these women with his tail raised and his vagina presented.

Takes all kinds I guess ;)

@Norm Lenhart

Lol, what was that?  I'm glad I'm not the only one who noticed it.  Someone should let Trump know what that means.  And then vacate the vicinity before his head explodes.

Silver Pines

  • Guest
Re: WSJ: The Cheap Moralizing of Never Trump
« Reply #369 on: October 20, 2016, 07:35:22 pm »
BRAVA @CatherineofAragon !!

And THANK you!!

@musiclady

2016....the year which found conservative women forced to stand up for their honor to conservative men.   **nononono*

Online Weird Tolkienish Figure

  • Technical
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,871
Re: WSJ: The Cheap Moralizing of Never Trump
« Reply #370 on: October 20, 2016, 07:38:22 pm »
"Grabbing genitals".


In Summer of 2015 who would have thought this would be the hot-topic issue of the 2016 election?

Offline Norm Lenhart

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6,773
Re: WSJ: The Cheap Moralizing of Never Trump
« Reply #371 on: October 20, 2016, 07:40:03 pm »
@Norm Lenhart

Lol, what was that?  I'm glad I'm not the only one who noticed it.  Someone should let Trump know what that means.  And then vacate the vicinity before his head explodes.

In all my years pripr to marriage, I used my fair share of terms but "Moved on her like a bitch" I can't even begin to imagine a dude saying. I get the "Moved on" thing, corny as it is because he's a Studio 54/70s era guy. they wore platforms (and not pink strappy ones either.) But 'like a bitch'?

To use the term all the cool kids say lately...I can't EVEN....
« Last Edit: October 20, 2016, 07:41:47 pm by Norm Lenhart »

Offline Norm Lenhart

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6,773
Re: WSJ: The Cheap Moralizing of Never Trump
« Reply #372 on: October 20, 2016, 07:41:23 pm »
@musiclady

2016....the year which found conservative women forced to stand up for their honor to conservative men.   **nononono*

You arent standing up to 'conservative' men. I question the 'men' part as well. Liberal males most likely.

Silver Pines

  • Guest
Re: WSJ: The Cheap Moralizing of Never Trump
« Reply #373 on: October 20, 2016, 07:48:07 pm »
"Grabbing genitals".


In Summer of 2015 who would have thought this would be the hot-topic issue of the 2016 election?


Probably that guy in your avatar had an inkling, but nobody else, lol.

Silver Pines

  • Guest
Re: WSJ: The Cheap Moralizing of Never Trump
« Reply #374 on: October 20, 2016, 07:49:08 pm »
In all my years pripr to marriage, I used my fair share of terms but "Moved on her like a bitch" I can't even begin to imagine a dude saying. I get the "Moved on" thing, corny as it is because he's a Studio 54/70s era guy. they wore platforms (and not pink strappy ones either.) But 'like a bitch'?

To use the term all the cool kids say lately...I can't EVEN....

He probably thought it sounded all cool and bad, lol.