News I feel just like this sometimes, lately

[StatGuy2000]

Even most seriously bad actions that seriously damage the country are reversible in terms of their ongoing damage even if the act itself is not reversible. For example, commuting the sentence of one of the worst traitors in US history is not reversible, but the damage to the USA was reversed when Obama left office. That being: for a few days traitors were told by the President's actions that the USA didn't care about treason, which gave Hope! to fugitive treasonous scum, up-and-coming traitors and our enemies alike(and took it from our allies). But the idea that these traitors had that the President might let them get away with it left office with him and thus the ongoing damage was reversed.

I assume you are referring above to Chelsea Manning (formerly Bradley Manning, prior to undergoing transition to a female). In which case, I completely, utterly disagree with your characterization of her (formerly him) as a traitor -- she (formerly he) is a classic whistleblower exposing illegal activities that the US Army committed during the second Iraq War.

I would be more than happy to discuss this further in a separate thread or in a PM, as that whole topic isn't current (any more), and it is (somewhat) off-topic.

 

[russ_watters]

I assume you are referring above to Chelsea Manning (formerly Bradley Manning, prior to undergoing transition to a female). In which case, I completely, utterly disagree with your characterization of her (formerly him) as a traitor -- she (formerly he) is a classic whistleblower exposing illegal activities that the US Army committed during the second Iraq War.

I would be more than happy to discuss this further in a separate thread or in a PM, as that whole topic isn't current (any more), and it is (somewhat) off-topic.

People are entitled to agree or disagree with what is "bad" because "bad" is a matter of opinion. So no, we don't need to discuss it (and Google will tell you all you need to know about both positions) because it is an example of what I said it is, for me (so there is nothing to discuss) and the factual part -- the fact that Trump isn't beholden to Obama's decision -- is what matters for this discussion.

This thread is (backhandedly) about Trump, so the point of my response and the example was a question: I'm asking for people (who believe it, such as DiracPool) to list the permanently damaging actions of Trump.

 

[DiracPool]

As many of the things Trump has done or set in motion were to reverse actions of Obama, that shows that the actions of a President are reversible by the next President. Do you have a particular action you think is irreversible?

When I used the word "irreversible," I wasn't referring so much to specific policies which, as you pointed out, could be reversed by a subsequent administration. I was referring more to the perception of the, if you will, dignity of our system of governance as perceived by the greater world at large, or even by those within the USA. I live in the USA and, to be completely honest, I'm embarrassed as to what a "clown show" our political system has turned out to be since Donald Trump entered the fray 16 months ago.

Rather than than get depressed by it, though, I think it may be more constructive to use this opportunity to study how this absurd state of affairs could have manifested itself. Personally, I think it points out a perhaps, latent major flaw in our system that went unrevealed for 200 years because it took the advent of Twitter to expose it. Idk, but I think the subject it ripe for study. The actuality of the Trump presidency, IMO, exposes the dark side of what can actually manifest from the ostensibly positive aspects of a society founded on personal freedom, capitalism, and free markets.

 

[russ_watters]

When I used the word "irreversible," I wasn't referring so much to specific policies which, as you pointed out, could be reversed by a subsequent administration.

Good to hear -- I had to ask because with all of the hyperbole out there, I'm not sure what constitutes a Collapse Of Our System Of Government to some people...That said:

I was referring more to the perception of the, if you will, dignity of our system of governance as perceived by the greater world at large, or even by those within the USA. I live in the USA and, to be completely honest, I'm embarrassed as to what a "clown show" our political system has turned out to be since Donald Trump entered the fray 16 months ago.

But this lack of dignity is primarily a reflection of our current leader's lack of dignity and the lack of respect people have for those who voted for him -- both of which can be changed by the election of the next President, can't they?

Personally, I think it points out a perhaps, latent major flaw in our system that went unrevealed for 200 years because it took the advent of Twitter to expose it.

That is disheartening to hear. Much of our system of government was designed specificially to deal with the possibility of bad leaders being elected and if Trump turns out to be an exceptionally bad leader - and not just exceptionally brash - our system of government is set up to deal with that and has successfully in the past. So it is disheartening to me to hear the loss of confidence in our system of government over something that has happened and been survived many times in the past and that all Americans and most people in the world should be aware is always a possibility.

This also means that electing an execptionally bad leader is not in itself an irreversible failure (it's a feature, not a bug): the failiure would come from failing to deal with and recover from his Presidency if indeed he does something really really bad.
[edit]
I'll be more blunt: I am much more concerned by the lack of respect and understanding for our system of government by some Trump opponents than I am by Trump himself. Aside from my above post, a lasting problem for American society is that one of our most important protected rights is under siege: we are losing our freedom of speech and substituting instead political indoctrination. When colleges adopt policies of favoritism for one political afiliation and suppress or protect suppression of the other - which is widespread and extreme today - it does generations worth of damage to free thought. The recent Berkeley riot against freedom of speech in which no one was arrested is one stark example of a problem that has been building for decades. That, to me, is a threat to our system much bigger than Trump is.

Sales of 1984 are up recently, but it is being applied in the wrong direction!

 

[DiracPool]

The actuality of the Trump presidency, IMO, exposes the dark side of what can actually manifest from the ostensibly positive aspects of a society founded on personal freedom, capitalism, and free markets.

Rather than just leaving everybody hanging on a negative note, maybe it would be better to offer or suggest some sort of remedy. The first "correction" to our constitution I would make is that, right under that clause that says the president must be at least 35 years old, should be a clause that says any would-be presidential candidate needs to take a high school class in "civics" at least and, most importantly, have some prior experience in governing. Owning the "teen USA" pageant and "Trump steaks" doesn't qualify. Yeah, those credits aren't transferable. I don't care if you were the mayor of Mayberry for one term. If you're going to hold the highest political office in the land, I want to see at least a little previous experience in diplomacy under your belt.

This is what I mean about the exposing of a flaw in our political system. It just should not be the case that you can go from hosting "the apprentice" one season to holding the nuclear football the next. Doesn't sit well with me. Trump has turned the US system of governance into a reality TV show and made a mockery of the whole process.

The danger here comes from the potential that the citizenry at some point may no longer respect that system of governance or it's rule of law because it's a joke. For example, if the president is going to mock federal judges and call them imbeciles if he doesn't agree with them, then why shouldn't I? Etc. We are already seeing this sort of widespread disrespect for our political system with the massive protests that are going on everywhere in the USA right now. So, again, I don't know how this is going to play out. Maybe it will turn out to be a mostly benign shakedown of our system that will yield a positive outcome. I hope so. But we'll see.

 

[DiracPool]

if Trump turns out to be an exceptionally bad leader - and not just exceptionally brash - our system of government is set up to deal with that and has successfully in the past.

When was this? Did I miss something? No president has ever been successfully impeached and subsequently convicted and removed from office. If you want to use Nixon as an example, remember he resigned voluntarily. I really can't imagine Trump resigning voluntarily from anything. I think you are correct in saying that our system of governance can be effective at removing bad players from office in general. There just hasn't been a test, yet, at the actual highest office of the presidency. Maybe Trump will prove to be that test.

 

[NTL2009]

When was this? Did I miss something? No president has ever been successfully impeached and subsequently convicted and removed from office. If you want to use Nixon as an example, remember he resigned voluntarily. I really can't imagine Trump resigning voluntarily from anything. I think you are correct in saying that our system of governance can be effective at removing bad players from office in general. There just hasn't been a test, yet, at the actual highest office of the presidency. Maybe Trump will prove to be that test.

I assume he means that we have an election every four years.

 

[DiracPool]

I assume he means that we have an election every four years.

A lot can happen in 4 years. That's not a fail-safe measure to deal with a bad actor at the helm of power.

 

[NTL2009]

Life may go on fine for some, but it may not go on fine for the majority. It seems Trump has a very low approval rating.

I think people need to take a breath here. 'Life may not go on fine for the majority'? Because of a 48.6% disapproval rating (RCP average)?

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_trump_job_approval-6179.html#polls

OMG! What were you saying back in Dec 2014, when Obama's disapproval rating hit 55.3%? Oh, the humanity!

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_obama_job_approval-1044.html

A little perspective and calm objectivity, please.

 

[NTL2009]

A lot can happen in 4 years. That's not a fail-safe measure to deal with a bad actor at the helm of power.

Just because impeachment hasn't directly removed a President from office (clearly, Nixon's resignation was as close as you can get without being able to call it 'direct'), doesn't mean it can't/won't happen in the future.

If Trump commits clearly impeachable offenses, the process is there. So let's see how this plays out.

And in the mean time, I brushed my teeth, washed my face, did some stretches, and had coffee with breakfast just like any other day.

 

[russ_watters]

When was this? Did I miss something? No president has ever been successfully impeached and subsequently convicted and removed from office. If you want to use Nixon as an example, remember he resigned voluntarily.

Nixon resigned because he believed that he would be successfully impeached and removed. But I wasn't just talking about Presidents or impeachment.

We haven't had many Presidents, so the lack of a successful conviction does not imply that a conviction would not be successful in the case of an exceptionally bad (criminal) leader. I think - and Nixon apparently agreed - that that recourse would work if needed.

Corupt holders of lower/state offices have been successfully removed on many occasions using similar tools.

Beyond that, Presidential power is held in check by both Congress and the courts on a farily regular basis, including many examples of both under Obama and already one under Trump. These limitations on Trump's ability to do (or continue to do for a long time) exceptionally bad things should not be overlooked.

And again: In my opinion, successfully dealing with an exceptionally bad leader would show the strength of the American system of government, not a weakness. It's the Apollo 13 principle.

 

[mheslep]

If Trump commits clearly impeachable offenses, the process is there...

Yes clear offenses. But also, for vague or ambiguous offenses, or if Congress simply decides it dislikes him sufficiently, the impeachment process is there, especially if Congress switches parties. For instance, Trump had the legal power to power to fire Yates, but a future Congress could deny this, as Congress did once before when it asserted the President can't fire his own Secretary of War. Should Trump lose contact with the electorate that put him in office, I think he could be taken down by a paper cut.

 

[russ_watters]

Yes clear offenses. But also, for vague or ambiguous offenses, or if Congress simply decides it dislikes him sufficiently, the impeachment process is there, especially if Congress switches parties. For instance, Trump had the legal power to power to fire Yates, but a future Congress could deny this, as Congress did once before when it asserted the President can't fire his own Secretary of War. Should Trump lose contact with the electorate that put him in office, I think he could be taken down by a paper cut.

Yes, that is an alternative danger of the Trump administration; the possibility that a rogue Congress or courts could unlawfully/unconstitutionaly act against him is very real.

 

[StatGuy2000]

But this lack of dignity is primarily a reflection of our current leader's lack of dignity and the lack of respect people have for those who voted for him -- both of which can be changed by the election of the next President, can't they?

As I see it, it is more than Trump's lack of dignity -- it is the actions that he has brought out both through his executive orders, as well as his unprecedented ouster of top military brass in the Joint Chiefs of Staff to make way for Steve Bannon (formerly employed at Breitbart News, long a source for fake news and racist propaganda) that has contributed to the "lack of dignity" within the American political climate of late.

As for lack of respect for those who have voted for Trump -- in certain cases, that lack of respect is warranted, if certain voters voted for Trump because of his sweeping slurs against whole ethnic groups and religions (I'm thinking of people like Richard Spencer and other members of the "alt-right") rather than in spite of them.

That is disheartening to hear. Much of our system of government was designed specifically to deal with the possibility of bad leaders being elected and if Trump turns out to be an exceptionally bad leader - and not just exceptionally brash - our system of government is set up to deal with that and has successfully in the past. So it is disheartening to me to hear the loss of confidence in our system of government over something that has happened and been survived many times in the past and that all Americans and most people in the world should be aware is always a possibility.

I agree that the American system of government was designed specifically to deal with the possibility of bad leaders. The concern though is that the very system of checks and balances built into the American system of government has been weakened over the past 30-40 years due to the corrupting influence of money in politics, particularly in light of Supreme Court decisions Buckley v Valeo (1976) and Citizens United vs FEC (2010), both of which have opened the floodgates for near-unlimited campaign donations to political candidates. It's this level of influence, described by some as "legalized bribery" that has contributed to the loss of faith among many Americans to their system of government, and allowed for a demagogue like Trump to be elected to begin with.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buckley_v._Valeo

 

[Evo]

Sorry, but this has become a political thread that has strayed from the OP's cartoon. Thread is closed.