Even in Europe the truth about Trump is out in bold print

[Stevicus]

Now the wall of lies has collapsed...evidently the previous president used to obey the higher powers ...while Trump wants to defy them.

That's pretty much hitting the nail on the head. Trump has obviously angered some very powerful people - the same people who have been screwing the public these past several decades. Others around here are merely parroting what the bigshots tell them to and are clearly frustrated that more people are rejecting the lies of the political establishment that has driven America into the ground.

Wealthy celebrities and European aristocrats don't exactly have the greatest track record in credibility, so who do they think they're trying to fool?

You don't even have to listen to Trump or "fake news" to figure it out. All one has to do is look at the price of rents in such liberal bastions like SF or NY and see where these people are coming from. They're full of it - at least until they start proving that they're actual friends of the American people.

 

[metis]

And what scale are you looking at here and what standard? Just because of a few off-color remarks that are said in every male locker room in the country?

C'mon, you well know it's a LOT more than just "a few off-color remarks".

 

[Stevicus]

C'mon, you well know it's a LOT more than just "a few off-color remarks".

Okay, so it's more than that, but still, I'd like to know what standard is being used to judge Trump and whether that same standard is applied to other politicians or presidents. All anyone seems to focus on are the seamy, titillating things, like porn stars and Trump's lecherous behavior - which I've never denied, by the way. The media using sexual peccadilloes to get people's attention. I get that, and I understand the meaning behind it.

But what about the actual issues? The actual nuts and bolts which have a direct effect on the American people?

Note that I never believed any of Reagan's "evil empire" talk, and I'm not going to believe it now - nor would anyone who has even a cursory understanding of Russian history or the history of Russian-American relations. As a history teacher, you can understand and appreciate what I'm talking about, can't you? There are two sides to every story.

Or maybe it's tariffs that bother people, but I would remind you that a lot of Democrats supported tariffs in the past. And they should support tariffs, because they're supposedly the party of the working man - or they were, once upon a time.

I'm against Trump's border wall idea and what's been happening regarding the separation of families along the border. We've been long overdue for immigration reform in this country, and there's a larger picture to consider where the blame falls upon both parties and most politicians we've had over the years. But I also sense a disingenuous appeal to emotion with all this "Trump is separating families," when the problem at hand goes much deeper than that.

I don't see anything wrong with Trump meeting with the North Korean leader. FDR and Truman met with Stalin. Eisenhower met with Khrushchev. Nixon met with both Mao and Brezhnev. Reagan met with Gorbachev. That's what the presidents do, and yet people are giving Trump a hard time over that?

Another common criticism is that Trump favors the rich, but they all do that. I think our entire government is in place just to make the rich richer and the poor poorer. The best proof of this is a simple chart showing the disparity between rich and poor in this country, so that's no argument either - unless one is subscribing to a double standard.

Those are just a few of the common issues being raised, and I've been aware of these issues before Trump came along. Some people react to me as if I'm not aware or that I get all my info from Fox News, which I don't even watch. I'm not saying that you do that, Metis, since you've always been polite and friendly. But it does get tiresome when people try to present some canned article or pre-packaged viewpoint and claiming that I or others don't go along with it out of ignorance.

If people show a willingness to explain their point of view and where they're coming from, I would listen. But I sense too many people are unwilling or unable to expound beyond just a surface level.

This isn't "false equivalencies." This is a matter of looking at each concrete issue at hand and looking at what the country has done as a whole over the course of our history, not just what Trump has done.

If I was still a member of the Catholic Church, I might be convinced that Trump is this country's punishment for our sins. But if that's the case, then it is us who must do penance. Attacking Trump does absolutely no good when the problem is us, our ways of living, our culture, and our methods of conducting politics.

 

[Yerda]

I don't believe that Trump is really all that different from the other candidates or politicians, but for the exact same reason, I don't believe he's really any worse either. I do believe that a lot of multinationals and other powerful factions have made a lot of money under the free trade economy, and they see their ill-gotten gains threatened by any talk of tariffs, hence the reason why there's such an intensified antipathy towards Trump.

I've seen similar tactics used against Perot, Nader, and Jerry Brown - whose only thing in common with Trump is that they were also against free trade. That's the deal-breaker and the only significant thing that truly distinguishes Trump from the rest. The rest is just minutiae.

I do believe he is worse but we can perhaps respectfully disagree here.

 

[Yerda]

He allowed everyone to put anything into conversation. That's what got people thinking he or someone might take those things seriously. But he was bluffing and a bit of convo is all you get.

I expect that you're right.

 

[metis]

Okay, so it's more than that, but still, I'd like to know what standard is being used to judge Trump and whether that same standard is applied to other politicians or presidents. All anyone seems to focus on are the seamy, titillating things, like porn stars and Trump's lecherous behavior - which I've never denied, by the way.

OK, let's take a quick look at some that fit into what you requested:

2016, fined for misuse of campaign contributions.

2016, fined for his Trump University fiasco.

Numerous times he's lost cases for refusing to pay sub-contractors.

Numerous times he has lost cases for refusing to pay back loans.

His "Lock her up!" statements that would be a violation of the Constitution if done.

Admitting twice he fired Comey to try and stop the investigation.

His attempt to eliminate the ACA and his elimination of the CHIP programs that help children and adults without insurance.

His tax cuts that will hurt the poor and many elderly because of the massive cuts in Medicaid.

His refusal to end his "zero-tolerance" policy that separates children from their parents while he blames the Democrats for that, which is a lie.

So, let's put the "shoe"on the other foot and why in the world would you support a president who does these things, plus much more? And don't personal ethics count? Why would you separate them from other ethical violations? Why should a president get a free pass on this?

I voted for Nixon in 1968, and I came to regret that decision and not make excuses as to why I screwed up. I know a fair number of people who voted for Trump and have told me that they've come to regret that, such as one of my son's-in-law. He doesn't defend Trump's actions, nor does he say or imply that they're somehow excusable because some other presidents haven't always acted morally.

Wrong is wrong, and two wrongs simply do not make a right-- at least that's how I was raised over 60 years ago. I very much respect you as a person, but I simply cannot accept the excuses for Trump's behavior by blaming past presidents.

 

[Stevicus]

I do believe he is worse but we can perhaps respectfully disagree here.

To me, Reagan was the absolute worst president we've had in my lifetime. Most of his successors are also just as bad, since they essentially followed his economic program and made no significant changes whatsoever. The only one thus far who has bucked the trend is Trump, if only for his opposition to free trade.

It's not even really a left vs. right issue, since there have been those on the left who opposed free trade, such as Nader, Jerry Brown, Traficant, and others. There aren't that many left now, as most of the Democratic Party sold out the American workers.

 

[Stevicus]

OK, let's take a quick look at some that fit into what you requested:

I hope you don't mind if I address these one by one.

2016, fined for misuse of campaign contributions.

This sounds like passing out speeding tickets at the Indy 500, but at least he paid the fine.

I don't see how this directly affects the American people, though, nor is it really anything related to any particular issue being discussed today.

2016, fined for his Trump University fiasco.

I don't see how this affects the American people either. It sounds bad, but it's typical of the kind of scandal we've come to expect from US politicians - just like Bush and Haliburton or Clinton and Whitewater. Everyone has a checkered past in one way or another, but I don't see how this sets any precedents, nor is it a false equivalence.

Certainly, it's not worse than Nixon and Watergate or Reagan's underhanded shenanigans with Iran. Or JFK's Bay of Pigs (which was planned under Ike's watch).

Numerous times he's lost cases for refusing to pay sub-contractors.

Numerous times he has lost cases for refusing to pay back loans.

Yeah, point taken, but if he lost the case and paid the fine, then that should be the end of it.

And it still doesn't affect the American people as a whole. It's just between Trump and his sub-contractors.

His "Lock her up!" statements that would be a violation of the Constitution if done.

I just took that as campaign hyperbole. Obviously, he hasn't locked her up, so what's the problem?

Admitting twice he fired Comey to try and stop the investigation.

Yes, although I see this as a judgment call. Are these investigators acting in good faith, or are they doing so for political reasons?

They've had these investigations going on for quite some time, and if they haven't come up with some kind of "smoking gun" by now, they probably never will. Is this just a fishing expedition or what?

His attempt to eliminate the ACA and his elimination of the CHIP programs that help children and adults without insurance.

Now, we're finally getting to something that directly affects the people. But I would also say that the ACA wasn't all that it was cracked up to be. The way it should have been, either the government should have paid for people's health insurance or mandated that employers pay 100% of the cost - no co-pays, no deductibles, period. Without that, it might as well be eliminated since it's no better than what we had before.

His tax cuts that will hurt the poor and many elderly because of the massive cuts in Medicaid.

That's been going on since Reagan. Nothing new here. Nothing to warrant any extra hatred of Trump that shouldn't be leveled at all of his predecessors.

His refusal to end his "zero-tolerance" policy that separates children from their parents while he blames the Democrats for that, which is a lie.

I would consider it half-truth/half-lie, since the Democrats are partly responsible (along with the Republicans) for failure to come up with any kind of meaningful immigration reform. Trump has said he wants to come to the table and make a deal with the Democrats on immigration reform, but the Democrats are refusing to do that. That is their fault.

Both parties have had decades to resolve immigration issues and border security, but all they've done is pay lip service. I daresay that the reason for this is because too many vested interests (such as those who profit from the exploitable labor of undocumented immigrants) want to maintain the status quo indefinitely. The only real choice is to kick them all out or let them stay and grant them citizenship. I would vote to let them stay, but either way, our government needs to either poop or get off the pot.

So, let's put the "shoe"on the other foot and why in the world would you support a president who does these things, plus much more? And don't personal ethics count? Why would you separate them from other ethical violations? Why should a president get a free pass on this?

He's not getting a free pass. If and when any impeachable charges are leveled against him, and if/when actual concrete, tangible, verifiable proof is offered in the proper venue (such as in Congress or a Federal court, not in the media), then I will accept whatever judgment is passed.

I can't say that I actually "support" him that much, but I'm also looking at the ones who are attacking him (not on this message board, but those at the media/government level). Their credibility is also subject to question and scrutiny. The fact that all these people are coming out of the woodwork and going off like Chicken Little over Trump - that's what raises my skepticism more than anything else. Guys like Senators McCain and Flake, our two senators from AZ. I've hated those guys for years, and if they hate Trump, then I consider that something worth thinking about.

And why would free-thinking liberals even put one iota of faith in reports from the FBI, CIA, NSA, or other such agencies which have absolutely horrible histories and reputations in the eyes of the public (far worse than anything Trump has done)? I'm supposed to believe them and their judgment of "ethics"? Why should they get a free pass on anything? Whatever happened to "question authority"? That's what I would ask.

I voted for Nixon in 1968, and I came to regret that decision and not make excuses as to why I screwed up. I know a fair number of people who voted for Trump and have told me that they've come to regret that, such as one of my son's-in-law. He doesn't defend Trump's actions, nor does he say or imply that they're somehow excusable because some other presidents haven't always acted morally.

I'm not making any excuses here. I haven't changed my views either. The big issue for me is the economy, and I've believed for decades that we need to end free trade and restore and revitalize the Rust Belt, our industrial base, and our infrastructure overall. The fact that Trump said much the same thing was what chimed with me, and I don't think that was a mistake at all. If Trump was lying about that, I haven't seen any evidence of it. But we'll see.

Wrong is wrong, and two wrongs simply do not make a right-- at least that's how I was raised over 60 years ago. I very much respect you as a person, but I simply cannot accept the excuses for Trump's behavior by blaming past presidents.

Well, for me, it goes beyond blaming past presidents, as I blame an entire political system. It's not that I'm "excusing" Trump's behavior, but I think Trump is more of a symptom of a deeper problem. What I see are those who are focusing on Trump and only Trump, as if he's the beginning and the end of all America's problems. It reminds me of the song "Industrial Disease" where there's a line: They're pointing out the enemy to keep you deaf blind, they want sap your energy, incarcerate your mind.

 

[metis]

Sorry, but I gotta be brief in response.

I would consider it half-truth/half-lie, since the Democrats are partly responsible (along with the Republicans) for failure to come up with any kind of meaningful immigration reform.

False, as they have for decades now tried to work out solutions that has included DACA and other related issues. The reality, which Trump & Co even have admitted, is that "the Wall" is their priority and they have repeatedly said that there can be no agreement unless the Dems cave-in on it.

Trump has said he wants to come to the table and make a deal with the Democrats on immigration reform, but the Democrats are refusing to do that.

See above. Do you watch Fox by chance?

The fact that all these people are coming out of the woodwork and going off like Chicken Little over Trump - that's what raises my skepticism more than anything else.

When we build what are basically concentration camps whereas even little children are being removed from their parents, what do you expect? I guess my question back is where is your outrage for this NAZI-esque tactic. I've studied the Holocaust in Poland and Israel, and what Trump & Co are doing is just too painfully reminiscent of what was done there. It is inhumane and morally repugnant, but more and more even Republican voices are being raised against this nasty anti-family policy, so maybe there is some hope.

And why would free-thinking liberals even put one iota of faith in reports from the FBI, CIA, NSA, or other such agencies which have absolutely horrible histories and reputations in the eyes of the public (far worse than anything Trump has done)?

I've not seen nor heard such attacks, so I don't know where you're getting this from. For example, which congressmen/women have said as such? How about "free-thinking liberals" here at RF? I haven't seen any posts as such.

The big issue for me is the economy, and I've believed for decades that we need to end free trade and restore and revitalize the Rust Belt, our industrial base, and our infrastructure overall.

That we agree on, which is why I was opposed to NAFTA at its outset. However, the genie is out of the bottle, and I'm afraid that we can't do anything about this without starting a trade war, which Trump is now doing. There is more than one way to skin a cat economically, but what he's doing is not likely to help but to make things worse. Keep an eye on the stock-market for indications.

 

[Stevicus]

Sorry, but I gotta be brief in response.False, as they have for decades now tried to work out solutions that has included DACA and other related issues. The reality, which Trump & Co even have admitted, is that "the Wall" is their priority and they have repeatedly said that there can be no agreement unless the Dems cave-in on it.

The problem existed long before any debates on DACA or "the Wall" came into play. I would consider that the main problem has been an incoherent policy and skewed attitudes towards our neighbors to the south. Many of the same people who have been pushing for "free trade" with Mexico are also pushing for tighter border security and a stepped-up "war on drugs." Many attitudes towards Mexico seem to vacillate between "trading partner," "vacation spot," and/or "a horrible place full of drugs, poverty, crime, and evil people."

Do Americans commonly have the same attitudes towards our neighbor to the north? Of course not. Do you seriously expect me to believe that this is some kind of partisan issue that can only be blamed on Trump? Both Clinton and Obama had ample opportunity to push for legalization and more coherent border/immigration policies. Meanwhile, the problem just continued to fester until Trump's "build a wall" rhetoric started up and resonated with a lot of people.

I'm not saying that I agree with that (far from it), but I can understand people's frustration. Foot-dragging politicians have a tendency to do that.

See above. Do you watch Fox by chance?

No, I generally get news over the internet and occasionally read stories from their website. But I go to a variety of sources, not just one.

When we build what are basically concentration camps whereas even little children are being removed from their parents, what do you expect? I guess my question back is where is your outrage for this NAZI-esque tactic. I've studied the Holocaust in Poland and Israel, and what Trump & Co are doing is just too painfully reminiscent of what was done there. It is inhumane and morally repugnant, but more and more even Republican voices are being raised against this nasty anti-family policy, so maybe there is some hope.

Okay, you make some points, but what I was referring to were the attitudes which existed long before this present policy was put into effect. However, I would remind everyone that the apparatus for doing these kinds of things has already been in place for a long time, and a few of us have been warning about the scourges of the state for a very long time as well, only to be met (from both sides) with contrary people who say it's "conspiracy theory" and "paranoid."

I seem to remember you and I even had a similar discussion last year (don't remember when exactly), when I spoke of the FBI and CIA in less than flattering terms, bringing up the activities of J. Edgar Hoover (among others). I've had the same discussion with other liberals and Democrats who all seemed to believe that "they're not like the way they used to be; they've all changed."

I've said all along, never trust the government, always question authority, and that both the Democrats and Republicans are two arms of the same monster.

I've studied the Holocaust, too, and my main issue with the historiography of that event was the constant theme of focusing solely on Hitler, as if he was some sort of demon who just popped up out of thin air. He had the apparatus in place to do what he did; he had a political culture of compliant, obedient people who were conditioned to "trust the government"; he had centuries of culture which included malignant nationalism and anti-Semitism to draw upon.

So again, my views on this are consistent: I would be just as inclined to question those who say "it's all about Hitler" just as I question those who say "it's all about Trump."

You ask "where is my outrage," and I can assure you that my outrage has been long term and very real. But for much of my life, I've been met with people who say "don't worry, be happy" and that "we have a wonderful country and a wonderful government." I've seen over the past decades how any criticism or attacks on the government are met with charges of "conspiracy theory" or "anti-government nut."

I've not seen nor heard such attacks, so I don't know where you're getting this from. For example, which congressmen/women have said as such? How about "free-thinking liberals" here at RF? I haven't seen any posts as such.

You may have misunderstood my point. A lot of people are using the investigation (such as from former FBI Director Mueller) or reports from the CIA about Russia as ammunition against the Trump Administration, but why should anyone trust the FBI or CIA on anything? There was one poster here (can't remember who offhand) who took me to task because I referred to the FBI as "scum."

That we agree on, which is why I was opposed to NAFTA at its outset. However, the genie is out of the bottle, and I'm afraid that we can't do anything about this without starting a trade war, which Trump is now doing.

Well, there's an old saying: It's better to be p*ssed off than p*ssed on.

There is more than one way to skin a cat economically, but what he's doing is not likely to help but to make things worse. Keep an eye on the stock-market for indications.

People have been warning for decades about the consequences of huge trade deficits, not to mention the high-flying recklessness on Wall Street while most people are clinging to life rafts on a sea of red ink. The other shoe was bound to drop sooner or later, Trump or no Trump. But too many people didn't believe it; they didn't think that anything could go wrong, but now...well...we have what we have.

The root problem is in how many insular delusions that people hold about patriotism, America, our role in the world, capitalism, freedom, the American Dream, American Exceptionalism, and so on. I once believed that Americans' eyes were finally opened and that we would embark on a better course, but then Reagan came along and everyone's eyes were shut again.

The main reason why I find myself losing patience with the Trump-bashers is not necessarily because I disagree with them. It's because it seems too much like a bunch of petulant children throwing a tantrum because someone just told them there's no Santa Claus. (I'm not directing that at you personally, but just observing the trend I've seen.)

 

[Shushersbedamned]

?

To me, Reagan was the absolute worst president we've had in my lifetime. Most of his successors are also just as bad, since they essentially followed his economic program and made no significant changes whatsoever. The only one thus far who has bucked the trend is Trump, if only for his opposition to free trade.

It's not even really a left vs. right issue, since there have been those on the left who opposed free trade, such as Nader, Jerry Brown, Traficant, and others. There aren't that many left now, as most of the Democratic Party sold out the American workers.

What is the change that you're looking for? You never mention. You say 'not this not this not this, this sucks.....................................................................................................................................................................................................................'

If I may,

what tf do you want of the entire america to which you have no emotional attachment whatsoever - one may even suspect, it isnt your own country. ?

 

[metis]

You ask "where is my outrage," and I can assure you that my outrage has been long term and very real.

Then I guess overall we're on the same team. I'm always at least a bit critical of all presidents, but definitely more this one because of his basic lack of compassion for all and his injustice towards so many.

Even Evangelicals are starting to become more critical of him, and yet 55% in a recent poll feel his separating of families is somehow moral. Apparently what's actually found in the Bible is not enough to convince them otherwise.

 

[Stevicus]

?
What is the change that you're looking for? You never mention. You say 'not this not this not this, this sucks.....................................................................................................................................................................................................................'

I've had that discussion before in this forum. This thread may not be on that particular topic, but all in all, those who know me and have conversed with me in the past here know pretty much where I stand on a variety of issues affecting America. Some people agree, some disagree; a lot of it depends on who's participating in the discussion and what the actual issue is about. We're just talking here.

If I may,

what tf do you want of the entire america to which you have no emotional attachment whatsoever - one may even suspect, it isnt your own country. ?

Well, first, you're already on record as stating that you're not American, so I don't believe you're in a position to judge me on this. I am an American. I was born in California. My parents were Americans. All of my grandparents and great-grandparents were American. In fact, you'd have to go several generations back in my family tree to find anyone who wasn't American. Suffice to say, all of my ancestors before the Civil War were Americans, and many were here even before America existed as an independent nation.

My family roots and my love for America run very deep.

But by the same token, I have no illusions about America. I see it as just a place where people came to live, and they went through a lot of struggles and hardships and did their best to survive. A lot of the mythos surrounding America, such as Manifest Destiny, American Exceptionalism, the "American Dream" - a lot of that is really just an illusion. They're just some things made up by politicians and others to manipulate the masses.

I'm also aware that a lot of our history is bad, brutal, and bloody. But America eventually became a highly industrialized, advanced, modern country which is the superpower we are today. But it wasn't the result of "destiny" or some "dream" or even "freedom" and the "wonderful" abstract economic system many people tout nowadays.

As far as what I would want for America today, I would like to see us take a more detached approach to the rest of the world. I wouldn't advocate isolationism, but more a friendly neutrality. We can still be well-armed and militarily prepared to defend our own soil, but we don't have to be overextended to having bases and personnel in dozens of countries all over the world. Fact is, we just can't afford it anymore, not on the scale that it is currently being done.

It's also true that we're not facing the same world as it was during the World Wars or even the Cold War. We need to revise how we look at the world and how we deal with it. We should still consider and pursue our own interests, of course, but we need not engage in aggressive warfare, gunboat diplomacy, or hostile rhetoric to do it.

If we have any alliances at all, I would favor alliances within our own hemisphere. I think we should do more to cultivate goodwill and better relations with our neighbors to the south - which is why I'm dead set against this whole "wall" idea and the current "zero tolerance" policy being implemented. I can understand where such ideas come from - and it's partly the result of the illusions I mentioned earlier.

Domestically, I'd like to see an end to policies which favor factionalism, regionalism, along with the various zealous ideologues who tend to think in abstractions rather than practical politics. I think one of the bigger problems we have in our government today is corruption.

 

[Stevicus]

Then I guess overall we're on the same team. I'm always at least a bit critical of all presidents, but definitely more this one because of his basic lack of compassion for all and his injustice towards so many.

Even Evangelicals are starting to become more critical of him, and yet 55% in a recent poll feel his separating of families is somehow moral. Apparently what's actually found in the Bible is not enough to convince them otherwise.

I just hope they can find a way to end this soon - if only just to find better lodgings and foster care for the kids. I saw the pictures of kids in cages, and it's totally indefensible. They have to do something, like right now.

But I can also understand where it comes from. I know from living here since the late 70s, there's always been some sort of ongoing controversy and discussion about the border, along with various incidents, accusations, violence, etc. I won't presume to justify the mentalities of some of the people who live out here, but I've been around them long enough to know where they're coming from. A lot of it goes back to older times, including back when and how this particular piece of real estate came to be under U.S. jurisdiction in the first place.

But that's part of why they can look at this situation and be rather harsh and cold-blooded with this kind of "serves 'em right" attitude. It's in the blood. It's in how things have been generally handled in this part of the country, I'm sorry to say.

That's also why I'm somewhat resistance to comparisons to the Nazis, since it would be easier and more relevant to compare our present situation with past eras in our own history. We're not "Frost Cuckoo Land," but more of a "Cowboy Cuckoo Land."