Has U.S. Democracy Been Trumped?

[cherdano]

Man, the internet was more fun back when cranky forgetful uncles didn't know how to use it.

And if you raise taxes on the affluent citizens, don't you encourage them to move elsewhere, taking all of their tax revenue with them? (see California)

 

I moved my family and business out of California many years ago for that very reason.

[ldrews]

Man, the internet was more fun back when cranky forgetful uncles didn't know how to use it.

 

Ahh, you are right, I did say that some time ago. I moved from California to Colorado in 1975. I found California taxes and regulations oppressive. I believe that Colorado is still in the USA.

 

I would recommend any family and/or business relocate from California. But that is just my personal opinion.

[ldrews]

You did state on these forums that you moved out of California to avoid paying taxes...

 

So, yes, in 1975 I did move my family and business from California to Colorado to escape what I felt were oppressive taxes and regulation. I did not move to Mexico until 2010 and not for tax reasons.

 

So you have made a mistake, a misstatement, and accused me of something that I did not do. Do you have the integrity to correct the record?

[mikeh]

So, yes, in 1975 I did move my family and business from California to Colorado to escape what I felt were oppressive taxes and regulation. I did not move to Mexico until 2010 and not for tax reasons.

 

So you have made a mistake, a misstatement, and accused me of something that I did not do. Do you have the integrity to correct the record?

Hmmm....you, of all people, calling for an apology after someone gets a fact wrong. The irony is delicious

[Winstonm]

s

 

 

 

fired! sigh....amateurish the whole episode amateurish America is not more safer than it was a week ago and looks foolish for nothing

 

 

It took Nixon more than 4 years to get here. We can only hope that the impeachment of Trump is also on a comparatively fast track.

[WellSpyder]

Well, you are right, I am currently resident in Mexico. So, you are saying that as a US citizen, currently residing outside of the US, that I have no standing in this debate. And that that would be true for the several million other citizens of the US living outside the US? Tell me, does that include vacationers and other US citizens in transit?

I wonder whether those currently living in the US would be safer if US citizens currently living elsewhere were subject to additional vetting before being allowed back in? If this vetting doesn't happen, who will indemnify US residents against possible harm that might be done to them by returning non-residents?

[PassedOut]

Seems that Sally Yates did exactly what the Republicans insisted that she do at her own confirmation hearing.

 

At her confirmation hearings to be deputy attorney general, Ms. Yates faced a grilling from Republicans who were furious about former President Barack Obamas order liberalizing immigration policy.

 

The question: Would Ms. Yates be willing to stand up to the president?

 

Her inquisitor? Senator Jeff Sessions, Republican of Alabama, and now Mr. Trumps nominee for attorney general.

 

If the views the president wants to execute are unlawful, should the attorney general or the deputy attorney general say No? Mr. Sessions asked.

 

I believe the attorney general or deputy attorney general has an obligation to follow the law and Constitution and give their independent legal advice to the president, Ms. Yates replied.

And so it came to be. I wonder how Sessions will do in that regard.

 

Trump’s hard-line actions have an intellectual godfather: Jeff Sessions

 

In an email in response to a request from The Washington Post, Bannon described Sessions as “the clearinghouse for policy and philosophy” in Trump’s administration, saying he and the senator are at the center of Trump’s “pro-America movement” and the global nationalist phenomenon.

 

“In America and Europe, working people are reasserting their right to control their own destinies,” Bannon wrote. “Jeff Sessions has been at the forefront of this movement for years, developing populist nation-state policies that are supported by the vast and overwhelming majority of Americans, but are poorly understood by cosmopolitan elites in the media that live in a handful of our larger cities.”

[ldrews]

Hmmm....you, of all people, calling for an apology after someone gets a fact wrong. The irony is delicious

 

Interesting. I have not asked for an apology but rather a corrected statement. It is lamentable that you don't see the difference.

[Zelandakh]

Interesting. I have not asked for an apology but rather a corrected statement. It is lamentable that you don't see the difference.

You have made a correction. I doubt anyone here knows more about your life than you do. You may well be lying (again) to make a point but that is something only you can know. Are you so unsure about your motives that you need to hear them from someone else as confirmation?

[ldrews]

You have made a correction. I doubt anyone here knows more about your life than you do. You may well be lying (again) to make a point but that is something only you can know. Are you so unsure about your motives that you need to hear them from someone else as confirmation?

 

You win! See you at the voting booth.

[Winstonm]

This article perfectly explains the mind of the authoritarian voter and the fear of loss that drove him to vote for and continue to support Trump.

 

This country’s inner cities require “cleaning out,” MacCree said, to free them from the grip of gangs. The border needs more men and more guns. People fleeing Arabic-speaking countries shouldn’t run, but should stay where they are and fight Islamic extremism — unless they’re the extremists themselves. Either way, they should not be afforded entry to the U.S.

[barmar]

Wow, that's incredible, whatever happened to compassion for victims? It's like saying we don't need police -- if someone is held up by a gunman, they should fight back, unless they have sympathy for armed robbers.

[Winstonm]

A lot of dollar volatility with the Muslim Danger-Will-Robbins ban. It brings to mind that one of the strongest arguments for the dollar as the world's reserve currency is the stability of the U.S. government, that it historically has operated within a fairly narrow confine of slightly left and slightly right. Now, however, with the Bannon Trump Trumpon Presidency there is not so much reason to believe this will continue to be so in the future, which means the standing of the dollar as the world's reserve currency may also be in question - and in play. That is a terrifying proposition.

[mikeh]

Wow, that's incredible, whatever happened to compassion for victims? It's like saying we don't need police -- if someone is held up by a gunman, they should fight back, unless they have sympathy for armed robbers.

It's racism, clear and obvious.

 

Brown people are not white people: they are intrinsically different and their presence will lead to the loss of American values.

 

'They' are 'others' and we don't like 'others': we only like 'us'.

 

Inner cities have to be 'cleared out' because there are too many 'black' people there, and they all gravitate to gangs. It must be something intrinsic in their makeup, maybe even genetic (tho I'm not too sure about that sciency stuff....maybe they are just plain evil).

 

[/sarcasm]

It is important to 'other' (used as a verb) groups of people, lest we have to wrestle with the awful thought that Jesus (who was undoubtedly white, and almost certainly evangelical) would want us to be kind to them.

 

You see, all these people are god-fearing Christians who see the Bible as the inerrant word of God, and they no doubt go to church every Sunday and pray that Trump will keep doing God's work here on earth.

 

You know, the truly scary part is that these people are the same species as the rest of us. They don't see it that way, however.....coloured folk aren't really the same, after all. I mean, look at the way they live!

 

Note that there are many, many people of faith who are appalled at this sort of racism: many Christian groups have given generously of their time and money to help refugees and illegals. And bigotry is not confined to the religious: Sam Harris is a prominent atheist who is an outspoken bigot, as are many of his followers. So much as I like to blame the pernicious effect of religion for this sort of thing, it isn't as simple as that, in my opinion. There is something more fundamental (to pun) at play. I did read, recently, an interesting piece on the attributes of those attracted by authoritarianism and I suspect that that has more to do with this sort of thing than anything else.

 

Authoritarians of all stripes do 'other' groups of people as a means of causing group cohesion amongst their followers. I don't believe trump is smart enough, or intellectually curious enough, to have studied history, but I think he instinctively recognizes this fact. Bannon, otoh, is smart enough, and relatively well-read (he describes himself as sharing Lenin's basic desire, to destroy the society in which he lives) to be able to nudge trump in the 'right' direction.

 

So we see trump's base ecstatic about what trump is doing, and the progressive forces need to understand that this is happening.

[USViking]

So obviously the level of risk is a matter of opinion unless you have some credible data that suggests otherwise. And again, the thoroughness of vetting is a matter of opinion. And I would be interested in seeing the data that indicates that there is no credible threat from the proscribed countries, especially since previously the intelligence community declared otherwise.

 

Apparently (http://www.numberof.net/number-of-muslim-countries-in-the-world/) there are about 50 "muslim" countries in the world. The proscribed countries number 7. Since there are 43 "muslim" countries not on the list it seems a stretch to call the proscribed list a "muslim ban". However, it is noteworthy that all of the countries on the list are, indeed, "muslim". This list was created under the Obama administration. So unless you are willing to assert that Obama was anti-muslim, then the list should be considered anti-terrorist, not anti-muslim.

 

WARNING

 

Linked site highlighted in quotation above contains malware.

 

Clicking on site option to view list of 50 Muslim countries opens inescapable full screen page necessitating unplugging desktop PC from wall socket.

 

At least it did with me.

[barmar]

At least it did with me.

But not me. And I did a little research to see if this was a known malware site after USV reported the problem, it isn't.

[Winstonm]

It's racism, clear and obvious.

 

 

Note that there are many, many people of faith who are appalled at this sort of racism: many Christian groups have given generously of their time and money to help refugees and illegals. And bigotry is not confined to the religious: Sam Harris is a prominent atheist who is an outspoken bigot, as are many of his followers. So much as I like to blame the pernicious effect of religion for this sort of thing, it isn't as simple as that, in my opinion. There is something more fundamental (to pun) at play. I did read, recently, an interesting piece on the attributes of those attracted by authoritarianism and I suspect that that has more to do with this sort of thing than anything else.

 

Authoritarians of all stripes do 'other' groups of people as a means of causing group cohesion amongst their followers. I don't believe trump is smart enough, or intellectually curious enough, to have studied history, but I think he instinctively recognizes this fact. Bannon, otoh, is smart enough, and relatively well-read (he describes himself as sharing Lenin's basic desire, to destroy the society in which he lives) to be able to nudge trump in the 'right' direction.

 

So we see trump's base ecstatic about what trump is doing, and the progressive forces need to understand that this is happening.

 

I have been pounding away at this idea of authoritarian voters since I first learned of it and read how dramatically that one datum was an incredibly accurate predictor of who would vote for Trump. Now, once we get into the authoritarian-voter's mindset, it becomes more complex, I think.

 

It is indeed racism, but not the blatant racism we are used to seeing where nothing but skin color matters. No, this racism is fear-driven and more tribal, a you-versus-us consolidation of similar -minded people unbalanced emotionally by the changes that are occurring. It was easy to see in the LA Times article I linked, that the Arizona man quoted saw the influx of darker-skinned, English-as-a-second-language people and determined that all border towns were at risk - at risk for what? For becoming less white dominated. This is the fear - the status quo is changing, there is danger in the world from brown-skinned people, and we must protect at all costs the U.S. white dominance as a safe haven from change.

 

How to combat this fear? I don't know. I doubt cognitive arguments will win out as this is an emotive battleground. It may simply take overwhelming numbers to squelch the fear and create change, regardless.

[Al_U_Card]

The fun starts in at about 30 seconds. Really quite funny.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELD2AwFN9Nc

[Al_U_Card]

Here is an interesting viewpoint that looks at Trump's actions from a different and quite "alternate" take. Everyone take a deep breath and try to lighten up a bit.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6b0bIEMsHwM

[y66]

From A Clarifying Moment In American History (Jan 29, 2017) by Eliot A Cohen:

 

I am not surprised by President Donald Trump’s antics this week. Not by the big splashy pronouncements such as announcing a wall that he would force Mexico to pay for, even as the Mexican foreign minister held talks with American officials in Washington. Not by the quiet, but no less dangerous bureaucratic orders, such as kicking the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff out of meetings of the Principals’ Committee, the senior foreign-policy decision-making group below the president, while inserting his chief ideologist, Steve Bannon, into them. Many conservative foreign-policy and national-security experts saw the dangers last spring and summer, which is why we signed letters denouncing not Trump’s policies but his temperament; not his program but his character.

 

We were right. And friends who urged us to tone it down, to make our peace with him, to stop saying as loudly as we could “this is abnormal,” to accommodate him, to show loyalty to the Republican Party, to think that he and his advisers could be tamed, were wrong. In an epic week beginning with a dark and divisive inaugural speech, extraordinary attacks on a free press, a visit to the CIA that dishonored a monument to anonymous heroes who paid the ultimate price, and now an attempt to ban selected groups of Muslims (including interpreters who served with our forces in Iraq and those with green cards, though not those from countries with Trump hotels, or from really indispensable states like Saudi Arabia), he has lived down to expectations.

 

Precisely because the problem is one of temperament and character, it will not get better. It will get worse, as power intoxicates Trump and those around him. It will probably end in calamity—substantial domestic protest and violence, a breakdown of international economic relationships, the collapse of major alliances, or perhaps one or more new wars (even with China) on top of the ones we already have. It will not be surprising in the slightest if his term ends not in four or in eight years, but sooner, with impeachment or removal under the 25th Amendment. The sooner Americans get used to these likelihoods, the better.

 

The question is, what should Americans do about it? To friends still thinking of serving as political appointees in this administration, beware: When you sell your soul to the Devil, he prefers to collect his purchase on the installment plan. Trump’s disregard for either Secretary of Defense Mattis or Secretary-designate Tillerson in his disastrous policy salvos this week, in favor of his White House advisers, tells you all you need to know about who is really in charge. To be associated with these people is going to be, for all but the strongest characters, an exercise in moral self-destruction.

 

For the community of conservative thinkers and experts, and more importantly, conservative politicians, this is a testing time. Either you stand up for your principles and for what you know is decent behavior, or you go down, if not now, then years from now, as a coward or opportunist. Your reputation will never recover, nor should it.

 

Rifts are opening up among friends that will not be healed. The conservative movement of Ronald Reagan and Jack Kemp, of William F. Buckley and Irving Kristol, was always heterogeneous, but it more or less hung together. No more. New currents of thought, new alliances, new political configurations will emerge. The biggest split will be between those who draw a line and the power-sick—whose longing to have access to power, or influence it, or indeed to wield it themselves—causes them to fatally compromise their values. For many more it will be a split between those obsessed with anxiety, hatred, and resentment, and those who can hear Lincoln’s call to the better angels of our nature, whose America is not replete with carnage, but a city on a hill.

 

This is one of those clarifying moments in American history, and like most such, it came upon us unawares, although historians in later years will be able to trace the deep and the contingent causes that brought us to this day. There is nothing to fear in this fact; rather, patriots should embrace it. The story of the United States is, as Lincoln put it, a perpetual story of “a rebirth of freedom” and not just its inheritance from the founding generation.

 

Some Americans can fight abuses of power and disastrous policies directly—in courts, in congressional offices, in the press. But all can dedicate themselves to restoring the qualities upon which this republic, like all republics depends: on reverence for the truth; on a sober patriotism grounded in duty, moderation, respect for law, commitment to tradition, knowledge of our history, and open-mindedness. These are all the opposites of the qualities exhibited by this president and his advisers. Trump, in one spectacular week, has already shown himself one of the worst of our presidents, who has no regard for the truth (indeed a contempt for it), whose patriotism is a belligerent nationalism, whose prior public service lay in avoiding both the draft and taxes, who does not know the Constitution, does not read and therefore does not understand our history, and who, at his moment of greatest success, obsesses about approval ratings, how many people listened to him on the Mall, and enemies.

 

He will do much more damage before he departs the scene, to become a subject of horrified wonder in our grandchildren’s history books. To repair the damage he will have done Americans must give particular care to how they educate their children, not only in love of country but in fair-mindedness; not only in democratic processes but democratic values. Americans, in their own communities, can find common ground with those whom they have been accustomed to think of as political opponents. They can attempt to renew a political culture damaged by their decayed systems of civic education, and by the cynicism of their popular culture.

 

There is in this week’s events the foretaste of things to come. We have yet to see what happens when Trump tries to use the Internal Revenue Service or the Federal Bureau of Investigation to destroy his opponents. He thinks he has succeeded in bullying companies, and he has no compunction about bullying individuals, including those with infinitely less power than himself. His advisers are already calling for journalists critical of the administration to be fired: Expect more efforts at personal retribution. He has demonstrated that he intends to govern by executive orders that will replace the laws passed by the people’s representatives.

 

In the end, however, he will fail. He will fail because however shrewd his tactics are, his strategy is terrible—The New York Times, the CIA, Mexican Americans, and all the others he has attacked are not going away. With every act he makes new enemies for himself and strengthens their commitment; he has his followers, but he gains no new friends. He will fail because he cannot corrupt the courts, and because even the most timid senator sooner or later will say “enough.” He will fail most of all because at the end of the day most Americans, including most of those who voted for him, are decent people who have no desire to live in an American version of Tayyip Erdogan’s Turkey, or Viktor Orban’s Hungary, or Vladimir Putin’s Russia.

 

There was nothing unanticipated in this first disturbing week of the Trump administration. It will not get better. Americans should therefore steel themselves, and hold their representatives to account. Those in a position to take a stand should do so, and those who are not should lay the groundwork for a better day. There is nothing great about the America that Trump thinks he is going to make; but in the end, it is the greatness of America that will stop him.

ELIOT A. COHEN is the director of the Strategic Studies Program at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies. From 2007 to 2009, he was a counselor to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. He is the author of "The Big Stick: The Limits of Soft Power and the Necessity of Military Force".

[Zelandakh]

You win! See you at the voting booth.

Sorry, I do not have any rights to vote in Mexico.

[Trinidad]

At the risk of opening a can of worms, I don't think that the fact that Idrews doesn't live in the USA anymore means that he is not entitled to an opinion on the USA or to express it.

 

I myself have studied in the USA, where I had the time of my life. As a result, I will always be genuinely interested in what happens there, both with a view from within and with a view from the outside. I don't think the fact that I am neither a citizen¹, nor a resident (now) means that I cannot hold an opinion and express it.

 

And if I think that I can express my opinion than Idrews can too, even if he would live on Mars.

 

Rik

 

¹ I am a citizen of the country that should come second, according to Al_U_Card's post.

[Trinidad]

The fun starts in at about 30 seconds. Really quite funny.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELD2AwFN9Nc

Did you know that a US citizen officially petitioned to make the Netherlands second?

 

The Netherlands has requested, within the scope of the new America first initiatives, to be simply: second. They don't want us to forget about them. So the White House should give them a call. 2nd place is open, and they asked nicely before anyone else. We'll make them great too. We can do it.

 

(from petitions.whitehouse.gov)

 

Rik

[hrothgar]

At the risk of opening a can of worms, I don't think that the fact that Idrews doesn't live in the USA anymore means that he is not entitled to an opinion on the USA or to express it.

 

I myself have studied in the USA, where I had the time of my life. As a result, I will always be genuinely interested in what happens there, both with a view from within and with a view from the outside. I don't think the fact that I am neither a citizen¹, nor a resident (now) means that I cannot hold an opinion and express it.

 

And if I think that I can express my opinion than Idrews can too, even if he would live on Mars.

 

 

The issue is not that drews does not live in the US, it is why he doesn't live in the US.

 

And I don't buy for a minute that he did so for any other reason than minimizing his tax burdens...

[kenberg]

WARNING

 

Linked site highlighted in quotation above contains malware.

 

Clicking on site option to view list of 50 Muslim countries opens inescapable full screen page necessitating unplugging desktop PC from wall socket.

 

At least it did with me.

 

barmar already remarked that there does not seem to be any malware, but I have an additional comment. From time to time I attempt to open something that produces the result you describe. And of course I have worried about what is going on. It seems to be that some sites have two issues: They take a long time to load, and while they are loading it is impossible to dismiss them. MyPC is reasonably new and of reasonable qulity, running on, I guess, Windows 10. I use Firefox.

When this happens I do one of two things. I unplug the computer (restart is inaccessable) or I go have some coffee while it does its thing. Ctrl-Alt-Del to bring up the "end task" option won't do it, nor, as far as I know, does anything else except just unplugging the computer or waiting it out. As you can tell ftom my vagueness, I am no expert but this may be what happened.