US Politics Mega-thread - Page 7523

On May 14 2017 05:52 NewSunshine wrote:

Perhaps my statement could be more nuanced. My sarcasm has been confined to jokes about reports that you'd be a fool to defend. I never made any assumptions about someone else's beliefs, or pin something on somebody, while simultaneously obfuscating my own message with sarcasm(or hyperbole, exaggeration, etc.). I stuck to jokes, which is a different animal and you know that. But instead of taking note of my point, you instead elect to argue why i shouldn't have said it in the first place. And I'm getting the feeling that's all you seem to want to do in this thread.

On May 14 2017 06:19 Danglars wrote:

Right right, your sarcasm is more principled than others. Give me a break.

I'm not arguing that you shouldn't have said it, I'm arguing that you should hold yourself to the same "Sarcastic comments in general really don't do this thread any favors imo" that you're encouraging others to do. I might actually believe you next time you say it. Right now it looks like you're fine dishing it out but you can't take it.

On May 14 2017 06:08 NewSunshine wrote:
While like hopefully everyone else, I want to see what this investigation amounts to, however little or much, I am not for a moment going to suggest that it is nonsense that people need to get over and move on from. It is not only a very serious implication, there is plenty of evidence mounting to suggest that such an investigation is necessary. This administration could come out OK, I recognize it can still go either way. But they're making moves that are either suspicious or stupid at best, so yes, I'm skeptical, and believe pushing the matter is very important. If you're going to play the devil's advocate just to do so, and suggest that I am wrong for questioning our leadership, that does not commend you to me.

If there was one principle that used to unite conservatives, it was respect for the rule of law. Not long ago, conservatives would have been horrified at wholesale violations of the norms and traditions of our political system, and would have been appalled by a president who showed overt contempt for the separation of powers. But this week, as if on cue, most of the conservative media fell into line, celebrating President Trump’s abrupt dismissal of the F.B.I. director, James Comey, and dismissing the fact that Mr. Comey was leading an investigation into the Trump campaign and its ties to Russia. “Dems in Meltdown Over Comey Firing,” declared a headline on Fox News, as Tucker Carlson gleefully replayed clips of Democrats denouncing the move. “It’s just insane actually,” he said, referring to their reactions. On Fox and talk radio, the message was the same, with only a few conservatives willing to sound a discordant or even cautious note. The talk-show host Rush Limbaugh was positively giddy opening his monologue on Wednesday by praising Mr. Trump for what he called his “epic trolling” of liberals. “This is great,” Mr. Limbaugh declared. “Can we agree that Donald Trump is probably enjoying this more than anybody wants to admit or that anybody knows? So he fires Comey yesterday. Who’s he meet with today? He’s meeting with the Soviet, the Russian foreign minister, Sergey Lavrov! I mean, what an epic troll this is.”

Given the enthusiasm of the president’s apologists, it is likely that much of Mr. Trump’s base will similarly rally to him as it has in the past

But perhaps most important, we saw once again how conservatism, with its belief in ordered liberty, is being eclipsed by something different: Loathing those who loathe the president. Rabid anti-anti-Trumpism.
In a lamentably overlooked monologue this month, Mr. Limbaugh embraced the new reality in which conservative ideas and principles had been displaced by anti-liberalism. For years, Mr. Limbaugh ran what he called the “Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.” But in the Trump era, he told his audience, he has changed that to the “Institute for Advanced Anti-Leftist Studies.” With Mr. Trump in the White House, conservative principles were no longer the point. “How many times during the campaign did I warn everybody Trump is not a conservative? Multiple times a day,” Mr. Limbaugh said. “How many times have I told you: ‘Do not expect Trump to be a conservative? He isn’t one.’ He went on to emphasize that the campaign was not about conservatism, because that’s not what Mr. Trump is about.

That was a remarkable admission, but it is also a key to understanding what is happening on the right. While there are those like Sean Hannity who are reliable cheerleaders for all things President Trump, much of the conservative news media is now less pro-Trump than it is anti-anti-Trump. The distinction is important, because anti-anti-Trumpism has become the new safe space for the right.

Here is how it works: Rather than defend President Trump’s specific actions, his conservative champions change the subject to (1) the biased “fake news” media, (2) over-the-top liberals, (3) hypocrites on the left, (4) anyone else victimizing Mr. Trump or his supporters and (5) whataboutism, as in “What about Obama?” “What about Clinton?”

For the anti-anti-Trump pundit, whatever the allegation against Mr. Trump, whatever his blunders or foibles, the other side is always worse.

Conservatism as I have understood it has been eclipsed by this anti-anti-Trumpism, by this cult of personality, by this tribal politics, where it’s more important we score a win… and that we make liberals’ heads explode, whatever that involves, than it is to stand up for a principle.

But the real heart of anti-anti-Trumpism is the delight in the frustration and anger of his opponents. Mr. Trump’s base is unlikely to hold him either to promises or tangible achievements, because conservative politics is now less about ideas or accomplishments than it is about making the right enemies cry out in anguish.
[...]
The ad hominem argument is rightly regarded as a logical fallacy because it substitutes personal attacks for a discussion of the argument someone is making. But on many talk shows, including Mr. Limbaugh’s, nearly every argument is ad hominem. Instead of offering statistics and building a case, it is easier to simply make fun of a Trump critic like Representative Maxine Waters, or shrug off a negative report because it came from the “lamestream media." Not surprisingly, the vast majority of airtime on conservative media is not taken up by issues or explanations of conservative approaches to markets or need to balance liberty with order. Why bother with such stuff, when there were personalities to be mocked and left-wing moonbats to be ridiculed?

What may have begun as a policy or a tactic in opposition has long since become a reflex. But there is an obvious price to be paid for essentially becoming a party devoted to trolling. In the long run, it’s hard to see how a party dedicated to liberal tears can remain a movement based on ideas or centered on principles. Conservatives will care less about governing and more about scoring “wins” — and inflicting losses on the left — no matter how hollow the victories or flawed the policies. Ultimately, though, this will end badly because it is a moral and intellectual dead end, and very likely a political one as well

The right’s reaction to the firing of Mr. Comey hardly bodes well. Even conservatives who are still smarting from his handling of Hillary Clinton’s emails should recognize that the timing of Mr. Comey’s abrupt dismissal in the midst of a growing investigation into Russian meddling raises fundamental questions about the rule of the law and the possibility that justice is being obstructed.As the right doubles down on anti-anti-Trumpism, it will find itself goaded into defending and rationalizing ever more outrageous conduct just as long as it annoys CNN and the left.

In many ways anti-anti-Trumpism mirrors Donald Trump himself, because at its core there are no fixed values, no respect for constitutional government or ideas of personal character, only a free-floating nihilism cloaked in insult, mockery and bombast

On May 14 2017 06:27 Danglars wrote:

I have yet to see a single poster in this thread calling the investigation nonsense, they're calling charges that it's obstructed nonsense.

On May 14 2017 03:45 IgnE wrote:


he's just a classic German authoritarian is what he's saying. democracy is nice until the wrong sort of people vote for the wrong sort of person. best to have a "deep state" run everything.

On May 14 2017 06:55 KwarK wrote:

That's the opposite of German authoritarianism. When the wrong people elected the wrong authoritarian in Germany the deep state was the single strongest opponent to him.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schwarze_Kapelle

On May 14 2017 08:09 IgnE wrote:


i wasn't talking about Hitler, i was talking about the German psyche bro. they have a deep need for hierarchy

On May 14 2017 08:16 Gorsameth wrote:

No, you weren't talking about hierarchy. You were talking BS about authoritarianism.

A structured government as nothing to do with authoritarianism. A properly structured government is actually a great tool against it by separating power.

On May 14 2017 08:18 IgnE wrote:


ok so we know that you are for a fourth branch of American government. i propose we call it the eye of sauron

also how dare you presume to know what i was talking about

On May 14 2017 03:45 IgnE wrote:


he's just a classic German authoritarian is what he's saying. democracy is nice until the wrong sort of people vote for the wrong sort of person. best to have a "deep state" run everything.

On May 14 2017 04:45 IgnE wrote:


I'm saying you are an authoritarian who wants rule by unaccountable police forces. Both Trump and the head of the SS can be authoritarian. The difference is that the electorate voted for, and can vote out, only one of those people.

The FBI director serves at the pleasure of the President. Simple as that.

Besides if you guys love the deep state so much, why so much outrage over Erdogan? He's basically just entrenching himself, so is it really that different from an unaccountable combined intelligence and police force? Turkey still has a Parliament.

On May 14 2017 08:24 Gorsameth wrote:

Why by your own words ofcourse.
I'm sure you were only talking about hierarchy... /s

No point discussing with you if your denying your own words.
I'm done with you.

On May 14 2017 08:27 IgnE wrote:


lol are you serious right now? the only german authoritarian was hitler? "authoritarian" only signifies nazism now? wat

this is what passes for discourse?

On May 14 2017 08:54 IgnE wrote:
i didn't deny my words; i denied kwark's words. i stand by my words. of course.

i thought i won the argument? fbi director serves at the pleasure of the president and anyone who disagrees is a closet authoritarian. it is known.

i wish moltke would appear

On May 14 2017 06:59 NewSunshine wrote:
You know, Danglars, you are honestly starting to exhaust me. Not everything I say needs to be an argument. My point had little to do with sarcasm and whether I use it too, but the idea that when talking politics, which is already tricky enough, making me guess what you mean to begin with doesn't help. I don't feel like we disagree on all that much, but I don't have the energy for you picking every possible nit and starting ridiculous arguments. I'm here to have productive discussions, not defend myself to someone who gets his kicks poking holes in people's posts.

On May 14 2017 09:15 Danglars wrote:

We don't get to pick what's open to debate. I'm rather accustomed to two or three people trying to poke holes in my arguments in the same hour I post, and I suggest you accustom yourself to the same. You posted a standard in here you cannot even hold yourself to. Your defense was nonsense about how you weren't wrong, you really meant something other than what you wrote. If you retract what you said now, so be it. If you're here to have productive discussions, do so, and don't try to set rules you won't live by.

+ Show Spoiler +