[Tanada]

I got exactly what I voted for up to and including the following:

1. Pulled out of the TPP
2. Extreme vetting
3. Neil Gorsuch

Agreed on all of these.

4. Building The Wall

Still waiting to see what actually happens on this one.

5. Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis

Agreed

6. Coal deregulation

This is not all good, there needs to be a balance between jobs and energy production on one side of the scales and environmental protection on the other side. When acid mine drainage destroys the value of property down stream I have a problem with that, those people down stream did not ask for a coal mine as a neighbor and they did not benefit financially from it in any way. Destroying the drinking water and often the value of their property as well is a big problem IMO.

7. Calling out the dishonest left wing media

This is one I have been wishing for since the end of the Reagan Presidency!

8. NATO told to ante up or else
9. Replacing ObamaCare
10) Lowering the corporate and personal tax rate

I am still waiting to see what happens with these. Like the wall we are still in early days and I have high hopes, but I don't count them as a done deal at this time.

[Newfie]

The basic function of any government is to insure the safety of its citizens while protecting individual liberty and their economic freedom to make choices.

Cog,

That is your DESIRE. And a nice wish.

Jared Diamond believes the basic function of government is so that we kill each other more slowly. By that definition some dictators, such as Hussin, would qualify. So that definition seems to work.

On the other hand there are innumerable examples where the government existed primarily to enrich themselves.

Then there are many hybrids. Gives he increasing disparity of wealth in the USA an argument could be made that the socialist governments of Europe better match your definition than the USA.

[Cog]

It is not my desire nor wish that matters. It is the basis on which the Declaration of Independence was written and the preamble to the US Constitution. Every police officer, military personnel, and elected official swears an oath to protect and defend the Constitution. That oath either means something or it does not.

[Newfie]

Well quite obviously it doesn't mean a hill of beans to most of congress and many top state and city officials. And they are setting the example for the rest of the country.

Not that I like it, it's what I observe.

Look at the 10 commandments, how many SAY they take them seriously, how many REALLY do? Humans are like that. Maybe not you, maybe. But most are.

[Cog]

While we still have the power, we use the ballot box to remove those scoundrels who will not follow their oath. If the ballot box is not an option we string them up.

[Newfie]

Brave words. But then you are just ignoring the constitution yourself. Just as so many "scoundrels" are today.

And what if the scoundrels lynch you instead?

It all comes down to this, human politics is not pure, it's messy and unfair and very human. No cut and dry clear answers.

[Cog]

If the politicians, and those who enforce the laws act within constitutional boundaries, then I will never have cause to string anyone up, nor will they have cause to do the same to me. As a free man with the right to bear arms, I can act to protect my rights by the use of force if necessary.

[Newfie]

That is a right you reserve for yourself, not granted by the constitution.

To take up arms against the government is rebellious and treasonous.

It may be warranted but you may well found yourself in a bit of a pickle.

It's the same kind of argument the sanctuary and illegal immigrant supporters are making.

[Cog]

If I were to take up arms against the government for just cause, then I would be doing what the Founders intended I do. That is what you don't get. My loyalty is to the US Constitution not to a man, a government, or any other political establishment. Even my military oath was not to the government but to the Constitution itself. Those that act outside or in contravention to the Constitution are enemies. Foreign or domestic ring a bell?

By the way, my right to bear arms is not something granted to me by the Second Amendment. I have that right by being a human being. The Second Amendment prevents the government from interfering with that inherent right that I already have.

[Plantagenet]

By the way, my right to bear arms is not something granted to me by the Second Amendment. I have that right by being a human being. The Second Amendment prevents the government from interfering with that inherent right that I already have.

That is debatable.

While a few libertarians might agree with you that the right to bear arms is a fundamental human right---IMHO its a more compelling argument to say the RIGHT TO SELF DEFENSE is a fundamental human right---

the-right-to-bear-arms-is-a-human-right

On the other hand, among Ds and generally on the left, most would give up the basic human right to self defense

gun-ownership-is-not-a-human-right

Liberal Ds seem to think people have no right to defend themselves if they attacked or robbed or their home is invaded---which IMHO is a crazy way to think.


Guess which one is a liberal D?

[Newfie]

I think that particular bias is situational. Let the SHTF and see who is out buying guns.

[Newfie]

If I were to take up arms against the government for just cause, then I would be doing what the Founders intended I do. That is what you don't get. My loyalty is to the US Constitution not to a man, a government, or any other political establishment. Even my military oath was not to the government but to the Constitution itself. Those that act outside or in contravention to the Constitution are enemies. Foreign or domestic ring a bell?

By the way, my right to bear arms is not something granted to me by the Second Amendment. I have that right by being a human being. The Second Amendment prevents the government from interfering with that inherent right that I already have.

You say it is a right you have by being human. I say it is a right that you take as a human. The right is not granted to me, it is taken by me. It's where dieisim comes in. I don't recognize a God who grants me rights. As an atheist I need to determine what rights I grant myself. That becomes tricky business.

But it informs our disagreement, perhaps trivial, over the Constitution. I don't need the Constitution to determine what my rights and obligations are. The Constitution is valuable because it sets forth a common understanding we (theoretically) agree to live by which helps reduce conflict, keeps us from killing one another.

But it's not some ultimate sacred document from the lips of God. it's a human agreement made at one point in time. I tend to agree with most of it and don't get too wrapped up about where I don't agree (actually I can't think of a good example off hand.)

Anyway, this thread is drifting from impeachment.

I don't see any impeachable offenses yet. God knows he is likely to give them what they want, he seems tactless and without common sense. A troll. What I do see, and it's disturbing, is this hue and cry for his blood. Mob rule. It's disgusting.

and yet this was all created in accordance with the constitution. Something is surely amiss. True no matter who won.

I guess I'm saying the Constitution is fine, for a race of sane, sensible folks of a reasonable demeanor. But that's not who we are as a country.

[vtsnowedin]

I don't see any impeachable offenses yet. God knows he is likely to give them what they want, he seems tactless and without common sense. A troll. What I do see, and it's disturbing, is this hue and cry for his blood. Mob rule. It's disgusting.

I'm very much in agreement with you here.
We have very worrying times ahead of us.

[Plantagenet]

I don't see any impeachable offenses yet. God knows he is likely to give them what they want, he seems tactless and without common sense. A troll. What I do see, and it's disturbing, is this hue and cry for his blood. Mob rule. It's disgusting.

and yet this was all created in accordance with the constitution. Something is surely amiss. True no matter who won.

The Constitution has weathered worse crises then this one in the past. Just because Trump is a troll and some Ds have turned into a mewling mob is no reason to give up on the Constitution.

I guess I'm saying the Constitution is fine, for a race of sane, sensible folks of a reasonable demeanor. But that's not who we are as a country.

The fact that humans are insane...or at least not very sensible or reasonable is exactly why we need the constitution. The constitution and the bill of rights are always the basis of our Republic, irregardless of how insane things get at any particular time.

[Shaved Monkey]

Has there ever been a president who people thought would be impeached so quickly after he took office ?
Have people changed or is it something to do with Trump?


Donald Trump's presidency 'likely to be second shortest in history', says presidential historian

Author predicts the US leader will last between 31 days and 199


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 83181.html

[Cog]

Since Dr Feinman was badly mistaken about Trump's chances to even win the presidency, I don't hold much stock in his ability to predict the longevity of Trump's presidential reign. He is a self-described liberal and progressive who sees the world with that tint.
http://www.theprogressiveprofessor.com/?page_id=2

http://historynewsnetwork.org/article/162647

[Cog]

But back to this whole issue of impeachment. Unless the president acts in a way that is illegal, its not going to happen. Even having his refugee executive order declared unconstitutional does not give rise to a criminal offense. Congress routinely passes laws that are declared unconstitutional at a later point in time and no ones goes to jail over it.

Being rude to the press and being unconventional to his approach to governance might piss people off but here again no crime is committed. For all the outrage over Trump you see on TV, you have an equal number of people, if not more, cheering him on.

Reversing progressive policies make people mad who embrace them. In four years, the progressives will have their chance to reverse course yet again. In the meantime, Trump is attempting to do exactly what he promised to do. A refreshing change really.

[Shaved Monkey]

For all the outrage over Trump you see on TV, you have an equal number of people, if not more, cheering him on.

Sound like Fake News Trump style

[Newfie]

I don't think people have changed, at least not on an evolutionary basis.

The circumstances have changed. Going back to the book Entrertaining Ourselves to Death, the thinks we read less and understand less now than ever before. The media, in its total scope from Madison Ave to Twitter to porn, has changed greatly and that effects the population greatly.

There is no doubt that American educational levels are poor compared to other 1st world countries. se have come to expect immediate gratification for most every whim. The ability to have delayed gratification is a very strong indication for success. Look how people are already calling Trump a failed President.

Also the rapid communication of emotions allows the formation of mob/herd reactions. Trump stokes this but it's a dangerous game that can backfire.