ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags !MOD BOX WARNING!

Reply
Old 6th September 2018, 09:29 AM   #81
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 45,773
'Lodestar' is an anagram for 'dares lot'. I bet there are other clues hidden in the text.
__________________
One cannot expect wisdom to flow from a pumpkin.
TragicMonkey is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2018, 09:29 AM   #82
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 29,054
Originally Posted by autumn1971 View Post
So a business entity whose whole profit margin is based on its world-wide reliability would risk everything by sloppy vetting?
LOL
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2018, 09:31 AM   #83
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 12,490
The 25th Amendment is pretty much worded in a way that guarantees it's never going to happen in the only scenarios anyone would ever want to use it.
__________________
"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en
JoeMorgue is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2018, 09:32 AM   #84
CORed
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Central City, Colorado, USA
Posts: 8,142
Originally Posted by lobosrul5 View Post
The press has always (or for any of our lifetimes anyways) been held at a higher standard than politicians (until Fox News came along). Sad as it is, we expect a degree of lying from politicians. The current POTUS has just taken it to extremes.
The old joke, "How do you know if a politician is lying? His lips are moving.", was a humorous exaggeration until Trump came along. In Trump's case, it's disturbingly close to the truth.
CORed is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2018, 09:33 AM   #85
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 12,490
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
'Lodestar' is an anagram for 'dares lot'. I bet there are other clues hidden in the text.
The whole thing is viral marketing for the next Dan Brown novel.
__________________
"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en
JoeMorgue is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2018, 09:36 AM   #86
lobosrul5
Graduate Poster
 
lobosrul5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 1,030
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
The whole thing is viral marketing for the next Dan Brown novel.
Yes, I can see "Robert Langdon" muttering to himself... lodestar... "dares a lot"... "who dares wins".... the SAS is running the USA!!!

Last edited by lobosrul5; 6th September 2018 at 09:37 AM.
lobosrul5 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2018, 09:36 AM   #87
RecoveringYuppy
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,670
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
What in the world is a cut-out?
A trusted intermediary.

Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
The NYT said they talked to someone in the Trump admin who confirmed that they were the author.

Did you listen to the podcast where the NYT editor was talking about how he determined it was real?
Theprestige seems to be grasping at straws.
__________________
REJ (Robert E Jones) posting anonymously under my real name for 30 years.

Make a fire for a man and you keep him warm for a day. Set him on fire and you keep him warm for the rest of his life.
RecoveringYuppy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2018, 09:37 AM   #88
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 29,054
Originally Posted by dann View Post
Does anybody have a copy of the job description?!
Yes.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2018, 09:37 AM   #89
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 40,575
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
I find the whole thing fascinating, so I'm glad they published it.

The only people mad at them for publishing it are the people who've been calling them fake news since before Trump revoked their WH press pass, so...
That's really not true. For example:
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/la-ol...htmlstory.html
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2018, 09:38 AM   #90
Giordano
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 14,698
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Or the author handed the text to a cut-out, who forwarded it to the New York Times under their own name. The editor would get in direct contact with the cut-out, who would claim to be the real author. The editor would have no way of knowing it was a trick.
Come on- do you really think that the NY Times would have been so casual about confirming the identity of its author given the visibility of the Op-ed, its impact, and the inevitable rabid attempts to discredit it? They have extensive procedures to confirm even far less important stories/pieces and a large legal department to ensure that they do so properly.
Giordano is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2018, 09:38 AM   #91
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 73,332
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
I guess I'm having a hard time grasping exactly what the big bombshell is supposed to be here.
The bombshell is a inside confirmation of what we thought we knew before. And also a pretty clear indication that the world is flirting with disaster daily.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2018, 09:38 AM   #92
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 40,575
Originally Posted by Dr. Keith View Post
So, we are now holding the NYT editorial board to a higher standard than the President of the United States. Bizarro world.
That doesn't follow from anything I said.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2018, 09:39 AM   #93
kellyb
Philosopher
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 8,874
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
That's really not true. For example:
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/la-ol...htmlstory.html
They're mad at the author, not the NYT.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2018, 09:40 AM   #94
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 73,332
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Of course. But I'm not speculating any more than someone who believes the editor has correctly identified the real author.
Right. Like evolution. It's true or it isn't. 50/50.

Teach the controversy.



I don't know but I trust newspapers to correctly identify their own sources better than some random bloke on the internet (no offense).
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2018, 09:41 AM   #95
Giordano
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 14,698
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
The 25th Amendment is pretty much worded in a way that guarantees it's never going to happen in the only scenarios anyone would ever want to use it.
Actually it works very well if the POTUS is unconscious, etc. The cabinet determines the POTUS is unable to perform their responsibilities; the President is unable to rebut this determination.
Giordano is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2018, 09:41 AM   #96
RecoveringYuppy
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,670
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
That's really not true. For example:
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/la-ol...htmlstory.html
That article expresses anger towards the author, not the NYT. (ETA: echoing kellyb)
__________________
REJ (Robert E Jones) posting anonymously under my real name for 30 years.

Make a fire for a man and you keep him warm for a day. Set him on fire and you keep him warm for the rest of his life.
RecoveringYuppy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2018, 09:43 AM   #97
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 29,054
Originally Posted by Giordano View Post
Actually impeachment is limited to "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors." It dos not apply to unfitness in any other way.
On the other hand, "unfitness" can be applied to the impeachment process in a wide range of ways, thanks to the phrasing, "high crimes and misdemeanors". That's why I think it's a better match for what people are wanting, which is to remove the President under any pretext. Impeachment admits a lot more pretexts than the 25th.

Quote:
The 25th amendment was created expressly to deal with if the President was "unable" to perform their duties, with "unable" not defined in the amendment but left to be defined first by the cabinet, and, if rebutted by the President, to be defined by Congress.
No. The test for inability is explicitly described in the amendment. Congress is invoked to resolve disputes about the outcome of the test, because while the test is clear, it is not immune to dispute.

Quote:
The amendment clearly is designed to include "medically unfit as in unconscious" as falling within the category "unable". I believe the drafters of the amendment, and most others, would view "medically unfit as in clinically and seriously insane" as also falling under the "unable" category.
Certainly. Likewise, "made to pass the test of ability under duress" would fall under the "unable" category.

But the two questions are very different. "Is the president unable to act in the role, despite appearances?" is a much narrower question than "is the president acting in the role so badly that he should be removed?". Thus, since both questions require two thirds of Congress to support the desired outcome, impeachment is a much better fit for pursuing that outcome. One obvious reason this is so is that for the impeachment process, Congress doesn't have to explore the President's inner motives, only the external results. If the President is behaving badly, Congress can impeach him on that basis alone. If it's a 25th Amendment dispute, Congress has to actually answer the question of mental health, instead of simply examining the outcome.

Last edited by theprestige; 6th September 2018 at 10:01 AM.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2018, 09:43 AM   #98
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 40,575
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
The bombshell is a inside confirmation of what we thought we knew before.
That is precisely why you shouldn't simply accept it as true. It's potentially a textbook example of confirmation bias. Without any way to independently verify that information, let alone a name of someone staking their reputation on it, it's not actually confirmation of anything. Your state of knowledge hasn't actually changed at all.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2018, 09:44 AM   #99
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 40,575
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
They're mad at the author, not the NYT.
Primarily, yes. But you don't seriously think she thought the NYT was right to publish it, do you?
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2018, 09:45 AM   #100
trustbutverify
Philosopher
 
trustbutverify's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 7,178
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Well, at least the editorial clarifies one thing: the "deep state" of entrenched bureaucrats is real, and is really working to undermine the Executive branch.
Trump's cabinet is the "deep state"? Wow.
__________________
"The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated." -- Mahatma Gandhi

Wollen owns the stage
trustbutverify is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2018, 09:45 AM   #101
kellyb
Philosopher
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 8,874
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
That is precisely why you shouldn't simply accept it as true. It's potentially a textbook example of confirmation bias. Without any way to independently verify that information, let alone a name of someone staking their reputation on it, it's not actually confirmation of anything. Your state of knowledge hasn't actually changed at all.
We do know that someone inside the administration is claiming it's true.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2018, 09:45 AM   #102
The Great Zaganza
Illuminator
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 4,590
Those "Adults in the Room" are as responsible as parents who do their kid's homework, thus making it impossible for the teacher (voter) to find out that the pupil is failing in all subjects.

I'm leaning more and more towards Kelllyanne, because she seems to be the brightest of the bunch and possibly under the greatest stress (also personal) to let off steam.
__________________
Opinion is divided on the subject. All the others say it is; I say it isn’t.
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2018, 09:46 AM   #103
kellyb
Philosopher
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 8,874
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Primarily, yes. But you don't seriously think she thought the NYT was right to publish it, do you?
I think the author is cowardly, but I'm also glad the NTY published it.

So, yes, I seriously think that.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2018, 09:48 AM   #104
kellyb
Philosopher
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 8,874
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post

I'm leaning more and more towards Kelllyanne, because she seems to be the brightest of the bunch and possibly under the greatest stress (also personal) to let off steam.
I think the letter's overall effect is harmful to the GOP, so I don't see her as being the one. She also doesn't hate Russia like the author.

eta:

I have a hard time seeing Kellyanna penning "it's the steady state, not the deep state" as well.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.

Last edited by kellyb; 6th September 2018 at 09:50 AM.
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2018, 09:49 AM   #105
RecoveringYuppy
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,670
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
That is precisely why you shouldn't simply accept it as true. It's potentially a textbook example of confirmation bias. Without any way to independently verify that information, let alone a name of someone staking their reputation on it, it's not actually confirmation of anything. Your state of knowledge hasn't actually changed at all.
You never accept articles based on anonymous sources? You seem to be grasping at straws here.
__________________
REJ (Robert E Jones) posting anonymously under my real name for 30 years.

Make a fire for a man and you keep him warm for a day. Set him on fire and you keep him warm for the rest of his life.
RecoveringYuppy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2018, 09:52 AM   #106
RecoveringYuppy
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,670
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Primarily, yes. But you don't seriously think she thought the NYT was right to publish it, do you?
What makes you think that? Desperation? The author you cited gets to point at the NYT for evidence of the enablers she hates.
__________________
REJ (Robert E Jones) posting anonymously under my real name for 30 years.

Make a fire for a man and you keep him warm for a day. Set him on fire and you keep him warm for the rest of his life.
RecoveringYuppy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2018, 09:54 AM   #107
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 29,054
Originally Posted by Giordano View Post
Come on- do you really think that the NY Times would have been so casual about confirming the identity of its author given the visibility of the Op-ed, its impact, and the inevitable rabid attempts to discredit it? They have extensive procedures to confirm even far less important stories/pieces and a large legal department to ensure that they do so properly.
Taking Soviet propaganda at face value this way was completely misleading, as talking with ordinary Russians might have revealed even at the time. Duranty’s prize-winning articles quoted not a single one – only Stalin, who forced farmers all over the Soviet Union into collective farms and sent those who resisted to concentration camps.

[...]

Some of Duranty’s editors criticized his reporting as tendentious, but The Times kept him as a correspondent until 1941. Since the 1980’s, the paper has been publicly acknowledging his failures.

New York Times Statement About 1932 Pulitzer Prize Awarded to Walter Duranty
Despite the obvious problems with Duranty's work, the NYT published it anyway, and it took them another fifty years to admit their mistake. Appeals to the editorial integrity of the New York Times, and to the reliability of its due diligence, do not impress.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2018, 09:54 AM   #108
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 22,981
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
'Lodestar' is an anagram for 'dares lot'. I bet there are other clues hidden in the text.
It's also a few other things including "leads rot" and "least rod."
__________________
I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver)

Quand il dit "cuic" le moineau croit tout dire. (When he's tweeted the sparrow thinks he's said it all. (Jules Renard)
bruto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2018, 09:56 AM   #109
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 29,054
Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy View Post
You never accept articles based on anonymous sources? You seem to be grasping at straws here.
Wait, what?

Are you saying you do accept anonymous, unverified claims? Why?
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2018, 09:56 AM   #110
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 40,575
Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy View Post
You never accept articles based on anonymous sources? You seem to be grasping at straws here.
If there's only one anonymous source with no confirmation, then yes, an article is suspect. Most journalists know this. Most readers should too.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2018, 09:57 AM   #111
trustbutverify
Philosopher
 
trustbutverify's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 7,178
Originally Posted by lobosrul5 View Post
Unfortunately the wording in the 25th is "unable" to perform his duties, not unfit. Besides which, if his cabinet did so then Trump would relieve them all, and they could no longer work covertly to thwart his worst impulses. And all for naught. Since there is about a 0.000001% chance that congress, needing a 2:1 majority in both houses, would actually remove him.
Exactly. Also, I'm not sure I'd characterize undermining Dump's ability to turn his indigestion-related nightmares into policy as "treason".
__________________
"The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated." -- Mahatma Gandhi

Wollen owns the stage
trustbutverify is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2018, 09:59 AM   #112
Giordano
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 14,698
delete - double post

Last edited by Giordano; 6th September 2018 at 10:00 AM.
Giordano is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2018, 10:00 AM   #113
Giordano
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 14,698
Editing screwup. See below.

Last edited by Giordano; 6th September 2018 at 10:05 AM.
Giordano is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2018, 10:00 AM   #114
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 40,575
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
I think the letter's overall effect is harmful to the GOP
I'm not sure that it does. While it plays directly into the "resistance" belief that Trump is unfit, it also plays directly into the Trump base belief that there's an unelected bureaucracy that's trying to undermine the results of the 2016 election. It's not a given that the first message will be more important than the second message. It will certainly help polarize things, but the overall effect is hard to gauge.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2018, 10:01 AM   #115
kellyb
Philosopher
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 8,874
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
If there's only one anonymous source with no confirmation, then yes, an article is suspect. Most journalists know this. Most readers should too.
Did you listen to the NYT podcast with the editor, explaining how he confirmed it came from someone in the admin?

The NYT editor gave confirmation that the letter is some sort of "legit". Someone in the admin was willing to claim authorship.

All you're left with is speculating that the NYT editor lying after that.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2018, 10:01 AM   #116
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 11,370
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Taking Soviet propaganda at face value this way was completely misleading, as talking with ordinary Russians might have revealed even at the time. Duranty’s prize-winning articles quoted not a single one – only Stalin, who forced farmers all over the Soviet Union into collective farms and sent those who resisted to concentration camps.

[...]

Some of Duranty’s editors criticized his reporting as tendentious, but The Times kept him as a correspondent until 1941. Since the 1980’s, the paper has been publicly acknowledging his failures.

New York Times Statement About 1932 Pulitzer Prize Awarded to Walter Duranty
Despite the obvious problems with Duranty's work, the NYT published it anyway, and it took them another fifty years to admit their mistake. Appeals to the editorial integrity of the New York Times, and to the reliability of its due diligence, do not impress.
That you have to reach back 80 years for a counter suggests that the NYT editorial board is generally trustworthy.
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.
varwoche is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2018, 10:02 AM   #117
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 73,332
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
That is precisely why you shouldn't simply accept it as true. It's potentially a textbook example of confirmation bias.
You're absolutely right, which is why I don't.

However, since it paints the same picture as Wolff and Woodard, in addition to many other 'hints' we've been getting, and that the Times knows who wrote the piece, I see that as good confirmation of its authenticity. Trump's and Sanders' reaction to it just seals the deal. This op-ed doesn't exist in a vaccuum.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2018, 10:03 AM   #118
RecoveringYuppy
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,670
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Wait, what?

Are you saying you do accept anonymous, unverified claims? Why?
This one is verified and you know it. Why lie about what I'm saying?

This article is verified and it only meets the lesser definition of anonymous, name withheld, as opposed to name unknown.
__________________
REJ (Robert E Jones) posting anonymously under my real name for 30 years.

Make a fire for a man and you keep him warm for a day. Set him on fire and you keep him warm for the rest of his life.
RecoveringYuppy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2018, 10:03 AM   #119
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 29,054
Originally Posted by Giordano View Post
No. The test for inability is explicitly described in the amendment. Congress is invoked to resolve disputes about the outcome of the test, because while the test is clear, it is not immune to dispute.


Certainly. Likewise, "made to pass the test of ability under duress" would fall under the "unable" category.

But the two questions are very different. "Is the president unable to act in the role, despite appearances?" is a much narrower question than "is the president acting in the role so badly that he should be removed?". Thus, since both questions require two thirds of Congress to support the desired outcome, impeachment is a much better fit for pursuing that outcome. One obvious reason this is so is that for the impeachment process, Congress doesn't have to explore the President's inner motives, only the external results. If the President is behaving badly, Congress can impeach him on that basis alone. If it's a 25th Amendment dispute, Congress has to actually answer the question of mental health, instead of simply examining the outcome.


Impeachment (and conviction):
"The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors."

25th Amendment:

Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.

Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session. If the Congress, within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office."
[/quote]

I borked my quote tags, which seems to have caused you to bork yours. I apologize.

Also, I don't see the point of quoting the text of the two passages. Those are the starting points, we've already moved forward from there.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2018, 10:04 AM   #120
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 12,490
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Wait, what?

Are you saying you do accept anonymous, unverified claims? Why?
An anonymous source vetted by one of the biggest news organizations in the country isn't the same thing as an anonymous claim.

I can see you just itching to lay down the "One True Skeptic Card" but just put it back in the deck.
__________________
"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en
JoeMorgue is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:52 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.