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.
Reply
Old 8th July 2018, 08:35 PM   #81
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 17,433
Originally Posted by cmikes View Post
I disagree. Other posters are correct that impeachment is a political act, so Congress can define "high crimes and misdemeanors" any way they please, but I also firmly believe in equality under the law. If, instead of Bill Clinton the President of the United States, the defendant in the Paula Jones sexual harassment case had been Bill Clinton the college professor or whatever, he would have been looking at ten to fifteen years in prison.

To just say that the sitting president is above the law strikes me as profoundly Un-American.
This is just incorrect, the penalty for Perjury in the US is a fine and/or a sentence of no more than 5 years in jail.

18 U.S. Code ß 1623 - False declarations before grand jury or court
(a) Whoever under oath (or in any declaration, certificate, verification, or statement under penalty of perjury as permitted under section 1746 of title 28, United States Code) in any proceeding before or ancillary to any court or grand jury of the United States knowingly makes any false material declaration or makes or uses any other information, including any book, paper, document, record, recording, or other material, knowing the same to contain any false material declaration, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.


ETA: Clinton's perjury was on the lower end, he deliberately interpreted "Sexual Relations" as to strictly mean intercourse involving penetration of the vagina by the penis rather then the wider more recognized version that includes Oral and other sexual acts. The odds that he would have received the maximum sentence, or likely any Jail time, are extremely low. A massive fine, yeah, that he would have been on the receiving end of.
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)


Last edited by PhantomWolf; 8th July 2018 at 08:40 PM.
PhantomWolf 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 8th July 2018, 08:48 PM   #82
Cl1mh4224rd
Philosopher
 
Cl1mh4224rd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,753
Originally Posted by thaiboxerken View Post
Neither quantity or quality matters, only that both sides do it. They want to believe they are taking the fair/balanced position.

Right. It's a weird sort of motivated reasoning, or even delusion, of its own.
Cl1mh4224rd 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 8th July 2018, 08:58 PM   #83
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 18,005
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
I've been casually perusing the web for grounds to impeach Trump, and so far all I can find is for violating the emoluments clause.

I think that's probably enough, but it seems like there should be more? Opinions?
The idea that continuing to operate a business that has foreign customers, or foreign governments who are customers, is a violation of the emoluments clause is wishful thinking.

ETA: That sentence is difficult to parse. I'll try this:

Trump is alleged to be violating the emoluments clause by continuing to operate a business which has foreign governments as customers. That belief is wishful thinking.



Trump isn't going to be impeached unless something comes out that we don't know about yet. Nothing that we know about so far constitutes anything impeachable. Of course, as others have pointed out, if the majority of the House thinks something is impeachable, it's impeachable. If 2/3 of the Senate agrees, he could be convicted. In practice though, due to long tradition, only a real crime will be considered grounds for impeachment, and there simply is no evidence that he has committed a real crime.


The best hope right now is the investigation into the Trump Foundation. There might be a crime in there somewhere. The Russian probe hasn't turned up anything, at least nothing that has been made public. The Stormy Daniels incident is sleazy, but not criminal. The emoluments clause is something that few people know about, fewer can spell it, and there is no hope of finding some violation that 2/3 of the Senate would agree with, based on what we know right now.

Last edited by Meadmaker; 8th July 2018 at 09:12 PM.
Meadmaker 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 9th July 2018, 04:51 AM   #84
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 44,154
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
I've been casually perusing the web for grounds to impeach Trump, and so far all I can find is for violating the emoluments clause.

I think that's probably enough, but it seems like there should be more? Opinions?
Not enforcing the senate's embargo on russia.

In reality the grounds don't really matter, it is the will of the republican senate to convict that is needed. That is so far away that why does talking about grounds matter?
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle 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 9th July 2018, 04:55 AM   #85
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 44,154
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
That's another thing. Outside of a symbolic and moral victory... what would getting rid of Trump actually do?

You'd have Pence. Then Ryan. Then Hatch. And so forth and so.

Sadly for the tribes you can't just mass impeach an entire party.
Not Ryan he is quitting, you think they could get to him before the election?
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle 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 9th July 2018, 04:57 AM   #86
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 44,154
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
His defense would be that all of that happened before he was elected and had nothing to do with his performance of his presidential duties. The Repubs certainly wouldn't impeach him for that, let alone convict.
Not really, what he needs to do is lose the overwhelming support of republicans, like Nixon did with the Saturday night massacre, so that voting to convict doesn't become a political death sentence for republicans. If the pee tape does that(I don't think it would) then they can vote on whatever grounds they want.

The political calculus is different than the legal calculus. And impeachment is a political action.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle 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 9th July 2018, 04:59 AM   #87
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 44,154
Originally Posted by Cain View Post
Oh, no you don't. We have to suffer the full four years -- and maybe eight. Then again, I didn't think we could do worse than the awesomely ignorant W, so maybe the public doesn't learn from these disasters.
Hey look how learned Trump makes W look. Republicans like blatant ignorance and refusal to learn.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle 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 9th July 2018, 05:47 AM   #88
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 29,053
Originally Posted by Random View Post
On the other hand, it means that if a majority of the House or slightly more than a third of the Senate is okay with the President of the US being a Russian intelligence asset who is building concentration camps for kids, then the President stays.
Yes. Mhm. Very interesting. Tell me more.
theprestige 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 9th July 2018, 06:03 AM   #89
C_Felix
Master Poster
 
C_Felix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Just outside Raleigh, NC
Posts: 2,862
I'm all for M. McConnell being impeached.
__________________
Eqinsu Ocha!
Eqinsu Ocha!
C_Felix 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 9th July 2018, 06:05 AM   #90
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 40,575
Originally Posted by C_Felix View Post
I'm all for M. McConnell being impeached.
Cocaine Mitch is never going down.
__________________
"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 9th July 2018, 06:10 AM   #91
thaiboxerken
Penultimate Amazing
 
thaiboxerken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 29,148
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Cocaine Mitch is never going down.
I think he has on Trump quite a few times........
__________________
All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power & profit - Thomas Paine
thaiboxerken 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 9th July 2018, 06:12 AM   #92
eeyore1954
Philosopher
 
eeyore1954's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 6,215
Originally Posted by Trebuchet View Post
There are no requirements specified in the Constitution, just "high crimes and misdemeanors". Which include, according to Trump's party, getting a BJ and lying about it.

Don't get your hopes up.
Lying under oath in a sexual harassment case.

Personally I never thought President Clinton should be impeached and according to what we know now there is no reason for President Trump either.
eeyore1954 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 9th July 2018, 06:17 AM   #93
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 40,575
Originally Posted by thaiboxerken View Post
I think he has on Trump quite a few times........
It's so funny to see liberals trying to make homophobic jokes.
__________________
"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 9th July 2018, 06:23 AM   #94
thaiboxerken
Penultimate Amazing
 
thaiboxerken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 29,148
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
It's so funny to see liberals trying to make homophobic jokes.
You can believe it's homophobic all you want if if makes you feel better.
__________________
All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power & profit - Thomas Paine
thaiboxerken 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 9th July 2018, 06:28 AM   #95
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 12,483
I think the difference between going after Trump because you feel he's committed a wrong doing he needs to be punished for and going after Trump for the need to "get back" at either him or the Republicans/Conservatives/Lizard People/Whatever.

Because I think there's no discussion serious enough to not be made better with pop culture references. When he became the Punisher Frank Castle described his mentality as:

"This is not about vengeance. Revenge is not a valid motive, it's a tawdry emotion response. Not vengeance. Punishment."

And think this is a question that people need to ask and be honest, if only to themselves. Are you trying to punish Trump or get back at him?

And if you don't see the meaningful distinction between the two, that's a problem as well.
__________________
"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 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 9th July 2018, 06:49 AM   #96
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 30,922
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
And think this is a question that people need to ask and be honest, if only to themselves. Are you trying to punish Trump or get back at him?
The Trump administration is the most nakedly corrupt of my lifetime; nepotism, cronyism, pay-to-play, you name it. He's actively alienating and distancing us from our allies while furthering Putin's agenda internationally. He is pursuing a nonsensical trade war for no apparent reason. So, yes. There is plenty of reasons to punish Trump.

But I honestly don't care if he is "punished" beyond being removed from office. The man is a danger and a threat to the US. He needs to be removed from office solely on those grounds alone. Call it "treason", if you like. You wouldn't be wrong.
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes.
"Itís easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." -- Mark Twain, maybe.
Upchurch 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 9th July 2018, 07:28 AM   #97
Apathia
Illuminator
 
Apathia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 4,682
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
I'm counting on Congress to hold Trump accountable. We are not a nation aligned with dictators and despots. We are a nation aligned with the free world even if it is flawed.

We need to change the majority in both the House and the Senate to hold Trump accountable.

Now, depending on the crimes Mueller turns up, impeachment should be on the table. It certainly looks like the Trump campaign conspired with Russian agents. It looks like Trump has been running a money laundering criminal enterprise for decades.

But we don't have that definitive evidence yet. One can't decide until Mueller finishes his report.

Impeach him on the emoluments clause, maybe not, but at a minimum there should be Congressional hearings to hold him accountable.

What I think is Trump knows that the Mueller report is going to be bad. So what does he do? Attempt to end the investigation and risk an even bigger blue wave? Or hope the GOP holds the Congress and end the investigation after the midterms?
From your mouth to God's ear.
__________________
"At the Supreme Court level where we work, 90 percent of any decision is emotional. The rational part of us supplies the reasons for supporting our predilections."
Justice William O. Douglas

"Humans aren't rational creatures but rationalizing creatures."
Author Unknown
Apathia 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 9th July 2018, 08:19 AM   #98
Beelzebuddy
Philosopher
 
Beelzebuddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 6,195
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
I think the difference between going after Trump because you feel he's committed a wrong doing he needs to be punished for and going after Trump for the need to "get back" at either him or the Republicans/Conservatives/Lizard People/Whatever.

Because I think there's no discussion serious enough to not be made better with pop culture references. When he became the Punisher Frank Castle described his mentality as:

"This is not about vengeance. Revenge is not a valid motive, it's a tawdry emotion response. Not vengeance. Punishment."

And think this is a question that people need to ask and be honest, if only to themselves. Are you trying to punish Trump or get back at him?

And if you don't see the meaningful distinction between the two, that's a problem as well.
First priority is to staunch the wound. If the allegations are to be believed, and so far everything that's happened has been consistent with them, we have an active agent of a hostile foreign power in the highest office in the land, deliberately trying to wreck as much as he can for as long as he can, and taking an entire political party with him (so far successfully). We need to get him out before Putin's hand up his ass commits us to a regrettable war or something else more permanent than hiring foxes to guard the henhouse. Pence is a homophobic religious whackjob who's nuttier than a sackful of squirrels, but at least he isn't actively committing treason.

The second priority is to prevent a repeat. Trump sailed into office because most of the things that it was assumed could stop him (like not divesting himself of conflicts of interest) turned out not to actually be laws, just deeply-rooted norms that no one had previously bothered to codify into law because they thought if we were ever at the point of needing a law for them that we'd be so deeply ********** it wouldn't matter anyway. I fear they may have been right.

Neither of these priorities have anything to do with Trump as an individual. I would be more than happy just to see him resign, and the senate pass a bilateral "Let Us Never Speak Of This Again" act. But I think it'll take more than that to winkle him out.

But if I have my druthers, I would very much like to see Trump properly investigated and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law for any crimes he may have committed (or be actively committing), even and especially after he leaves office. It bothers me that political figures of all stripes almost never see prosecution for their crimes once they leave the stage.

Last edited by Beelzebuddy; 9th July 2018 at 08:23 AM.
Beelzebuddy 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 9th July 2018, 08:24 AM   #99
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 29,053
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
And if you don't see the meaningful distinction between the two, that's a problem as well.
To me, revenge is a form of punishment. It's not clear to me what distinction you're making, or what meaning we should take from it.
theprestige 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 9th July 2018, 08:24 AM   #100
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 19,169
Originally Posted by thaiboxerken View Post
You can believe it's homophobic all you want if if makes you feel better.
The homophobia is in assuming that one man giving a blowjob to another man is something to be ashamed of. It's recasting a sex act as a degrading act of submission.
Mycroft 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 9th July 2018, 08:26 AM   #101
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 19,169
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Are you trying to punish Trump or get back at him?
Neither. I just want his reckless destruction to stop.
Mycroft 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 9th July 2018, 08:36 AM   #102
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 29,053
Originally Posted by thaiboxerken View Post
I think he has on Trump quite a few times........
Why is gay sex such a popular metaphor for degradation, among progressives?
theprestige 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 9th July 2018, 08:41 AM   #103
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 29,053
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
Neither. I just want his reckless destruction to stop.
I think that historians will record a Trump administration that is no more recklessly desctructive than other contemporary administrations.
theprestige 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 9th July 2018, 08:42 AM   #104
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 30,922
Originally Posted by Beelzebuddy View Post
The second priority is to prevent a repeat. Trump sailed into office because most of the things that it was assumed could stop him (like not divesting himself of conflicts of interest) turned out not to actually be laws, just deeply-rooted norms that no one had previously bothered to codify into law because they thought if we were ever at the point of needing a law for them that we'd be so deeply ********** it wouldn't matter anyway. I fear they may have been right.
Just to nitpick a tad, I don't think many people thought these things were straight up illegal. I think many people (including Trump, perhaps) thought that these things would prevent Trump from becoming President because people gave a damn about politicians not being blatantly corrupt. It just turned out that enough Trump supporters just do not give a damn at all.
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes.
"Itís easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." -- Mark Twain, maybe.
Upchurch 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 9th July 2018, 08:46 AM   #105
CORed
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Central City, Colorado, USA
Posts: 8,142
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Are we talking "technically" or on a practical level?

Technically Article One, Clause 5 of the Constitution is worded vaguely enough (treason, bribery, or any "high crime) that basically the Senate could impeach anyone in politics if they can find the right way to come at it.

Practically? That's harder because... we forget but it's never actually happened. Johnson and Clinton were both acquitted and Nixon pulled a "You can't fire me I quit" and was then pardoned. Technically speaking we've never had a President impeached. It's hard to argue precedent or trends based on a simple of "Almost one"
Nitpick: I would say "almost two" as Andrew Johnson fell one vote short of removal, and Nixon almost certainly would have been impeached and removed had he not resigned (he kept his pension by resigning, which may have been a factor, if not the key factor, in his decision to resign.
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 9th July 2018, 08:57 AM   #106
NoahFence
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 22,131
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I think that historians will record a Trump administration that is no more recklessly desctructive than other contemporary administrations.


adorable.
NoahFence 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 9th July 2018, 09:01 AM   #107
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 30,922
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I think that historians will record a Trump administration that is no more recklessly desctructive than other contemporary administrations.
Only if Trumpian fascists force them to do so.
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes.
"Itís easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." -- Mark Twain, maybe.
Upchurch 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 9th July 2018, 09:14 AM   #108
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 29,053
Originally Posted by NoahFence View Post
: jaw-dropp

adorable.
His first year is on course to not be particularly destructive. There's no indication that he's going to ramp up his destructiveness. Historians won't be caught up in the partisan rhetoric of the moment. They'll also have more opportunity to review the long-term effects.
theprestige 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 9th July 2018, 09:22 AM   #109
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 40,575
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
His first year is on course to not be particularly destructive. There's no indication that he's going to ramp up his destructiveness. Historians won't be caught up in the partisan rhetoric of the moment. They'll also have more opportunity to review the long-term effects.
I particularly liked stories shortly after inauguration about Trump doing some terrible thing, only to have it turn out to be standard operating procedure. Like the resignation of all those Obama-appointed ambassadors.

Good times, good times.
__________________
"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 9th July 2018, 09:23 AM   #110
Cl1mh4224rd
Philosopher
 
Cl1mh4224rd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,753
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
The homophobia is in assuming that one man giving a blowjob to another man is something to be ashamed of. It's recasting a sex act as a degrading act of submission.

Your second sentence is the point of the insult, I think. Nothing to do with homosexuality.
Cl1mh4224rd 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 9th July 2018, 09:25 AM   #111
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 44,154
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
The homophobia is in assuming that one man giving a blowjob to another man is something to be ashamed of. It's recasting a sex act as a degrading act of submission.
Hey the exact nature of what McConnel was going below trumps belt are left to the imagination of the reader. He is clearly kissing Trumps ass, so why turn it into something sexual?
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle 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 9th July 2018, 09:28 AM   #112
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 30,922
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
His first year is on course to not be particularly destructive. There's no indication that he's going to ramp up his destructiveness.
Not if you view extreme nationalism, isolationism, the return of white nationalism, and the fall of US leadership in the world as good things, I suppose he hasn't.
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes.
"Itís easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." -- Mark Twain, maybe.
Upchurch 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 9th July 2018, 09:30 AM   #113
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 29,053
Originally Posted by Cl1mh4224rd View Post
Your second sentence is the point of the insult, I think. Nothing to do with homosexuality.
You wish to depict two men in a degraded state. For this purpose, you choose to depict them having sex with each other. The homosexuality is central to the purpose of the metaphor.
theprestige 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 9th July 2018, 10:01 AM   #114
Beelzebuddy
Philosopher
 
Beelzebuddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 6,195
Originally Posted by Upchurch View Post
Just to nitpick a tad, I don't think many people thought these things were straight up illegal. I think many people (including Trump, perhaps) thought that these things would prevent Trump from becoming President because people gave a damn about politicians not being blatantly corrupt. It just turned out that enough Trump supporters just do not give a damn at all.
The most well-known example: collusion with a foreign power to influence american elections. Technically not illegal, but only because it runs so deeply against the spirit of politics that no one thought to make it illegal. Yet.
Beelzebuddy 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 9th July 2018, 10:14 AM   #115
Beelzebuddy
Philosopher
 
Beelzebuddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 6,195
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
You wish to depict two men in a degraded state. For this purpose, you choose to depict them having sex with each other. The homosexuality is central to the purpose of the metaphor.
The sexuality is central to the purpose. The homo- prefix comes from them both being men.
Beelzebuddy 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 9th July 2018, 10:24 AM   #116
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 19,169
Originally Posted by Cl1mh4224rd View Post
Your second sentence is the point of the insult, I think. Nothing to do with homosexuality.
The connection is that it's a homosexual act that's cast as a degrading act of submission. So very much to do with homosexuality.

Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
Hey the exact nature of what McConnel was going below trumps belt are left to the imagination of the reader. He is clearly kissing Trumps ass, so why turn it into something sexual?
"Going down on" is slang for giving a blow job, not for kissing ass.

Be honest. Stay honest.
Mycroft 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 9th July 2018, 11:04 AM   #117
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 29,053
Originally Posted by Upchurch View Post
Not if you view extreme nationalism, isolationism, the return of white nationalism, and the fall of US leadership in the world as good things, I suppose he hasn't.
We're not talking about "good" things. We're talking about "recklessly destructive" things.

I don't have to view things as good, in order to view them as not being especially destructive. "Extreme nationalism" and "isolationism" aren't even destruction of anything. They're just shifts in the level of engagement. And despite all the rhetoric and butthurt, I don't think they've even been that extreme. I think that's exactly the thing that historians will assess as being much less significant than current rhetoric would suggest.
theprestige 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 9th July 2018, 11:12 AM   #118
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 29,053
Originally Posted by Beelzebuddy View Post
The sexuality is central to the purpose. The homo- prefix comes from them both being men.
Why is men having sex with each other an acceptable metaphor for men degrading themselves?
theprestige 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 9th July 2018, 11:18 AM   #119
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 40,575
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Why is men having sex with each other an acceptable metaphor for men degrading themselves?
If they're Republicans, yes. Otherwise it's hate speech.
__________________
"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 9th July 2018, 11:24 AM   #120
Bob001
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,511
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Why is men having sex with each other an acceptable metaphor for men degrading themselves?
It's not a matter of anybody degrading anybody. It's a matter of one person being completely, senselessly subservient to the other. The same metaphor would be just as appropriate -- maybe more so -- if the person imagined in kneepads was Sarah Sanders, Kellyanne Conway or -- maybe especially -- Kirstjen Nielsen.

Last edited by Bob001; 9th July 2018 at 11:26 AM.
Bob001 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
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 03:08 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.