Tuesday, August 15, 2017

Can everyone now see that the issues surrounding Donald Trump are NOT right-left issues

People who follow politics are inclined to think that any and all issues are a matter of whether you are left or right. If you are left, you want the government to help out a lot to overcome economic disparity, if you are right you think the capitalist system should run its course. If you are left, you are pro-choice on abortion and support gay marriage, if you are right you don't. If you are right you think national defense should be strong, and we need to be proactive against the enemies of freedom throughout the world. If you are left, you are more inclined to give peace a chance.

But the issue surrounding Trump is not a left-right issue. The issue surrounding Russian interference in our election system is an issue surrounding our national security. They hacked the e-mails of the Democratic National Committee. They hacked into election databases. The intelligence community is unanimous on this. Whether or not it swayed the election is beside the point. What if both DNC and RNC e-mails had been published? Then we could have heard all the concerns from members of the RNC about the possibility of a Trump nomination, and we might have heard what a lot of Republicans thought of Trump before actually endorsing him. Would that have hurt Trump? I bet it would. But the Russians are attempting to harm our election process. It has to stop, and anyone who helped them do it, if there were Americans who did, have to be punished. This happened to help Republicans this time, but the Russians could just as easily turn against the Republicans next time. But Trump continues to mess with the investigation, firing the FBI director and turning against his own Attorney General because he recused himself from the investigation. I happen to think that, even without a case for collusion, his complete refusal to defend our country against enemies, foreign and domestic, and constantly pandering to Putin, is impeachable. Other countries fight back against messing with their elections. Our President has done nothing to protect the integrity of ours. He'd rather go on a wild goose chase about illegal immigrants who might have voted then deal with these very clear and present threats, to prove, contrary to all evidence, that he didn't lose the popular vote.

Someone using Twitter to engage in petty attacks on TV hosts is not engaging the the professionalism one expects of the manager of a restaurant, much less the President of the United States. I find him to be breathtakingly petty.

And now, trying to find equivalencies between neo-Nazis and Klansmen and those who opposed them is beneath contempt, as many conservatives recognize.

 You can be a conservative Republican and accept these points. Trump does not serve the interests of conservatism, any more than he serves the interests of liberalism. Sure he wanted to repeal Obamacare, but his shallow understanding of the issues surrounding health-care, but he started by saying he wanted everyone covered, which is what Democrats have been trying to do with the health care plans for decades, going all the way back to Hillarycare. He thinks that the art of the deal will give us a health plan that will make everyone happy. That's what I call delusional.

Real conservatives and real liberals treat women with respect. They might differ on what that respect should amount to, but they should agree that Trump's frequent degrading comments about women (it's not just Access Hollywood, what was on Howard Stern was bad enough) are unacceptable from anyone who hopes to be the leader of the free world.

Real conservatives (and real liberals too), respect military service. A man who never wore the uniform saying of a hero like John McCain, "I like people who weren't captured"is a man who does not respect basic conservative values, much less share them.

Saying "Hillary is worse" is not an answer. If the opposition to Trump reaches its ultimate conclusion, Mike Pence, a conservative, will be President. And Hillary, whatever her faults may be, understood government and how it operates better than any Presidential candidate prior to taking office. Instead, we have a kindergartner with his finger on the nuclear button, and lunatics like Kim Jong Un to deal with in the world. Does anyone now find this preferable? Conservatives and liberals should unite to get rid of Trump, then get back to all the issues they disagree about so intensely.


35 comments:

Nick said...

"And now, trying to find equivalencies between neo-Nazis and Klansmen and those who opposed them is beneath contempt, as many conservatives recognize." So,the extremely violent, far left Antifa "protesters", are not just as reprehensible?

Nick said...

In one fell swoop, the God-Emperor changed the rhetorical game:

“What about the 'alt-left' that came charging at, as you say, the 'alt-right'? Do they have any semblance of guilt?” Trump said. “They came charging with clubs in their hands,” he said of the counter-protesters.

Trump effectively reopened the debate, despite insistence from politicians in both parties that white supremacists and other racists deserved to be singled out.

“You had a group on one side that was mad, and you had a group on the other side that was violent. Nobody wants to say that, but I’ll say that,” he said.

Trump defended the cause of those who gathered to protest the removal of a statue honoring Gen. Robert E. Lee and the Confederacy.

“Was George Washington a slave owner. So will George Washington lose his status?” he said. “What do you think of Thomas Jefferson? Do you like him? ... You’re changing history. You’re changing culture.”

While Trump condemned the driver who rammed the crowd and killed a counter-protester, he declined to label the action specifically as an act of terrorism.

That's the power of the bully pulpit. And that's the work of a master of rhetoric in action. Trump is right to decline to label the action of the driver as terrorism, because the chances are extremely good that he's never going to face trial.

This is not the first time someone has run over and killed protesters blocking the road. In previous cases, the drivers were found not guilty of any wrongdoing. No doubt the video of masked antifas smashing the car with metal bars is going to go a long way towards exculpating the killer driver.

Labels: law, rhetoric - http://voxday.blogspot.com/2017/08/antifa-alt-left.html

Hal said...

Am coming around to believing that he will actually be impeached and removed from office before the end of his term. He looked like he was off his rocker in the press conference today. I wonder how Pence is able to reconcile his Christian beliefs with supporting Trump?

I've disliked some of the Presidents we've had in my lifetime, but Trump is the first to make me feel ashamed to be an American. He really is a disgusting excuse for a human being.

Hal said...

"Trump defended the cause of those who gathered to protest the removal of a statue honoring Gen. Robert E. Lee and the Confederacy."

We shouldn't be honoring the Confederacy or those who fought for it. It was evil. It promoted the enslaving of other human beings.

Chad Handley said...

"So,the extremely violent, far left Antifa "protesters", are not just as reprehensible?"

What are your feelings on World War 2, Nick? Were the Allies just as reprehensible as the Nazis because they too used violence?

Legion of Logic said...

Chad: "What are your feelings on World War 2, Nick? Were the Allies just as reprehensible as the Nazis because they too used violence?"

I would be disgusted with myself for defending a bunch of hate-filled, violent thugs like Antifa. Every bit as bad as the far right, it's only dumb luck they haven't killed anyone yet. Any WW2 vet who heard that comparison would be rightfully furious.


Hal: "He looked like he was off his rocker in the press conference today."

Looked to me like the extremely biased media was off its rocker at that event. It was a disgrace to journalism.


VR: "And Hillary, whatever her faults may be, understood government and how it operates better than any Presidential candidate prior to taking office."

Makes it easier for corruption, which any reasonable person suspects she is quite familiar with.

Nick said...

Chad Handley, so, in your perverted mind, antifa are equivalent to the allies in WW2? You are sick!

Nick said...

The Rise of the Violent Left...Next, the parade’s organizers received an anonymous email warning that if “Trump supporters” and others who promote “hateful rhetoric” marched, “we will have two hundred or more people rush into the parade … and drag and push those people out.” When Portland police said they lacked the resources to provide adequate security, the organizers canceled the parade. It was a sign of things to come....For progressives, Donald Trump is not just another Republican president. Seventy-six percent of Democrats, according to a Suffolk poll from last September, consider him a racist. Last March, according to a YouGov survey, 71 percent of Democrats agreed that his campaign contained “fascist undertones.” All of which raises a question that is likely to bedevil progressives for years to come: If you believe the president of the United States is leading a racist, fascist movement that threatens the rights, if not the lives, of vulnerable minorities, how far are you willing to go to stop it?

In Washington, D.C., the response to that question centers on how members of Congress can oppose Trump’s agenda, on how Democrats can retake the House of Representatives, and on how and when to push for impeachment. But in the country at large, some militant leftists are offering a very different answer. On Inauguration Day, a masked activist punched the white-supremacist leader Richard Spencer. In February, protesters violently disrupted UC Berkeley’s plans to host a speech by Milo Yiannopoulos, a former Breitbart.com editor. In March, protesters pushed and shoved the controversial conservative political scientist Charles Murray when he spoke at Middlebury College, in Vermont.

As far-flung as these incidents were, they have something crucial in common. Like the organizations that opposed the Multnomah County Republican Party’s participation in the 82nd Avenue of Roses Parade, these activists appear to be linked to a movement called “antifa,” which is short for antifascist or Anti-Fascist Action. The movement’s secrecy makes definitively cataloging its activities difficult, but this much is certain: Antifa’s power is growing. And how the rest of the activist left responds will help define its moral character in the Trump age.-https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/09/the-rise-of-the-violent-left/534192/?utm_source=fbb

Hal said...

A neo-nazi killed a young woman and seriously injured many others. Conservatives like Ted Cruz had the sense to condemn it as an act of domestic terroism. All Trump can do is pander to his alt-right base.

Legion of Logic said...

Conservatives will indeed condemn violent right-wing behavior. I wonder why the left is not willing to do the same, but rather is comparing the violent Antifa thugs to those who fought against Hitler?

The evidence seems to indicate that the end justifies the means to the progressive mind...so long as the end is progressive. I have seen no condemnation of Antifa from anyone on the left. Even Christians.

And I suspect any condemnation of Antifa in the future, if such an unlikely event occurred, will include blaming the right for being the reason Antifa is so violent, so it will really still be excusing these thugs.

Chad Handley said...

"Chad Handley, so, in your perverted mind, antifa are equivalent to the allies in WW2? You are sick! "

Antifa is short for anti-facist. I think that's a pretty good description of the Allies. You would disagree?

The allies were not utterly morally perfect. They also occasionally committed some heinous acts in the midst of war. The bombing of Dresden comes to mind.

But anyone who thinks that violence committed in the name of fighting Nazis is equivalent to (or in the case of you and Legion of Logic, apparently worse than) violence in the name of Nazism itself has lost all moral perspective. That's the point.

Legion of Logic:

" it's only dumb luck they haven't killed anyone yet."

But the far right racist wingnuts you're so eager to carry water for have killed people. Lots of people. Since 9/11, they've killed 10 times as many people as all left-wing terrorists and Islamic terrorists COMBINED. West Point just produced an anti-terrorism study that says right wing terrorists commit 300 acts of terrorism a year. And since Trump's been elected that's trending up.

But of course, it's both sides we should be worried, about, right? We should be equally worried about the side that's killed NOBODY as we are by the side that tries to kill people 300 times a year, vastly outpacing terrorist acts by Muslim terrorist groups.

That neither you nor Nick can admit that the violence problem is almost entirely actually on one side tells us everything we need to know about you and Nick and the people you ultimately sympathize with.

Chad Handley said...

"Conservatives will indeed condemn violent right-wing behavior. I wonder why the left is not willing to do the same, but rather is comparing the violent Antifa thugs to those who fought against Hitler?"

I'm not condoning antifa's actions, but there is no moral equivalence between Nazis and people who use force to confront Nazis.

When there are nonviolent options on the table, both are bad. One is definitely worse.

Anyone who can't see that is blind.

Joe Hinman said...

I like this so much I[m limiting to it on facebook

Joe Hinman said...

Legion of Logic said...
Conservatives will indeed condemn violent right-wing behavior. I wonder why the left is not willing to do the same, but rather is comparing the violent Antifa thugs to those who fought against Hitler?

The evidence seems to indicate that the end justifies the means to the progressive mind...so long as the end is progressive. I have seen no condemnation of Antifa from anyone on the left. Even Christians.

there is a difference in saying the left responded wrongly, and saying they caused it. To say there's blame on both sides is stupid.the right wing was moving into a community they were not part of to harasser a legitimate act of the community in that area,the left was reacting to what the right chose to undertake.

I do think violence was the wrong response,


And I suspect any condemnation of Antifa in the future, if such an unlikely event occurred, will include blaming the right for being the reason Antifa is so violent, so it will really still be excusing these thugs.

chandelier racism with kids gloves is stupid, ask Neville Chamberlain

Joe Hinman said...

that should say "handling fascism with kids gloves"

Joe Hinman said...

Atheist prediction of knowledge to science


This is no 3 in a 3 part series, it stands alone on it;s own merits. It can be understood without the other two. The thesis: redirection of knowledge to scene,the basis of scientism, reduces human consciousness to a single dimension where obedience to the social system of exploitation is the only option possible,where one-dimensional humanity seeks satisfaction of false needs.

Legion of Logic said...

Chad: "That neither you nor Nick can admit that the violence problem is almost entirely actually on one side tells us everything we need to know about you and Nick and the people you ultimately sympathize with."

Nice try. I do condemn the far right as (currently) being worse than the far left. I also condemn Antifa for being a bunch of violent thugs who beat people simply for wearing Trump hats, and attack people for attending conservative speeches. The fascists are anti-fascist, how cute.

But you go on defending these hate-filled criminals as heroes. I think we both know which of us actually sympathizes with one of the groups in question, and it isn't me.

Hal said...

"Conservatives will indeed condemn violent right-wing behavior. I wonder why the left is not willing to do the same, but rather is comparing the violent Antifa thugs to those who fought against Hitler?"

Stalin was one of our allies. A good case could be made that he was more evil than Hitler. Unfortunately, even US and Britain made some morally questionable actions during the war. Am thinking of all the civilians killed in the Allied fire-bombings.

You are correct that conservatives have been condemning the white supremacists here. Am thinking of Rubio and Cruz. The problem is Trump seems incapable of doing so. He is basically supporting the alt-right in this situation.

Mortal said...

For the record, count me among those who believe that the sooner Trump is gone, the better.

Legion of Logic said...

I thought Trump did condemn them at the press conference? Or is it the fact that he also (rightly) condemned the violent thugs from Antifa that it isn't good enough?

I supported almost every Republican candidate over Trump, and I'd have happily voted Jim Webb (Democrat) over Trump. I spent the election season trying to talk people out of supporting Trump. But the sheer volume of hatred coming at him from the left, even I'm not convinced is fully warranted, any more than the volume of hatred coming at Obama was warranted. Nothing Trump could have said at this press conference would have satisfied the left, so I'm surprised he even tried.

Society is fracturing.

Hal said...

"I thought Trump did condemn them at the press conference? "

He made a false equivalence which the alt-right ate up. It negated any real criticism of the alt-right. David Duke congratulated him. Look at Nick's response in this thread.

Many conservatives are also criticizing Trump over this. The criticism is not just from the left.

Hal said...

Jennifer Rubin, who is about as conservative as they come, makes some good remarks regarding Trump here.

Legion of Logic said...

Hal: "He made a false equivalence which the alt-right ate up."

Okay, so the left didn't think the President of the United States should condemn violent left-wing thugs who showed up at the event for the sole purpose of violence, thereby making the situation even more volatile. I fundamentally disagree.

President Obama gave remarks after a black man murdered five police officers in Dallas because he wanted to kill white people and was angry at police in general over the high-profile shootings of black males. His remarks condemned the violence against police, and they also condemned excessive force by police. Even though the Dallas incident did not include excessive police force, Obama rightly condemned it anyway, because it was part of the situation's backdrop. I suspect no one on the left complained that Obama was balanced in the condemnation.

President Trump is right to condemn both white supremacists and Antifa. To claim otherwise is supporting and justifying left-wing violence, far as I'm concerned.

Hal said...

Conservatives and liberals are condemning Trump's response to this tragedy. You can keep harping on the left all you want. But this isn't a right-left issue as Victor rightly points out.

Chad Handley said...

"I also condemn Antifa for being a bunch of violent thugs who beat people simply for wearing Trump hats, and attack people for attending conservative speeches. "

First of all, what percentage of people in that crowd were card-carrying members of Antifa? Most of the counter-protestors came there with no intention of starting violence, as opposed to the goose-stepping Nazis who had gun cashes stashed around the city. You're deliberately exagerrating the Antifa presence to give yourself cover for trying to make a moral equivalency argument.

That being said, I unequivocally condemn Antifa when they beat people up for simply wearing Trump hats or for giving conservative speeches. That is despicable and vile.

However, when they beat people up for coming into a community brandishing assault rifles, waving Nazi flags, and giving Hitler salutes, I'm gonna give 'em a bit of a pass. *shrug*

"But you go on defending these hate-filled criminals as heroes"

I did not defend them as heroes. I merely made the point that violence committed resisting Nazism is not morally equivalent to violence committed in service to Nazism. You apparently disagree, which puts you in a decided minority with some extremely questionable company. Might want to think about that.




Chad Handley said...

"Nothing Trump could have said at this press conference would have satisfied the left, so I'm surprised he even tried."

If he had said Saturday what he read of a prompter on Monday morning, everyone would have been satisfied. If, on Saturday, he would have responded to reporters asking him whether he condemns white supremacy by saying "Of course I do!" instead of walking out of the room like he didn't hear the question, everyone would have been satisfied. If he didn't try to make violent Nazism morally equivalent to violent anti-Nazism, everyone would have been satisfied.

The left is more than satisfied with the responses of arch conservatives like Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio. The left has been praising these men in the press for their timely and forthright responses.

Pretty much the only person the left isn't satisfied with is Trump, because he botched his response horribly, according to most people on the right and left.

All due respect, you are seriously hanging out in Crazyville in terms of your response to this incident. You might really want to look around to see who agrees with your position here. It'll pretty much just be Donald Trump and the people who showed up at the rally shouting "Jews will not replace us!" The company you keep, and all that.

grodrigues said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Legion of Logic said...

Chad, you are defending Antifa, because once you open the floodgates to legitimizing violence against those you find vile, well guess what? Antifa finds conservatives to be vile. They think conservatives are equivalent to fascists. Obviously they will then attack conservatives just like they attack Nazis, because it's now a legitimate strategy against those who say things you don't like. That's why I have zero sympathy for Antifa - they are a bunch of violent thugs, nothing more.

Your scorn doesn't bother me, as I feel quite content condemning violence on all sides, and not simply from those not on my side of the fence. On the current trajectory, someone from Antifa is going to seriously maim or kill someone, so they get zero sympathy from me. I condemn both sides because that is the right thing to do - and I can do so without denying the actions of the driver were by far the worst.

One of us condemns violence over words, the other supports it so long as he doesn't like the target. I wouldn't be so quick to criticize, if I was you.

Legion of Logic said...

Keep in mind, before you continue trying to link me to Trump (won't work), that I was initially appalled in this thread that the left is trying to make Antifa - an bunch of violent thugs - into heroes by comparing them to the soldiers who fought against Hitler, a global threat that could only be brought down through war. It's not about making Antifa morally equivalent to anything other than themselves, but rather the left beginning to glorify their hatred and violence as heroism. That is disgusting.

Had that comment not been made, and the focus kept entirely on the detestable white supremacist movement, I'd have had nothing to say. But defending Antifa? Sick.

Chad Handley said...

"On the current trajectory, someone from Antifa is going to seriously maim or kill someone, so they get zero sympathy from me."

Right, you're more concerned with the group that's never killed anybody than you are with the groups who have killed in droves. The group waving the flag of a party that melted 11 million men, women, and children in ovens.

"It's not about making Antifa morally equivalent to anything other than themselves, but rather the left beginning to glorify their hatred and violence as heroism. That is disgusting."

Is English among any of the languages you speak? Is your username an attempt at ironic humor?

How many times do I have to say that I am not honoring Antifa as heroes? How many times do I have to say that both sides were wrong? Dresden was a horrible wrong, but anybody using Dresden to say the Allies were morally the same as the Nazis is a vile, despicable, idiot. Antifa showing up to the rally to fight was wrong, but using that to pretend that Antifa, a group that's never killed anybody, is as bad as a group that marches under the flag of 11 million murdered Jews, is vile and despicable.

How is it that everyone in the world gets this across the political spectrum, from Barrack Obama to Jeff Friggin' Sessions, but it eludes you?





Chad Handley said...

Can I just ask you flat out - do you think the Antifa movement is morally equivalent to Nazism?

Antifa uses non-lethal violence to suppress free speech.

Nazis use lethal violence to attempt to exterminate entire races of people.

Both are pretty terrible, but if the two groups got in a fight, I know which side I'd want to win. How about you?

Sure, it'd be better if there was no fight, and both groups just disappeared. But if Nazis show up to terrorize a town and Antifa shows up to fight oppose them, I'm not going to say that Antifa is equally to blame if violence breaks out. I'm blaming the people who showed up with the guns, who hid caches of guns around town, and who were yelling racist and anti-semitic slurs. I'm not blaming the people who showed up to oppose them.

Victor Reppert said...

Let me get back to the point of the OP. The issue with Trump isn't left-right. There may have been leftists at the rally who are open to criticism, such as Antifa. In terms of violent intent, in terms of the inherent bigotry of their message, the implied equivalency between them and the KKK and the neo-Nazis is nevertheless despicable. If you show up at a rally with brass knuckles and assault rifles, you are looking for violence.

This is NOT Trump vs. the Left, unless Ted Cruz represents the Left.

steve said...

Victor,

From what I've read, a premise of your argument has been debunked:

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/441266/hillary-clinton-democratic-emails-hacked-russia

Hal said...

This article is more up to date and provides more info regarding efforts by Russia to interfere in our election process than the one linked by Steve.

Victor Reppert said...

The evidence for Russian interference appears to be overwhelming, and even Trump, at least at some points, has admitted it. Pompeo certainly has.

http://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-russia-election-hacking-barack-obama-hillary-clinton-628835