Of Demagogues and a Nation's Laws

We know of demagogues from the quills of aristocrats: Thucydides - who would work at the Council on Foreign Relations or be elegantly ensconced in Brussels were he alive today; Aristophanes - London playwright? Or Manhattan theatre sensation who occasionally can be seen in Hollywood? From their perches above the seething masses they fingered out Cleon - a tradesman turned orator - as a leader of the common people. As the term demagogue originally meant. And even then, it was already sliding towards a negative connotation.

By the 1800's James Fenimore Cooper was edifying the American people on the dangers of demagogues according to his now widely accepted criteria. James Fenimore Cooper whose ancestors and whose own life reads like America's own history, and whose writings helped create some of that history. As a rather popular writer, of course. If not populist. Lord Byron had a bear at Cambridge. Cooper locked a donkey in a hall at Yale and was soon expelled. Both men had money, handed down from their daddies. Cleon worked for his living.

Cooper, of course, did write very popular and defining works, but also received more than his share of criticism. Especially for his Naval History, which today is considered an important work. And he loved to sue for libel - especially the anti-Jackson Whig press. He was seen as self-promoting by his critics, and perhaps just a touch too ... populist?

Should we trust Cooper to guide us through the dangers of a demagogue? Demagogue is thrown around as easily as the the word fascist nowadays and perhaps it is helpful to remember who is doing the throwing. It is the manipulation of their connection with so-called common people and their disruption of prevailing customs, rules, and institutions, and eventually the law, that provide the warnings of the damage that can be done, according to Cooper.

Does Trump do any of this? If you believe the Never-Trump media, yes and worse. If you believe those who support Trump, whatever order he is disrupting is a corrupted one that is managed by elites whose interests are either directly in conflict with their own concerns, or uninterested.

In fact, the great debate is over which laws we're talking about. Trump supporters claim him as he has explicitly stated, as the law and order candidate. Those who oppose him, revile him as disobeying a different set of laws: the globalist, liberal values that underlie their hostility to Trump. Even if Trump actually shares a subset of those liberal values. For which he has also been reviled by his conservative critics.

This isn't a battle over a supposed demagogue who's going to ignore the laws. This a global struggle over whether laws are nation-specific - even as they share some fundamental characteristics - or whether a global set of rules will continue to reach down into every town and community in America, and around the world.

Posted by Keeley at July 22, 2016 5:14 PM
Comments
Comment #406258

It is terrifying to contemplate a “global set of rules” as you describe, trumping our Constitution.

Brexit could be the first evidence of a significant rejection of globalism and rule by unelected proxy.

Posted by: Royal Flush at July 22, 2016 5:28 PM
Comment #406268

Sad to say that if you don’t provide any links to prove what you say, you can say anything you want.

Surprisingly, just like I, Trump.

Since you bring up Cooper;

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/12/02/donald-trump-wasnt-a-textbook-demagogue-until-now/

“James Fenimore Cooper observed that true demagogues met four criteria: they posture as men of the common people; they trigger waves of powerful emotion; they manipulate this emotion for political benefit; and they threaten or break established principles of governance.”

I would suggest that our erstwhile thread author wouldn’t know what a demagogue was if I, Trump himself, on stage at the RNC, whipped out a dictionary, and read the definition to the assembled masses.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at July 23, 2016 9:25 AM
Comment #406269

Why do you keep bringing up Obama (I) before you mention Trump?

Posted by: Weary Willie at July 23, 2016 9:33 AM
Comment #406270

What I got from I, Trump’s acceptance speech;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYjlZVNFjiI

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at July 23, 2016 9:47 AM
Comment #406273

You need to get your eyes checked, Rocky Marks.

Posted by: Weary Willie at July 23, 2016 10:08 AM
Comment #406276
“James Fenimore Cooper observed that true demagogues met four criteria: they posture as men of the common people; they trigger waves of powerful emotion; they manipulate this emotion for political benefit; and they threaten or break established principles of governance.”
Drumpf is another Mussolini. Oliver Cromwell is generally considered the first modern dictator, warts and all, and Napolean the second, wanting to get rid of people who did too much thinking. There’s no mystery about why Drumpf loves the poorly educated. Posted by: ohrealy at July 23, 2016 12:12 PM
Comment #406277


If you don’t get it Willie, my explaining it to you isn’t going to help.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at July 23, 2016 1:28 PM
Comment #406278

You only see the worst. A true Democratic, you are. The only thing I disagree with is your saying he triggers emotion. I’ve been looking for someone who threatens to put the political class in jail for a long time. I’ve been looking for someone who will run government like a business for a long time. I’ve been looking for someone who won’t protect their fellow politicians like cops do, and doctors do, for a long time. I found them all in Trump. Your calling him funny names won’t change that.

You can’t explain it, Rocky Marks.


Posted by: Weary Willie at July 23, 2016 1:45 PM
Comment #406279

Weary, I expect Mr. Trump to win the election and I expect him to shake up the status quo political class tyranny of both parties in Washington.

Posted by: Royal Flush at July 23, 2016 2:03 PM
Comment #406280

You don’t get it, Willie. The emperor has no clothes. It’s not about calling Trump funny names because the words demagogue, and fascist aren’t funny.
You can’t run the country like a business because a business has no due process, and Trump, by the way has bankrupted his investors three freaking times, and all he had to say about it was “they weren’t good people”. WTF!

Trump isn’t going to understand the Constitution even if he pays someone to read it to him.

He doesn’t get it either. What kind of negotiator tells his allies if they are attacked they might just have to go pound sand?

Royal, I am not hoping for Clinton to win, but I am surely hoping Trump doesn’t.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at July 23, 2016 2:20 PM
Comment #406281

“What kind of negotiator tells his allies if they are attacked they might just have to go pound sand?”

Rocky…you really should look up the interview that created your misconception so you understand what Trump really said.

Regarding Trump and the Constitution Rocky, I believe he will follow it rather than use it for toilet paper as Obama has done.

Posted by: Royal Flush at July 23, 2016 2:41 PM
Comment #406282

Royal,

“…you really should look up the interview that created your misconception so you understand what Trump really said.”

I have no misconception. I read the transcripts of the interview. Trump spent a lot of time talking out his ass about the question. But that’s nothing new.
Trump has spent a tremendous amount of time talking out his ass for the last year. He has dominated the news cycle with suggestions that were blatantly unconstitutional. He has dominated the news cycle with statements that were just plain wrong, and he should have known better about.

He makes GW Bush look positively involved.

Trump is all about Trump and always has been. Trump speaks for no one but Trump.

There is nothing Presidential about the man.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at July 23, 2016 2:58 PM
Comment #406283

Rocky, what does it add to the debate when you just tilt to the far left on any Trump espoused issue?

Some NATO countries have not held up their end of the agreement for years. The US gov’t/mil has been after NATO to pay their fair share and, of late, to ramp up their NATO effort to include fighting terrorists.

This NATO thing was a slow pitch for Trump to take a swing at. It would get him a few votes with no harm done.

To infer that Trump somehow would withhold support to a NATO country misses the Marks.

Posted by: roy ellis at July 23, 2016 3:01 PM
Comment #406284


“Rocky, what does it add to the debate when you just tilt to the far left on any Trump espoused issue?”

Apparently, anyone not supporting Trump is tilting to the far left?

There has only been once in the history of NATO that, as a group, they came to the aid of a member, and that was to the aid of America after September 11th 2001.

As a country we put ourselves into the position of being the worlds police force, having the planet’s largest military by many times will do that.
Trump wants to build respect out of fear, and for my money the only things that come out of fear is contempt, and isolation. Neither of which are good things.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at July 23, 2016 4:34 PM
Comment #406285

Hillary’s VP choice, Tim Kaine, gave a speech and knocked it out of the park this morning. Everyone is amazed at how good this guy is turning out to be, including me. It sure caught me off guard. I heard a few negatives about him, and while no one will ever be perfect, I had no idea just how many positives this guy brings to the table. That was a great choice!

As for NATO, to even hint that the US might not honor its treaty obligation and come to the aid of an ally is a terrible mistake. If Trump ever wins, the first thing the Russians will do is test him. Trump has no political experience and no experience with government or the military or foreign policy. So Putin will wonder whether Trump is really an isolationist. Did Trump choose the slogan America First because it was the battle cry of pre-WWII isolationists who wanted to keep the US out of the war against the Nazis, and Trump feels the same way?

The North Koreans endorsed Trump in an official newspaper editorial. They heard the same kind of talk about South Korea that Trump repeated about NATO.

Trump is an extremely dangerous candidate.

Posted by: phx8 at July 23, 2016 5:00 PM
Comment #406286

Kaine was apparently picked because Virginia has a Dem governor to appoint a successor. HRC doesn’t want to do anything to screw up taking over the Senate.

Posted by: ohrealy at July 23, 2016 5:17 PM
Comment #406287

Oh, my! phx8 is masturbating again! Why is he talking? He’s always wrong! Why do we listen to him?

Posted by: Weary Willie at July 23, 2016 5:40 PM
Comment #406288

ohrealy,
I thought Kaine was basically a defensive pick too. I thought he was just there because he was a Clinton crony, a safe pick who would appeal to moderates, and a good way of carrying Virginia without jeopardizing a Senate seat. I was wrong.

This guy really impressed me. He gave a terrific speech this morning, and he does have an impressive resume. Like I said, he is not perfect, but he is way better than I was expecting.

Posted by: phx8 at July 23, 2016 5:53 PM
Comment #406289

ohrealy,
I thought Kaine was basically a defensive pick too. I thought he was just there because he was a Clinton crony, a safe choice who would appeal to moderates, and a good way of carrying Virginia without jeopardizing a Senate seat. I was wrong.

This guy really impressed me. He gave a terrific speech this morning, and he does have an impressive resume. Like I said, he is not perfect, but he is way better than I was expecting.

Posted by: phx8 at July 23, 2016 5:56 PM
Comment #406290

Rocky, thanks for a cogent reply.

I’m guessing that the dems generally feel as you do. From your response If I understand you correctly you believe we should operate on the world scene as an equal with a much smaller military footprint.

In that regard I have to believe you are in the minority opinion. I think the Latvians/Lithuains/Polish (sic) sleep with one eye open what with the bear so close.

To me, history has convinced me that China and Russia could break bad if it hits the fan. Plus, the realization that Iran, N. Kor, and Pakistan are tinkering around with nuclear weapons leaves me suspicious/narvous about their intentions.

I am not willing to risk it all to make nice, play on a level field,

Assume the US had only a regular sized standing army. How would we operate/react under a nuclear threat from some super power?

Also, believe we must maintain a strong military footprint with R&D to keep us well ahead of other countries. Just saw a new gadget where a soldier can stand on a thrust engine/platform and fly around the battlefield to 18000 feet.

Let’s say we give it all up, adopt a make nice/can’t we just get along approach. What happens in 50 years when a superpower decides that like what you’ve got. Once you give it up you don’t get it back, at least not in time to whack a bad guy.

And, we do derive the technology from military R&R - the internet and similar.

I would express the same feelings about giving up our guns. I will always want to be the last many standing.

Trump vocalizes well on a strong military and law and order. I like that.

Posted by: roy ellis at July 23, 2016 6:09 PM
Comment #406291

A lot of money is coming from Russia to Trump. There is a good reason he will not release his taxes, and there is a good reason no American bank will loan him money:

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/trump-putin-yes-it-s-really-a-thing

Posted by: phx8 at July 23, 2016 7:36 PM
Comment #406292


Roy,

“Trump vocalizes well on a strong military and law and order. I like that.”

You surely are welcome to your opinion, but please don’t be offended if I think you’re just a bit nuts.

We already have the largest, most expensive, strongest military in the known universe. Crime is down, and has been for quite some time.

Trump’s bulls**t and bluster act may play well with the stiffs, but under the surface he has demonstrated he truly doesn’t have a clue.

As I said before he managed to hijack the news for the last year with a constant barrage of hyperbole. His truth to lies ratio is well over 60%. What people see in him is beyond me.

What’s he going to do when he can’t fire people any more?

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at July 23, 2016 7:37 PM
Comment #406293

Assange from Wikileaks has been accused in the past of working for Russian intelligence. His leaks do not target them, and he advised Snowden to go to Russia. Today he just released e-mails targeting the DNC ahead of the convention, helping Trump.

The campaign manager for Trump, Paul Manafort, used to lobby for a Russian oligarch, the one in charge of making Ukraine as Russian as possible before being overthrown.

Trump people recently changed the GOP platform. Now the US will no longer provide the Ukrainians lethal arms.

You conservatives are playing with fire. You are supporting a guy who refuses to release his tax returns and has openly expressed admiration for Putin.

Posted by: phx8 at July 23, 2016 8:23 PM
Comment #406294

Rocky, while I like much of the populist rhetoric coming from Trump, I believe we all understand that a president is little more than a figurehead.

Obama has been able to achieve very little but what he has accomplished has mostly been allowed by the Rep’s just to give them ammo for the election and for political reasons.

I think Bill and Hil have been playing to close to the fire so I will pull the lever for Trump and hope.

ph, Trump, Manaport and company will have to be vetted by the Bureau. Not that that would not give one much assurance as Hil still retains her tickets.

Posted by: roy ellis at July 23, 2016 8:55 PM
Comment #406295

Vetting? This is not a matter of vetting by the FBI. This involves connecting dots that are already out there.

In the past, Russia has provided financial support to La Pen, the ethno-nationalist in France. Putin also had close ties with Berlusconi. That is not surprising. Russia is acting to promote its own self-interest. They want to undermine NATO, split the Continent away from the US, and weaken the West by promoting internal strife.

Trump’s ties to the Russians are already known.

“Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets. We see a lot of money pouring in from Russia.”
Donald Trump Jr., 2008

When Trump ran into deep financial difficulties due to bankruptcies in 2004, financiers came to his aid, including Bayrock, and the money came from Russia. It is not surprising Trump would turn to the Russian oligarchs. American banks will not finance him. That is not necessarily illegal. But it sure is a cause for concern.

From the previously linked article:

“Trump’s foreign policy advisor on Russia and Europe is Carter Page, a man whose entire professional career has revolved around investments in Russia and who has deep and continuing financial and employment ties to Gazprom.”

So it is not just Paul Manafort, who lobbied for one Russian Oligarch who used to be in charge of Ukraine.

And-

“This is one thing that made the Trump convention very different. The Trump Camp was totally indifferent to the platform. So party activists were able to write one of the most conservative platforms in history. Not with Trump’s backing but because he simply didn’t care. With one big exception: Trump’s team mobilized the nominee’s traditional mix of cajoling and strong-arming on one point: changing the party platform on assistance to Ukraine against Russian military operations in eastern Ukraine.”

“There is something between a non-trivial and a substantial amount of circumstantial evidence for a financial relationship between Trump and Putin or a non-tacit alliance between the two men. Even if you draw no adverse conclusions, Trump’s financial empire is heavily leveraged and has a deep reliance on capital infusions from oligarchs and other sources of wealth aligned with Putin. That’s simply not something that can be waved off or ignored.”

Especially when it is combined with Trump’s willingness to pursue policies that would be in Russia’s interests. This is what comes of nominating a person who refuses to release any tax returns.

Posted by: phx8 at July 24, 2016 2:01 AM
Comment #406296


Roy,

With all due respect, what are you so afraid of that you would vote for a bark at the moon authoritarian like Trump.

Seriously, you would want his finger on the button?

From the rest of the planet there would only be two responses; That of our allies who would be scared sh**less, and that of our enemies who could give a flying duck.

During the “Cold War” there was an expression; “I hope the Russians love their children too…”

Frankly, I’m pretty sure the extremists don’t care.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at July 24, 2016 10:03 AM
Comment #406298

Rocky, from my post you assume I am afraid of something. Exactly the opposite, RM. I don’t fear terrorist, N. Kor, Iran, Russia, China, none of that.

Reason is the US is the strongest force in the world. We don’t need to fear anything and that’s the way I like it an want to keep it. I’m way willing to spend more money on keeping our military number one. B52’s are getting old, newer missile technology is available, and so on - - -

How about small drones that could fly in an target a single individual sans the collateral? Lot’s to be done.

Be serioud, RM, Obama could not even execute a waterboarding program by himself and neither could Trump.


Posted by: roy ellis at July 24, 2016 1:29 PM
Comment #406299

The Clinton campaign manager came right out and said it: the Russians are helping Trump.

Two Russian intelligence cyber-attacks on the DNC occurred last month.

http://freebeacon.com/national-security/russian-hackers-behind-dnc-breach/

The Trump campaign changed the party platform on Ukraine to make it more favorable to the Russians.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/trump-campaign-guts-gops-anti-russia-stance-on-ukraine/2016/07/18/98adb3b0-4cf3-11e6-a7d8-13d06b37f256_story.html

Assange from Wikieaks published the material right before the Democratic convention. He has been accused of working for the Russians in the past, although that was never proven.

Trump’s links to the Russians are going to be looked at long and hard by a lot of people. This has been one of the most blatant attempts by a foreign power to influence the US election.

“Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets. We see a lot of money pouring in from Russia.”
Donald Trump Jr., 2008

Posted by: phx8 at July 24, 2016 1:47 PM
Comment #406300


Roy,

“Be serioud, RM, Obama could not even execute a waterboarding program by himself and neither could Trump.”

I couldn’t be more serious.
We Americans helped to define the practice as torture, and thus as a war crime. We executed those who used the tactic during WW2, and then insanely justified our own use of the practice as not a war crime during our adventure in the war on terror. That Trump would even speak to this in the manner that he has shows me that he is more interested in revenge than justice.

History it has been proven multiple times that cooperation has fueled more progress than aggression.

Trump, AND his followers need to be dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st century.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at July 24, 2016 2:21 PM
Comment #406301
Trump, AND his followers need to be dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st century.

Hopefully, the 21st century will pass them by without even waving. One funny thing this year is how old the candidates are. They’re all the last vestiges of the previous century. I liked that O’Malley guy that was in the debates.

pdx8, I was getting Kaine mixed up with Webb before. I’m going to have to see them both together to be sure they’re not the same person. They must be related somehow.

Posted by: ohrealy at July 24, 2016 2:49 PM
Comment #406303

“Hopefully, the 21st century will pass them by without even waving.”

Now, now, we all have to share this country. Though Jon Stewart had the right of it.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at July 24, 2016 3:11 PM
Comment #406305

The total number of votes for Drumpf will be equal to the total number of idiots in the country. Why would anyone think that he doesn’t have his own agenda that has nothing to do with our country’s interests? He should have chosen Ivanka as his running mate. She’ll be 35 by election day.

Posted by: ohrealy at July 24, 2016 4:36 PM
Comment #406310

“…there is a good reason no American bank will loan him money:”

Posted by: phx8 at July 23, 2016 7:36 PM

“There’s no evidence that Trump has been blackballed. There is evidence that some big U.S. banks don’t want to work with him, but Deutsche Bank has lent him $300 million since 2012.”

https://medium.com/@jeffreycarr/fact-checking-that-trump-putin-thing-8ed9fd850d40#.lrjzwfkoq

Posted by: Royal Flush at July 25, 2016 1:21 PM
Comment #406311

Rocky wrote; “We already have the largest, most expensive, strongest military in the known universe.”

Rocky…do you ever read anything recent about our shrinking military or do you just swallow the mainstream liberal bullshit?

As a member of the American Legion I receive and read their magazine. Here’s a link to an article that may open the eyes of those not totally blinded to the truth.

OUR INCREDIBLE SHRINKING MILITARY

http://www.legion.org/magazine/233414/our-incredible-shrinking-military

Posted by: Royal Flush at July 25, 2016 1:41 PM
Comment #406314

Obamacare success most likely will not be touted by the Hillary team at the DNC convention. It should be fun to listen to Hillary defend this crappy legislation in the upcoming debates.

“Count it as another nail in ObamaCare’s coffin: Humana, one of the country’s top insurers, announced Thursday that it’s pulling out of ObamaCare exchange plans in all but a few states next year.

It will offer policies in “no more” than 11 state marketplaces, down from 19. The numbers don’t add up: Humana took nearly $1 billion in losses from the coverage this year.

This follows the exit from the exchanges of such other giants as Cigna and UnitedHealth Group, also after outsized losses.”

http://nypost.com/2016/07/24/the-latest-nail-in-obamacares-coffin/

Posted by: Royal Flush at July 25, 2016 2:52 PM
Comment #406329

“…do you ever read anything recent about our shrinking military or do you just swallow the mainstream liberal bullshit?”

Are we getting our money’s worth?

We are spending 1.5 trillion (yeah with a “T”)for a fighter program (the F-35) that is a pile of crap.
How about the V-22 Osprey?

Look I’m all for a strong military. I am all for having our men and women decked out in the latest and best technology money can by, but if it doesn’t work where does that leave those same men and women.
It doesn’t seem to me that they are any safer with tech that is crap, no matter how much we spend on it.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at July 25, 2016 7:58 PM
Comment #406335
You only see the worst. A true Democratic, you are.

The pied piper plays the tune and you guys cannot see the whole picture, yet you complain the rest of us only see the worse!

The only thing I disagree with is your saying he triggers emotion.

Weary is Trump’s bigotry and racism emotional or logical? He pushes your buttons on certain issues, nationalism is emotional not logical as an example.


I’ve been looking for someone who threatens to put the political class in jail for a long time.

SO you get into bed with Trump the guy who admitted to bribing most of the repub candidates for president, to gain political favors! Why hasn’t he come forward before if he will…. oh… just someone who threatens not actually does anything?

I’ve been looking for someone who will run government like a business for a long time.

I have long thought conservatives like authoritarian dictators more than democratically elected representatives Weary. I am surprised you didn’t get your fill of the businessman as president during the GWB era. Second time shame on you.


I’ve been looking for someone who won’t protect their fellow politicians like cops do, and doctors do, for a long time.

Well Trump certainly is unable to protect anyone but himself, gotta give you that Weary.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissism


I found them all in Trump. Your calling him funny names won’t change that.

You and many other Americans, but only those Americans who need the strict father figure.

http://evonomics.com/no-one-knows-why-trump-is-winning/

Posted by: j2t2 at July 25, 2016 10:43 PM
Comment #406340

The only ones who don’t know why ‘Trump is winning’ are those gullible enough to believe all the “bigotry, racism and authoritarian” nonsense.

And, seeing how liberalism is based on authoritarianism, it’s funny as he11 to see liberals bleat about ‘authoritarian dictators’ and ‘father figures.’ You guys demand strict obedience to government authority at the expense of personal freedom, so that government will provide for you.

Posted by: kctim at July 26, 2016 9:22 AM
Comment #406347

I don’t believe Drumpf is winning anything. He was well within the margin of error in an average of various polls after the convention bump. The Dems haven’t even nominated HRC yet. Sanders gave a nice speech last night. Michelle Obama was even better. It’s more than 3 months until the election.

from the article linked by j2t2:

Take conservatism: What does being against abortion have to do with being for owning guns? What does owning guns have to do with denying the reality of global warming? How does being anti-government fit with wanting a stronger military? How can you be pro-life and for the death penalty?

I don’t believe in their conclusion. My conclusion is that these sets of beliefs are those of specific interest groups that have been patched together to form a coalition that The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy believes they can use to advance the interests of the wealthiest owners of the country. Rhetoricians like Gingrich use pretzel logic to appeal through truthiness (IOW lying) using buzzwords that they believe will cause the reaction they need like Pavlov training a dog.

Posted by: ohrealy at July 26, 2016 11:30 AM
Comment #406348

Those on the right tend to support the rights of the individual over the desires of society. The further right you go, the more support for the rights of the individual and personal responsibility.

Those on the left tend to support the desires of society over the rights of the individual. The further left you go, the more support to have a powerful, centralized government in control to provide for, and be dependent on.

The leftists would be a lot less nuts and hateful if they would just respect the fact that some people still support individual rights over the desires of society.

Posted by: kctim at July 26, 2016 12:25 PM
Comment #406349

kctim,

You have it backwards. Donald Trump and the rest of the Republican Party have put forth a vision of group rights rather than individual rights. For them, we derive our rights from our status as American citizens rather than our mere humanity. People who believe certain creeds or practice certain sexualities are targeted for scorn and outcast.

There is no room for individual liberty in a party dominated by white identity politics, protectionist trade policies and raw nationalism.

Posted by: Warren Porter at July 26, 2016 1:10 PM
Comment #406350

Remember, Trump claims to be the Law and Order candidate. I’m not even sure what that means, but it sure sounds like he takes the side of society.

Posted by: phx8 at July 26, 2016 1:42 PM
Comment #406351

Warren,

Our founders put forth a vision of individual rights for those who were part of the only group that matters: American citizens. To suggest that protecting those individual rights and not pandering to non American citizens is some kind of assault on our individual rights, is ridiculous.

The rest of your post is nothing but opinionated hyperbole derived from their unwillingness to give special treatment to one person over another.

Posted by: kctim at July 26, 2016 1:52 PM
Comment #406352

kctim,

If our rights are contingent on citizenship then those rights are granted by governmental whim rather than endowed by our Creator. Conditioning individual rights upon status as a citizen is not reflected in our founding documents.

unwillingness to give special treatment to one person over another

56 years ago, were the Greensboro Four demanding special treatment from the local Woolsworth Lunch Counter?

Posted by: Warren Porter at July 26, 2016 2:02 PM
Comment #406353

Warren,

“We the People of the United States…”

“secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity…”

Placing the security and well-being of the United States and its people ahead of others is not bigotry, xenophobia or racism.

Individual rights can only be “granted by governmental whim” if it is given the power to do so.

“56 years ago, were the Greensboro Four demanding special treatment from the local Woolsworth Lunch Counter?”

Yes. They were demanding that a private business owner accommodate them against his will. But that really isn’t the special treatment groups of people are demanding nowadays, is it.

Posted by: kctim at July 26, 2016 2:27 PM
Comment #406357

“…Michelle Obama was even better.”

Will Michelle’s new found liking of America change back to dislike when she and Barack leave the White house?

Posted by: Royal Flush at July 26, 2016 3:59 PM
Comment #406359


“Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton said “deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and structural biases have to be changed” to allow women access to “reproductive health care” – which was widely seen as a call to change views on abortion.

My Christian friends, we must change our religious beliefs and delete bible passages to live, without persecution, in another Clinton administration.

She also stated; “… laws don’t count for much if they’re not enforced. Laws have to be backed up with resources and political will.” I wonder if the Obama White house, justice dept and FBI know this?

This woman is so accustomed to lying and obfuscation she didn’t realize how stupid she sounded when a few minutes later, after talking favorably about enforcement of our laws, was critical of those wishing to prevent illegal immigration and deporting those in the country illegally.

http://www.christianpost.com/news/hillary-clinton-religious-beliefs-have-to-be-changed-about-abortion-138179/

Posted by: Royal Flush at July 26, 2016 4:29 PM
Comment #406362

Hurrah for Donald Trump and the GOP platform which both call for repeal of the “Johnson Amendment”.

“The ADF (Alliance Defending Freedom) remains hopeful that the IRS will decide to take someone expressing their First Amendment rights from the pulpit to court because they are ready. The Johnson Amendment 1) violates the “establishment clause” by requiring the IRS to monitor sermons to make sure that they are not transgressing its restrictions; 2) violates the “free speech clause” because it requires the IRS to discriminate against speech based solely on the content of the speech; 3) violates the “free speech clause” by “conditioning the receipt of a tax exemption on refraining from certain speech”; and 4) violates the “free exercise clause” because it burdens the free exercise of religion without a compelling reason.”

http://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/faith-and-morals/item/23696-gop-platform-repeal-the-johnson-amendment-inhibiting-pastors-free-speech

Posted by: Royal Flush at July 26, 2016 4:59 PM
Comment #406365

To…to funny

“Michelle Obama gave a speech in support of Hillary Clinton saying she urged her daughters to ignore any candidate who questioned her husband’s faith or birthplace, which is odd, considering both of those scandals originated with the Hillary ‘08 campaign.”

Read more at http://americanactionnews.com/articles/dnc-update-democrats-bury-their-heads-in-the-sand-on-this-major-issue#URZ7jyQJMkcVQPsW.99

Posted by: Royal Flush at July 26, 2016 6:07 PM
Comment #406366

My Liberal Pals must just love this.

“There’s a reason why Bernie Sanders supporters could be heard chanting “we trusted you” as Warren made the case for corporate shill Hillary Clinton. She has completely sold out her base. After her speech last night, one thing is clear: Warren’s doesn’t really hate crony capitalism. She simply hates that she’s not in charge of it.”

Read more at http://americanactionnews.com/articles/goofy-elizabeth-warren-tries-to-hit-trump-and-then-the-donald-responds#b2U3R3rLEjAafcwy.99

Posted by: Royal Flush at July 26, 2016 6:14 PM
Comment #406367

It’s amazing that the right wing even thinks that Drumpf shares their views, just because he’s a big enough liar.

Posted by: ohrealy at July 26, 2016 6:29 PM
Comment #406368

From resigning-my-position-republican-committeeman

I will not contribute my name, my work or my character to an utterly indefensible cause. No sensible adult demands moral purity from a political party, but conscience is meaningless without constraints. A party willing to lend its collective capital to Donald Trump has entered a compromise beyond any credible threshold of legitimacy. There is no redemption in being one of the “good Nazis.”

I hereby resign my position as a York Township Republican committeeman. My 30-year tenure as a Republican is over.

Sincerely,

Chris Ladd

York Township in DuPage County is just one more place where the Rpblcns have screwed themselves. Once solidly Rpblcn, Henry Hyde was it’s congressman at one time, it has started trending Democratic, and Drumpf is only going to accelerate that trend.

Posted by: oraoghaile at July 26, 2016 7:04 PM
Comment #406369

I have read from numerous sources that there were no American flags present at the DNC convention yesterday. I wonder why?

Posted by: Royal Flush at July 26, 2016 7:08 PM
Comment #406370

Avik Roy, a Fux contributor and opponent of HRC and Obamacare, “believes the Republican Party has lost its right to govern, because it is driven by white nationalism rather than a true commitment to equality for all Americans.”
from avik-roy

Posted by: oraoghaile at July 26, 2016 7:17 PM
Comment #406373

kctim,

The preamble to the Constitution makes no reference to citizenship. References to ourselves or our posterity are abstract notions, evidenced by the fact that we do not need to be literally descended from a signer of the Constitution to be guaranteed our rights.

Placing the security and well-being of the United States and its people ahead of others is not bigotry, xenophobia or racism.

Individual rights always trump collective desires for well-being or security. This is why it was wrong for the US to imprison citizens of Japanese descent during WWII.

Yes. They were demanding that a private business owner accommodate them against his will. But that really isn’t the special treatment groups of people are demanding nowadays, is it.

While I commend your consistency, you are wrong. People fought for equal treatment not special treatment. It is inconceivable for me to imagine how you construe the demand to be treated black patrons the same as white ones as a “special right”.

Royal Flush,

“Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton said “deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and structural biases have to be changed” to allow women access to “reproductive health care” – which was widely seen as a call to change views on abortion.

My Christian friends, we must change our religious beliefs and delete bible passages to live, without persecution, in another Clinton administration. “Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton said “deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and structural biases have to be changed” to allow women access to “reproductive health care” – which was widely seen as a call to change views on abortion.

My Christian friends, we must change our religious beliefs and delete bible passages to live, without persecution, in another Clinton administration.

A century and a half ago, most American Christians supported slavery as a result of particular passages in the Bible. After decades of governmental intervention, those Christians today interpret those passages differently. However, there is no persecution against people who interpret the Bible along traditional lines as long as they don’t violate our laws against slavery. It should not be concerning for someone to wish that other beliefs go through a similar process.

This woman is so accustomed to lying and obfuscation she didn’t realize how stupid she sounded when a few minutes later, after talking favorably about enforcement of our laws, was critical of those wishing to prevent illegal immigration and deporting those in the country illegally.
Obviously, Clinton would rather change the law instead of failing to enforce it.

Regarding the Johnson Amendment:
Any preacher can make any political endorsement any day of the week without fear of prosecution as long as they pay taxes like any other political organization. Otherwise, any political organization would skirt our tax laws by declaring a religious affiliation.

I have read from numerous sources that there were no American flags present at the DNC convention yesterday. I wonder why?

Because your sources are bullshit.

Posted by: Warren Porter at July 26, 2016 10:14 PM
Comment #406374

Thanks for the snopes link, WP. It was such an odd comment by RF, I figured he had something wrong with his eyesight. Turns out this was actually a thing on the loony fringes of the right wing.

Posted by: phx8 at July 26, 2016 11:47 PM
Comment #406375

Warren,

It is the Constitution of the United States, for We the People of the United States. Other countries are not bound by it, nor are their citizens protected by it.
I’m not sure if you are just grasping at straws here, or if you are simply joining in with the lefts attempts to dismiss the importance of the Constitution, either way you are wrong.

“It is inconceivable for me to imagine how you construe the demand to be treated black patrons the same as white ones as a “special right”.”

That is because you are willing to dismiss the fact that both sides have rights that must be protected, in order to justify and satisfy an emotional goal.
We the People have the right to be treated equally by our government, we don’t have some right for our government to compel others to act or believe in a certain way. That power rests with the people.

When you show favor to one individual by violating the rights of another individual, you are giving special treatment to that individual.

Posted by: kctim at July 27, 2016 9:50 AM
Comment #406377

the loony fringes of the right wing.
Posted by: phx8 at July 26, 2016 11:47 PM

Welcome to watchblog. That’s why I don’t bother reading the spam comments. I enjoyed WJC42’s speech. He sounds like he’s having dental problems. HRC45 will be a great POTUS.

Posted by: oraoghaile at July 27, 2016 12:09 PM
Comment #406378

Warren wrote; “Obviously, Clinton would rather change the law instead of failing to enforce it.”

Obvious? Facts please! Is it obvious because she would act as Obama has in failing to do his Constitutional duty?

“Regarding the Johnson Amendment:
Any preacher can make any political endorsement any day of the week without fear of prosecution as long as they pay taxes like any other political organization. Otherwise, any political organization would skirt our tax laws by declaring a religious affiliation.”

The article I linked from ADF gave four reasons why the SP would rule against the IRS if it attempted to enforce the Johnson Amendment. Can you counter their arguments?


Posted by: Royal Flush at July 27, 2016 12:26 PM
Comment #406381

“Uncle Sam’s Misguided Children” from the snopes page, are the right wing versions of Monica Lewinsky.

Posted by: oraoghaile at July 27, 2016 2:02 PM
Comment #406382

kctim,

It is the Constitution of the United States, for We the People of the United States. Other countries are not bound by it, nor are their citizens protected by it. I’m not sure if you are just grasping at straws here, or if you are simply joining in with the lefts attempts to dismiss the importance of the Constitution, either way you are wrong.

It’s a philosophical point. While the Constitution is an important founding document that guides how the nation is governed, it is not the reason we have rights. 15 years before the Constitution was written, Thomas Jefferson explained the origin of Natural Rights, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights”. Because our rights are endowed by our Creator, even a document such as the Constitution cannot abrogate them. This is confirmed in the 9th amendment of the Constitution which affirms that We the People retain unenumerated rights not specifically mentioned.

That is because you are willing to dismiss the fact that both sides have rights that must be protected, in order to justify and satisfy an emotional goal. We the People have the right to be treated equally by our government, we don’t have some right for our government to compel others to act or believe in a certain way. That power rests with the people
Situations where two individuals’ rights conflict are numerous. The right to equal protection trumps private property rights and other economic rights. This isn’t special treatment as the result would be the same regardless of the persons’ classifications.
When you show favor to one individual by violating the rights of another individual, you are giving special treatment to that individual.
When we prosecute someone for murder, we abrogate the right to kill another human being because it conflicts with another person’s right to live. Does that mean we give special treatment to the murder victim over the murderer?

Royal Flush,

Obvious? Facts please! Is it obvious because she would act as Obama has in failing to do his Constitutional duty

Both Obama and HRC have been on the record as being in favor of comprehensive immigration reform. Namely, changing the law such that it grants lawful status to otherwise illegal immigrants. Introducing a guest worker program and doing away with quotas and other barriers to legal immigration means enforcement of remaining immigration laws would be trivial.

The article I linked from ADF gave four reasons why the SP would rule against the IRS if it attempted to enforce the Johnson Amendment. Can you counter their arguments?
Sorry to nitpick, but you gave me an article from The New American. Normally, this sort of confusion wouldn’t be an issue, but I notice a wider pattern where you are failing to comprehend the media you consume. This isn’t the first time you have confused a secondary source with a primary one. If you aren’t able to distinguish between the two, you won’t be able to think critically or reach rational conclusions.

Now, regarding the cited claims from the ADF: The allegation that IRS rules violate free speech is totally baseless. The 1st Amendment certainly protects a preacher’s right to express his religious and political beliefs however he wants. However, nothing in the first Amendment protects a right for any organization to be exempt from taxation. Because the tax exemption is a privilege rather than a right, none of the processes regulating it violate the Constitution.

Posted by: Warren Porter at July 27, 2016 3:25 PM
Comment #406387

Warren, explaining the position of Obama and Clinton on illegal immigration doesn’t excuse refusing to enforce existing law.

Nitpick all you wish Warren as I have noticed a pattern of your inability to address the topic or question posed by others but rather answer a question not asked that you can answer.

Your position on the Johnson amendment is incorrect. Curtailing free speech to obtain a tax exemption is not constitutional. If I am not mistaken, free speech predates the IRS.

ADF mentions three more reasons why the Supreme Court would rule against the IRS.

Posted by: Royal Flush at July 27, 2016 4:12 PM
Comment #406393

Regarding immigration: There’s no excuse for refusing to enforce the law. However, Clinton and Obama have repeatedly signaled that they believe the law needs to be changed.

If I am not mistaken, free speech predates the IRS.

And how is this relevant?

Curtailing free speech to obtain a tax exemption is not constitutional.
Tax exemptions are are not unalienable rights. They are granted at government’s whim and can be taken away likewise.
ADF mentions three more reasons why the Supreme Court would rule against the IRS.

All four of the reasons rely on the same premise: That there is a fundamental right for a religious organization to claim a tax exemption. That premise is false, which invalidates all four arguments at the same time.

Posted by: Warren Porter at July 27, 2016 5:02 PM
Comment #406396

If I am not mistaken, free speech predates the IRS.

“And how is this relevant?”

Prior to the Johnson Amendment and prior to the establishment of the IRS Warren; I believe we can agree that there was no government induced penalty for churches which expressed religiously based political opinions from the pulpit.

Warren claims; “Tax exemptions are are not unalienable rights.”

Of course not and; tax exemptions used to squelch political speech is unconstitutional.

Posted by: Royal Flush at July 27, 2016 5:39 PM
Comment #406399
Prior to the Johnson Amendment and prior to the establishment of the IRS Warren; I believe we can agree that there was no government induced penalty for churches which expressed religiously based political opinions from the pulpit.

Even today, there are no government induced penalties for churches which express religiously based political opinions from the pulpit. Losing a special privilege is not a penalty.

Of course not and; tax exemptions used to squelch political speech is unconstitutional.

So we should get rid of all tax tax exemptions for nonprofits? The idea is a bit radical, but I could get behind it if done properly (perhaps keeping revenue neutral by reducing rates for everyone).

Posted by: Warren Porter at July 27, 2016 6:05 PM
Comment #408375

You have showed the relation of Demagogues and a Nation’s Laws. I think as responsible citizen of US, we should have knowledge about nation’s laws to away from any case to cross that laws. This website is good to have good collection of Republicans and its related articles. The approach of this site is similar like www.bestessayservicereviews.com. The student who are studying history subjects must keep visiting both sites.

Posted by: Ethan00 at October 9, 2016 1:10 AM
Post a comment