How Does Morality Change?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Swerd

Swerd

Audioholic Warlord
I'm sure that's the case. While I can't identify with the current version of the GOP, I am a very right-leaning person. Just slightly more economically centrist than Ayn Rand. ;-) Right now Warren and OAC are making me nauseous. OAC especially, as the woman is just as bad as Trump about not having her facts straight, doesn't do research, doesn't understand how the tax code works, and just plain old seems like she doesn't know what she's talking about. She and Trump deserve each other.
I certainly have not read any Ayn Rand, nor do I plan on doing so. So I'll have to respond to your near-fascination position of this economic fetishism some other time, when I'm not so fired up. Right now, my view of her so-called economic philosophy is that it's about as relevant as Marxism.
 
Last edited:
Old Onkyo

Old Onkyo

Audioholic General
I tried, but I can’t resist.
America made it’s moral statement with the election of Trump.

You elected him with zero experience based on his celebrity, appeal to race based fear, (make America great again)...and a personal history depicting a lack of morals that would disqualify him from employment at most major corporations.

But Americans continue to support him.

Trump himself said “I could shoot someone in broad daylight and these people would still vote for me.”

He reminds me of Jerry Springer. Springer has been on TV forever, but no one admits to watching him.

If he is eligible to run again, he will win. Morals don’t change overnight.
 
Swerd

Swerd

Audioholic Warlord
It'll be interesting how the 3 week respite from the shut-down works out.

Pretty sure that the Dems are going to offer something like $12 Billion for border security with the stipulation that it is not to be used for the wall (although they might allow fencing and certainly maintenance of fencing).

Trump really screwed himself when he caved to Rush and Coulter. He may come up with some brilliant deflection strategy that I cannot foresee, but I have a hard time imagining anyway that he can reinstate the shutdown without taking a tremendous political hit ... and the hit if he caves on the wall and doesn't shut down the Gov will still be bad/hard.
That leaves declaring an emergency which may be his best way to not lose too much face (even if the legal system denies it, he can maintain his conviction to the wall and blame the judges). That probably leaves him damaged the least.
His whole position is weakened because he had already agreed to not getting funding for the wall before Rush Coulter changed his mind. It makes it clear he doesn't really have a personal commitment to the wall.
I don't see anyway that this can end to his advantage, but my crystal ball is not always right.
Wow! What a day. I've got a couple of observations:

Trump tried to face down Speaker of The House Pelosi and had to retreat. He tried to insult her and out bluff her and he failed. She denied him the opportunity to give a State of the Union address on national TV in the House of Representatives. She looked tough and Trump looked weak.

Apparently, behind the scenes, GOP senators rebelled. Six of them said outright that they could no longer support Trump's shut down. I believe all of them face re-election in 2020. It's easy to imagine that more than those 6 threatened to join them. Mitch McConnell, who had numerous phone calls with Trump on Thursday night & Friday morning, apparently said he couldn't guarantee GOP supporting votes in the Senate.

Trump had to learn the hard way that Washington politics is different than NYC real estate developing. In his old world, his deals always involved different people who hadn't worked with him before. He could lie & deceive and then face new people for the next deal. In politics, you face the same adversaries day in and day out. If no one trusts your word, you can't function.

Other factors played major roles today. One was the sick-out of air traffic controllers at New York LaGuardia. It delayed some 500 flights today. The other was the IRS employees who had been ordered to return to work without pay. Some 14,000 of them refused.

All in all, I can't see Trump trying another shut down in 3 weeks. He lost this one, he'd rather do anything but face failure again. If he hasn't learned to respect Speaker Pelosi, he may have learned to fear her. I can't see any GOP support from the Senate. So Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh can suck it.

Oh yeah – Roger Stone, that lying sack of sh!t, was arrested and perp-walked by the FBI today. I doubt if he'll talk, but if he does, I don't know who would believe him.
 
Last edited:
lovinthehd

lovinthehd

Audioholic Jedi
I tried, but I can’t resist.
America made it’s moral statement with the election of Trump.

You elected him with zero experience based on his celebrity, appeal to race based fear, (make America great again)...and a personal history depicting a lack of morals that would disqualify him from employment at most major corporations.

But Americans continue to support him.

Trump himself said “I could shoot someone in broad daylight and these people would still vote for me.”

He reminds me of Jerry Springer. Springer has been on TV forever, but no one admits to watching him.

If he is eligible to run again, he will win. Morals don’t change overnight.
Curious, where are you?

Most of us don't support him. Unless he does something way beyond what we've seen so far, and the democrats field a really stupid candidate, doubt he can win 2020. The stupidity in Murika is mind boggling, tho, so anything is possible
 
KEW

KEW

Audioholic Overlord
Wow! What a day. I've got a couple of observations:

Trump tried to face down Speaker of The House Pelosi and had to retreat. He tried to insult her and out bluff her and he failed. She denied him the opportunity to give a State of the Union address on national TV in the House of Representatives. She looked tough and Trump looked weak.

Apparently, behind the scenes, GOP senators rebelled. Six of them said outright that they could no longer support Trump's shut down. I believe all of them face re-election in 2020. It's easy to imagine that more than those 6 threatened to join them. Mitch McConnell, who had numerous phone calls with Trump on Thursday night & Friday morning, apparently said he couldn't guarantee GOP supporting votes in the Senate.
Interestingly, I put Pelosi and McConnell in the same pigeon hole. I don't have much respect for either as far as integrity goes, but they are both astute at the political game. I'm betting McConnell had a hard time keeping the glee out of his voice when telling Trump he might not have the votes in the Senate. I doubt he appreciates having someone with Trumps sway over the GOP around (eg. Mark Sanford as the sacrificial "make a point" lamb). The "wall shutdown" has taken Trump down a couple of notches without destroying the Republicans in Congress (I noticed several reporters framed it as a contest between the Dem's and Trump since Mitch side-stepped Senate debate on "the wall").
I can even imagine Nancy and Mitch behind closed doors working out an agreement for the "common good" of taking some of the wind out of Trump's sails!
Definitely an interesting time to be alive in the history of our country. So much stuff that I would have never expected to see in my lifetime!

Trump had to learn the hard way that Washington politics is different than NYC real estate developing. In his old world, his deals always involved different people who hadn't worked with him before. He could lie & deceive and then face new people for the next deal. In politics, you face the same adversaries day in and day out. If no one trusts your word, you can't function.
Also consider that he was probably surrounded by sycophants who fed his ego ... and anyone of normal means could be bullied via the threat of a life-ruining protracted law-suite.

Other factors played major roles today. One was the sick-out of air traffic controllers at New York LaGuardia. It delayed some 500 flights today. The other was the IRS employees who had been ordered to return to work without pay. Some 14,000 of them refused.

All in all, I can't see Trump trying another shut down in 3 weeks. He lost this one, he'd rather do anything but face failure again. If he hasn't learned to respect Speaker Pelosi, he may have learned to fear her. I can't see any GOP support from the Senate. So Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh can suck it.

Oh yeah – Roger Stone, that lying sack of sh!t, was arrested and perp-walked by the FBI today. I doubt if he'll talk, but if he does, I don't know who would believe him.
Yep, Trump is screwed on this one. The best he can do is generate some new provocation which will distract our short attention spans onto something else (although it seems there are more and more "Trump news" items from external sources that he may not be able to maintain control over the distraction of the day).

You are in rare form today!
 
mtrycrafts

mtrycrafts

Seriously, I have no life.
...

You elected him with zero experience based on his celebrity, ....
Well, not really. 10 million more voted for three other candidates. The Electoral College elected him and most likely the Russians had a heavy hand in that in three critical states.;)
As to celebrity, his style and ideas resonated with too many out there.
 
killdozzer

killdozzer

Audioholic Samurai
It seems far too much like a poorly disguised effort at right wing trolling.
Oh, thank goodness someone said this, I thought it was me. My general picture (and a Central European at that, so it won't matter much) is that the antigovernment lobby is dominant on both ends and I see all this “government playing incompetent” as profitable for this lobby. I think that the entire reason why some PR think-tank would accept such an undignified mission as to bring a person like Donald Trump into the White House draws on same reasons. It further develops the distrust for the state and the institutions. I see this bickering as purposeful in and of itself. It was never about the wall. This is also the reason, IMO for Sarah Palin, second Bush and now Trump and I don’t say this because I think republicans are stupid. I don’t. I just think they are pushing the said distrust more than the dems at the moment and they are using this tactic.

Now, personally, and this is where true problems will show their head IMO, as I believe very few of you, republicans or democrats, will agree with this; I see all these, let’s lump them into “anti-state” political options as bad. I think there will come a time when people will realise the true task at hand is to reclaim the state for themselves. I don’t see private interest and individual interest as overlapping in any significant amount. I usually ask people to try and answer why did we, the human race, start with states? Was it really so that Koch Brothers could have five today and ten tomorrow and do you all still believe it will happen same for you? And don’t you think without the state they will only jump to twenty?

I know, I know, probably every average European starts to sound like Sandres after only a few lines.:D:D

(Oh, go on, Irv! Label it dumb without explanation. You know you want to!)
 
killdozzer

killdozzer

Audioholic Samurai
Almost every Democrat supported a wall until Trump.
This statement is rather confusing for me. I've never heard of this. Can you quote someone from five years ago?
 
H

Hetfield

Audioholic Samurai
Ok, I'll play this game. Mr. Wonderful in the White has called for a wall along the entire boarder which would be something like 2,000 miles. He also said a million times Mexico would pay for it and would gladly pay for it and might even out right hand me over a check. Of course now he says he never said that even though there a million tapes on this. The Democrats have always said walls where it makes sense and money for other security at the boarder. But those things doesn't fit the rights narrative that Democrats love crime which is really dumb and that they want them to come in for votes.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
 
H

herbu

Audioholic Samurai
I'm sorry, when did almost every democrat support a wall? You pull that out of your butt?
Are you and shady kidding me? Maybe I should have said "Democrat leader" instead of "Democrat". So easy to see videos of Democrat leaders supporting a wall. Bill, Hillary, Barack Hussein, Chuck, Nancy. Please tell me which Democrat leader has consistently opposed a wall.

If "morality" hasn't changed, surely there are Dem leaders who disputed Bill, or BHO. And surely there were protests and demonstrations against their immoral proposals. Surely the media attacked them. Right?

I'm seeing the normal emotional response to my question. I am not seeing an answer. OK, let's not say "almost every". Instead, let's say "majority". It doesn't change the premise or the question. How did a wall that the majority of Democrats supported become bad and immoral? The conditions and dangers cited by the Dem leaders above have increased significantly. The numbers are rising. If it was a problem for Bill, it's worse now.

I think opposition to a wall today is pure politics. Somebody show me the logic. A wall has been supported by Dems for the last 25 years. The reasons they cited are worse now than then. Yet the same solution has become immoral. Can anybody explain the logic?
 
S

shadyJ

Speaker of the House
Staff member
This statement is rather confusing for me. I've never heard of this. Can you quote someone from five years ago?
The claims being bandied about in here are mostly nonsense. The author of the above linked article from the Washington Post was written by a well-known right-wing shill who is cherry-picking to serve his argument. Here is a more sober take on the subject. Basically Democrats want border security but don't want to rely on a monstrous wall that is much more over-the-top than what is already in place. The proposed wall by Trump isn't a solution to border security, its a symbolic monument for racists.
 
KEW

KEW

Audioholic Overlord
Are you and shady kidding me? Maybe I should have said "Democrat leader" instead of "Democrat". So easy to see videos of Democrat leaders supporting a wall. Bill, Hillary, Barack Hussein, Chuck, Nancy. Please tell me which Democrat leader has consistently opposed a wall.

If "morality" hasn't changed, surely there are Dem leaders who disputed Bill, or BHO. And surely there were protests and demonstrations against their immoral proposals. Surely the media attacked them. Right?

I'm seeing the normal emotional response to my question. I am not seeing an answer. OK, let's not say "almost every". Instead, let's say "majority". It doesn't change the premise or the question. How did a wall that the majority of Democrats supported become bad and immoral? The conditions and dangers cited by the Dem leaders above have increased significantly. The numbers are rising. If it was a problem for Bill, it's worse now.

I think opposition to a wall today is pure politics. Somebody show me the logic. A wall has been supported by Dems for the last 25 years. The reasons they cited are worse now than then. Yet the same solution has become immoral. Can anybody explain the logic?
I have given you the answer twice.
Trump redifined the wall as.immoral when he framed the immigrants as rapists and murderers in a very unrealistic and racist manner.
I can only guess that you haven't acknowledged it because it is inconvenient to you position or you don't get it.
If Trump merely asked for funding for 200 additional miles of fencing to improve border security he would have gotten it without any debate.
 
Last edited:
H

herbu

Audioholic Samurai
This thread largely supports my statement that smart, and I think good people have lost the inclination to logically debate political issues. Why? Whether you admit it or not, Dems supported a barrier, (whether you call it a wall or fence... geez), until Trump was elected. Yet in 5 pages of responses, nobody has even attempted to explain the reversal. Why?
 
H

Hetfield

Audioholic Samurai
This thread largely supports my statement that smart, and I think good people have lost the inclination to logically debate political issues. Why? Whether you admit it or not, Dems supported a barrier, (whether you call it a wall or fence... geez), until Trump was elected. Yet in 5 pages of responses, nobody has even attempted to explain the reversal. Why?
Read the above post. He is correct.
The Democrats never supported a 1900 mile fence, that is a lie.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
 
everettT

everettT

Audioholic Spartan
The claims being bandied about in here are mostly nonsense. The author of the above linked article from the Washington Post was written by a well-known right-wing shill who is cherry-picking to serve his argument. Here is a more sober take on the subject. Basically Democrats want border security but don't want to rely on a monstrous wall that is much more over-the-top than what is already in place. The proposed wall by Trump isn't a solution to border security, its a symbolic monument for racists.
Your kidding right? The leadership all are on record saying so. Security was the fence act in 06.
 
highfigh

highfigh

Seriously, I have no life.
Here is my proof, he is a greedy prick. And s lot of questions and just what he divested but mostly be is a greedy prick. Kudlown on the other hand just loves the camera but is clueless.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
That's not proof, it's supposition- if you want to post negative comments about someone, at least do some research.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top