Trump: Less Authoritarian Than Obama | National Review

This article is quite good.

It's well written, but there are some glaring flaws in its logic.

I'll start with a positive. I don't like Judge Gorsuch's views on most major issues, but he's generally consistent and maintains a logical thread through all of them. He's a conservative in the truest sense of the word and would make a good jurist. That said, the Pure Vulcan Logic that his ilk tend to apply is woefully misplaced in the modern era. Also, his 4th Amendment 'right to privacy' interpretations are where the inconsistency appears (for me at least). He's ruled that 'No Trespassing' signs on private property are enough to require a warrant to even step on the lawn to knock on the door, but also believes that the State has a compelling interest in preventing abortion.

The article is also nominally correct in saying that preventing the EPA from using interpretation to use new information to better apply the Clean Air Act is not authoritarian. Yes, but it also flies in the face of logic. An agency charged with protecting the environment uses new data to update guidelines under a mandate it was given 30 years ago... sounds more like a government agency understanding the red tape of Washington and instead relying on experts to help it fulfill its legal purpose than a bunch of anti-corporate hippies making life tough for Big Coal.

DeVos and Pruitt and most of the other appointees are where the authoritarianism rears its head. It's a kind of corporate authoritarianism where money is always correct (these people are rich, therefore they must be smart!) and expertise is derided as liberalism run amok. It's the stark black and white authoritarianism of 'part of this system isn't working, therefore we burn it all down and impose my vision' rather than, 'part of this system isn't working, therefore let's fix this part and keep the part that works'.

Finally, authoritarianism isn't just men with machine guns on the street corner or dead journalists, it's also the inability to speak truth to power. Every lie, every half-truth, every shady deal, every personal enrichment (literally pick one: travel ban, hotels in Dubai, inauguration attendance, terror attacks in Sweden) - this is also authoritarianism; harnassing the organs of state for personal enhancement, gains for the faithful few, let chance or God sort out the res; keep the public disoriented, distracted; host campaign rallies for 2020 in February 2017... because it's definitely NOT about the cheering crowds, right Donald?

We don't live in a dictatorship and I'm not worried that Trump will transform the country into one. He's so personally odious that even his supporters don't much like him. As far as cults of personality go, he doesn't have a great one. What's hurting us is his gaslighting of the media. It's calculated to undermine public confidence in the truth, to make it so the truth only comes from the seat of power. It's a subtle change, but one that can have a profound influence on generations to come. News has always had an element of self-selection, but now it's bubble city. Don't like immigrants? We have news about all the rapes and murders by immigrants you can stomach. Love immigrants? Here's a heartwarming story about a poor Mexican family making it in America. We already have alternative narrative. Now with alternative facts, you can make a full-fledged alternative reality.

A bit long sorry. Mostly because I hate that line 'it's not as bad as it could be', which the article is putting forth. They are correct that the man is not a 24/7 monster. That's because he's not the only one with power. The GOP has a few good men left and they're using their influence where it counts (such as Gorsuch). But when you have men like Steve Bannon whispering in your ear (the man is as close to Wormtongue as we've seen in American politics) and a cabinent full of people who actively tried to destroy the institutions they now head, as a means to enrich themselves, you have the seeds of authoritarianism. The article childishly ignores that to point to a few bright/neutral spots from the past 5 weeks.

Trump today is now blaming Obama for all of the leaks. Spicer is calling surprise secret meetings just so he can snoop on the WH's staff's cell phones. The GOP is saying that there's nothing behind the whole Trump/Russia/Wikileaks thing and it should be swept under the rug.

Just another day in the neighborhood.

http://cdn03.cdn.justjared.com/wp-co...impression.jpg

That pic tho. Lol

Do you think becoming a part of China will be fun? Or do you think it would suck 10X worse than anything we go through today?

.

Report: Trump to call for return of human space exploration - LA Times

I can get down with this, actually.

Kellyanne Conway's Feet on Oval Office Couch Kick Off Debate - NBC News

If the media can find a more stupid controversy to chase after than this, then I truly believe we can accomplish anything because this is one of the dumbest things I've heard people get upset about in my whole life.

This is why it baffles me that some people think you should respect the office of the President no matter who is in it. This has nothing to do with Trump, I just don't know why anybody should be expected to respect someone whose only achievement was to be elected by 300 million petty cretins who bitch about putting your feet on a couch. I think it's kinda funny that she looks like a little kid in those photos, but who the **** cares?

but but but

U N P R E C E D E N T E D

I was honestly skeptical that he'd do anything negatively outrageous/society stirring, but so far he definitely has done a lot of pretty un-choice things

I think we have a lot to learn from other planets. Space exploration could shatter our own laws of science if we find exceptions to them, which can advance us in ways we would have never thought possible. There's also the fact that the ability to get to space and explore it requires a lot of things that can be useful outside of astronomy. I was similarly wary of it years ago but have since come to support advancing science where possible.

Considering the potential benefit to future population growth from colonization, and the increase in resources if mining other planets ever becomes economically feasible, I'd say space travel is probably one of the most worthwhile things we can invest money in, even if the benefits aren't felt for generations.

And just from a personal standpoint, putting all your efforts into pragmatic concerns like poverty and whatnot just feels too utilitarian. I'd rather be a little frivolous and allow our race to actually indulge its ****ing imagination.

I could eat.

Duh. Spending money on things that give us actual culture will probably always seem like a criminally pointless waste of resources to someone below the poverty line, but if you went down that road then the entire music industry would likewise be a complete waste of time that could be better spent on doing things that tangibly improved the lives of others. Spending money on frivolous things that stick with the human race long after they are built or discovered or accomplished or chiseled (music, the Pyramids, the moon landing, etc) gives the human race "texture" and personality that makes the world more than just a depressing collection of Soviet housing blocks.

Like sending monkeys to space or what?

Nah, I think that the ubiquitousness of the internet has done wonders for knowledge in the lower classes.

Meh, I've heard that conjectured but I was never really sold on the reasons because they count on things never changing and forget that there's more than dying to the death rate.

Now that's a damn hefty claim to be making.

Too bad the money that'll be needed to fund it will come at the express of programs like preservation of the arts, school lunch programs, senior citizen medicaid and social security, and stuff like the EPA, national park preservation, federal infrustruce maintainence (bridges, roads, clean water , etc.), and supporting our allies when they are on the verge of being screwed over by one of our enemies, not to mention tax increases for you and me with less and less federal benefits.

Other than the possibility of finding proof of alien bacterial life under the surface of Europa, science has long ago proven there's nothing else to gain from our own solar system.

So awesome idea, let's gut the house we live in so a bunch of boys with expensive toys can see if there's a way to build a tree house in the swimming pool.

:usehead::usehead::usehead::usehead:

@Chula Please you would've been all over it if it was Obama's move.

If the poor who have had their money used for supposedly frivolous things that expand human culture have never been moved to wonder and joy by such things then they might as well be replaced by robot slaves because they have no other value to society beyond their labor. And that simply isn't true, so obviously they derive value from them, even if that value can't easily be quantified.

Reaching for the stars to explore a universe beyond our own tiny little mudball is a beautiful thing, and shouldn't be cast aside simply because it doesn't obviously and immediately improve quality of life.

Stop addressing me with lame comebacks and bring some substance for a change.

And should it be cast aside if it hurts quality of life for the masses just to fund it?

I will address the substance of your posts when there is genuine substance to your posts. Until then you're going to have to handle the substantial truth in my posts that point out your reactionary nature :wavey:.

The only thing that you've said against the benefits of space exploration is the misguided notion that there's nothing else for us to discover in space. How the **** are you going to know what you will and will not discover? If you know that you're going to discover it, it's not a discovery.

You just want to be able to fight in space battles.
Leave Violet out of this.

There will be a lot of distance to cover agriculturally before colonization will be practical. Imagine if we could make anaerobic GMO foods so we can make crops without having to seal in oxygen? I'm gonna go invent that now actually, be back in five.

Like **** I think you understand what science may or may not have to gain from space exploration.

And any money spent, publicly or privately, on anything that can be considered frivolous can potentially hurt quality of life for someone. How much money do you spend on guitars that you could be donating to charity? Could you have bought a less expensive house and still lived comfortably? And yet the money you spend on things you don't necessarily need is spent to make yourself happy, meaning that it isn't a waste cause the only thing worth pursuing in life is fulfillment, whether your own or that of others.

I'm not saying there isn't a limit to money that should be spent on space exploration, or that if quality of life falls to below a certain threshold that we won't need to make a judgement call, but if money can be put into the space program without putting undue hardship on society then by **** let's do it.

Anybody who doesn't want to go into space and shoot lasers is dead inside.

You only think our society is ****ty cause you're a young, jaded kid who's found easy answers in socialism. All things considered we're fine.

To be fair, there is a massive difference in the ethical standards of an individual and a government, so this is a false equivalency.

By a vast margin I would rather live in a Western country right now than any other place at any time. We're fine. And when it comes time to blast off and colonize Mars we'll probably be even better off.

I'm not specifically speaking about public vs private spending. I'm talking about the general idea that in order to achieve pleasure from pretty much anything, you have to do something pointless. Want a better meal? Put seasoning on that ****, or buy more expensive ingredients, or expend more effort than is necessary to prepare and cook it. But that's ultimately a waste of time since you could have just eaten with only gaining sustenance in mind. And the **** wants that?

The same basic principle holds true for a great many things that would make life a much less interesting prospect if they didn't exist, from aesthetically pleasing architecture vs. utilitarian architecture, to buying and playing video games, to taking a walk in the park when you could be working. And often the money, time, and effort spent on these frivolous activities could be logically said to have been better spent on more practical concerns that would more obviously benefit society while ultimately making it boring and soulless.

And this is one great reason I support space exploration, because it provides cultural value to the human race that makes us a vastly more aesthetically interesting species than if we abandoned it to start crunching numbers.

Uh oh haven't solved every issue on earth better stop doing everything but focus on poverty.

Reminds me of this nonsense

Like when Republicans complain about spending on welfare when we're already spending too much on earmarks and therefore we shouldn't spend money on anything until political corruption has been solved?

Space exploration can help us better understand our own atmosphere and what makes it unique to make your fantasy a reality.

You don't want us to spend money on something innocuous like space exploration, but you want to give humanity the ability to potentially destroy the Earth's climate through the law of unintended consequences? Have you no imagination?

That sounds identical to the situation you described earlier.

My post was about "where the **** is the money going to come from".

Dip****, I said that science has already proven there's nothing in our own universe other than the slim hope for Europa.

Learn to comprehend instead of simply knee-jerk reacting in order to try and get a rise out of me.

Can someone please install an IGNORE function to this board?

What the **** are you talking about, you senile old bat?

Source for this super wrong claim please.

Or would you rather I just have science prove itself wrong, as it's intended to do?
http://www.space.com/35806-trappist-1-facts.html

And let's not have any more name calling. I don't want to have to strike back and really hurt your feelings or anything like that.

Would you agree that preserving the arts, our national parks, museums, making sure our children get good educations, taking care of our elderly, protecting the environment, maintaining our infrustucture are all great things for the United States? Not sure why you are talking about the human race - are you assuming that Russia, China, Europe, and the rich Arabs nations are going to start writing checks to fund the US so they can once again stare at the stars?

This is all about Trump wanting to spend trillions of dollars that this country doesn't have unless they gut the **** out of a lot of essential stuff.

I mean he's already gutting environmental stuff so that he can dump another $56 billion into our military so they can buy another 10,000 or so $200 toilet seats.

To be honest I find your attitude on this subject pretty naive and detached from whats currently going on in our country.