OptimisticOwl
Legend
Posts: 58,754
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation: 857
I Root For: Rice
Location: DFW Metroplex
    
|
RE: Trump Administration
(11-30-2017 07:26 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote: (11-29-2017 06:21 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: (11-29-2017 05:34 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote: (11-23-2017 08:07 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: (11-23-2017 02:32 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote: If it weren't a pattern of behavior and a one off goof (or even several goofs) I would agree. But for Trump, that's not what we're talking about.
We're talking about his repeated actions that indicate he is a petulant narcissist, who is quick to react and doesn't understand the consequences of his actions. The potential for negative outcomes to come from someone like that holding the codes to the nukes makes me very, very nervous. And at the moment, there are members of Congress of both sides of the aisle that feel the same way.
And what tangible good has come directly from Trump's actions (calling KJU names on Twitter and threatening military action on Twitter)? They have continued to test nuclear weapons and proactively test long range missiles. The UN did ratchet up sanctions, but that doesn't appear to be connected to Trump's provocative language. If anything, it is likely Trump and Xi Jinping's relationship that has helped with NK the most. I think his tweets are likely undermining his efforts.
Well, as someone who has actually had access to the nuclear launch codes, I’m not bothered. And those members of congress are playing sound bytes for votes instead of expressing real fears.
This is kind of in vein as my comment about why Trump's tweets do matter.
In the past few days, there have been reports that Trump has told people that the voice on the Access Hollywood tapes is not his and that it was faked and that he has been continuing to question the legitimacy of Obama's birth certificate.
I saw an op-ed from Jennifer Rubin that wonders if these two newest revelations (well, she mainly just focuses on the Access Hollywood bit), doesn't indicate that he is mentally unfit to be POTUS and that the 25th Amendment should be invoked. From here words:
Quote: Now, it may be that Trump knows full well he is lying. He may take delight in horrifying aides and lawmakers, like a child relishing the shock on adults’ faces when he uses foul language. If so, that makes him a moral abomination unworthy of his office, but not bonkers. If, however, he actually believes that former president Barack Obama wasn’t born in America, that Obama wiretapped him, that he (not Hillary Clinton) won the popular vote and the women’s vote and that it’s not his voice on the “Access Hollywood” tape, then he’s something far more problematic than a liar. In such circumstances, he would be mentally and emotionally incapable of performing his duties (which require one to grasp and process reality) and it would be long past time for him to go.
At some point, how far should we let things go until real questions are asked about whether or not Trump has a firm grasp on reality or morality? Both of which I imagine are a necessity for a POTUS to have.
I would say this is one situation in which you don't want to be preemptive, else you are just setting up the US for a coup.
Firm grasp on reality? How do you determine that? If he is seeing little green men hiding under the couch, or if he believes North Korea will respond to sanctions? Are tax reductions firmly rooted in reality? Personally, i don't think Hillary had a great grasp on reality, having lived essentially totally removed from most of the experiences that shape us. Similar to Kim Jong Il's grasp on reality - quite different from the millions of lesser beings in their fiefdoms. Is that the definition of reality we would use?
Firm grasp on morality? Whose morals shall we use as the measuring stick? The people who see abortion as murder, or the people who see abortion as a human right? The people who think young women should be modest and hide themselves from the eyes of men, or those who think otherwise? The people who think plural marriage is fine, or the people who think it should only for two, the people who think t should only be tween one man and one woman, and/or the people who tyhink it should be for life? I thought liberals were against legislating morals?
the 25th was meant to cover periods when the President was unconscious, or close to it - surgery, coma, severe illness - like when Reagan was in surgery.
.
was it moral ofmTruman to kill hundreds of thousand of civilians and children with the bomb? was it realistic of Johnson to ramp up the war in Viet Nam? i would hate for judgements of realism and moral superiority to be left up to the President's opponents, regardless of party.
What are the Constitutional requirements for morality, anyway?
For reality, what you get into is perspective and experience, not reality. Reality is just that, how things actually exist. When you talk about Clinton or Kim Jong Un, you're talking about how they perceive the world and what their individual experience is. I'm talking about cold hard facts - the sky is blue, up is up, down is down, etc. The world is full of facts that can't be disputed with sane mind, and at what point do we start wondering wondering about the sanity of someone who is disputing facts. I mean, Obama was born in the US and it is Trump on those Access Hollywood tapes (heck, he even admitted it earlier this year). I find it a bit unsettling that we appear to be debating what facts are.
And I think Trump's retweeting of the Britain First people is a good example of why things can be dangerous when the POTUS lacks cognition and relies on lies/a false reality. One of the videos he retweeted as showing a Muslim beating up a Dutch boy on crutches was debunked as being a native Dutch boy beating up another one. Trump has been using that video to push a narrative that could be used to push policy changes - a video that is 100% false.
And to morality, you appear to be talking about social morality - issues that we have as a society have deemed to fall into that category (abortion, war, marriage, etc.). I'm not talking about that, I'm talking about personal morality and how one interacts with another. Is it really debatable that someone who is willing to continually lie, not spin, not bend the truth, but outright lie, is beginning to lack morality? We're not talking about opinions on policy (e.g. Trump's claims about the tax bill), we're talking about lies Trump has either made up, or conspiracy theories he has fallen for - both of which he has no problem leveraging in a way that makes one question his character.
And also, I never suggested we legislate morality, I just asked if the grasp of it was necessary for POTUS to do their job, not that we should create legislation based on it.
Finally, I'd very much argue that the 25th Amendment is also in place for medical issues that include things like sanity/dementia. Just like with Reagan, the 25th Amendment should have been used to remove him from office if it had been found out he was exhibiting symptoms of Alzheimer's while in office. That's the type of medical condition that could affect his ability to govern, by affecting his grasp on reality.
25th
Section 4. Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.
Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session. If the Congress, within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office
I presume this is what you hope to happen. Going to be hard to get a 2/3 vote in both houses that the president is out of touch with reality based on his declaration of the size of his inauguration or his hands. Couldn't get it based on DNA evidence against Clinton.
No mention of morality.
|
|
