(11-30-2017 11:25 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 11:00 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 10:30 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 07:26 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(11-29-2017 06:21 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  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.

Where does Hillary's 'vast right wing conspiracy' fall on this spectrum of reality-check? (setting aside the Captain Queeg implications in that ....)

Not sure I get the reference.

The 'vast right wing conspiracy' or Captain Queeg? (sorry couldnt resist).

Here is the reference ---
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZlV3oQ3pLA0

Caine Mutiny with Bogey in an awesome role. Second time this month someone much younger than myself didnt know this movie...... sigh.....

I was talking about the Clinton reference (although I was not familiar with the pop culture reference).