Trump calls out Biden on religion

[VonDerTann]

Actually, Fred, people do care - many, many folks (particularly the young!) put a lot of stock in what entertainers, or anyone else with a ‘cult of personality,’ say. Would the entertainers say what they say, if no one cared? Would the news report it? The fact the media reports these things corroborates the comments’ importance.

So there’s really nothing “schoolyard” about anything I say. “Schoolyard” is saying, “their comments are irrelevant since no one cares,” which is what you argue.

Further, you ignore the cumulative effect of all this nastiness: When lots of people engage in this nastiness (and again, we’re talking insults on Melania and Barron too) our standards are redefined downward where this nastiness becomes commonplace.

 

[NevermoreLenore]

Your posts seem more emotional than logical. I am not going to play. If you want to talk facts, like Trump speaks at a 4th grade level, or that he has cheated contractors out of millions, or that there is such a vast vacancy of leadership in the White House that covid19 has spread like wildfire, or that there is actual footage of him saying he just ‘grabs them by the p----’ …maybe then I’ll reengage. Oh, and there is an entire Wikipedia page of Trump’s name calling.

List of nicknames used by Donald Trump about other people - Wikipedia

 

[VeryBlessed]

To be frank, the last two presidential election cycles have produced weak and problematic candidates and many (most?) of us had to just hold our noses and vote for one.

Tragically, I think we get the president we deserve, one who reflects us. Like if you could take every American and mix them all together and make one composite person, who would that person be? What would they be like? Until a majority of us are deeply spiritual with selfless moral integrity, I don’t think we’re going to get a president who has all the good qualities we admire, without any of the bad qualities that we all indulge far too much. I don’t see a way out except a country wide spiritual renewal.

 

[NevermoreLenore]

Tragically, I think we get the president we deserve, one who reflects us.

I agree with this sentiment.

 

[VonDerTann]

I am not going to play.

I’M going to play. I’d walked away; you called me back by defending namecalling.

Hmmm…Trump “speaks at a fourth grade level.” Well, let’s look hard at this. 1) Do you really think a man who can turn a hole in the ground into a 50-story building, is stupid? I mean, no one on this board - not you; not me; not anyone else - would know how to do that? 2) if he speaks simply, aren’t you really condemning all politicans who did that (like say Harry Truman?) as being dumb? After all, Harry was just a haberdasher; as opposed to, say, his effete blueblooded rival Tom Dewey? I’d rather my president spoke plainly than like, say, Barack OBama.

You have a wikipedia page. I’ll counter with the number of times people have acted so hostile to Trump that they get paid a visit by the Secret Service - like Madonna got, or like Peter Fonda got for his anti-Barron comments.

Further, as I’ve also enjoyed defending, Trump gets yelled at for committing the “sin” of actually fighting back - unlike, say, effete wimpy men like Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan, who would stand around and smile and say nothing when nastiness was leveled at them.

 

[VeryBlessed]

I say this with sadness, but too many of us are morally and spiritually lost, and as such, we’re just not capable of electing a person who does not reflect that lostness. Such a person would never get the votes.

 

[NevermoreLenore]

you called me back by defending namecalling

You’re projecting; here and in all your responses to others in this thread. I do not defend name calling.

his effete blueblooded rival

effete wimpy men like Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan,

Calling men ‘effete’ isn’t name calling? So it’s okay to name call, just not against Trump? Interesting logic.

Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan, who would stand around and smile and say nothing when nastiness was leveled at them.

Hmmm, like turning the other cheek? Acting charitably? It takes far more strength and integrity to stay silent when attack than by, as you say, ‘fighting back’.

 

[farronwolf]

So I didn’t read the entire thread, but get where the two camps are coming in. What I get from this is.

If you claim to be Catholic and don’t strictly adhere to every teaching of the Church, you should be called out and put on public display and be made to explain why you disagree or go against Church teaching as a public official.

Yet:

If you are not Catholic, but claim to be christian, you don’t have to explain any of your personal actions which clearly go against most everything that Christianity or the Catholic Church teaches or stands for, as long as you are mostly anti abortion.

Yep, this makes perfect sense to me.

Because someone is not Catholic we give them a pass. I guess all the Catholics who have ever used birth control, had abortions, gotten divorced and remarried, received communion when not in a state of grace, or done any list of things that goes against the teachings of the Church should simply stop claiming to be Catholic.

Our Churches would be empty of parishioners, and just about all the clergy as well.

 

[Freddy]

Actually, Fred, people do care - many, many folks (particularly the young!) put a lot of stock in what entertainers, or anyone else with a ‘cult of personality,’ say. Would the entertainers say what they say, if no one cared? Would the news report it? The fact the media reports these things corroborates the comments’ importance.

What you say is correct. And obviously doesn’t make it right that some people have a trite appreciation of what constitutes a genuine politician. But the problem is that people who actually vote seem to have a trite appreciation of what they are voting for.

If nothing else you should have a degree of repect for the opposing view. For the person representing that view. I’ve been around for eleven presidents. And I had a respect, grudgingly at times, for all of them. They were honest men who held honest views.

The current incumbent? He is a shameful example of a system that has allowed him to attain such a position.

 

[VonDerTann]

You’re really mixing what politicians do with what people on this board do.

Are you saying that my saying a politician “effete” on a web board is the same as 1) calling that person a “mother------” or showing their severed head; or 2) calling other posters names, as has been done to me many times?

Just want to be clear.

I’d point out that this board is chock full of people who call names routinely - whether it be Trump; their supporters; other posters, etc. - yet cry “turn the other cheek!” when their own behavior gets challenged.

 

[VonDerTann]

If nothing else you should have a degree of repect for the opposing view. For the person representing that view. I’ve been around for eleven presidents. And I had a respect, grudgingly at times, for all of them. They were honest men who held honest views.

Yes, agree. I’ve only been around for 7 US presidents and the only one I did not think was honest was Obama, and Clinton lied about his affairs (“I did not have an inappropriate relationship with that woman”). I also can’t really square honesty with advocacy of abortion, but that’s for me to try & wrap my head around.

 

[VonDerTann]

like turning the other cheek? Acting charitably? It takes far more strength and integrity to stay silent when attack than by, as you say, ‘fighting back’.

I’m not going to “act charitably” when someone attacks my wife; my son; or holds up an imitation of my bloody severed head or says they want to kill me. I’m not going to turn the other cheek to that - nor will I lose any sleep about doing so. I’ll take it up with God in the next life.

 

[Freddy]

You’re really mixing what politicians do with what people on this board do.

This may be just my view, but yeah - I do consider that what people say in a forum or in the bar or at a bbq doesn’t need to be held to such a standard as the POTUS. Because what I say in tbe bar or at the bbq only represents me. But the POTUS represents every American. He represents the country. He represents all states, ‘from California to the New York Island’.

If he is the person you want to represent America, then so be it.

 

[VonDerTann]

I think he’s the best president in the last 100 years, and I for one am proud to have him as my representative.

And BTW Fred, we often disagree, but your posts are always thought-provoking.

 

[VeryBlessed]

If he is the person you want to represent America, then so be it.

I can’t vote for the one, and I hate voting for the other. But again, the problem is not the one or the other. The problem is us.

 

[NevermoreLenore]

You’re really mixing what politicians do with what people on this board do.

Politicians are people.

I’d point out that this board is chock full of people who call names routinely

I don’t call people names; not online nor in real life. I can only speak for myself, except to add that the flagging system and moderation of these boards ensure adherence to TOS.

Is there an answer that would satisfy you? It seems you only want validation for your perspective, because any time a point or fact about Trump is presented, you counterpoint with things his opponents have said or done without addressing the initial points raised. I don’t view people in comparison; I don’t defend one person by pointing out the sins and foibles of another. I would argue that the president of our country should have enough security within himself and his own intelligence and integrity to always act with dignity, regardless of the actions or words of anyone else. Politically, I am an independent and that allows me to step outside of party politics and look at each one as individuals without muddying the waters with the necessity of loyalty to party. Clearly, we have very different approaches and I don’t think I will give you the answer or response you’re seeking.

 

[Nepperhan]

Trump and Biden are public figures, and anything they say is fair game for public discourse. We are choosing a President — that is one of the most important things we do as citizens. No one is questioning Biden’s piety or the state of his soul.

I disagree. I think that Trump did exactly that sort of questioning and posters here act as if that sort of inquiry is appropriate.

 

[Freddy]

I think he’s the best president in the last 100 years, and I for one am proud to have him as my representative.

And BTW Fred, we often disagree, but your posts are always thought-provoking.

This is what I find so incredibly difficult to come to terms with. And so monstrously frustrating. That people - like yourself, come across as genuinely nice people that I’m sure I’d enjoy having a beer with, but still align yourelf with someone, in my humble opinion, is the worst example of a politician I have ever known. And not just in local politics (I’ve known a few) and not just in federal politics (and there have been some) but anywhere. At any time. Please trust me when I say that this is the lowest point in politics that I have ever experienced. I have honestly considered that the democratic system has failed.

I travelled aound the States with my wife last year and we fell in love with the country and the people. I’ve been around a lot of places but I never felt so welcomed. Y’all so friendly. But we couldn’t get over the fact that half the people we met on average had voted for Trump.

He doesn’t represent you. At least, he doesn’t represent the country we discovered. He’s doesn’t represent what people like me consider to be America. And we’re honestly depressed about that.

 

[VonDerTann]

I take your post as a great compliment. There’s a lot to like about America. Thank you.

Clearly I have a different view of Trump. Obviously I will not convince you, but I do in fact see him as a great president. In no real order, here’s a few reasons I think he’s been a great president. Perhaps it might at least convince you that a case can be made for Trump, even if you yourself are not convinced.

–For too many years, US federal politics have been some permutation of “the left attacks; the right stands there and smiles.” I do in fact like Trump for fighting back and for completely changing the dynamic of politics.

–For that matter, the US has in fact been ruled for decades by an entrenched elite who are insulated from, and largely antagonistic towards, middle America & working people. This entrenched elite is both democrat and republican. Trump is really the only US president (maybe since Andrew Jackson) to really want to end the power of the entrenched elite, AKA “drain the swamp,” which is long overdue.

–China is a growing threat to world peace. Trump has stood up to China in ways both his democrat and republican predecessors never would. I would add that Pope Francis’ behavior and policies toward China are IMHO a complete affront to Catholic values.

–Trump has advocated for the unborn in a way no president since Roe v Wade has, and he has made a mission to appoint conservative judges to federal courts.

–I don’t want my president to be a citizen of the world; I want him to put America first in everything. Trump does that in ways no president has in the last 100 years. Putin puts Russia first 100% of the time; The President of the US should do the same.

–He’s done all the above in the face of deeply, almost diabolical, hatred from some and endless baseless (ie there was no ‘Russian collusion’) attacks.

Anyway, please forgive me, I must run out to work.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

But the abortion debate is not relevant to whoever is picked by the Republicans as the nominee. They could have picked any Republican and they would have been anti abortion. And whoever they picked would have been more supportive of religious viewpoints than Trump. That scene of him in front of the church waving a bible about was close to being the most embarrassing thing I’ve seen from a politician.

So he is plainly not the best man for the job. The best man for the job would be someone who could construct a meaningful and coherent sentence. Who wasn’t a compulsive liar. Who treated women with respect. Who wasn’t living in a fantasy land where the cornonavirus would simply dissapear. Who didn’t dismiss his friends and cosy up to dictators. The list of his failings would exceed the word limit for any one post.

Isn’t there one Republican who could fullfill those basic requirements? You are really telling me that he is the best you could expect ?

For some reason, in the 2020 primary season, there was no groundswell, no scrum of contenders for the Republican nomination for president. William Weld, Mark Sanford, and Joe Walsh (the ex-congressman, not the musician), and that was about it. American political parties with sitting incumbents — who have proven that they can win the presidency — do not typically seek to topple that candidate. There was no serious challenge to Reagan, Clinton, GW Bush, or Obama in their incumbency elections. There was no reason for there to be a challenge.

Really, the whole idea of political parties and presidential elections by popular vote in each state was never envisioned in the Constitution as originally drafted. The legislatures of each state were charged with selecting electors, wise men who would do their best to find someone suitable to be president, and if that failed, there was the fail-safe of allowing the House to select the president, and the Senate to select the vice president. Fast-forward 200 years and you have this rabbit hash of 51 separate state (and DC) elections, with politicians attempting to appeal to vast swaths of the electorate in an attempt to garner 50%+1 of the electoral votes. Electors are mere placeholders, they are bound to their state’s majority vote (in most cases), and nobody even knows or cares who they are. Each party has its own slate of electors, and that is who the voters are selecting, but nobody knows that either. I actually find it refreshing when a random elector “goes rogue” — that is more in line with the way things were supposed to work in the first place! If you had a slate of wise, impartial solons from each state, assembling in college, then you would have a real chance of selecting “the best man for the job”. The presidency was intended to be more like an elected monarchy of fixed term, not a springboard for a demagogue.