Trump behaves like a dictator

[Greenlee]

My problem has to do what thy can be used for. There are limitations in place, but I do not feel that they are strict enough, and to protect us from an avowed political activist like Trump, history shows that the breadth of what these orders can accomplish is far too liberal. The Healthcare act is an excellent example. Not so much in the act itself, but that it can be thrown out almost in its entirety by a single executive order. Wherever you stand in the issue of the act, to have that kind unilateral authority should be alarming to everyone.

 

[SteveB28]

The dichotomy I was referring to is that if I object to other presidential administrations then I must support Trump.

Ah, is that desperation...? Descending to baseless accusation...?

Please indicate where I have accused you of automatically supporting Trump, as a result of your criticisms of President Obama....my criticisms of your case have specifically centred around your objections to executive orders.

Do you lean statist in your political ideology?

To some degree we all do, unless we are out-and-out anarchists. I am probably more so than yourself. I live in a country that has been part of a reasonably successful 'experiment' permitting significant state control of education, medicine, welfare, etc, so my bias in that direction may be understandable.


.

 

[SteveB28]

My problem has to do what thy can be used for. There are limitations in place, but I do not feel that they are strict enough, and to protect us from an avowed political activist like Trump, history shows that the breadth of what these orders can accomplish is far too liberal. The Healthcare act is an excellent example. Not so much in the act itself, but that it can be thrown out almost in its entirety by a single executive order. Wherever you stand in the issue of the act, to have that kind unilateral authority should be alarming to everyone.

Ok, we have some common ground again.....

I too would lament (on your collective behalf) if many of the advances that have been made could be simply wiped out with the stroke of a pen. But, likewise, am I right in concluding that many of those advances could not have been achieved in the first place, had the president's powers been curtailed?

 

[SteveB28]

There are other means, surely, to rein in a President who wishes to behave dictatorially? Even though you folk have presented one party with a majority in all branches of your parliament, there must still be options to place brakes on irresponsible leadership?

 

[Greenlee]

Ah, is that desperation...? Descending to baseless accusation...?

Please indicate where I have accused you of automatically supporting Trump, as a result of your criticisms of President Obama....my criticisms of your case have specifically centred around your objections to executive orders.

I don't think that was a baseless accusation. You asked me yesterday if I dot think that Trump would try to rein from his throne. The entire point of this thread is on Trumps dictatorial characteristics, which you obviously agree with, and have been demanding I answer to your inquisition.

You even premised your argument on a care for your American friends that we not be lead astray by wrongly supporting Trump.

Baseless? That's just dishonest.

I regret ever engaging you in dialogue.

the logical fallacies, the condescending tone... why can't this just be a pleasant dialogue? Why must it turn so adversarial?

 

[Greenlee]

Ok, we have some common ground again.....

I too would lament (on your collective behalf) if many of the advances that have been made could be simply wiped out with the stroke of a pen. But, likewise, am I right in concluding that many of those advances could not have been achieved in the first place, had the president's powers been curtailed?

That's precisely my point from the very beginning.

 

[Aryeh]

I see what you are getting at, but it's all a matter of perspective. Inflation was at a thousand percent higher before Germany allowed a dictator like Hitler to take control. The US may not be in a wonderful position domestically or internationally, but as a part time resident in a developing country, in a more broad global view, the US is far from dire straights, whatever Trump tries to claim.

I just don't see it happening, especially if the US takes notice and reins in the executive power a little. Without this step, I can see a dictator coming to power maybe not immediately but in the not so distant future.

But we can't have it both ways. If we allow the executive branch to continue its trajectory of the last couple of decades where sociopolitical agenda-driven unilateral edicts are handed down in the form of executive orders, we are probably heading down a road that could install a despot regime some day.

Let's wait and see...

 

[SteveB28]

I don't think that was a baseless accusation. You asked me yesterday if I dot think that Trump would try to rein from his throne. The entire point of this thread is on Trumps dictatorial characteristics, which you obviously agree with, and have been demanding I answer to your inquisition.

You even premised your argument on a care for your American friends that we not be lead astray by wrongly supporting Trump.

Baseless? That's just dishonest.

I regret ever engaging you in dialogue.

the logical fallacies, the condescending tone... why can't this just be a pleasant dialogue? Why must it turn so adversarial?

Now, now....you could do me the honour of actually answering my question....which was....

Please indicate where I have accused you of automatically supporting Trump, as a result of your criticisms of President Obama....?

If you are fair, you will concede that I have NOT concluded that you are a Trump supporter (or that you even voted for him). Moreover, you would be hard pressed to find me leaping from your criticism of President Obama to that conclusion.

You know what they say about why we shouldn't 'assume'....?

 

[JonFromMinnesota]

If you believe Trump to be a dictator, than neither do you.

I never said he was. He does reveal authoritarian type behavior though. Suggesting someone who burns an American flag be jailed and/or have their citizenship revoked being one example.

 

[rjs330]

You're entitled to your own opinions but not your own facts. Climate change is exhibit A. There is no debate over it anymore but the majority of elected republicans continue to deny it.

What most deniers deny is not that the climate isn't changing. It's the reasons why and how bad it is. Facts are facts are facts. How they are interpreted is what is at the heart of the matter. I'm a staunch denier. But I don't deny the climate is changing. It is. It always has and always will. It's part of nature.

What we deny is the cause and the catastrophic prophecies.

Sent from my XT1635-01 using Tapatalk

 

[SteveB28]

What most deniers deny is not that the climate isn't changing. It's the reasons why and how bad it is. Facts are facts are facts. How they are interpreted is what is at the heart of the matter. I'm a staunch denier. But I don't deny the climate is changing. It is. It always has and always will. It's part of nature.

What we deny is the cause and the catastrophic prophecies.

Sent from my XT1635-01 using Tapatalk

And yet, the same scientific research that has revealed the change is also revealing the extent, the cause, the variation from normal ranges and the predicted outcomes.

Your denial appears to be on the basis of personal preference, not science......



.

 

[JonFromMinnesota]

I'm a staunch denier. But I don't deny the climate is changing. It is. It always has and always will. It's part of nature.

What we deny is the cause and the catastrophic prophecies

Humans are a major contributing factor to climate change. This is an objective fact. It is not up for debate.

 

[rjs330]

And yet, the same scientific research that has revealed the change is also revealing the extent, the cause, the variation from normal ranges and the predicted outcomes.

Your denial appears to be on the basis of personal preference, not science......



.

Well you would be wrong. I have done s bit of research on the subject and in other places on this forum quoted many scientists who do not agree with the catastrophic global warming crowd. What I came to the realization is that the science is not really settled on this subject despite the political claims.

I could quote a lot more people, but it takes to long to do so.

Science can see and measure, but with global warming it also interprets. What I have found in my research is that the interpretation is what is deeply flawed.

Sent from my XT1635-01 using Tapatalk

 

[SteveB28]

Well you would be wrong. I have done s bit of research on the subject and in other places on this forum quoted many scientists who do not agree with the catastrophic global warming crowd. What I came to the realization is that the science is not really settled on this subject despite the political claims.

I could quote a lot more people, but it takes to long to do so.

Science can see and measure, but with global warming it also interprets. What I have found in my research is that the interpretation is what is deeply flawed.

Sent from my XT1635-01 using Tapatalk

No you haven't. You've listened to the tiny minority of voices in the scientific community, because it is in your interests to do so.

There are few issues in the field of science that enjoy such a strong consensus.

Stop thinking about your own wants so much and start thinking about your children and grandchildren....



.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Well, not to split hairs, but the premise of the campaign was that the country would fail if left in the hands of democrats, not that it already had failed.

So all that "America is a disaster" talk on the campaign trail was... what, prophecy?

 

[rjs330]

Humans are a major contributing factor to climate change. This is an objective fact. It is not up for debate.

It is not an objective fact and is very much up for debate. The scientists that I've read are very clear on this matter. The debate is not settled. There's been a lot of bad interpretation in this field based upon a preconceived paradigm.

Sent from my XT1635-01 using Tapatalk

 

[rjs330]

No you haven't. You've listened to the tiny minority of voices in the scientific community, because it is in your interests to do so.

There are few issues in the field of science that enjoy such a strong consensus.

Stop thinking about your own wants so much and start thinking about your children and grandchildren....



.

That's my concern. My kids and grandchildren are going to suffer under more and more governmental control over their lives based upon a faulty science. This is totally about government controls. Its politically motivated. It has to to be for the scientists who state the truth to be shut out and demonized so much. Money flows to those who believe in it and is jerked away from the scientists who have other findings. The facts Ive seen and read directly contradict many of the claims of the alarmists. Very solid men and solid research.

Sent from my XT1635-01 using Tapatalk

 

[JonFromMinnesota]

It is not an objective fact and is very much up for debate. The scientists that I've read are very clear on this matter. The debate is not settled

Name 5 of them and cite their research papers.

That's my concern. My kids and grandchildren are going to suffer under more and more governmental control over their lives based upon a faulty science

How are you arriving at the conclusion that moving to clean energy = Your kids and grandchildren suffering? Not doing anything would lead to that result.

This is totally about government controls. Its politically motivated

Politically motivated by fossil fuel companies and republicans they have in their pockets, yes.

It has to to be for the scientists who state the truth to be shut out and demonized so much

There is no authority in science.

The facts Ive seen and read directly contradict many of the claims of the alarmists. Very solid men and solid research.

Cite these research papers. How do you know these are solid men and solid research? Do you have a PHD in climatology? Can you describe in your own words what the ratio of C12 and C13 in the atmosphere means for climate change?

 

[Veritas]

Humans are a major contributing factor to climate change. This is an objective fact. It is not up for debate.

Your very statement is anethema to science. Nothing is EVER settled when real science is the objective. So-called "climate change" is psudo-science masquerading as fact to dupe the masses and funnel money to all sorts of alternative energy companies as well as grants to reinforce its message. There are so many holes in this theory and loads of tampered data, I find it hard that any reasonable and intelligent person would accept it as fact without question.

 

[Veritas]

I never said he was. He does reveal authoritarian type behavior though. Suggesting someone who burns an American flag be jailed and/or have their citizenship revoked being one example.

As opposed to a president who at every turn bypassed Congress and Courts and ignored the Constitution. Nah, that's just progressivism.