The Trump 2nd Term

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Pargat Perrer
    replied
    Originally posted by Peter McKillop View Post

    I liked Frank's post too. I'm not sure if it's the Constitution itself that is antiquated or the framers' implicit expectation that under stress, basic human decency would prevail. In 2024 it seems that to be President or a cabinet/senior member in the incoming executive branch, you must be civilly liable for, or under investigation for/suspicion of, sex crimes. Now I suppose we can expect the comedy to continue as Trump's big Chesstalk supporters, Sid, Vlad, Dilip, and Tom, slither out to tell us why Matt Gaetz will be an excellent Attorney General.

    Yes, basic human decency is an antiquated concept in today's world. It has probably happened in every great civilization. Even the Biblical Old Testament is full of stories of God / Yahweh having to punish man for sinful ways (Sodom and Gomorrah, Noah's Ark, etc etc etc). I"m sure Roman and Greek and Egyptian civilizations had the same issues leading to inevitable collapse.

    The cycle never stops.

    In the case now of the Trump victory, I believe we may see the fruition of the old Marx adage that if you give a capitalist enough rope, he will hang himself. He didn't have enough rope in his first term. He will this time, I am very sure of that.

    The US Constitution is no guarantee of anything anymore.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bob Armstrong
    replied
    Hi Dilip:

    Meaford, where my hobby farm is, would likely function better, as you say (10,000). But I fear there would be a practical problem in the transition period getting people to accept that size.......it is not a totally mature town.....lacks a number of common city amenities.....cooperative moved out; Canadian Tire moved out; a major manufacturer, Amerock, moved out. There is no supermarket downtown for seniors who don't drive, etc.

    Yet it is a lovely place to live, admittedly. But for me, maybe not for so many others.

    It may be that it will be an incremental devolution?

    Bob A

    Leave a comment:


  • Dilip Panjwani
    replied
    Thanks, Bob. You rightly pointed out earlier that neighborliness is essential between the common man and the person representing him. However, that is unlikely to be achieved with a village size of 25000. That is where the circles within circles set-up excels, as it makes the highest politicians in the world easily accessible to everyone!
    The other aspect one has to remember is that the 'villages' or 'circles within circles' could work only if 'laws' are kept to a minimum, otherwise if the villages around you insist on electric vehicles and you have a gas powered one, you are stuck! Luckily, the only law we really need {besides maybe very few others like common-sense traffic and easy access to finance laws}, is the Natural Law!

    Leave a comment:


  • Bob Armstrong
    replied
    Hi Dilip:

    I don't know that......but I would expect that a "village" would be a modest sized city (Maybe the size of Owen Sound or Collingwood, Ontario [20-25,000]; bigger cities, like Toronto, would be de-amalgamated. I fear that villages bigger than that cannot achieve the "Localness" of character to affect the main areas of life and politics.

    The Democratic Marxist Party of Ontario (See its Fb page) believes that a transition would best start by villagication of one province to start, and to show the benefits to the rest. DM has picked Ontario as the possible test case.

    Bob A

    Leave a comment:


  • Dilip Panjwani
    replied
    Originally posted by Bob Armstrong View Post
    Big Government IS the Problem

    IMHO - The federal Canadian government needs to become the secretariat for a collection of villages, across the country, which exercise all control.

    The villages will decide what they will work together on, to achieve something non-local.

    Make all politicians "local"; and they will be paid according to the will of the village and its taxation. Corruption.....they'll have to face the neighbours they live beside, and who elect them........good luck.

    Bob A (Democratic Marxist)
    Bob,
    How many 'villages' you think would constitute Canada?

    Leave a comment:


  • Bob Armstrong
    replied
    Big Government IS the Problem

    IMHO - The federal Canadian government needs to become the secretariat for a collection of villages, across the country, which exercise all control.

    The villages will decide what they will work together on, to achieve something non-local.

    Make all politicians "local"; and they will be paid according to the will of the village and its taxation. Corruption.....they'll have to face the neighbours they live beside, and who elect them........good luck.

    Bob A (Democratic Marxist)

    Leave a comment:


  • Tom O'Donnell
    replied
    Agreed 100%. The smaller the federal government, one that only deals with things that are critical and can't be performed by the private sector, the better.

    Arguments that capitalism is bad because some people are corrupt ignores that government is also made of people.

    The difference is that if I don't like the way that say WalMart does business, I can avoid doing business with them. The same cannot be said for a federal government.

    Leave a comment:


  • Dilip Panjwani
    replied
    Originally posted by Tom O'Donnell View Post

    Joe Biden's Daughter Ashley Confirms Legitimacy of the 'Showers with Dad' Diary Entry

    Unfortunately politics does not generally attract decent people. No matter the party.
    That is because only crooks like to interfere with other people's lives, which is what politicians do under our current system; and our current political system also unnecessarily gives huge power to politicians. Libertarianism can correct all that!
    And by reducing the unnecessarily large amounts of money politicians have at their disposal, Elon and Vivek will make a good beginning...
    Last edited by Dilip Panjwani; Saturday, 16th November, 2024, 05:09 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tom O'Donnell
    replied
    Originally posted by Peter McKillop View Post

    I liked Frank's post too. I'm not sure if it's the Constitution itself that is antiquated or the framers' implicit expectation that under stress, basic human decency would prevail. In 2024 it seems that to be President or a cabinet/senior member in the incoming executive branch, you must be civilly liable for, or under investigation for/suspicion of, sex crimes. Now I suppose we can expect the comedy to continue as Trump's big Chesstalk supporters, Sid, Vlad, Dilip, and Tom, slither out to tell us why Matt Gaetz will be an excellent Attorney General.
    Joe Biden's Daughter Ashley Confirms Legitimacy of the 'Showers with Dad' Diary Entry

    Unfortunately politics does not generally attract decent people. No matter the party.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bob Armstrong
    replied
    Hi Peter:

    Trump's Secretary of Defense: Veteran - turned - Fox News host, Pete Hegseth

    Click image for larger version

Name:	Republican Pary logo.png
Views:	85
Size:	44.7 KB
ID:	238208

    - appointed after only days of considering...and very little internal vetting.

    - Within 48 hours, the heads of Trump’s transition team were brought a complaint about a sexual assault allegation regarding Hegseth. The campaign was brought information that aligns with what Monterey, California, police described as an investigation into “an alleged sexual assault” involving Hegseth on October 8, 2017.

    - sexual assault allegation .....stunn[ed] several members of Trump’s team, who have since raised questions about the viability of his nomination, according to two people close to the situation.

    CNN: 24/11/15 (https://www.cnn.com/2024/11/15/polit...-newtab-en-us-)
    ,
    Bob A

    Leave a comment:


  • Peter McKillop
    replied
    Originally posted by Pargat Perrer View Post

    Thank you for that post Frank.

    It lays bare the problem with modern-day America dealing with an antiquated Constitution.
    I liked Frank's post too. I'm not sure if it's the Constitution itself that is antiquated or the framers' implicit expectation that under stress, basic human decency would prevail. In 2024 it seems that to be President or a cabinet/senior member in the incoming executive branch, you must be civilly liable for, or under investigation for/suspicion of, sex crimes. Now I suppose we can expect the comedy to continue as Trump's big Chesstalk supporters, Sid, Vlad, Dilip, and Tom, slither out to tell us why Matt Gaetz will be an excellent Attorney General.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bob Armstrong
    replied
    As I understand it, given consistent red & blue States in federal elections, no possible amendment would likely get the number of States required (Over 50%) I believe.

    Bob A

    Leave a comment:


  • Pargat Perrer
    replied
    Originally posted by Frank Dixon View Post
    In the 1780s, the U.S. Constitutional creation workers never evidently imagined that a convicted felon, serial bankrupt, and adjudicated rapist, such as Donald Trump, could be elected president, so they didn't think to put those aspects in to disqualify potential candidates.
    Thank you for that post Frank.

    It lays bare the problem with modern-day America dealing with an antiquated Constitution.

    Leave a comment:


  • Dilip Panjwani
    replied
    What Michael Moore has to say about the American people:
    "If you stop and think about it, we’ve come up with a lot of doozies in our history," he wrote in a post on MichaelMoore.com. "Like the genocide of 20 million Native Americans. Or the enslavement of 12 million kidnapped Africans. Or us invading Vietnam and killing 4 million Asian people for no reason at all. We are not a good people."
    He may be right, but his statement has nothing to do with Trump's desires... if at all, it reminds one of the Democrats' lawfare, and the current hysterical response of the Left wingers and the swamp dwellers to Trump's appointees...
    Last edited by Dilip Panjwani; Friday, 15th November, 2024, 09:26 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sid Belzberg
    replied
    Originally posted by Frank Dixon View Post
    In the 1780s, the U.S. Constitutional creation workers never evidently imagined that a convicted felon, serial bankrupt, and adjudicated rapist, such as Donald Trump, could be elected president, so they didn't think to put those aspects in to disqualify potential candidates.
    "
    Rest assured, Frank, the "US Constitutional creation workers" knew exactly what they were doing, starting with the first three words: "We The People," who have just spoken their opinion about the merits of these charges you just listed, sprung from Stalinesque like show trial Kangaroo courts. May I remind you that the original basis of the impeachment of President-Elect Trump's first term regarding Russian interference was based on a fake Dosier by Steele bought and paid for by the Hillary Clinton Campaign and, even by special prosecutor Mueller's admission, the whole thing was a giant orchestrated sham!
    Now, you expect us to put credence into anything the DOJ cooks up for political reasons?
    Last edited by Sid Belzberg; Friday, 15th November, 2024, 10:15 AM.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X