teedubbya wrote:I did and do z.... i don't think something wrong before is justifiable now because so and so did it. If it was wrong then it is now (I'm looking at you Eric Holder). If it was ok then it's likely ok now.
As for the kardashian thing.... well there is the fact they (and kanye) have actually been in the oval office consulting and helping the Donald with policy. that's just a fact. it happened and is odd. We also had more than one reality show senior (direct to the Prez) adviser (Omarosa lol effin Omarosa) not including the fox pundants that have been hired on.
Taxes - I know many in here claim to have paid less this year and I am happy for them. I didn't. But more importantly even if there was relief for the small guy it's time limited but the relief for the big guys is permanent. I'm for less tax all around, but that didn't really happen.
Discarding rules of decorum, separation of powers and decency/respect for the office. Again we could get bogged down debating the details of this but its not the point. I believe in the sanctity and respect the office itself. To me it's why a BJ in the oval office is disturbing. I had problems with GWB but I admire his respect for the office. I expect that from our Prez and am not wiling to simply;y say oh its cool... just don't pay attention to twitter or the press. When the President of the US publicly demands investigations by the FBI or whomever on US citizens that's a problem. Demanding (or even questioning) publicly or otherwise that certain people get locked up that's a problem. Calling anyone treasonous is akin to calling for the death penalty. We should be more careful with that let alone the Prez. That doesn't even address singling out individual judges prior to their ruling in an attempt to invalidate their decision in advance. It's my bias but the person in that office should be a cut above JimmyCT.
The blanket stonewalling is something some probably cheer in terms of the game. I also know you see it as a metal detector and I respect that. I see it as something much more dangerous especially since the Senate through intentional actions Reid and McConnel) has been neutered from it's original intention as a deliberative body and is not doing it's job. Perhaps the pendulum will swing and this will be the catalyst for improvement but I'm skeptical.
Government ethics - already inadequate guardrails designed to separate personal gain or conflict of interest have been smashed when I want them fortified and improved. Not just at the top but much lower are following by example. I did see this in previous admins but this is much worse.
I'll stop now. This was free flow off the top the head and may not make complete sense. I could come up with many more (not media or twitter driven). And I do have some things I am ok with and do see an over reaction from the clucking chickens on some things. But that wasn't the request.
Easily the worst president of my lifetime which I thought impossible given Carter, Nixon, Johnson and the big O. It's not even a competition. Not mainstream media or twitter driven. (I have tweeted once in my life... for Fantasy football reasons and do not have it on my phones or computers).
I completely agree with you if we are judging him as a man who actually wanted to do a good job.
My belief is that he is there to set an example for justification to neuter the power of the Federal government.
From day one his position on almost everything has been "This government is nothing but a pain in everyone's neck and we need to stop it as much as possible". That was my impression during the debates and has somewhat been diluted by his own ego and those around him including in Congress. I have never thought he was there to be a good president, but to make a mockery of it all, and show how easily the presidency, in its current form, can be corrupted. For that he has done well so far within boundaries, it would really show in his second term...
What he didn't expect was for so few people to agree with him, and for so many to oppose him.. The same people on the left who were saying the entire system needed to be overhauled and corporate owned governments overthrown for some kind of socialistic anarchy; a few months later they are blasting Trump for walking a few steps ahead of the Queen! And oh he did not bow deeply enough, he doesn't kiss rings properly, the savage! At that point I saw that people were just picking every single little flaw and what Congress was doing for corporations, taking away our regulations that mostly kept us safe, that was ignored.
I think the idea of the presidency, in this day and age, is simply ridiculous. One single man is too flawed, by his very nature, to do what is expected of him. A step in the right direction would be to have four people, two from each party(if we're still going to have 2 parties), who have to come to a compromise on each and every issue, and do what is expected of them. That's not a perfect solution by any means, and would have its own problems of course. Most would not be able to do it. But it would set an example for everyone else, to compromise with each other as we are united as one people. I think a lot of windows would shift if being polar opposite was no longer the norm, so it would not be the same debate as it is now.
Maybe we just see what we want to see. I don't give it much mind anymore. It's easy to see when someone is just trying to take your attention away and put on a show.