Bolton's book was leaked to the press - Page 6 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the USA and Canada.

Moderator: PoFo North America Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15062315
Finfinder wrote:Why should any thinking person believe there is anything to this latest eleventh hour bombshell, a word that has been over used the last three years. Even if you are against Trump and everything he stands for, what has the media and opposition ever produced as a bombshell that has come to any significant revelation. They are ones who have lost credibility and yet they still pray on what their consumers wish for, but never deliver.


If you repeat it often enough, you'll probably end up believing it, but don't expect others to believe it.

Trump could gun down people in NYC in broad daylight and his supporters would argue that this is the most appropriate action for the president to take. But no matter how often they repeat it, it doesn't make it come true.

In any normal country, Trump would have resigned long time ago, well, he would never have become president in the first place. This just is one more proof that America has gone wrong in a very big way.
#15062321
Atlantis wrote:If you repeat it often enough, you'll probably end up believing it, but don't expect others to believe it.

Trump could gun down people in NYC in broad daylight and his supporters would argue that this is the most appropriate action for the president to take. But no matter how often they repeat it, it doesn't make it come true.

In any normal country, Trump would have resigned long time ago, well, he would never have become president in the first place. This just is one more proof that America has gone wrong in a very big way.



That's ridiculous despite there hasn't been any crime or wrong doing ever accused or even proven for a Trump supporter to make a defense of an outlandish example like that. The US isn't a normal country. Its not normal for an administration to get caught spying on an opposition presidential campaign, having high level officials of your executive branch colluding to negate an election. It's not normal to attempt a completely partisan political impeachment with no crime even alleged. We don't have to prove our innocence in this country from our adversaries. The burden is on the people making the allegations and to date there hasn't a single bombshell that fits any of the standards we hold in our constitution. Someone that would support a Trump agenda has been given every reason to question the motives and credibility of the opposition and the media given past partisan collusions and how everything they allege has never come to fruition. Why non Trump supporters do not question this is beyond logic. Give some proof of something that has actually occurred and then maybe your statement can hold a little water.
#15062419
Atlantis wrote:In any normal country, Trump would have resigned long time ago, well, he would never have become president in the first place. This just is one more proof that America has gone wrong in a very big way.


To be fair, no country of significant size is normal.

If the United States had been a normal country then the people would have behaved like French yellow shirts or anti-China Hong-kongers at this moment, and caused all kinds of havoc, already.

If China had been a normal country the government would already have been overthrown.

If India had been a normal country things like nationality act and Kashmir net shutdown would not have happened.

Ironically Russia seems slightly closer to a normal country than all of the above, at least from Putin's attempt to change the constitution, he seems to think that making the country look more like a normal one is in his best interest.
#15062458
Patrickov wrote:To be fair, no country of significant size is normal.

If the United States had been a normal country then the people would have behaved like French yellow shirts or anti-China Hong-kongers at this moment, and caused all kinds of havoc, already.

If China had been a normal country the government would already have been overthrown.

If India had been a normal country things like nationality act and Kashmir net shutdown would not have happened.

Ironically Russia seems slightly closer to a normal country than all of the above, at least from Putin's attempt to change the constitution, he seems to think that making the country look more like a normal one is in his best interest.

The reason for this is that all large countries are constantly in danger of breaking up into smaller countries, due to cultural heterogeneity. Some of them cope with this by partially giving in to the centrifugal forces (e.g., the USA with its 'states rights' and its electoral college), while others ruthlessly crush any dissent or separatist movements in order to overcome these centrifugal forces (China is the canonical example of this). But it's worth pointing out that even the USA will not tolerate any armed attempt to break away from the Union, as their 19th century Civil War demonstrated.
#15062459
Potemkin wrote:But it's worth pointing out that even the USA will not tolerate any armed attempt to break away from the Union, as their 19th century Civil War demonstrated.


This crisis, if exists, certainly is not to the level that the Union itself has to be questioned. It is more like an implementation of punishment on whoever should be found guilty, but not, on a societal scale.
#15062460
Potemkin wrote:Some of them cope with this by partially giving in to the centrifugal forces (e.g., the USA with its 'states rights' and its electoral college),

I feel there is far too little contempt for the American Constitution. Now as a practical political compromise for the time, to solve the problems of the founders at that time it was no doubt very good and intelligent. But as a timeless expression of constitutional principles its a pathetic joke. No one really cared about the States, it was just that the States inherited their de-facto power from the previous Colonial institutions. The only reason that the United States still exists is because of its civil wars. The war of independence being its first. If King George III had just let the colonies leave, the United States would not have got off the ground. And if it hadn't been for the Confederate successionists the United States would have probably fallen apart by now.

No one really cared about State sovereignty. The division was between the North, the Near South that wanted to become slave farmers and the deep South that needed a constant influx of new slaves, because of its appalling slave death rate. The 1808 compromise successfully solved the division over the Transatlantic slave trade setting up the country for the 2nd Civil War of 1861. But this again demonstrated that neither Yankee nor Dixie gave a toss about States rights.
#15062463
Rich wrote:I feel there is far too little contempt for the American Constitution. Now as a practical political compromise for the time, to solve the problems of the founders at that time it was no doubt very good and intelligent. But as a timeless expression of constitutional principles its a pathetic joke. No one really cared about the States, it was just that the States inherited their de-facto power from the previous Colonial institutions. The only reason that the United States still exists is because of its civil wars. The war of independence being its first. If King George III had just let the colonies leave, the United States would not have got off the ground. And if it hadn't been for the Confederate successionists the United States would have probably fallen apart by now.

I agree that the American Constitution was essentially a compromise on the part of the Founding Fathers. They patched it together as best they could with chewing gum and bits of string, but it is essentially non-transferable. It is only relevant to the peculiar history of the US.

No one really cared about State sovereignty. The division was between the North, the Near South that wanted to become slave farmers and the deep South that needed a constant influx of new slaves, because of its appalling slave death rate. The 1808 compromise successfully solved the division over the Transatlantic slave trade setting up the country for the 2nd Civil War of 1861. But this again demonstrated that neither Yankee nor Dixie gave a toss about States rights.

Agreed. The South tried to secede over the right to own slaves, and the Confederacy rode roughshod over their own states' rights throughout the Civil War. And as far as the North was concerned, states' rights did not extend to the right to secede from the Union. Which means that so-called 'states rights' were just an historical holdover from colonial times, of no real or meaningful significance. The main purpose of the concept now seems to be to act as a safety valve to let off steam, to prevent the centrifugal forces acting on any large country from tearing it apart. The Electoral College is one example of such a safety valve.
#15062539
Rich wrote:I feel there is far too little contempt for the American Constitution. Now as a practical political compromise for the time, to solve the problems of the founders at that time it was no doubt very good and intelligent. But as a timeless expression of constitutional principles its a pathetic joke. No one really cared about the States, it was just that the States inherited their de-facto power from the previous Colonial institutions. The only reason that the United States still exists is because of its civil wars. The war of independence being its first. If King George III had just let the colonies leave, the United States would not have got off the ground. And if it hadn't been for the Confederate successionists the United States would have probably fallen apart by now.

No one really cared about State sovereignty. The division was between the North, the Near South that wanted to become slave farmers and the deep South that needed a constant influx of new slaves, because of its appalling slave death rate. The 1808 compromise successfully solved the division over the Transatlantic slave trade setting up the country for the 2nd Civil War of 1861. But this again demonstrated that neither Yankee nor Dixie gave a toss about States rights.


All that being said your thoughts are incomplete without explaining in detail what parts of the constitution you think are a pathetic joke.
#15062541
Rich wrote:
I feel there is far too little contempt for the American Constitution. Now as a practical political compromise for the time, to solve the problems of the founders at that time it was no doubt very good and intelligent. But as a timeless expression of constitutional principles its a pathetic joke. No one really cared about the States, it was just that the States inherited their de-facto power from the previous Colonial institutions. The only reason that the United States still exists is because of its civil wars. The war of independence being its first. If King George III had just let the colonies leave, the United States would not have got off the ground. And if it hadn't been for the Confederate successionists the United States would have probably fallen apart by now.

No one really cared about State sovereignty. The division was between the North, the Near South that wanted to become slave farmers and the deep South that needed a constant influx of new slaves, because of its appalling slave death rate. The 1808 compromise successfully solved the division over the Transatlantic slave trade setting up the country for the 2nd Civil War of 1861. But this again demonstrated that neither Yankee nor Dixie gave a toss about States rights.



Nope.

That's a ludicrous distortion of the history..

I am going to tackle one small point. The country was created as a nation of allied states. The Civil War turned that on it's head.

After the Civil War we had a strong central government that called most of the shots.

We have a rich and complex history, you might want to learn about it.
#15062584
late wrote:Nope.

That's a ludicrous distortion of the history..

I am going to tackle one small point. The country was created as a nation of allied states. The Civil War turned that on it's head.

After the Civil War we had a strong central government that called most of the shots.

We have a rich and complex history, you might want to learn about it.

Before the Civil War, people would say "The United States are...", but after it they would say "The United States is...". Something had clearly changed in the way people thought of the US as a nation.
#15062655
late wrote:I am going to tackle one small point. The country was created as a nation of allied states. The Civil War turned that on it's head.

After the Civil War we had a strong central government that called most of the shots.


Compared to traditional sovereign states, those independent US states had a shallow national identity. That's what enabled the strong central government and the "imperial presidency".

Even if European independent states were to form a full-fledged federation in some distant future, it would never have a strong central government because the member states are far too jealous of their national identities, each having it's own language, tradition and culture. That's why a federal Europe can never become an empire.

EU is not prepared on nuclear war, but Russia,[…]

It is implausible that the IDF could not or would[…]

Moving on to the next misuse of language that sho[…]

There is no reason to have a state at all unless w[…]