A poll on the president's official website.

limblips

Well-Known Member
PREMO Member
How encouraging you are reading Trump's website. Eventually as you grow you will learn the concepts of sarcasm, satire and humor. Meanwhile don't be embarrassed, masturbation is healthy outlet for raging hormones in pubescent teens. However it is recommended that you do it to yourself not others.
 

Burnthings

Member
How encouraging you are reading Trump's website. Eventually as you grow you will learn the concepts of sarcasm, satire and humor. Meanwhile don't be embarrassed, masturbation is healthy outlet for raging hormones in pubescent teens. However it is recommended that you do it to yourself not others.
It's one thing when it come from you crass clowns, but not something that should come from a President.
 

PsyOps

Pixelated
It's one thing when it come from you crass clowns, but not something that should come from a President.
It didn't come from Trump himself, it came from his campaign committee. It was meant to be tongue-and-cheek. Far be it for you libs to have any sense of humor... well, except for when you're calling the president a 'motherf###er'.
 

This_person

Well-Known Member
It's one thing when it come from you crass clowns, but not something that should come from a President.
Do you believe the president is, or should be, the moral leader of the nation? That he should set the standard we, the subjects, should look to for guidance in how to live our lives?
 

Burnthings

Member
It didn't come from Trump himself, it came from his campaign committee. It was meant to be tongue-and-cheek. Far be it for you libs to have any sense of humor... well, except for when you're calling the president a 'motherf###er'.
That's actually a fair point.
 

PsyOps

Pixelated
Do you believe the president is, or should be, the moral leader of the nation? That he should set the standard we, the subjects, should look to for guidance in how to live our lives?
First you have to define what's considered 'moral'.

I admired Obama for his apparent dedication to his family. He was well-spoken. But I considered his policies to be immoral. I loathed his politics. I would never look towards him as some standard for my morality.

I admire Trump for his transparency and his policies as president. I find his in-your-face approach kind of refreshing and entertaining, because I get that most of it is meant to be trolling snark meant to illicit a response from his detractors. But his extra-marital behavior is bothersome to me.

I have no reason to look toward our elected SERVANTS (not leaders) for my moral direction. I look toward them to do what I elected them to do. That's it! I expect them to have morals in their lives where they act in honesty, have upstanding family lives, and treat everyone with care and respect. I expect them to look towards the people for their morality, not the other way around.
 

This_person

Well-Known Member
I have no reason to look toward our elected SERVANTS (not leaders) for my moral direction. I look toward them to do what I elected them to do. That's it! I expect them to have morals in their lives where they act in honesty, have upstanding family lives, and treat everyone with care and respect. I expect them to look towards the people for their morality, not the other way around.
This response is essentially what I was going to say to Burnie, because I anticipated an answer from him (clearly, I was wrong to do so).

Much of the left looks to politicians to be our moral leaders (April Ryan said exactly that yesterday on CNN). I do not. Any thinking, reasonable individual would not. But, many do. They do not see the politicians as employees doing a job of handling the day-in, day-out maintenance of the things which the Constitution (in the case of federal politicians) authorizes them to do. They see politicians as "leaders" of us, in direct violation of the founding American spirit, the constitution, and common sense.

Further, they see government as our religious institution to which we should all bow.

Your response WRT both Obama and Trump are spot on, in my humble opinion, and your final paragraph is the point I was trying to make.
 

nutz

Well-Known Member
Meanwhile don't be embarrassed, masturbation is healthy outlet for raging hormones in pubescent teens. However it is recommended that you do it to yourself not others.
Why do you hate gays? Or is it whores? Maybe both? 😕
 

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
Do you believe the president is, or should be, the moral leader of the nation? That he should set the standard we, the subjects, should look to for guidance in how to live our lives?
You know - I used to.
I learned later about Presidents like Kennedy and Johnson. About Nixon and his not too veiled anti-Semitism. And Carter's.
Then we had people like Marion Barry.

I think Clinton really was the last straw. At first I was just disgusted at the dismissiveness of the Democrats.
Eventually I relinquished the idea of a leader being a moral leader. It became clear enough that it was sufficient that they could at least DO THE JOB we sent them to do. For all of Carter's much vaunted morality (at least, during his campaign) he was actually utterly ineffective as a leader.

I came to realize a basic axiom of politics and as an extension - my own workplace. And that is, you always want your immediate supervisor to be your friend and mentor - but you want the man at the top to be ruthless and effective. You don't want your supervisor - or whomever is immediately above you - to be tough, mean and - maybe even immoral, because sometimes, they'll be your confidant. But the man at the top is fighting for your survival and prosperity. Your supervisor may let you keep your job, but the BIG boss is protecting ALL your asses.

When it's the PRESIDENT - I feel even more so, because if they do a lousy job, unlike the company president, we can FIRE him. Vote him out. DO the job we sent you to do or that's it. Do a great job and you can do it however you like.

Now - that said - yeah, I don't want my President to be a Boris Yeltsin or Rob Ford (the drunk mayor of Toronto who died a few years ago).
That's embarassing. I don't MIND if he's a Patton - foul-mouthed, rude, undiplomatic - because as vulgar as Patton was, he won battles and our enemies FEARED him.
 

Kyle

Just being a fly in the ointment...
PREMO Member
I don't MIND if he's a Patton - foul-mouthed, rude, undiplomatic - because as vulgar as Patton was, he won battles and our enemies FEARED him.
Truman and Johnson just came to mind.
 

This_person

Well-Known Member
You know - I used to.
I learned later about Presidents like Kennedy and Johnson. About Nixon and his not too veiled anti-Semitism. And Carter's.
Then we had people like Marion Barry.

I think Clinton really was the last straw. At first I was just disgusted at the dismissiveness of the Democrats.
Eventually I relinquished the idea of a leader being a moral leader. It became clear enough that it was sufficient that they could at least DO THE JOB we sent them to do. For all of Carter's much vaunted morality (at least, during his campaign) he was actually utterly ineffective as a leader.

I came to realize a basic axiom of politics and as an extension - my own workplace. And that is, you always want your immediate supervisor to be your friend and mentor - but you want the man at the top to be ruthless and effective. You don't want your supervisor - or whomever is immediately above you - to be tough, mean and - maybe even immoral, because sometimes, they'll be your confidant. But the man at the top is fighting for your survival and prosperity. Your supervisor may let you keep your job, but the BIG boss is protecting ALL your asses.

When it's the PRESIDENT - I feel even more so, because if they do a lousy job, unlike the company president, we can FIRE him. Vote him out. DO the job we sent you to do or that's it. Do a great job and you can do it however you like.

Now - that said - yeah, I don't want my President to be a Boris Yeltsin or Rob Ford (the drunk mayor of Toronto who died a few years ago).
That's embarassing. I don't MIND if he's a Patton - foul-mouthed, rude, undiplomatic - because as vulgar as Patton was, he won battles and our enemies FEARED him.
Carter probably would have peaked in effectiveness as a Sec State - so long as there was a Mattis as Sec Def.

The analogy to a workplace is very good, in my opinion. Just as good would be YOU as that company president. You want the guys you employee to do their job. You don't really care if Alice is cheating on her husband if it doesn't impact her ability to perform her work. If Bobby is stealing (whether it's from the company or the local grocery store, doesn't really matter) you really can't trust he's doing the job, so you'll have to let him go. Kris has a foul mouth, but Kris wasn't hired to talk pretty, so you really don't care.

My point is that it is WE who have to be the combination of ruthless and effective as employers, looking out for the whole country and not just our own personal interests. It matters to me that the TSA is conducting warrantless search and seizure not because I intend to violate it, but because it is not good for our nation to find those things a "norm" and become complacent with a loss of our liberty. Even if I never fly, it's important.

See my point?
 

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
It matters to me that the TSA is conducting warrantless search and seizure not because I intend to violate it, but because it is not good for our nation to find those things a "norm" and become complacent with a loss of our liberty. Even if I never fly, it's important.
I've had any number of people - liberals, mostly - who think it is strange that I vigorous defend the right to own a gun and bear arms - even though I don't own a gun, nor have I ever owned one. It is as you say, if the government can break its agreement not to violate our God-given rights in one instance, there's no preventing them from going further.
 
Top