Who wrote this?

[Pete F.]

“A president whose character manifests itself in patterns of reckless personal conduct, deceit, abuse of power, and contempt for the rule of law cannot be a good president”
“In a self-governing and law-abiding nation, we must never allow ourselves to be lulled into passive disgust or indifference, the civic equivalent of a shrug of the shoulders, We must never lose our sense, when appropriate, of outrage.”

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

“A president whose character manifests itself in patterns of reckless personal conduct, deceit, abuse of power, and contempt for the rule of law cannot be a good president”
“In a self-governing and law-abiding nation, we must never allow ourselves to be lulled into passive disgust or indifference, the civic equivalent of a shrug of the shoulders, We must never lose our sense, when appropriate, of outrage.”

"“A president whose character manifests itself in patterns of reckless personal conduct, deceit, abuse of power, and contempt for the rule of law cannot be a good president”

The hell he can't. Bill Clinton was a good president. He was such a sleaze, that LAWYERS decided even he was beneath them, and they disbarred him. But he made the country better.

Right or wrong?

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

The hell he can't. Bill Clinton was a good president. He was such a sleaze, that LAWYERS decided even he was beneath them, and they disbarred him. But he made the country better.

Right or wrong?

Clinton had infidelity issues for sure but I don’t think he did much otherwise as president to qualify as a sleeze.

Pretty sure he wasn’t actually disbarred either.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[nightfighter]

Woodrow Wilson was no peach.....

[spence]

Originally Posted by nightfighter

Woodrow Wilson was no peach.....

Great president though on many fronts.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[nightfighter]

Originally Posted by spence

Great president though on many fronts.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

He got J Edgar Hoover on his path, beginning with he Alien Enemy Bureau. Then there was George Creel working his dirty deeds in the Committee on Public Information. And then there was the misuse of power through the Espionage Act of 1917 and the Sedition Act of 1918. None of that would fly in today's world of the internet and social media. Wilson had a little known, seldom recognized nasty dark side....

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Clinton had infidelity issues for sure but I don’t think he did much otherwise as president to qualify as a sleeze.

Pretty sure he wasn’t actually disbarred either.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

lying under oath, nah that's no biggie...

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

lying under oath, nah that's no biggie...

It’s not good but when you’re trying to squirrel your way out of an improper affair I can see it. Not a ringing character endorsement but I’m not sure it qualifies as sleeze.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

It’s not good but when you’re trying to squirrel your way out of an improper affair I can see it. Not a ringing character endorsement but I’m not sure it qualifies as sleeze.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So being serially unfaithful, serially betraying your wife and child, then using that as a political weapon by accusing the GOP of framing him, and then lying about it under oath as POTUS...doesn't rise to the level of sleezy…

okee-dokey.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Pretty sure he wasn’t actually disbarred either.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Tell that to your pals at NBC...

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/10904831/n.../#.XDJEn_ZFxhE

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Tell that to your pals at NBC...

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/10904831/n.../#.XDJEn_ZFxhE

That says suspended not disbarred...not the same thing.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

That says suspended not disbarred...not the same thing.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

POsted the wrong article...

"In 2001, following a 5-year suspension by the Arkansas bar, the United States Supreme Court disbarred Bill Clinton"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disbarment

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

“A president whose character manifests itself in patterns of reckless personal conduct, deceit, abuse of power, and contempt for the rule of law cannot be a good president”
“In a self-governing and law-abiding nation, we must never allow ourselves to be lulled into passive disgust or indifference, the civic equivalent of a shrug of the shoulders, We must never lose our sense, when appropriate, of outrage.”

Someone who has been accused of being a right wing hack and who was just another authoritarian Hitler type.

[PaulS]

Not a chance in hell President Trump could write that.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Not a chance in hell President Trump could write that.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Agreed, WAY too elegant for him.

[Nebe]

mittens.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Slipknot]

Bill Bennett said that

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Slipknot

Bill Bennett said that

Winner
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Winner
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Exactly, a Progresive's version of an authoritarian right wing hack.

[Sea Dangles]

Why bother Jim. This argument loses credibility because it requires honesty on the part of some people whom are truly offended by the concept of such a thing. This is where Spence dances while you pull strings. But he is giggling....🤡
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

“A president whose character manifests itself in patterns of reckless personal conduct, deceit, abuse of power, and contempt for the rule of law cannot be a good president”
“In a self-governing and law-abiding nation, we must never allow ourselves to be lulled into passive disgust or indifference, the civic equivalent of a shrug of the shoulders, We must never lose our sense, when appropriate, of outrage.”

This could easily have been the Mainstream Media in 2012 while telling us how were all gonna die if Mitt Binders or something.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

Quote:

Originally Posted by nightfighter He got J Edgar Hoover on his path, beginning with he Alien Enemy Bureau. Then there was George Creel working his dirty deeds in the Committee on Public Information. And then there was the misuse of power through the Espionage Act of 1917 and the Sedition Act of 1918. None of that would fly in today's world of the internet and social media. Wilson had a little known, seldom recognized nasty dark side....


In context of WW1 I’m not sure some of this stuff is insidious as you make it sound. I do remember Wilson having some race issues though.

Are you saying that Trump has misused power more than or equal to the 1918 Alien and Sedition Act? Are you saying that Trump has abused the first Amendment more than or equal to the passing of that act? I know that you and wdmso and PeteF rail on Trump's tweets and his attempted barring of a journalist from his press conference, but no legislation was passed in either case nor was it asked for by Trump. Nor was the First Amendment in any danger.

And you remember Wilson having SOME race issues? He was an out and out blatant racist. He supported the KKK in his praise of the movie Birth of a Nation which glorified the KKK. There was an actual and verified Klan resurgence after that. He segregated several agencies of the Federal Government. He stated that the negro race was inferior. Those just for starters.

Trump, who Dems love to call a racist has not done anything close to the things Wilson did.

And, according to you, Wilson was an "extremist." He was one of the founders of the Progressive movement who claimed the Constitution was outdated and an impediment to government doing what he considered needed to be done. When I wrote a post about the early Progressives and their desire to remove constitutional impediments to what they considered should be unfettered government, you accused me of citing extremists (Wilson, et al) to support my "extremist" views.

So four of the biggest things you, and other Trump haters, like to accuse Trump of--racism, extremism, anti-free speech, and destruction of the Constitution--are actual Wilsonian traits which surpass anything, by a long shot, that Trump has done. Yet you give Wilson a pass with nary a slap on the wrist, and almost daily pile on Trump

Your a sly chameleon that situationally changes its spots. That's why I say you're a slick con artist. Even more so than Trump who's supposed con is an open book.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Are you saying that Trump has misused power more than or equal to the 1918 Alien and Sedition Act? Are you saying that Trump has abused the first Amendment more than or equal to the passing of that act? I know that you and wdmso and PeteF rail on Trump's tweets and his attempted barring of a journalist from his press conference, but no legislation was passed in either case nor was it asked for by Trump. Nor was the First Amendment in any danger.

And you remember Wilson having SOME race issues? He was an out and out blatant racist. He supported the KKK in his praise of the movie Birth of a Nation which glorified the KKK. There was an actual and verified Klan resurgence after that. He segregated several agencies of the Federal Government. He stated that the negro race was inferior. Those just for starters.

Trump, who Dems love to call a racist has not done anything close to the things Wilson did.

And, according to you, Wilson was an "extremist." He was one of the founders of the Progressive movement who claimed the Constitution was outdated and an impediment to government doing what he considered needed to be done. When I wrote a post about the early Progressives and their desire to remove constitutional impediments to what they considered should be unfettered government, you accused me of citing extremists (Wilson, et al) to support my "extremist" views.

So four of the biggest things you, and other Trump haters, like to accuse Trump of--racism, extremism, anti-free speech, and destruction of the Constitution--are actual Wilsonian traits which surpass anything, by a long shot, that Trump has done. Yet you give Wilson a pass with nary a slap on the wrist, and almost daily pile on Trump

Your a sly chameleon that situationally changes its spots. That's why I say you're a slick con artist. Even more so than Trump who's supposed con is an open book.

What about Wilson, Trump’s not as bad as a president 100 years ago?
Really
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

What about Wilson, Trump’s not as bad as a president 100 years ago?
Really
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Wilson got us into one of the most horrific wars in history, and he was far worse than Trump in those horrid 4 items I mentioned, and that you and others try to brand Trump with.

Yeah, really.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Wilson got us into one of the most horrific wars in history, and he was far worse than Trump in those horrid 4 items I mentioned, and that you and others try to brand Trump with.

Yeah, really.

After the Germans started torpedoing american shipping and asked Mexico to ally with them against the US he asked Congress to declare war.
I assume you have been listening to Glen Beck rant about Wilson.
Several other reasons I would think you would try and brand Wilson as bad along with Roosevelt and Taft.
They passed measures to regulate workplaces, food and drugs. They barred child labor and mandated school attendance. And they won antitrust laws to break up corporate monopolies. According to Roosevelt, corporations "should be so supervised and so regulated that they shall act for the interest of the community as a whole."

But Roosevelt used a light touch in his regulation of corporations, which he called "indispensable instruments of our modern civilization." By contrast, Wilson pledged to use the newly empowered federal state to break up large companies and restore the economic competition of an earlier age. Defeating TR and Taft in 1912, Wilson immediately cut tariffs on imported goods, which he said benefited big businesses at the expense of consumers. He pushed through the Clayton Antitrust Act, which blocked price-fixing and prevented the same people from sitting on the boards of competing companies. And he instituted the Federal Trade Commission, which investigates unfair business practices.

Wilson also tackled the nation's banking system, which had left American investors at the mercy of unscrupulous financiers and the unpredictable ups and downs of the economy. His answer was the Federal Reserve, which continues to regulate the national money supply and interest rates in order to cushion us against the worst blows of the business cycle. And he nominated Louis Brandeis—the nation’s leading champion of worker protections—for the Supreme Court.
Unlike Trump he certainly was not the United State's Yeltsin.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

After the Germans started torpedoing american shipping and asked Mexico to ally with them against the US he asked Congress to declare war.

The Germans didn't torpedo American shipping just for the heck of it, or to start a war with America. In the first place, Britain, with a superior navy, had emplaced a blockade against shipping goods into Germany (which included American ships carrying vital cargo to Germany). So the Germans retaliated with, since they didn't have as powerful a navy as the British, submarines to blockade goods entering allied waters. They warned that any ships carrying vital goods would be sunk.

If the Germans had allowed enough cargo bearing ships to cross the blockade, while they themselves were being blockaded, they would severely damage any chance to win the war. The US government should have warned American vessels to stay clear of the blockade, but economic losses to American companies overrode the danger.

Germany did not want the US to enter the war against them, for obvious reasons. But there were strong reasons that such might be the case. The US had strong historical and cultural ties to Britain. There was a strong sentiment pushing for an "Atlanticist" foreign policy here that argued for international policy based on anglophile views and which campaigned for the US intervention in the war on the side of the Allied forces.

And there were strong economic reasons such as highly influential American businessmen who desired an Allied victory. Big bankers like J.P. Morgan helped finance British and French war efforts with $3 billion in loans and bond purchases. If the Allies lost, they probably wouldn’t be able to repay their debt to their US lenders. Many businessmen therefore wanted US intervention in the war on the side of the Allied forces.

Germany sought Mexico's help only IF the US entered the war against them. There was no intention, otherwise, of starting a war with the US.

I assume you have been listening to Glen Beck rant about Wilson.
Several other reasons I would think you would try and brand Wilson as bad along with Roosevelt and Taft.

I assume you have been listening to Glen Beck since you seem to know what he ranted. I don't know because I don't listen to him.

They passed measures to regulate workplaces, food and drugs. They barred child labor and mandated school attendance. And they won antitrust laws to break up corporate monopolies. According to Roosevelt, corporations "should be so supervised and so regulated that they shall act for the interest of the community as a whole."

But Roosevelt used a light touch in his regulation of corporations, which he called "indispensable instruments of our modern civilization."

I am not discussing Teddy Roosevelt or Taft here. That would be another thread. I compared Wilson to Trump on values that you skewer Trump on.

By contrast, Wilson pledged to use the newly empowered federal state

There it is . . . and you express it so admiringly . . . the newly empowered federal state! Does that run a tingle up your leg?

to break up large companies and restore the economic competition of an earlier age.

That's laughable. Competition is what leads to the growth of companies. The only way to stop uneven growth is to regulate against individual competence and superior ability, to enforce some sort of supposed equality.

Defeating TR and Taft in 1912, Wilson immediately cut tariffs on imported goods, which he said benefited big businesses at the expense of consumers.

Cutting tariffs is good, especially if that is reciprocated. When it isn't, in the long run, it can lead to what we face today, the siphoning of our wealth to other countries and the diminishing of our so-called middle class. And if he broke up the big companies, why was he worried about tariffs benefitting them?

He pushed through the Clayton Antitrust Act, which blocked price-fixing and prevented the same people from sitting on the boards of competing companies. And he instituted the Federal Trade Commission, which investigates unfair business practices.

And so now we have wage fixing (minimum wage, the other side of the price fixing coin) the growth of a plethora of commissions and agencies where "the same people" that are supposed to be regulated are sitting on the boards. Good move. Not to mention, the vast majority of federal regulatory agencies are not constitutional, except Progressive judges (like Justice Brandeis) "interpreted" them so.

Wilson also tackled the nation's banking system, which had left American investors at the mercy of unscrupulous financiers and the unpredictable ups and downs of the economy. His answer was the Federal Reserve,

Which puts us in the hands of a smaller, monopolized, group of financiers who have manipulated the entire nation into unsustainable debt, most of which is owed to them. Another good job.

which continues to regulate the national money supply and interest rates in order to cushion us against the worst blows of the business cycle.

Apparently the blows keep coming, and the Federal Reserve "cushions" us by lending us more money (magically printed out of thin air at no cost to the Fed), the sum of which is never reduced but constantly grows, and only the interest, which also grows, is ever made payments to. Funny how that works and the Fed financiers get richer and more powerful and have a huge guaranteed income ranging into forever.

And he nominated Louis Brandeis—the nation’s leading champion of worker protections—for the Supreme Court.

Brandeis was one of our early Progressives, and was a completely natural selection for Wilson as their Progressive views aligned pretty well, But Wilson was probably more in favor of government power than Brandeis.

But he was definitely of the same mind as Wilson in seeing the Constitution as some evolving platform from which to create law and precedent based on social needs (his opinion, of course, of what society needs) rather than a structure on which government is based and performs. The old fashioned checks and balances nonsense did not stand in his way of "interpretation." Ergo he could be a leading champion of that nice phrase "worker protections" (whatever he thought that was supposed to be) instead of a leading champion of constitution based government.


Unlike Trump he certainly was not the United State's Yeltsin.

There is only one Yeltsin. And only one Trump. Wilson, on the other hand, was followed by other big and little Wilson's who all helped us get into our post constitutional flux of Post Modern, Social Marxist, moral relativist, fragmented, atomized society of multiple genders, federal tit feeding, social justice warrior, "intellectual" and authoritarian group think that must forever go into more debt to sustain itself.

Oh, and that war that Wilson got us into, it's result and resolution was the reason for the next big war, which FDR got us into. And that war was the means by which Stalin was able to spread his communist control over half of Europe and most of Asia.

All good stuff. Maybe Trump can Trump that with some new worldwide destruction of humanity's quest for freedom.

And, despite your attempt at wandering away from my comparison, it still stands that Wilson was far more a racist, extremist, anti-free speecher and destroyer of the Constitution than Trump is.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

What about Wilson, Trump’s not as bad as a president 100 years ago?
Really
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I don’t think you can really compare racist behavior today vs 100 years ago, as a people we’ve evolved quite a bit.

Also, I think the KKK and Birth of a Nation stuff isn’t even true, not that he didn’t have other race issues even for the time.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

I don’t think you can really compare racist behavior today vs 100 years ago, as a people we’ve evolved quite a bit.

Also, I think the KKK and Birth of a Nation stuff isn’t even true, not that he didn’t have other race issues even for the time.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Your usual gob of erroneous puffery.