Minnesota Network for Progressive Action

About Comments
The mnpACT! blog welcomes all comments from visitors, which are immediately posted, but we also filter for spammers:
  • No active URLs or web links are allowed (use www.yourweb.com).
  • No drug or pharma- ceutical names are allowed.
  • Your comment "Name" must be one word with no spaces and cannot be an email address.
You should also note that a few IP addresses and homepage URLs have been banned from posting comments because they have posted multiple spam messages.

Please be aware we monitor ALL comments and reserve the right to delete obvious spam comments.



 
Politics Blogs - Blog Top Sites

Listed on BlogShares

 
site search

Site Meter
 
  Progressive Political Blog

Progressive Politics in Minnesota, the Nation, and the World

Promises Made....

Category: Donald Trump
Posted: 05/14/18 12:29, Edited: 05/14/18 12:30

By Dave Mindeman

Promises made - promises kept?

Build the wall - not built; but if it is, the money will be paid by us.

Drug Prices - big Pharma is still happy.

Immigration - kept his promise to destroy families. There's one.

Infrastructure - Non-existent.

Keeping Jobs - Well, I'm not sure saving jobs at ZTE in China counts.

Iran Treaty - Oh, he kept that one - and we will pay for it.

Paris Treaty - Kept that one also - and the world will pay for it.

Drain the Swamp - The swamp got bigger instead, and it includes him.

Middle East Peace - Fixed it by ending all possibilities.

Foreign Trade Deficits - Anyone know what the hell he is doing?

Stock Market - Well, he is raising the price of oil.

Sue all the women accusers - They are suing him.

"Only I Can Fix It" - He broke it!




comments (0) permalink

Woe Unto The Hypocrites

Category: Donald Trump
Posted: 05/07/18 00:23

by Dave Mindeman

The evangelical mind is not really a Christian mind. No, it has become a pure political rationalization machine.

Let's take the case of Franklin Graham. Regarding Trump, his recent statements include this:

Graham actually said Trump's sex life is "nobody's business." His paying off a p** star is "nobody's business." His affair just months after his youngest son was born is "nobody's business". I don't have concern, in a sense, because these things happened many years ago - and there's such bigger problems in front of us as a nation that we need to be dealing with than other things in his life a long time ago. I think some of these things - that's for him and his wife to deal with," Graham insisted. "I don't defend those kinds of relationships he had. But the country knew the kind of person he was back then, and they still made the decision to make him the president of the United States," Graham said. "I think when the country went after President Clinton, the Republicans, that was a great mistake that should never have happened."

That last line is a feeble attempt to hide his hypocrisy. But it is hard to hide when it is in print. So, let's go back to the rod/accounts-wsj">Wall Street Journal - August 27, 1998.....

The topic of private vs. public behavior has emerged as perhaps the central moral issue raised by Bill Clinton's "improper relationship" with Monica Lewinsky. Much of America seems to have succumbed to the notion that what a person does in private has little bearing on his public actions or job performance, even if he is the president of the United States.

Last week Mr. Clinton told 70 million Americans that his adulterous actions with Ms. Lewinsky were a "private" matter "between me, the two people I love the most--my wife and our daughter--and our God."

But the God of the Bible says that what one does in private does matter. Mr. Clinton's months-long extramarital sexual behavior in the Oval Office now concerns him and the rest of the world, not just his immediate family. If he will lie to or mislead his wife and daughter, those with whom he is most intimate, what will prevent him from doing the same to the American public?

Private conduct does have public consequences. Some of Mr. Clinton's defenders present King David of the Bible, one of history's great leaders, as an example as they call on us to forgive and forget the president's moral failings. Since God pardoned David's adulterous act with Bathsheba, the reasoning goes, we should similarly forgive Mr. Clinton.

But forgiveness is not the end of David's story. Huge consequences followed immediately. The prophet Nathan confronted David with the news that while his life would be spared, the life of his child would be extinguished after just seven days on earth. Bathsheba's husband and others were killed in an attempt to cover up the illicit affair. David, who confessed his sin when confronted by Nathan (perhaps God's special prosecutor), also witnessed a bloody coup attempt by his own son, Absalom. He was never the same king.


So, Mr. Graham has decided that Clinton's transgression needed to be condemned - while Trump's behavior is, well, "nobody's business".

Evangelicals are willing to compromise themselves for the sake of political expediency. Is that a religion of consistent faith? Is that a religion that stands on principle?

Hardcore evangelicals will insist that the Bible is the inerrant word of God. But maybe except when it is uncomfortable? When it conflicts with political goals?

Evangelicals condemn liberal beliefs that we are the poor's benefactor. They condemn liberals who believe in choice - telling us we can't have it both ways. There are absolutes, they say.

Really? I guess your absolutes have some soft areas when it comes to politics. Your commandments have a left and right swing to them.

Franklin Graham and his like remind me of a passage in Matthew...

"What sorrow awaits you teachers of religious law and you Pharisees. Hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs--beautiful on the outside but filled on the inside with dead people's bones and all sorts of impurity."

Do not preach to us about our failings until you clean up the massive amount of hypocrisy that constitutes your relationship with Trump.
comments (0) permalink

The Rule Of Law

Category: Donald Trump
Posted: 05/02/18 01:46

by Dave Mindeman

Is the rule of law in jeopardy?

I really hate that this question needs to be asked but current events suggest that the threat to the rule of law is very real.

We have a portion of our country that thinks political disagreements are an argument over truth. That facts are subject to points of view. And that anything can be said without consequence.

This should be disturbing to everyone, but like everything else in this country, its right or wrongness depends on your political perspective.

We are learning how discourse can poison a society. But it isn't just rhetoric that is being destructively attacked - rather it is the very rule of law... the basis of how our government is structured.

Trump and his supporters have a united front that tells us the President cannot be guilty of anything - no matter what he says or does, his actions must be defended.

We got to this point once before with Richard Nixon in 1974 - but Nixon did not take the ultimate and dangerous course of challenging the legalities of the rule of law in that case. He resigned and allowed the political structure of this country to heal.

I do not think that President Trump is capable of that kind of very basic decency. He would rather destroy the very foundation of our democracy.

No matter what the Mueller investigation ends with, Trump will more than likely challenge it. And then what? We have a sitting President who says that their is no legal means to tell him he is wrong.

Because we are so polarized and the seats of power are controlled by just one political party, President Trump can declare right and wrong by fiat.

Since we only have a minority of representatives that still believe in a democratic republic, how can a criminal complaint or charge be rectified? What do we have left that can challenge a President who declares himself above the law?

I do not believe that we have anything to turn to. Normally, we could count on an impartial judicial system. But even that has been corrupted to the point of judges basing their decisions on party preferences.

To be sure, a challenge will be mounted to a President this out of control, but what is the remedy? It can go through the court system, but it will move to the ultimate decision at the Supreme Court. And do you have any confidence in THIS Supreme Court - or more succinctly, do you have confidence in the 5 justices that will make the decision?

The scenarios that you might decide to run through on this never end well.

Our system depends on allowing our laws to mean something. That when you do something, you get your day in court - and the most important thing about that is that you agree to submit yourself to any decision from that court.

Donald Trump seems to believe that he does not have to do that. He is moving closer to a final decision that what he thinks is best should be the final arbiter of what can and cannot be done. The nuisance of court disagreements are getting tiresome and may soon become a luxury of the past.

The evidence mounts regarding Donald Trump. He will be subject to criminal counts. But will Trump go gently into that good night?

Don't bet on it.
comments (0) permalink

Calendar

« September 2018 »
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30


Latest posts


Archive

(one year)

Categories


Comments



Links


RSS Feeds

RSS 0.91
RSS 2.0

 
 
 
Powered by
Powered by SBlog
 
Copyright © Minnesota Network for Progressive Action. All rights reserved. Legal. Privacy Policy. Sitemap.