Trump Appoints Anti-Marijuana Senator Jeff Sessions for Attorney General

[BabyFacedFinster]

Scary, scary , scary. He is not unifying the country, he is dividing it even more. Other countries look at this charade we call a federal government and it makes us look like a joke. We elected PT Barnum as our president.

And I also fear the lack of transparency with the media. Whether you like the tactics of the media or not, this is the way that we all learn what is going on in our government.

Without better communication then it starts looking like a dictatorship. All I get to see and know is that someone comes to his doorstep at his gigantic mansion in NJ. The King opens the door, shakes the hand, and everyone retreats into the secret palace. Then the door opens, another handshake, and then the King closes the door again. No newsbrief, no nothing. Peasants like us now need to know our place.

BTW, if you want to laugh and take a break . Go to youtube and search the "Cartoon Donald Trump" clips from the Steven Colbert show. Hilarious!

 

[lwien]

The major problem with all this shit that Trump has been coming down with during his campaign and currently is that people will begin to accept this crap as the norm but from my point of view, we should NEVER accept this stuff..............NEVER.

He's talking about banning certain news outlets from the briefing room because they've given him a hard time. Wake up Trump. It's the presses job to give ALL presidents a tough time and hold them accountable for their actions. There has ALWAYS been friction between the executive office and the press. Deal with it. It's supposed to be that way. If no one is allowed to challenge you than you have carte blanche to run amok and that we should NEVER allow to happen.

Edit: Damn, forgot what this thread was supposed to be about. The problem is that in the whole scheme of things, the Sessions appointment in regards to the legalization of cannabis is small potatoes in comparison to the other stuff that's going down.

 

[BabyFacedFinster]

Why do I just feel like Sessions is biding his time, waiting for January to come, rolling his hands over his knuckles and saying "Excellent!" in a sinister Mr. Burns from the Simpsons sort of way.

 

[grokit]

They all are, and this has all happened before

When reagan became president in a similar wave of 'make america great again' national pride; by the end of his first term every single one of his cabinet members had been indicted for federal crimes.

A decade or so after, we got bush-cheney for eight more years of the same, because we never learn. These guys seem determined to make the bush-cheney administration look like a bunch of pansies.

 

[Tranquility]

He has given us no reason to calm down; quite the opposite. It is inappropriate and hypocritical for anyone who supports Trump or excuses those who do to act like the anger started when Trump won the contest. He ran a campaign full of fear and hate that has been unique in our time. Trump lit these fires deliberately and continues to fan them. Put the blame where it belongs: on Trump and those gleefully riding the wave of hate he's ushering into the mainstream again.

Let us consider, for a moment, which side seems more hateful here.

Not some theoretical thing the news media tells us about how we should feel, but the actual words and thoughts of people we have actual examples of--the posts here.

Shall we compare and contrast the words used? Not just the words that refer to the target (Trump or Clinton), but also the words that refer to supporters? If we do, I think we will find the claim of hatred might be considered projection and not an accurate description of the other side.

 

[KimDracula]

Let us consider, for a moment, which side seems more hateful here.

Not some theoretical thing the news media tells us about how we should feel, but the actual words and thoughts of people we have actual examples of--the posts here.

Shall we compare and contrast the words used? Not just the words that refer to the target (Trump or Clinton), but also the words that refer to supporters? If we do, I think we will find the claim of hatred might be considered projection and not an accurate description of the other side.

Nonsense.

Pointing out and condemning small-minded hate and having contempt for those that support it is not the same thing as being hateful and bigoted. I think this is obvious.

It shouldn't be so easy to forget all the awful things this man said. It's not normal that white supremacists flock to him (and get appointed to his cabinet). It also shouldn't be so easy to draw instant false equivalencies. Trump apologists seem to have nothing else to offer.

 

[Tranquility]

Nonsense.

Pointing out and condemning small-minded hate and having contempt for those that support it is not the same thing as being hateful and bigoted. I think this is obvious.

It shouldn't be so easy to forget all the awful things this man said. It's not normal that white supremacists flock to him (and get appointed to his cabinet). It also shouldn't be so easy to draw instant false equivalencies. Trump apologists seem to have nothing else to offer.

Haters always have a reason for their hate.

As Krauthammer wrote well over a decade ago, Conservatives think liberals are stupid. Liberals think conservatives are evil.

 

[lwien]

Haters always have a reason for their hate.

As Krauthammer wrote well over a decade ago, Conservatives think liberals are stupid. Liberals think conservatives are evil.

Krauthammer is wrong. Liberals think that conservatives are evil AND stupid.

The problem with this line of thinking, of course, is painting a large group of people with a very broad brush. It just doesn't work.

 

[Tranquility]

Krauthammer is wrong. Liberals think that conservatives are evil AND stupid.

Fair enough.

The problem with this line of thinking, of course, is painting a large group of people with a very broad brush. It just doesn't work.

It might just work here.

Not all are representative of a spot on the right-left divide. But, there seems no chance to discuss any issue without some immediately turning up the dial to 11. When every issue seems to require an insult to those who differ, maybe it is time to push back the keyboard and take a breath rather than come up with justifications.

(Funny thing is, nothing but the "fair enough" is really directed at you. Even though we seem fairly far apart on many political issues, you and I seem to be able to discuss things without top-level insults. Why is that?)

 

[lwien]

(Funny thing is, nothing but the "fair enough" is really directed at you. Even though we seem fairly far apart on many political issues, you and I seem to be able to discuss things without top-level insults. Why is that?)

'Cause we're old and realize that we need to save our energy for the battles that can REALLY make a difference.

The other thing, of course, is that if I ever posted up how I REALLY feel at times, I'd get banned. (visions of @momofthegoons standing over me with a whip kinda keeps me in line.....)

 

[t-dub]

The other thing, of course, is that if I ever posted up how I REALLY feel at times, I'd get banned. (visions of @momofthegoons standing over me with a whip kinda keeps me in line.....)

A while back I was issued a WWMD (what would mom do) bracelet that I must wear at all times when logged onto FC . . .

 

[Tranquility]

'Cause we're old and realize that we need to save our energy for the battles that can REALLY make a difference.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...lously-escapes-from-five-lions-because-of-in/

Five lions let a buffalo get away because they are too busy fighting each other at Mala Mala Private Game Reserve in South Africa.​

 

[lwien]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...lously-escapes-from-five-lions-because-of-in/

Five lions let a buffalo get away because they are too busy fighting each other at Mala Mala Private Game Reserve in South Africa.​

Ya gotta wonder after all the dust settled, which lion or lioness did one of these...............

 

[CuckFumbustion]

They all are, and this has all happened before

When reagan became president in a similar wave of 'make america great again' national pride; by the end of his first term every single one of his cabinet members had been indicted for federal crimes.

A decade or so after, we got bush-cheney for eight more years of the same, because we never learn. These guys seem determined to make the bush-cheney administration look like a bunch of pansies.

(Sorry arrived late to the thread. I posted an article about this issue in Cannibus news.) Anyway back to your point. Spot on about your Reagan Cabinet being indicted. And I say to that alos, why wait? Go to the swamp and start turning over rocks. At least we can keep them on the ropes for four years. Trump is eager to prosecute and sue which already makes him a target. If Romney is Sec of state, that makes him fourth in line. He seems the most rational of the ship of fools. Or am I wrong about that?

I hate to go after a presidential elect. It sets another bad precedent for potential candidates for president. But how many of these appointees and Jeff Sessions need Senate confirmation?
Remember the delays occuring of Obama's apointee's? We need to at least vet them thru the process.
Dems: No Sail Through Senate Confirmation For Sessions Like Clinton And Kerry Had

 

[Baron23]

yogoshio said: ↑
I still am dumbfounded how anyone could say Trump won. Hilary lost.

Totally agree with this.

Wow, mate. You sure took that out of context. Perhaps we should include the rest of yogshio's post:

And the idea that just because someone prefers Trumps sack of lies over Hilary's sack of corruption means they are wanting to ride a wave of hate. More like they wanted off the wave of blatant political corruption.

Underlining added by me.

So back the topic of the nomination for Atty General, I'm not particularly enamored of Jeff Sessions, but its always worth looking at both sides of the debate, yeah?

Democrats, the party who cried racist


This is an interesting read IMO, particularly the part about Sessions.

Pointing out and condemning small-minded hate and having contempt for those that support it is not the same thing as being hateful and bigoted. I think this is obvious.

Ah yes....that everlasting feature of American discourse...rampant self-righteousness...seems to be alive and well on all sides of this debate. That level of brick-thick self-certainty must be very comforting even if also blinding. Cheers

 

[lwien]

Wow, mate. You sure took that out of context. Perhaps we should include the rest of yogshio's post:

I should NOT include the rest of @yogoshio 's post. And you are correct. I did take it out of context and the reason is that while there are some posts that I may agree with or disagree with in their totality, there are also segments of posts that I may agree with or disagree with and so yes, if I like or dislike what someone is saying, I will be VERY specific as to what it is that I either agree with or disagree with.

Specifically to this quote, I ALWAYS thought since Trump got elected that he didn't win but rather that she lost and I've felt that way wayyyyyyy before @yogoshio posted that up so this was a prime opportunity for me to state that fact.

 

[Baron23]

I should NOT include the rest of @yogoshio 's post. And you are correct. I did take it out of context and the reason is that while there are some posts that I may agree with or disagree with in their totality, there are also segments of posts that I may agree with or disagree with and so yes, if I like or dislike what someone is saying, I will be VERY specific as to what it is that I either agree with or disagree with.

Specifically to this quote, I ALWAYS thought since Trump got elected that he didn't win but rather that she lost and I've felt that way wayyyyyyy before @yogoshio posted that up so this was a prime opportunity for me to state that fact.

You certainly may do as you wish. But by taking it out of context you changed the direction of his intended meaning and by using him a source of the quotation you imply that he agrees with your changes. I don't that was true. But carry on.

 

[Deleted Member 1643]

Donald Trump’s ‘Monster’s Ball’

Call to action from Charles M. Blow at the NY Times. Sessions is among the monsters discussed. An excellent issue overall, detailing the US descent into plutocracy. Includes a lead article on turning commerce over to billionaire speculators and helpful flow charts of known conflicts of interest.

 

[grokit]

The "normalization" continues...

Calling Jeff Sessions “racist” conveniently ignores the work he’s done for Alabama’s black community
Lowndes County, Alabama needed help, and Sessions came through. Liberal critics need to give him credit

Calling Jeff Sessions "racist" conveniently ignores the work he's done for Alabama's black community
Jeff Sessions (Credit: Getty/Mark Wilson)

"If liberals like to claim they don’t think in simple black-white terms, perhaps they would consider the important work Sessions has done for the past decade and a half with Bob Woodson, an African-American community leader awarded the MacArthur Fellowship (commonly known as a “Genius Grant”) and the Presidential Medal of Freedom by George W. Bush."

more:
http://www.salon.com/2016/12/01/cal...e-work-hes-done-for-alabamas-black-community/

 

[Deleted Member 1643]

This seems like a new twist...

Good case for Sessions helping residents of Lowndes County a few times over the fifteen years.

Some more fuel for the fire: in the mid nineties led a (losing) battle against a decision that inequitable funding of Alabama schools was unconstitutional.

Jeff Sessions’ Other Civil Rights Problem

"Alabama’s public schools, still underfunded, still separate and unequal, ranked near the bottom nationally, stand as one of Jeff Sessions’ most enduring legacies. It’s a troubling mark on the record of the man who is to be nominated to oversee the Department of Justice, the federal agency responsible for upholding America’s civil rights laws."

 

[grokit]

Good case for Session helping residents of Lowndes County a few times over the past decade.

Some more fuel for the fire: in the mid nineties led a (losing) battle against a decision that inequitable funding of Alabama schools was unconstitutional.

Jeff Sessions’ Other Civil Rights Problem

"Alabama’s public schools, still underfunded, still separate and unequal, ranked near the bottom nationally, stand as one of Jeff Sessions’ most enduring legacies. It’s a troubling mark on the record of the man who is to be nominated to oversee the Department of Justice, the federal agency responsible for upholding America’s civil rights laws."

The article I posted just above is an example of how our supposedly more-liberal media outlets are trying to "whitewash" trump's nominations, which is part of their effort to "normalize" the upcoming chaos.

 

[Deleted Member 1643]

The article I posted just above is an example of how our supposedly more-liberal media outlets are trying to "whitewash" trump's nominations, which is part of their effort to "normalize" the upcoming chaos.

Agree - these alleged good deeds hardly tip the scale.

 

[KimDracula]

Why are those in this thread that lean Conservative unable to countenance criticisms of Trump based on the man's own words, campaign, and appointments? The response is always simply to pivot to Clinton (which is always a lazy assumption that she is corrupt) or to call me self-righteous. The election is over. Attacking Clinton should no longer serve as a proxy for a substantive defense of Trump.

I don't understand this instinct. I would understand if I were attacking someone of substance who hadn't overtly alienated nearly every demographic cohort there is while lying with nearly every breath. If I were leveling the same kind of severe attacks against someone more typically Republican like Romney, for example, the knee-jerk responses would make sense because Romney didn't talk the same way. Paul Ryan is a walking collection of Conservative philosophies that I hate but he also isn't like Trump. It's weird that some of you can't see the difference.

Demagoguery is about appealing to people's worst nature, usually with healthy doses of fear and xenophobia. You encourage the fear people are wont to feel and give them others to blame. People don't have to be hateful people through and through to fall victim to it. Trump voters aren't evil people. We all have the potential to be manipulated in this way especially if we refuse to believe it can happen.

Regarding the normalization of Trump, here's an interesting take on it if anyone is interested. It's about the best way to combat authoritarian populists:

http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/11/30/13767174/case-for-normalizing-trump

 

[turk]

...yeah...funny that.

 

[CalyxSmokr]

The problem of the imperial presidency is well known. One of the overriding complaints of the Obama administration are the number and effect of executive orders and other bureaucratic manipulations that seem to change the nature of the statutes they address. Sometimes, for nothing more than what appears to be political advantage. Rather than complaining Trump has that potential, why don't we work on trying to reduce it in all presidents? The Republicans have always at least claimed to dislike the executive overreach so they should go along with reform and the Democrats should love to craft reform that could limit Trump; what's not to like?

The terror over Trump gets to the fragility of some progressive initiatives and the power of one man to break or support them. That's the problem when we become a country no longer ruled by law but by men. Certainly, the power of the government to intrude into our lives has reached levels talked about in science fiction novels long ago. Most of those were dystopian. That is why Constitutional process is imperative. The Founding Fathers knew what men's hearts hold. They tried to devise a system to check such impulse. If it cannot now, then it is WE who have failed by allowing nonsense when those in power doing the nonsense were doing it for something we liked.

I get the fact a side won that seems antithetical to many progressive beliefs and that causes hurt. That hurt sometimes brings out the pejoratives. It hurts worse that they won real good too. I think we will find it is the Congress that is the more socially conservative of the branches that results. Trump has interacted with those on all sides of the political spectrum through his life in both a personal and professional way. He has expressed more liberal and progressive positions, at least in his past, than any Republican president in history. Is the Trump administration going to be a buddy to the left? No. But I don't think it will be hard to bring him to the middle or more left position he probably already believes on many issues--even with Congressional Republicans trying to pull him right.

As to the final joke, Trump seems to have lived his life in a way that fully accepts and interacts with all sorts of people. I have never heard an accusation that deserved more than a cursory inspection he has discriminated against anyone because he is gay. The socially conservative Republicans are already staking out the political fight on marriage rights as Trump has said the issue has been decided. He opened up his courses when others discriminated against those who were gay. He may be many things; a lot of them bad. To accuse him of being anti-gay or not knowledgeable about issues important to Americans who are gay seems more propaganda than reality.

Ultimately Trump will be busy making deals for himself and distracted with nonsense. The people doing the work for him are anti-pot zealots. To think Trump will bring them to heel seems wildly optimistic. All they have to do is enforce the federal law on the books. Law enforcement, private prisons, and alcohol lobbies will be happy to grease the skids.