Little boys no longer belong in politics/cowards steer clear

Violence against women and girls is a problem of pandemic proportions. At least one out of every three women around the world has been beaten, coerced into sex, or otherwise abused in her lifetime with the abuser usually someone known to her

I think it's stupid to wear guilt because someone that looks like you did a bad thing.

The second presidential debate – bloody, muddy and raucous – was just enough to save Donald Trump’s campaign from extinction, but not enough to restore his chances of winning, barring an act of God (a medical calamity) or of Putin (a cosmically incriminating WikiLeak).

That Trump crashed because of a sex-talk tape is odd. It should have been a surprise to no one. His views on women have been on open display for years. And he’d offered a dazzling array of other reasons for disqualification: habitual mendacity, pathological narcissism, profound ignorance and an astonishing dearth of basic human empathy.

To which list Trump added in the second debate, and it had nothing to do with sex. It was his threat, if elected, to put Hillary Clinton in jail.

After appointing a special prosecutor, of course. The niceties must be observed. First, a fair trial, then a proper hanging. The day after the debate at a rally in Pennsylvania, Trump responded to chants of “lock her up,” with “Lock her up is right.” Two days later, he told a rally in Lakeland, Florida, “She has to go to jail.”

Such incendiary talk is an affront to elementary democratic decency and a breach of the boundaries of American political discourse. In democracies, the electoral process is a subtle and elaborate substitute for combat, the age-old way of settling struggles for power. But that sublimation only works if there is mutual agreement to accept both the legitimacy of the result (which Trump keeps undermining with charges that the very process is “rigged”) and the boundaries of the contest.

The prize for the winner is temporary accession to limited political power, not the satisfaction of vendettas. Vladimir Putin, Hugo Chavez and a cavalcade of two-bit caudillos lock up their opponents. American leaders don’t.

One doesn’t even talk like this. It takes decades, centuries, to develop ingrained norms of political restraint and self-control. But they can be undone in short order by a demagogue feeding a vengeful populism.

This is not to say that the investigation into the Clinton emails was not itself compromised by politics. FBI director James Comey’s recommendation not to pursue charges was both troubling and puzzling. And Barack Obama very improperly tilted the scales by interjecting, while the investigation was still underway, that Clinton’s emails had not endangered national security.

But the answer is not to start a new process whose outcome is preordained. Conservatives have relentlessly, and correctly, criticized this administration for abusing its power and suborning the civil administration (e.g., the IRS). Is the Republican response to do the same?

Wasn’t presidential overreach one of the major charges against Obama by the anti-establishment GOP candidates? Wasn’t the animating spirit of the entire tea party movement the restoration of constitutional limits and restraints?

In America, we don’t persecute political opponents. Which is why we retroactively honor Gerald Ford for his pardon of Richard Nixon, for which, at the time, Ford was widely reviled. It ultimately cost him the presidency. Nixon might well have been convicted. But Ford understood that jailing a president for actions carried out in the context of his official duties would threaten the very civil nature of democratic governance.

What makes Trump’s promise to lock her up all the more alarming is that it’s not an isolated incident. This is not the first time he’s insinuated using the powers of the presidency against political enemies. He has threatened Amazon’s Jeff Bezos, owner of The Washington Post, for using the newspaper “as a tool for political power against me and other people. … We can’t let him get away with it.”

With exercising free political speech?

Trump has gone after others with equal subtlety. “I hear,” he tweeted, “the Rickets sic family, who own the Chicago Cubs, are secretly spending $’s against me. They better be careful, they have a lot to hide!”

He also promises to “open up” libel laws to permit easier prosecution of those who attack him unfairly. Has he ever conceded any attack on him to be fair?

This election is not just about placing the nuclear codes in Trump’s hands. It’s also about handing him the instruments of civilian coercion, such as the IRS, the FBI, the FCC, the SEC. Think of what he could do to enforce the “fairness” he demands. Imagine giving over the vast power of the modern state to a man who says in advance that he will punish his critics and jail his opponent.

The Washington Post Writers Group

Michele Obama is a bit of a hypocrite to only voice this against DT. While she has rappers in the White House who treat women equally poorly, if not worse? DT has never been accused of rape of physical abuse.

I guess you missed the rape case of his that is going to trial?

13 yo girl.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/oct/12/donald-trump-jeffrey-epstein-alleged-rape-lawsuit

I've been lucky in life. I grew up in a household with a strong & intelligent mother, and I have always respected women for their intelligence & abilities.

Michele Obama is a bit of a hypocrite to only voice this against DT. While she has rappers in the White House who treat women equally poorly, if not worse? DT has never been accused of rape of physical abuse.

she Michelle needs to be grabbed by the POON

Violence against women and girls is a problem of pandemic proportions. At least one out of every three women around the world has been beaten, coerced into sex, or otherwise abused in her lifetime with the abuser usually someone known to her

You're making illegitimate comparisons, Steve. Anyone with a brain finds Hillary to be undeserving of sympathy.She does play the game by the rules though and this has nothing to do with what's right, only what's legal. (Logic Vs. Philosophy)

So lay off of Michelle Obama. She's the only glimpse of daylight in an American election centered on darkness and sexual misconduct.

Anyone with a brain finds Hillary to be undeserving of sympathy.

I know they switched babies on me at the hospital, since no child of mine could be that dumb.

"He's just et up with stupid & cussedness."

As is bluering.

wow bluering, just wow.

over the years you have sometimes posted sh#t that clearly demonstrated your narrow minded , but this one clearly takes the cake. Hillary is right, most of trumps supporters are deplorable, but most especially those like yourself. i hope you get your pussy grabbed tomorrow.

bluering is definitely in for a spanking once his mother gets home.

According to a Chicago Tribune wire from December 1992, Trump approached a youth choir group outside the then-Trump-owned Plaza Hotel in Manhattan and engaged the group in conversation.

Trump asked one of the girls her age, and when she said she was 14, Trump replied, “Wow! Just think—in a couple of years I’ll be dating you.”

The second presidential debate – bloody, muddy and raucous – was just enough to save Donald Trump’s campaign from extinction, but not enough to restore his chances of winning, barring an act of God (a medical calamity) or of Putin (a cosmically incriminating WikiLeak).

That Trump crashed because of a sex-talk tape is odd. It should have been a surprise to no one. His views on women have been on open display for years. And he’d offered a dazzling array of other reasons for disqualification: habitual mendacity, pathological narcissism, profound ignorance and an astonishing dearth of basic human empathy.

To which list Trump added in the second debate, and it had nothing to do with sex. It was his threat, if elected, to put Hillary Clinton in jail.

After appointing a special prosecutor, of course. The niceties must be observed. First, a fair trial, then a proper hanging. The day after the debate at a rally in Pennsylvania, Trump responded to chants of “lock her up,” with “Lock her up is right.” Two days later, he told a rally in Lakeland, Florida, “She has to go to jail.”

Such incendiary talk is an affront to elementary democratic decency and a breach of the boundaries of American political discourse. In democracies, the electoral process is a subtle and elaborate substitute for combat, the age-old way of settling struggles for power. But that sublimation only works if there is mutual agreement to accept both the legitimacy of the result (which Trump keeps undermining with charges that the very process is “rigged”) and the boundaries of the contest.

The prize for the winner is temporary accession to limited political power, not the satisfaction of vendettas. Vladimir Putin, Hugo Chavez and a cavalcade of two-bit caudillos lock up their opponents. American leaders don’t.

One doesn’t even talk like this. It takes decades, centuries, to develop ingrained norms of political restraint and self-control. But they can be undone in short order by a demagogue feeding a vengeful populism.

This is not to say that the investigation into the Clinton emails was not itself compromised by politics. FBI director James Comey’s recommendation not to pursue charges was both troubling and puzzling. And Barack Obama very improperly tilted the scales by interjecting, while the investigation was still underway, that Clinton’s emails had not endangered national security.

But the answer is not to start a new process whose outcome is preordained. Conservatives have relentlessly, and correctly, criticized this administration for abusing its power and suborning the civil administration (e.g., the IRS). Is the Republican response to do the same?

Wasn’t presidential overreach one of the major charges against Obama by the anti-establishment GOP candidates? Wasn’t the animating spirit of the entire tea party movement the restoration of constitutional limits and restraints?

In America, we don’t persecute political opponents. Which is why we retroactively honor Gerald Ford for his pardon of Richard Nixon, for which, at the time, Ford was widely reviled. It ultimately cost him the presidency. Nixon might well have been convicted. But Ford understood that jailing a president for actions carried out in the context of his official duties would threaten the very civil nature of democratic governance.

What makes Trump’s promise to lock her up all the more alarming is that it’s not an isolated incident. This is not the first time he’s insinuated using the powers of the presidency against political enemies. He has threatened Amazon’s Jeff Bezos, owner of The Washington Post, for using the newspaper “as a tool for political power against me and other people. … We can’t let him get away with it.”

With exercising free political speech?

Trump has gone after others with equal subtlety. “I hear,” he tweeted, “the Rickets sic family, who own the Chicago Cubs, are secretly spending $’s against me. They better be careful, they have a lot to hide!”

He also promises to “open up” libel laws to permit easier prosecution of those who attack him unfairly. Has he ever conceded any attack on him to be fair?

This election is not just about placing the nuclear codes in Trump’s hands. It’s also about handing him the instruments of civilian coercion, such as the IRS, the FBI, the FCC, the SEC. Think of what he could do to enforce the “fairness” he demands. Imagine giving over the vast power of the modern state to a man who says in advance that he will punish his critics and jail his opponent.

The Washington Post Writers Group

Are you forgetting about all the women who have worked their way up through Trump Corp and applaud him, for legit performance on the job? No let's forget that.

What a shame so many folks are drinking the acid laced coolaide. Everyone is talking about dicks and pussies and blacks and whites. The media has totally distracted America from the real issues at stake.

It's a bunch of phony outrage. Nothing more.

Come on out to Squamish!? We can swap leads on some of the best granite on the planet.

Nobody asked you to wear guilt. But it is all of our duty to strive for equality and justice for all.

With that said, I would vote for Michele Obama in an instant if she were running for president. Too bad our political system has sunk so low that a.) a fool such as Trump has gotten as far as he has in the election process, and b.) we think having the first woman president as Hillary represents some kind of milestone. While I would never vote for Trump under any circumstances, I don't think I'll be voting for Hillary either. Her record of supporting women equates to political expediency. . like everything she does.

3. Teach your daughters to avoid azzholes

Hillary Clinton defended a child rapist and laughed about how she got him off so easily. Here she tries to defend it in her typical legalistic, sophist bullshit manner; http://www.cbsnews.com/news/hillary-clinton-stands-by-her-defense-of-1975-rape-suspect/.

3. Teach your daughters to avoid azzholes


Amen to that!

And this explains why so few women are here, or post much when they are here. If that is a surprise to anyone, then they have not been paying much attention.

Violence is bad against any person (or animal).

Are you forgetting about all the women who have worked their way up through Trump Corp and applaud him, for legit performance on the job? No let's forget that.

Typical Right Wing behavior, support the accuser, victimize the victim.
They do it every time: George Zimmerman is rich from donations from right wingers after he killed Trayvon.

Even a post saying "don't be violent to anything" got an angry-ish response. Why is that? Aren't there some things we can all agree on? It seems not being violent is a pretty easy one to start with

as for agreeing on things. Werner sees eating meat as violence. Which it is in one sense. So when you said to not be violent towards even animals, he sees it as being hypocritical if one eats meat.

I have seen more and more talk about Trump being chosen by God lately. Is that a common way of thinking among his supporters?

To what extent is birth and death violence? Bloodshed?