Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 46 of 46

Thread: Starting this thread for posterity

  1. #41
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    734
    Hub Bucks
    722
    Savings
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    My Feedback
    0
    (0% Positive Feedback)
    Rep Power
    8

    Re: Starting this thread for posterity

    Heh - unfortunately my cynical side sort of disagrees with both of you. 'Sort of' because I agree that Trump doesn't think much more about religion other than the fact that it can be useful. And it's my cynical side because I have some fundamental disagreements with both of you about what freedom of and from religion looks like.

    I do think that Trump has surrounded himself with people that take religion very seriously (with the exception of Tillerson) - Bannon, Pence, etc etc. A lot of my less religious conservative and centrist friends that voted for Trump, especially after the Bannon appointment, became concerned that Trump will serve as a sort of Trojan Horse for the religious right. I could see some of his smart, religious, experienced cabinet garnering enough power/influence to breathe some more life into the kind of religious nationalism that the tea party embraced and guiding Trump's policy decisions/appointments in more 'traditionally Christian' directions.

    A lot of these terms are fraught with all sorts of baggage. Please don't take offense as it's not meant to be given.
    "Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    734
    Hub Bucks
    722
    Savings
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    My Feedback
    0
    (0% Positive Feedback)
    Rep Power
    8

    Re: Starting this thread for posterity

    What do you guys think about Bannon? The guy calls himself a Leninist and a Christian Crusader. Which do you think he actually is?
    "Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Eagle Nation
    Posts
    1,753
    Hub Bucks
    9,824
    Savings
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    My Feedback
    0
    (0% Positive Feedback)
    Rep Power
    19

    Re: Starting this thread for posterity

    I really don't know what he is. I do think he is much to controversial to be on Trump's staff, but Trump either knew all about him or a few of his advisors did and told him to pick Bannon.

  4. Thanks pirateIRL thanked for this post
  5. #44
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    734
    Hub Bucks
    722
    Savings
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    My Feedback
    0
    (0% Positive Feedback)
    Rep Power
    8

    Re: Starting this thread for posterity

    Picking Bannon to be Chief Strategist did seem tone deaf. "We're mired in controversy so let's put up another lightning rod!" If I understood something about the guy I'd be more sympathetic but he's pretty tough to understand. I think that the controversies over most of Trump's picks are manufactured but Bannon has earned it.
    "Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."

  6. #45
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Look Closely Everyone
    Posts
    40,689
    Hub Bucks
    493,545
    Savings
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    My Mood
    Breezy
    My Feedback
    0
    (0% Positive Feedback)
    Rep Power
    91

    Re: Starting this thread for posterity

    I don't much care for Bannon in the same vein that I didn't care for Valerie Jarrett. They're people whose opinions weight too heavily into their respective bosses' heads.
    Henkyfork, the trumpet supporter.

  7. Thanks pirateIRL thanked for this post
  8. #46
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    734
    Hub Bucks
    722
    Savings
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    My Feedback
    0
    (0% Positive Feedback)
    Rep Power
    8

    Re: Starting this thread for posterity

    The Chief Strategist's role has become more important over the past few decades because of how we are concentrating power in the executive branch. Unfortunately our politics have become more ideological over that period as well so we've wound up with further right and further left Presidents. Presidents choose their Chief Strategists. So we have wound up with a string of increasingly powerful Chief Strategists that are ideologues.

    I'd love to see how an independent that campaigned solely on the platform of transferring power away from the executive to the legislative would poll against Trump and Clinton today now that both sides have a good whip-lashing in recent memory. heh
    "Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •