No False Equivalence for the Washington Post

You know it's one of my big pet peeves. When the press in a struggle to be 'even handed' can't criticize the Republicans without an equal criticism of the Democrats even if the examples are hardly similar.

That might seem fair to them but it's sort of like a teacher being fair to students by treating bullies and victims equally. Telling them both to cut it out.

The Beltway belief in false equivalence goes so far that some reporters don't even vote-thinking that this somehow proves their objectivity.

http://www.politico.com/story/2008/02/should-journalists-vote-yes-no-sometimes-008470

Anyway, no one can accuse the Washington Post of false equivalence this time. Not on Trump. They aren't even waiting for the DNC to say Trump is not up to the job and doesn't belong within 10 miles of the Oval Office.

Good for them.

"DONALD J. TRUMP, until now a Republican problem, this week became a challenge the nation must confront and overcome. The real estate tycoon is uniquely unqualified to serve as president, in experience and temperament. He is mounting a campaign of snarl and sneer, not substance. To the extent he has views, they are wrong in their diagnosis of America’s problems and dangerous in their proposed solutions. Mr. Trump’s politics of denigration and division could strain the bonds that have held a diverse nation together. His contempt for constitutional norms might reveal the nation’s two-century-old experiment in checks and balances to be more fragile than we knew."

"Any one of these characteristics would be disqualifying; together, they make Mr. Trump a peril. We recognize that this is not the usual moment to make such a statement. In an ordinary election year, we would acknowledge the Republican nominee, move on to the Democratic convention and spend the following months, like other voters, evaluating the candidates’ performance in debates, on the stump and in position papers. This year we will follow the campaign as always, offering honest views on all the candidates. But we cannot salute the Republican nominee or pretend that we might endorse him this fall. A Trump presidency would be dangerous for the nation and the world."


https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/donald-trump-is-a-unique-threat-to-american-democracy/2016/07/22/a6d823cc-4f4f-11e6-aa14-e0c1087f7583_story.html?

I appreciate them acknowledging this is not a normal election where it's just a question of who's views on taxes or regulations you like better. Trump is a threat to our democracy. Full stop.

"Most alarming is Mr. Trump’s contempt for the Constitution and the unwritten democratic norms upon which our system depends. He doesn’t know what is in the nation’s founding document. When asked by a member of Congress about Article I, which enumerates congressional powers, the candidate responded, “I am going to abide by the Constitution whether it’s number 1, number 2, number 12, number 9.” The charter has seven articles.

"Worse, he doesn’t seem to care about its limitations on executive power. He has threatened that those who criticize him will suffer when he is president. He has vowed to torture suspected terrorists and bomb their innocent relatives, no matter the illegality of either act. He has vowed toconstrict the independent press. He went after a judge whose rulings angered him, exacerbating his contempt for the independence of the judiciary by insisting that the judge should be disqualified because of his Mexican heritage. Mr. Trump has encouraged and celebrated violence at his rallies. The U.S. democratic system is strong and has proved resilient when it has been tested before. We have faith in it. But to elect Mr. Trump would be to knowingly subject it to threat."

The Paul Ryan-Mitch McConnell case for Trump is: elect him and don't worry he can't blow things up too much as the Constitution is strong.

But as the Post says you don't knowingly subject it to threat. Maybe your watch is water proof. That's no reason to submerge it in a pool for hours. 

As Jesus Christ says, 'Though shalt not tempt the Lord, thy God.'

http://biblehub.com/luke/4-12.htm

You don't tempt fate irresponsibly.

Timothy B. Lee has a theory on why Peter Thiel really supports Donald Trump.

It sounds pretty persuasive to me. Thiel is a libertarian maximalist who wants to destroy the government.

I should also point out that he surely agrees with Trump on strengthening libel laws against the media and generally weakening democracy. Thiel actually believes that women shouldn't be allowed to vote.

Many of Trump’s supporters are under the impression that Trump is a successful businessman who will bring his management expertise to Washington. But Thiel can’t possibly believe this.

"It’s not just that Trump has a long string of business failures, from Atlantic City casinos to Trump steaks. Thiel himself described Trump as "symptomatic of everything that is wrong with New York City" just two years ago — he’s under no illusions that Trump is a great businessman."

"So what’s going on? I think the most likely explanation is that Thiel has become so disillusioned with the American political system that he thinks it would benefit from the political earthquake of a Trump presidency. It’s not that Trump would directly fix what’s wrong with the American government. Rather, it’s that major changes only happen during a crisis — and a Trump presidency makes crises dramatically more likely."

"You can see signs of this kind of apocalyptic thinking in Thiel’s other recent projects."

"PayPal, the company that made Thiel rich, was an (ultimately unsuccessful) effort to create an alternative financial system that operated beyond the control of governments and big banks. PayPal’s larger vision was quickly crushed by regulators, who forced PayPal to become a conventional payment service that worked with big banks instead of disrupting them."

"In 2008, Thiel provided seed funding for the Seasteading Institute, a nonprofit organization devoted to building a new society from scratch on the high seas."

http://www.vox.com/2016/7/22/12254468/peter-thiel-donald-trump

In that society, women could not vote and probably workers can't unionize and there will be no minorities.

"I no longer believe that freedom and democracy are compatible," Thiel wrote in a 2009 essay explaining the ideas behind Seasteading. He evidently believed it would be easier to build a new society from the bottom up than to fix the problems with the American political system."

See, Peter Thiel and the Washington Post agree: both think that Trump is a clear and present threat to our system of government. just that Thiel thinks that's a good thing.