Straight Dope Message Board

[Ruken]

I just got an alert from WSJ that he tapped Rick Perry for Energy. 151

[Damuri Ajashi]

Originally Posted by Ruken

I just got an alert from WSJ that he tapped Rick Perry for Energy.

Wait, wasn't that one of the departments he would have gotten rid of? 152

[Lobohan]

Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi

Wait, wasn't that one of the departments he would have gotten rid of?

I believe that's the actual one he forgot in the oops moment. 153

[BobLibDem]

Hey, we're all set. He can't eliminate it if he can't remember it, even if he heads it. 154

[Typo Negative]

I hear this on the radio and thought it was a joke.

Trump picks ExxonMobil CEO Rex Tillerson to be secretary of state 155

[Ruken]

Originally Posted by Lobohan

I believe that's the actual one he forgot in the oops moment.

Correct. I'm not sure he knew what it does. Maybe he's done some homework? 156

[Euphonious Polemic]

Originally Posted by Typo Negative

I hear this on the radio and thought it was a joke.

Trump picks ExxonMobil CEO Rex Tillerson to be secretary of state

In a totally unrelated item, Tillerson's company, Exxon, stands to make BILLIONS of dollars in deals with Russia, once the sanctions have been lifted.

I'm sure that the fact that Tillerson is the CEO of Exxon, and has been given the Russian Order of Friendship (highest award a non-Russian can get) by Putin himself will have NO. BEARING. WHATSOEVER. on the soon to be announced lifting of sanctions.

Just think about that again.... the man whose company stands to make BILLIONS in business deals from his good Russian friends has just been named Secretary State.
Enjoy this, Republicans. Revel in it. This is now what you support - open, in-your-face, totally obvious corruption. 157

[SteveG1]

Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi

Wait, wasn't that one of the departments he would have gotten rid of?

Exactly. 158

[SteveG1]

Originally Posted by Typo Negative

I hear this on the radio and thought it was a joke.

Trump picks ExxonMobil CEO Rex Tillerson to be secretary of state

It's true. 159

[Czarcasm]

Is Secretary of State one of the positions that has to do the "blind trust" thing? 160

[SteveG1]

Originally Posted by Czarcasm

Is Secretary of State one of the positions that has to do the "blind trust" thing?

I have no idea. 161

[elucidator]

"The business of America is business." - Calvin Coolidge 162

[Euphonious Polemic]

Originally Posted by Czarcasm

Is Secretary of State one of the positions that has to do the "blind trust" thing?

There is no such thing anymore.

The graft is pretty much right out in the open now. It's a business, and the goal is to enrich Trump and those he appoints. I would not be at all surprised if the administration has an open call for companies to pay Trump or any of his cabinet directly, in cash for preferred government treatment. 163

[SteveG1]

Originally Posted by elucidator

"The business of America is business." - Calvin Coolidge

Hmmmmm ...

http://www.economist.com/news/books-...-less-led-more

“WEANED on a pickle” was how the acid-tongued Alice Roosevelt Longworth described Calvin Coolidge, America’s president from 1923 to 1929. Popular historians have been no kinder. Many blame his laissez-faire approach for prompting the Wall Street crash of 1929.

Implicit in this view is the presumption that only interventionist central government can help America recover from economic shock. Mr Coolidge’s hallmark was distrust of government. He saw it as an entity that uses “despotic exactions” (taxes) that sap individual initiative and prosperity across the board.
...
He also objected to public ownership of the Post Office, tax exemptions for municipal debt and farm subsidies, all of which have produced costs that still hang heavily over America.
...
Even in the face of natural disasters, he held back, fearing that intervention would undermine individual initiative and corrupt the national government.

164

[SteveG1]

Originally Posted by Euphonious Polemic

There is no such thing anymore.

The graft is pretty much right out in the open now. It's a business, and the goal is to enrich Trump and those he appoints. I would not be at all surprised if the administration has an open call for companies to pay Trump or any of his cabinet directly, in cash for preferred government treatment.

I see it as a deliberate attempt to legitimize "pay to play" at the highest levels, and the crippling or destruction of the very agencies that might have stopped or at least limited the unprecedented level of corruption we will see. 165

[dasmoocher]

Originally Posted by Euphonious Polemic

In a totally unrelated item, Tillerson's company, Exxon, stands to make BILLIONS of dollars in deals with Russia, once the sanctions have been lifted.

I'm sure that the fact that Tillerson is the CEO of Exxon, and has been given the Russian Order of Friendship (highest award a non-Russian can get) by Putin himself will have NO. BEARING. WHATSOEVER. on the soon to be announced lifting of sanctions.

Just think about that again.... the man whose company stands to make BILLIONS in business deals from his good Russian friends has just been named Secretary State.
Enjoy this, Republicans. Revel in it. This is now what you support - open, in-your-face, totally obvious corruption.

It's all part of the master plan. Once the EPA is gutted and the Arctic warns up, Exxon will have access to new oil fields! 166

[ThelmaLou]

My God! Calvin Coolidge is a 2016 Republican!

HurricaneDitka, I believe this man would be your ideal president, amirite?

Originally Posted by SteveG1

http://www.economist.com/news/books-...-less-led-more

167

[jshore]

I see a theme in many of these appointments: For Secretary of Energy, Labor, Education, and the Head of the EPA, he has basically gone and found the person who is most opposed to the mission or very existence of these departments and put them in charge. 168

[Morgyn]

Originally Posted by jshore

I see a theme in many of these appointments: For Secretary of Energy, Labor, Education, and the Head of the EPA, he has basically gone and found the person who is most opposed to the mission or very existence of these departments and put them in charge.

Cough.


I swear, I am invisible. 169

[Czarcasm]

Originally Posted by jshore

I see a theme in many of these appointments: For Secretary of Energy, Labor, Education, and the Head of the EPA, he has basically gone and found the person who is most opposed to the mission or very existence of these departments and put them in charge.

I'm surprised someone hasn't brought this up before.


170

[SteveG1]

Originally Posted by jshore

I see a theme in many of these appointments: For Secretary of Energy, Labor, Education, and the Head of the EPA, he has basically gone and found the person who is most opposed to the mission or very existence of these departments and put them in charge.

Exactly. 171

[SteveG1]

Originally Posted by Czarcasm

I'm surprised someone hasn't brought this up before.

So am I. Shocked! Shocked!

Originally Posted by SteveG1

I see it as a deliberate attempt to legitimize "pay to play" at the highest levels, and the crippling or destruction of the very agencies that might have stopped or at least limited the unprecedented level of corruption we will see.

172

[ThelmaLou]

It's deja vu all over again. Again. 173

[Stranger On A Train]

Well, at least he's has his priorities in line: CNN: "Kanye West meets with Donald Trump at Trump Tower".

Trump could certainly use some sound life coaching and advice on dealing with the stress of being a major public figure known for making cogent statements and sound fiscal decisions. This is much better time spent than, say, getting a daily briefing on the state of national security and foreign relations.

Stranger 174

[SteveG1]

Well fuck it. He won't be running the country, Putin will. 175

[Euphonious Polemic]

Originally Posted by SteveG1

Well fuck it. He won't be running the country, Putin will.

And let's face it. If Trump let Putin walk into Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania, the Republican voters would defend that decision mightily, as would many R's in senate and the house. 176

[elucidator]

Latvia. Sad. 177

[ThelmaLou]

How can people (including some Dopers) be blind to the kind of man who will soon be president?? And act like it doesn't matter??

Donald Trump, the all-knowing know-nothing

...Today we stand on the verge of a new presidency, one that has a complex and, to be frank, rather appalling relationship to knowledge and certainty. The implications are deeply troubling.

In Donald Trump, we may never have seen a political figure who more easily blended his own certainty with a contempt for the knowledge of others and the belief that knowledge itself is largely irrelevant to making vital decisions. It may have had a rational basis for a candidate running with zero relevant experience, but throughout the campaign, Trump poured contempt on the idea that knowing about things like policy and how government works might be useful for a president. "I know more about ISIS than the generals do, believe me," he said. He didn't need to seek counsel on foreign affairs because "I have a very good brain and I've said a lot of things." And in an interview on Sunday, he said he isn't bothering to receive daily intelligence briefings like previous presidents did, because "I'm, like, a smart person."

So Trump knows all. Yet at the same time, he tries to convince the public that there's almost no such thing as truth. He lies constantly, of course, dismissing any evidence contrary to the position he's taking at a particular moment as nothing but the product of dishonest media or his partisan opponents. He'll even say something, then tell you he never said it. Simultaneously, he tries to convince the public that we live in a land of the unknowable. ...

Cite

178

[Damuri Ajashi]

Originally Posted by Lobohan

I believe that's the actual one he forgot in the oops moment.

I like Rick Perry and I think he'd make a decent bartender or preacher but how do you put that guy in charge of a department full of our best scientists and oversight of our nuclear weapons and nuclear power plants. I mean, he's not Homer Simpson but wtf? 179

[dasmoocher]

Originally Posted by SteveG1

So am I. Shocked! Shocked!

Of all the countries in all the world, he had to get elected in mine.

Originally Posted by SteveG1

Well fuck it. He won't be running the country, Putin will.

Putin can see his new house from Russia--the White House. 180

[running coach]

Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi

I like Rick Perry and I think he'd make a decent bartender or preacher but how do you put that guy in charge of a department full of our best scientists and oversight of our nuclear weapons and nuclear power plants. I mean, he's not Homer Simpson but wtf?

But he'd like to be. 181

[GIGObuster]

Can someone point to any Trump cabinet member that does not deny science?

Trump taps Montana congressman Ryan Zinke as Interior secretary, demonstrating that Republicans do want to send us to the dark ages. 182

[dasmoocher]

Originally Posted by GIGObuster

Can someone point to any Trump cabinet member that does not deny science?

Trump taps Montana congressman Ryan Zinke as Interior secretary, demonstrating that Republicans do want to send us to the dark ages.

Well, Mad Dog probably believes in the physics of kinetic projectiles on human anatomy. So, there's two fields of science that he might accept. 183

[dasmoocher]

I'm starting to believe my own conspiracy theory is that these people don't really deny global warming privately--they're counting on it being real to open up the Arctic for drilling! I use to say this in jest, but with Trump, it might actually be real. 184

[ThelmaLou]

Originally Posted by dasmoocher

I'm starting to believe my own conspiracy theory is that these people don't really deny global warming privately--they're counting on it being real to open up the Arctic for drilling! I use to say this in jest, but with Trump, it might actually be real.

I think you're right. 185

[Defensive Indifference]

Newsweek has a good round up of some of Trump's most worrisome conflicts of interest. It's a long piece, but well worth reading. It describes a long list of business entanglements that present the possibility of influence peddling, corruption, and coercion. It summarizes them:

Given the extraordinary power Donald Trump now wields, it’s obvious that foreign governments and corporations can easily curry favor, bribe or even blackmail him, which is why the Founding Fathers so feared outside influences on the Executive Branch. Once he’s president, Trump does not need to ask for cash to be delivered to his pockets or to those of his children to cross the line into illicit activities—and possibly impeachable offenses. Macri of Argentina cannot know if his country will be punished by the Trump White House if the remaining permits for that Buenos Aires project are denied. Abe of Japan does not know if a government holdup of Ivanka Trump’s deal with Sanei International will lead her impulsive father to call for an American military withdrawal from his country. Erdogan of Turkey has told associates he believes he must keep pressure on Trump’s business partner there to essentially blackmail the president into extraditing a political enemy. Duterte of the Philippines believes he has received approval from the president-elect to, at best, abide by or, at worst, continue to authorize the frenzied slaughter of drug users and dealers, and knows he can harm the Trump family if the president ever angers him.

Parts of the article are a little dense, but stick with it. Eichenwald explains it well.

One of Trump's arguments from early in the campaign was that he was so rich that he couldn't be bought. This was always transparently ridiculous. But now we have direct evidence of how venal he really is. Ivanka (with no official government position) sits in on Trump's first meeting with Japan's Abe, evidently in order to advance business interests. Trump has a call with Macri and three days later the permitting issues that had plagued a development project in Buenos Aires are magically resolved. In Turkey, Erdogan detains a Trump business partner, apparently to pressure Trump to extradite the suspected leader of the recent coup, whom the Obama administration had been uninterested in turning over. There's more, none of it any good.

http://www.newsweek.com/2016/12/23/d...us-531140.html 186

[Little_Pig]

Originally Posted by Typo Negative

I hear this on the radio and thought it was a joke.

Trump picks ExxonMobil CEO Rex Tillerson to be secretary of state

Hey Typo Negative. Look at the upside. ==>Chicago Strip Club Gives Free Lap Dances.<==

This could replace Medicare! 187

[SteveG1]

Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi

How many did George W bush have 10 to 15 years ago?

Its the same sort of temper tantrum that we would have seen if McCain won in 2008 or Romney won in 2012.

I doubt it. I seriously doubt it. Even considering "philosophical" differences, McCain and Romney were intelligent, competent, and SANE. 188

[SteveG1]

Originally Posted by dasmoocher

Well, Mad Dog probably believes in the physics of kinetic projectiles on human anatomy. So, there's two fields of science that he might accept.

Think about this for a while ...

The one called Mad Dog is probably the LEAST crazy one of the bunch. 189

[CatandMouse]

Originally Posted by SteveG1

Well fuck it. He won't be running the country, Putin will.

And I was so sure that Pence would be running the country... 190

[Damuri Ajashi]

Originally Posted by SteveG1

I doubt it. I seriously doubt it. Even considering "philosophical" differences, McCain and Romney were intelligent, competent, and SANE.

That's the point. It wouldn't matter. If a republican wins there is going to be a temper tantrum on this board. The Trump victory was actually followed by a few days of stunned fucking silence before the temper tantrums started but the same people starting multiple pit threads on Trump would have done the same with Romney and McCain. And probably sooner. 191

[drad dog]

Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi

That's the point. It wouldn't matter. If a republican wins there is going to be a temper tantrum on this board. The Trump victory was actually followed by a few days of stunned fucking silence before the temper tantrums started but the same people starting multiple pit threads on Trump would have done the same with Romney and McCain. And probably sooner.

You are the tantrum I've observed lately. Endless bawling, repetition, blaming, and projecting.

Hillary was another politician, not lots worse nor lots better. She lost. Let it go or run yourself. 192

[Siam Sam]

Trump's administration has already become a bad joke weeks before it's even started. 193

[galen ubal]

Trump has made 17 picks for his cabinet. Added together, they have more wealth than the bottom one-third of American households, according to this article. 194

[Bridget Burke]

Originally Posted by drad dog

You are the tantrum I've observed lately. Endless bawling, repetition, blaming, and projecting.

Hillary was another politician, not lots worse nor lots better. She lost. Let it go or run yourself.

You'd think our local Republicans would be full of joyous anticipation of the future that awaits. They should be regaling us with tales of The Greatness of The Donald & The Wisdom shown by his Cabinet Choices. Let's hear more about Rick Perry & Ben Carson!

Instead, they keep telling us that Hillary was "flawed." The more we learn about Trump, the better she looks. Well, more Americans did prefer her... 195

[Grim Render]

Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi

How many did George W bush have 10 to 15 years ago?

Its the same sort of temper tantrum that we would have seen if McCain won in 2008 or Romney won in 2012.

I think there is a noticeable difference. People have advanced getting Romney or McCain in instead of this guy. If they had won in 2008 or 2012, I don't see the same "any other Republican" desire. 196

[Nava]

Originally Posted by drad dog

Too bad Bill Cosby is black. He would be the perfect Ombudsmen. It's going to be a big job.

Nah, being black means he can get to be Trump's second black. 197

[Damuri Ajashi]

Originally Posted by drad dog

You are the tantrum I've observed lately. Endless bawling, repetition, blaming, and projecting.

Hillary was another politician, not lots worse nor lots better. She lost. Let it go or run yourself.

You seem to think of anything that disrupts your bubble thinking as a temper tantrum. I'm just dropping some truth on you guys and you can't see it because you still can't get over the fact that Madonna Hillary was a horrible candidate. For every thread I have started about why Hillary deserves the blame for this loss, there are an infinite number of threads started about how Trump won because all the racists (who stayed home when a black dude was running for President) voted for him, because I have started exactly zero threads. I just refute all the bullshit being thrown around about why we lost the election. We are trying to fight ignorance after all.

Hillary was a horrible politician. She never won an election where the skids weren't greased for her. But we nominated her because she insisted it was her turn and she was going to win. Well, she lost and she owns that. 198

[Damuri Ajashi]

Originally Posted by Grim Render

I think there is a noticeable difference. People have advanced getting Romney or McCain in instead of this guy. If they had won in 2008 or 2012, I don't see the same "any other Republican" desire.

I understand Trump is worse but we have buried the fucking needle on demonizing the Republican candidates. What could we say about Trump that we haven't already said about McCain and Romney?

Do you doubt for a second that we would have seen wailing and gnashing of teeth on this board if Romney won in 2012? The partisans on this board have cried wolf so often that its just par for the course. 199

[Channing Idaho Banks]

That's the problem with crying wolf! 200