05-07-2020, 10:35 PM
(This post was last modified: 05-07-2020, 10:41 PM by pefloresjr.)
GR,
I think you have previously written that you are not a fan of Trump and are simply trying to make sure that people's feelings of hostility toward President Trump don't color their views of actions by his administration. I don't personally disagree with that point of view and try to check myself and my views for those kinds of biases. it's a good practice.
Along those lines, referring to the several sources within CDC who spoke about the guidelines not being released as "the bureaucratic faction getting its jabs in" seems pretty hostile toward those science and health professionals working at CDC. Is it possible you are not recognizing an overreaction on your part based on your worry about hostility toward President Trump or some other anti-government bias? Are all government employees "bureaucrats" who are part of a faction? My experience with the many scientists who work at (and previously worked at) CDC and FDA is that they are conscientious professionals who are dedicated to advancing healthcare and protecting the public. I guess, I am wondering if your guarding against "overreactions" to Trump takes precedence over a concern that the best work of the scientists be relayed to the public in the face of a global health crisis. I assume that you don't think it is best for executive political considerations to overrule scientific guidelines that might not align with political marketing and goals.
Thinking this out as I write and finish enjoying a good bottle of wine, if you are truly coming at this from a neutral viewpoint that so many others are unable to obtain, perhaps you should review your posts to ensure that they don't instinctively take President Trump's side and assume the other viewpoint is biased and incorrect.
Cheers,
Pete F.
Ps. The wine is a Peachy Canyon Grenache, Syrah, and Mourvedre blend and is excellent. I recommend it.
I completely agree. It would be a very rare action for any party to limit executive power when they are in power. Not that it couldn't happen in particular circumstances (Pete Buttigieg ran on the policy that he would first seek and return to Congress every three years for war powers) but it is not very likely in most circumstances. I expect that the expansion of executive power is likely to continue to distort the historical political balance of power.
Cheers,
Pete F.
I think you have previously written that you are not a fan of Trump and are simply trying to make sure that people's feelings of hostility toward President Trump don't color their views of actions by his administration. I don't personally disagree with that point of view and try to check myself and my views for those kinds of biases. it's a good practice.
Along those lines, referring to the several sources within CDC who spoke about the guidelines not being released as "the bureaucratic faction getting its jabs in" seems pretty hostile toward those science and health professionals working at CDC. Is it possible you are not recognizing an overreaction on your part based on your worry about hostility toward President Trump or some other anti-government bias? Are all government employees "bureaucrats" who are part of a faction? My experience with the many scientists who work at (and previously worked at) CDC and FDA is that they are conscientious professionals who are dedicated to advancing healthcare and protecting the public. I guess, I am wondering if your guarding against "overreactions" to Trump takes precedence over a concern that the best work of the scientists be relayed to the public in the face of a global health crisis. I assume that you don't think it is best for executive political considerations to overrule scientific guidelines that might not align with political marketing and goals.
Thinking this out as I write and finish enjoying a good bottle of wine, if you are truly coming at this from a neutral viewpoint that so many others are unable to obtain, perhaps you should review your posts to ensure that they don't instinctively take President Trump's side and assume the other viewpoint is biased and incorrect.
Cheers,
Pete F.
Ps. The wine is a Peachy Canyon Grenache, Syrah, and Mourvedre blend and is excellent. I recommend it.
(05-07-2020, 10:22 PM)Mick Wrote:(05-07-2020, 01:45 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote: If Biden wins the POTUS election in November, the number of laws passed to limit Executive Branch power will make our heads spin. Some significant new restrictions and requirements are going to be implemented.
I wonder about that. When has a President or a Congress in power with the same party ever voluntarily supported limits on their power?
I completely agree. It would be a very rare action for any party to limit executive power when they are in power. Not that it couldn't happen in particular circumstances (Pete Buttigieg ran on the policy that he would first seek and return to Congress every three years for war powers) but it is not very likely in most circumstances. I expect that the expansion of executive power is likely to continue to distort the historical political balance of power.
Cheers,
Pete F.