Trump outrage of the day

[OtherJen]

He’s at it again.  If we did less testing we’d have fewer cases.

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-stop-coronavirus-testing-right-now-have-very-few-cases-2020-6?fbclid=IwAR3hIMxWshzlCYEjZkSp5GRFwfpr8kPKnUS9CGxfpL0EcNg_tCq8oVugdl8

Ha! Yeah, that's totally how it works. It's like a little kid who doesn't want to eat dinner and instead drops it under the table to fool his parents.

[nereo]

If his doctors stop weighing the President, does his obesity go away?
Hmm....

[OtherJen]

If his doctors stop weighing the President, does his obesity go away?
Hmm....

Of course! And if we never acknowledge his birthday, he'll never get older and live forever!

[Travis]

If his doctors stop weighing the President, does his obesity go away?
Hmm....

What obesity? He's the fittest President ever.

Of course his doctor freely admits that his medical reports on the President are written by Trump himself.

[ixtap]

If his doctors stop weighing the President, does his obesity go away?
Hmm....

What obesity? He's the fittest President ever.

Of course his doctor freely admits that his medical reports on the President are written by Trump himself.

Pretty sure he would lose his license if he admitted to writing about all those positive tests!

[nereo]

If his doctors stop weighing the President, does his obesity go away?
Hmm....

What obesity? He's the fittest President ever.

Of course his doctor freely admits that his medical reports on the President are written by Trump himself.

His latest physical officially puts him in the obese category, though it oddly still insists he is “healthy”

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-06-03/trump-is-healthy-doctor-says-in-report-that-shows-he-s-obese

[Travis]

If his doctors stop weighing the President, does his obesity go away?
Hmm....

What obesity? He's the fittest President ever.

Of course his doctor freely admits that his medical reports on the President are written by Trump himself.

His latest physical officially puts him in the obese category, though it oddly still insists he is “healthy”

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-06-03/trump-is-healthy-doctor-says-in-report-that-shows-he-s-obese

His speech at West Point is putting some more doubts into people's heads about his health. He struggled to drink a glass of water and walked down the ramp off the podium with some difficulty.

[Dancin'Dog]

Are all the Fine People that attend his rallies welcome to carry their arms into the rally, so they'll all feel safe?  I really can't imagine a more wonderful happy safe feeling that would be. 

[ixtap]

Are all the Fine People that attend his rallies welcome to carry their arms into the rally, so they'll all feel safe?  I really can't imagine a more wonderful happy safe feeling that would be.

Generally not.

[PKFFW]

A citizen in a democracy has a responsibility to inform themselves, which is best done by a variety of information - different media, readings of history and so on.

Just to be clear, you do understand that the above is purely your opinion.  In Australia at least, there is no responsibility for a citizen to inform themselves.

[Kyle Schuant]

In Australia at least, there is no responsibility for a citizen to inform themselves.

Rights exist, even if they are not legally permitted, and responsibilities exist, even if they are not legally imposed. You continue to have rights even if you choose not to exercise them, and you continue to have responsibilities even if you choose not to fulfil them.

I understand that in our modern Western society we care a lot for rights and do our best to evade our responsibilities, but there it is.

Among their many other responsibilities, a citizen has a responsibility to inform themselves about things, especially if they wish to express an opinion on them.

[marty998]

If his doctors stop weighing the President, does his obesity go away?
Hmm....

What obesity? He's the fittest President ever.

Of course his doctor freely admits that his medical reports on the President are written by Trump himself.

His latest physical officially puts him in the obese category, though it oddly still insists he is “healthy”

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-06-03/trump-is-healthy-doctor-says-in-report-that-shows-he-s-obese

His speech at West Point is putting some more doubts into people's heads about his health. He struggled to drink a glass of water and walked down the ramp off the podium with some difficulty.

I don't like the guy, but even I can see that clip of him "stumbling" down the stairs/ramp was a stitch up and portrayed him unfairly.

There are better ways to criticise him. There is so much material from his own mouth that could be used instead.

[marty998]

In Australia at least, there is no responsibility for a citizen to inform themselves.

Rights exist, even if they are not legally permitted, and responsibilities exist, even if they are not legally imposed. You continue to have rights even if you choose not to exercise them, and you continue to have responsibilities even if you choose not to fulfil them.

I understand that in our modern Western society we care a lot for rights and do our best to evade our responsibilities, but there it is.

Among their many other responsibilities, a citizen has a responsibility to inform themselves about things, especially if they wish to express an opinion on them.

I disagree here, but not strongly. Everyone can express an opinion. Nobody has a responsibility to be informed (I wish that it were so, but that comes with it's own set of problems (how do you force someone to be informed?))

The troubling thing is the indignant behaviour and doubling down when a persons uninformed opinion is proven to be incorrect.
And whether it can be put down to either stupidity or malicious intent makes it even more troubling.

[talltexan]

When did Trump start worrying about lawsuits?

In this case, I am willing to bet that the venue insurance is the one requiring the waivers. It looks like the venue is being opened up special for this, they are otherwise closed through the end of July.

I just read this. The venue has been closed since the end of March, and will not host any other events until The end of July
This is a bizarre instance of special treatment. I fear it will not end well

Lol, some of us have been saying this about this entire chapter of history.

[nereo]

I don't like the guy, but even I can see that clip of him "stumbling" down the stairs/ramp was a stitch up and portrayed him unfairly.

There are better ways to criticise him. There is so much material from his own mouth that could be used instead.

We have 50 pages now of Trump outrages, and that doesnt’ even include his entire presidency, let along all the stuff he did as a candidate or private citizen.  I agree the West Point clip is pretty small potatoes.

What it does show (to me) is that Trump is a septuagenarian who’s never been great at reading off a teleprompter.  It refutes his claim that he’s “the heathiest President in the history of our country” - but beyond a very few gullible souls I’m not sure anyone really believed that in the first place.  I’m not aware of any 74 year old that is as spry as in his/her 30s (save some odd cases where they were deathly ill early on and recovered later in life).  And to be fair there’s no reason why a person of advanced age with physical ailments can’t be a national leader (there are hundreds of examples to chose from here, but let’s put FDR, Pelosi, Grassley, QE2, Pope Francis & Mandela).  Note you don’t have to agree with their methods or politics, but all have been effective in their positions well past the age of 70.

A better - and still unanswerable - question is to what level has cognitive ability slipped. It’s easy to take a bunch of random events and stitch them together to make a person look incoherent (see: Biden, or earlier: HRC, and currently: Trump).  But beyond a formal evaluation (which Trump won’t submit to) at best we can say is he’s able to walk and talk and lead a rally for well over hour, which means he’s not senile, just abhorrent.

[sherr]

A better - and still unanswerable - question is to what level has cognitive ability slipped. It’s easy to take a bunch of random events and stitch them together to make a person look incoherent (see: Biden, or earlier: HRC, and currently: Trump).  But beyond a formal evaluation (which Trump won’t submit to) at best we can say is he’s able to walk and talk and lead a rally for well over hour, which means he’s not senile, just abhorrent.

Didn't you hear? He did submit to one, and he got a perfect score! Truly marvelous, the least cognitively-declined president ever.

Agreed though. I think there is definitely a lot of mental decline, which you can observe for yourself if you compare one of his interviews from, say, the 90s with any speech he gives today. But that doesn't even move the meter for me on "reasons to dislike Trump for president". The things he says and does are a million times worse than the way he says / does them.

[Fireball]

A better - and still unanswerable - question is to what level has cognitive ability slipped. It’s easy to take a bunch of random events and stitch them together to make a person look incoherent (see: Biden, or earlier: HRC, and currently: Trump).  But beyond a formal evaluation (which Trump won’t submit to) at best we can say is he’s able to walk and talk and lead a rally for well over hour, which means he’s not senile, just abhorrent.

Didn't you hear? He did submit to one, and he got a perfect score! Truly marvelous, the least cognitively-declined president ever.

Agreed though. I think there is definitely a lot of mental decline, which you can observe for yourself if you compare one of his interviews from, say, the 90s with any speech he gives today. But that doesn't even move the meter for me on "reasons to dislike Trump for president". The things he says and does are a million times worse than the way he says / does them.

I absolutely agree, but one of the things his base cannot stand is weakness in any form. Sew a little doubt in their minds about his fitness and it would move the needle for some. Admitting to grabbing a woman by the p*ssy is completely fine for them. Too weak and feeble to drink a glass of water - unacceptable.  What a country.

[OtherJen]

If his doctors stop weighing the President, does his obesity go away?
Hmm....

What obesity? He's the fittest President ever.

Of course his doctor freely admits that his medical reports on the President are written by Trump himself.

His latest physical officially puts him in the obese category, though it oddly still insists he is “healthy”

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-06-03/trump-is-healthy-doctor-says-in-report-that-shows-he-s-obese

His speech at West Point is putting some more doubts into people's heads about his health. He struggled to drink a glass of water and walked down the ramp off the podium with some difficulty.

I don't like the guy, but even I can see that clip of him "stumbling" down the stairs/ramp was a stitch up and portrayed him unfairly.

There are better ways to criticise him. There is so much material from his own mouth that could be used instead.

I agree that the video of him walking was not convincing by itself. At the same event, however, he appeared to be slurring his words a bit during the speech and was unable to raise a glass to his mouth fully with one hand.

[nereo]

Agreed though. I think there is definitely a lot of mental decline, which you can observe for yourself if you compare one of his interviews from, say, the 90s with any speech he gives today. But that doesn't even move the meter for me on "reasons to dislike Trump for president". The things he says and does are a million times worse than the way he says / does them.

cognitive decline is evident for everyone as they go from their 40s (Trump was 44 in the year 1990) to their 70s (Trump is 74 today).  That is to be expected.
So the question isn't whether a person's brain is "the same" as it was when they were younger, but whether they can still perform the job. It doesn't make a lot of sense to compare interviews of Trump at age 44 to interviews today (or to do so for Biden or Warren or HRC for that matter).   Older people speak slower than their younger selves.  They take longer to formulate thoughts.  That doesn't mean they aren't capable.  We clearly have no problem electing and appointing septaugenarians and even octogenarians to high levels of leadership - every single one of them is less mentally astute than they were earlier in their lives.    My personal opinion is that there's a long, long list of reasons why Trump is unfit to be our president.  The fact that he's older, fatter and slower than he was in the 1990s doesn't even make the top 10.

[talltexan]

The interesting thing to me is that Republican Presidents are often older. Eisenhower retired from the job in 1961 as the oldest President ever. Nixon, Ford, and Both bushes were all in their sixties when the left the office. Trump continued that pattern, but he broke a different one.

Meanwhile, JFK was the youngest man ever elected to the office. Carter had barely turned 50 when he ascended, and both Clinton and Obama saw their fiftieth birthdays in the office.

What's interesting about Trump is that he was born seventeen years before Obama. Never before in the history of the US has the birth year of a Presidential successor been that much earlier than previous. (Reagan was born 13 years before Carter)

[nereo]

Huh.   As someone who's first presidential election where I could vote was in 2000, it seems really weird to think of Carter as being abnormally young for the time.  To me, he's always been the elder-statesman and former president.

I tried to see if there was a pattern between age and party among current congress members, and concluded that there's just a bunch of 70+ individuals from both parties.  The oldest (Feinstein) is a Democrat, but the next four all from the GOP.  Of those over the age of 70, 15 are democrats, 12 are Republicans, and 2 are independents (both of whom caucus with Ds).  That's statistically insignificant, FWIW.
Expand it to those over 65 and it becomes (21-D / 26-R / 2-I).

[LennStar]

The interesting thing to me is that Republican Presidents are often older. Eisenhower retired from the job in 1961 as the oldest President ever. Nixon, Ford, and Both bushes were all in their sixties when the left the office. Trump continued that pattern, but he broke a different one.

Meanwhile, JFK was the youngest man ever elected to the office. Carter had barely turned 50 when he ascended, and both Clinton and Obama saw their fiftieth birthdays in the office.

What's interesting about Trump is that he was born seventeen years before Obama. Never before in the history of the US has the birth year of a Presidential successor been that much earlier than previous. (Reagan was born 13 years before Carter)

It is no surprise if you remember that conservatives generally have a faible for hierarchys, include the age hierarchy, and also nothing looks more like conservative than an old guy.
In contrast "left" Democrats prefer skill over hierarchy and are generally more rebellious.

There is a reason why left grassroots are mostly led by young women and right grassroots by old men (in comparison to each other). And that is not because the leading Socialists around Marx (including himself) were fervent feminists (at least in theory). It is a self-feeding feedback circle for conservativs to get the conservative people and the "other" side the not-conservativs.

 

[PKFFW]

In Australia at least, there is no responsibility for a citizen to inform themselves.

Rights exist, even if they are not legally permitted, and responsibilities exist, even if they are not legally imposed. You continue to have rights even if you choose not to exercise them, and you continue to have responsibilities even if you choose not to fulfil them.

I understand that in our modern Western society we care a lot for rights and do our best to evade our responsibilities, but there it is.

Among their many other responsibilities, a citizen has a responsibility to inform themselves about things, especially if they wish to express an opinion on them.

Well, yes and no.

Without quibbling as to whether you have any rights at all that are not legally permitted (eg: do you actually have any inherent "right" to life?  If so, I'd love to hear the argument for it) I will agree you are correct up until your last sentence.

It is only your opinion that there is any responsibility for a citizen inform themselves about anything.  I would entirely agree that it would behoove all citizens to inform themselves.  I would entirely agree that all citizens should inform themselves.  I would entirely agree that society would work better if citizens did inform themselves.  However, the simple fact is, there is no responsibility for them to do so.  Just as there is no responsibility for any citizen to like chocolate icecream no matter how much I think it would benefit them if they did.

[MasterStache]

In Australia at least, there is no responsibility for a citizen to inform themselves.

Rights exist, even if they are not legally permitted, and responsibilities exist, even if they are not legally imposed. You continue to have rights even if you choose not to exercise them, and you continue to have responsibilities even if you choose not to fulfil them.

I understand that in our modern Western society we care a lot for rights and do our best to evade our responsibilities, but there it is.

Among their many other responsibilities, a citizen has a responsibility to inform themselves about things, especially if they wish to express an opinion on them.

Well, yes and no.

Without quibbling as to whether you have any rights at all that are not legally permitted (eg: do you actually have any inherent "right" to life?  If so, I'd love to hear the argument for it) I will agree you are correct up until your last sentence.

It is only your opinion that there is any responsibility for a citizen inform themselves about anything.  I would entirely agree that it would behoove all citizens to inform themselves.  I would entirely agree that all citizens should inform themselves.  I would entirely agree that society would work better if citizens did inform themselves.  However, the simple fact is, there is no responsibility for them to do so.  Just as there is no responsibility for any citizen to like chocolate icecream no matter how much I think it would benefit them if they did.

Mmmmm, chocolate ice cream! (-:

[Kyle Schuant]

It is only your opinion that there is any responsibility for a citizen inform themselves about anything. 

It's only your opinion that you have the right to freedom of speech. It's not like we can derive rights and responsibilities from considerations of the formulae of electromagnetism or something.

Humans have rights, and they have responsibilities. These continue to exist whether or not legislation supports or enforces them, and whether or not the person exercises them.

[ysette9]

Ooh, what a good idea!

Now the great debate: is chocolate ice cream worth the trouble of brushing my teeth all over again?

[Just Joe]

Is it worth getting back in the car to drive to the grocery store? Almost... ;)

[PKFFW]

It's only your opinion that you have the right to freedom of speech. It's not like we can derive rights and responsibilities from considerations of the formulae of electromagnetism or something.

Humans have rights, and they have responsibilities. These continue to exist whether or not legislation supports or enforces them, and whether or not the person exercises them.

Ok so you are making the "inherent rights/responsibility" argument.

I've never heard the "inherent" argument applied to responsibilities at all (is there an inherent responsibility to continue to breathe for example?) and certainly never to support the idea that a citizen of a country has the "inherent responsibility" to inform themselves about certain topics.  If that is so, is it their inherent responsibility to continue to be a member of the society about which it is their inherent responsibility to inform themselves?  If not, how then could it be an inherent responsibility to inform themselves about the society if they have no inherent responsibility to even be a member of the society in the first place?  Questions abound.

Care to enlighten me in the nuance of the argument as applied to this inherent responsibility in a manner that goes beyond it being your opinion they should do so?

[talltexan]

It is only your opinion that there is any responsibility for a citizen inform themselves about anything. 

It's only your opinion that you have the right to freedom of speech. It's not like we can derive rights and responsibilities from considerations of the formulae of electromagnetism or something.

Humans have rights, and they have responsibilities. These continue to exist whether or not legislation supports or enforces them, and whether or not the person exercises them.

I'm having trouble deciphering this: are you arguing that there is no fundamental right? Within societies, the prevailing law and traditions of the society define whether this is true. In a natural state, humans are free to express what they want, but they will probably not have the time or inclination to do it while they are fighting off local warlords who are stealing from them.

[MasterStache]

Chocolate ice cream would benefit us all. It's incumbent on all of us to eat more of it. Although my gut would disagree.

[Luke Warm]

Ooh, what a good idea!

Now the great debate: is chocolate ice cream worth the trouble of brushing my teeth all over again?

it is especially if you use a minty toothpaste. mint chocolate! win!

[talltexan]

silly me, always worried about brushing my teeth before I remember to drink Orange juice.

[eljefe-speaks]

His speech at West Point is putting some more doubts into people's heads about his health. He struggled to drink a glass of water...

Some talk show host did a supercut of all the times Trump couldn't drink water without 2 hands. My guess is he has a neck problem that prevents him from tilting his head back. He has to lean back to tilt his head to drink water. This was also true in the famous picture of the oaf staring at the sun during the eclipse.

[OtherJen]

His speech at West Point is putting some more doubts into people's heads about his health. He struggled to drink a glass of water...

Some talk show host did a supercut of all the times Trump couldn't drink water without 2 hands. My guess is he has a neck problem that prevents him from tilting his head back. He has to lean back to tilt his head to drink water. This was also true in the famous picture of the oaf staring at the sun during the eclipse.

But why would that prevent him from lifting his hand high enough to bring a glass of water to his mouth? He was able to do so just a few years ago, according to this article: https://www.forbes.com/sites/stephaniesarkis/2020/06/15/questions-continue-about-president-trumps-health/#4de4d3681468

[nereo]

The most benign explanation may also be the most likely - his wrist hurt (for whatever reason).  Carpal tunnel, osteoarthritis, a mild sprain, an unexpected muscle spasm brought on (ironically) by dehydration or an electolyte imbalance... any of those could give a person trouble holding a glass of water, and none really matter a hoot for being an elected official.
So many reasons I won't support Trump.  I could care less whether he needs two hands to take a sip of water. 

[ixtap]

The most benign explanation may also be the most likely - his wrist hurt (for whatever reason).  Carpal tunnel, osteoarthritis, a mild sprain, an unexpected muscle spasm brought on (ironically) by dehydration or an electolyte imbalance... any of those could give a person trouble holding a glass of water, and none really matter a hoot for being an elected official.
So many reasons I won't support Trump.  I could care less whether he needs two hands to take a sip of water.

I think this is a good example of people stooping to his level. He would be all over it if someone currently out of favor stumbled or in any way showed a sign of physical weakness, but as an incident it is completely unimportant.

Just like his birthday. Hey, its Trump's birthday and he hates Obama, so let's flood social media with pictures of Obama. Um, how about let's not be petty and keep posting other things that piss off Trump supporters, like social programs, police reform, BLM, trans rights...

[eljefe-speaks]

The most benign explanation may also be the most likely - his wrist hurt (for whatever reason).  Carpal tunnel, osteoarthritis, a mild sprain, an unexpected muscle spasm brought on (ironically) by dehydration or an electolyte imbalance... any of those could give a person trouble holding a glass of water, and none really matter a hoot for being an elected official.
So many reasons I won't support Trump.  I could care less whether he needs two hands to take a sip of water.

I think this is a good example of people stooping to his level. He would be all over it if someone currently out of favor stumbled or in any way showed a sign of physical weakness, but as an incident it is completely unimportant.

Just like his birthday. Hey, its Trump's birthday and he hates Obama, so let's flood social media with pictures of Obama. Um, how about let's not be petty and keep posting other things that piss off Trump supporters, like social programs, police reform, BLM, trans rights...

... science, logic, truth, democracy...

[ixtap]

The most benign explanation may also be the most likely - his wrist hurt (for whatever reason).  Carpal tunnel, osteoarthritis, a mild sprain, an unexpected muscle spasm brought on (ironically) by dehydration or an electolyte imbalance... any of those could give a person trouble holding a glass of water, and none really matter a hoot for being an elected official.
So many reasons I won't support Trump.  I could care less whether he needs two hands to take a sip of water.

I think this is a good example of people stooping to his level. He would be all over it if someone currently out of favor stumbled or in any way showed a sign of physical weakness, but as an incident it is completely unimportant.

Just like his birthday. Hey, its Trump's birthday and he hates Obama, so let's flood social media with pictures of Obama. Um, how about let's not be petty and keep posting other things that piss off Trump supporters, like social programs, police reform, BLM, trans rights...

... science, logic, truth, democracy...

That is a much better list than mine!

[nereo]

So according to exerpts from Bolton's new book, Trump directly asked China's president Xi to "help him win re-election".

Apparently nothing was learned from Ukraine...

[OtherJen]

So according to exerpts from Bolton's new book, Trump directly asked China's president Xi to "help him win re-election".

Apparently nothing was learned from Ukraine...

Why would he have learned anything? Nothing he does ever has negative consequences for him.

[ysette9]

So according to exerpts from Bolton's new book, Trump directly asked China's president Xi to "help him win re-election".

Apparently nothing was learned from Ukraine...

He learned that he can get away with shit like that

[nereo]

So according to exerpts from Bolton's new book, Trump directly asked China's president Xi to "help him win re-election".

Apparently nothing was learned from Ukraine...

Why would he have learned anything? Nothing he does ever has negative consequences for him.

I realize that's a popular narrative, but I don't think it's accurate.  He wasn't removed from office, but he was impeached. A great number of his actions have been struck down by the courts, and his support numbers have been awful, even during a stretch of economic expansion, relative peace and low unemployment when he should have been riding very high. He had he smallest "rally-around-the-flag" bump of any major leader, and now is one of the few that's below pre-Covid levels. He lost the House in large part because of a reaction to his presidency.  If he loses re-election he will have done so having out-spent all other elections and as the only President to have never had a monthly approval rating above 50%.   Many of his marquee businesses have lost substantial revenue, and some (e.g. the Trump Hotel in DC) are up for sale.

[GuitarStv]

So according to exerpts from Bolton's new book, Trump directly asked China's president Xi to "help him win re-election".

Apparently nothing was learned from Ukraine...

Why would he have learned anything? Nothing he does ever has negative consequences for him.

I realize that's a popular narrative, but I don't think it's accurate.  He wasn't removed from office, but he was impeached. A great number of his actions have been struck down by the courts, and his support numbers have been awful, even during a stretch of economic expansion, relative peace and low unemployment when he should have been riding very high. He had he smallest "rally-around-the-flag" bump of any major leader, and now is one of the few that's below pre-Covid levels. He lost the House in large part because of a reaction to his presidency.  If he loses re-election he will have done so having out-spent all other elections and as the only President to have never had a monthly approval rating above 50%.   Many of his marquee businesses have lost substantial revenue, and some (e.g. the Trump Hotel in DC) are up for sale.

Besides the impeachment, all of that was due to his own incompetence and stupidity.  Not because of the crimes he committed while president.

I think that Trump learned the lesson that the Republicans taught him very well about committing crimes while in office.  There are no rules for you President Trump.  There is no conduct that you can perform that is unbecoming, and there are no laws to which you are beholden.  If the Democrats try to hold you accountable, we'll cover for you.

Lesson learned, and learned well!

[talltexan]

It's not a free pass, though. For Trump to enjoy the support of Republicans--which means accepting whatever corruption he can manage--he has to deliver:

• Tax Cuts
• Judges
• Eternal occupation of the White House

[bacchi]

It's not a free pass, though. For Trump to enjoy the support of Republicans--which means accepting whatever corruption he can manage--he has to deliver:

• Tax Cuts
• Judges
• Eternal occupation of the White House

Evangelicals were hoping that the Court would limit rights for LBGT and Gorsuch disappointed. Does that sour the 2nd part of the deal?

[Travis]

It's not a free pass, though. For Trump to enjoy the support of Republicans--which means accepting whatever corruption he can manage--he has to deliver:

• Tax Cuts
• Judges
• Eternal occupation of the White House

Republican voters or Republican members of Congress? He needs the former to be reelected, and he needs the latter to get through legislation.  Right now he doesn't need the Republicans in Congress on his side.  He'll never be in danger from that side of the aisle as long as McConnell is still there to do his bidding.  If he gets reelected, the rest will fall back in line and do what he tells them.

[John Galt incarnate!]

Humans have rights, and they have responsibilities. These continue to exist whether or not legislation supports or enforces them, and whether or not the person exercises them.

Kyle, under the Australian Constitution what guaranteed "personal rights" do you and your fellow Australians enjoy?

I'm curious.

EDIT: I found them further down in the WIKI entry.

No Bill of Rights

The Constitution contains no comprehensive set of human rights guarantees. Factors sometimes cited for this include faith in the common law's protection of rights and a belief that a powerful Senate would effectively resist overzealous governments.

The Constitution does contain protection for several specific rights. These include:

right to vote in Commonwealth elections if one can vote in State ones (section 41)

freedom of religion, and prohibition of religious tests for Federal offices (section 116)
trial by jury in Federal cases tried on indictment (section 80)

"just terms" for the compulsory "acquisition" of property by the Commonwealth (section 51(xxxi))

an ambiguously worded prohibition on discrimination against residents of other States (section 117)[34][35]


Wikipedia

The [Australian] Constitution created a framework of government some of whose main features, and sources of inspiration, were the following:

constitutional monarchy (British and existing colonial models)

federalism (United States model)

parliamentary, or "responsible", government (British and existing colonial models)

distinct textual separation of powers (US model)

direct election to both Houses of Parliament (then a novelty)

Governor-General as a representative of a monarch (existing colonial models, notably Canada)

requirement of a referendum for amendment of the Constitution (Swiss model)

only very limited guarantees of personal rights (rejection of the US model)

judicial review (US model)

[talltexan]

Do the Commonwealth countries operate without free expression? Is criticism of the Queen something against which government can sanction?

Here in the US, it feels like criticism of the President is an Olympic sport.

[DarkandStormy]

It's not a free pass, though. For Trump to enjoy the support of Republicans--which means accepting whatever corruption he can manage--he has to deliver:

• Tax Cuts
• Judges
• Eternal occupation of the White House

Republican voters or Republican members of Congress? He needs the former to be reelected, and he needs the latter to get through legislation.  Right now he doesn't need the Republicans in Congress on his side. He'll never be in danger from that side of the aisle as long as McConnell is still there to do his bidding.  If he gets reelected, the rest will fall back in line and do what he tells them.

Not sure why you think McConnell is doing Trump's bidding.  Trump is merely a rubber stamp for McConnell.  It's the other way around - Trump is doing McConnell's bidding.

[RetiredAt63]

Do the Commonwealth countries operate without free expression? Is criticism of the Queen something against which government can sanction?

Here in the US, it feels like criticism of the President is an Olympic sport.

The Queen is pretty irrelevant, the main discussion is do we even bother keeping the monarchy after she is gone.  But that is a constitutional issue and not of major public concern.   A bit more attention is paid to the GG but again it's basically a ceremonial position.  It's always open season on politicians, especially the PM and Opposition leader.

And Singh (NDP leader) is making news because he called a Bloc member a racist in the House of Commons, for good reason, and won't apologize.

Edited because I obviously can't type or proofread on my tablet.