Members of Potus’ inner circle and at least one member of his expanding legal team are now calling him a ” unitary executive”.About fifty years ago a woman psychiatrist,(for some reason I don’t want to use female here)I believe her name was Beulah Parker,wrote a book called ‘my language is me.’It explored the language of schizophrenics,neologisms,clang association etc.and sought dynamic explanations that linked to a meaningful historical developmental self.The treatment of schizophrenia is no longer significantly psychoanalytic but the psycholinguistic view of speech as doing more than communicating persists.With this introduction,let’s look at the words “unitary executive”.Unitary is a seldom used word more at home in the 18th and 19th century than today.It is a cross between single(unique)and singular( remarkable),executive simply means mover,shaker and boss.The argument is that this nonpareil( it means unrivaled,unmatchable one) cannot be prosecuted for a crime,( murder too !?)can fire anyone,can pardon anyone( not only those guilty of federal crimes) himself as well,if through some miscarriage of justice he is convicted of a crime( murder too ?!)America beware! These clowns have described an Emperor a Supreme Ruler whose power regards(disregards)Constitutionall limitations and definitions simply as suggestions &and uncemented guidelines.
The fatal confrontations between police and fellow citizens and humans is influenced by the ‘terms of engagement’ war language employed with the encouragement of DOJ rather than the policy language of civilian oversight bodies.With less warlike language we may find police killing others while fearing for their lives less common.This is not a likely outcome with a DOJ headed by unitary executive myrmidon,Stennis held sway for over 40 years as a Dixiecrat senator from Mississippi.How long can we tolerate Sessions.
-
Follow
Following
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
The Octogenarians 
Daedal2207: “The treatment of schizophrenia is no longer significantly psychoanalytic but the psycholinguistic view of speech as doing more than communicating persists.”
By “psycholinguistic view of speech” does Daedal2207 mean – what people choose to read into it – often called “spin”?
No matter the words used by others to describe the POTUS the courts will decide his constitutionally allowed range of powers and limitations. Let’s hope that the judging courts are dedicated to the original, divided-power intent of the constitution and not dedicated to usurping powers of Congress or the Presidency.
Why would a DOJ myrmidon (even if accurately described) cause police to be inclined, or desirous of killing without good reason? And what is “Stennis”?
I have detected alarming rates of “disrespect” for Trump, the individual, the President, and the process. Perhaps the focus should be on content – message rather than messenger. “What works best” will be an objective, measurable process with measurable results. Liking or hating the messenger of a policy or an idea matters not at all if that which is being advanced truly benefits the future. “What works best” does not have to be something that anyone needs to demonize or “feel” as being Offensive or Godly. So, respect the process that most likely reveals the objective truth of things. The scientific method tests and reveals the most probable truths. Logic, based with truthful premises, allows us to bring the highest accuracy to projected consequences.
It seems to me that focusing on content with someone who lies so frequently and so absurdly cannot be helpful to your argument.Thanks for the pickup Stennis is the beginning of a clipped sentence. See the revision.
My argument focused attention away from the “messenger’s” styles of speech. Hyperbole, or exaggeration, can be considered a stylistic form of lying, but when understood within various contexts it becomes something less or not at all egregious. Sometimes it is even positive. Ted Kennedy “borked” Bork by exaggerating, or lying, about the character and consequences of the judge’s judgments. Obama most certainly lied about “keeping your doctor”. These provide solid reasons for being skeptical about the true intent of these person’s verbal expressions. A claim to know exactly what another meant or intended is often itself a form of lie if it ignores many variables that should be revealed within one’s analysis.
The content of the issue facing the placement of Bork on the Supreme Court had to do with determining the basic function of the court, “original intent” or “a living document”. The content of messenger Obama’s effort had to do with which healthcare system is “best” – central control or free market. Our efforts at wisdom have to do with knowing best what will be the ACTUAL consequences if that which is advocated prevails – no matter the messengers’ use of lies or truths,
Reblogged this on daedal2207's Blog and commented:
“Disrespect”is now an excuse for fighting and killing even if it is only. verbal or gestural. Trumpeter stop Trumpeting!