Trump Hits The Nail on the Head Again

[Tim_D]

A wise man once said “Leaders have to lead but they also have to listen”.

Listening is a two-way street. You certainly seem to be interested in lecturing one side. Do not your snippets of wisdom apply to both?

 

[liturgyluver]

Listening is a two-way street. You certainly seem to be interested in lecturing one side. Do not your snippets of wisdom apply to both?

Yes, as I have said - for the third time now!

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Of course, you don’t see it as disappointing that a sitting congressman refuses to attend the inauguration because he has deemed the president elect to be “illegitimate.”

And it is OK to say on national news that “I don’t see this President-elect as a legitimate president” ?

Yet you have no problem with Lewis calling Trump illegitimate? Double standards at its finest.

Do you mean like the whole left including the congressman are doing to Trump.

To all of you who think their disagreement with Lewis on the issue of Trump legitimacy is a valid defense for Trump’s most recent tweet:

Notice that nowhere in Trump’s tweet does he even mention the issue of his legitimacy, or try to offer an argument for his position. He could have cited any number of arguments to refute John Lewis. But instead he relied on the teachings of his mentor and right-hand man of Senator McCarthy, Roy Cohn. Cohn taught him that when you are attacked, you attack back, and harder. That tactic served McCarthy well, until saner heads eventually prevailed. But it is a new tactic in today’s public sphere, so I guess we have to learn our lesson all over again. The point is this tactic is anti-reason.

If Lewis made a statement that is against Trump, reason would suggest that the statement should be refuted. But the unreasoned attack that Trump made had as its intended side effect to change the subject away from Trump’s legitimacy and toward irrelevant attacks against Lewis. Even if the attacks turn out to be easily refutable (and they are), they still achieve their goal for Trump of changing the debate.

In this case I don’t know why Trump bothered with such a distasteful display. He is in no danger of being ruled illegitimate. The vast majority of the nation has accepted him as our next President and things are moving along toward a peaceful transition of power. There will always be some people who will voice objections, but if Trump insists on trashing everyone who disagrees with him, like this civil rights legend who has put his life on the line in the service of these rights, Trump is going to be judged very petty by history.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

I don’t see it as mindlessly tweeting. I see it as calling out people who need to be called out. I also think the fighting is good. When politicians get along it means they are going along with each other to the detriment of the common good. Fighting certainly is a good thing when one major political party casts every policy of the other as being based solely on hatred and cruelty. Unreasonable people can’t be reasoned with. They must be fought.

Fighting through reasoned debates benefits our nation. Fighting with mindless irrelevant personal attacks does not.

 

[Michael68]

How very disappointing to see our President Elect denigrate anyone who disagrees with him. But in this case I don’t know what he means. Congressman Lewis is a representative of the people of 3/4 of Atlanta. He does not govern them. That is the responsibility of the mayor of Atlanta and to some extent the Governor of Georgia. If Trump has any complaints about the condition of the 5th district of Georgia, he should take it up with them instead of making silly comments about their Congressman.

Their silly congressman should stop making silly statements that make no sense!

 

[Brendan]

How very disappointing to see our President Elect denigrate anyone who disagrees with him. But in this case I don’t know what he means…

Trump told Lewis to “fix and help”. Are you saying that Lewis cannot do either in Congress?* If the only people who can fix and help the district is the Mayor,then whatis Lewis doing in Washington at all?

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Trump told Lewis to “fix and help”. Are you saying that Lewis cannot do either in Congress?* If the only people who can fix and help the district is the Mayor,then whatis Lewis doing in Washington at all?

He is representing the interests and views of the people in his district, and by all accounts, the people in his district agree with him.

In any case, there are many other districts in the nation with problems. But Trump picked on this one because of what Lewis said about Trump. Very petty.

 

[7_Sorrows]

"President-elect Donald Trump harshly responded to civil rights icon John Lewis on Saturday, calling him “all talk” and “no action” after the Georgia lawmaker said Trump was not a “legitimate” president.

“Congressman John Lewis should spend more time on fixing and helping his district, which is in horrible shape and falling apart (not to mention crime infested) rather than falsely complaining about the election results. All talk, talk, talk - no action or results. Sad,” Trump tweeted Saturday, which happened to fall on the weekend of the Martin Luther King Jr. federal holiday."

cnn.com/2017/01/14/politics/john-lewis-donald-trump/index.html

How very refreshing to hear someone state the obvious that many have been thinking for years. Many of the “civil rights” representatives in Congress spend all of their time spewing hot air in Washington while conditions in their districts back home crumble. Whatever happened to representing your constituency?

I am glad Trump will not be a pushover for these bitter and disrespectful politicians.
They are still experiencing sour grapes Hillary will not be standing at the podium this Friday.

 

[7_Sorrows]

He is representing the interests and views of the people in his district, and by all accounts, the people in his district agree with him.

In any case, there are many other districts in the nation with problems. But Trump picked on this one because of what Lewis said about Trump. Very petty.

You are characterizing the wrong person as petty.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

I am glad Trump will not be a pushover for these bitter and disrespectful politicians.

There is large distance between being a pushover and being the schoolyard bully. As President Elect, couldn’t he have picked somewhere in between?

 

[pianistclare]

Of course, you don’t see it as disappointing that a sitting congressman refuses to attend the inauguration because he has deemed the president elect to be “illegitimate.”

Also, as a congressman, it is your duty to represent the people of your district. You don’t get to say that your district is a mess and crumbling to the ground but “that’s not my job, it’s the job of the mayor.” If it isn’t part of the duty of the representative, then what is his function at all?

Classic partisan politics: criticize Trump for stating the obvious but give a pass to the one on whom part of the burden lies. Pitiful.

Agreed. And I’m QUITE familiar with Atlanta.

 

[Michael68]

There is large distance between being a pushover and being the schoolyard bully. As President Elect, couldn’t he have picked somewhere in between?

Can your side stop bullying? I don’t think so.
Good for Trump standing up to this silliness!!!

 

[7_Sorrows]

There is large distance between being a pushover and being the schoolyard bully. As President Elect, couldn’t he have picked somewhere in between?

he is only letting the liberals attacking him daily and relentlously that he can fight back. Trump is not the bully in the schoolyard. He is surrounded by bullies - the media, Hollywood and the liberal politicians.

 

[Tim_D]

If Lewis made a statement that is against Trump, reason would suggest that the statement should be refuted.

He did refute it. Maybe not in the scholastic tradition that you prefer but by pointing out a harsh reality, that a congressman is more concerned with petty political “consequences” (where have we heard that term used in regard to elections before?) than the conditions of his congressional district back home. Is lack of jobs, low income and high crime acceptable had Hillary Clinton became president? It certainly seems of low concern since Trump will be president.

…but if Trump insists on trashing everyone who disagrees with him, like this civil rights legend who has put his life on the line in the service of these rights, Trump is going to be judged very petty by history.

People don’t care about “civil rights legends” anymore. The people who were alive back then are either dead or old enough to where they don’t care about it anymore because they’ve been hearing it all their lives. For the people who were born and grew up after, it has no impact on them. Martin Luther King day is equally greeted as labor day or memorial day by thousands of federal and state workers because it gives them a 3-day weekend. Nothing more.

If Trump can foster conditions that will improve the economy, create jobs and make people more optimistic then he will be judged well.

 

[dvdjs]

CNN posted a story about it and linked it to BuzzFeed. They may not have published the details, but by linking it, they gave it their approval of legitimacy.

No. CNN published their article about how this document was moving about the top echelons of the government. Period.

BuzzFeed followed up after CNN and published the document, with disclaimers about its verification. After the BuzzFeed publication, and the ensuing sensation, CNN updated it web article with the link. There was widespread discussion of the BuzzFeed article thrughout the media.

It used to be in the news business, you did not give credence to things that were unsubstantiated.

Huh? I am not sure when this graceful period was, but certainly it has been long, long gone in the alt-media. And even in the MSM: what substantiation process was used to vet information obtained from WikiLeaks, let alone stories imaginatively created from them?

You certainly do seem to employ a nuanced use of the word “truth.” The avalanche of criticism toward CNN in regards to this event was a result of them presenting things as “fact” that could not be substantiated. Or are all of CNN’s critics equally ignorant of the “truth” as us here?

I googled. I found some criticism in the MSM of BuzzFeed, but not CNN. Some of the criticism was that it opened the door for DJT and followers to be dismissive of all of the issues raised, by cherry picking some details that did no pan out. It, of course, also opened the door to further advancing of epistemological chaos, and to attack the press - which had been sitting on this for months, even before the election. DJT should have thanked them profusely.

And no responsible person criticized CNN or BuzzFeed for presented the research as fact, because they did not do this.

NO ONE presented “things as ‘fact’ that could not be substantiated” That is not a nuanced truth. That is a simple truth. Some may find that not particularly meaningful, since inevitably some will take the disclaimed material as laden with truthiness; information should be disseminated with greater responsibility.

I welcome that. It would be especially welcome if there were some self reflection about how this irresponsibility was employed so lavishly to advance the canididacy of DJT

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Can your side stop bullying? I don’t think so.

A bully is someone with superior power who misuses it. I don’t see Lewis as having superior power in this debate. In fact, Lewis’ comment has no power at all, and is easily refuted if needed. But if you don’t trust reason, then I suppose you would resort to the Roy Cohn tactic.

 

[Tim_D]

You are characterizing the wrong person as petty.

 

[Tim_D]

There is large distance between being a pushover and being the schoolyard bully. As President Elect, couldn’t he have picked somewhere in between?

Trump is accused of being an “illegitimate” president and you think he went over the line in his response?

What situation can you describe where his response could be deemed appropriate?

 

[Tim_D]

And no responsible person criticized CNN or BuzzFeed for presented the research as fact, because they did not do this.

You must not watch or read the daily news.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

He did refute it. Maybe not in the scholastic tradition that you prefer but by pointing out a harsh reality, that a congressman is more concerned with petty political “consequences” (where have we heard that term used in regard to elections before?) than the conditions of his congressional district back home. Is lack of jobs, low income and high crime acceptable had Hillary Clinton became president? It certainly seems of low concern since Trump will be president.

That you think this is a refutation of the claim that Trump is illegitimate is a sad commentary on the state of reasoned debate in the public sphere.

People don’t care about “civil rights legends” anymore. The people who were alive back then are either dead or old enough to where they don’t care about it anymore because they’ve been hearing it all their lives. For the people who were born and grew up after, it has no impact on them.

OK, now you have officially jumped off the deep end.