We need to stop reacting to Trump—and start responding. There’s a big difference.

President Donald Trump speaks with reporters before departing on Marine One on the South Lawn of the White House, Wednesday, Aug. 21, 2019, in Washington. Trump is headed to Kentucky. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

In a busy 48-hour period, President Trump asserted on camera that any American Jew who votes for Democrats is “uninformed or disloyal”; broadcast Wayne Allyn Root’s praise of his own person in a tweet (“the Jewish people in Israel love him...like he’s the King of Israel. They love him like he is the second coming of God”); and, while riffing on his own alleged fortitude in deciding to “take on China,” looked up at the sky and shouted, over the din of a helicopter, “I am the chosen one!” These statements from a commander in chief of the United States military are more than a little unprecedented.

If it is true that Americans are peculiarly vigilant when it comes to a president’s pretensions to divinity or rhetorical targeting of some Jews as more acceptable than others, one might think this would cause more than a temporary stir. And yet it is as if the citizenry has been trained to dutifully let it all go by Sunday. The actionable intelligence of such eye-rubbingly irresponsible statements voiced aloud by a man entrusted with the power to deploy lethal force against any person or population he deems a threat will hardly register as a blip in the U.S. bandwidth. How did this come to be?

Advertisement

The beloved science fiction writer Philip K. Dick once offered an account of the function of disinformation that could prove helpful in an era when verifiable facts (like a recording of the president’s statement) gain little or no traction among people paralyzed by a cascade of reactions—and reactions to reactions—that always seem to fall short of substantial response to the facts. Disinformation, Mr. Dick tells us, is “noise driving out signal,” but it “is noise posing as signal so you do not even recognize it as noise.”

Disinformation deadens the possibility of an actively informed electorate and, therefore, coherent governance.

It works like a charm. Disinformation deadens the possibility of an actively informed electorate and, therefore, coherent governance. In words worthy of Hannah Arendt or George Orwell, Mr. Dick names the state of play powerfully: “If you float enough disinformation into circulation you will totally abolish everyone’s contact with reality, probably your own included.”

This is indeed our current state. The president speaks, people react, repeat cycle. At least for now, it remains a stimulus-reaction procedure, not stimulus-response. Response would involve a moral actor risking something. As we try to maintain contact with reality, we recall the existence, on paper, of the 25th Amendment. Who in the president’s inner circle could serve as the adult in the room? Perhaps Vice President Pence. Or maybe we need someone who’s recently left the room. Some Republican commentators have suggested that Nikki Haley might play that role. Perhaps they will risk something.

[Don’t miss more stories like this one. Sign up for our newsletter.]

Or not. The former ambassador to the United Nations offered no response to the president’s pronouncements concerning his chosenness. While many of us were distracted by the question of whether or not Mr. Trump thought of himself as the Messiah, Ms. Haley saw fit to react, instead, to supposed rumors that she would replace Mr. Pence as vice president on the 2020 ticket. “Enough of the false rumors,” she tweeted. “Vice President Pence has been a dear friend of mine for years. He has been a loyal and trustworthy VP to the President. He has my complete support.”

To be clear, this is not the response of a self-respecting adult in the room. This is a reaction to alleged reactions, which Ms. Haley alluringly refers to as “false rumors.” What false rumors? To even ask is to risk being drawn into another disinformation cycle, a culture of non-response, all heat and no light. To risk genuine response is to lose ground in a realm driven by reaction. In truth, we have been at it for a while.

Consider the night then-candidate Trump hosted “Saturday Night Live” in 2015. A ratings boon or an act of profound irresponsibility on the part of NBC? Let the viewer decide. This question was alive and signaling in the opening monologue that was abruptly interrupted by Larry David, who stood up on live television and yelled, “Trump’s a racist!” After a few pregnant seconds, Mr. David revealed he was a paid protester. The audience laughed. “That’s O.K.,” Mr. Trump allowed in the tone of a mafia boss, and the “great show tonight” proceeded unencumbered.

Four years on, the question of whether or not Mr. Trump is a racist is still ratings gold because it invites endless reaction, huge audiences and, let the reader understand, money-making without end. Was Mr. David’s role in this exchange a shirking of responsibility? That is a question for actual signal, not noise.

We do well to take our own measure concerning whether or not deep responsibility remains among our core concerns.

Then as now, Mr. Trump’s implied call for the execution of black men who were later exonerated (the Central Park Five) and refusal to apologize for his incendiary language awaits a substantial response from someone who can meaningfully counter his claims to authority. No Republican nominee for president nor anyone in Mr. Trump’s cabinet has found it expedient to risk a substantial response to these incitements to violence. Reaction? Oh my, yes, all day long. Response? Not yet. In October 2016, Mr. Pence heard an audio recording of Donald J. Trump boasting about his own pattern of sexual assault. Mr. Pence responded by concluding that he still had a sufficiently credible partner in pursuing his goals. Millions of Americans followed his lead.

[Want to discuss politics with other America readers? Join our Facebook discussion group, moderated by America’s writers and editors.]

And today, the pattern of predatory disinformation repeats. For news networks, provocation drives profits in an expense of spirit and a waste of shame, a lucrative effort for some but an assault on the general welfare of many. We wake up wanting to tune in and weigh in, and we are blessed (or cursed) with the technology to do so. As we pause and wonder how it is that we, the people, could allow a man whose ignorance of and contempt for the Constitution is well established to take the oath of office for the president of the United States, we do well to consider the distance between reaction and response, noise and signal, disinformation and actionable intelligence. We do well to take our own measure concerning whether or not deep responsibility remains among our core concerns.

Rebecca Solnit offers a timely adage for anyone interested in being a genuinely responsive people in this beleaguered world that God so loves: “The revolt against brutality begins with a revolt against the language that hides that brutality.”

Disinformation of the sort President Trump floats by speaking of disloyal Jews, his role in the second coming of God and his own chosenness is of a piece with his own refusal to commit, in advance, to accept the results of our last presidential election: “I’ll keep you in suspense.” Shocking words and disavowals of the duties and obligations of law-abiding citizens are nothing new among men without boundaries. Disorientating speech is in the playbook of anyone who feels their survival depends on avoiding accountability. Keeping others in suspended animation is a form of flex essential for brutal behavior and brutalizing policies.

But we need not be stupefied by this cycle of weaponized incoherence nor continue to enable the enablers of disinformation. We can wake up to ourselves at any time and, if stupefaction is a process rather than a state, we can reverse the process in myriad ways even now. One risky and responsive word at a time.

Comments are automatically closed two weeks after an article's initial publication. See our comments policy for more.
J Jones
1 month 2 weeks ago

I read it the day Slate published it. Newsflash: news organizations have editorial strategies. Newsflash: that is one good reason among many to read a broad range of publications across the ideological spectrum. Newsflash: Trump is a racist and a liar. Millions and millions of Americans do not mind. Some of them comment here. I suspect you do care. And yet you distract. It is a puzzle, Stuart.

Stuart Meisenzahl
1 month 2 weeks ago

J Jones
News flash : the NYTimes transcript demonstrates unequivocal premeditated bias by a media giant who is suppose to report facts. And to the point of my original comment on this matter, it demonstrates that the NY Times intends to create a racism narrative now that it’s two year Russian Collusion narrative has collapsed ....killed off by the very person the Times was depending on for vindication. Newspapers are not suppose to create “narratives”.....ie., where every story and news report contains either blatant or subtle cross references to the same theme. The NY Times Executive Editor was not talking about The Times editorial policy ...this was at a newsroom staff meeting describing how “ The News “ was going to be handled going forward.

J Jones
1 month 2 weeks ago

Actually, here is what is on the leaked audio in no particular order and these are just the topics I recall from the transcript of the unstructured 75 minute exchange between Baquet and dozens of NYTimes staff who were calling questions and comments he would then address:
- Baquet talked about pretty basic stuff for a newspaper. Will the word "racist" get past the editors or will the newsroom (reporters) need to report without using that descriptive term? (Baquet, the NYTimes first Black executive editor, does not want investigative reporters to use the term). This parallels the discussions throughout US journalism about whether
the word "lie" would be used by reporters in articles about the 45th President of the United States and his Admin (increasingly, yes).
- Additionally, Baquet talked about how the newsroom was "built" to cover Trump during the Mueller investigation. That refers to investigative teams, assignments, page/section placement, resources for travel, resources for fact-checking leads and making reporters available to other news outlets, etc --- standard newsroom logistics. The President of the United States and his Administration were under investigation by a Special Counsel for collusion with a hostile foreign government to impact a US Presidential election. The NYTimes used its globally unparalleled investigative resources to "build" a newsroom capable of covering that story. Enormous story? Check. Enormous resources devoted to it? Check. Enormous print space devoted to it? Check. The Mueller investigation is over. Check. Only if the paper were going to close up shop would there be no need for "rebuilding the newsroom".
- This particular conversation between Baquet and the newsroom was prompted by a serious controversy over a headline and the art and science of headlines.
- It was also prompted by an enormous conflict by a Times Congressional editor's problematic Twittering about Congresswomen of color and female Congressional candidates of color
- it was also prompted by that same editor for professional retaliation against a black female colleague for her public and critical response to his public and problematic tweets about black women of color who are members of Congress as well as candidates.
-Also addressed was how the NYTimes has and will report
Trump, long on the factual record as a racist, has deployed his racism as a primary political tool from the get-go. It has been evident and corrosive from the get-go.
- Then there is the reality that newspapers are for profit-businesses and need readers and were/are unhappy with some of the above.

That is a LOT for Baquet and dozens and dozens of NYTimes staff to address in an unstructured dialogue in 75 minutes. And that ------- all that ----- is what is on the leaked audio. I leave you to your characterizations and your unfettered right to criticize the NYTimes.

None of that changes who The current President of the United States has revealed and continues to reveal himself to be every day through his own words: an impulsive and ignorant and racist narcissist who lies and attacks as reflexively as he breathes and who poisons almost everything he touches, creating chaos all over the world because he and millions of Americans are good with all that.

E.Patrick Mosman
1 month 2 weeks ago

Actually the media and democrat Presidential candidates have failed the morality test with false accusations about the President's Charlottesville statement and failed to even mention progressive/liberal officials using obviously one-sided media reports to arouse the anti-Trump masses. What exactly happened when a permitted rally opposing the removal of a statue was met by masked, armed antifa thugs who had no permit to be in that part of the city.Who threw the first stone? Who attacked whom with bats, bottles of urine,pepper spray etc? Who has been and continues disrupting conservative speakers on campus with violence? Who hid their identity? Who had a permit to hold a public meeting at the park? Who has the right,no pun intended, to judge one side over another, pseudo Nazis vs hard core Progressives(Communists) and racist organizations like BLM? Lets get real over who is the most violent. As the President said both sides had violent members.
Perhaps a reporter for the NY Times is telling it like it was, "antifa'" thugs beating those who came to protest the rewriting of history.
Sheryl Gay Stolberg ? @SherylNYT Replying to @SherylNYT 2. "The hard left seemed as hate-filled as alt-right. I saw club-wielding "antifa" beating white nationalists being led out of the park. 2/2"
It is time for a reset of the media and democrats moral compasses.

E.Patrick Mosman
1 month 2 weeks ago

Duplicate removed

E.Patrick Mosman
1 month 2 weeks ago

REmoved

Vincent Gaglione
1 month 3 weeks ago

“These statements from a commander in chief of the United States military are more than a little unprecedented.” Ya think!

The responses, not reactions, are supposed to come from reliable and trustworthy sources, people in positions that give them gravitas. BUT, we live in a USA society where that kind of thinking just doesn’t exist anymore. For example, read some of the commenters in various articles here about the Pope! And foreign leaders with some gravitas – Angela Merkel, for example - hold no weight with USA citizens whose lifeblood is American exceptionalism.

Even our own sources of morality and honesty, a local Bishop and the parish priest, have abdicated their roles in speaking responses to immorality on the political level. I cite the deliberate name-calling and handling of people in the immigration policies that Trump has endeavored to implement.

I am not at all sure that the responses that would challenge the president will ever be spoken or heard because a significant portion of the citizenry has lost its moral compass and has substituted political rhetoric for moral certitude. That the president speaks and acts immorally on the political level quite often, I have no doubt in my mind, even if everyone else thinks I am crazy.

J Cosgrove
1 month 3 weeks ago

But we can always depend on you being the superior moral person. You tell us repeatedly that others here lack your understanding and character. I suggest you watch the entire press conference and give an accurate assessment. It’s what a moral person would do. The author completely distorted the Trump comment and you fell for it. See full conference The China discussion starts about 15:30 minutes into it.
https://cs.pn/33Wjagi

Stuart Meisenzahl
1 month 3 weeks ago

Vince
You seem to believe and assert that American politics has entered into a level of political coarseness,veniality, and immorality never before seen in our land.
As I recollect you were in the education business and as such you know well that as far back the Jefferson-Hamilton campaigns that the norm was gross accusations, purchase of defamatory newspaper articles, spreading of maliciously false rumors, hiring of street thugs to break up rallies, torch light intimidation,etc. As Secretary of State to Adams, Jefferson systematically spread lies about Adams and his programs. The Jackson election campaign is famous for its populist outrage in every form..

The Past misconduct is no excuse for current political misconduct , but it does belie your moralistic, finger-wagging assertion that we are in the midst of a new era of uncorrected coarseness and immorality.

Vincent Gaglione
1 month 3 weeks ago

Morning Stuart,

“…..that we are in the midst of a new era of uncorrected coarseness and immorality.” At least you do appreciate my moralistic tone, it would seem. (I am a little taken aback by those accusing me of an arrogant moralist point of view. What the hell else are we expected to express on a Catholic website, eh!) The fact is that after some 200+ years I would hope that we would be beyond the kind of coarseness and immorality to which you refer. But as you correctly pointed out, it is a “new era” of it. And, yes indeed, I don’t think that we should have to endure such again.
Vinny

Stuart Meisenzahl
1 month 3 weeks ago

Vince
The current iteration of this political coarseness and extreme language has the same roots as the past eras of such events—populism -unleashed wholesale dissatisfaction with the established political leaders. It is well to keep in mind that the Trump election was as much a rejection of the entrenched Republican leaders as it was of the Democratic Candidate /Democratic apparatus.

Christopher Scott
1 month 3 weeks ago

....So those that belong to the political party of Harvey Weinstein and Jeffrey Epstein, and support drag queen story time and teaching gender fluidity to children get to accuse others of losing their moral compass? Trump says a lot of bombastic things, but he was right when he said “You may not like me but you have to vote for me... otherwise you get that” (He’s right about a lot of things that count) Like I sad earlier, liberalism today is a full blown mental disorder.

Crystal Watson
1 month 3 weeks ago

Jeffrey Epstein, who Trump called "a terrific guy", who Trump hung around with for decades, who had Trump's private phone numbers in his little black book. That Jeffrey Epstein?

Christopher Scott
1 month 3 weeks ago

Epstein was banned from ALL Trump resorts. Trump called him out and it’s the Trump administration that is prosecuting him (still) Not so with Bill Clinton. Obama never went after him and if Hillary got elected it’s doubtful anything would have changed. You really need to turn off the fake news get out more often.

Stuart Meisenzahl
1 month 3 weeks ago

Crystal
Yes ,....that is the the self same Jeffrey Epstein whom Trump banned about 15 years ago from Trump’s Mar a Lago Club......you know the Epstein guy that Bill Clinton has flown around the world with on a plane known as “The Lolita Express”...of course there is no history there

Crystal Watson
1 month 3 weeks ago

Doesn't matter if he knew Clinton. The fact is he was close friends with Trump. Let's watch again that lovely video in which Trump and the pervert oggle a bunch of women and their "attributes" ... https://youtu.be/KLcfpU2cubo

Christopher Scott
1 month 3 weeks ago

Does that link you post deny and/or prove that anything in the statement I made above to be false? That’s a meaningless video that proves or shows nothing except how you’re easily influenced and manipulated by watching too much fake news! This is how democracies fail.

Stuart Meisenzahl
1 month 3 weeks ago

Crystal

I did not say Clinton “just knew Epstein”......I pointed out that Clinton was a “frequent flyer”on Epstein’ s plane “The Lolita Express”

Crystal Watson
1 month 3 weeks ago

Yes, Clinton was his friend, I grant that. But I'm talking about Trump. He and Epstein both attended a party at Trump's estate in which there were 28 women, and only the two men. One young women accused Trump of raping her when she was 13 at one of Epstein's parties. Now Epstein is suspiciously dead and can't talk about his friendship with Trump. Died while in a federal prison under the rule of AG William Barr, who has already shown he is willing to lie for Trump. Hmmmm.

Stuart Meisenzahl
1 month 3 weeks ago

Crystal
The young woman filed a complaint during the 2016campaign; made a face obscured video but failed to show up for any of her promised press interviews and then withdrew her complaint. No explanation !

Crystal Watson
1 month 2 weeks ago

I don't doubt she was intimidated into giving up.

Stuart Meisenzahl
1 month 2 weeks ago

Crystal
Trump has been famous for 35 years.....yet she waited until he was running for President 24 years after the alleged event to bring suit.....give me a brake

Crystal Watson
1 month 2 weeks ago

There are a score of women who have come forward saying Trump sexually assaulted them, including the recent rape assertion from E. Jean Carroll. I have no doubt Trump is a rapist and I have no doubt he has bullied most of his victims into giving up on trying to hold him to justice.

Stuart Meisenzahl
1 month 2 weeks ago

Crystal
Please note that Trump has a history of “buying off” any allegation of impropriety which has any legs....eg., see Stormy Daniels , etc. Based on this you can be reasonably assured that he would have “bought off” these women if there were any possibility of proof of his misconduct.

karen oconnell
1 month 3 weeks ago

Pence may in fact be a ''good friend to Niki Haley and the ''current occupier of the WH''----------- but he is not a friend to 350 million citizens. he is a ''non person.'

J Jones
1 month 3 weeks ago

Pence is every bit as transactional as Trump. I think history is likely to reveal that Pence signed on to this ticket because Trump is willing to do Pence's evangelical bidding in exchange for the White House. I don't buy it for a minute that Pence has any respect for Trump.

J Jones
1 month 3 weeks ago

Pence is every bit as transactional as Trump. I think history is likely to reveal that Pence signed on to this ticket because Trump is willing to do Pence's evangelical bidding in exchange for the White House. I don't buy it for a minute that Pence has any respect for Trump.

karen oconnell
1 month 3 weeks ago

Pence may in fact be a ''good friend to Niki Haley and the ''current occupier of the WH''----------- but he is not a friend to 350 million citizens. he is a ''non person.'

Crystal Watson
1 month 2 weeks ago

Pence is as creepy as Trump. He uses his version of Christianity to doom others. He and the Evangelicals have a lot to answer for.

Andrew Strada
1 month 2 weeks ago

We live in a very vulgar age so why it is so surprising that we are ruled by such a vulgarian? This society truly has chosen the President it deserves. Unfortunately, fifty years ago the only way the elites could think of to eliminate class distinctions was to make us all lower class. So instead of William F. Buckley we get Rush Limbaugh. Instead of Ronald Reagan we get Donald Trump. Well, life goes on.

Mr. Dark is not a fan. We get that. So vote against President Trump, work for his opponent, whatever. But please stop whining and lecturing and hectoring. Your approach convinces no one and annoys many.

Crystal Watson
1 month 2 weeks ago

"Life goes on". Not for the many people who have died on Trump's watch, including children.

Andrew Strada
1 month 2 weeks ago

Do you think that toning down the rhetoric would increase or decrease the likelihood of Trump's reelection?

Crystal Watson
1 month 2 weeks ago

It's not rhetoric. These are the reasons people will vote against Trump. These are the reasons people will tell their elected representatives to impeach Trump. Barely a day passes when he doesn't do something that causes harm. I understand Republicans who voted him in would rather not dwell, but the truth is the truth.

Alan Johnstone
1 month 2 weeks ago

If Christians were predominantly writing these articles and making these comments, they would be misrepresenting Christianity.

One at a time: Chosen. The secular and empyrical data make this a truth statement. He was elected under the standard rules of your nation. Yes, chosen.
The faith, even the pagan and evil leaders are acknowledged in the Bible as holding their positions within the will of God. Some even described as being appointed to punish God's people from their unfaithfulness. Yes, chosen by God.

Now, about these neologisms.
Which commandment forbids, as a grave moral fault, taking note of the ethnicity or sex of persons as part of discerning their danger or harmlessness?

All who use the words racism, sexism, far right, left wing, totalitarian, liberal and the like are not engaging in moral theology but political rhetoric.
Bring it on, but do not expect doing so to do anything but signal to the hearers and readers something about the person's bias.

If you are a follower of Christ, pray for your rulers and leaders as He instructed you to do.

Crystal Watson
1 month 2 weeks ago

Trump wasn't chosen, he cheated with Russia and still didn't win the popular vote. And there is no reason why leaders should be respected when they are bad. "Woe to you ..." ... Matthew 23.

Tim O'Leary
1 month 2 weeks ago

Crystal - The popular vote has never been how Presidents are chosen in the USA. It's in our Constitution. 10 US presidents have been chosen without winning a majority of the popular vote, including Abraham Lincoln (40% of the popular vote), Woodrow Wilson (42%) and Bill Clinton (43%). Trump got 46%, so by your (and AOC's) logic, he is more 'chosen' than Lincoln. Even Hillary failed to get a majority of the popular vote, garnering 48% - thanks to Gary Johnson & Jill Stein). The popular vote wasn't even recorded until 1824, when the country chose JQ Adams, even though Jackson won the popular vote. Facts are stubborn things but Trump was chosen by the same system as Washington, Jefferson & Lincoln, none of who had a documented popular majority.

Stuart Meisenzahl
1 month 2 weeks ago

Crystal
Your obsession that “[Trump ] cheated with Russia” despite the 2 year long Mueller Report concluding there was no Collusion indicates that you level of extreme grief over Hillary Clinton’s loss has not abated.
Accept it!.....Yes.... the nouveau political bozo “with a train wreck of a campaign” that spent about half of Hillary’s Money and was OPPOSED BY: (a)by the entire establishment of his own party, (b)by 4 living past Presidents, (c) by all major news media, (d) by the 30 year old Clinton machine, and(e) by the active involvement of major Federal agencies.

You need to focus on what this extraordinary event says about the rejection of the establishment of both parties and the Clintons in particular. Keep in mind Trump did not win just because of his base....he was aided and abetted in this victory by traditional democrats who switched and by democrats who just could not support Hillary Clinton. There is so much more afoot here than the issue of “grossly flawed personalities” and “respect”. Your personal disappointment and grief should be suborned to an analysis of “Why” . Talking about the Russians as an excuse is over...time to focus on the real reasons. Keep in mind that Mueller Reports that the Russians spent about $15Million in an election campaign in which we’ll over $2 billion was spent by the two contenders.

Christopher Scott
1 month 2 weeks ago

Stuart, you need to stop arguing with Crystal and those like her in this comment section. Their irrational arguments are beyond TDS, it a severe case cognitive dissonance in owning up to the fact that their foolishness in supporting political and Hollywood figures involved in sexualizing and trafficking young children it makes them complicit. They watch so much fake news and pop culture tv that it’s drilled too deeply into their thick skulls. Just point out their stupidity and move on... the rest is up to them to answer for. Pray for them

Crystal Watson
1 month 2 weeks ago

Yeah, don't argue with anyone outside the alternate facts bubble - you might be exposed to reality.

Terry Kane
1 month 2 weeks ago

Mr. Dark dislikes the president of the United States - that's fine. However, to mislead the readers of this article is not traditional journalism; it is interpretive journalism.
This "dark" column is biased but, this being America magazine, that is not a surprise.
The writer claims, "Mr. Trump’s implied call for the execution of black men who were later exonerated (the Central Park Five)" is nowhere near true. The May 1, 1989 ad in the New York Times mentioned did call for the death penalty to be reinstated in New York State. However, the Central Park 5 were never mentioned - If Mr. Dark sees an implication in it, that is his inference.
There was a vicious crime wave going on at the time and the CP5 were just one example of that problem. Also, they were NOT exonerated - the original sentence was vacated and the choice was made by NY politicians not to retry the convicted perpetrators. The prosecutor at the time of the original case acknowledged in court that the 5 were not the rapists, but they were involved in the criminal attack of the jogger. Their own attorneys commented that the defendants had made so many self-incriminating statements that a successful defense was impossible:After the verdict, Mr. Richardson's lawyer, Howard Diller, said he was "shattered."
"They convicted themselves with their own statements," he said. "We could not overcome them."
Colin Moore, the lawyer for Mr. Wise, said his client's "vivid" videotaped statement "proved to be too difficult to overcome."
This 2018 piece is worth reading:
http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2018-07-25.html

Lloyd William
1 month 2 weeks ago

Nastiness, half-truths, and biased journalism and politics is nothing new. We have a long history dating back to the time of our revolution. It is unfortunate that many people so identify with one political party that they are willing to close their mind to the truth.

The truth is that our President is human and has many faults that are easy to see. While some are blinded to these faults, others refuse to see any good because of the blind opposition. Wouldn’t it be nice if we could step back from our preconceived ideas and see both the good and bad? And wouldn’t it be refreshing to have America publish an objective, unbiased article that reflects something other a distorted liberal left view of current issues?

Crystal Watson
1 month 2 weeks ago

The efforts of Republicans to make Trump sound like just a normal guy with a few common flaws is hilarious.

Lloyd William
1 month 2 weeks ago

Crystal, I don’t condone the President’s nastiest words or actions. I recognize his faults and I am not making excuses for him. I wish more Republicans would speak up when he’s becomes embarrassing such as his disparaging of someone like the late John McCain. I was not a big fan of President Clinton but I recognize he was an effective president in some ways. It is clear that you are unable to accept any good that may come from the Trump presidency. I find it sad that partisans from both the left and right are blinded to any possible good on the other side

Crystal Watson
1 month 2 weeks ago

Trump has done an enormous amount of damage and the damage continues. If he has done anything good, it is completely eclipsed by that.

Crystal Watson
1 month 2 weeks ago

PS - you can't separate someone's worth from the things they say and do. That is who they are.

J Jones
1 month 2 weeks ago

Crystal, well said. Trump is not acting out and talking trash at poker games. Trump lies every day in his official role as the President of the United States. At the G-7, he publicly reported about weekend calls from China signalling forward movement in the trade war. It moved the stick market. Now it appears he lied. But Americans need to quit being so judgmental and unChristian and emotional. That lie is just a personal failing, easy enough to overlook.

Tim O'Leary
1 month 2 weeks ago

J Jones & Crystal - no doubt Trump is many of the things you say, as I often recount in my posts as some of the reasons why I didn't vote for him. Many feminists excused the sexual harassment and outright assault perpetrated by Bill Clinton as President (Wiley, Jones, Lewinsky - something I don't think Trump is charged with yet) and worse earlier (Broaddrick) - see this 2017 story for a recap https://hotair.com/archives/ed-morrissey/2017/11/14/atlantic-say-remember-feminists-threw-women-bus-protect-guy/. They had the idea that no matter how many women he abused, as long as he kept abortion going, they would support him. So, if you did vote for Clinton, especially the second time, it is very disingenuous for you to say those calculations are not permitted for those who see abortion as the killing of human beings, in the millions.

As to lies, there are big lies and small lies. The media scream against Trump's myriad small lies (the "I'm the best" variety, or "I never said that" or sloppy parsing of words) while they perpetuate really harmful lies, ones that could cause major harm. They try to incite foreign wars, fan the flames of racism (esp. hatred of "whites"), persist in pushing the collusion-with-Russia racket, hope for a recession, etc., etc. Then there are even bigger lies, that the unborn or just born aren't human, that gender is not binary, that children don't need their father and mother for healthy upbringing. And the biggest lie of all - that there is no God.

KATHERIN MARSH
1 month 2 weeks ago

Re: Your comment about Trump having the "power to deploy lethal force against any person or population he deems a threat."
Yours is a messy little bit of misinformation. Did you say that in order to get a reaction? I find that many in the press do not give straightforward factual information. Rather they wrap misleading nouns and highly inflammatory adjectives to their reporting of Trump. I think they want to create a negative reaction towards Trump in the listener and viewer. My response is that what most of the press says about Trump cannot be trusted.

Ernie Sherretta
1 month 2 weeks ago

DJT 's history, character, reputation, mental state, videos, tweets, speak for themselves. Only persons with their head in the sand would support him. I dare anyone, anyone, to show me how Jesus would accept his behavior other than to forgive him but forgiveness depends on metanoia or change of heart and as a narcissist, he is incapable of such. So Jesus would have mercy on him but not condone or support him. The NRA is against the Way, the Truth, and the Life of Jesus. Non-violence is a non- negotiable fact of the Way! All this banter about the media is just an excuse for people of power, fame, and fortune, to support the modern icon of Satan who replaced Adolf Hitler. FYI, DJT used a little book of Hitler's quotes to inspire his modus operandi. Look it up!

Tim O'Leary
1 month 2 weeks ago

Ernie - Your pacifist view is a very incomplete story on the Gospel. Hitler and his Nazi descendants would have wiped out all Jews and Christians by now, were it not for the gun-toting, bomb-blasting, battle-winning killing machine the Allies used to defeat him. We just had a Gospel reading a week or so ago with the following words of Jesus in Matthew 10: "Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn “‘a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law—a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household.’ (Mt 10:34-39). Contemplate what that meant.

Also, His cleansing of the temple with a whip out of cords that he used to drive out the merchants and upturn their tables does not look like non-violence. Notice in His encounters with soldiers, He never told them to give up their career. He didn't even condemn the capital punishment of the two thieves he was crucified with. Then, recall the violence against Satan and his allies in Jesus' words and in the Book of Revelations.

Trump is terribly flawed, but at least he doesn't support the killing of the unborn and just born, the non-so-non-violent official position of all his Democratic opponents. In an ideal world, we get to choose a president who matches our values and goals. In the real world, we are often faced with a bad choice and a worse choice.

Advertisement

The latest from america

On Oct. 14, 2018, he was canonized by Pope Francis. Today, Salvadorans ask themselves what the transition from “Msgr. Romero”—what he has been called in El Salvador for decades—to “St. Romero” means for his legacy.
Melissa VidaOctober 14, 2019
Pope Francis, tweeting about the new saints he recognized Oct. 13, inadvertently used a hashtag connected to the New Orleans Saints football team. But fans appreciated it, as did the team. (CNS photo)
A hashtag mix-up caused a papal tweet meant to give thanks for the Catholic Church's newest saints to be read as Pope Francis showing support for the New Orleans Saints' football team.
Domenico Giani, lead bodyguard for Pope Francis and head of the Vatican police force, keeps watch as the pope leaves his general audience in St. Peter's Square at the Vatican May 1, 2019. Pope Francis accepted the resignation of Giani Oct. 14, nearly two weeks after an internal security notice was leaked to the Italian press. (CNS photo/Paul Haring)
Domenico Giani resigned after being unable to identify the source of a leak of a confidential Vatican security notice connected to ongoing financial investigations.
Gerard O’ConnellOctober 14, 2019
The cardinal archbishop of Westminster came to Rome with 15 English and Welsh bishops to concelebrate the Mass in which Pope Francis declared Newman a saint, the first British saint to be born after 1800.
Gerard O’ConnellOctober 13, 2019