NOBODY ASKED ME, BUT.
The media - and even some of his Republican opponents- were upset recently because Trump didn't correct some guy at his political rally who stated he didn't like Muslims and he also believed President Obama was not a citizen.
Some of the polls I've followed would suggest this "Trumphite" is not alone in his beliefs, but that's besides the point. The guy was no more a threat than a cartoonist in France - until the media told us otherwise.
Those of you who are enjoying "The Trump Show" had to also enjoy the irony the media used to prove Trump was wrong by not defending Obama.
They opted to run over and over an old clip of McCain taking a different tact when he faced a person during the last campaign - making the same allegation -and he Did defend Obama.
So, "How did that work out," I wondered.
Trumps paraphrased response to the criticism was "Hey, if folks are critical of me, do you think Obama is going to defend Me?"
Made sense to me, even though his retort was again clearly "thinking out of the box.'
However, it went well with his response to CBS's Scott Pelley who later raised the question once more and insisted to Trump that he had an obligation to respond and Trump's reply was: "You Don't Know That!"
Why shouldn't Trump say what he really felt? He's a maverick. We've seen a few of them in our day.
How long did it take before you stopped allowing your mom to pick out your clothes - you maverick - you.
As I recall , it also took me a while to get used to Clint Eastwood's portrayal of "Dirty Harry", as a definitely non-stereotypical detective. Somehow I survived the shock and realization that all detectives didn't act like Charlie Chan or Miss Marple.
Despite my positive reaction - albeit possibly temporary - to celebrate someone willing to take on the media BS, it would appear there are many more who disagree.
It seems to boil down to the uncomfortable conclusion for some that Trump is outrageous and he refuses to act like what we've come to expect from politicians.
For years we've been told and were willing to accept what political commentators told us was acceptable, expected, and necessary, if a candidate was to have any real hopes for election success in this country.
That irony also fails to escape me. Seriously, is "more of the same" what America really wants served up on the politics plate? (It's a yes or no question.)
Even the Pope is speaking up about our political gridlock.
Isn't it about time for us to file under Q - "questionable" - or "quaint "- what we've been told is right all these years?
Or, are you willing to keep in those same mental folders all the old saws we learned as a child?
How bout the alleged truism: No swimming after eating because you'll drown ?
So we didn't. But, miraculously, in it's place, we discovered how to almost achieve the same result by insisting on drinking eight glasses of water, 365 days a year, because we were assured by somebody, whose name has long been forgotten, that this was the only way for us to be properly hydrated?
Would you not agree that we've allowed the media and scientific experts to dictate to us "what's important, what's not", as well as, "what's appropriate and what's not?"
These so-called experts seem to have become self-appointed resource replacements for a triage of Emily Post, Miss Manners, and Mr. Wizard.
Personally, I wished they had stopped with their advice and warnings right after they informed us which side of the plate to place the soup spoon.
I also believe it's not just the politicians who need a shake up.
I think we should consider locating one of those "go fund me" sources and raise enough money to purchase an hour or so of air time, then find a really tenacious interviewer as well as an excellent research source.
The purpose of this exercise would be to question some of our most obnoxious media members using both personal and political hardball questions - not the ones they are asked to answer on Sunday morning in a controlled and friendly environment?
Such an approach might have answered the question why did it take the actions of veterans whose plane may have really been under attack to expose Brian Williams - instead of the media?
I believe it was Pataki who recently questioned one debate interviewer as to why all the questions he had asked the former New York Governor were about Trump - and not about him.
It was a question I've asked myself several times. and I believe we need to ask more of them of the media, even though it didn't appear to do much for Pataki.
I'm convinced it's not just disenchanted voters who are elevating Trump's poll numbers. They've had help from a love-hate relationship the media has with Trump
The media may hate his obstinance and failure to abide by their rules, but they love what he's doing for their finances.
Fortunately, when they're through pushing this Trump story, similar to how they foisted Sarah Palin and Michele Backman on us in the past, they will inevitably find another topic or person with whom they are more enamored, and we can go back to watching Seinfeld re-runs - instead of the 6:30 national news.
Hey, it's the American Way!
The media's sincerity is only matched by that of the political rhetoric of those who employ them or the folks who have learned how best curry their favor by granting exclusive interviews.
The problem for our society presently is that for too long ,and for the most part, we've become acclimated to politicians who are so careful what they say so as to not risk offending either the media or any potential voter, via a slip up and interviewers who are content to let them slide.
As a result, by the time Election Day is almost near, both the candidates AND the media will have managed to make brussel sprouts look exciting by comparison, as we try to decide who has the leadership qualities we seek to support.
It's just something that every four years we've come to expect similar to knowing what day we can expect the Social Security deposit will appear in our bank balance -(assuming, those same politicians will allow this hard earned benefit to continue.)
Politicians really have only two goals. The first is to be elected. The second is to be re-elected.
Meantime , like the courtroom artist at Brady's hearings, we continue to rely on the media to tell us which candidates are the right ones and then allow the rest to look like bad guys by carefully selecting the photo on the front page that best exemplifes and supports the text in the two or three columns below the picture.
Who knew Hillary, or Cosby for that matter could look so different depending on what point of view or opinion the media wanted to make about them?
Perhaps we're better served by relying on the late night show hosts for their political expertise.
You laugh but Bill Maher has been getting away with it for years - and nobody makes fun of HIS hair - or, as far as I know - demands that He has successfully run for office in order to obtain the requisite expertise he claims to have.
Dare to break the stereotypes! It's not my optimistic belief that anything much is going to change unless we do.
But, in the meantime, I believe we all have an obligation to start thinking for ourselves and use the good brain God gave us, before making such an important decision.
In 2012, 42.5% of us chose not to exercise that option. Who's willing to argue that a .400 hitter can't help the team?
Oh, what a difference we might have made 4 years ago by deciding "on our own" who was the best choice and and then following up at the polls with our vote.
All of the above is why I love the special license plate that asked the question:
"Since Most People Don't Agree With What's P.C. - Who Actually Decided That It's Correct?"
No comments:
Post a Comment