They say what’s good for the goose is good for the gander and what goes around comes around.
Ever wonder what kind of country we would be if we all played by Donald Trump’s rules of engagement and just made stuff up about him?
Not a very good one I suspect.
Trump’s blatant lies about President Obama are well documented here are just a few that he states WITHOUT ANY EVIDENCE AT ALL:
In 2011 Trump said “somebody” told him Obama might be hiding his birth certificate because it might identify him as a Muslim. Not that this is a bad thing even if it were true but that’s a discussion for another day
In 2014 Trump tweeted “Obama sent weapons to ISIS through Benghazi yet holding up shipments to Israel”
In 2015 Trump said “they actually think Obama hates Israel. I think he does”
The clear implication in all of this was that Trump was attempting to portraying Obama as anti-Semitic WITHOUT ANY EVIDENCE AT ALL
So if we as a country dropped to his level and played in the gutter using Trump’s own rules of engagement would it be wrong to say WITHOUT ANY EVIDENCE AT ALL:
That Trump is German and “somebody” told me he is a believer in Hitler’s master race theory
That Trump is secretly arming white militias around America
That Trump has secretly told white nationalist to prepare for a coming race war and that when it’s over America will be cleansed of it’s black and brown problem and America will be great again.
I’m just wondering because Trump has, with the help of Fox News, been given carte blanche to say whatever he wants about whoever he wants WITHOUT ANY EVIDENCE AT ALL to verify the validity of his statements and smears on a person’s career and character and yet many in his base take his statements to be true. So why can’t we do the same to him? Oh yeah that really wouldn’t be American now would it?
The truth still counts for something and we should all reject statements made WITH NO EVIDENCE AT ALL
I went to Cardinal Spellman high school in the Bronx. In addition to being the alma matter of Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor, among other things, it had a forensics team that competed nationwide. In my senior year, I was proud to say I was President of that forensics team. For four years, I competed on the forensics team’s cross-ex debate team. To this day, I credited my experience on that team as being a significant part of the development of who I am today. The rules of cross-ex debate were simple enough if you were on the affirmative side of a debate, you needed to show:
Significance of both the problem and that the benefit must be substantial enough to merit changing state or national policies affecting millions of peoples, Inherency of the the problems cited must be inextricably connected to elements of the status quo that are relatively enduring or are unique to the status quo or cannot be eliminated without reform to the status quo.
The plan includes a concrete description of actions that will be taken to solve the problems cited in enough detail that the negative can understand and, potentially, criticize them. And finally
Solvency – present claims and ground to prove the plan’s benefits and that it solves the problems cited.
If you were on the negative side of the debate, you could win by proving through evidence that just one of the above was not true.
This I learned as a teenager. Sadly in today’s highest chamber of debate, Congress, none of this is practiced. Instead, the debates have devolved into I want; you can’t have, battle based not on facts and evidence and, most importantly, what’s right for the country but rather particular interest and if you have a (D) or an (R) after your name. Adults elected by the populous acting more like children and having temper tantrums when they can’t get their way.
I’m thankful for the life lessons debate taught me; I just wished most of Congress would share in those lessons.
Dear American people
Today’s problem is that the government is supposed to derive its power from the people’s will. Still, we have essentially given up their authority dividing ourselves into two parties who no longer hold politicians accountable but blindly follow the sound bites of those in power based on if they have a (R) or a (D) after their name. Individuals who. have only a casual interest in educating themselves to maintain their wealth and power.
Let us take back our government by
Informing ourselves on the issues
Educating ourselves on the options
Holding our representatives accountable.
Let us retake control of the government; after all, it is our government.
There can be no doubt that we are a country divided. Sadly, much of this division is not based on an ideology by the people on what is best for the people of this country but rather what letter follows your name, (R) or (D). We have become more concerned with ensuring our “team” wins rather than educating ourselves on the issues and their impact. This mentality has led to blind allegiance to those in power. We have ceded the very government we so proudly hold dear to a few hundred individuals who profit on our ignorance. Our desire to have our “team” win means the power does not even need to hide their deception; they do it right in front of us; for us, it was once said, “The eyes are useless when the mind is blind.” The more the masses allow their minds to be blinded, the easier it is to manipulate them. They follow their “team,” nodding in agreement with whatever decisions it makes. This thinking removes any sense of accountability from those in power; as Albert Einstein commented, “Blind belief in authority is the greatest enemy of truth.” For any democracy to effectively govern for citizens’ good, it represents those citizens must become informed about issues that can improve their lives. In many countries around the world, the government has taken away the will of its people. We seemingly have made the conscious decision to surrender it to a small percentage of the rich and powerful depending on what letter they have behind their name. We can not continue to allow our government to be dependent on political ignorance and blind allegiance, for it will undoubtedly lead to our downfall as one of the most significant experiments ever endeavored – a government of the people, by the people, for the people.