The Republican National Committee issued this statement to celebrate Christmas:
“WASHINGTON – Republican National Committee (RNC) Chairman Reince Priebus and Co-Chair Sharon Day released the following statement celebrating Christmas:
“Merry Christmas to all! Over two millennia ago, a new hope was born into the world, a Savior who would offer the promise of salvation to all mankind. Just as the three wise men did on that night, this Christmas heralds a time to celebrate the good news of a new King. We hope Americans celebrating Christmas today will enjoy a day of festivities and a renewed closeness with family and friends.
“Even as we celebrate, we must also remember those among us who are less fortunate. Many on this day are without hope, and need the kindness and compassion of those around them. It is our prayer we will rise to meet the material, emotional, and spiritual needs of individuals all around us, and what better day is there to love our fellow man than today?
“As we open presents, enjoy Christmas dinner, and celebrate our own family traditions, we are mindful of our men and women in uniform. Many are stationed around the world today protecting our freedoms, and cannot be with their own spouses, children, parents, and siblings. We express the deepest gratitude for service that takes them away from celebrating with loved ones, and we ought to remember them in our thoughts and prayers not just on Christmas Day, but the whole year round.”
Just for the record, Trump is neither my savior nor my king.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
The Prince of Tweet is far cry from the Prince of Peace.
LikeLike
Jon Awbrey—like!
And just when you think the Trumbots can’t wound themselves any more viciously… they are being exhorted by Reince Priebus and Sharon Day to celebrate “the good news of a new King.”
😳
If someone on a thread of this blog, for example, had written something along the same lines, they would surely have been accused of not just tasteless humor but vile sacrilege. Along with being a part, no doubt, of that vicious War on Christmas…
Is it just my imagination, or has Santa Claus provided shoe-shaped mouths to all those that have been so naughty that they Trumped nice?
😎
LikeLike
Jon Awbrey:
“Prince of Tweet” inspired another thought.
Imagine if, in 2008 or 2012 the DNC had issued the same sort of statement likening Barack Obama to Jesus Christ.
Imagine the furious response—by those now saying that all of us are taking things too “literally” and not “symbolically” enough.
The cognitive dissonance is jarring…
😎
LikeLike
Indeed. I recently coined the word hypocristian to described this style of double-standardizing.
LikeLike
Provided, of course, that the intent you read in the statement was the goal of the writer
LikeLike
KTA, “cognitive dissonance” is their middle name.
I have conservative friends who are Trump supporters, who have been twisting themselves into pretzels in order to excuse or justify what has been going on in the GOP (and with Trump) since he won the election, and for most of them, since he won the Republican nomination. Things that they would have been ranting and raving about if it was a Democrat saying, tweeting, or doing such things.
All I can do is shake my head about the whole thing- and continue to work for and support those who are at least mostly on the same page politically as I am, particularly at the local level. Because I think we need to start at the local and state level to bring eventual change to the national level. The local elected people wil eventually (at least many of them) move up to the national level. Yes, this is a long-term strategy, but we need to start it now.
LikeLike
Hubris aside, they are not stupid enough for the wording of this to have been an innocent mistake. They also do not seem smart enough to see how badly this would play with both doubters and the opposition.
LikeLike
Doubters and opposition are in no way on the minds of the Trump team…..like in NO way.
They could care less what the other side thinks.
Not only is this a characteristic of Trump and his team, it is also one of the direct results of the HRC loss. In spite of her 3mil popular vote win, the dems are ruined……as they should be because they have destroyed the idea of meaningful opposition via their awful neo-liberal policies for the last 30 years. That much is clear.
Trump is in the process of a fascist acquisition of power. A part of that is doing things like blurring the edges for the legions of religio-maniacs, who have been empowered within the electorate for the past many decades, with this idea of savior/king/president. Why not? It’ll probably work, considering the target audience.
LikeLike
Only one with malice in mind could take the “King” reference to trump.
A willful misconstruing of the statement could arrive at such a ridiculous conclusion.
LikeLike
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/12/25/rncs-new-king-christmas-message-ignites-social-media-furor.html
LikeLike
Hypocrites.
LikeLike
Kindness and compassion? Trump and his gang of billionaire oligarchs have as much kindness, compassion and empathy as an asp.
LikeLike
Which conclusion one can arrive at only by not knowing the Story…
LikeLike
Rudy,
So was the RNC wording the same for the last 8 years?
Just post the links for the last few years where the RNC Christmas message was “this Christmas heralds a time to celebrate the good news of a NEW King.”
But last year the RNC message did NOT care enough to welcome the NEW King:
https://gop.com/rnc-message-celebrating-christmas-2015/
Rudy, no doubt the RNC were terrified someone might think they meant President Obama last year.
Shame on you for defending this when this seems to be the first time the RNC decided to welcome the “NEW KING”. No wonder the Pope finds those men so reprehensible and wants to distinguish real Christianity from the people who use the religion to enrich themselves and gain power. Too bad too many people like you enable them.
LikeLike
Once again, you can find mud whenever you are looking for it.
LikeLike
Once again, you can’t explain why the RNC didn’t use this wording last year.
So instead you try to change the subject.
What ever possessed the RNC to think that THIS year of all years they should say: “this Christmas heralds a time to celebrate the good news of a new King”?
Why didn’t it occur to the RNC to celebrate the “new King” last year?
I love how when you don’t have an answer you throw insults. Here’s a suggestion for you:
“The reason the RNC never before said that Americans should welcome our new king is because it never occurred to them to say it untilTrump was elected. It’s just a happy coincidence.”
LikeLike
I officially call an end to this wordplay with Rudy. I have learned from long experience that he is like a dog with a bone. He will go on and on and back and forth, never relenting. I am going to bed. Good night.
LikeLike
I give you the orange king:
http://christmas-specials.wikia.com/wiki/Heat_Miser
LikeLike
“Jesus H. Tap-Dancing Christ”
Straight from the Blues Brothers:
Rev. Cleophus: “Do you see the light?”
Jake: “Yes!! Yes!! Jesus H. tap-dancing Christ…I have seen the light!!”
Do the Drumpf acolytes have a clue as to just what they have actually done?
Priebus = toadie, stooge, follower, goon…take your pick…
LikeLike
How about asking the question a little different? Does Clinton now realize where she went wrong?
LikeLike
Rudy,
Why are you worried about Hillary? She is not going to be president. The big orange idiot is.
LikeLike
Because Clinton lost. As the pundits have been saying from the very beginning, this election was hers to lose.
Her failures as a running candidate is what brought us here. Not trumps brilliance – it doesn’t exist. Not his amazing strategy – he had none. Not his big mouth – which he did have.
What brought us here was Clinton ignoring the calls from three states to come and spend some time there. Not my conclusions, but definitely those of her financial backers.
trump benefitted from those mistakes.
LikeLike
So are we to ignore Trump’s horrible decisions and words and those of his allies because…it’s Hillary’s fault?
LikeLike
Once again: stick to actual facts, rather than finding something in a Christmas message and distorting it to no end.
So far, the ONLY nominee I agree with is the secretary of defense. Soldiers don’t like sending out others to die for some lofty political ideal. Civilians do not have too much wisdom in that area.
As far as the rest is concerned? Plenty of issues to discuss – without having the legging van zout op iedere slak.
LikeLike
Rudy,
Do you defend the Pope this strongly when he makes it clear that Donald Trump and his followers are a danger to the world?
Somehow I suspect you spend far more of your time defending Donald Trump from any critics than you do defending the Pope from the right wing Christians who seems to despise him.
What possesses you to spend your time on this blog posting about how we are all misunderstanding Donald Trump and the people who want to make him all powerful?
How sad to waste your time attacking anyone who dares to criticize Mr. Trump. We get it. You admire him and want to shut down all criticism. How dare we!
LikeLike
Are they actually likening Trump to Jesus?
LikeLike
A new low in tackiness.
LikeLike
The RNC is not. Those who try to make that connection are looking for mud to toss.
Simple. You can misinterpret everything written or spoken if you have that kind of a mindset.
It seems that mindset abounds.
LikeLike
Evidently, Rudy, many people read the RNC statement and its reference to “the new King” as an allusion to Trump. The controversy was reported by CNBC: http://www.cnbc.com/2016/12/25/rncs-new-king-christmas-message-ignites-social-media-furor.html
LikeLike
The RNC IS comparing Trump to Jesus Christ! “JUST AS the three wise men did on that night, this Christmas heralds a time to celebrate the good news of a new King.” Total comparison. To them, he is Jesus, and those who voted for him are the “wise men” that are heralding his arrival.
“King” is even capitalized. There’s nothing to assume here. It’s in the “four corners of the text.”
LikeLike
There is so much I could “say” right now, but the good doctor wound definitely toss me out.
LikeLike
I think the RNC knew exactly what they were doing and wanted to draw criticism so they could respond with shocked amazement.
LikeLike
Boy, I hate to live life like you do. Being ready to think the worst behind everything in life…
LikeLike
Rudy,
I try to find the good where I can. I can’t find much good in Trump, a habitual liar and bully.
LikeLike
Since that response was not directed to you…
But given your response, you cannot imagine that I feel the same about Clinton! Why would you have the right to your interpretation of events, but I don’t?
I cannot see anything good in a Clinton administration with her plans. NOTHING is free. Not education. Not healthcare. Not roads. Nothing.
And it will be people like me who will end up in the hole. It’s happened before, it will happen again.
Not that I expect anything good for people in my situation from trump, either.
We don’t matter to ANY politician.
LikeLike
Interesting take on my comment. I would hardly equate the RNC’s “twitterings” with thinking “the worst behind everything in life.”
LikeLike
Funny how last year the RNC did NOT welcome any “new King. Apparently they wanted to wait until they COULD welcome a “new King”. There was no such allusion in their Christmas message.
I would love to hear Rudy’s theory as to why they suddenly decided this year to change the wording to imply that Trump was the new King who we should all worship as Jesus.
Just a “coincidence” that the RNC didn’t make this reference until there WAS a President-elect they could worship as King?
LikeLike
Rudy thinks no one on the blog can read except him. I delete his comments when he tells me I don’t know how to read. They are many.
LikeLike
The only person to answer that question is the author.
Have any of you taken the time/courage to do that??? Or is it easier to make things look bad because it fits your world view?
LikeLike
See what I mean? I will put in a call to Reince Priebus first thing in the morning.
LikeLike
Looking forward to the results of that call.
I have some predictions on your responses, but hope to be pleasantly surprised.
LikeLike
Rudy, you are increasingly ridiculous. You believe I can reach Reince Priebus on the phone?
LikeLike
Have to agree with Rudy here. It’s a stretch to read the whole context of that quote and say the RNC was equating or even comparing Trump to Jesus.
Full disclosure: I am a practicing Christian and NOT a Trump supporter.
LikeLike
So, Dave, who is “the new King” in the RNC statement, and why was this “new King” not mentioned last Christmas?
LikeLike
Do you write the same Christmas letter every year? Do readers then attach meanings to your message and make things up as they go along?
LikeLike
Rudy,
Who is the “New King” that the RNC is welcoming?
LikeLike
As you read the statement within the given context, the writer uses the example of the magi who welcomed the new king. And urges us to welcome that new king in our time, as well.
Less and less people in this country believe in the story of the new king. It is a loss for any society to allow such a loss.
I spoke this morning about that selfsame new king. Not from a Christmas perspective, a “once a year thing,” which has lost so much to commercialism.
My comments were based on the life lived, the examples set to be followed.
No one among the listeners ever thought that trump was the subject of discussion.
But those listeners, quite a few of whom voted for trump, are much more familiar with the actual reference made by Priebus…
LikeLike
Odd to get a sermon from a political party. I got mine at Midnight Mass last night, though nothing was said about the “new King” and quite a lot was said about having kindness, love, and compassion for those in need in a time of darkness.
LikeLike
daveeckstrom,
I would agree with you except the RNC did not see fit to insist that Americans celebrate the good news of a “new King” last year in their Christmas message. No such statement at all in their entire message:
https://gop.com/rnc-message-celebrating-christmas-2015/
In fact, their statement was very different last year. But of course, from their perspective, Christians won and proved they own this country and should have the right to rule all. So no doubt this seemed like the correct message now.
It is a fact that last year the RNC made no demand to celebrate the “new King.” Unless you can find an earlier year where they said this, it is odd that you are determined to read it as simply a “happy coincidence” that the RNC should welcome their new King at the exact same moment that a man who insists he should rule as the new King is elected.
LikeLike
Rudy: “The good doctor WOUND toss me out?” As my father used to say, “Your Freudian slip is showing.”
LikeLike
What is slipping, is big fingers on a small keyboard.
“Would”. I assumed people would get that…
LikeLike
Or you can read. You can misrepresent with the use of words. No one is misinterpreting a stupid statement. I assume your mindset is to not read but to claim that something that is written actually means something else.
LikeLike
Rudy, you can also misinterpret everything written or spoken.
How would you interpret the line :
“Just as the three wise men did on that night, this Christmas heralds a time to celebrate the good news of a new King.”
The fact that the RNC is a political organization that just won the White House, and not a religious organization that didn’t just win the White House actually has bearing on the statement, which is ambiguous as best.
Who are they referring to as “THIS Christmas’s new King?”
I suppose it’s possible, as the RNC claims, that the remark refers to no one but the new King Jesus,( whose birth, after all, many Americans are celebrating) in which case the wording is strangely ignorant of the interpretation clearly implicit in it.
LikeLike
Jonathan,
It would appear that the words “this Christmas” do not refer to “this Christmas,” but to “that Christmas.”
More problematic is that these words, however bungled, are issued not from a pulpit or an altar, but from the press office of a political party. Aren’t the political parties supposed to be nonsectarian?
LikeLike
Unfortunately reading intent into both message and explanation does not make it so.
trump has a number of very clear statements re different groups. He can try to deny, but the written and spoken words are there.
He seems to be backtracking on quite a few of those statements and promises.
But there, too, he is acting like a politician.
The next two years, the country is stuck with the current (self caused!) situation. There are many republicans who do not like him, nor have they voted for him.
So for us, too, there is a lot of work to be done over the next two years.
trump will sign his own death warrant, political speaking. It’s up to those who disagree with him (whatever the reason) to be prepared.
LikeLike
Perhaps all of us just don’t get the point that we are taking the RNC both too “literally” and too “symbolically” [a la Corey Lewandowski and Anthony Scaramucci].
Protestations to the contrary that a couple of commenters aren’t Trump supporters.
Simple test. If it walks like a Humpty Dumpty and quacks like a Humpty Dumpty…
¿😳?
We just don’t recognize the Lewis Carroll fans in our midst:
[start]
‘And only one for birthday presents, you know. There’s glory for you!’
‘I don’t know what you mean by “glory”,’ Alice said.
Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. ‘Of course you don’t — till I tell you. I meant “there’s a nice knock-down argument for you!”’
‘But “glory” doesn’t mean “a nice knock-down argument”,’ Alice objected.
‘When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’
‘The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’
‘The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master — that’s all.’
Alice was too much puzzled to say anything; so after a minute Humpty Dumpty began again. ‘They’ve a temper, some of them — particularly verbs: they’re the proudest — adjectives you can do anything with, but not verbs — however, I can manage the whole lot of them! Impenetrability! That’s what I say!’
‘Would you tell me please,’ said Alice, ‘what that means?’
‘Now you talk like a reasonable child,’ said Humpty Dumpty, looking very much pleased. ‘I meant by “impenetrability” that we’ve had enough of that subject, and it would be just as well if you’d mention what you mean to do next, as I suppose you don’t mean to stop here all the rest of your life.’
‘That’s a great deal to make one word mean,’ Alice said in a thoughtful tone.
‘When I make a word do a lot of work like that,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘I always pay it extra.’
‘Oh!’ said Alice. She was too much puzzled to make any other remark.
[end]
Conundrum solved. With all the big bucks behind the president-elect, the commenters in question are just questioning why we don’t understand that they are paying words to make them do the extra work of not meaning what they mean and meaning what they don’t mean.
Impenetrability. Time to move on. Nothing to see here because according to a couple of folks, rheeality Trumps reality.
😎
LikeLike
Now someone is going to write that you are comparing Trump to Humpty Dumpty since they both have a lot of “ump” in them. Perhaps it would be most appropriate to start referring to him as “Trumpty.” I know I am stretching it, but you continually entertain and enlighten with your ability to produce the perfect quote, KTA.
LikeLike
Vomit again. I just keep doing this!!!
LikeLike
The RNC issued its Hanukkah message on Dec. 16:
“This evening we mark the beginning of Hanukkah, and I want to wish everyone celebrating the Festival of Lights a joyful time with friends and family,” said Chairman Priebus. “During these eight nights, Jewish families in America and around the world will recall the story of the Maccabees, and the timeless values of faith and perseverance are ones we can all cherish. Happy Hanukkah!”
“To our Jewish friends and family, it’s my prayer that your homes are brightened not just by the light of the candles but also by the love of family this Hanukkah,” said Co-Chairman Day. “As you enjoy the rich traditions of the holiday, may you enjoy a time of spiritual renewal and blessings.”
Unlike today’s statement, this is a message Jews, Christians, and all others of good will can take to heart in these dark days, and maybe the Republicans no not of which they speak. Yes, we all should “recall the story of the Maccabees”, the outnumbered band of brothers who rose up against tyranny and won. Believe in miracles.
LikeLike
You do realize that the Maccabees eventually lost, right? That the internal struggles did not really bring peace?
So if you are looking for a civil war, lasting over 100 years, with an outsider taking over in the end, which will lead eventually to a total destruction, I would suggest you rethink your strategy.
LikeLike
Thanks for the education, but really in these dark times I was only suggesting that instead of hanging our heads a little resistance might go a long way to limiting the damage which Trump and his minions are out to cause to our democracy. Chag Sameach.
LikeLike
Or, you could start preparing for the midterm elections NOW. sounds like a much better and practical idea.
LikeLike
A seemingly childlike mind, Tweets in parables or angry thought bubbles, has hard feelings toward moneylenders, yet is as Christlike as a great white shark.
LikeLike
He being Trump isn’t mine either. I love your blogs and save it and share with progressive Dems and UFT friends.
LikeLike
King Donald and Queen Melania live in Trump Castle in the Kingdom of States. Guess who is a princess?
Note to Duane,
I may be cured of the binge watching. The news provides sufficient entertainment
nowadays.
LikeLike
Like!
LikeLike
R. Priebus, Court jester and Fool, in the Kingdom of the Blind.
LikeLike
Hillary didn’t make mistakes. She was winning until she got Comeyd. Third party candidates were a lure for progressives who couldn’t stand her, (Interesting, since she was the women’s rights and children’s rights candidate) so those numbers came into play. This election is one of four elections in the US where the popular vote and the EC didn’t align. She beat him by almost 3 million. The importance of this election went unnoticed by many on the progressive left who were lukewarm to her – the first time we would have had a female, a feminist, a fighter for children, and a visionary for women’s rights worldwide. Being lukewarm to a candidate doesn’t help them win. When people in the US can put women’s rights as priorities, we will have a visionary female president who is a champion for women. We missed this one. They don’t come around often. It’s a shame for our country. It’s a terrible thing for the world.
LikeLike
Unless Trump will over-tweet this announcement, we should appreciate the openess of the new government about its intentions. Nobody can later say that one could not know what Trump and his surrogates were up to.
LikeLike
With friends like Andrew Cuomo and Arne Duncan are the democrats any better. LONG LIVE KING TRUMP!
LikeLike
Aside from the obvious hubris inherent in their statement, the RNC’s lack of knowledge of the Nativity has me laughing out loud, rather than cringingly shocked. The Three Kings didn’t show up until January 6th, otherwise known as the Epiphany. With all the support the Trumpster received from the Evangelical Christian right, they should be extremely embarrassed by the RNC’s ignorance. But then again, facts don’t matter anymore in this post-truth era, right?
Apparently, the political epiphany that the RNC so desires won’t occur until Jan. 20th. And from that day on, may heaven help us!
LikeLike
Technically, we don’t know when the Epiphany was since we don’t know when Christmas was. The Bible doesn’t tell us what date Jesus was born. The fact that the shepherds were in the fields suggests it wasn’t winter. Most likely December 25 was chosen to co-opt the pagan holiday already celebrated on that date, which most likely celebrated the solstice. So, yes, the Three Kings showed up twelve days after the birth of Christ, but it most likely wasn’t on January 6.
LikeLike
I think the RNC’s message is purposefully ambiguous so we can spend all our time arguing about what it means. The same goes for Trumps tweets incessant tweets. Have to agree with Rudy about one thing – our time would be better spent preparing for the midterm elections.
LikeLike
This.
LikeLike
It’s an old marketing ploy-“Any coverage/discussion spreads the message”.
LikeLike
Charles I, Louis XVI ,Nicholas II, ………………?
LikeLike
My first reaction to reading about our “new King’ was revulsion. Presidential quality should be more than what Trump has shown.
I sometimes go to BBC to find out what media outside of US influence has to say. Here is a summary concerning Trump’s picks. BBC recognizes that what was said on the campaign trail isn’t what he is now doing.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38297406
Shared from BBC News… Trump presidency: What his new team teaches us
Anthony Zurcher North America reporter
Here are selective quotes from the article:
What we’ve learned: Mr Trump campaigned against a global elite that he said was stripping the working class of its wealth. By looking to Wall Street insiders and corporate chieftains for key administration spots, however, his post-election actions signal a decidedly different mentality.
What we’ve learned: Candidate Trump often espoused a less interventionist foreign policy on the campaign trail, but President-elect Trump’s decision to surround himself with generals could indicate he will be quicker on the trigger.
What we’ve learned: Facing off against Mr Trump in the past isn’t necessarily a deal-breaker for the president-elect, but a subsequent bent knee – offered both by Mr Carson and Mr Perry – is a key to bygones being bygones.
What we’ve learned: Mr Trump railed against the political establishment on the campaign trail, but some of his nominees are very comfortable in the Washington “swamp”. The tension between the insiders and the outsiders in the Trump transition team is likely to continue well into his presidency.
What we’ve learned: While fiery speeches and television appearances are nice, one of the quickest ways to Mr Trump’s corridors of power appears to be with an open chequebook.
LikeLike
We were always taught that the biggest Christian event of the calendar year was Easter, not Christmas.
It was almost like people who wanted to make a big show out of religion made a huge fuss over Christmas but “serious” Christians knew Easter was the thing 🙂
Trump’s yelling about Christmas with those huge trees behind him and the insistence on Merry Christmas rather than some other greeting just seems blatantly political to me. You wonder if people will ever get tired of this incessant messaging and marketing – the political campaigns that never end. It’s exhausting and so cynical. It gets nastier and dumber every cycle.
LikeLike
Did you see that Trump released a Merry Christmas photo of himself with a clenched fist in the air. What does that signify? Doesn’t look merry.
LikeLike
#NotMyKing
LikeLike
There is only ONE true KING and they called him “Wonderful!!” May HE have mercy on us all and renewed Salvation and HOPE this Christmas Season! May all those around the world know HIM, be blessed and find peace through HIS words! Hallelujah!
LikeLike
Monarchy, what a wonderful form of government, eh!
LikeLike
We know that Christ, the King, is neither your Savior nor King, by your choice.
Donald Trump does not see himself as savior or king, but does appear to have accepted Christ as his Savior, something only God knows for certain.
LikeLike
Oh now that’s funny. What on earth would give you the impression that Trump has accepted Christ as his Savior? Is it his strict moral conduct? His opposition to extramarital sex, gambling, drinking, etc.? His regular attendance at church? His treatment of “the least of these my brethren”? Please do tell.
LikeLike
Thank you, Dienne. My thoughts exactly.
LikeLike
Read the prodigal son story. Are you insinuating its too late for Trump to be saved? Im not judging Trump. Are you?
LikeLike
If you would remember, the prodigal son “crawled” home not expecting anything from his father. Trump bears no resemblance to the figure in that parable. What God ultimately does to Trump is really no concern of mine. What Trump does to this country is. In my opinion, anyone who trusts him farther than they can throw him is a seriously deluded.
LikeLike
Amy Goodman did an interview with Bernie Sanders on Democracy Now. Here is a quote from a much longer interview.
………………..
AMY GOODMAN: It’s a good show. [Democracy Now] Your thoughts that Donald Trump said that he would have won the popular vote but for the millions of people who voted illegally?
LikeLike
The president on the loss of the elections:
President Obama said in an interview released Monday that he could have beaten Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump “if I had run again.” In his most pointed critique yet, Obama said Hillary Clinton’s campaign acted too cautiously out of a mistaken belief that victory was all but certain.
“If you think you’re winning, then you have a tendency, just like in sports, maybe to play it safer,” Obama said in the interview with former adviser and longtime friend David Axelrod, a CNN analyst, for his “The Axe Files” podcast. The president said Clinton “understandably . . . looked and said, well, given my opponent and the things he’s saying and what he’s doing, we should focus on that.”
Obama stressed his admiration for Clinton and said she had been the victim of unfair attacks. But, as he has in other exit interviews, he insisted that her defeat was not a rejection of the eight years of his presidency. To the contrary, he argued that he had put together a winning coalition that stretched across the country but that the Democratic Party and the Clinton campaign had failed to follow through on it.
“I am confident in this vision because I’m confident that if I — if I had run again and articulated it — I think I could’ve mobilized a majority of the American people to rally behind it,” the president said.
“See, I think the issue was less that Democrats have somehow abandoned the white working class, I think that’s nonsense,” Obama said. “Look, the Affordable Care Act benefits a huge number of Trump voters. There are a lot of folks in places like West Virginia or Kentucky who didn’t vote for Hillary, didn’t vote for me, but are being helped by this . . . The problem is, is that we’re not there on the ground communicating not only the dry policy aspects of this, but that we care about these communities, that we’re bleeding for these communities.”
Tonite Washington Post
LikeLike
Arrogant.
Obama could have announced what he knew about Russian hacking. He kept it quiet.
Obama could have told Comeynot to interfere with a big nothingburger. Where are those infamous emails now? They were always nothing.
This was written in October but it explains why Hillary lost:
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/10/fear-of-a-female-president/497564/
LikeLike
Polly,
None of us can know what is in Trump’s heart.
We must judge him by his words and deeds.
His words reveal a man who lies without remorse or apology. See his evaluation on Politifact. As Sanders and various Republicans said, Trump is a pathological liar.
His deeds reveal a man who has selected people to lead cabinet departments who are either unfit or actually hostile to the Department’s mission.
If you can save his soul, I hope you do it soon.
LikeLike
Does Trump have a heart?
LikeLike
That description, unfortunately, can be applied to a lot of politicians. Whatever flavor you pick.
LikeLike
The phrase “does appear to have accepted” means just what Dienne said it means.
Give respect to get respect. When someone clearly misconstrues what someone else has said and/or written, an apology is expected.
The “literally/symbolically” Trump defense doesn’t work on this blog.
Your call.
😎
LikeLike
Polly – you’re the one who said it appears Trump has accepted Christ as his savior. I’m merely asking what it is that gives that appearance, in your opinion. You could have said “we don’t know whether Trump has accepted Christ as his savior”, but you didn’t. You said it appears he has. Your argument, you defend it.
LikeLike
Did not some of the evangelical leaders claim to have been there, when trump asked “Jesus into his heart?”
LikeLike
Rudy,
I assume you are serious. Trump is a womanizer, a casino owner, a con man who cheated ordinary folk of their life savings, a man who bows too Mammon, a serial liar.. and he was “saved?”
LikeLike
Yes, am serious.
Jun 29, 2016 – James Dobson Says Paula White Led Donald Trump to Jesus Christ … Donald Trump is a “baby Christian” who has accepted a relationship with Jesus, … One of his favorites is Gaithers,” she said.”
LikeLike
Rudy,
Trump is a fraud, a con man, a serial liar.
A “baby Christian?” You make a mockery of a great faith with such comments.
LikeLike
See if we can complete the exercise
The quote:
James Dobson Says Paula White Led Donald Trump to Jesus Christ….
“Donald Trump is a “baby Christian” who has accepted a relationship with Jesus, … One of his favorites is Gaithers,” she said.”
Now, complete the following sentence: the statement about the baby Christian as a description was made by:
A) James Dobson
B) Paula white
C) Rudy Schellekens
I guess we can all agree the correct answer is B.
So maybe you now understand that the quote in in question is not my statement, but an answer to part of today’s discussion about trump “having caught religion…”
LikeLike
Rudy,
I will say it again, slowly. Read it twice before you reply. Trump is a serial liar. A con man. A fraud. A phony. He will betray those he promised to save. He has gathered a basket of billionaire deplorables to fleece working people and cancel their healthcare.
He is an entertainer. A professional showman.
I did not say this was your personal view. I said pay attention to what he says and does.
LikeLike
I believe so. The fact remains between Trump and the Lord.
LikeLike
Rudy says “That description, unfortunately, can be applied to a lot of politicians. ”
Do you mean like Hitler and Stalin? Those politicians? Because “that description” fits them?
The fact that you seem to be spending a significant portion of your free time posting on here defending Donald Trump and telling us we should ignore what he does and what his supporters do is pretty shocking for any non-racist non-immigrant hating American. And yet, that is how you choose your time.
Why aren’t you out there fighting for a different candidate for midterms instead of posting on a blog chiding anyone who dares to criticize the great Trump?
Methinks you obviously are thrilled to pieces that Trump won. And if so, spending your time amidst people disgusted at his actions must give you lots of pleasure. Especially when you can constantly chide them for daring to criticize the man you believe is such a great leader.
And if you don’t believe Trump is a great leader, go out and do something yourself instead of attacking his critics. Or go to Breitbart.com where you can celebrate with like-minded people.
LikeLike
Lets see. I am the ONLY one who suggested start working on change NOW.
I keep reminding you that there are REAL issues that need dealt with rather than making up issues where there are none.
Since you don’t have a clue about my personal circumstances and actions, it is in the best presumptuous and in the worst…. well I’ll let you imagine.
In my world I understand where problems lie, and am in the process of working out plans on what can be done locally, statewide – and in the end, the nation.
So rather than making a big hill out of a misteprented statement in the RNC Christmas message, I prefer to look at how I can rally local politicians in to staying away from charter schools, or private schools UNLESS they are held to the same rules as public schools. UNLESS there is the same accountability as public education.
LikeLike
NYCPP – if you read Rudy carefully, he’s not defending Trump. In fact, he’s had some very harsh things to say about Trump. He’s simply asking for balance and fairness. This passage that the RNC put out is ambiguous. I might argue that it is intentionally so, as another commenter mentioned above to create yet another big distraction. But precisely because it’s ambiguous, we can’t say for sure what it’s intended to mean. Also, regardless of what Trump says, the fact remains that he shouldn’t be our president. There is no way the Democrats should have been able to lose to him. It’s not like he had a winning strategy or political brilliance, as Rudy points out. If anything, he seemed to be trying to lose. It took epic errors, miscalculations and plain old blatant misunderstanding of the public mood for the Democrats to pull off such an historic loss. The best path forward is to look at those errors and try to correct them going forward, or we’re looking at Trump and his ilk for the foreseeable future.
LikeLike
This, for instance, is something the Democrats should consider when they are wondering why they lost and planning their strategies going forward: http://www.alternet.org/human-rights/attack-st-louis-homeless-sneaks-under-dark-cloud
LikeLike
“precisely because it’s ambiguous, we can’t say for sure what it’s intended to mean…”
That’s what Trump’s defenders said about almost every nasty innuendo he made during the campaign. Are you saying they should all be beyond criticism? What is clear to me is that the RNC did not “welcome the NEW King” on Christmas day last year — and someone below posted that allusion is incorrect since that happened 12 days after Christmas so it certainly makes sense that it was never part of their Christmas message before.
You linked to an article about the St. Louis Mayor that certainly makes him sound terrible. Do you realize that there have been Democrats who sold out and were corrupt for decades? Tip O’Neill would never have withstood the treatment Hillary got and I wonder if you think the US would have been a better place had he been defeated by a Republican? Maybe Reagan could have abolished social security and medicare decades ago! That would have showed all those nasty
By the way, you just helped defeat a woman who was far more likely to stop the Democrats like that St. Louis Mayor than recent Democratic leaders (I haven’t heard Bernie attacking that Mayor nor Elizabeth Warren — why not?). You helped defeat a woman who was running on the most liberal platform in decades. You helped defeat a woman who would have turned the Democratic Party left exactly as she tried to do when she was working on a healthcare plan.
I don’t know what “strategies” you want them to adopt that Russ Feingold — who voters rejected even more strongly than they did Hillary — didn’t offer.
“It took epic errors, miscalculations and plain old blatant misunderstanding of the public mood for the Democrats to pull off such an historic loss.”
What was “historic” about it? That Hillary Clinton won a popular vote victory larger than recent Democratic candidates and lost the electoral vote due to the FBI interference and voter suppression efforts that managed to strike large numbers of eligible voters off the roles? That managed to have inner city Detroit left with broken voting machines where it isn’t clear what votes were actually registered and where Donald Trump — despite losing — sure ended up with a huge number of votes that were tens of thousands larger than his entire victory?
The irony is that I agree with you that the Democrats need a more liberal platform just like the one Hillary ran on but that voters like you rejected because you claimed she couldn’t be trusted and Bernie was a stupid dupe to trust her. So we will never agree on this issue because I don’t like people using the same dishonesty that Trump voters do to make their case, and your “historic loss” blame it all on Hillary because she is the nasty woman who encourages the St. Louis Mayor to do these kinds of nasty things is why the Democrats will keep losing.
Dems will lose as long as we have voters who spout dishonest nastiness about “historic losses” and “the FBI was blameless and votes that aren’t in the midwest where white people live just don’t matter so stop talking about the fact that the democratic candidate won by a huge popular margin”.
LikeLike
What’s known as “liberal” today was once known as being progressive before the far right spent decades demonizing the word “liberal”.
The real term is “progressive” and being a progressive left-of-center is better for most of the people but not the greed is good wealthiest 1 percent. Communism, Political Capitalism, and Terminal Cancer all have one thing in common, they are all bad for most of the people.
What are ‘Liberals’, What are ‘Progressives,’ and Why the Difference Matters
“That is, we define words relative to other ideas that come to mind when we hear, read, or think about them. Those other ideas form the “frame” within which we find meaning for a word. Both “liberal” and “progressive” exist in the POLITICS frame and – in the U.S. – both imply opposition to “conservative.” Add to that the fact that conservatives have for decades used “liberal” as an epithet, and many people have come to believe that “progressive” is simply a euphemism for “liberal.” But those two terms have different histories and hallmarks.”
http://www.politicususa.com/2013/06/15/liberals-progressives-difference-matters.html
Republican President Teddy Roosevelt was a progressive. He supported labor unions and exampled why. He broke the big corporate monopolies and he explained why. He fought to improve the lives of those who lived in poverty, and he explained why.
The working people need labor unions to represent them, corrupt or not, to counter the evils that come from Milton Friedman corporate greed-is-good thinking. The one good thing about labor unions is that they are democratic organizations where the members get to vote and elect their leaders every few years. That offers the working members an opportunity to vote out corrupt leaders at the top.
The people do not get a chance to vote out a corrupt CEO or corrupt board of directors for a private sector greed-is-good corporation.
Hillary Clinton,for all of her faults, was a far better candidate than Littlefingers Donald Trump will ever be. Littlefingers alleged she had never accomplished anything in the public sector. That was a lie, a very big lie, just one more of his many, many lies.
Hillary Clinton has a LONG history of supporting women and children. She was also involved in the Senate to bring about campaign finance reform.
https://votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/55463/hillary-clinton/12/campaign-finance-and-elections
What happened to that campaign finance reform?
Citizens United happened thanks to a 5 to 4 vote in the conservative dominated U.S. Supreme Court of the time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC
LikeLike
Lloyd, I consider myself a social democrat, with a strong streak of way-left populism.
LikeLike
The kind of populism this Bloomberg piece talks about?
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-11-15/populism-takes-over-the-world-ivjisbhu
LikeLike
Nope, the kind of populism espoused by George McGovern, known as the “prairie populist.” Look it up.
I voted for him in 1972.
LikeLike
The one in the New Republic?
https://newrepublic.com/article/130737/democrats-still-dont-get-george-mcgovern
LikeLike
You got it. And when McGovern lost (and I manned the phones and worked for his campaign), that was when the Democrats started shifting to the right and became so-called “neo-liberals.” Which were in no way real “liberals.”
George, rest in peace. I still love you, Prairie Populist!
LikeLike
That was the turning point for the Democrats that led to Littlefingers winning the White House where he will surely wreck the U.S. and possibly the world before he’s done.
LikeLike
Yes, Lloyd, exactly so.
I mean, why should people who are so inclined vote for a “faux” Republican, neo-liberal Democrat, when they can vote for a (supposedly) actual Republican lunatic?
I didn’t leave the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party left me. 😦
LikeLike
I forget the year I left the Democratic Party and registered as an independent. That was a long time ago.
I don’t plan to return unless the Blues return to their progressive, social safety net roots and kick out the lunatic fringe that calls itself neo-liberal.
At this point, on a scale of 1 to 10 with 10 being the most detestable, I rank the GOP a 20 and the Blues a 10.
LikeLike
NYCPSP – Sigh. Your attitude certainly isn’t helping me come back to the Democrats. In fact, it’s why I left in the first place. For starters, no, I didn’t help elect Trump. I live in Illinois, which was solidly blue. I could have voted for Trump himself without contributing to his election. (I shouldn’t need to say this, but, no, I did not vote for Trump.) You seem utterly unable to grasp any sense of nuance, which is why it’s inordinately frustrating to engage with you.
Also, yes, the St. Louis Democratic mayor does seem utterly corrupt. That’s sort of the point. He’s not alone. Emanuel, Booker, Cuomo, dozens of others are all in the same boat. Clinton and Obama too. That’s exactly why people voted for Democrats in smaller numbers this election. The Democrats need to look inward not outward right now and until that happens, enjoy President Trump.
LikeLike
Rudy,
Obama’s recent statements regarding the election are in extremely bad taste. Publicly criticizing the candidate he presumably supported pours salt in the wounds. Had his policies been more successful in raising the standard of living of the middle and so called working classes, there might have been fewer disgruntled voters. Despite having voted for him twice, I do not forgive him for the free reign given to Wall Street profiteers who nearly brought the American economy to its knees, the shameless proliferation of charter schools and the dispicable treatment of the standard bearers of public education. After eight years, there is little evidence of hope and change in directions I would consider noteworthy.
LikeLike
“…That’s exactly why people voted for Democrats in smaller numbers this election….”
So it’s the fault of Cuomo, Emanuel and the corrupt Democratic Mayor of St. Louis?
If that was the case, why did the Republican Congress spend year after year investigating Benghazi with not 3, not 5, but what, ten investigations designed to smear Hillary?
If that was the case why did the FBI feel the need to take the unprecedented step of insisting that Comey release his very misleading letter about how he had found “new evidence” of her corruption — when he had no idea if he had any “evidence” at all — 11 days before the election?
If that was the case why did the Russian-supported wikileaks ONLY release nasty stuff about Hillary Clinton and not about all candidates? Why release only the e-mails that had random DNC staff’s suggestions of dirty tricks that never happened against Bernie without all the responses that obviously told them don’t do those dirty tricks? You think that wasn’t intentional? Did you believe Bernie when he said if you looked at his staffer’s e-mails you’d see similar nasty stuff said about Hillary?
You think Hillary Clinton — who won the popular vote by a significant margin — was destined to lose because she is so corrupt just like that St. Louis Mayor? Voters strongly approved of Obama — with the same policies you condemn Hillary for — yet 70% of those same voters “know” that Hillary is corrupt. You think that the FBI, wikileaks, untold Congressional investigations, nasty innuendoes by the NY Times reporter covering Hillary and their headline writers had nothing to do with it? It’s all because they perused the policies of Obama and rejected them soundly?
The problem with all you Hillary haters is that you somehow think that the Supreme Court doesn’t matter. Imagine what would have happened if Citizens United was stuck down by Hillary-appointed justices. Instead, we will get a Court that will make it even harder for a real progressive to win.
And all because you and many other “progressives” (who didn’t trust Bernie’s support of Hillary) are convinced Hillary was, is, and always will be a corrupt politician who needed to be defeated even if it meant Trump won.
And you enable nasty tricks that are a danger to democracy by claiming that they didn’t matter and we should all pretend they didn’t happen because “It’s Hillary’s fault she lost”.
Just imagine if the Democrats of the early 1970s had your view and said “we must NOT look at Watergate because McGovern was such a crappy loser candidate let’s just blame him and attack him because that’s much more useful than holding Watergate Hearings and trying to illuminate corruption by a man — Richard Nixon — who actually did win a landslide victory (unlike Trump).
I am so glad the Democrats back then weren’t so determined to blame the losing candidate that they lost sight of what is really important in elections — which is bringing corruption out instead of saying “our own candidate was so corrupt and such a loser that let’s just let the nasty stuff the Republicans did stay covered up forever.”
By the way, Jimmy Carter also got attacked as a neoconservative and was probably as pro-business as any Democratic had been in ages. Ted Kennedy ran a primary challenge against him from the left. I was one of those voters who thought even a Reagan victory was better than letting that nasty corrupt Carter who ruined the Democratic Party from winning again. I fell for all the anti-Carter propaganda.
Boy did history prove me wrong. I wonder if there will ever come a time when you look at Trump’s victory and Hillary’s entire life realize how wrong you were too.
LikeLike
Or perhaps it continues to be Mammon?
LikeLike
Dienne: you wrote—
“This passage that the RNC put out is ambiguous.” Unless one is shamelessly dishonest, this is simple fact.
Which eviscerates any argument that it means one, and only one, thing.
You add “I might argue that it is intentionally so” but, as I see it, this doesn’t change the statement’s inherent ambiguity [especially given context—see below]. We can guess at, with greater or lesser foundation, the authors’ intentions, but the statement as worded can be interpreted, or distorted, in various ways. Unless, of course, one defends the RNC statement and asserts—discounting even the slightest possibility of error or misunderstanding—that they have godlike abilities like telepathy and the ability to time travel and teleport through solid matter and thus were present at the statement’s inception etc.
One way to approach this is to use general American English usage, taking into account such factors as under whose aegis it was issued (an allegedly secular institution and not a sectarian Christian organization, i.e., the Republican Party) and the recent very contentious presidential election.
Or one can strain at gnats by arguing that the very specialized in-group usage of specific religious groups Trumps the generalized usage of hundreds of millions of American English speakers and disregarding such factors as the aforementioned.
As dianeravitch writes elsewhere on this thread: “We must judge him by his words and deeds.”
And the statement is both a word and a deed. Literally (not symbolically!) as argued by the RNC supporters, at best—or worst—it combines severely constrained in-house jargon with sneaky adoration of Donald Trump.
Disclaimer: I am not religious. But I have known believers of many faiths, including people I not only dearly respect but deeply admire. I can state with certainty that the Christians among them would be deeply offended at the “best” alternative the RNCbots have suggested: that any allusion (however strong and unambiguous) to Donald Trump as the “new King” is/was just an accident, slip of the tongue & pen, unintended.
This is just another example of the default setting of rheephormsters and their camp followers: meet any legitimate concern with the sneer, jeer and smear.
But question them? Point out the sequoias in their own eyes? Nailed to the wall long ago by a very old and very dead and very French guy:
“Hypocrisy is the homage vice pays to virtue.” [François de la Rochefoucauld]
😎
LikeLike
Not particularly open-minded.
May all trolls lumber back underneath their bridges.
LikeLike
Blasphemous!
LikeLike
Wait. Are we SURE that’s what is being said?They are not saying that this Christmas like every other we celebrate this King – the Savior, baby Jesus? Please tell me you have misinterpreted this. Pleeeeeeze…!?
LikeLike
Demagoguery!
Submission!
Floccinaucinihilipilification!
Self-flagellation!
Self-aggrandizement!
LikeLike
Whether Sinclair Lewis actually said this or not is of no matter – it’s still true: “When fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross.” The RNC statement’s implication that we all celebrate Christmas and welcome a new King, and it’s phony expression of concern for the families of our volunteer warriors that chicken hawks like Trump love to send to fight and die so that the 1% can enjoy, tax-free, the benefits of the corporate state, certainly proves Lewis’ observation. It can’t happen here? It just did.
LikeLike
Yes.
LikeLike
Four presidents, all democrats, got the country involved in wars that cost the lives of around three MILLION soldiers.
So I would be careful referring to republicans as hawks. After all, history tells a different story.
Unless of course, Wilson, Roosevelt, Truman and Kennedy were protecting the 1%?
LikeLike
There you go again. Republicans are virtuous, peace-loving, etc. Trup will bring us to an age of kindness, prosperity, etc.
LikeLike
Once again, you have a context issue. A statement was made about the “hawks” that will send our soldiers to war. In each of those situations, it was a war decided by civilians. Until bush 1, no republican president sent soldiers into war.
Each death is a tragedy. But in casualty numbers, those “wars” have minimal casualties.
So before starting to throw titles out, it would be good to look at the realities of who the “hawks” have been over the last century.
In a previous post I mentioned westmoreland and Haig as exceptions.
LikeLike
I seem to recall that Bush 1 sent US soldiers to Kuwait and Bush 2 sent soldiers to Iraq. The latter destabilized the Middle East and set off a series of other wars. Europe now has more than a million refugees from the Middle East. The dominoes are still falling due to George W. Bush’s decision to launch a major war in search of Weapons of Mass Destruction. Still looking.
LikeLike
So Bush #2 didn’t start any wars when he was president? Only Bush #1
In addition, Dwight D. Eisenhower sent the first troops to Vietnam in 1956.
Nixon inherited the Vietnam war but expanded it illegal without permission from Congress into Laos and Cambodia by bombing and raids by US military.
US Presidents Reconsiders – by death toll
Quote: “Nixon was the worst by far for what he did in Cambodia, what many argue was outright genocide.” … Reagan was a close second for collaborating with genocide in Guatemala.” …
“The 12 worst presidents: Nixon, Reagan, Jackson, Buchanan, Polk, Fillmore, Clinton, Ford, Truman, McKinley, GW Bush and Andrew Johnson. The four best: Lincoln, Van Buren, Carter and Grant.”
http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/25376-us-presidents-reconsidered-by-death-toll
LikeLike
Let me try it this way: “the bushES” is what I wrote.
I was very much aware of Bush 1 and Kuwait.
During a military conference in Berchtesgaden the calls started coming in, all pagers went crazy, and within three hours, 400 servicemen and their families were on the road.
A normally 11 hour trip took 17 hours, because of all the military convoys on the road, to German and Dutch ports to get troops and equipment to the field.
It was also the first war, the start of which was on live tv. I still have tapes of the first 24 hours.
LikeLike
I referred to them as chicken Hawks. I include besides Trump Dick Cheney and George W. Bush.
LikeLike
Does not change the facts of history.
LikeLike
Rudy,
The facts of history surely include the war in Kuwait and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
LikeLike
Did or did I not include both bushes in the post?
LikeLike
Sorry,
I thought you started with Wilson,then FDR, then JFK and LBJ to make the point that Democrats start wars, not Republicans.
Trump already announced his intention to launch a new nuclear arms race. I forget your point.
LikeLike
Did you forget the Civil War in which about 700,000 Americans died?
LikeLike
I thought I’d stay within the last 100 years – since WW1
LikeLike
I want to add a few facts for Rudy: for instance, three of the five presidents that fought the Vietnam War were Republicans and it was Eisenhower, a Republican, who sent the first troops to Vietnam in the 1950s.
During the Vietnam War, Nixon, a Republican, illegally approved the bombing of Laos and Cambodia dropping more bombs on those two countries then there were people living there, more bombs than the U.S. dropped during all of World War II.
And who lied about WMDs to justify going to war in Iraq?
George W. Bush, a Republican.
And who started the first Gulf War in Iraq in 1990?
George H. W. Bush, a Republican
And G. H. W. Bush also started a conflict in Somalia that continued into the Clinton administration. It was called “Operation Restore Hope” and it never achieved its goals.
LikeLike
I referred to both bushes.
Nixon inherited a war.
Timeline of U.S. Involvement in Vietnam Conflict
1950 First shipment of American military aid to the French colonial administration in Vietnam arrives
1955 President Eisenhower sends first military advisors to South Vietnam to train the South Vietnamese Army
1956 At French exit the US Military Assistance Advisor Group (MAAG) assumes full responsibility for training South Vietnamese forces
1959 First two Americans are killed during a Viet Minh guerillas strike at Bien Hoa
1961 President Kennedy sends 100 Special Forces troops to South Vietnam
1961 A U.S. aircraft carrier arrives in Saigon and Vice President Johnson visits Saigon
1962 U.S. Air Force begins using Agent Orange to defoliate trails used by Viet Cong forces
1963 U.S. military advisors and Special Forces increase to 21,000
1964 U.S. destroyers USS Maddox and USS Turner Joy are reported attacked by the North Vietnamese in the Gulf of Tonkin. U.S. Congress passes “Gulf of Tonkin” resolution authorizing President Johnson to wage all-out war against North Vietnam
Here you go.
LikeLike
Rudy, how are you arriving at 3 million [American] soldiers killed? I assume you mean American deaths only. WWI – 116,708; WWII – 450,000; Korean War – 36,516; Vietnam War 58,000; the recent wars in the middle east are less than 10,000.
LikeLike
I counted all deaths…
LikeLike
Again, THANK YOU, Diane.
I am embarrassed by our election process. Seems broken to me. Too much $$$$$ in politics and none of it is good.
LikeLike
I’m quite in pain seeing Trump’s Christmas and New Year Tweets. That fist just hanging so awkwardly in the air, at the shoulder, the ‘very, very, very, very’.
I feel we’ve called a kid to the board who just doesn’t know what to do.
LikeLike
A clenched fist is a menacing gesture. It is not a symbol of peace, live or good will towards all. Why would Trump choose that as his Christmas message?
LikeLike
White power gang sign in front of a Christmas tree?
LikeLike
Strength, victory and nuclear proliferation? What a message for this time. What an obscene message.
LikeLike
Unfit! Unfit!
LikeLike
We dont know the condition of Trumps soul when and if he came to.the Lord. ALL of us are sinners in need of forgiveness and assurance of salvation.
The prodigal wether crawling, walking or however he came to his father, didnt know what his father would do. We now know that our Heavenly Father , through His sons sacrifice assures us of salvation when we come to Him.
I am a King’s kid..
LikeLike
Prince of Peace is the wrong label for Littlefingers Donald Trump. A more suitable meme would be “Emperor of Lies, Prince of Darkness, Groper in Chief, and the horseman riding the Pale Horse or the Red Horse, or the Black Horse (can’t make my mind up which horse because Little Fingers mounts them all).”
LikeLike
Save that religious crap for someone else. Donald Trump is a hypocritical, non-Christian and is already a walking disaster.
LikeLike
“I” can’t save anyones soul. Way above my pay grade.
LikeLike
The Pope would find your insistence that Trump is a Christian because Trump says he is a Christian to be pretty reprehensible. But I suspect you judge this Pope more harshly than you judge Trump.
One doesn’t ask forgiveness and continue to commit the same sins over and over again and say “but I’m a Christian so you must support all that I say”.
I suspect you did not give Hillary Clinton — someone who is a REAL Christian — the kind of respect and “forgiveness” that you seem determined to insist we all give Trump.
No doubt you believe Trump embodies real Christian values and Hillary Clinton does not. Which puts you at odds with the Pope, but then again, no doubt you don’t like him either.
LikeLike
“Real Christian”
Are you not now moving into the same judgment that you deny those who believe trump is a Christian?
You cannot know either case. Look at deeds?
Be honest in both evaluations.
LikeLike
Rudy,
That’s a credible point. I should clarify.
Trump and Hillary both identify as Christians. Only one has attended church regularly and worked to make the lives of children better. Only one thought his “Christianity” demanded that he tell the world for 5 years that Obama was a Kenyan who lied about being born in America. And who then lied and said he did that to “help” the President because that nasty Hillary started it all and “forced” him to keep repeating his lie for 5 years. No need to apologize because he was acting in the way that was Christian and correct.
I find it hard to believe that many Christians want to embrace Donald Trump as the kind of man they believes demonstrates the values Christians hold most highly. And any pretense that he is the prodigal son is laughable, given that he has never once acknowledged any wrongdoing in his past. I doubt the words “I’m sorry” or “I was wrong” ever crossed his lips.
But if you want to make that case that Trump is the embodiment of “real” Christian values, then please feel free to make it. Look at deeds. Be honest in your evaluation. Teach children that they should act exactly like Mr. Trump and live their lives with the same “respect” for others that Jesus taught them by modeling themselves after the way Donald Trump acts and continues to act.
And you still didn’t provide a reasonable explanation why this year of all years the RNC suddenly decide that a “new King” needed to be celebrated when they saw no need to celebrate that new King last year. Just a happy coincidence they decided to use that wording when someone who they want us to consider the “new king” takes office?
LikeLike
“I have nothing to ask forgiveness for” was what trump said after his “conversion.”
Seems kind of an odd statement.
It’s not my job to explain the writings of the RNC chair.
I find it difficult to believe that someone who promotes abortion for any reason is a Christian. Whatever she does for children (would live to see some examples of that. She stole the claim to Ted Kennedys work on child insurance).
Someone who blames others for their own failures does not hold to the Christian standard of personal accountability.
Just showing up in a church meeting does not make one a Christian.
Someone who supports same sex marriage does not act like a Christian.
So, now that we have shown shortcomings re Christian on both sides, can we lay the “new King” statement distortion to rest, please?
LikeLike
Rudy,
FYI, Hillary never “promoted” abortion. What she said very clearly was that the government should not control women’s bodies, should not force them to have abortions, or impose the views of the religious right on them. Should a woman die in childbirth to save the baby? Should she bear the rapist’s child? Her father’s child? These are decisions between a woman and her doctor. I wonder how many abortions Trump has paid for?
LikeLike
Here we go again. My statement was, “…for ANY reason…”
NINETY SEVEN % of abortions are for reasons other than life of the mother, rape or incest.
That means that the majority of abortions are for “convenience” reasons. Please note the “…”
LikeLike
Rudy,
None of your business why women get abortions.
What is the law in the Netherlands?
LikeLike
Abortion in the Netherlands has been legal since 1984 for any reason up to the 21st week of pregnancy, and legal for medical reasons up to the 24th week.
Although there is a five day waiting period for abortions. (I don’t know if the waiting period applies, however, to a woman who is in danger of imminent death if the pregnancy continues for those five days.)
LikeLike
Holland is one of the first countries where abortion was legalized. A social scientist made a prediction at that time. “Whatever value you give to the beginning of life will ultimately determine the value you place on the end of life”
And so Holland became one of the first countries to legalize euthanasia. And that led to a neonatal dr to euthanize a new born without following standard procedures. And got away with it.
Which now turned euthanasia into another “right.”
LikeLike
Key to this whole discussion is the belief that the act of fertilization creates a human being imbued with a soul by his/her Creator from that moment. Apparently that belief in the sanctity of life from conception doesn’t include the assumption that all children without birth parents will be provided with a loving family who believes that sanctity requires them to take care of those children once they are outside the womb. In any case, under what circumstances in the U. S. are we all required to abide by the religious code of one group of people? Didn’t we nix the idea of a state religion?
LikeLike
Not quite sure how this ever became a surprise to many that life does begin at conception.
It’s a biological fact. It’s not a monkey, rat, fish or anything but human.
I watched my new grandson the other day. Three months old. Slowly growing until he can join us “on the outside” in April 2017.
We refer to him as Reed. Not “fetus.” Not glob. We refer to him as a person. As a person, already developing his own personality, combining what each parent has contributed.
But by referring to a “fetus,” a non-entity, it’s made abortion a lot easier. After all, it’s not human u till born, right??
So what is it between conception and birth?
LikeLike
Not quite what I said but then again you know that.
LikeLike
2old2teach, it does seem as if many of those on the right who are opposed to abortion, seem to think that life begins at conception, but ends at birth, because they often want to cut aid to poor families with young children. This, to me, smacks of hypocrisy. I’m not saying that all “right-to-lifers” are like this, but too many are.
And trying to argue for a different viewpoint when it comes to Rudy is like whistling in the wind. 😉
LikeLike
Since you do not know anything about me, you can make sssumptions. That’s fine with me.
But I happen to put my money where my mouth is.
LikeLike
Like having 12 children?
LikeLike
TAke a pick: want to be my left hand or my right hand?
Not quite sure what makes you the question about the number of children I have.
You should know, by now, that I have two of those.
LikeLike
Diane, bless you for continuing to argue with Rudy, but I won’t address him directly. His opinions and his mind are set in stone, and I find it useless to engage people like that; it just raises my blood pressure, and I cannot afford that physically.
And he should know that I put my money where my mouth is, as well. I give to Planned Parenthood, the ACLU, People For the American Way, Doctors Without Borders, The Southern Poverty Law Center, and a number of other such organizations. Plus I work for and support politicians on the same page as I am, particularly on the local and state level.
Have a great New Year, Diane, and keep up the good work!
LikeLike
Rudy, why do you claim that ALL Christian denominations believe no one in the country where they live should ever be allowed to have an abortion legally?
From wikipedia (questionable source, so feel free to correct): “Protestant supporters of abortion rights include the United Church of Christ, the United Methodist Church, the Episcopal Church, the United Presbyterian Church, the Presbyterian Church (USA), and the Lutheran Women’s Caucus.[10][38] The American Baptist Churches USA, Episcopal Church, Evangelical Lutheran Church of America, the Presbyterian Church (USA) and The United Church of Christ consider abortion permissible under certain restricted circumstances.”
Now it is you, Rudy, who seems to be saying that the only people allowed to claim to be Christian are those who believe that ALL women must be forced to recognize that life begins from day 1 of conception and all abortions must be illegal even if the mother will die.
Do you now claim that Methodists are not “real” Christians now?
LikeLike
Must I really teach you to read??? I make it clear time and again that I talk about abortion for OTHER reasons than health of mother, rape and incest. How many times do I have to repeat myself?
I speak of the 97% of abortions for reasons other than…
Those are not made up numbers, by the way. They come sources like the CDC and the Gutmacher institute.
Apart from that, churches are moving further and further away from Christianity.
LikeLike
Readers of this blog should feel honored that they are privy to the sacred words of the Supreme Authority on what groups and individuals are more Christian and what groups and individuals are less.
I realize I should feel humbled and bow down before such irrefutable wisdom, but I shall persist in my error in not feeling it is my place to make such judgments.
But then, what do I know? I’m just a KrazyTA that believes in giving respect to get respect.
😎
LikeLike
Believe what you want. Don’t foist it on others. Always keep a wary eye so as not to be scammed by this species, by those dead or alive, collective or individual.
LikeLike
Akedemos,
Our tradition of religious freedom is intertwined with the separation of church and state. The law should not establish one religion or many religions. If a religious group needs government subsidy to survive, it doesn’t have much of a following; and in time will find that government funding will impinge on religious liberty.
LikeLike
I’m mainly responding to Polly, really.
LikeLike
Meanwhile Trump must separate state and estate.
LikeLike
It seems that the statement is meant to be ambiguous so as to allow xtian supporters to say that the statement is about Jesus while at the same time allowing detractors to make THETrumpster comparison. Even though not xtian at all I take the first interpretation as the intended meaning.
But ambiguousness of the statement hints at important distinctions in categories of proof/assent that a statement means “X” and is a true statement.
I am currently reading a book by one of my favorite philosophers, heaven forbid a white male Frenchman who, to misquote KrazyTA, is not dead, Andre Comte-Sponville’s “The Little Book of Atheist Spirituality”, who discusses Kant’s three degrees/dimensions/categories of “belief and assent”: “OPINION, which admits that it is both subjectively and objectively insufficient [as a valid arguing point], FAITH which is subjectively but not objectively sufficient, and finally KNOWLEDGE which is both subjectively and objectively sufficient.” pg. 70.
It is from Comte-Sponville where I got the idea of “fidelity to truth”. Anything less than “fidelity to truth”, Knowledge, is insufficient to buttress one’s assertions. The root of many problems stems from the confusing and conflating the three categories of “belief and assent” with many people believing that opinion and faith are adequate means of “knowing” when they are not/cannot be. I think that 1+1=3 is my opinion. The “Good Book” told me that 1+1=5 is my faith belief. 1+1=2 is objectively and subjectively true (within the realm of common mathematics, yes there are other systems where it may be false), therefore is knowledge.
Now what one does with knowledge is either wise-wisdom or ignorant-stupidity as determined by the effects of the actions but that is for another day.
LikeLike
Your part can be the king, but unless people are treating you like royalty, you ain’t no king, man.
Jeff Bridges
LikeLike
To add insult to injury, he didn’t even get the story right. The wise men were not there at the birth, shepherds and angel, and lowly animals were.
LikeLike
Why aren’t people calling out that error? Isn’t it quite embarrassing and demonstrate how little real knowledge of Christianity these people have?
LikeLike
“The King is Half-Undressed”
A great tune from the early 90’s by a little known SF band called Jellyfish…
On this cold avenue of lights
The reds and greens but mostly reds
For you he’s stopping
In seeing him she knows him less
His stick is wet she’s half undressed
And all in all they’re both obsessed
With so much nothing
I know it’s hard for you to see
What lies behind’s a mystery
If words could speak they’d mean even less
When the king is half undressed
She dots her eyes with a smiley face
A work of art in all but taste
The fool deserves the bed he’s made
Where idiots slumber
Divine she is to aire his fate
A crack of smile
Through all this hate
Means nothing more in this nervous state
Of so much nothing
I know it’s hard for you to see
The truth behind is misery
If words could speak they’d mean even less
When the king is half undressed
Blue Autumns
Sunshine Kisses
Hearts and Flowers
Broken Wishes
LikeLike
So…how many Magi were there and how long did they travel.to find Jesus? The Bible doesnt say.
Knowledge of that information has little bearing on a Christians faith.
Time for me to leave this discussion which has been vitriolic in many posts. Trump will be the one to defend his actions and faith. I pray for a hedge of protection for him.and our Nation, under God.
LikeLike
“I pray for a hedge of protection for him.and our Nation, under God.”
Which god? The one from the 1950s?
LikeLike
God .
LikeLike
There are many gods made up by man. Not one of those gods are anything else other than the imagination of homo supposedly sapiens, so again which one?
LikeLike
Sorry Polly about the vitriol. I say this with all sincerity. Most of those who post here are passionate about causes.
I tend not to gravitate towards Evanglista websites, knowing I’ll only generate problems there. Maybe that might work for you in kind in.
Don’t know if it matters too much to you, but I’ll share a thought from a Black Muslim friend of mine from more than thirty years ago…
“You can be spiritual without being religious.” Just a thought for everyone to bear in mind this holiday season. May we have a safe 2017.
LikeLike
Dienne is perfectly capable of defending herself but I once again ask you to remember what I wrote above:
[start]
The phrase “does appear to have accepted” means just what Dienne said it means.
Give respect to get respect. When someone clearly misconstrues what someone else has said and/or written, an apology is expected.
[end]
Your silence would be compliance with what you describe as “vitriolic”* discussion.
😎
P.S. *vitriolic: (adj.), filled with bitter criticism or malice.
LikeLike
I have both reverence and contempt when someone unnecessarily volunteers they are going to pray for something. I am impressed by faith and prayer connotes very serious matters indeed, matters of life and death, soul and higher meaning, etc. But, at the same time, it is as if they are telling me they are going to go have a very serious talk with their vacuum cleaner.
LikeLike
Diane,
The message you quoted is, I believe, an attempt at a Christmas message of good will and nonpartisan.
I feel that your snarky comment (while I certainly agree with it’s content and am ashamed to call Trump my president) is beneath you.
LikeLike
Several thoughts after reading through what can easily be described as a lot of nonsense:
The Republican National Committee does not care a whit about the “less fortunate.” If Republicans did, they wouldn’t keep pushing policies that oppress the “less fortunate” and reward corporations and the upper tax brackets.
Donald Trump is not a “king” in any sense or measure of the word. Nor is he an astute businessman. Pure and simple, he’s a charlatan. A demagogue. He ran a campaign that was xenophobic, racist, and misogynistic, and his campaign resonated with many who are authoritarian and racist to their very core.
Hillary Clinton could – and should – have run a a better campaign. But clearly, the false right-wing narrative about Clinton played a big part in her loss. So too did FBI Director Comey’s bad behavior, and more importantly, so did Russian intelligence agency operations, including their hacks, email releases, and fake news. As a cyber-warfare and tech expert noted recently about Russian involvement, “the evidence is so rich that there are only two reasons not to accept it — one, because you don’t understand the technical details, or because you don’t want to understand it for political reasons… It’s really not controversial that we’re looking at a major Russian campaign.”
Late deciders broke for Trump, likely swayed by the email “scandal” (which was pure political concoction). As The Post reported, “People who decided late broke strongly for Donald Trump in the states that mattered, according to exit polls. And without this apparent late surge, Hillary Clinton would be our president-elect — not Trump.”
Education – or lack thereof – played a critical role in Clinton’s loss and Trump’s win. FiveThirtyEight reported the details:
“Hillary Clinton improved on President Obama’s 2012 performance in 48 of the country’s 50 most-well-educated counties. And on average, she improved on Obama’s margin of victory in these countries by almost 9 percentage points, even though Obama had done pretty well in them to begin with.”
And in the fifty least-well-educated counties, “Clinton lost ground relative to Obama in 47 of the 50 counties — she did an average of 11 percentage points worse, in fact. These are really the places that won Donald Trump the presidency, especially given that a fair number of them are in swing states such as Ohio and North Carolina.”
Trump does not believe in democracy or democratic governance or democratic values and principles. Neither do most Republicans; their extensive voter suppression efforts attest to that.
Going forward, there is a dire need to restore the democratic citizenship, civic education role to public schooling. Republicans don’t believe in that either.
I’m worried that far too many citizens – and educators – are in that same boat.
LikeLike
Didn’t The King (Herod) send soldiers out to kill the baby boys of Bethlehem?
All Hail The King!
Lock up the children.
Burn down the houses that don’t display a Nativity Scene on the front lawn.
Can I get an Amen?
LikeLike
Our “new King’ apparently isn’t interested in informing the public except through tweets. Apparently holding a news conference with intelligent professional journalists is difficult so he avoids it.
The AP details Trump’s attacks on Hillary Clinton — attacks that could be used against him right now:
LikeLike
He avoids press conferences for obvious reasons. He wants to control all the media that is about him. He will say what he wants to say directly to the public through tweets, with no one asking awkward questions. Reporters might ask him about the news conference where he was going to demonstrate that Melania had the proper working papers and was not an illegal immigrant. They might ask him about his many conflicts of interest. He has said that the president is exempt from any conflict of interest laws. At some point, he will feel compelled to meet with the press. He will do his best to control the questions, or to give non sequitur answers. Politicians often pull this trick; the reporter asks a question, and the politicians gives the answer to a different question. Watch them.
LikeLike
Littlefingers @realDonaldTrump Twitter account only has 18-million followers.
62.9 million voted for him and 65.8 million voted for Hillary Clinton, but he will be president of 320 million Americans
The question to answer is who will Trump rule for – the 18 million, 62.9 million, 65.8 million, the almost 90 million eligible voters that did not vote for anyone, everyone in the U.S., or will he only be a president for the 0.1 percent wealthiest American, or Russia’s Putin?
LikeLike
Lloyd,
As far as I am concerned, he is Putin’s boy.
LikeLike
As to: “…we must also remember those among us who are less fortunate. Many on this day are without hope, and need the kindness and compassion of those around them.”
NO! We must remember WHY these people are IN A LESS FORTUNATE CONDITION. As Dom Helder Camara said — ‘When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist.’
Let’s keep asking WHY. . and know that we neither want to give a man/woman a fish nor just teach him/her how to fish, especiall because THE FISHING POLES AND THE RIVER/OCEANS FULL OF FISH ARE TAKEN AWAY FROM THEM.
The have mores are getting more and more and using the “less fortunate” to win votes and will create an even worse place for the poor among us.
LikeLike
Yes, Luz, exactly ^^this^^.
LikeLike
I think they meant “Kingpin”?
LikeLike
I just saw this in the opinion section of the LA Times. Thought it expresses exactly what is missing in Trump’s mind.
Opinion: Trump’s careless ignorance could make him the world’s most dangerous man by David Horsey
..”It is Trump who is uniquely scary, not because he is a Republican and not because of his personal demerits. The nation can survive a president with a record of using women as sexual toys (Trump will not be the first). The nation can survive a president who is rude and bullying. The nation can even survive a con man. But it will be much harder to steer clear of harm with a president who seems to have no idea how little he really knows about very important things.”
Los Angeles Times
LikeLike
Dunning–Kruger Trump
LikeLike