SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
takyon (881)
{takyon} {at} {soylentnews.org}
10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org] Jango Raid [soylentnews.org]
How McCain Got the Last Word Against Trump (archive)
By the time he died on Saturday, Mr. McCain had carefully stage-managed a four-day celebration of his life — but what was also an unmistakable rebuke to President Trump and his agenda. For years, Mr. Trump had used Twitter and the presidential bully pulpit to mock and condemn the senator. In death, Mr. McCain found a way to have the last word, even quietly making it clear through friends that Mr. Trump was not welcome at the services.
“I think it’s fair to say that they have a very different view of this country and what this country means, here and abroad,” said Mark Salter, the senator’s longtime friend and co-author who sat with Mr. McCain — often with a lump in his throat — during the many discussions about his looming death. “His overall message was: ‘It doesn’t have to be this shitty.’”
The series of events honoring Mr. McCain is the kind of grandiose spectacle that is normally reserved for someone who became president, not someone who twice failed to do so. Friends said that Mr. McCain was surprised by the level of interest in his death even as he planned it.
When advisers suggested that his coffin should lie in state at the Arizona Capitol, Mr. McCain said he believed the legislature would never approve such a rare honor for him, recalled Rick Davis, who had been at Mr. McCain’s side for decades and served as his 2008 campaign chairman. “Every inch of the way, he underestimated what he thought this would be about,” Mr. Davis said.
The memorial events this week began in Arizona on Wednesday, when Mr. McCain’s body was taken to the Capitol, and will continue Thursday at a service at North Phoenix Baptist Church. The procession will then shift to the nation’s capital, when Mr. McCain’s coffin will arrive at an air base outside Washington as the president holds one of his raucous campaign-style rallies for supporters in Indiana.
By the weekend, when virtually all of official Washington — Democrats and Republicans alike — gathers at the National Cathedral for a nationally televised farewell, Mr. Trump is expected to have retreated to Camp David, where White House aides hope he will contain his anger at the attention being lavished on Mr. McCain.
[...] Vladimir Kara-Murza, a Russian activist who survived two poisoning attempts for his opposition to the government of President Vladimir V. Putin, said that Mr. McCain, who was widely seen as one of the Russian leader’s fiercest detractors, had also asked him in April to be a pallbearer. “He spoke the truth regardless of party or political situations,” Mr. Kara-Murza said. “That was his defining characteristic.”
In Washington, a town where Mr. Trump has given Mr. Putin an open invitation to visit, Mr. Kara-Murza said that Mr. McCain’s choice of a Russian pallbearer — one repeatedly brought to the brink of death for challenging his country’s authoritarian brand of politics — was “actually pretty symbolic.”
(Score: 1) by Sulla on Thursday August 30 2018, @06:48PM (16 children)
You know whats shitty?
Lying about chemical weapons to go to war in Iraq
Pushing a war with Iran and North Korea to the MIC (and his doners)
Destabilize Syria to benefit MIC (and his doners)
Shooting down the F22 deal because he made money on the F35 deal
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by Snow on Thursday August 30 2018, @07:13PM (13 children)
It's like your mouth is connected to Trump's asshole. You just eat his shit up.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 30 2018, @07:19PM
That pleasure is all yours [theintercept.com] bon appetite.
(Score: 1) by Sulla on Thursday August 30 2018, @07:41PM (9 children)
No, I just hate McCain because he's a warmonger who has actively worked to restrict the freedoms provided in the Bill of Rights
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 2) by Snow on Thursday August 30 2018, @08:28PM (2 children)
That's fair.
I think that people are praising McCain at the moment not so much because of his track record, but rather because it seemed that he was capable of looking at both sides. In a climate where it's 'Us Vs Them', Trump supporters blindly follow Trump, and Trump haters blindly hate trump. It was nice to see someone that, while officially in the Trump camp, would frequently disagree with him publicly.
(Score: 1) by Sulla on Thursday August 30 2018, @08:46PM (1 child)
I think the left only cares about McCain because he is dead and no longer their problem. He was good at reaching across the isle on issues that benefited the rich and powerful, and thats something the government has always had bipartisan support for. The democrats were great at pointing out how much of a huge racist McCain was back in 2008,
https://www.truthdig.com/articles/that-time-republicans-used-racism-to-defeat-mccains-presidential-bid/ [truthdig.com]
https://www.frontpagemag.com/point/271157/new-york-times-called-mccain-racist-now-it-uses-daniel-greenfield [frontpagemag.com]
McCain now gets a pass because he became a good republican.
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 2) by takyon on Thursday August 30 2018, @09:03PM
I think the left liked McCain in the early 2000s because he had been steamrolled by Bush in the 2000 primary, and many would have preferred McCain to Bush. Warmonger he may be, but it took a very specific crew to get us into the Iraq War, a crew who began planning to invade Iraq the day after 9/11. The 2008 campaign and Sarah Palin obviously soured feelings, although people remember that moment when McCain defended Obama [vox.com] at a town hall meeting. Being a solid anti-Trump Republican who cast the deciding vote on health care in the Senate obviously gave McCain cred. And you can't really blame McCain for being a bitter enemy of Trump, because McCain preferred "straight talk" and bipartisanship to populism. McCain was also one of Trump's early targets during the 2016 campaign, with the war hero remark being one of the first shocks that made people go "Of course Trump is going to drop out because of this... right?" Every similar moment during the campaign just built on that foundation.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 30 2018, @10:20PM (5 children)
Like Trump? I mean, look at the wars we're still engaged in now. It doesn't seem like Trump wants to get us out of any of the 7+ wars we're in right now. It doesn't seem like he wants to end the NSA's mass surveillance, the TSA, the drug war, or any other unconstitutional nonsense. Continuing unconstitutional practices and unjust wars is just as bad as starting them.
Why, it seems more like Trump is nothing more than an establishment puppet who makes stupid Tweets.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Thursday August 30 2018, @11:11PM
Trump calls for death penalties for drug dealers as focus of opioids plan [theguardian.com]
He'll end the war! ...by turning it into a slaughter.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Sulla on Thursday August 30 2018, @11:25PM (3 children)
I have posted it before so I won't bother again. Go look up the international stats (so you don't have to trust the US if you so choose) on number of civilians killed by US or US funded sources since Trump took office. The last time you will see civilian casualty numbers this low was late in the Clinton admin or before 9/11 Bush. We stopped funding Syrian rebel groups early in Trump admin at his ordering and civilian deaths pretty much disappeared along the Iraq/Jordan border, Russians/Turkey/Israel are still causing problems, but Syria is in a much more stable state for the average civilian. After the flury at the beginning of his administration the pro-war rhetoric (with the exception of Dem and Rep hawks) went away for North Korea while a deal is attempted.
Is Trump great regarding war? No. But he is better than Bush I/II, Clinton, and Obama. At this point all you can really blame on Trump in regards to oversees hot conflict is our continued support of the Saudis in regard to Yemen. So even if you want to give him a D, its better than an F.
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Friday August 31 2018, @07:10PM
Under the Trump administration, US airstrikes are killing more civilians [theconversation.com]
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Friday August 31 2018, @07:13PM (1 child)
Trump has Already Killed More Civilians than Obama in U.S. Fight Against ISIS [newsweek.com]
Donald Trump Is Dropping Bombs at Unprecedented Levels [foreignpolicy.com]
(Score: 1) by realDonaldTrump on Friday August 31 2018, @11:02PM
You elected me to DEFEAT ISIS. Big promise I made. A promise I've kept. Very proudly. Obama & Crooked Hillary are the Founders of ISIS, the literal founders. Very WEAK & INEFFECTIVE against ISIS. THEY HAVE BEEN AROUND TOO LONG!
I've worked with our allies in the Middle East, and with Israel -- I didn't say Israel, by the way, never said Israel -- to help them lead the fight. Very hard fight, very tough enemy. We've been fighting much harder than Obama & Crooked ever did. And we've been winning tremendously.
Defeat ISIS. Move Embassy to Jerusalem. Cancel HORRIBLE Iran Deal. Make TREMENDOUS Arms Deal with Saudi. And start the Sunni NATO, the Arab NATO to go up against Iran. That's my Peace Plan. And it's working beautifully. I'm getting a Nobel Prize for that one. And I'm going to have more Nobel Prizes than anybody. But, ZERO Emmys. The Apprentice never won -- even though it should have many times over. Absolutely horrendous, folks. RIGGED!!!!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 31 2018, @02:09AM (1 child)
Do you deny what Sulla said was true? What does it have to do with Trump then. TDS indeed.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 31 2018, @11:09PM
I doubt there was any denial, but there is often a strong backlash to "whataboutism". McCain's point of "it doesn't have to be this shitty" is a valid point we should be discussing instead of trying to destroy his message because we don't like him. I never liked him, but I did respect his stance against torture and a few other things where the more typical politicians just sheeple along with it.
The ultimate irony as usual is that Trump supporters say "TDS" when they are actually the ones deranged by Trump and his lies. Projection, it is what you're best at!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 30 2018, @07:14PM (1 child)
Things may well be less shitty now McCain is gone.
(Score: 2) by realDonaldTrump on Thursday September 13 2018, @02:11PM
Make America Great Again!
(Score: 1) by Sulla on Thursday August 30 2018, @06:55PM
McCain's offer of extending an olive branch was his attempt to bury the hatchet by asking Trump to give Cindy McCain a job,
https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/arizona/2017/06/13/cindy-mccain-president-donald-trump-state-department/391412001/ [azcentral.com]
Hey, we can stop hating eachother, just pay me off
Maybe McCain should have made a more reasonable offer than having Trump make up for his bad insults of McCain by hiring his wife and making the swamp that much deeper. Tells me that McCain only cared about the insult so far as to get some of that sweet sweet corruption money.
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 30 2018, @07:17PM
Just last week, he finally did something for America. He died for his country. It's a bit overdue, but still, he died. America is great again.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by requerdanos on Thursday August 30 2018, @07:22PM (25 children)
This statement caught me in an unexpected way and gave me new perspective.
It says that there is someone who was merely a political rival of McCain with a hobby of insulting people who is not merely a poorly-mannered competitor, as that would seem to indicate, but a genuinely unstable individual with not only anger issues but a near-complete lack of understanding of human interaction, empathy, and respect for others.
Sure, I like to jab about Trump being an idiot (though it has worn thin as he makes himself an easier and easier target--the jokes write themselves), but I've done that while sincerely wishing the guy well, and hoping that his unconventional bumbling has great results. But this is not a jab or a joke, it's a horrific picture of someone who is literally portrayed as being angry about friends and fans mourning someone who died with a lot of friends and fans.
That's alarming on a completely new level, nothing like the nagging bother of simply "doing dumb and self-centered things"--but identifying him as basically the enemy of anyone within his sphere of influence (which is unfortunately magnified).
(Score: 1) by Sulla on Thursday August 30 2018, @07:45PM (2 children)
Which is more likely
1) Trump boiling with anger throwing stuff in the White House because McCain gets to have a state funeral and he doesn't like McCain
2) McCain said a month or so ago that he doesn't want Trump anywhere near his funeral. He is going to have a state event that Trump isn't invited to. So Trump tells everyone to fuck off and goes to Camp David to avoid the spectacle.
If it was 1, he would have gone to one of his houses to play golf and demanded important people who McCain wanted at his funeral to come with him to discuss policy.
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 4, Informative) by Snow on Thursday August 30 2018, @08:30PM
Those two options are not mutually exclusive.
(Score: 2) by requerdanos on Thursday August 30 2018, @08:33PM
The emotional approaches you mention aren't tied to locations, and Trump being angry or merely avoidant can happen at the White House, at Camp David, or at Disney World for all location has to do with it.
There is no evidence nor indication that Trump only is angry or pitches unreasonable fits at one of his houses and never at Camp David nor at the White House, but there is evidence [politico.com], on the contrary, that he pitches childish anger fits at the White House. Your statement is, logically, nonsense.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 30 2018, @07:56PM (13 children)
Trump knows politics, and is resisting the urge to honor McCain appropriately.
Appropriately in this case: piss on his grave
Your idea of "understanding of human interaction, empathy, and respect for others" is absurd. Let's go there: would you have wanted to attend a respectful funeral for Hitler? How about Osama, Pol Pot, Idi Amin, or Saddam Hussein? Some people are simply undeserving. At best they should be chucked into a trash compacter.
(Score: 3, Disagree) by requerdanos on Thursday August 30 2018, @08:29PM (3 children)
Thank you for your reasoned reply. My thanks here are, for what it's worth, genuine.
I don't know about absurd, but it's certainly not a universal one, however much it might enjoy majority or plurality, whichever the case may be.
I cite these two over the others because they died during my adult life and within my knowledge. Yes, I would have been interested in attending a respectful funeral for these people. Besides having basic respect for them as humans, I have even visited the home countries of each. However they too may have lacked understanding of human interaction, empathy, and respect for others, and however much damage they may have done within their unfortunately large sphere of influence, they were all still people and despite their overwhelmingly negative actions and the public perception thereof, they still had value as humans which can be recognized with respect even be that unpopular. [This applies to Hitler, Pol Pot, etc. as well.]
If your worldview allows respect for others only as objects that can be beneficial to you or to those you are interested in, or not, then the conclusion that some of them are only worth trash is going to come up a lot more often than just in the case of major political leaders. Most of the seven billion people in the world have never done anything special to benefit you personally or to tickle your notions of goodness. Indeed, most also harbor hatred, strife, and various flavors of evil in their hearts, tagging them as "deserving" of disrespect. But even if people have worked to try to deserve disrespect, I submit that there is a base level at which even the evil-at-core should be respected as being human.
The idea is to "love your neighbors" because they are human, and not based on whether they "deserve" your personal respect of their humanity to be respected or shown common decency.
It's precisely this difference that I came today to have questions about with respect to the President.
I don't say that you necessarily should feel the same way; and certainly, opinions and feelings will vary. But I hope that this approach becomes more and more common, and not less and less. Especially in our leaders.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Friday August 31 2018, @02:43AM
Some people are more deserving of respect than others.
One of humanity's most common problems is distinguishing between respect and freindship, or "liking". I've liked a lot of people, who I didn't consider worthy of much respect. I've respected a lot of other people who I didn't like. It's great when you actually like a respectable person. But bottom line - the two words should never be used synonymously.
McCain? There were things I liked about him, and more things that I didn't like. Those likes and dislikes had little influence on my respect for him. He did a few respectable things. He also did a boatload of things that were worthy of disrespect.
I don't fall into the rather small camp of people who hate the man, but I sure as hell can't be part of this posthumous McCain worship.
John McCain is just another man, who like most men, did some really good stuff now and then, and did some really shitty stuff now and then.
As I've pointed out in the past, it's really great to be the grandson of an admiral, and the son of another admiral. Your fuckups are easily covered over, and your smallest achievements are blown into national achievements. Damn, I wish my daddy had been an admiral!!
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 2) by Joe on Friday August 31 2018, @08:48PM (1 child)
I have a lot of problems understanding your approach. I'll briefly detail mine so you can see the differences:
Start with a base level of care, respect, and trust for humans.
Adjust those base levels, up or down, based on the past actions/inaction of the individual, then correct for outside factors (e.g. difficult upbringing, desperate situation, cultural factors, etc.).
The levels are then further adjusted to account for predicted future behavior.
Finally, the levels determine the overall value of the individual in relation to others.
It seems to me that either you don't adjust from the base level or you have a lower limit for how far you adjust downward. Either way, the lowest level of value you place on a person extends all the way to respecting their dead flesh or the concept of their existence.
Your approach is scope insensitive, weighted by some sort of availability heuristic or salience bias, and that does not adjust for death (extended-self hypothesis).
Time, resources, and emotional energy are all limited and there are billions of people in the world. Even if you believe that something like Hitler's dead body has some positive value that warrants time and respect, it should be so far down the list of priorities that its effective value is negligible.
- Joe
(Score: 2) by requerdanos on Saturday September 01 2018, @03:26AM
The base respect level is, in the approach I describe, the floor, below which you can't adjust.
Silly example: "Such and such did nothing but cause people grief, murder thousands of children while their parents watched, and tortured kittens, for no reason but just as a hobby out of boredom. The only thing left to respect is their basic humanity and what a waste their time on earth was." == still more valuable than garbage, because they were a person, however evil or misguided, with potential, however unfulfilled, someone's son/brother/etc. who might mourn for them, while in contrast garbage never was that nor could have been.
Their value *to me*? Might be nothing, less than nothing (at least "nothing" is inoffensive), actively harmful. This was their failing, in the case of the kitten-torturer child-murderer above, Hitler, etc. Their failing; I am sorry they made those choices.
While I recognize their failing, I don't use it as an occasion to also fail, and lower my behavior closer to theirs, by not showing basic respect.
A not-so-silly example: When my dad passed away, I called my half-sister in another state to let her know that our father had died. I didn't reach her, but I did reach her mother (who was our dad's ex-wife, divorced for many years from him). When I told her why I was looking for my sister, her reaction was "Well, good! I'm glad *he's* finally dead." She was to my surprise able to pass at least some of this venom on as my sister did not attend our dad's funeral.
Okay, perhaps they had their differences, perhaps in her view he treated her poorly. Whatever. That's still a shitty and cruel thing to say to someone in fresh mourning of a loved one. To her, he was worth garbage. Okay, perhaps so, due to his failings (or hers, or both, or whatever), no problem. But that doesn't account for her being a useless piece of shit in this manner--that's *her* failing.
From my perspective, she subscribes to "your" view, the President probably also does, and I don't.
Not trying to convert you, nor lump your behavior in with hers (far from it), just trying to explain how it looks from over here. respect=due irrespective of actions/decisions. esteem=depends on actions/decisions.
respect != esteem; esteem != respect.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday August 30 2018, @09:00PM (8 children)
You're right about McCain being one of the trash-compactor-burial types, but *so is Trump.* If anything Trump is an incinerator-burial case.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by Snow on Thursday August 30 2018, @09:14PM
I don't think trump would really care about the method of burial/disposal -- as long as there was a HUGE crowd.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by requerdanos on Thursday August 30 2018, @09:17PM (6 children)
Here's the thing. I am not concerned about Trump being unhappy with, angry at, disappointed in, etc., John McCain. None of the concerns I am describing--and that the Trumpers are taking issue with--have anything to do with whether John McCain is a saint or a sinner.
TFA points out Trump having difficulty trying to
(emphasis added).
It's not a problem with McCain being a great guy and a war hero, nor about McCain being reviled and disliked troublemaker. It's about the fact that the President of the United States of America is spiteful and emotionally unsophisticated and petty enough to be, quoting my post above,
The guy is angry that a bunch of people are mourning someone who died, and celebrating his life. That's not (just) disrespect of McCain, but rather, shows active contempt for the thousands of people to whom McCain's passing was seen as a loss.
Look, some people are nice, some are jerks, that's life. But if someone (be they nice or jerk) dies, and others miss them, that's just something that happens and that should be respected even if you didn't personally like or value the dearly departed. Responding to that with anger instead of respect, regardless of the level of give-a-damn about the dearly departed in question, is frankly disturbingly aberrant.
Disturbingly aberrant is a phrase that might be thrown around as hyperbole describing Trump's approach to a lot of things, but here I use the phrase to mean that the behavior is aberrant in a disturbing way, in the literal sense. It's concerning.
(Score: 2) by digitalaudiorock on Thursday August 30 2018, @11:21PM (2 children)
This sort of gets to the heart of some of the worst things about Trump as a person...traits that some people seem to be OK with that leave me absolutely dumbstruck.
That's the fact that nothing he does ever seems to be actually motivated by anything good...compassion, ethics, you name it. Nothing even seems driven by any real ideologies of any kind.The vast majority of everything he does it driven purely by his ego...that accounts for almost all of it. He clearly doesn't believe in the rule of law, but rather in the rule of money and power. God only knows how there are so many asshats out there that think he's somehow some champion of the little guy...though the not so veiled racism is probably a big part of that.
There seem to be people who somehow like the fact that he's an obnoxious asshole...the kind of guy that normal people would smack into next fucking month in normal life. I just don't get it.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Friday August 31 2018, @02:24AM (1 child)
That seems both fair and accurate. Now - how about you use that same filter to examine all the other big names in politics? Take the twenty most famous names, and examine them through the filter of ego. It will apply pretty equally in US politics, world politics, or any nation's politics. In many cases, you'll find that the ego has some ideology bolted on, to make the ego less revolting to voters, but the ego remains the driving force.
I'll do one for you: Hillary Clinton. Remember, it was "her TURN". The woman had no solid positions on anything - she "pivoted" daily. In all of her public career, she was never wrong, never even made a mistake. If there was anything that may have looked like a mistake, it was the fault of her underlings. Ego, all the way.
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 2) by digitalaudiorock on Friday August 31 2018, @12:59PM
I actually agree when it comes to Hillary...never been a fan. I've literally never seen her talk when it didn't come across as totally scripted politician-speak. Having said that I voted for her over Trump and do believe she'd have been 1000 fold less dangerous than the horror show we've got now.
(Score: 2, Informative) by khallow on Friday August 31 2018, @12:24PM (2 children)
No, the article claims that without supporting evidence.
(Score: 2) by requerdanos on Friday August 31 2018, @12:30PM (1 child)
Your calls for facts, sir, are interfering with my sophistry.
I suppose that's a good thing, though.
I do concur that there is no solid evidence presented that the President had any particular emotional response (sad, happy, rueful, angry, etc.) to the proceedings.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday September 01 2018, @01:11AM
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday August 31 2018, @04:02AM (7 children)
Only if you don't treat it as another bit of propaganda. Who here is doing the "hoping"? Do they even exist?
Sounds to me like a jab, a drive-by comment which doesn't add anything to the story.
(Score: 2) by requerdanos on Friday August 31 2018, @05:09AM (6 children)
A very apt question. In this story and a previous one [nytimes.com] on the Trump-McCain's Funeral friction, the people doing the hoping, complaining, etc. are shadowy nameless sources. Either invented persons with fictional views, or persons who comment anonymously as the "leakers" that the President seems to dislike so.
I can drive-by and jab with the best of them, but this is just a reaction--pointless or profound, as you like--to the perceived incongruity in the President's reactions to McCain's funeral, the total knowledge of which doesn't depend on nameless sources of the times.
(Score: 2, Informative) by khallow on Friday August 31 2018, @11:48AM (5 children)
What incongruity? You haven't quoted much that doesn't depend on nameless sources. All we know is that he isn't showing up to the funeral (perhaps because he allegedly has been excluded from the funeral) and may instead be hanging out at Camp David. Admittedly, that is a place he doesn't [washingtonpost.com] hang out at very much. But there just isn't much story there once you get past the nameless allegation - which is the "jab" I referred to.
(Score: 2) by requerdanos on Friday August 31 2018, @12:39PM (4 children)
The incongruity is in most people being at least semi-respectful in consideration of family and friends of the deceased vs. the Modern Presidental approach [nytimes.com].
Not in TFA--you're right. However, this realization doesn't rest on that unsourced jab (which is poor reporting and I would expect better of the Times). There is information from multiple sources documenting the President's reactions, especially his public reaction (great sources), but also his private ones (unidentified sources tell this reporter's friend's hairdresser on condition of anonymity).
The statement was admittedly not a riveting documentary of an event or condition as such, but provided me with a vantage point from which to view the situation, from which I didn't like what I saw.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday September 01 2018, @12:32AM (3 children)
What incongruity? You haven't described something that would indicate that Trump is being semi-disrespectful of the funeral.
What information would that be?
This is silly. You have yet to describe anything relevant to your beliefs. At best, we have some foot dragging [nytimes.com] on public displays of "respect". Oh dear, Trump procrastinated on publicly praising someone he disliked or possibly loathed and isn't showing up for the funeral. Big deal.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday September 01 2018, @01:07AM (2 children)
(Score: 2) by requerdanos on Saturday September 01 2018, @03:36AM (1 child)
I dunno, I think we're not doing too bad at communicating, even if not perfect.
The disagreement may be here. In my worldview, no one ever "should be seething" instead of respectful about people mourning a dead person that they cared about.
I have a time or two in the past been not especially unhappy to hear that people who positioned themselves as my enemies had passed on to the can't-do-more-harm-to-me area of the grave. But no amount of grief they caused me in life is cause for me to be "seething" instead of respectful of their parents/kids/spouses/friends/families mourning and marking their passing. That would have made me the problem, not them.
Basically, it boils down to this: If you, dear reader, believe you "should be seething" instead of respectful of the mourners of a person who recently died, you are the problem with the world, not the person you are "seething" because of.
If you're a nobody, this holds true.
If you're in a position or leadership or power, this holds a thousand times more.
If you're the President of the United States, then I hope you have been horribly maligned by the Times here, and are not the human defective the 'anonymous leakers' around you seem predisposed to suspect that you are.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday September 01 2018, @09:03AM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 30 2018, @09:51PM
McCain was another rather corrupt politician supporting the standard US MIC approach to foreign affairs.
However, he did actually take some stands of morality. Our politics has fallen so far that McCain is somehow the rare politician that will dare to go against his party when the awful is too high.
It shows how depraved and corrupt our country has become that such a warmonger is actually one of the brighter points in politics. Not the brightest point by any means, but Trump sure makes him look like a saint.
Gaaahd, just thinking of Trump and his squidgy face with beady eyes throwing these tantrums is enough to turn my stomach. Our president folks.