President Trump's current idea of unifying the country is expressed in his Feb 2019 State of the Union (SOTU) address, where he demanded the Dems and anyone who disagrees with him cooperate or expect no legislation to get passed. Seems like unity to you, right?
NO! NO! He used words to bring people together, and threatens anyone who does not fall inline with his policies.
I call Bull Sh*t! I call BS!
"5 key takeaways from President Donald Trump's State of the Union address
Trump called for unity despite past weeks of gridlock."
By Cheyenne Haslett and Jordyn Phelps Feb 6, 2019 4:02 AM ET
"Trump calls for "greatness" and compromise in State of the Union but doesn't budge from his own uncompromising positions"
"Trump remains steadfast on the wall"
"The nation won’t soon forget the women who watched"
"Trump uses speech to announce dates for second North Korea summit, highlight peace efforts"
"Stacey Abrams closes out the night, another emphasis that Trump’s second State of the Union comes on the heels of a new era"
These are ABC's Cheyenne and Jordyn "takeaways," but there was a lot of ugly fear mongering and lies in this speech, along with bits of kindness which are impossible to attribute to Donald Trump given his track record for empathy for anyone who has not paid homage to him.
NO UNITY SOUGHT!
"Trump attacks Democrats and Mueller in divisive State of the Union – as it happened"
Ben Jacobs in Washington, and Adam Gabbatt and Erin Durkin in New York
Tue 5 Feb 2019 23.43 EST First published on Tue 5 Feb 2019 08.53 EST
Look at a different set of 6 takeaways . . .
"The key points from Trump's State of the Union address"
The president pitched bipartisanship but struck polarising tone on immigration and socialism
By Sabrina Siddiqui 6 Feb 2019
"Trump pitches bipartisanship while pushing his own agenda"
"On immigration, a dark tone and scare tactics prevail"
"Trump celebrates women in moment rife with irony"
"Trump’s foreign policy doctrine: no more ‘endless wars’"
"Trump denounces socialism in 2020 election preview"
I think we can see Tweety was not unifying the country, rather he was holding a campaign rally in his mind.
Tweety uses words like a fool, following "bipartisan" with "my way or nothing!" Why does the mainstream media even give him credit for "a call to unity?' There was no true sense of unity in the SOTU speech, NONE.
Written 18 Jan 2019, to a friend asking for the unifying leadership our country needs.
Good morning Trump supporter,
I've been unpacking every point, sentence by sentence, from your lengthy email yesterday. Too analytical am I. I frustrated some bosses. I am studying your views, not judging your views.
My bottom line:
Going thru all the points, counterpoint discussions is interesting, stimulating, I love it. Old retired guys need it, but America needs a President who chooses to lead us all, every single American. LBJ on 31 March 1968, frustrated by his Viet Nam issues, told the country, and world in a TV broadcast, that he was not going to spend another hour or day on partisan politics.
We need that thinking today more than ever! In 2019, tribalism can destroy our country. I know the response: what about the Dems? The President is President, and it is 100% up to the President, the hardest job in the world, to take the first step at non-partisan action. It was amazing. No matter why LBJ said this, and did what he did, the United States needs this kind of bravado and "shock therapy" today.
If President Trump had LBJ's courage, I would support him in 2020. President Trump does not need to declare he won't run, he needs to be a better President.
America's President's first duty is to bring Americans together, to create consensus, to build unity. It is not hard to sell hope and unity. It will be hard for a man who thinks belligerence "sells." The President should know It isn't a sign of weakness to reach out to the people who disagree with him.
Productivity improves with unity. Most presidents, and good business leaders, understand the benefits of unity.
President Trump has to package his actions and ideas like Mary Poppins - a little bit of sugar makes the medicine go down.
Our President prides himself in his salesmanship, he has to sell his agenda better.
The President's most important duty is to overcome tribalism, not fuel tribalism and antagonism.
The Presidential tweets hurt America, they make him less effective, and the tweets hurt every effort to sell his initiatives, his "product."
A divided country, like a politicized military, cannot achieve its full potential, and will ultimately fail.
Your talking points are incredibly interesting, recall Fox News often, and give me many "dots" for part of the President Trump story. Part of the story, not the entire story. I benefit when you provide me what you think I missed. Nevertheless, it's hard to put everything in an email. Same for you probably. There are credible responses to every point, some from the left "side," some from the independent "side," and many connecting "dots" in-between because the story is complex. I spend my retired days connecting all the dots.
I'll probably just put my notes for this story in my "folder of thoughts."
I was the "analytical" type in Program Office and Raytheon meetings, too analytical at times.
INTJ? Our Defense Systems Management College training in 1984 serves me still.
For example, on the US economy, my analysis tells me revenues good, spending excessive, the gap is multiple Congresses, and multiple President's fault. so the notion of cutting entitlements is absurd as it blames the poor, elderly, sick, and, dare I say it, immigrants for the mistakes of Congress and Presidents. The poor are always in debt, always poor; the rich got themselves in debt thru no fault of the poor. Americans have a debt problem in fact, distinct from the spending (deficit) problem. Blaming the powerless is too easy, and sad to me. You may know Tucker Carlson, a fellow I do not normally follow or respond to well, recently presented a dramatic monologue. Tucker stated the American NOT free-market capitalism is rigged. He gave his reasons, I have mine, and there are a number of honest economists who say the same.
BTW, analysis of our economy has to include our weak productivity, weak wages, and failure to address what DoD lists is a national security threat, climate change.
Rather than go thru every point you offer me, I'll skip to my inevitable conclusion, via three things. These are equally applicable to all political inclinations, colors, races, creeds, religions, and sexual orientation / identities.
These are "Equal opportunity" challenges . . . made relevant to me by the current Administration.
These can be retro to Obama, if you need to do that, hoping to make my closing notes "fair and balanced." Going back to Obama will not change anything in 2019 or 2020. OK, here they are:
- for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction, thus, for example, with President Trump's jaw boning NATO for more defense spending, comes Macron's Euro-Army idea; Trump's criticism of Merkel led to the German leader stating it looks like Europe cannot rely on America any longer. I agree "jaw boning" NATO leaders to contribute more to their defense was apparently effective, but at what cost in the long run? My experience on the Cooperative NATO AWACS program was they are diligent people, and their leaders are not stupid or stingy with their budgets, just wise with their budgets, e.g., five years at a time. The problem is, I don't see the benefit of publicly embarrassing, and intentionally insulting NATO leaders. I see this behavior as weakness. Bullying and tossing candy in the G-7 meeting in Canada is not effective. Why does President Trump need to act like a bully when he has all the power in the world? He is actually a weak person because he cannot get things done through merit and wisdom.
President Trump tweets too much, period, and the worst tweets get reactions he should not want. Trump tweets hurt his cause, and undermine what I see as a President's first duty, to bring people together for consensus.
All the people President Trump publicly, and by tweet, insults or embarrasses, have egos, personal psychological defense mechanisms, and no doubt have long memories. America will pay a price.
When it comes to NATO members meeting their agreed goal, I offer that strong economies are a security "weapon." The Marshall Plan prevented future wars in Europe and enabled strong economies the have held Russia at bay for 70 years. The Marshall Plan was not a mistake as President Trump has stated.
- the Law of Unintended Consequences: President Trump proclaimed that there were “very fine people” on both sides of the August 15, 2017, white supremacy march in VA. We fought fascists in two world wars, and we must continue that fight in the US against a significant domestic Neo-Nazi fascist and White Nationalist threat. The FBI has stated this domestic threat is more dangerous than threats from Muslim terrorists. The Neo Nazis and White Nationalist praised the comment. President Trump had no idea how to address the terror threat when he created his Muslim ban and has no idea of the backlash. President Trump has no idea where "friending" the single largest contributor to world terror, and murderer of Khashoggi, Saudi Arabia, for the sake of weapons sales, will lead. Saudi Arabia exports terrorism via Wahhabism, teaching hate of Western civilizations. Salafi is taught in Saudi Arabia, with sharia law. Saudis are mostly Sunni, warlike against anyone not Sunni. President Trump has no idea what comes from praising dictators, America's enemies, Russia, in particular, and leaders of country's with incredibly horrible human rights.
- a colloquialism, what goes around, comes around, can mean when President Trump is belligerent, suggesting violence is a solution in police arrests, violence in political discourse (body slamming a reporter and many more) at rallies, and using swear words, all captured on video, it's all on TV, so there is no "bias" reporting these, it comes back to "haunt" him in the form of violence by ANTIFA (fighting fascism in 2019, as we did in the world wars), and more swearing by politicians.
Justin Timberlake:
"What goes around, goes around, goes around
Comes all the way back around"
Has President Trump considered that his negative tweets, comments in interviews and rallies, and Rose Garden etc., when reported by the media, are counted in the Fox News reports of media "bias," 94% or 90%, or XX% negative? What would the media "bias" be if President Trump were a positive guy?
Peace,
Frank
