“Pondering the Pundits” is an Open Thread. It is a selection of editorials and opinions from around the news medium and the internet blogs. The intent is to provide a forum for your reactions and opinions, not just to the opinions presented, but to what ever you find important.
Thanks to ek hornbeck, click on the link and you can access all the past “Pondering the Pundits”.
Follow us on Twitter @StarsHollowGzt
Paul Krugman: Pieces of Silver
By now, it’s obvious to everyone with open eyes that Donald Trump is an ignorant, wildly dishonest, erratic, immature, bullying egomaniac. On the other hand, he’s a terrible person. But despite some high-profile defections, most senior figures in the Republican Party — very much including Paul Ryan, the speaker of the House, and Mitch McConnell, the Senate majority leader — are still supporting him, threats of violence and all. Why?
One answer is that these were never men and women of principle. I know that many in the news media are still determined to portray Mr. Ryan, in particular, as an honest man serious about policy, but his actual policy proposals have always been transparent con jobs.
Another answer is that in an era of intense partisanship, the greatest risk facing many Republican politicians isn’t that of losing in the general election, it’s that of losing to an extremist primary challenger. This makes them afraid to cross Mr. Trump, whose ugliness channels the true feelings of the party’s base.
But there’s a third answer, which can be summarized in one number: 34.
Michael Winship: Donald Trump Has Some Explaining to Do
First things first, Donald Trump: Release. Your. Tax. Returns.
No excuses.
Second, if we have to have a cartoon character running for president, I would prefer Bart Simpson. He has better writers and a healthier sense of self-awareness.
Like Donald Trump, Bart clings to a life’s philosophy best summed up as, “Whatever it is, I didn’t do it, unless it’s something good, in which case I did do it, even if I didn’t do it.”
That said, while Bart rarely can discern right from wrong, he frowns on bad organization and a lack of finesse. Of the Trump campaign, he would look askance and dismissively pronounce, as he has of other fiascoes, “This is senseless destruction with none of my usual social commentary.”
Bart also has a finer comprehension than Trump of government and the US Constitution, a document he supports and understands, but about which he forthrightly declares, “I’m pretty sure the Patriot Act killed it to ensure our freedoms.”
But back to those tax returns. According to experts, the old “I’m being audited and can’t release them” argument does not hold water. For the umpteenth time, what is Trump hiding?
Amanda Marcotte: An abuser’s best weapon: The murder that wiped out a Pa. family is a reminder that guns are too easy to get
Over the weekend, five family members — Mark and Megan Short, along with their three children and even the dog — were found shot to death in their home in Berks County, Pennsylvania. [..]
Even though most of the articles did mention, almost in passing, that the couple had been struggling with “domestic issues.” this coverage could very easily lead readers to believe that the likely story here is that one or both parents committed this horrible crime as a reaction to the stress of Willow’s illness or Megan’s mental health issues. But then — in a development that should be no surprise to anyone who actually understands the issue of domestic homicide — new details suggesting a very different story emerged.
“Megan Short, who died alongside her husband, Mark, and the couple’s three children in an apparent murder-suicide over the weekend, had been planning to leave her husband, ” read the follow-up report at NBC 10. The story went on to detail that the couple had started dating when Megan was only 17 years old and Mark was 24, and that Megan had been communicating with friends about her desire to leave and her belief that her husband was abusive.
While there’s no way to confirm for sure what happened here, the entire story is a potent reminder that while mass shootings where madmen attack strangers grab the most headlines, the much larger problem in this country is people, mostly men, killing partners and family members — and then often themselves — in a desperate act to maintain dominance and control.
Amy Goodman and Denis Moynihan:
Donald Trump is giving new meaning to “bully pulpit,” ratcheting his irrational campaign rhetoric to new and dangerous lows. In North Carolina Tuesday, he said: “Hillary wants to abolish—essentially, abolish—the Second Amendment. By the way, and if she gets to pick—if she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks. Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is.” Trump’s suggestion that his supporters could assassinate Hillary Clinton or the judges she might appoint provoked outrage, not only nationally, but around the globe. His virulent, demagogic language did not alienate everyone, though; as more and more Republicans denounce Trump, he still enjoys fervid support from some personalities at Rupert Murdoch’s Fox News Channel and the National Rifle Association. This unholy trinity of Trump, Fox and the NRA could easily provoke political violence during this campaign season.
Hours after his remarks, Trump made his first news appearance on Fox’s “Hannity” show. Sean Hannity pre-empted Trump, offering his own twisted logic to help blunt the deepening catastrophe: “So, obviously you are saying that there’s a strong political movement within the Second Amendment and if people mobilize and vote they can stop Hillary from having this impact on the court.” Trump obligingly concurred with that revisionist version of his call to arms. But the ploy fails on its face. Trump was not advocating for a political movement to stop Hillary Clinton from gaining office; he was suggesting that “Second Amendment people” could take action after the fact, if she wins.
Lincoln Mitchell: Kissinger’s Endorsement Is Not What Clinton Needs
Despite a campaign where, to a great extent, the erratic and offensive behavior, intolerance and vulgarity is the message, there are some issues where Donald Trump has differentiated himself from most other Republicans as well as his Democratic opponent. His views on trade, efforts to, rhetorically at least, make the Republican Party the tribute of the white working man, and strong anti-immigrant views separate him from most of his vanquished GOP opponents. However, the biggest issue where Trump has separated himself from his opponents in both parties is foreign policy. In recent weeks, the increasingly convincing evidence that Trump is, wittingly or not, a Russian stooge has dominated the foreign policy component of this election, but there is more to Trump’s foreign policy than that.
Trump has appealed to voters by proposing an American foreign policy that, while reflecting the anger and intolerance at the heart of his campaign, also calls for a US that is considerably less involved with the rest of the world. The second half of that message, were it coming from a more effective and balanced candidate, could resonate with voters, especially as Trump is running against Hillary Clinton who, to her core, is an interventionist and establishment figure on foreign policy.
Recent Comments