Tag Archives: Donald Trump

Good for you, Megyn Kelly

megyn_kelly4

This isn’t a perfect world.

There. Having stipulated that, one element of a perfect world — would we ever achieve it — would be that journalists wouldn’t become part of the story they cover.

I prefer to think of journalists as, say, the football referee you never notice during the heat of the game. So it should be with those who cover the news.

Unfortunately, and this is more true about broadcast journalists than those who work in the print media, we see occasions when journalists become part of the story.

Stand up, Megyn Kelly. Take a bow.

Kelly had the temerity during this past week’s Republican presidential joint appearance, to ask Donald Trump about statements he’d made about women. He has referred to them in highly disparaging terms. Trump tried to slough it off by saying he referred only to Rosie O’Donnell. The crowd laughed.

Kelly, though, persisted with her question, which was a patently fair and pertinent question to the leading GOP presidential candidate.

Trump didn’t see it that way, saying the next day she had blood in her eyes and had “blood coming from her wherever.” The statement was reprehensible on its face. Republicans and Democrats alike have condemned the comment and demanded Trump’s apology to Kelly.

He then said Kelly, a Fox News anchor who was one of three network moderators at the Fox-sponsored joint appearance, should apologize to him for asking the question in the first place.

Kelly, though, said she won’t apologize for anything. She said she was employing “good journalism” in seeking an answer to a relevant question.

None of this should be about a journalist, whose job ought to be to stay out of the way. Megyn Kelly asked an appropriate question of a leading candidate for the presidency and got a proverbial pie in the face for doing her job.

 

How might Trump bow out?

donald-trump

This might require a bit of imagination, but I’ll pose the question anyway.

How do you suppose Donald Trump is going to end his futile campaign to be nominated by the Republican Party for president of the United States?

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/donald-trump-the-cringe-worthy-crossroads?cid=sm_fb_maddow

Much of the chatter now is that Trump’s latest detestable insult — delivered to Fox News moderator Megyn Kelly — has put his campaign at a “crossroads.” Does he continue on or does he start looking for a possible way to bow out?

The latest polling information suggests he hasn’t been hurt by that hideous statement about Kelly having “blood coming out of her wherever.” Kelly had asked Trump to respond to contentions that he’s a sexist. That particular statement from Trump tells us all that Kelly’s question — which she posed during this past week’s joint appearance with the 10 leading GOP candidates — was spot on.

Candidates often merely suspend their campaigns when things go badly. In this social media age, one forum might be to just put out an Internet message, post it on Twitter, or Facebook, or on some website.

Then they’re gone.

Trump? He isn’t wired that way.

My guess is that once his support begins to crater — and I believe it will — that he’ll make some kind of big show about it, blaming everyone under the sun except himself for the amazingly stupid things he has said about fellow politicians, media representatives, other GOP candidates, the president of the United States … you name it, he’s hurled an insult in every direction possible.

I’ll be waiting with bated breath. Something tells me his withdrawal from the race might be worth the price of admission all by itself.

 

 

Cliché went missing this morning

This morning began like most Sunday mornings for my wife and me.

We awoke. Got cleaned up. Had some breakfast.

Then I turned on the TV to watch a news-talk show, ABC’s “This Week.”

The discussion was quite lively. George Stephanopoulos interviewed Donald Trump, Rick Perry and Mike Huckabee — all of whom are running for the Republican Party presidential nomination.

Then he went to the roundtable discussion, which included the usual eclectic blend of pundits on the left and the right. They all weighed in with their views of the week’s political news, which of course was dominated by the Republican joint appearance Thursday night and Trump’s rather ghastly reference to one of the moderators and the question she asked about Trump’s views regarding women.

But as the discussions ended after an hour on the air, I was struck by something I didn’t hear.

It was the sound of the world’s most annoying clichĂ©: “At the end of the day … ”

It’s become the clichĂ© du jour of talking heads and politicians.

My theory about the phrase is this: Public officials, usually politicians, like to say the phrase to set up what they think is the most profound statement they can deliver on a given subject.

“At the end of the day, George … the world is going to spin off its axis and is going to crash into the sun.”

But over the past few years — and it hasn’t been that many years since someone introduced it into our contemporary political vernacular — it’s become overused in the extreme. I’ve heard pols use it multiple times in a single run-on sentence.

This morning, though, the phrase was MIA.

May it never be found.

Blue suits: uniform of the day

blue suits

My wife likely would be the first — and maybe the last — person to tell you I have no business being a fashion consultant.

She reminds me on occasion that I tend to dress like a stereotypical journalist — whatever that means. I’m often a bit rumpled and not quite “pulled together,” to use her description.

Still, am I the only Republican presidential “debate” viewer Thursday night who noticed that all 10 members of the GOP “A Team,” the guys at the top of the polls, were dressed essentially the same?

With the obvious exception of Ben Carson (third from left in the picture), all these guys even kinda/sorta looked the same. Most of them have dark-ish hair — although Sen. Rand Paul’s (second from right) style is sort of, um, one of a kind.

Meanwhile, Donald Trump’s ‘do stands alone.

It seems as though they all talked to the same media consultant who issued the memo: blue suit, plain shirt, red or blue tie; Old Glory lapel flag pins are optional.

But the sameness among all of them — yes, even The Donald — looks a bit creepy.

I’m betting the three Democratic male presidential candidates will consult with the same media guru prior to their debate.

 

Is ‘liar’ the worst political insult?

WASHINGTON, DC - DECEMBER 18:  Carly Fiorina, former CEO of the Hewlett-Packard Company, speaks at the Heritage Foundation December 18, 2014 in Washington, DC. Fiorina joined a panel discussion on the topic of "And Now for a Congressional Growth Agenda".  (Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images)

Let’s take a break from the Donald Trump blather.

I want to discuss Carly Fiorina, who I thought killed it at the GOP “undercard” debate Thursday night. My hope is that the former business mogul makes it to the A Team roster at the next Republican debate.

But she said something that’s worth exploring. She has called Democratic frontrunner Hillary Rodham Clinton a “liar.” She said Clinton has lied about what she knew at the time of the Benghazi attack in September 2012; she has lied about the email matter.

I was reminded a bit by a scene from one of my favorite films, “The Cowboys,” starring John Wayne.

In the scene, Wayne’s character crosses paths with a gang of cattle rustlers led by Bruce Dern, who tried to persuade The Duke that he and his men are experienced at driving cattle, which is what Wayne did with a bunch of youngsters. He tells Wayne that he worked with this and that rancher. But Wayne knows better and confronts Dern, telling him that one of the men he claimed to work for had died years earlier.

Dern then tries to back away from his false claim, telling Wayne that he had just gotten out of jail and was trying to turn his life around. “I don’t care about that,” Wayne tells him, “but what I can’t stand is a liar.”

He tells Dern and his men to beat it.

Calling someone a liar is about as serious as it gets. It speaks to the character of the individual who receives the accusation.

It can be hurtful if the individual who gets pegged as such believes he or she has been truthful. It’s no fun being hit with that term and believe me, I know how it can raise the hackles of those who receive the label.

I cannot predict how Carly Fiorina’s intensely personal attack on Hillary Clinton is going to play out. That was only one of the things she said during the debate this past week. I thought on the whole she acquitted herself very well and likely has risen to the front rank of GOP candidates.

And as John Heilmann said this morning on ABC News’s “This Week” talk show, given the talk about Trump and his recent statements about Megyn Kelly and all the attention that has come to him regading his views on women in general, it would be wise indeed to ensure that Fiorina is included in the next found of first team debaters.

As for the “liar” accusation, someone will need to press Fiorina on specific evidence she has that Clinton lied about Benghazi or the email controversy. This shouldn’t be the kind of accusation that gets flung out there without proof.

Perhaps she’ll do better at answering that question than Trump did when he was asked Thursday night to provide credible evidence that Mexico’s government is “sending” criminals into the United States.

Is America full of “deviants”?

Donald Trump said of Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly that she had “blood coming out of her eyes … blood coming from her wherever.”

Most of us out here know what he meant by “wherever.”

But then Trump said he meant to say “nose,” and that those who make the obvious connection between “wherever” and the unspoken reference to female biology have “deviant” thoughts.

Let’s back up for just a moment.

Kelly was one of three moderators at the Fox News Channel-sponsored Republican presidential primary debate this past week. She asked Trump about his previous comments regarding women and wondered whether they suggest he holds chauvinistic views about women.

His response to the nature of Kelly’s question suggests — to me, at least — that he’s more than a chauvinist. He is totally unfit at any level possible to hold the job he says he wants.

Which likely brings me to another point about Trump’s presidential candidacy. It is that he isn’t at all interested in becoming president. He’s doing all of this to call attention to himself. He’s not going to be nominated by the GOP, let alone elected in November 2016.

So, what in the world is causing us to gobble up so much space in the blogosphere, TV air time, and column inches in newspapers and other publications?

Trump knows precisely what he’s doing. He has tapped into that celebrity-worship culture that attracts so many Americans to the thoughtlessness that spews forth from this guy.

Heaven help me. I think I need an intervention.

‘Wherever’ reference may seal the deal for Trump

Megyn Kelly is a grown woman who likely has received her share of criticism over the years doing what she does as a broadcast journalist. It goes with the territory.

But this latest reprehensible insult from the leading Republican Party presidential candidate surely must go way, way beyond what is an honest critique of her work.

Donald Trump, when asked on CNN what he thought of the Fox News moderator’s question during this week’s Fox-sponsored GOP presidential debate about some of the quotes attributed to Trump and whether they suggest he doesn’t respect women, said that Kelly had “blood coming out of her eyes. Blood coming out of her wherever.”

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trumps-comment-about-kelly-roils-gop-race/ar-BBlw0aY

You no doubt know to what he seemed to be referring with that hideous statement. He said he meant to say “nose.”

Nose. Wherever.

Hmmm. Sure, Donald.

Can there be any more compelling evidence given — by the candidate himself — that he is unfit at almost any level imaginable to occupy the office he is seeking?

Say what you will about politicians. They get their share of criticism. Much of it — maybe most of it — is justified.

The pols who are really good at what they do, though, possess a skill set that Trump cannot grasp. It involves decorum, diplomatic skill, a command of language. Has anyone seen a scintilla of evidence of any of that as this man has risen to the top of GOP preference polls in advance of the party’s presidential primary season?

Erick Erickson, head of Red State America, a prominent conservative political organization, disinvited Trump from an event he has planned. Good for him. Erickson said he would not allow his daughter to be in the same room with Trump.

Trump reaction? He said he is “honored” to be disinvited.

I now am waiting to see whether Trump’s support finally begins to wither up and blow away in the hot — and foul — air he is spewing.

Any outrage over moderator correcting Trump?

Let us try to balance two similar episodes involving debate moderators.

Then we can wonder: Are we treating them in a “fair and balanced” manner?

In the 2012 debate between Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney and President Barack Obama, Romney asserted that Obama failed to refer to the attack in September of that year on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, as a “terrorist” event.

Moderator Candy Crowley of CNN corrected Gov. Romney, telling him at that moment that the president did make such a declaration.

Political conservatives went ballistic, saying Crowley had no business interjecting herself into a political debate.

Then last night, Fox News moderator Megyn Kelly asked GOP candidate Donald Trump about statements he has made about women. She told Trump: “You’ve called women you don’t like fat pigs, dogs, slobs and disgusting animals.”

Trump interrupted Kelly, responding, “Only Rosie O’Donnell,” to which Kelly said, “For the record, it was way beyond Rosie O’Donnell.”

OK, did Kelly interject herself into the debate in the manner that Crowley allegedly did in 2012? If so, where’s the outrage — from the right?

And, for the record, both Crowley and Kelly acted appropriately in both instances — in my oh-so-humble view — in setting the record straight.

Trump still in front … but only for now?

Of all the moments worth mentioning from Thursday night’s Republican Party Top 10 debate, one — in my mind — stands out dramatically.

It involves Fox News moderator Chris Wallace and, you guessed it, Donald Trump.

I give Wallace great credit for seeking a specific answer to a specific allegation that Trump has leveled at Mexico’s government, which is that the Mexican government is “sending” illegal immigrants across the border, into the United States, where they are raping and murdering Americans.

Twice last night he sought some specifics from Trump, who early in the morning after the debate remains — I’m betting — the GOP frontrunner.

When he failed to provide specifics to the first question, Wallace gave him another 30 seconds to specify what proof Trump had to back up his allegation.

Trump finally said he’d “been to the border last week” and talked to Border Patrol officers who told him “that’s what is going on down there, whether you like it or not.”

So. There you have it.

Border Patrol agents told him. That means it’s true, yes?

It was an entertaining and edifying exchange between a loudmouth entertainer seeking the presidency of the United States of America and a moderator seeking some detail in one of the more outrageous allegations that has come from a candidate’s mouth.

And yet, this guy somehow is getting away with this stuff?

I’m going to stand by my belief that Trump’s candidacy likely died when he made light of Sen. John McCain’s Vietnam War record. Events such as what we heard when Chris Wallace asked him twice to provide proof of a claim that Mexico’s government is “sending” illegal immigrants into the United States only highlights Trump’s unfitness for public office.

The big question remains: When will the GOP faithful realize it, too?

Top 10 GOP debate didn’t settle a thing

Well, so much for great expectations from the first set of Republican presidential joint appearances.

We had the two sets of “debates.” The first one provided a major — and frankly, pleasant — surprise. It turned out to be Carly Fiorina’s strong showing. I believe she might find herself in the top tier of candidates at the next set of joint appearances.

As for the main event, the one involving the Top 10 candidates (according to the polls), no one seemed to rise out of the rabble.

It was disappointing to me.

I wanted to watch the debate with a open mind. Readers of this blog know my bias tilts away from the Republican side of the aisle.

But, hey, we’re going to elect a new president in November 2016. It’s time to keep my eyes wide open.

The top dog in this GOP field happens to be someone who’s never held elective office. Donald Trump didn’t show me a single thing tonight that justifies how he has managed to become the top Republican candidate for president of the United States.

The rest of ’em? They all sounded just as I thought they would. They all seem to think the United States is going straight to hell. They blame the current president and, of course, are lumping the Democratic Party frontrunner with him.

My hope now is that Carly Fiorina — on what I perceive as her strong showing at the earlier debate — will be heard along with the GOP first team.