It is hard, given the months-long history of
political gibberish Americans have endured, to figure out what to believe. Many
of us probably have simply given up trying, dismissing the utterances out of
the nation's capital as cherry-picked facts at best and out and out lies at
worst. We no longer can believe what someone says. Or shouldn't.
Oddly, that very point was driven home last week by
Kellyanne Conway, the president-elect's chief mouthpiece, when she went on
television to defend one of her boss's latest rewrites of his own history.
Donald Trump had just denied that he ever mocked a
disabled New York Times reporter even though the blatant ridicule was taped and
televised repeatedly. Trump, flailing his arm in the air, told his 2015 South
Carolina audience, "You ought to see this guy."
This guy is Serge Kovaleski. He has arthrogryposis,
a condition that leaves his right arm and hand bent and rigid. Trump had issues
with Kovaleski's reporting and this is how the then-candidate got even. It was
red meat to Trump's audience. He enjoys ginning up supporters with anti-media
barbs, and this rally was no exception.
About 10 days ago, the nation's Tweeter-in-chief
took to the internet to boast that Arnold Schwarzenegger's
"Apprentice" ratings weren't what "the ratings machine,
DJT" had put up. Some supporters said Trump was simply teasing the former
California governor. Given Trump's rather pronounced need to always be seen as
the best, his utter lack of a sense of humor about DJT, and how he has used his
Twitter account to bash those who've crossed him, teasing Schwarzenegger didn't
seem to be Trump's point. Think Vanity Fair. Think Alec Baldwin/SNL. And, of
course, think Meryl Streep.
Three days after Trump chided Schwarzenegger,
Streep, the most acclaimed actress of our time, had the unmitigated gall to
allude to Trump's attack on Kovaleski — without mentioning either man by name —
the president-elect struck back with a middle-of-the-night Twitter attack.
Streep is an overrated, Hillary flunky, he said.
So, what are we to make of all this? Apparently,
we're supposed to ignore what the president-elect says, at least according to
Conway.
"Why is everything taken at face value?"
Conway said in defense of her boss' obvious mockery of Kovaleski. "You
can't give him the benefit of the doubt on this and he's telling you what was
in his heart? You always want to go by what's come out of his mouth rather than
look at what's in his heart."
Wow! Kellyanne, how is that possible? How are we to
plumb his heart without listening to what he says?
Are we also to ignore what he does? Such as: Not
releasing his tax returns as promised? Praising Putin? Publicly castigating the
entire American intelligence apparatus? Specifying how he'll regulate the
the150 Wall Street firms and other financial institutions that, according to
the Wall Street Journal, he owes $1.85 billion? Pushing un-vetted candidates into
cabinet positions (a public school hater at Education, a climate change denier
at EPA, an Exxon exec with deep ties to Russia and questionable ties to Iran at
State, a Goldman Sachs exec at Treasury, an anti-gay at Justice, a fast food
exec at Labor, a World Wrestling Entertainment exec at the SBA)? Insisting on
an immediate repeal of Obamacare without one single replacement idea on the
table? (And he didn't outline one during his circus-like (news conference
Wednesday.)Actions, as practically everybody's mommy told us growing up, speak louder than words. So far his words, Conway's urgings notwithstanding, tell us Trump's heart is easily bruised and he has an uncontrollable need to strike back at any slight. This is not reassuring, knowing as we do that the officer with the nuclear football soon will sit in the corridor outside Trump's bedroom door.
Contact Eric Grunder, former opinion page editor of The Record, at elgrunder@msn.com. Follow him at oncruisecontrolafter65.blogspot.com and on Twitter @elgrunder.
#media #trump #Conway #whitehouse
No comments:
Post a Comment