Sunday, January 15, 2017

Donald Trump Picks Fight with Civil Rights Legend John Lewis on MLK Weekend

Daily Beast    President-elect Donald Trump would start a fight in an empty broom closet. As a candidate in the Republican primary and then later in a hard fought campaign against Hillary Clinton, the former real estate developer exuded precious little grace—preferring brickbats to olive branches. Without question, Trump is far less prone to rise above the bar of decency than he is to slither beneath it.

In a mere six days he will rest his briefcase in the Oval Office, where he will face a myriad of critical issues— both foreign and domestic. However, if his latest skirmish on social media is any indication, Trump will step onto the world stage and come face-to-face with his most formidable foe: himself.

His latest outburst—an attack on Congressman John Lewis just before the nation celebrates Martin Luther King Day-- drew consternation from both sides of the aisle and social media erupted with indignation. That’s because Lewis was not only a King foot soldier. He was president of the Student Nonviolent Coordination Committee (SNCC) and is the youngest and only living member of “The Big Six.” Lewis was one of the original 13 Freedom Riders, young people who risked their lives to challenge racial segregation in the South. He was arrested 45 times, beaten and bloodied in the name of human rights.

After one of the most divisive national contests this country has endured and with looming suspicions of Russian intervention, Lewis declared that he would not attend the upcoming inauguration. In an interview with NBC’s Chuck Todd, Lewis—clearly angered by intelligence briefings—said he did not see the former reality show personality as a “legitimate president.”

That, of course, did not sit well with Trump.

He might have responded with some modicum of grace, urging the country to come together in perilous times. He might have thanked the venerated civil rights icon for his service, affirmed his own commitment to human rights and welcomed Lewis to meet with him to discuss the issues. I mean, if he has time for Ray Lewis, Steve Harvey and Kanye West, surely there is room on the calendar for someone who is steeped in public policy and who possesses decades of experience both building and crossing bridges.

Instead, Trump hit back in a pair of outlandish tweets, he saying, “Congressman John Lewis should spend more time on fixing and helping his district, which is in horrible shape and falling apart (not to mention crime infested) rather than falsely complaining about the election results.”

“All talk, talk, talk — no action or results,” Trump concluded. “Sad!”

That Trump would respond in such a feckless and disconnected manner should surprise no one. That he appears to have a nascent understanding on our nation’s history—and Lewis’s critical role— should not raise an eyebrow. With skin as thin as unsweetened tea, surrounding himself with sycophants who dare not question him, it is abundantly clear that he has spent no time thinking about who Lewis is and even less time in Atlanta.

Lewis’s “results” are a proliferation of human rights, as well as increased economic and political opportunity. He was on the right side of history when it came to LGBT and reproductive rights, among other issues. In 1994, when the country was caught up in hysteria and pushed a crime bill that later destroyed whole communities, John Lewis was one of only eleven black members of the House to stand against it.

One can argue about the validity of a “dossier” strewn with behavior unbefitting the Oval Office, but there can be no dispute about the “good trouble” Lewis has gotten himself into over the course of his adult life. One of the “results” of his activism was the Fair Housing Act, the very legislation under which the Justice Department sued Donald Trump and his father.

While Trump was getting repeated military deferments for his sore feet, Lewis’s feet were on the avenues, highways and byways attempting to fashion a more inclusive society.

Let's be clear: Georgia’s 5th Congressional district is thriving. Comprised by a large swath of the city and cutting through two counties, it is home to the Georgia governor’s mansion, Spelman and Morehouse Colleges, Georgia Tech, the Buckhead business and entertainment district, and the world’s most travelled airport—Hartsfield Jackson International. Home to Fortune 500 companies, the district is both racially and economically diverse.

Migration to Atlanta from other regions of the country over last three decades tells a story of growing, comparatively broad based prosperity.

Like every other big city in America, public safety is a priority for local leaders. However, Atlanta is certainly not “infested” with crime. And nothing about my city says it is “falling apart.” In fact, just as the city seal implies, Atlanta has been rising from the ashes since General Sherman burned down the west end.[...]

The truth is Donald Trump is a lot like Bull Connor, only with much more bull. Connor, the Birmingham public service commissioner Lewis and others took on as Freedom Riders, at least understood the math. Trump is walking into the White House based on a 70,000 vote margin across three states. That’s no mandate. That’s a fluke.

60 comments :

  1. Lewis is the one who picked the fight, not Trump. Had Lewis been white and Trump black, he would have been labeled a racist.

    ReplyDelete
  2. John Lewis is a sacred cow of the Liberal variety that despite all his nonsense and ridiculous positions it is forbidden to criticize or disagree with since he was one of the holy soldiers of freeing African americans of biased American treatment.

    ''They would choose only messengers whom we?re not allowed to reply to,? she writes. ''That?s why all Democratic spokesmen these days are sobbing hysterical women. You can't respond to them because that would be questioning the authenticity of their suffering.? And so we get the likes of the ''Jersey Girls'' exploiting the deaths of their husbands on 9/11, Sheehan exploiting the death in Iraq of her son to attack President Bush, Joe Wilson, Rep. John Murtha and other untouchables. To challenge their assertions is blasphemy and ''over the line.? And an assault on the ''sacred.?

    ReplyDelete
  3. wrong! It is not questioning his judgment - it is the personal attack on him because he dares question the legitimacy of Trump's win.

    AGAIN IT IS NOT A QUESTION OF CRITICIZING IT IS THE STUPID PERSONAL ATTACKS THAT TRUMP DOES

    ReplyDelete
  4. IT IS THE STUPID RESPONSE THAT TRUMP MADE - NOT THE FACT THAT HE DISAGREES WITH LEWIS

    ReplyDelete
  5. What's personal about Lewis's failure to maintain his district? Why isn't his lack of acceptance of the fully legal winning of the presidency outlandish and disrespectful of the country and its institutions?

    It is indeed sad that he doesn't respect the laws of America in accepting the results of the election and the criticism of him is very mild in this regard.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Ok. If you were Trump how would YOU have responded to Lewis's assertion?

    ReplyDelete
  7. How do you think the outgoing President would have responded to such criticism?

    ReplyDelete
  8. The true nature of John Lewis

    http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/01/15/john-lewis-false-racism-hero-partisan/

    ReplyDelete
  9. Re. Coulter's comment: The Republican convention featured speakers with dead children (Smith, Mendoza, Vaughn, Shaw) and siblings (Terry); people who work for the military (Flynn); people with war records (Ernst); and, as a last resort, reality television stars (Robertson)? And that is all from the first night. Suggesting that finding speakers that will raise the sympathies of the listeners is a tactic unique to the liberals is one of the odder things I have read in a while.

    ReplyDelete
  10. you still refuse to acknowledge that Trump's response was obnoxious and inappropriate - which is typical

    ReplyDelete
  11. you miss the point. Whatever Trump does must be the right way because after all he won the election so his infantile trantrums have been approved by his "landslide" victory.

    ReplyDelete
  12. the author of the article specifically describes how a mature political figure would have handled the matter.
    Trump has every right to disagree with critics - but he doesn't have a right to try and trash them personally and deny their accomplishments?

    Trump apparently doesn't realize that his brawling mudwrestly style is not appropriate for the President of the U.S. He might win the debate by attrition but he is losing the country

    ReplyDelete
  13. because it isn't true. You obviously don't concern yourself with Trump's trash talk - why not?
    Why didn't you criticize Trump when he said the election was rigged and he was not accepting a loss? And he said it without any evidence that the election was rigged. Now there is some basis.
    Why the double standard? Why wasn't it sad that Trump wasn't planning on respecting the laws of America

    ReplyDelete
  14. WRONG! IT IS THE ONLY KIND OF EFFECTIVE RESPONSE FOR TRUMP TO SQUELCH THESE LIBERAL ATTACKS ON HIM. (Let's cut out the caps.)

    Dr., your shortsightedness is alarming. With this new Lefty-antagonist on the scene do you really believe a response "with some modicum of grace, urging the country to come together in perilous times" would have the hypocritical-malevolent-"Not My President"-movement lay down their weapons? They don't want the country to come together! What don't you get? That's not their agenda. Were Trump to take that step and welcome Lewis to "meet with him to discuss the issues" it wouldn't change an iota in the country's divide. On the contrary, such formal platforms to continuously be heard would only be counterproductive by paving the way for every other liberal to follow suit in getting attention.

    Also, would you kindly answer a simple question (in the most non-convoluted way you can): why was it fair game to attack Trump when he intimated he would question the integrity of the presidential poll results but it's OK for leftists, not merely to question but, to rebelliously reject the Congressional accepted results of the election?

    ReplyDelete
  15. Lewis deserved what Trump gave him after Lewis started this fight with Trump.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Lewis' comment was equally stupid.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Lewis' comment was an attack on the American democratic process and an attack on the legitimacy of the electoral process of American elections.

    ReplyDelete
  18. then you didn't understand what he said

    ReplyDelete
  19. Nope. Anybody who disagrees with Trump is personally attacked - there was no justification for it.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Any particular reason my comment wasn't posted?

    ReplyDelete
  21. nope - you are wrong. Trump has a standard of response to criticism which is simply disgusting. It is not effective but simply promotes divisions and hatred. He is not trying to be the President of all the people but simply threatens to stomp on anyone who disagrees with him or questions his competence.

    this is not right wing verus left wing. This is a demaogue versus democracy.
    Trump had absolutely no evidence that the election was unfair when he announced he would not accept it because he said it was rigged. Simply lies.

    The legitimacy of Trump's election which depended on 70k votes and he lost the popular vote by 3 million with the knowledge that now exists about Russian hacking is something else. While I feel it is important to still accept that Trump is legimate - but I am not surprised that someone might reject.

    ReplyDelete
  22. yes - I don't moderate comments 24hr a day. Sometimes you might have to wait for hours before I get around to it.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Okay, we get it! Donald Trump is a "ferd". But what do you expect a politician to be, a Rebbe Akiva Eiger or a Chofetz Chaim? (Although truth be told , in days of yore Rebbi Shimon Soifer, the son of the Chasom Soifer did occupy a position as a Congressman in the Polish Seim, at the same time as he was presiding as the Rov of Krakow. But that was then.)

    As to your suggestion that Trump, had he been a more mature political figure, might have responded to Lewis's assault on the legitimacy of his Presidency with the modicum of grace described in the article, in substance would not the result have the the same? Diplomacy is simply the art of telling someone to go to hell whilst maintaining a genteel demeanor and wearing a polite smile.

    This brings to mind the grandiloquence of Winston Churchill who was offended by a spurious attack against him a a member of the House of Commons where it agiainst House rules to rfer to a statement m ade my a memeber while the Housen was insession regardkless iof the provaction of the oofefensdder. Chuchill repspoded to the onset be reatking, "my distinguished colloeague ahs a tendency towrds terminological inexactitude.

    i am reminded of the anecdote told of Harry Truman who made an appearance at a tea party at the White House Rose Garden that was hosted by the First Lady in honor of the Daughters of the American Revolution. President Truman conducted this elite group on a tour of the Rose Garden and commented as he passed the flowering bushes, "This here bush was helped along with ten pounds of manure, and that bush yonder needed fifteen pounds of manure, and I get to yell you all that manure sure made a difference."

    One of the distinguished guests turned to the First Lady, aghast. "Mrs. Truman, can't you get the President to use the word 'fertilizer', instead of .the pedestrian word 'manure'? Mrs. Truman responded, "Do you how long I had to work to get the President to use the word "manure'?

    ReplyDelete
  24. Apparently you don't realize that it is his brawling mudwrestly style that won him the blue-collar vote that got him elected. Trump is the type of person who sticks with what works. Lewis's remarks were aimed to excuse the Democrats' refusal to accept Trump's election. That cannot be left to fester so Lewis deserved a potch despite his past accomplishments.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Please explain it then. He attacked the American democratic system. By declaring Trump illegitimate, he's going against hundreds of years of precedence and literally destroying the fabric of our society. Imagine a Republican leader saying Obama wasn't president due the black vote. As a leader of the Civil Rights Movement, he should understand that the Democratic process is the only thing we have that prevents us from falling into a dictatorship. Shame on him.

    ReplyDelete
  26. What is definitely true is that Trump is by far the least popular incoming president since this has been measured. His obnoxious, boorish, bullying behavior is certainly not winning over anyone who did not vote for him, and remember, far less than 50% of the electorate voted for him in the first place.

    ReplyDelete
  27. If it is established - even according to your standards - that Trump won because of Russian hacking and selective leaking of emails - are you claiming that has no impact on his legitimacy?
    If he had won and Clinton had claimed that it was impossible that he had won unless the system had been rigged or corrupted but offered no evidence - then you have a right to demand that everyone accept the results.

    It is simply a question of whether results can be declared legitimate if obtained in illegitimate ways vs trying to declare the results invalid without offering any proof.

    A example - you have a olympic events with certified winners or you have a world series game winner and it turns out that some of the players were using drugs or that a referee had been bribed. Would anyone claim that since the winner had been officially declared it can not be retracted? On the other hand if you have these winners but the losers claim that it is impossible that they lost and the loser refuses to concede - that is something totally different.

    ReplyDelete
  28. the point is that Trump is not benefiting by these twitter fits nor is the country. It simply serves his psychological needs to attack those who criticize him. It is time for his handlers to take away his twitter account. American has done quite well without a presidential twitter account up until now.
    We don't need to be exposed constantly to the raw naked Trump

    ReplyDelete
  29. Actually, that birth certificate thingy is not settled. There was a recent report that two independent and established companies that are experts in detecting forgeries determined that the facsimile of Pres. Obama's birth certificate found on the White House website was a forgery.

    ReplyDelete
  30. To flatly claim that the Russians determined the results is ludicrous. At a minimum, you'd have to x-ray the thought process of a hundred million people and figure out which ones would have voted for Ms. Clinton if the hacking hadn't occurred, which ones refrained from voting altogether because of the hacking, etc etc. and even then nothing is proven because we can't reset the clock and find out what would have happened in an alternate universe. At best, one can, if they so desire, believe the Russians determined the outcome. It's a free country. People can believe anything they want. I believe I feel uplifted by a man in the White House who shoots from the hip any and all comers. It just feels good to believe that. If I'm wrong, well then, I hope someone better suited to be Peesident is elected in four years.

    ReplyDelete
  31. You talkin' about me? Yeah, that's me. Blue Collar Joe.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Was member of Austrian Parliament, not poland.

    ReplyDelete
  33. You are totally missing the point. The left always picks spokesmen that have some quality such as having a son die in war, having a dreaded illness or just plain being insane that doesn't allow for anyone to hurt their feelings by responding to their outrageous and foolish ramblings. Lewis is the poster boy for obnoxious and ridiculous statements and actions and needs to be put in his place.

    ReplyDelete
  34. I don't understand your quibbling on the quality of Trump's responses when at the same time Obama is destroying the legitimacy of Israel in the world and opening them to attack,chas veshalom and you have no comment.

    No one that knows anything and is not totally partisan has said that the so called Russian hacking made any significant effect on the election. The popular vote in favor of Clinton was all in one state, California and was probably mostly illegal aliens.

    The view that Trump mocked a disabled person was totally proven wrong by the person that showed that Trump used that same style of response to many other totally normal people.

    As you have noted, your comments don't reach the public at large so what is the point of your constant harping on him. What do you hope to accomplish?

    ReplyDelete
  35. Lewis' statement that Trump is not a legitimate president started the fight. Trump should learn to ignore things, but Lewis attacked Trump. PowerLine, who are not fans of Trump, has a good write up of this dust up. Not sure what either side of this has to do with daattorah

    ReplyDelete
  36. Correlation doesn't equal causation. I'm sure you're very well aware of that.

    ReplyDelete
  37. You believe this but not the unverified reports on Trump's activities in Russia?

    ReplyDelete
  38. Here’s Everything And Everyone Trump Has Attacked On Twitter Since The Election! Not very presidential, if you ask me.

    https://www.buzzfeed.com/davidmack/trump-twitter-list?utm_term=.xjx9wqxjw#.wyNqOA0QO

    ReplyDelete
  39. I am not missing the point. The right does the exact same thing.

    ReplyDelete
  40. (Avodah Zara 17b): "he who only studies the Torah, is like a man who is without a G-d, as it is said (Chronicles II 15:3) 'Now for long seasons, Israel was without the true G-d'. Hence, Torah study must be combined with acts of kindness".

    I am not speaking for DT but two things that this blog has shown me is that the frum community cares about truth (intellectual honesty) and high standards of ethical behaviour in leadership (secular and religious). I think that is a good thing.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Rather nonsensical reply. This is far from a quibble

    You are saying I can't comment about Trump unless I also speak about Obama?! Obama is history already.

    BTW I did mention Obama http://daattorah.blogspot.com/2016/12/obamas-shameful-farewell-message-to.html

    ReplyDelete
  42. I try to approach things scientifically. It's not about "belief" in this context. There is a report that the results of two independent laboratories coincided. I "believe" that report was not fake news. There is compelling evidence that the DNC hacking was done by Russian hackers closely associated with the Russian government, and that the Russian government at the highest levels managed the hacking and dissemination of the hacked material. None of these reports "prove" anything to me. They are data that is useful on the road to developing proofs.

    ReplyDelete
  43. What is the point if you are not going to change the slightest thing?

    ReplyDelete
  44. The fact that the Russians hacked the DNC, is the correlation. It is not equal causation, that their actions affected the outcome of the elections in a very big way.
    Hillary Clinton was deeply unpopular before the Russians hacked the DNC.

    ReplyDelete
  45. The Olympics recently took back some medals, years after they were awarded. (Whether they actually sent someone to pick up the physical medals is something else.). Officially, they're no longer in the Olympic record books. Perhaps they csn sue someone for claiming such a medal.

    ReplyDelete
  46. If Clinton eon because the press slanted it's coverage heavily in her favor, would that make her an illegitimate president. No. The hacking and disclosure of her emails, in terms of impacting the election, is not much different.

    ReplyDelete
  47. This is not a comparable example. In your case, the athlete did something wrong, or directly affected the decision. Here, Trump had nothing to do with the hacking. Also, no one is saying that the leaked info is blatantly false, or the voters were paid off in any way. It is comparable to the news media providing totally uneven , or biased reporting, slanted to one candidate or another. Or perhapse the U.S. president letting it be known that the United States favors one candidate over another in another country's elections, something which goes on all the time! In short, the voters were given the info, and were allowed to make up their own minds.

    ReplyDelete
  48. My mistake . I got confused with Rav Meir Shapiro who represented the Agudah in the Sejm.

    ReplyDelete
  49. The results of acting like a jerk and a bully:
    Just 40 percent see Trump favorably overall. That’s 21 points behind Obama’s departing favorability rating (his best since November 2009) and by far the lowest popularity for an incoming president in polling since 1977. Previous start-of-presidency favorability ratings have ranged from 56 percent for George W. Bush to 79 percent for Obama.

    ReplyDelete
  50. As has been pointed out Legitimate has two meanings. 1) according to the law 2) is appropriate.

    Considering that Trump has a shameful 40% approval rating - would you have any problem with the statement that most American's do not view him as the legitimate leader of their country? Not that he doesn't have the legal status of president but that his shameful and boorish behavior make most Americans view him as not being their president.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Actually it was the other way around. Lewis was the one who picked the fight. Lewis is also the biggest racist around. And you need to lay off trump already, its getting tiresome.

    ReplyDelete
  52. you really need to lay off of trump. you seem idiotic!

    ReplyDelete
  53. You could probably make the argument that most people who do not view him as their president do so due to his policies and not his boorish behavior. I also think that most people who feel that the Russian hacking is what makes his presidency "not legitimate" would use the first definition of legitimate, not the second. I understand that this is my opinion, based on my interpertation of various comments posted on this blog and elsewhere,but if you can post your opinion as fact, so can I. BTW Trumps behavior IS boorish and shameful, but that can probably be said about most politicians, certainly by their opposition, and many times even by their supporters.

    ReplyDelete
  54. So was the ponevezer rav. And many other rabbonim. (And many lost, cause agudah thought every O will vote for them. The agudah was a political party in Poland. American agudah is very careful not to be involved in that level of politics.)

    ReplyDelete
  55. You are being intentionally obtuse. EVEN if it was Russian hacking of the dnc emails (and that has not been corroborated in the slightest, and Assange certainly says it wasn't them) the hacking merely disclosed the criminality of the Clinton's. Saying that he is the illegitimate candidate because of the exposure of the verified misdeeds and crimes of his opponent is ridiculous. If it WAS the Russians, then thank God they did it, because if they hadn't we would have ended up with the most corrupt administration in America's history.

    ReplyDelete
  56. And what about the (confirmed and verified) fact that Clinton was fed the debate questions, and that the debates themselves were "moderated" in a manner intentionally beneficial to her?
    And what about the fact that the entire mainstream media to a man threw out all pretense of neutrality in their attempt to get the American voting public to vote against him?
    But no. You say the TRUMP is the illegitimate candidate.
    You should be embarrassed.

    ReplyDelete
  57. Says you in a stupid personal attack....

    ReplyDelete

ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL NOT BE POSTED!
please use either your real name or a pseudonym.