Campaign watch: The status of Mr. Lincoln's experiment!

SATURDAY, MARCH 12, 2016

Fast times at Tribal High:
Way back then, Mr. Lincoln was devoted to a noble if misdescribed experiment.

In an address the world would little note, he expressed an ongoing desire—his desire that "government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth."

Today we're engaged in one of those eras where sensible people might wonder if we the people have the tools to meet that famous challenge. In an attitude we'll steal from Lincoln, we'll suggest that the possible failure of that experiment is apparent today in the conduct of Us, as well as in that laid to Them.

Let's start Over There. In our view, Candidate Trump is the least appropriate person ever to get this close to the White House. (Millions of our fellow citizens disagree with that view.)

Our view? When Trump declaimed for an hour this Tuesday night beside a table piled high with raw beef, an obvious question presented again:

Could Candidate Trump be mentally ill? We've asked that obvious question before. Today, we float it again.

(Generally speaking, it's a very bad idea to bring psychiatry into our political debates. In our view, Trump is sufficiently unusual to call that stricture into question. For what it's worth, mainstream journalists routinely questioned Candidate Gore's psychological state during Campaign 2000. Needless to say, there were no objections from us the liberals. Our intellectual leaders were busy protecting their sacred careers.)

In our view, Candidate Trump's bizarre behavior rises to the level of possible mental illness. Then too, there's the conduct pursued by Our Team, by the tribe Over Here.

Regarding the behavior and attitudes of Our Own Team, let's consider a fascinating news report in today's Washington Post. After that, let's consider last night's Maddow Show.

The news report to which we refer was written by Jose DelReal. In hard copy, it appears at the top of the Post's front page. It runs 2561 words.

As is the norm in today's low-cost mainstream press, DelReal seems to be quite young; he graduated from Harvard in June 2013. (Before that, he wrote for his hometown Anchorage Daily News while he was still a student at East High School.)

DelReal's relative youth may cut several ways. His report today is fascinating. In his fourth paragraph, he writes this:
DELREAL (3/12/16): Inside the Peabody Opera House in St. Louis earlier in the day, protesters interrupted Trump eight times, prompting catcalls and chants from the crowd as security officers removed them. Scores were injured or arrested in clashes between Trump supporters and critics outside the venue, where thousands had gathered in an overflow area to listen to the event over loudspeakers.
Question: Did you know we'd reached the point where this particular candidate was being "interrupted" eight times in a single campaign event?

We were struck by the highlighted statement, slightly unclear though it is. Much later in DelReal's report, we were also struck by this:
DELREAL: During an event Saturday at the University of Central Florida in Orlando, which was interrupted by protesters at least a dozen times, Trump looked on while a man in the crowd grabbed a young Latino man who was with a black man yelling at the stage. One of Trump's top campaign staffers, George Gigicos, was the first to reach the two protesters, with security officers directly behind him, according to video from the audience posted online.
Say what? That earlier campaign event was "interrupted" by members of Our Team "at least a dozen times?"

For the record, we're not entirely sure exactly what that statement means. That said, this is the way Jenna Johnson reported the event in real time, in last Sunday's Post:
JOHNSON (3/6/16): The rally, held in an arena on the campus of the University of Central Florida, attracted thousands and was interrupted more than a dozen times by protesters. At one point, Trump marveled at how "fun" his rallies are compared to those of other candidates.

Later, two young men got close to the stage and began yelling directly at Trump, as one of them crumpled a campaign sign. Trump stopped speaking and stood on the edge of the stage, watching the two protesters, at least one of whom was black.
Make no mistake. Within the current tribalized context, those highly energetic "protestors" are playing on Our Team. That said, do you think it's a good idea to "interrupt" a campaign speech a dozen times; to "get close to the stage and begin yelling directly at" the candidate; to "crumple a campaign sign" as you do?

More questions:

Do you think conduct like that is best described as a "protest?" Do you think that conduct fits within the basic framework within which we try to conduct "government by the people?"

Personally, we don't think it's a great idea to do politics that way. We'd be inclined to use the word "disruption" to describe that approach, rather than the word "protest."

Personally, we aren't inclined to find that conduct heroic, bright or politically helpful. We aren't inclined to regard that conduct as "principled" in any serious way.

That said, as we read DelReal's fascinating report, we were fascinated by the apparent outlook of others on Our Team. Before we get to one of our candidates, let's consider this remark by one of our fiery protestors:
DELREAL: In interviews, several protesters who have been assaulted during a Trump rally said they think that racial bias and a mob mentality are at play.

"I'm not going to say Donald Trump is responsible for this. But the undertone of his campaign is very racist," said Isaiah Griffin, 38, who attended the Fayetteville rally with Jones. "He's bringing out a lot of the things that America tries to sweep under the rug that we know are still here. It's racism."

Friend Ronnie Rouse, 32, added, "Everybody wants to keep their Second Amendment right, but they don't want to let you keep your First."
Do you think you have a "First Amendment right" to interrupt a candidate a dozen times during a single speech? We're going to guess that many voters will find that formulation odd. We'd be inclined to agree.

That said, one of our candidates seems to be right in line with this somewhat unusual thinking. Fresh from her latest weird remark, the one concerning Nancy Reagan, Candidate Clinton has now been quoted saying this:
DELREAL: "You can't even have a rally in a major city in this country anymore without violence or potential violence," Trump said in an interview on MSNBC. "I didn't want to see the real violence, and that's why I decided to call it off."

These incidents, and the candidate's own rhetoric, would almost certainly become an issue in the general election if he becomes the nominee. Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton said during an MSNBC interview this week that she is "truly distraught and even appalled by a lot of what I see going on" at Trump events.

"You know, you don't make America great by, you know, dumping on everything that made America great, like freedom of speech and assembly and, you know, the right of people to protest," she said.
When we interrupt a candidate a dozen times, yelling at him from the front of the stage, are we affirming "everything that made America great, like freedom of speech and assembly?" For our money, Candidate Clinton made more sense with her statement about Nancy Reagan.

Should people playing on Our Team stage these interruptions? Do you think that conduct is part of Mr. Lincoln's idea? And uh-oh! Let's also ask this:

Do you think that conduct is likely to be politically helpful?

We're so old that we can remember when other people on Our Team helped bring on The Ages of Nixon and Reagan with similar principled conduct. Luckily, if you watch the Maddow Show, you won't be asked to wonder about the appropriateness or political wisdom of the work being done by Our Side.

Alas! Rachel Maddow provides many services to us, her gullible viewers. One such service is this—she tends to disappear considerations which might make us question the wisdom and moral greatness of those who play on Our Team.

Last evening, Maddow provided this familiar service shortly after 9 PM Eastern. As soon as she came on the air, she interviewed Tina Sfondeles, a reporter for the Chicago Sun-Times who was present in the hall when last night's campaign event was cancelled by Candidate Trump.

Sfondeles could have a mistaken impression of what occurred, of course. But speaking about the "hundreds of protestors" who had gathered inside the hall, she described "the deafening noise when they announced the postponement. It was just— My ears are still ringing a little bit," Sfoldeles told Maddow as she continued. "But these people were so happy because they came here to do this, to disrupt it. And they got their way, the protestors."

Sfondeles could have a mistaken impression, of course. That said, let's consider the principle involved in what she described:

Do you think players on Our Team should attend campaign events with the intention of "disrupting" those events? Possibly with the hope or intent of shutting the events down?

Good news! If you were a Maddow watcher last night, you didn't have to consider those questions! Playing a typical service role, Maddow blew right past this statement by Sfondeles, in which our heroic tribemates were portrayed in a way which may not seem moral or wise.

At the start of last night's show, Maddow blew right past that statement. As usual, her moral concerns would all be directed The Other Way Only last night.

As a full-service tribal guide, Maddow routinely protects us against any concerns about our own team's behavior. That said, in this morning's New York Times, Davey and Bosman report last night's events in Chicago the same way Sfondeles did.

They too were present in the hall. This is the way they began their front-page report in the Times:
DAVEY AND BOSMAN (3/121/6): With thousands of people already packed into stands and music blaring to warm up the crowd, Donald J. Trump’s campaign abruptly canceled his rally here on Friday night over security concerns as protesters clashed with his supporters inside an arena where he was to speak.

Minutes after Mr. Trump was to have taken to a podium on the campus of a large, diverse public university just west of downtown, an announcer suddenly pronounced the event over before it had begun. Hundreds of protesters, who had promised to be a visible presence here and filled several sections of the arena, let out an elated, unstopping cheer. Mr. Trump’s supporters, many of whom had waited hours to see the Republican front-runner, seemed stunned and slowly filed out in anger.
Should hundreds of players on Our Team "let out an elated, unstopping cheer" when a candidate's event is cancelled? Is it morally right or politically smart when our teammates behave that way?

We'd answer those questions in this way: no, and probably not. But of one thing you can be certain. Our darling Rachel will work very hard to keep us tribally barefoot and clueless—to keep us from having to confront such obvious points of concern.

In our view, Candidate Trump has been horrific, in endless ways, dating at least to 2011. That said, basic questions exist about the conduct, and the political wisdom, of players within Our Own Tribe.

People like these young "protestors" have caused tremendous harm in the past. If you keep watching the totally tribal Maddow, you won't have to think about that.

Basic questions exist about the wisdom of people within Our Own Tribe. Are you willing to think about those questions? Or have you instead gone totally tribal at Totally Tribal High?

71 comments:

  1. Perhaps there is hope for this bitter, nihilistic, hate-filled man.

    Although he had to bring in liberal-bashing, he did bring himself to write

    "In our view, Candidate Trump's bizarre behavior rises to the level of possible mental illness."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Liberals forget how close under the surface the hatred of the mentally ill is in their discourse. Even Sanders made a dig at Republicans, no liberals cared.

      Why does this matter? When people don't want to seek psychiatric help because they know they're not the crazy ones, it's Those People who are.

      Delete
  2. I don't think these protesters are necessarily on our side. I think there's an entirely new side at work here, young people who consider themselves to be morally superior "progressives" whose mission it is to force compliance to their agenda and whose sense of entitlement knows no bounds. They'll do the same thing at the Democratic convention if Bernie doesn't get the nomination.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A good point, although it's tough to mind-read motives.

      However, I believe TDH is pointing out the cheerleading done commending such negativity.

      This election could very well define a generation. Has America (and her media) devolved to the point that she can only shout-down demagogues rather than challenge their insanity?

      Delete
    2. "This election could very well define a generation."

      Well, since the people most strongly supporting Trump are from the generation defined by Bob Somerby as the one whose damage ushered in the Era of Nixon and Reagan, go ahead and define a generation.
      It's a fool's errand so it seems right up your alley.

      Delete
    3. @6:51
      Have you already forgotten G.W.B.?

      Delete
    4. G.W.B.? Isn't he part of Bob's generation?

      Delete
    5. The disruptors are perpetually aggrieved with no work ethic or family values. They need to feel victimized to justify their destructive anti-social lifestyles.

      Delete
    6. "no work ethic" just means "won't accept menial pay for a shitty job."

      Delete
  3. "History never repeats," the good men from Split Enz once claimed. Nevertheless, it rhymes. Paging Rick Perlstein?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. On Olympus, the gods roared with laughter.

      Delete
    2. I know the book was panned by Somerby, but skim over Nixonland's psychological take on Nixon's formative yeas and it does an astounding job pointing out, in chronological order, illustrating the same type of ultimately self destructive political behavior.

      Delete
  4. "People like these young "protestors" have caused tremendous harm in the past."

    Fortunately the person who made this observation has had no effect in any endeavor, past or present. He didn't even inspire a minor character in a novel which embodied his two college roomies.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why has he always been on "our team?"

      Our guess? It was Al's turn to pick, not Tommy Lee's.

      Delete
  5. If you want to argue if it was good tactics or not, fine.

    But are you forgetting that Lincoln actually arrested people for protesting the Civil War?

    Most importantly:

    You can start crying about the rights of the most covered candidate in the election when you also cover the peaceful protest a the Palmer House against the governor's inability to pass a budget. Until then you're simply doing what Clinton, Trump and the rest of the billionaires want.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lincoln was ruthless. He sent the army to kill rebel soldiers and destroy rebel resources. He even went so far as to steal the rebels' slaves.

      Delete
    2. Sarcasm is a very good way to avoid taking a stance on anything.

      Delete
  6. I feel really horrible that those attending the various Trump Bund rallies have to put up with protesters.

    ReplyDelete
  7. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/hillary-clinton-nancy-reagan-aids_us_56e44622e4b0860f99d93d02

    ReplyDelete
  8. The Nazis could take over Baltimore tomorrow and Bob would find a way to blame Rachel or some underpaid young scribe.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. God forbid they should grow oldish and be overpaid.

      Delete
  9. It's generally believed that Republicans win elections, especially non-Presidential ones, by getting out more voters. This is what a lot of Republican tactics are designed to do, and this includes Trump. Democratic agitators like Maddow are doing a similar thing. Is taking a high-minded line going to do the job? We know it isn't. Would the media pay more attention to Democrats - and pro-Democratic pundits and talking heads - if they were always scrupulous and fair?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Bob seems to have misunderstood the words to the effect "they want to keep their 2nd amendment rights but deny us our 1st amendment rights"...No one even hinted the protest was a 2nd amendment right.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Whoo boy, I think Bob is a highly excited state these days. I think he completely blows it in misunderstand Hillary Clinton's statements. She is, it seems to me, DEFENDING the Trump camp when She speaks of his rights to free assembly.
    Speaking for myself, I do think I am with a lot of liberals who not only dislike Trump being silenced (though legitimate, orderly protests of his ghastly campaign are fine), we are uneasy with the Black Lives Matter interruption techniques AND the way our candidates have coddled them. Wall, that's not really fair, WE HATE those techniques.
    I ran a statement about this through a political thread I read. Some disagreed with me, some agreed. But a lot of people get it in our TRIBE.

    Again, read Hillary Clinton's Statement and see if Bob isn't, as he is so often these days, too worked up to objectively understand what is being said. The Maddow stuff seems like an account of what happened in a given situation, not an endorsement of said.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Barneybot HilldebeastMarch 12, 2016 at 10:02 PM

      "... though legitimate, orderly protests of his ghastly campaign are fine ...."

      And who or what makes this subjective determination? Somerby? You? Trump? Rachel Maddow? The Fayetteville PD?

      Delete
    2. Only in America would we sneer at Black people for taking over a stage, but applaud as our empire takes over the world.

      Delete
    3. 12:17, our empire is having plenty trouble with the world. And Black people have, for generations, had there own stage in American life, which I guess you somehow missed.

      Delete
    4. Yes, a separate but equal stage.

      Delete
  12. Outstanding Bob. Reassuring to read your wise thoughts on this new move by the pseudo-left, openly attacking free speech and celebrating and hero-worshipping the attackers.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Is this that tough? Protests that allow the speaker to speak might serve as a good rule of thumb. Protester accepting the traditions of peaceful civil disobedience might be respected. We might also note that after Nixon was harassed in this fashion, to the extent that the waited around for obnoxious crowds so he could play maryter, he hammered McGovern and we had to listen to "liberals are the enemies of free speech" blather from years, a favorite meme of Bill Maher and others. Wise up and grow up.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So the answer is you. By the way, you should follow your own advice.

      Delete
    2. At a very fundamental level, you really don't seem to grasp this free speech/human interaction thing. Please do the world a favor and stick to the internet.

      Delete
    3. Barneybot HilldebeastMarch 13, 2016 at 8:46 AM

      And, of course, you are the self-appointed arbiter of what "the world" favors as well as the patronizing voice of "free speech/human thing." I assume you rest on the 7th day.

      Delete
  14. Thanks Bob, your take is exactly right, excellent overview. So now the corporate pseudo-left shows a bit more of its soul: disruption of speech 'I don't like' is okay, it's great, let's all stand on our seats and applaud!

    ReplyDelete
  15. Seven "that saids" in one post (two in a single paragraph), all used improperly, 2000 words to say maybe it's not smart politics to interrupt speeches. This blog has become unreadable.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Yes, you've convinced me. The problem is the horrible, horrible Bob Somerby, and nothing else.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think Bob Somerby is entitled to his opinion and that doesn't make him a "horrible, horrible" person". You need to be more tolerant of opinions that are at variance with your own.

      Delete
    2. Survivors of Trump, our final President, will remember Bob Somerby's wise predictions and discourse pleasing pleasant protests.

      Delete
  17. My life became devastated when my husband sent me packing, after 8 years that we have been together. I was lost and helpless after trying so many ways to make my husband take me back. One day at work, i was absent minded not knowing that my boss was calling me, so he sat and asked me what its was all about i told him and he smiled and said that it was not a problem. I never understand what he meant by it wasn't a problem getting my husband back, he said he used a spell to get his wife back when she left him for another man and now they are together till date and at first i was shocked hearing such thing from my boss. He gave me an email address of the great spell caster who helped him get his wife back, i never believed this would work but i had no choice that to get in contact with the spell caster which i did, and he requested for my information and that of my husband to enable him cast the spell and i sent him the details, but after two days, my mom called me that my husband came pleading that he wants me back, i never believed it because it was just like a dream and i had to rush down to my mothers place and to my greatest surprise, my husband was kneeling before me pleading for forgiveness that he wants me and the kid back home, then i gave Happy a call regarding sudden change of my husband and he made it clear to me that my husband will love me till the end of the world, that he will never leave my sight. Now me and my husband is back together again and has started doing pleasant things he hasn't done before, he makes me happy and do what he is suppose to do as a man without nagging. Please if you need help of any kind, kindly contact Happy for help and you can reach him via email: happylovespell2@gmail.com

    ReplyDelete
  18. I only occasionally attend protests because they tend to be so ineffective. There are so many protests that do not get any press mention despite the significant time investment of activists, who are usually regular people and not political elites. Perhaps we should not be supporting interruption as a means of protest, but I doubt protesters would be interrupting rallies if more subdued tactics got media coverage.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Has anyone read Clinton's "full" apology for the Reagan-AIDS misstatement? Geez what political insincerity, down to making sure to put groups in correct order when crediting "generations of brave lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people, along with straight allies, who started not just a conversation but a movement that continues to this day."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Has anyone read ......'?

      Yes.

      Delete
    2. Hints to Hillaries:

      Apologies are for losers.

      Delete
  20. Am I the only one who thinks a civil action should be brought on behalf of the protester who got sucker punched. Sue the hitter and THE DONALD as a co-conspirator. "You go do it and I'll pay the legal fees" isn't far from "Here is $100. Go kill my neighbor". Only sue him for $9 billion. . . leave him $1 billion to get by on. Just a thought.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If Trump's account of a finger gesture provocation immediately preceding it is true, I'd like to see the action brought just to watch it fail.

      Delete
    2. "If Trump's account . . . is true"

      Funniest thing I'll read all day!

      Delete
  21. That humble four-question test?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Are you willing to think about those questions?

      Delete
    2. People like these young "protestors" have caused tremendous harm in the past.

      Delete
    3. No, they stopped a tremendously harmful war in the past.

      Delete
  22. The panic over a possible Trump presidency is palpable. It is now to the point where the Republican elites can taste the fear.The protesters are the usual suspects. Young people that want freebies from uncle sam. Would it really be so horrible if Mexico finally had to care for their own poor instead of outsourcing a good portion of them and their needs on this side of the border where the American Taxpayer has to pick up the tab? By the way the heroin epidemic can be traced right back to lax border security.I was in the military and was stationed briefly in Texas near the border and traveled into Mexico on occasion and it was almost impossible to find a flushing toilet once you left a resort,hotel or government building.This is a country that will not invest in its own population and infrastructure because the Mexican government does not need to.The Republican party created the Trump behemoth. Every elected official of both parties has pledged to defend this country against all enemies both foreign and domestic but they will not seal the border even when American lives are at stake. Maybe Trump is somewhat unstable but the elected officials who have allowed this situation to fester are truly crazy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I was in the military too. So what? You're spouting nonsense and blaming Mexicans for your fear. Go ahead and vote for Trump if it makes you feel safer.

      Delete
    2. Minimizing the importance of serious scrutiny where both Mexican and Islamic immigration are concerned is a form of stupidity and masochistic mental derangement the entire left suffers from.

      Delete
    3. It's also stupidity and masochistic mental derangement to minimize the scrutiny of:
      Wall Street.
      Bankers.
      Pharmaceutical companies.
      Sam Brownback.

      Delete
  23. Bob should read Dr. King's "Letter from the Birmingham Jail."

    It was Dr. King's response to his critics who warned him that he was pushing too hard, disrupting too much, and who tried to lay at his feet the blame for the violent response the Civil Rights movement was enduring.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Sad to see Bob join forces with HuffPo and attack Hillary Clinton in this post. He is giving comfort to the man he suggest may be insane.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Probably a good thing that this blog's credibility has sunk so low that even right-wingers don't do "Even liberal blogger Bob Somerby says . . ." links to it any more.

      Delete
    2. I understand some of the analysts are applying for the many high wage vacancies not being filled over at Breitbart.

      Delete
    3. Isn't it about time for Bob to rehash the Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown cases again? Took him three days to get to 60 comments on a Trump post, and for a guy whose been blogging about the media and politics for 18 years, that's pathetic.

      Delete
  25. Trump was responding to Mitt Romney's suggestion that his companies failed. That was the reason for the steak and water displays. Trump is not mentally ill. His children are stellar people and he has been a consistent personality over years, with no record of insanity. The disruptors at his rally should have their heads examined for their various afflictions and violent tendencies.

    ReplyDelete
  26. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  27. He just keep on loving me everyday since when Dr.Ogudugu helped me through his act of spell casting to bring him back to me, Kennedy and i have been having a rocky relationship for some time but i am so happy now because since the interference of Dr.Ogudugu Kennedy has changed to be a romantic lover and these are thing he has not been doing for some time. I believe this will prove to people that Dr.Ogudugu is a powerful spell caster and you can contact Dr.Ogudugu through these details below

    Via Email: greatogudugu@gmail.com

    ReplyDelete
  28. Tiểu phẫu cắt bao quy đầu là gì không phải ai cũng biết được. Quy trình cắt bao quy đầu như thế nào cũng là vấn đề được rất nhiều nam giới quan tâm. http://catbaoquydautphcm.com/
    Lý do bạn nên cắt bao quy đầu khá đơn giản, việc cắt bao quy đầu giúp bạn giảm thiểu tối đa các bệnh lý nam khoa do dài, hẹp, đặc biệt là viêm nhiễm đường sinh dụchttp://chiphicatbaoquydau.com/
    Điều trị bệnh lậu như thế nào ... Bệnh lậu mạn tính ở nữ cũng cần chẩn đoán phân biệt với một sốbệnh cũng gây viêm âm hộ, âm đạo do vi khuẩn chlamydia trachomatis, mycoplasma, ... Chẩn đoán và điều trị bệnh lậu giai đoạn mã http://chuabenhlaubaonhieutien.com/
    Xuất tinh sớm là gì? Bạn có biết rằng 20% nam giới mắc bệnh xuất tinh sớm và đây là 1 trong 5 bệnh về tình dục được điều trị nhiều nhất không? ... http://chuaxuattinhsombaonhieutien.com/
    http://congtyhuthamcau.info/

    Dấu hiệu đi cầu ra máu cần kết hợp kiểm chứng cùng nhiều triệu chứng khác thông qua khámvà xét nghiệm, chẩn đoán mới có thể nhận biết bạn đang mắc cụ thể chứng bệnh nào. http://dakhoaaua.vn/di-ngoai-ra-mau-tuoi-nhung-khong-dau-la-benh-gi-1501.html

    ReplyDelete