I deliberately chose to watch nothing of the inaugural, little, of the marches today, and very little of the political commentary in real time.
I have chosen to read a variety of sources of coverage and commentary — here, my twitter feed, various news organizations across the political spectrum.
Several things struck me forcefully and I will offer my as yet only half-formed reactions.
We learned from the Public Editor that the New York Times had details of Russian involvement but at the final decision of its top boss chose NOT to publish them. This is not the first time a paper’s decision not to publish what they had made a major difference. Electorally what immediately came to mind is that several papers had the story of Sen. Bob Packwood’s persistent sexual harrassment but did not publish it before his last election, enabling him to get reelected one last time. On a larger scale, newspapers had most of the details of the forthcoming Bay of Pigs invasion but at the request of President Kennedy did not publish them, although if they had that fiasco could have been avoided.
There is no one entity to blame for the narrow loss Hillary Clinton suffered, but there is no doubt that the unbalanced media coverage, by both print and broadcast outlets and the different standard being used on the two major candidates, played a significant role, and one that also, I would argue, contributed to the Republicans holding on to the Senate, something not often discussed but which should be, because had the Dems taken back the upper chamber then some of the worst of what we are about to undergo between appointments and legislation could have been stopped.
As strongly as I feel about that, I feel more strongly about what I will say next
The media is at a critical point. Trump has in sending out Sean Spicer to lie presented a situation for the media and we will see how forcefully they act. That, and Trump’s disgraceful performance at the CIA are occasions for the media to forcefully report, and to hell with what the administration thinks.
First, no press secretary should ever give bald-face lies to the press. S/he immediately loses all credibility and cannot do the job s/he is supposed to do. Second, a President can come out, give a statement, and not take questions, but for a press secretary to that, and to basically yell at the press, is to fuel a situation of hostility that is justified. If that is deliberate — and I think it was — it means this administration is in the process of attempting to prevent the press from providing critical coverage.
I am reminded of a probably apocryphal anecdote during World War II. The Nazi commander of a major occupied city (my mind is blank on which, perhaps Copenhagen) came to meet with the editor of the major newspaper in the city. To show his good will, the Nazi dimissed his body guards, an unbuckled the belt and holster holding his pistol and laid them and his swagger stick on the table. Whereupon the editor put down his pen.
The only way Trump and crew will be able to prevent critical coverage is to be able to totally control the internet, and I expect them to move to try to get some control.
What we saw in the coverage yesterday, including the immediate reaction to some of the speech (especially the word “carnage” but also the clearly plagiarized sections) seems to be an indication the the media will not just roll over. The coverage of crowd size, the comparison photos, the data on metro riders — these do not lie, and the media tonight is pointing that out.
Now I am glad to see all that. But let me go back to where I started this — where were they during the campaign? And will they continue to aggressively challenge the untruths that are certain to be a regular part of communication from the administration, as we have already seen before this,in the testimony of some of the nominees?
We cannot say the American people do not care. I do not know if we will ever get appropriate counts for all the demonstrations, but I am hearing that the DC gathering was probably around a million. Add to that the ¾ of a million in LA, the ¼ million in Chicago, at least 400,000 in New York, and you start to get the scope of this.
And remember — this was all organized in a few weeks starting with a woman in Hawaii posting something online, while the Trump inaugural had more than two month and $100 million and yet had a pitiful response.
I have participated in my share of demonstrations in the past, including several major demonstrations, most notably having come to DC on August 28, 1963. Right now as I continue to recover from surgery just before the election, even were I inclined to such participation, my health would not allow me to. I could not be standing in the outdoors for several hours.
I also do not like being crushed in large crowds, whether on Metro or in demonstrations or even for a short trip in elevators.
I suspect of the hundreds of thousands in DC today there were more than a few who have similar feelings, but felt so strongly that they nevertheless participated, for which I applaud them.
What is paramount in my mind right now is this: America has had a shock to its system. There are many coming to realize how much of the progress this country has made over at least my lifetime (and I am in the leading edge of Baby Boomers, having been born in 1946, as have 3 of our last 4 Presidents, only Obama being an exception) is now in jeopardy.
Moreover, it is not just this country, but, given the predilections of many key figures of the administration starting with the two electeds, the stability and even continued existence of civilization around the world are also threatened. That is NOT a hyperbolic statement. Start with the approach to the environment and energy, the denial of what is already happening with climate change, the fact that some of the serious conflict around the world, including in Syria, is a direct result of climate change.
It is also reckless rhetoric.
It is also a myopia that does not understand that America thrives more when we are in a cooperative relationship with most nations but also stand on key issues of human rights.
Michelle Obama was criticized for saying for the first time in her life she was proud to be an American. I suppose right now I would be willing to be criticized for saying that what I am proud of is the millions of people who stood up today, and were it not for that, I would be ashamed and embarrassed to call myself an American given where this administration seems to be heading.
This post is not cohesive. It is a product of a mixture of feelings — sorrow, anger, rage, empathy, and more.
I do not expect it to resonate, nor will I attempt to draw attention to it.
It was something I felt I had to express, and this is a key way for me to do that.
If it speaks to anyone else, so be it.
If not, so be it.
As of right now we still have a liberal democracy, but under this administration that is very much in jeopardy.
The protests today give hope.
The media push back against the administration is welcome.
The administration’s reaction, Trump’s reactions, should be frightening.
Now if you will excuse me, I am going to pour myself a big glass of whiskey.