In the aftermath of the horrendous events at the Capitol, I have been discouraged by some of the commentary on the left. While I understand the impulse to criticize those who are currently abandoning Trump as being too late and opportunistic, I believe it is unwise to berate these folks. Are we trying to discourage folks from abandoning their loyalty to Trump? Do we want to permanently alienate these folks from the body politic? Will our desire for vengeance only widen the dangerous rifts which we have decried as poisonous to the body politic? Shouldn't we be welcoming folks back into reality and sanity - even at this late date? Isn't it wise to provide folks with an off ramp when they are racing toward going over the cliff? Are we trying to restore faith in our institutions or permanently exclude folks who disagree with us? Do we desire the restoration of the ability of folks on the right and left to have civil conversations and reach reasonable compromise solutions to our problems? OR Are we trying to create yet another group of folks who are permanently aggrieved? Yes, let's condemn and isolate the folks who continue to support Trump's wickedness, but we should welcome everyone who is willing to abandon him!
Amen and awoman.
ReplyDeleteOnly those who break the law should be pursued.
Now that Trump made clear he will not attend the inaugeration I feel he should be impeached and NOT be invited.
I fear impeachment though because it holds a possibility for a full pardon.
Nck
Miller in reality posed an extremely difficult question.
ReplyDeleteThe prez's twitter account has been disabled. If he moves to another platform without rules whatsoever, we might just find ourselves in a perilious situation.
Perhaps we should not punish or reward within a context involving Trump. But welcome an pursue in terms of law and defense of sacred values. Never discuss Trump ever from this point on. But engage with people on values, what binds us and how we are going to determine americas destiny (through our peaceful behavior enforcing the laws and customs of democracy involving a lot of listening and dialogue and legal pursuit of those who do not wish to engage in peaceful exchange through established fora and media but persist in high pitched agressive engaging of fellow citizens who might be of differing opinion (and there are rules to qualify for citizen status).
Nck
He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them. But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not know so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion. Nor is it enough that he should hear the opinions of adversaries from his own teachers presented as they state them and accompanied by what they offer as refutations. He must be able to hear those reasons from people who actually believe them. He must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
ReplyDeleteDBP
DeleteI might add this quote as a general rule I personally use for sifting "opinions" from valuable information to me.
Brene Brown on when to value feedback:
“If you’re not in the arena also getting your ass kicked, I’m not interested in your feedback. If you have constructive feedback you want to give me, I want it... But if you’re in the cheap seats, not putting yourself on the line, and just talking about how I can do it better, I’m in no way interested in your feedback.”
Nck
"Iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend."
DeleteProverbs 27:17
What a sad moment for every American to see President Trump leave the White House............................................................... ........ without welcoming his legally elected successor in.
ReplyDeleteA Commander in Chief, even if only appointed instead of commissioned, could have tried to be an officer AND a Gentleman.
Nck