Free Speech
FSA Ticket | Today | Join | Member | Search | Who's On | Help | Sign In | |
FSA > General > Political Discussion Go to subcategory:
Author Content
docjim
  • From:USA

Date Posted:07-12-2018 01:00:10Copy HTML

Contrasts and Character


The nation laid to rest the 41st President of the Untied States this week, George Herbert Walker Bush. Amid the many sincere and heartfelt recollections of President Bush was a theme that appeared over and over, that George H.W. Bush was, in all things, a man of character.


But what does it mean to be so considered? Abigail Van Buren once defined character in this way: The best index to a person's character is how he treats people who can't do him any good, and how he treats people who can't fight back.


 President Bush was a famous letter writer. When he once used an incorrect name for a news reporter three times in a press briefing, he wrote a personal note to the reporter later that day when informed of his mistake, asking her to accept his apology for using the wrong name. Did he need to care about this mistake enough to write the note? The reporter may have been disappointed by the mistake, but certainly the error had no impact upon the Bush presidency or how the media would cover the issues of the day. But Bush wrote because he cared about the person behind the questions, the woman behind the task of reporting. This was the character of George Bush.


President Bush was in office when the Soviet Union fell, and the Berlin Wall came down. It was a triumph for Western civilization, and for democracy, a victory won by the efforts of President Reagan and President Bush, and by the steadfast US policies of deterrence and defense. It was also a reflection of the strength of the European and American pacts of defense, of NATO and economic cooperation between the free nations. Bush could have taken center stage and publically demanded credit for the fall of the Soviet empire. He did not. When asked by his advisors why he would not accept accolades for the Fall, George Bush said we would need to work with the Russians to rebuild their formula for governing and taking self-praise might undermine those future efforts.


In both examples George Bush demonstrated character, refusing to diminish the Russians when they had lost the Cold War so obviously, and refusing to ignore even a small personal slight to a single reporter.


One cannot but contrast the character of President Bush with the current President, Donald J. Trump. And in that contrast, few would argue that character is the strength of the current president. Much more likely, supporters would argue that upsetting the norms of government is what Trump brings to the office of the President.


So, does character really matter?


Dennis Prager wrote: “Goodness is about character - integrity, honesty, kindness, generosity, moral courage, and the like. More than anything else, it is about how we treat other people.”


The Chief Tweeter does not treat other people with kindness or generosity. The leader of our government will never be known for his honesty and has struggled to demonstrate any degree of kindness towards others in fulfillment of his role as our leader in moments of national disaster. Whether blaming California for the fires that cost so many so much, or telling Puerto Rico that its people were not working hard enough to recover 10 days after the hurricane, kindness has not been his virtue.


Perhaps the passing Of George H. W. Bush will remind all of us that we experience great loss when character is not at the center of any Presidency. In many ways it is character that grants a president the right to represent the American people.


Op Ed

Drjim893

12/7/18




DRJim
govols Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #1
  • From:USA

Re:The contrast

Date Posted:07-12-2018 01:25:41Copy HTML

Is it possible that President Trump, by becoming and being president, might remind us that the president was never intended to be anything more than executive, and very rarely, commander in chief? The president was never intended to be leader of the free world or moral guidestone for either the republic or humanity at large. The presidency wasn't instituted to establish a king figure nor a god figure, nor even an exemplar of mannerly behavior; it was intended as an administrator subject to the will of a self-governing sovereign people.

dunjuz_not Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #2
  • From:USA

Re:The contrast

Date Posted:07-12-2018 09:59:33Copy HTML

I think the ruling class prefers to be regarded in awe.

We're all prisoners of conscious.~
_QZ_ Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #3
  • From:USA

Re:The contrast

Date Posted:07-12-2018 02:03:09Copy HTML

Perhaps the passing Of George H. W. Bush will remind all of us that we experience great loss when character is not at the center of any Presidency. In many ways it is character that grants a president the right to represent the American people.



I don't need reminding, Jim.  I've been missing it since Clinton's first term.   And I have to disagree that character grants a POTUS that right...winning the electoral college does.   It appears to me that what Americans are looking for is a strong leader.  In the modern age, that seems to demand someone who sold their soul long before, so I'd argue it is the lack of character that folks crave because the goal is "winning" at any cost.    "Winning" is rather subjective of course, as partisan supporters seem to be very flexible as to what that words means.  



HW was actually not a great president...perhaps had he served in a much earlier era.   But IMO he was a great man, certainly one to be admired for living a full rich life.    

_QZ_ Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #4
  • From:USA

Re:The contrast

Date Posted:07-12-2018 02:18:42Copy HTML

Is it possible that President Trump, by becoming and being president, might remind us that the president was never intended to be anything more than executive, and very rarely, commander in chief? The president was never intended to be leader of the free world or moral guidestone for either the republic or humanity at large. The presidency wasn't instituted to establish a king figure nor a god figure, nor even an exemplar of mannerly behavior; it was intended as an administrator subject to the will of a self-governing sovereign people.





I agree, of course, Govols...though I think that horse has left the barn.  And while I would prefer a POTUS who had some actual morals, it is more the fact that the culture has pretty much taken an axe to institutions which used to inculcate them.   We are pretty much electing the worst versions of ourselves, and then we wonder why there is so much division.  

skwanderer Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #5
  • From:USA

Re:The contrast

Date Posted:07-12-2018 02:30:41Copy HTML

"My position concerning God is that of an agnostic. I am convinced that a vivid consciousness of the primary importance of moral principles for the betterment and ennoblement of life does not need the idea of a law-giver, especially a law-giver who works on the basis of reward and punishment." Albert Einstein
skrumpie Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #6
  • From:Argentina

Re:The contrast

Date Posted:07-12-2018 02:43:00Copy HTML

Well, the usual subjects, the two men here on this board who are always eager to self-proclaim their education, have, yet again, done no more than parrot back talking points they did not think of themselves.


Jim, in his usua scramble to take the words of others and pretend they came first to his mind, and Skwanderer with a very ignorant tweet.


Do you remember, Jim, when Maxine Waters endorsed Bill Clinton, calling Bush a 'racist'.


How was his 'character' back then, according to this female icon of socialist blabber?

Try to remember the kind of September when men weren't girls and girls weren't fellas..................
Bogus0Pomp Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #7
  • From:USA

Re:The contrast

Date Posted:07-12-2018 03:12:06Copy HTML

And I have to disagree that character grants a POTUS that right...winning the electoral college does.


I'm fairly certain that Jim meant that in the philosophical sense rather than the mechanical, procedural sense.

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z "If you can read these 26 letters, there is nothing about the universe that you can't learn." -- Lambros D. Callimoahos
docjim Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #8
  • From:USA

Re:The contrast

Date Posted:07-12-2018 05:52:37Copy HTML

Bogus,


You would be right of course. I am familiar with the electoral process, but this article is about the man, the moral man, that was George Bush. 


I did not think, as Q mentioned, that George Bush was a great president; I do think he was a good man. Likewise, his son was , I think, a good husband and father, a good man, and, unfortunately, a poor president.


My point, which eludes some here, is that it was impossible to avoid the contrast of character between our current president and George Bush, number 41, given the reflections upon Bush all week.


Govols seems to argue that character makes no difference. I would disagree. Character causes one to speak the truth; lack of character has no connection to truth-speaking. Character causes one to not bully others with words or the power of large audience, to diminish others; rather to spare our smaller insecurities from others.


Skrumpie, as always, sees personal attack as her lone contribution to any conversation.


I find this president's conduct, demeanor, and moral bankruptcy to diminish all of us and our nation. Around the world America is less respected because of the Trump effect, and this is harming our relationships in trade, defense, and trust. While the founders may not have seen international leadership a necessity to the office of the president, they most certainly expected integrity in the office and its occupants. For, like it or not, that person stands as the representative of the American people.


Those who support this president's conduct, be aware, that no matter how egregious a future president may act, it will never be more offensive than the Trump vacuity of morality. Once you consign integrity, honestly, truthfulness, and morality to the bin of "I don't care" there is no coming back from that lack of concern with character.






DRJim
skwanderer Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #9
  • From:USA

Re:The contrast

Date Posted:07-12-2018 06:04:49Copy HTML

Those who support this president's conduct, be aware, that no matter how egregious a future president may act, it will never be more offensive than the Trump vacuity of morality. Once you consign integrity, honestly, truthfulness, and morality to the bin of "I don't care" there is no coming back from that lack of concern with character. ___ You are assuming the GOP is not full of hypocrites. You must know they will be the first to forget Trump and criticize your guy for wearing another tan suit in the future.
skrumpie Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #10
  • From:Argentina

Re:The contrast

Date Posted:07-12-2018 06:24:51Copy HTML

Skrumpie, as always, sees personal attack as her lone contribution to any conversation.


I find this president's conduct, demeanor, and moral bankruptcy to diminish all of us and our nation. Around the world America is less respected because of the Trump effect, and this is harming our relationships in trade, defense, and trust. While the founders may not have seen international leadership a necessity to the office of the president, they most certainly expected integrity in the office and its occupants. For, like it or not, that person stands as the representative of the American people.


Every word of that, Jim, is a parroted talking point.  If those you follow in the press had not said them first, you would have parroted entirely different talking points from them.  


Those who support this president's conduct, be aware, that no matter how egregious a future president may act, it will never be more offensive than the Trump vacuity of morality. Once you consign integrity, honestly, truthfulness, and morality to the bin of "I don't care" there is no coming back from that lack of concern with character.


Sorry Jim, but SlimyUglyBillySlugClinton had the greatest vacuity of morality in my lifetime, diddling, as he did, a girl close in age to his own daughter, then blaming her for him being unable to resist her charms.


As far as integrity, honesty, truthfulness and morality, all that was and is lacked in Obama, was from the beginning, and that will never end.  He will always hold the title of pure trash for a great many of us in this country.


If you wish to discuss character, Jim, you need to find an honest splinter of bone in your body and admit Trump's foibles don't hold a candle to these two.


Try to remember the kind of September when men weren't girls and girls weren't fellas..................
Bogus0Pomp Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #11
  • From:USA

Re:The contrast

Date Posted:07-12-2018 07:02:55Copy HTML

Skrumpie is so thoughtfully prompt in confirming, via demonstration, that Jim's comment

"Skrumpie, as always, sees personal attack as her lone contribution to any conversation."

is flawlessly accurate and true.

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z "If you can read these 26 letters, there is nothing about the universe that you can't learn." -- Lambros D. Callimoahos
Bogus0Pomp Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #12
  • From:USA

Re:The contrast

Date Posted:07-12-2018 07:03:47Copy HTML

...


I find this president's conduct, demeanor, and moral bankruptcy to diminish all of us and our nation. Around the world America is less respected because of the Trump effect, and this is harming our relationships in trade, defense, and trust. While the founders may not have seen international leadership a necessity to the office of the president, they most certainly expected integrity in the office and its occupants. For, like it or not, that person stands as the representative of the American people.


Those who support this president's conduct, be aware, that no matter how egregious a future president may act, it will never be more offensive than the Trump vacuity of morality. Once you consign integrity, honestly, truthfulness, and morality to the bin of "I don't care" there is no coming back from that lack of concern with character.




I couldn't agree more, Jim.

mickeyrat Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #13
  • From:USA

Re:The contrast

Date Posted:08-12-2018 12:41:14Copy HTML

If Trump diminishes anything, it is not the office of the President, which can't be diminished, but his own person.
_QZ_ Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #14
  • From:USA

Re:The contrast

Date Posted:08-12-2018 12:53:15Copy HTML

And I have to disagree that character grants a POTUS that right...winning the electoral college does.


I'm fairly certain that Jim meant that in the philosophical sense rather than the mechanical, procedural sense.



I understood what he meant Bogus....I was disagreeing with the premise.  Furthermore, one can't continue to support and defend politicians who CLEARLY have no character and then argue "the philosophical sense" means diddly squat.   

 

Copyright © 2000-2018 Aimoo Free Forum All rights reserved.