I am proud to present an epic Comment of he Day by A M Golden on the post, “MAGA Loyalists: Do You REALLY Believe That Anyone Who Makes A Public Threat Like This Can Be Trusted To Be President? Because He Can’t…Ever.” It is wise, wide-raanging and nuanced, so I’m not going to waste your time with an introduction. Just read, think, and enjoy.
***
As the saying goes, “When someone tells you who they really are, believe them.” We have enough evidence to see with our own eyes and ears who Trump is and who he is not and that should not be relevant to who Joe Biden is and who he is not.
This entry, the previous one in the latest installment of the “Nation of Assholes” series and the one before that about Rudy Giuliani’s untrustworthy secret recorder have all coalesced in my mind this weekend as I have spent several days wearing myself out over planning for a pop-culture convention next week by following other conventions in other cities on social media to determine how the shows are accommodating the guests’ requirements under SAG-AFTRA’s strike rules and what that means for how I should approach any celebrity guest I wish to meet.
I get tired of holding the hands of new convention-goers who don’t understand the rules, ask for clarification and end up not following my advice. I get tired of veteran convention-goers who think they have the right to get around the rules. For entitled people who cut lines, who try to sweet-talk the guest into extra perks and who make little to no effort to ask polite, intelligent questions. They make everything harder on everyone else. Celebrities won’t want to attend these things if people don’t understand or respect boundaries. I have too many stories to recount of fans acting like inconsiderate asses and those stories are from before the pandemic.
We are already an entitled enough culture that treats celebrities like commodities, as if buying a movie ticket or following a TV program requires that anyone who appeared in the same owes us unlimited time, an autograph, a selfie, a kidney… One of the best things about the strike is that it’s finally becoming somewhat public knowledge that most actors aren’t millionaires.
We treat others like us even worse. Not only do we not put most of our fellow citizens on pedestals, but we don’t even afford them the basic respect of treating them the way we would want to be treated. As long as there’s something in it for us, I guess…
Somehow, qualities of character, such as honesty, integrity, patience, kindness, self-control (sorry, I think I wandered into the Fruits of the Spirit from the Bible) seem to have been lost very quickly. We are a mess as a culture and there’s a lot of blame to go around, not least because we have forgotten the Golden Rule.
Once upon a time (when I was a young college kid), there was an older man in our church named Johnnie. Johnnie’s life was upended when he was a young man the night someone broke into his home while he was away and murdered Johnnie’s father, sister and left his mother for dead. He struggled a lot until he found Christ and embraced Christianity. He even went to the prison so he could tell the murderer that he forgave him, but the officials wouldn’t let him see the inmate.
Johnnie was a neat guy. He came into McDonald’s one day, not knowing I worked there, and was standing in line. He and I spotted each other on opposite sides of the counter and waved. In church the next week, he told the class of the importance of living your faith outside the church walls. As an example, he pointed out that he ran into me at a time and place he hadn’t expected and it wouldn’t have looked good if he’d been rude to the employees or other customers. The importance of keeping your good name – your reputation – is essential if anyone is going to listen to you.
After all, Johnnie revealed that he’d only had two heroes in his life – Pete Rose and James Brown. “And, in one year, they both became embroiled in scandals.” Pick your heroes wisely. As Flaubert wrote in “Madame Bovary”, “We must not touch our idols; the gilt sticks to our fingers.” These days, you don’t even have to meet your idols to be disappointed in them.
Pete Rose, James Brown and, if he ever had one, Donald Trump lost their good names by not being mindful. The process occurred as a result of one poor decision after another. We can’t allow anyone who has treated his good name – his reputation – so shabbily to get it back just because other ball players cheated on a bigger scale, other musicians have killed women rather than just beating them and other Presidents have been more dismissive of the rule of law.
It’s easy to point out, though, that the Pete Roses, the James Browns and the Donald Trumps have feet of clay. It’s our fault for putting such people on pedestals, as if they are somehow above lesser mortals. We would do better to remember that we have the same feet of clay. Sometimes our internal alarms don’t ring or we don’t understand when they do ring or we just don’t listen to them. That’s what makes it easy for the Roses, the Browns and the Trumps of the world to mislead us with rationalizations. Culture becomes worse when we adopt those rationalizations to excuse poor behavior on our own part.
One of the best quotes I’ve read about integrity is from Rationalization #22, aka There Are Worse Things: “One’s objective is to be the best human being that we can be, not to just avoid being the worst rotter anyone has ever met.”
That there are worse people out there than you is likely true. That doesn’t give you the right to behave unethically. The pandemic, the election chicanery fights, the SCOTUS decisions, the blazing double standards or your rotten day at work doesn’t justify jettisoning respect for others.
Why do we not understand that? Have we lost the concept of how important a commodity a good name is?
Which brings me back to conventions.
I am a fan of a particular character actor with a long resume. Not an A-list movie star, he nonetheless is entertaining performer, an interesting person to listen to and seems to be a genuinely nice person. I’ve met him a few times and have always had a good experience. We’ll call him Joe Darling. I don’t know her personally, but he has a big fan I’ll call Diane. Diane is a member of multiple fan groups for one of the programs for which Joe is best known, she follows him on social media, she has left multiple comments on the posts he makes and, overall, has seemed singularly fixated on him. I wouldn’t call her comments necessarily inappropriate but they represented to me someone who perhaps needed to dial it down a notch.
There were red flags that she should’ve noticed; I certainly did. For example, she mentioned that she’d ordered a Cameo video from him and was bummed that he apparently “let it expire” without responding, commenting that she’d probably asked a question that was too personal. For better or for worse, the internet provides people with the opportunity to be more bold than they would be in person. Some people haven’t learned that there are boundaries when it comes to online interactions that need to be understood and respected. Privately, I felt it was a good thing she hadn’t had the opportunity to meet him in person.
That changed this week. Joe was a scheduled guest at a show that came to her city. She bought her tickets and arranged to finally meet her hero. She expressed anxiety online. She had a gift for him (Not my thing but some fans do that). How would it go? Several of us tried to reassure her kindly. I, however, had, in the words of Han Solo, “a bad feeling about this”. I couldn’t stop her from going and, after all, how does one politely warn someone one doesn’t even know to, “Behave yourself”? Conventions have handlers with the guests to keep the lines moving and to enforce rules so – I thought – she wouldn’t have much time to go too far.
It turns out any advice in how to behave would have been too late. She reported what had happened on a fan group. Her experience was not what she wanted it to be…not because Joe Darling isn’t a nice guy, but she admitted that she’d been making a nuisance of herself.
Unbeknownst to her fellow fans, Diane had apparently made a habit of constantly contacting Joe via his website and sending gifts to him. Suddenly, the expired Cameo order, some of the discouraging comments she’d posted and her anxious feeling before the show made a great deal of sense to me. Obviously, Joe was trying to handle an obsessed fan by not responding to her messages, acknowledging her gifts, ignoring her requests and not replying to her comments on his social media page.
At the show, he signed her autograph and took a nice smiling photo with her, which was very gracious of him under the circumstances, and then told her firmly that her behavior was borderline stalking and that it needed to end or he would take action.
She reported what had happened on a fan page and told us that she accepted blame for being overzealous. That’s a good thing. I felt compassion for both of them: for Joe to be put in a position where he had to enforce boundaries with a fan; for Diane – whose internal alarms weren’t ringing loudly enough for her to recognize that she was making poor choices – to have what should have been a neat moment turn into an embarrassing one. Behaving herself in person wouldn’t have changed a thing because she’d already developed a negative reputation that preceded her.
That there have been obsessed fans who have physically attacked and even killed their idols doesn’t make Diane’s actions acceptable. That Joe Biden has been an extraordinarily unethical President doesn’t make Trump a better choice. That Rudy Giuliani has expended all the good will given to him after 9/11 by leaps and bounds doesn’t mean it’s right to record a sexual encounter with him to bring him down. That the pandemic closed theaters that are now running with minimal staff does not make it alright to disturb other patrons now that moviegoers are used to an “anything goes” attitude while watching films at home.
I doubt Trump has learned anything from his experiences. Even if he has, at this late date, he has forfeited any trust he once held and doesn’t deserve to be President. There are consequences when you lose your good name, after all. Pete Rose won’t get into the Hall of Fame even if he’s learned his lesson (which he hasn’t). I hope Diane has learned from her experience, though she will probably have to admire Joe from afar and offline from now on.
Proverbs 22:1 tells us that “A good name is more desirable than great riches; to be esteemed is better than silver or gold.”
Whether we are acting as citizens or employees or simply fans, our reputations can open or close doors. There may have been a point at which Diane or Donald Trump could have stopped, reassessed what they were doing and thought better of it in time to avoid the consequences. We’ll never know because they didn’t.
Ethics Alarms 
Totally, completely, and in all other ways outstanding!
Congratulations.
If a handful of ethical beings determine someone has forfeited their good name but a much much larger group rewards the behaviors because it serves their purposes how does the ethical convince the unethical’s supporters to abandon their interests for a higher purpose if it means they will suffer the costs of being good and noble when the supporters believe others are not held to the same standard?
In my earlier post I didn’t blame Trump for his behaviors because behaviors are learned. I did not get the vapors when the Billy Bush grab em video came to light because it is true that some women will basically prostitute themselves to be close to the rich and powerful. In fact, sociologists have found that tall men can command higher salaries and women prefer taller men who create the appearance of being a good resource provider. You don’t see career women marrying down.
The bullied seek champions which is why Trump is popular and why Trump is portrayed as a bully. This is merely one group putting their champion up against the other sides proverbial black knight.
Society creates these unethical beings because we choose to not call out bad behavior because it benefits us or that we are simply too wrapped up into our own selves to be willing to absorb the costs of pushing ethical behavior.
I continue to read this blog because I know I am partly to blame for looking away when I see unethical behavior and I look for ways to change my own behaviors. If we all want ethical leaders it is we who must set the example and not just complain about those we find objectionable as well as ensuring we don’t reward unethical behaviors from those we favor.
Unfortunately, I won’t hold my breath
With that said AM’s comment was well done and worthy of COTD status.
An excellent and thought-provoking commentary.
Well done!
AM is golden. Thanks for taking the time.
I didn’t get a chance to post this in the MAGA thread so I’ll do it here: the biggest difference between Trump and the professional politicians (Biden, Obama, etc.) is that Trump, not being a professional politician, simply speaks his mind without filter and acts in the open and without care to hide or lay smoke screens or distractions. Some, like Obama, are 100% inauthentic and always acting out of script
Yes, and a leader of a nation cannot “simply speak his mind without filter and act in the open and without care.” It’s self-indulgent, stupid, and incompetent.
Jack
How do we know he has no filter? We cannot possibly know what he would like to say but is holding back. We can only know that he says things that rub some people the wrong way. Can we or even should we unilaterally state that one’s behavior or comment is more egregious than another’s. No one griped when Biden said Trump would “put y’all back in chains”. Obama made numerous divisive statements but I did not hear a call that his self-serving narcissistic statements made him unworthy of the office.
If we are honest, leadership means getting people to follow when they know they will incur a cost. This means the followers must put away their parochial interests for the cause.
Generating a following is not leadership if it means buying the followers. King George found that out when his Hessians would not stand up against committed patriots.
Leaders do not seek to gain personally from the role. They are there to instill within the rank and file a sense of purpose that would supersede individual interests. Patton was no diplomat but he was a true leader. I will admit Patton’s desire to be in war was his heroic flaw.
No doubt that Trump has his own fatal flaws but why should we accept the alternative in which professionals pre-filter, screen and poll test what information we get to hear or read?
I don’t know if anyone can live up to the ideals of being absolutely ethical at all times. Nor do I think that we can assume those whose speech is filtered will not act unethically when they assume power.
If a known self-serving bigot with a cadre of professional filters can cast his opponent as a racist does that make him a better leader?
CM…Come on. This sounds like a closing argument by the defense attorney of a hopelessly guilty client.
“We cannot possibly know what he would like to say but is holding back.” But it’s fair to assume that its even worse than what he actually says.
“No doubt that Trump has his own fatal flaws but why should we accept the alternative in which professionals pre-filter, screen and poll test what information we get to hear or read?” Equivocation. There are fatal flaws and there are fatal flaws. And a competent, trustworthy leader in a divided nation with racial tensions where he is being meticulously framed as a racist and xenophobe does not call for four minority Congresswomen to “go back where they came from,” because it undermines his own credibility, plays into he detractor’s hands, and makes his adversaries victims. That’s not candor, that’s idiocy. And a POTUS cannot be an idiot, or keep appearing to be one.
“No one griped when Biden said Trump would “put y’all back in chains”. What? I griped; lots of pundits did. But Joe was just an idiot VP when he said that, and nobody could have known then that someone that dumb could get elected—because he had Trump to run against.
“Patton was no diplomat but he was a true leader.” My father, who served under Patton, says he lost the respect of his troops when he slapped a soldier suffering from battle fatigue. Dad thought Ike should have had him court-martialed. Some lines cannot be crossed.
“I don’t know if anyone can live up to the ideals of being absolutely ethical at all times.” Seriously? The “Nobody’s Perfect” rationalization in defense of TRUMP? It’s not a matter of not being “absolutely ethical at all times”! It’s a matter of having no ethical compass at all! He has done the right thing in many cases, but it is never based on ethics.
“We can only know that he says things that rub some people the wrong way.” Trump said, in his last award-winning ethics quote of 2022, “A Massive Fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution!” A call to terminate of the law of the land by a Former President and current candidate rubs some people the wrong way? I don’t want to be around anyone whom it rubs the right way unless I have a loaded gun…
Jack my entire point was those who are careful with what they say but act as dangerously are to be feared than one who tells you what he actually thinks,
In the abstract, sure. But since we don’t know what the first are thinking or planning, we can only act on what we know. Moreover, not having the brains or filters to not blurt out thoughts that haven’t been considered carefully and that will undermine one’s work is itself something to be wary of. Should we have admired and Trusted Bill Clinton more if he blurted out, when being interviewed by, say, Norah O’Donnell, “I’m sorry but you’re do hot I’m getting a hard-on!”?
Jack, your points are well taken and thoroughly true.
I want to have someone give me reason for voting for them and not be told why one candidate or another is unworthy. If Trump is the nominee and I accept your premise that he should not be allowed to be president because of his significant issues then my only ethical choice would be to not vote for either candidate. To me that is no different than watching a totalitarian regime consolidate more power. How is that being anything other than a “good German”?
I try to avoid getting tripped up in the rationalizations trap but if you see the regime in power actually working to restrict freedom and is willing to knowingly abrogate the Constitution to achieve a political advantage how do you weigh your choices given no available alternatives.
I personally wish Trump would go away but he is obviously not going to do so. There is a great deal of talk about him running as a third party candidate if he is denied the nomination. Dealing with that issue is where the fight against him should be had. Right now those of us who do not want to see the AUC rewarded should focus on his competitors and what they offer instead of knocking them for every misstep or staff screwup.
I have said many times the only reason people knock the competition is because they have nothing better to offer. To me the most unethical thing a competitor can do is disparage another legitimate competitor without exposing what the differences are. The problem I have with most of the field is that they all disparage others for their own gain*. Non competitors can do so all they want but until they explain why I should not choose X they need to give me an alternative so that I can make my own assessment.
* I have not heard Vivek Ramaswamy denigrate a competitor.
I have to agree with Chris above. I can hear about how awful Trump is all day long but he isn’t running for President in a vacuum. You say Trump is so far gone that you cannot ethically support him, so what does that leave for an ethical course of action?
Voting for whoever the Democrats nominates is clearly off the table, as that would be an endorsement of all the damage they have done to the country. The only options left are to a) not vote at all or b) vote for a candidate that has no chance of winning. Of course this is predicated on Trump winning the Republican nomination, but that seems the most likely outcome at this point. I can’t see that essentially doing nothing to prevent the leftists from seizing more power is the correct action. Yes Trump is an asshole who doesn’t know how to engage the public as a leader should, and voting for him encourages this kind of behavior. Yet everything Biden has done is at least an order of magnitude worse and presumably the next Dem candidate will be the same. The only proper course I can see is choosing the lesser evil. Endorsing any evil at all is distasteful but the alternatives are worse.
Millions of people see it your way Mason.
Once again, I am honored by the recognition. Thank you to everyone for your compliments.
Since making my post, I have found out what Diane put in the Cameo request that went unfulfilled. I don’t know what she was thinking. How anyone can operate with such a lack of self-awareness is beyond me.
But, then again, Trump manages to operate somehow.