Setting a new low in seeking reasons to criticize the President it and its readers love to hate, the New York Times devoted a full article (“Trump’s Blue Suit at Pope’s Funeral Draws Attention”) to President Trump’s choice of suit to wear to the Pope’s funeral. Get this:
President Trump, it seems, is fully committed to going his own way when it comes to international relations — even during the funeral of a pope. On Saturday, as he joined other world leaders to pay his respects to Pope Francis, he stood in St. Peter’s Square among President Emmanuel Macron of France (who was wearing black), Prime Minister Keir Starmer of Britain (in black), President Javier Milei of Argentina (in black) and Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni of Italy (in black). Mr. Trump? He was wearing blue.And not even dark, midnight blue, but a clear, sapphire-like blue, with matching tie. Amid all the black and Cardinal red, it popped out like a sign.The choice did not grossly violate the dress code for the event (which reportedly called for a dark suit with a black tie for men). Prince William also appeared to be wearing blue, though a shade closer to navy, and former President Joseph R. Biden Jr. wore a blue tie. But Mr. Trump’s look certainly skirted the edges.
Oh, bite me. Skirted what “edges?” This rates a Kaufman on Ethics Alarms. That is a situation where my concern about the controversy at hand equals George S. Kaufman’s famous description of how interested he was in the complaint by aging crooner Eddie Fisher (father of Carrie) that he was having trouble meeting and dating young women. The famous wit and playwright said (on a live panel TV show),
“Mr. Fisher, on Mount Wilson there is a telescope that can magnify the most distant stars to twenty-four times the magnification of any previous telescope. This remarkable instrument was unsurpassed in the world of astronomy until the development and construction of the Mount Palomar telescope. The Mount Palomar telescope is an even more remarkable instrument of magnification. Owing to advances and improvements in optical technology, it is capable of magnifying the stars to four times the magnification and resolution of the Mount Wilson telescope. Mr. Fisher, if you could somehow put the Mount Wilson telescope inside the Mount Palomar telescope, you still wouldn’t be able to see my interest in your problem.”
That’s exactly how much I care about the Times fashion editor’s objection to what the President chose to wear to the funeral of a man with influence far beyond his wisdom, who criticized the President for enforcing its immigration laws, and who was, by any fair measure, a communist. Trump showed generous respect by attending the funeral at all.
Ethics Alarms 
The NYT thinks blue is bad? I hope they didn’t see that big group of men all wearing red!
The choice did not grossly violate the dress code for the event (which reportedly called for a dark suit with a black tie for men). Who reported that this was the expected dress code. Does this mean a NYT’s reporter called for it? I see 5 men in the picture wearing red 0r blue ties and a woman in blue print dress (far right and partially cropped out).
Actually in the world of business attire the darker the suit the higher the rank. CEO’s traditionally wear dark charcoal grey/black suits while underlings wear blues and browns. Trump wearing a blue suit could be seen as an act of humility to the Pontiff and God.
And the man several rows behind the President that appears to be yawning doesn’t seem to be wearing a tie at all.
Is that Biden in the back row with his Dark Brandon sunglasses surrounded by secret service ready to catch him when he falls out of his chair?
https://x.com/stillgray/status/1916473801925091446?s=46
Here’s the picture before they cropped it.
Check who’s not in workout gear in the bottom left.
Good catch! Cue the OB Axiom: “What’s WRONG With These People?”
PWS
It’s pretty obvious that the colors in the picture at the link have been modified, blued, that is. Just compare it to any number of other images of the funeral crowd; the alteration is readily apparent.
There are plenty of dark blue suits there, but the image has been altered to make blue stand out more.
Clearly. Unless the photo editor was very specific in not also adjusting the president’s suit, the fact that his suit shares the same adjusted hue as about a half dozen or so others, the point stands.
Never mind the other colors present.
The point stands that the progressive propaganda wing is being its usual Trump deranged self.
https://x.com/jdunlap1974/status/1916505430198460698?s=46
Hopefully this is an antidote to your hope that the media wasn’t actually being deceitful.
The NY Times was definitely being deceitful with that crop of the photo and the headline, something I’ve come to expect of them.
Nah, there’s no mainstream media bias! Can’t wait to get “A Friend”‘s rationalization for this one so I can spam it without reading the damn thing.
Your snide remarks about Pope Francis were really uncalled for, uninformed, and just plain nasty. Your article was about Trump and his stupid blue suit, but you just couldn’t keep from a dig at the end about a man whom most people are “not worthy to loosen the thongs of his sandals.” (as spoken by John the Baptist about Jesus in the Bible, Luke 3:16).
Pope Francis, like all popes throughout history, had a unique status as a world leader. As the head of state of the Vatican, he had a secular role to play. But as leader of the world’s 1.3 billion Roman Catholics and respected by many non-Roman Catholics, his role as spiritual and moral leader was more important. And his responsibility and concern crossed all political borders and spanned cultural and even religious differences. Some would find these two roles to be incompatible, but no human enterprise, even a religion, can totally avoid the political ramifications of their works nor the implications thereof. Further, for the Pope and for all who follow the morally reasonable teachings of Jesus and the Church, his and our concerns go beyond the borders of Vatican City and the doors of our churches.
It is folly to have expected the Vicar of Jesus Christ to avoid speaking out against anything that adversely affected any human being. Pope Francis, indeed I daresay all popes, upheld the dignity of each individual human, and that stance required the wisdom to speak in the defense of all marginalized people, especially immigrants and refugees.
In his February 10, 2025 letter to the U.S. Bishops, he states, with proper respect for national security motives:
“I have followed closely the major crisis that is taking place in the United States with the initiation of a program of mass deportations. The rightly formed conscience cannot fail to make a critical judgment and express its disagreement with any measure that tacitly or explicitly identifies the illegal status of some migrants with criminality. At the same time, one must recognize the right of a nation to defend itself and keep communities safe from those who have committed violent or serious crimes while in the country or prior to arrival. That said, the act of deporting people who in many cases have left their own land for reasons of extreme poverty, insecurity, exploitation, persecution or serious deterioration of the environment, damages the dignity of many men and women, and of entire families, and places them in a state of particular vulnerability and defenselessness.” (Letter of the Holy Father to the Bishops of the United States of America (10 February 2025) | Francis) (The entire letter is worth reading to understand Pope Francis’ reasoning.)
These are not the words of a man “with influence far beyond his wisdom.” The “wisdom” of anyone who de-values the dignity of any one human being isn’t worth attending to, ever. The “wisdom” of anyone who equates desperate “illegal” immigration with criminality isn’t worth attending to, ever. And if you, or any of this commentariat, thinks that Pope Francis was a communist (wrong term, I believe; socialist probably), then so was Jesus and all of Catholic social teaching (Seven Themes of Catholic Social Teaching | USCCB). I know that there are Christians, even other Catholics, who disagree with this, but I believe that they are the ones who have ignored or perverted the teachings that are clear in the Gospels (e,g., Matthew 25:31-46).
Of course, none of this will mean anything to anyone who has no spirituality (and I don’t mean just Catholic or just Christian), but to those who do, it should mean everything.
Comment of the Day! (But I remains convinced that the whole concept of a Pope is archaic and with as much legitimacy as the Oracle at Delphi, as well as being unalterably opposed to any position or institution that behaved as the Roman Catholic Church did during the Holocaust and the predator priest scandal, just to name the top two.
I was wondering the other day why flags seem to be flying at half-mast. Mrs. OB informed me it’s because the Pope has died. Whaaat? We’re going to fly flags at half-mast when heads of churches die? Will this include mullahs? The head of the Anglican church, you know the church that’s spent the last four or five centuries simply being anti-Papist? And anyway, Francis was little more than a really nasty, preachy Commie. An embarrassment to the church. But hey, he’s kept women out of the rectory, so all his fellow priests were fine with him. I just say, “Good riddance, Frank. Be gone.”
The Church, like any human institution (yes, I call it human), is not without MANY faults, JUST LIKE THE U.S. PRESIDENCY, but I digress. There is much that is not good that can be laid at the metaphorical feet of the Church, but Francis was a man, NOT an institution — a man who, while far from perfect (both some on the left and some on the right have decried his policies as not going far enough or going too far) deserved respect, if not admiration (and in my case, as with many worldwide, love)..
Just posted your Comment of the Day that makes that argument eloquently.
Rationalization: The Pope and the Church aren’t the worst things. Au contraire. I’d say when you look up “the worst thing” in the dictionary, the Church and its clergy are, in fact, the picture.
Tell that to all the little boys who were screwed up for life by the humans who aren’t the institution, although the institution did everything it could to protect the miscreant humans. Who, by the way, are doubtless still diddling little boys in the rectory and elsewhere. God can forgive these creeps, but I don’t have to.
God does, but I don’t,
God will, but I won’t,
And that’s the difference
between God and me.
–Lyle Lovett
Here is the problem: the Popes engage in the same trick Jon Stewart engages in, the “Clown nose on, Clown nose off” routine. (Except that it’s “Pope nose on, Pope nose off”) When Stewart says something unfair and untrue, it’s “Hey, I’m just a comic!” When he thinks he’s being profound, then it’s pundit time.
The Pope’s pronouncements carry world-wide weight, and most of the public doesn’t make the distinction between when he is speaking as a “fallible human being” and when he purports to be speaking for God. Thus he has a duty to be responsible and careful, which he was not: Francis was reckless and irresponsible, as well as political. He said, for example, that one culture is as valid as another, which is not just crap, but dangerous crap. He refused to accept the resignation of an official who was part of the child predator cover-up. And while lecturing the U.S. about its moral duty to have open borders, a completely insane position, he never gave any support to the conservative effort here to minimize abortions, because, to be blunt, he was allied with the Democrats (that is, socialists) , and didn’t have the integrity to call them out for their enthusiastic fetus killing (by not even acknowledging that abortion involves the ending of a human life, and not just a “choice.”)
Yecchh. Pooie. His tenure was a spectacular and unforgivable abuse of position and authority, and employing the rationalizations like “Nobody’s perfect” to excuse him is indefensible. The same could be said of Al Capone.
AKA Schrödinger’s Douchebag
PWS
Since Pope Francis was a man, and not an institution, then the statements he makes should be subject to questioning like any man, especially when directed to the world at large and not merely believing Catholics.
Also, I believe the leader of my own church is a prophet of God, but I would never, even in hyperbole, describe him as one who’s sandals most aren’t worthy to unloose.
Sorry for the hyperbole. And I would never assert that you can’t question his, or any pope’s or frankly anyone’s, statements.
Pope Francis, indeed I daresay all popes, upheld the dignity of each individual human, and that stance required the wisdom to speak in the defense of all marginalized people, especially immigrants and refugees.
Write something that tells me you have NO understanding of the history of the Papacy without actually saying those words.
Here’s a list of some of your illustrious popes, who you think upheld the dignity of each individual human:
Now, to be sure, I’m choosing some of the worst men to have ever held the office as my examples. But anyone who dares to assert that all popes have been concerned with the dignity of individual humans needs to square at least these, and likely more besides, with that assertation.
You are right, and as I’ve written elsewhere, I was triggered and emotional. The papacy is riddled with corruption and ungodly acts for which there is no excuse nor forgiveness. I stand rightly corrected. But as Moaning Myrtle cried out in Harry Potter, “I was distraught!” [read triggered] [Thanks a lot, Jack.]
I’m confused. Since when is a NYT writer concerned about showing respect to the Catholic church? For example, the church is not big on gays and certainly not big on trans-genderism. Shouldn’t the NYT be screaming at Trump for attending the funeral? Would AOC attend the funeral of a Pope? Not on a bet, unless she cynically wants to have her cake and eat it too by pandering to her Puerto Rican base despite being a standard issue hipster.
Biden Relegated To The Back Of World Leaders Section For Pope’s Funereal
Biden Relegated To The Back Of World Leaders Section For Pope’s Funereal
MONEY QUOTE: “No Longer Part Of The Cool Kids’ Club“
PWS