It didn’t take much time for the New York Times to begin an expected all-out attack on President-elect Donald Trump.
In an editorial that must have been written in the wee hours of the morning after Clinton conceded the election, the Times started to sling mud. “So who is the man who will be the 45th president?” The Times queried.
The paper felt it had an obligation to remind us that Trump has not released complete financials, as if this was a capital offense. There’s no constitutional or legal requirement to do so.
“Mr. Trump is the most unprepared president-elect in history.” Probably true. But is any president-elect truly prepared to become the commander-in-chief of the most powerful nation in the world? Obama wasn’t, that’s for sure.
“[Trump] is temperamentally unfit to lead a diverse nation of 320 million.” Fifty two million of these very same people cast their vote for Trump to do the job, a number greater than what Clinton received, it should be noted.
“[Trump] threatened to prosecute and jail his political opponents . . .” I thought he just threatened to sue his detractors for libel, a perfectly legal action.
“. . . he has said he would curtail freedom of the press.” Perhaps this is a slight exaggeration by the Times. Changing the rights of the press is a constitutional issue.
“He . . . intends to cut taxes for the wealthy . . .” The times neglected to mention that Trump wants to cut taxes for all Americans and businesses. “. . . and withdraw the health care protection of [ACA/Obamacare] from tens of millions of Americans.” Yeah. Trump wants to redo the law before it crashes and burns because of skyrocketing costs, higher premiums and worsening terms (like deductibles).
The editorial indicates that Trump will abrogate the Iran nuke arrangement. He should, it’s an abomination that gives our worst enemy a license to build nuclear weapons. To quote Trump, it’s really dumb deal. And he’s going to “do away with” NAFTA. Since it is effectively stealing jobs from America, this is an excellent idea.
Trump will “restore” a “right-wing majority” to the Supreme Court. Of course he will and should. Clinton would have replaced Scalia, a conservative, with a liberal judge. This would have “changed” (as opposed to restore) the balance that has existed in the court for many years. When the Democrats win the presidency and the Senate they could then tilt the court if vacancies arise.
Donald Trump won the election against all odds by recognizing that many Americans wanted to change the political establishment in Washington. He single-handedly saved the Republican majorities in the House and the Senate, per Paul Ryan. It was a gigantic victory.
Not only that, Trump won even though the Times and all the other left-wing newspapers and media outlets bombarded him on a daily basis. Maybe the system is just a little rigged.
Trump offered Americans a chance to reset the national agenda. The electorate wanted to give someone from outside the beltway a chance to improve America. The Democrats have failed miserably to improve the country economically, socially or diplomatically during the past eight years. Their terrible presidential candidate together with Obama’s failed presidency gave Trump an opportunity to capture the top job. If the Times or any liberals want to vent, they should direct their anger at Hillary Clinton and the current administration.
Clinton and Obama have asked Americans to unite behind the new president. The Times has chosen to conduct its own private war against a president that has not yet assumed control, ignoring a tradition in this country only minutes after he was declared the winner. This is not a good start to any effort to bring comity back to our government.