Skip to main content

My Open Letter to CNN Senior Political Analyst, David Gergen

I know I'm not alone in stating that I am thrilled the campaigns for the race for the White House have finally ended. Nevertheless, the aftermath of this recent election poses some troubling questions and concerns.

David Gergen

David Gergen

Dear Mr. Gergen;

I am writing this note as I have long held considerable respect for you as a political commentator.

When you participated in the CNN panel of commentators the other evening following the election, you asked if the media had been an enabler of sorts. I was impressed with this question, and the wisdom and humility behind it. The answer is a resounding, "Yes." To quote an unflattering phrase with regard to Donald Trump, "He played you (the media) like a tune," while the reality show shell-game played on. As Colin Powell wrote to CNN's Fareed Zakaria: "It is time to start ignoring him. You guys are playing his game, you are his oxygen. He outraged us again today with his comments on Paris no-go for police districts. I will watch and pick the timing, not respond to the latest outrage."

Throughout this disturbing campaign, I watched with alarm as the media gave relatively minimal attention to Mr. Trump's history of unprincipled/illegal behavior -- from the Mohawks casino scandal, to the federal fraud case surrounding Trump "University;" the subcontractor vendors he cheated; his divisive, disingenuous and alarmingly uniformed comments on the campaign trail; and more. Professional fact checkers did not refer to him as "the King of the Whoppers" out of some caprice.

Hillary Clinton's e-mail scandals were brought up, time and again, ad nauseum. Secretary Clinton is hardly a saint. Nevertheless, if the media wished to portray a fair and balanced view during this infamous race for the White House, one assumes they would have first considered if such an approach were at all feasible, given the ethical and professional histories/biographies of both candidates. For many months, the media chased Trump's tweets, continually, rather than do their homework, and research and report on the more important issues. By the way, I should note that of all the television news programs produced today, I find that CNN has one of the best.


I watched in dismay as journalists parlayed misinformation and disinformation to viewers and readers who believed what they wanted to believe in a world where op-eds and gossip from social media are considered fact. As I wrote in an article for Hubpages, "Television news is regularly compressed into 60-second bites of information, as if viewers had the attention span and IQ levels of a gnat. Drama-laden media sound bites are interpreted as knowledge. Reporting political scandals is often more significant than reporting facts."

The voters I know, personally, who voted for Trump did so on the basis of the single-issue voter, and are concerned with one the following:

  1. Scalia's Supreme Court replacement
  2. Lower taxes
  3. Deregulation of the financial services industry
  4. The ease of restrictions on the production of fossil fuels
  5. The repeal of Obamacare
  6. "I hate Hillary Clinton." Benghazi was often referenced, with statements such as, "She let Chris Stevens die."
  7. Relief that Pence will take the Oval Office after Trump is impeached. (I also believe that Mr. Trump eventually will be impeached.) Trump's way of life is about to change, dramatically. He won't be living in a gold fish bowl, per se, but some believe that he will be unable to curb the darker angels of his nature as he interacts with individuals, nearly 24/7, on a scale never before considered. They estimate the impeachment process to commence a year into his presidency.
  8. They wanted change. We should keep in mind that many voted for Barack Obama as an instrument of change back in 2008, and how Senator McCain cast himself as a maverick of the GOP political establishment during that campaign. (Voters haven't voted for a Presidential candidate from same party beyond two consecutive terms in over a century. Truman doesn't count. This is often referred to as the "two-term jinx.")

These are good, hard-working people, who do not research issues in order to familiarize themselves with domestic and world affairs. Nor do they do fully understand how global trade functions, the foundations of NATO or the complexities of the Middle East. Conversely, most of my friends who voted for Clinton, do. (I am often annoyed when I hear people describe Trump supporters as, "they're all stupid." Uniformed, perhaps, but not ignorant.)

Interestingly, not one of the Trump voters I referenced above felt "disenfranchised." Others do, however, and crave more opportunities. They're working two jobs or have seen their wages reduced and hours cut as business seeks to increase profits and/or appease stockholders. The perfect storm of deregulation/lack of oversight, repeal of Glass Steagall and rampant greed -- key factors which spawned the 2008 economic collapse of the financial services industry -- left an inedible sting on Wall Street and corporate America, while devastating the lives of many. Technology and global competition have also usurped workers in certain industries.


We are now witnessing something unprecedented since Richard Nixon and the Viet Nam War: Thousands are taking to the streets in cities across the US in anti-Trump protests. This time, however, their dissent centers on the man, himself -- not a vehemently contested war that polarized a nation. Trump supporters blame the Clinton campaign. True, the Secretary went too negative as well, but not nearly as divisive and fear-mongering as our new President-elect, Donald Trump. What did everyone expect? As David Axelrod also noted the other evening on CNN, "You reap what you sow."

Only 25.6% of eligible voters actually voted for Trump; the numbers are slightly higher for Clinton. That's not exactly a mandate. And despite those of us who want change, at the end of the proverbial day, it is the voter who selects members of "the swamp" we refer to as Congress -- either by our actions or inaction.

I'm an Independent voter who has learned one undeniable fact: America isn't easy, and can be unforgiving if we don't do our homework. In retrospect, perhaps it is time for the media to rethink a few things. I certainly hope so. In the interim, all we can do as a nation is hope for -- and work toward -- the best of who we are.


Genna Eastman

Boston, Massachusetts

Scroll to Continue

© 2016 Genna East


Genna East on December 02, 2017:

Thank you, Shyron. 2018 is almost upon us, and I think voters are about to send a surprising message to a number of candidates. Good to see you.

Shyron E Shenko from Texas on November 29, 2017:

Dear Genna, this is a fascinating open letter and so true. You did a fantastic job on the research and I can only hope that everyone reads this and remembers it When it is time to vote in 2018.

I don't believe that any party should have total control i.e. all three branches of government.

How did I miss this?

Blessings always

Genna East (author) from Massachusetts, USA on March 20, 2017:

Kathleen, I only hope that I was able to maintain some patience. There were a few times when I had to bite my tongue, so to speak. I appreciate your kind, perceptive words. And I agree that David Gergen is a reasonable, insightful, sane and calm voice in the midst of unreasonable, chaotic and crazy times. We need more voices like his.

Kathleen Cochran from Atlanta, Georgia on March 20, 2017:

How has it taken me so long to find your writing? This is an interesting open letter to a commentator I also admire for his reputation for reasonable insight.

I'm also impressed and encouraged by the level of discussion you generated and how long it lasted before a few of the HP trolls got wind of it. You are more patient with this element than I've been.

Must read more of your work.

Genna East (author) from Massachusetts, USA on March 11, 2017:

Hi Gilbert. I couldn't agree more. Thank you for your thoughtful comment.

Gilbert Arevalo from Hacienda Heights, California on March 10, 2017:

You write a strong argument for your side, Genna. You pointed out relevant issues our 3 branches of government have their hands tied with. Indeed, we face a political climate like we've never seen. I should try to be the best I can be. There are frustrating situations we have no control of whatsoever. Positive action starts from each one of us. We must try to get along with each other the best we can. Each issue you posted can take up pages and pages of discussion.

mckbirdbks from Emerald Wells, Just off the crossroads,Texas on February 26, 2017:

Hello Genna - You certainly did your research. Sad to say, but in my opinion Comey implicated himself in whatever we are calling this episode of American history and scandal. There is plenty of information that ties Mannafort to the Russians.

There is a photo of Flynn at some event, sitting at a table with Putin. Russia won this American election. Tillerson received some kind of hero medal from the Russian government.

This whole thing is lose, lose for Americans. We all got played.

Genna East (author) from Massachusetts, USA on February 26, 2017:

Now the WH is upset with the FBI for not releasing a statement re the NYT story that was also reported by CNN. Of course they can't. Let's examine the facts:

The NYT story came from intelligence sources. "Phone records and intercepted calls showed that Trump associates and campaign aides had repeated contact with the Russians." I'm guessing part of this story might have been exaggerated in terms of the inference of the word, "constant," as opposed to "repeated." Nevertheless, the story came from the intelligence community. Sources are sources, and one can't shoot the NYT as the messenger for reporting what in-the-know sources had advised.

Regarding McCabe's out-of-the-blue and unsolicited comment to Preibus following a meeting at the WH that the NYT story was BS: What part of it is BS? Preibus said the reporting is "overstated," then, "complete garbage." Which is it?

On the flip side, the FBI is investigating contacts between members of the Trump campaign and the Russians. We already know about Flynn. Comey's response to the WH request in that they cannot comment on every story is also a kind of BS, but from a common sense perspective. They can't just state, "The story is false." They could hardly frame the statement in a way that would represent classified investigations into the issue as entirely false when, in fact, they aren't. Nor can they confirm to the public what part of the story is true. For example, once again, the word "repeated" versus "constant," or "repeated" in terms of more than one contact or with more than one individual. And might such a statement be met with an interpretation that Intel sources who leak to the press can't be trusted -- including the FBI? If I were Comey, I wouldn't have touched the WH's request with a ten-foot pole.

The WH can argue semantics until the proverbial cows return this instance, they are essential to understanding what actually happened. Mr. Trump's obsession with the Moscow hacking and election results; his affinity for doing business with Russia and Russian financiers; Flynn's involvement; Mannafort, etc., only thicken the smoke. So does the President's own brand of BS:

1. During one of the 2016 Presidential debates: "I don't know Putin. I have no idea... I never met Putin. This is not my best friend. I have nothing to do with Putin. I've never spoken to him. I don't know anything about him other than he will respect me."

2. During a 2013 Interview with MSNBC when asked if he had a relationship with Mr. Putin: "I do have a relationship, and I can tell you that he's very interested in what we're doing here today. "

3. During his 2015 Interview with conservative radio host Michael Savage when asked if he ever met Putin: “Yes," he answered emphatically. "A long time ago. We got along great, by the way.”

4. During a 2015 National Press Club speech: Trump stated that while he was in Moscow for the Miss Universe contest: “I spoke, indirectly and directly, with President Putin, who could not have been nicer.”

I think it would help all parties involved if the POTUS acted far more like a statesman, and didn't lie so frequently and blatantly.

mckbirdbks from Emerald Wells, Just off the crossroads,Texas on February 24, 2017:

Hi Genna - Perhaps the media should focus their attention on the goings on in Congress and the Senate and other area of political misgivings. Perhaps a blackout of all the WH mouthpieces is in order. A radio silence if you will. While still following all they do and all they say, just never mentioning them by name.

Did you see the crowd at CPAC waving Russian flags? That is where we are. Republicans waving Russian flags.

Genna East (author) from Massachusetts, USA on February 24, 2017:

And here we go...

"White House blocks CNN, New York Times from press briefing hours after Trump slams media..."

"The Wall Street Journal, which did participate in the briefing, said in a statement that it was unaware of the exclusions and "had we known at the time, we would not have participated, and we will not participate in such closed briefings in the future."

Genna East (author) from Massachusetts, USA on February 24, 2017:

Mike: Absolutely!

mckbirdbks from Emerald Wells, Just off the crossroads,Texas on February 24, 2017:

Deconstruction of the United States government, weakens our standing in the world. As deconstruction progresses, our enemies become stronger and will begin to test our weaknesses. Loosely conjoined States do not comprise a nation. America has adopted many ideas from other Western nations of the world and that has brought us progress. It is progress that lifted all of us. There is no rolling back time to some feudal system long discarded.

Why would any American call for a New World Order, when America is on top of the world right now?

Genna East (author) from Massachusetts, USA on February 24, 2017:

Patty: I couldn't agree more. What he did was horrible. Smearing Native Americans was his way of trying to stay competitive when competition threatened his casino interests in Atlantic City. The attack ads he sponsored, lying about how he financed them, and how they were not from "donors" was uncovered. He had to pay huge fine plus make a public apology, which I'm sure didn't sit well with him. I still can't get my mind around how anyone could put this man into the Oval Office -- he's one of the most unethical businessmen that ever drew breath.

Patty Inglish MS from USA and Asgardia, the First Space Nation on February 23, 2017:

Although my ancestors don't belong to the St. Regis Mohawks, but another band, the Trump attempt to discredit St. Regis M's and put them out of business with his own casino is outrageous. For decades, his ilk and henchmen have been physically forcing the St. Regis M's across the NY-Canada border within their own reservation to live in Canada. Trump want to eliminate at least the Mohawk from USA and two out of three of their bands are denied federal recognition.

Even Mohawks on the NY State Police force fought St. Regis Mohawks in the 1990s, running them across the border.

I am disgusted. No, I am angry again.

mckbirdbks from Emerald Wells, Just off the crossroads,Texas on February 23, 2017:

Hello Genna - There are boatloads of 'could of's' and 'would of's' to ponder. America has come to a crossroads. There is way to much going on behind the scenes to feel comfortable. The disparaging remarks about the press, about the intelligence agencies and to our allies around the world are sending a clear signal. An environment of distrust, and dislike has split us as a nation. Family members are split apart. Does any of this sound familiar in an historic perspective?

Oops, I see I am rambling again.

Genna East (author) from Massachusetts, USA on February 23, 2017:

Mckbirdbks: Thank you, Mike.

I keep coming back to what Nellieanna wrote in her thoughtful comments. That it is the man, himself we should be concerned about; "who he is as he constantly revealed himself to be." She's right. Would it have made any difference had the media given more attention to Trump's history of breaking the law, lying to and cheating people, and bullying and attacking others, as opposed to playing into his game? I shudder to think that it wouldn't have made any difference at all. The same way I shudder to think there is some truth to what he said on the campaign trail: "I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose any voters."

Genna East (author) from Massachusetts, USA on February 22, 2017:


You stated in your original comment, "Please tell me who you think is the worst, I want to watch them." I began my responding comment by stating, "First of all," as simply a way of beginning a lengthy comment with several points involved. The first point addressed that statement. It had nothing to do with "putting words" in your mouth.

By the way, authors responding to comments others have posted to their articles has been a long-standing prerogative with HP for years.

Regarding the link you supplied to a CNN dispute, you ignored many controversies associated with other networks, altogether. I merely addressed one in my comment as an example.

And I'd be careful with using ratings as some kind of barometer in judging the viewing choices of others. That's rather like saying if people preferred to watch Sundance's "Rectify" over AMC's "The Walking Dead" -- one of the highest rated dramas on television -- they shouldn't be taken seriously.

In any event, thank you for commenting. It's been fun. Take care. :-)

mckbirdbks from Emerald Wells, Just off the crossroads,Texas on February 21, 2017:

Hi Genna - You have the traits of a statesmen (is there a term, stateswoman?) You treat all who have arrived here in the comment stream, as would a cultured host. I applaud that.

Genna East (author) from Massachusetts, USA on February 21, 2017:

Hi Mike. It's more "cherry picking" through the facts than actual fact checking. Rudeness is something I've come to expect from certain people, Mike. All we can do is to explain/respond as politely as we can. If we try to correct anyone, the rudeness often only accelerates.

mckbirdbks from Emerald Wells, Just off the crossroads,Texas on February 21, 2017:

Hello Genna - Well, HP certainly put this article in the right, little box, i.e., Soapbox. Nice to see all the helpful 'fact checkers' gathering here. I suspect it keeps them occupied.

Banned cause of PISSANTS Promisem and Dean Traylor on February 21, 2017:

"First of all, I never stated that CNN is the only network I watch."


First of all no one, at least not I, said you did... so why do you start your reply to my comment with that?

It's very clear what you said as I quoted it verbatim. Nice try at putting words in my mouth.

The links I posted need no reply from you, they simply demonstrate how little stock anyone should put in your opinion.

Genna East (author) from Massachusetts, USA on February 21, 2017:

Hi TazMe:

First of all, I never stated that CNN is the only network I watch. As I wrote in an earlier comment, I watch CNN, PBS (I especially like Frontline), BBC, and read print news from various sources, time permitting. On occasion, I will tune in "Morning Joe" on MSNBC, or peek in on other programs to compare reporting. I also like CSPAN. I rarely miss CNN's Sunday morning lineup; if I can't watch it during Sunday, I will view the installment from On Demand. Plus, I like the fact that they bring in different and/or opposing viewpoints to their evening panels. And as I stated in the article, David Gergen is an analyst I have long respected.

Regarding your link on the CNN/Carbone lawsuit. I can't comment on this as I haven't read the decision, nor the arguments or merits of the case. LawNews presented a less sensationalized report on it in that CNN may have acted with “actual malice” with the report — a standard necessary to prove a defamation claim. I am a bit intrigued that CNN chose not to settle the suit out of court, which is often the case. (No pun intended.) As you probably know, Fox paid out over twenty million in settlement dollars to three women over allegations of sexual harassment with former Chairman and CEO, Roger Ailes, which is why he left Fox. I understand that Fox also paid a figure in the high six figures to Ms. Huddy in exchange for her silence and promise not to bring suit against Bill O'Reilly. It's incredibly naive for any of us to assume there will never be any controversies associated with a network.

As far as your link to ratings is concerned, I don't pay any attention to them, or the drama, dummying down, and framing manipulation I've already mentioned in an above comment that certain networks employ to draw people in. I've even tuned out CNN a couple of times when they were still discussing the same issue I thought was overkill; to be fair, they were spending a lot of time getting other viewpoints for people tuning in at different times during the evening.

Having said this, will I still be watching CNN six months from now? Who knows? But I wouldn't worry about you wanting to watch "the worst." :-)

mckbirdbks from Emerald Wells, Just off the crossroads,Texas on February 21, 2017:

Hello Genna - John McCain does seem to have a mind/voice of his own. That does not appear true of many in the House and Senate. My prediction is that the Republican wall of shoulder-to-shoulder soldiers in those bodies fall all at once, when 'something' finally does stick to the leader of the billionaire club.

Genna East (author) from Massachusetts, USA on February 21, 2017:

Hi Mike. I made a typo in my previous comment. It's Acosta -- not De Costa. My apologies.

Who knows where this tangled web will lead? Good grief!

By the way, John McCain is also concerned about the toxic triad of Trump/Bannon/Miller. Although I disagree with the Senator on certain issues, I still respect him, and give him credit for having the integrity and moral toughness to stand up to Trump, on the record. He is a patriot who made a mistake in his improperly vetted choice of Sarah Palin for VP. The irony is that this opened the door to uninformed populism, which also concerned McCain. Remember what Trump said about him before? “He’s not a war hero. He’s a war hero because he was captured. I like people who weren’t captured.” John McCain will always be a hero and more of a man than Donald Trump could ever hope to be.

mckbirdbks from Emerald Wells, Just off the crossroads,Texas on February 20, 2017:

Hello Genna - We have Mike Pence in Brussels contradicting what the president said, and former general Mattis in Iraq saying we are not there to steal their oil. So more lines are being drawn.

I don't have details, but I heard today that the head of the Right Wing in German visited Putin in Russia recently. That raised questions, with me, as to just how far reaching the Russian President has his tentacles in the manipulation of democratic processes.

Bannon is a self proclaimed Leninist, which speaks for itself. It does not get much clearer than that.

And the beat goes on.

Oh, and Mannafort (sp) is in the news for being in the 'bribe journals' of the former president of the Ukraine. So, we have walked into the spider web.

Banned cause of PISSANTS Promisem and Dean Traylor on February 20, 2017:

"By the way, I should note that of all the television news programs produced today, I find that CNN has one of the best."

Well you said it Genna, this is what you think is best:

Please tell me who you think is the worst, I want to watch them.

Genna East (author) from Massachusetts, USA on February 20, 2017:

Mike, I meant to add before I was called away from my computer:

You've brought up some interesting points, Mike. The Bannon-Trump pairing is deeply troubling -- and Trump's bizarre rhetoric and actions feed this concern. Even Fox News has been pretty tough on Trump and taken him to task on more than one occasion. For example, after Trump's incredulous, spur of the moment press conference last week, Shepard Smith defended CNN's De Costa over the issue of Russia issue and the "fake news" nuttiness: "It's crazy what we're watching every day. He keeps repeating ridiculous, throw-away lines." Chris Wallace stated that Trump had crossed the line with his comment about how the media is the enemy of the American people. Meanwhile, we have people like Mattis (for whom I have considerable respect), running around doing damage control because the Campaigner in Chief too often sounds like a schizophrenic con regarding foreign affairs. You can't make this stuff, up, Mike.

Genna East (author) from Massachusetts, USA on February 20, 2017:

Mckbirdbks: Hi Mike. You didn't muddy it up at all. I'm always pleased to see your comments...any time.

mckbirdbks from Emerald Wells, Just off the crossroads,Texas on February 20, 2017:

Hello Genna - I did not mean to muddy up your comment stream.

Jack Lee from Yorktown NY on February 20, 2017:

Mcbird, no need. I wrote a hub on it.

Genna East (author) from Massachusetts, USA on February 20, 2017:

Mckbirdbks: Hi Mike. Please, feel free to chime in anytime you wish. You're always welcome. I see you're brought up some very interesting points to consider. :-)

mckbirdbks from Emerald Wells, Just off the crossroads,Texas on February 20, 2017:

J.L. The Constitution is as only as good as the people who are sworn to protect it.

Since you suggest a lesson in civics, I offer one in English.

Condescending: having or showing a feeling of patronizing superiority

Jack Lee from Yorktown NY on February 20, 2017:

Mckbird, your fears are unfounded. Our Constitution is robust and the 2nd Amendment is there to preserve our freedom.

You may need some refresher couse in civics.

mckbirdbks from Emerald Wells, Just off the crossroads,Texas on February 20, 2017:

J.L. it is called freedom of speech. I guess I will enjoy it while it is still available. Class dismissed.

Jack Lee from Yorktown NY on February 20, 2017:

What do you mean you are not buying it?

You already bought into the lies and distortions...

I tried to point out the obvious and you dismiss it. You are entitled to your opinion, but you are not entitled to distorting facts. You and I might not like Trump te person but that does not give you the right to smear him for political gains.

mckbirdbks from Emerald Wells, Just off the crossroads,Texas on February 20, 2017:

J.L. nice try, but no cigar. I am not required to know anything about a man, not running for top office of the country. I am listening now. Rhetoric coming from D.C., right now, parallel those used by another regime.

Jack Lee from Yorktown NY on February 20, 2017:


Where do you draw the parallel between the Nazi party and Trump?

This is TDS gone overboard...

Before 2015, with all that you know about Donald Trump, before he ran for President? I am going to ask you a simple question?

Pay attention...

Was there any sign of him being a racist, a sexist, a masoginist or a nazi tendencies...?

He was a businessman for 40 years and a hollywood celebrity with a top rated tv show...

Can you square these two views of the same man?

If not, you are being lied to and deceived by the very people you trust to get your news.

mckbirdbks from Emerald Wells, Just off the crossroads,Texas on February 20, 2017:

What follows is the manifesto of the Nazi party. See for yourself the similarity in speech and pattern of what we are hearing today by the person elected president and his henchmen. This is what the people are upset about. A rhetoric of hate has prevailed throughout the campaign and now with the new administration. A hybrid government produced from and infected with corporate greed and nationalism is bound to lead us into darkness. All distractions aside, all complexities ignored, we are walking down the wrong path.

Sorry Genna, for jumping into your comment stream – but in my opinion, you don’t address the failures of government by destroying a country.

The Program of the German Workers’ Party is a program for our time.

The leadership rejects the establishment of new aims after those set out in the Program have been achieved, for the sole purpose of making it possible for the Party to continue to exist as the result of the artificially stimulated dissatisfaction of the masses.

1. We demand the uniting of all Germans within one Greater Germany, on the basis of the right to self-determination of nations.

2. We demand equal rights for the German people (Volk) with respect to other nations, and the annulment of the peace treaty of Versailles and St. Germain.

3. We demand land and soil (Colonies) to feed our People and settle our excess population.

4. Only Nationals (Volksgenossen) can be Citizens of the State. Only persons of German blood can be Nationals, regardless of religious affiliation. No Jew can therefore be a German National.

5. Any person who is not a Citizen will be able to live in Germany only as a guest and must be subject to legislation for Aliens.

6. Only a Citizen is entitled to decide the leadership and laws of the State. We therefore demand that only Citizens may hold public office, regardless of whether it is a national, state or local office.

We oppose the corrupting parliamentary custom of making party considerations, and not character and ability, the criterion for appointments to official positions.

7. We demand that the State make it its duty to provide opportunities of employment first of all for its own Citizens. If it is not possible to maintain the entire population of the State, then foreign nationals (non-Citizens) are to be expelled from the Reich.

8. Any further immigration of non-Germans is to be prevented. We demand that all non-Germans who entered Germany after August 2, 1914, be forced to leave the Reich without delay.

9. All German Citizens must have equal rights and duties.

10. It must be the first duty of every Citizen to carry out intellectual or physical work. Individual activity must not be harmful to the public interest and must be pursued within the framework of the community and for the general good.

We therefore demand:

11. The abolition of all income obtained without labor or effort.

Breaking the Servitude of Interest.

12. In view of the tremendous sacrifices in property and blood demanded of the nation by every war, personal gain from the war must be termed a crime against the nation. We therefore demand the total confiscation of all war profits.

13. We demand the nationalization of all enterprises (already) converted into corporations (trusts).

14. We demand profit-sharing in large enterprises.

15. We demand the large-scale development of old-age pension schemes.

16. We demand the creation and maintenance of a sound middle class; the immediate communalization of the large department stores, which are to be leased at low rates to small tradesmen. We demand the most careful consideration for the owners of small businesses in orders placed by national, state, or community authorities.

17. We demand land reform in accordance with our national needs and a law for expropriation without compensation of land for public purposes. Abolition of ground rent and prevention of all speculation in land.

18. We demand ruthless battle against those who harm the common good by their activities. Persons committing base crimes against the People, usurers, profiteers, etc., are to be punished by death without regard to religion or race.

19. We demand the replacement of Roman Law, which serves a materialistic World Order, by German Law.

20. In order to make higher education – and thereby entry into leading positions – available to every able and industrious German, the State must provide a thorough restructuring of our entire public educational system. The courses of study at all educational institutions are to be adjusted to meet the requirements of practical life. Understanding of the concept of the State must be achieved through the schools (teaching of civics) at the earliest age at which it can be grasped. We demand the education at the public expense of specially gifted children of poor parents, without regard to the latters’ position or occupation.

21. The State must raise the level of national health by means of mother-and-child care, the banning of juvenile labor, achievements of physical fitness through legislation for compulsory gymnastics and sports, and maximum support for all organizations providing physical training for young people.

22. We demand the abolition of hireling troops and the creation of a national army.

23. We demand laws to fight against deliberate political lies and their dissemination by the press. In order to make it possible to create a German press, we demand:

a) all editors and editorial employees of newspapers appearing in the German language must be German by race;

b) non-German newspapers require express permission from the State for their publication. They may not be printed in the German language;

c) any financial participation in a German newspaper or influence on such a paper is to be forbidden by law to non-Germans and the penalty for any breach of this law will be the closing of the newspaper in question, as well as the immediate expulsion from the Reich of the non-Germans involved.

Newspapers which violate the public interest are to be banned. We demand laws against trends in art and literature which have a destructive effect on our national life, and the suppression of performances that offend against the above requirements.

24. We demand freedom for all religious denominations, provided that they do not endanger the existence of the State or offend the concepts of decency and morality of the Germanic race.

The Party as such stands for positive Christianity, without associating itself with any particular denomination. It fights against the Jewish-materialistic spirit within and around us, and is convinced that a permanent revival of our nation can be achieved only from within, on the basis of: Public Interest before Private Interest.

25. To carry out all the above we demand: the creation of a strong central authority in the Reich. Unquestioned authority by the political central Parliament over the entire Reich and over its organizations in general. The establishment of trade and professional organizations to enforce the Reich basic laws in the individual states.

The Party leadership promises to take an uncompromising stand, at the cost of their own lives if need be, on the enforcement of the above points.

Munich, Germany

February 24, 1920.

Jack Lee from Yorktown NY on February 20, 2017:

Thanks for honest debate. You have a great day!

Genna East (author) from Massachusetts, USA on February 20, 2017:

Jack, that simply isn't true. CNN has panel guests that debate both sides of the issue, constantly. I disagree with you on your other points as well. In any event, here ends the discussion. Have a good week.

Jack Lee from Yorktown NY on February 20, 2017:

I like Fox news and fox business... The reason they are not considered main street media even though they get quite a following in rating numbers, is they are the exception compared to the other channels. They are leaning convervative while most others are liberal. One more difference, fox has guests who debate both side of the issue, where as msnbc and others will only have guests that agree with the host. You seem to equate the left with the right as extreme and the middle is what you sit. I see it differently. You have a few on the right such as talk radio, fox news, OAN, breitbart... but you have all the rest on the left and far left... there are very few news organizations that sits in the middle. That is the problem.

Genna East (author) from Massachusetts, USA on February 20, 2017:

No, it wasn't obvious." You recently stated in a forum, "The media is dead." I noticed you left several outlets off of your list in your above comment, such as The Wall Street Journal, one of the publications I happen to read.

Fox News is part of mainstream media, despite their assertions to the contrary. Cable news is MSM -- regardless of the fact that its definition is bantered about like a Frisbee -- as they reach large-scale markets. Radio stations are more local. Nevertheless, Fox is known for their more conservative views, while MSNBC is known for their more liberal views. Whether one agrees or not, both have been accused of what is often referred to as "framing" as it relates to media bias and persuading viewers to support opposite ends of the spectrum.

I should also note that Fox quotes The Washington Post (among other outlets) in running reputable news stories, which they should do when first learning about the item from another outlet. Actually, Fox, CNN and MSNBC all quote each other, refer to interviews conducted by the other, etc. -- some in a reputable light, others not.

Jack Lee from Yorktown NY on February 19, 2017:

It should be obvious the media I was reffering to is the Main Street Media, namely, NYT, Washington Post, NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN... and Time magazine and others.

We can debate the broken government in another hub...

But do you deny our government is in dire straights?

Genna East (author) from Massachusetts, USA on February 19, 2017:

Jack: I noticed that the media sources you recommend on one of your hubs to be quite interesting:

"Here is my Recommended Sources...

for TV news:

Fox News - The O'Reilly Factor.

OAN - One America News channel.

for radio:

Rush Limbaugh show

Mark Levin show

for the WEB:"

Out of curiosity, are these outlets part of the media you recently claimed are "dead"? I found it interesting that you incorrectly assumed that I watch only CNN, and am thereby "biased." But I'm an Independent, which I think explains quite a bit. I've already listed the media sources I utilize in comments, above, and see no need to repeat them. I don't ascribe to extremism from either side of the aisle, or the "us versus them" certain outlets deliberately employ to garner ratings and profits, the truth be damned -- and that includes the ones you listed above. Thoughtful, fact-based reporting on issues and individuals concern me, and I base my viewing accordingly.

Nor do I wish to enter into an argument about the state of government. That isn't the purpose of this hub. Enjoy your Sunday, Jack. :-)

Genna East (author) from Massachusetts, USA on February 19, 2017:

Hi Jack. I had to quickly revise my previous comment: No, I did not "dismiss them as uneducated." Being uninformed on certain key issues is not the same thing as being "uneducated." And if you read through the hub and the comments, you will also note that I do not watch only CNN. This hub was directed to David Gergen, who is a senior political analyst for CNN. I'm afraid you misinterpreted the hub, entirely, but I welcome your comments. Actually, they brought a smile. And by the way, it is the voters that decide who occupies the very government you claim is "broken."

Jack Lee from Yorktown NY on February 19, 2017:

Your condescension of the American voter is glaring. While I agree with some of the points regarding why people voted for Trump, you seems to dismiss them as uneducated...

The problem is not the voters but the government. They have over stepped their Consitutional powers and gone against the wishes of the America people. This is the case will illegal immigration and with foreign policy...

The system is broken and that is why the people voted for an outsider who is not political in nature and in fact attacked both democrats and republicans in Congress.

The fact you rely on CNN for most of your news, demonstrate your own bias.

Genna East (author) from Massachusetts, USA on December 05, 2016:

Hi Cyndi...thank you for commenting. I couldn't agree more. And I also agree with Nellieanna that it is the man, the candidate, the person, voters should focus on, and not the media. Unfortunately, there are those who watch news snippets and listen to the opinions of analysts in order to form their own. Preconceptions can distort the truth, leading to bias. Have a good week. :-)

Genna East (author) from Massachusetts, USA on December 05, 2016:

Dear Martie...

I posted this response to your comment days ago, but it somehow disappeared. My apologies:

Hi Martie. Nice to see you; I appreciate your comment. You've posed a theory that others agree with. Jacob Zuma's history of alleged profiteering and corruption, his political maneuverings for private interests, are not that dissimilar to Trump's past actions. I wonder how many of us cry, "Country first!"? Then again, there are voters who declare that voting for someone for a personal gain will somehow represent a gain for the country.

Some time ago, Bill Holland (billybuc) wrote in one of this hubs that a kind of insanity can take hold of people regarding politics/election seasons. No truer words were ever written. When this happens, an emotional gut feeling or reaction displaces reason and morphs into a kind of prejudice. These prejudices run deep. Things have become so divisive. We can agree to respectfully disagree without screaming at each other, turning a cold shoulder to family and friendship, or worse. I know someone who cancelled Thanksgiving dinner because she voted Republican (I have friends who voted for Trump and Clinton), and most of her family voted for Clinton. And therein lies the insanity.

Cynthia B Turner from Georgia on December 05, 2016:

Excellently written. DT did play the media and they fell for it. I never understood why the media zeroed in on some of the trivial subjects and overlooked or payed minimal attention to some of the more important issues. All the while DT is touting "media bias!" I'm not a political writer although I like politics (unlike a lot of people) and work hard to get people to understand why they should pay attention to the political process and when there are candidates I want to see elected. On the other hand I understand, or think I do, some of the psychology of those who voted for him. From some of the comments here, it appears others do, too. I do think that many voters don't connect the dots when looking at who to vote for. Listening to media snippets and candidate soundbites is not enough.

Thank you for your thought provoking article. Take care.

Genna on November 27, 2016:

Hi Martie. Nice to see you; I appreciate your comment. You've posed a theory that others agree with. Jacob Zuma's history of alleged profiteering and corruption, his political maneuverings for private interests, are not that dissimilar to Trump's past actions. I wonder how many of us cry, "Country first!"? Then again, there are voters who declare that voting for someone for a personal gain will somehow represent a gain for the country.

Some time ago, Bill Holland (billybuc) wrote in one of this hubs that a kind of insanity can take hold of people regarding politics/election seasons. No truer words were ever written. When this happens, an emotional gut feeling or reaction displaces reason and morphs into a kind of prejudice. These prejudices run deep. Things have become so divisive. We can agree to respectfully disagree without screaming at each other, turning a cold shoulder to family and friendship, or worse. I know someone who cancelled Thanksgiving dinner because she voted Republican (I have friends who voted for Trump and Clinton), and most of her family voted for Clinton. And therein lies the insanity.

I hope I'm wrong about President-elect Trump. I truly do. I'll be the first person to do a mea culpa if I am. But so far, he's done exactly what I thought he would do, with no surprises. All we can do is wait and see what happens.

MartieCoetser on November 24, 2016:

Genna, in this open letter to David Gergen you have raised some importent matters, among other the power of the media. I don't think the majority people in the USA are uniformed or ignorant, as is the case in South Africa. They rather nurture a self-centered and selfish perception of reality, and Donald Trump managed to assure them that he will realize all their selfish wishes. Thanks for sharing your thoughts :)

Genna East (author) from Massachusetts, USA on November 15, 2016:

I forgot to add in my above comment that it isn't a secret in certain circles that Julian Assange of WikiLeaks hates Hillary Clinton and wants to destroy her. (David Gergen affirmed this on CNN.) What would have happened had those "leaks," with the alleged help of Putin, centered on Donald Trump; his e-mails, campaign communications; tax returns? The election results would have been quite different.

Genna East (author) from Massachusetts, USA on November 14, 2016:

Dear Nellieanna...

Sorry I'm late but it's been a long day. Again, I agree with your comments.

We do not have to base our opinions on the those of pundits, etc. But it is alarming to learn how many people actually do. I forgot to note in the article above, another story that was barely a blip on the news: Tony Schwartz and his lengthy association with Donald Trump. Mr. Schwartz actually wrote the entire book, "The Art of the Deal" and confessed that it was really a work of fiction. In retrospect, he said that if he had to write it again, the book would be titled “The Sociopath.”

CNN is one of my preferred networks. (And I have a lot of respect for David Gergen.) On more than one occasion, when I would watch McEnany, Conway or Lord defend Donald Trump, I had turn the sound off. Their Stepford-like argument in support of their candidate whenever he would humiliate himself - either on video or via his bizarre Tweets -- was altogether predictable (he's misunderstood; he was being sarcastic; he meant something else entirely); then pivot to Clinton in attack mode. They were as predictable as homing pigeons. The media is "crooked," CNN is "disgusting" and the New York times "is going to hell," was Trump's martyred cry. To be fair, Hillary's one statement about "deplorables" was deplorable. Good heavens -- what was she thinking? (To her credit, she apologized.) Trump surrogates had a field day with that one -- and of course, the e-mails.

The choice of Bannon is disconcerting but unsurprising for Trump, given the work on his campaign that helped propel him to the White House. Perhaps Donald hopes that Priebus will act as some kind of fire wall between Bannon and civilized world. :-)

Happy Thanksgiving. Is it really next week?

Genna East (author) from Massachusetts, USA on November 14, 2016:

Paula: Thank you and a Happy Thanksgiving to you as well.

Nellieanna Hay from TEXAS on November 13, 2016:

Genna, dearest - Thank you for your gracious, very informed and informational reply.

It IS the person himself concerning me, - not the ‘free press’ - media! They tend to balance out. He’s the concern & he keeps unfolding.

As I said, I did not watch a variety of news media, somewhat not wanting to miss actual addresses or statements by the candidates on another channel while I might be tuned in somewhere else. As you agree, it’s good to really hear the candidates themselves, to form one’s judgements mostly based on that, though other reporting also contributes regarding other facts, countries and people who become involved, which would not be gleaned from the candidates’ own words themselves.

So I literally watched CNN almost all day and into nights all through this entire odyssey from shortly before the primaries. CNN’s intention seems to leave nothing uncovered during their full all-day schedules. They have a vast number of individual reporters and commentaries all during those hours, who are far from rubber stamps, so give dimension to reporting. There were representatives of both candidates and their surrogates seated in quite lively discussion panels and representative interviews, as well as knowledgeable people not part of the ‘sides’, and other people not directly involved in the sides, all contributing.

So hopefully, it was fairly well-balanced. In any case, my objective was to not miss timing-dependent opportunities to witness it while it was in progress, as would never happen again for this specific event. I am not a dedicated political enthusiast, but this held great importance to me personally. From as soon as I knew Trump’s intention to run for President of my U.S., I was intensely involved. Perhaps my life’s exposure to many world-wide political developments which had beginnings has honed my sensitivity to some of the ‘red flags’. As it was, my earliest predictions for if he won were quite serious and continued to be bolstered and supported by many of his own pronouncements and self-evident intentions. But, from the start I’ve said that I hope I’m wrong, though he & his surrogates are good at re-shaping his pronouncements to mean otherwise, which is hardly reassuring to me!

Any favoring of Clinton seemed to correspond with Trump’s more and more aggressive stances, which his surrogates were so eager to defend and proclaim while heartily attacking his opponent in the discussion panels. Even so, the correspondents also defended him from Clinton sides when they were equally as adamant. Accusations that the media were all against him was not so in my observations.

His appointments today for his Presidential cabinet are not too assuring, especially his appointed Strategy Manager, Steve Bannon, nor are some other linings-up begun and developed during the campaign. We shall see.

Suzie from Carson City on November 13, 2016:

Genna.....If there has been a time that life hasn't been crazy.....I obviously slept through it! Peace! and have a nice Thanksgiving!

Genna East (author) from Massachusetts, USA on November 13, 2016:


Hello Paula....

What a nice comment, thank you. I think other hubbers are more adept at writing political content than I. I try to stay way from it whenever possible, but this proved to be a little difficult during the recent presidential campaign.

I wonder if Trump's ego would allow him to accept the fact that certain voters voted for him only to keep Hillary out of office. Actually, a number of people voted for Hillary, solely to keep Trump as far away from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue as possible.

Sigh...we live in crazy times. In retrospect, I wonder if this hasn't always been the case. Has there ever been a time when this wasn't true?

Peace, and happy Sunday. :-)

Genna East (author) from Massachusetts, USA on November 13, 2016:

Suhail and my dog:

Hello Suhail. Thank you. How's the weather in your part of Ontario? We are bracing for a bitter cold winter here, in New England.

I think a Sanders choice might have carried some impact with undecided voters and those who voted for Trump solely because they were angry at the system. But I don't know about the Rust Belt and other states. It's difficult to second guess this election that proved to be unpredictable based on pollster and analyst predictions. You are probably closer to the truth than they were.

Thanks for your visit and comments.

Genna East (author) from Massachusetts, USA on November 13, 2016:

Sanxuary: I couldn't help but smile over your tongue-in-cheek humor that is regrettably based on some uncomfortable -- and unflattering -- truths. I can only add this: A friend of mine watches Bill Maher. He called me this morning to quote a line from Bill's monologue: “Can you imagine someone who has been in a coma for the last two years, just waking up?  ‘Hey man, you know the guy from the Celebrity Apprentice? Yeah, he’s the president now. And Bill Cosby’s the drug czar."

Thankfully, we have two other branches of government (aside from the executive) that will, with any luck, prohibit Trump from acting out the more repulsive aspects of his nature.

Genna East (author) from Massachusetts, USA on November 13, 2016:


Thank you, Lela. I hope you are right, and that the transformation is a positive one! I appreciate your visit and kind comments.

Genna East (author) from Massachusetts, USA on November 13, 2016:

Flourish Anyway: You are not alone, my friend. We need one of your wonderful music collection hubs to lift our spirits, given what is happening on our streets and the need to, as Nellieanna said so aptly wrote, "Fasten our seat belts. I hope you are enjoying your weekend. Blessings and peace to you on this Sunday. :-)

Genna East (author) from Massachusetts, USA on November 13, 2016:

Dear Nellieanna...

It is wonderful to see you! I hope all is well. :-)

I agree, wholeheartedly, with the elements in your post. Like you, I am not swayed by the opinions of pundits, analysts or journalists, especially regarding this long-fought, unsettling campaign. We have but to listen to the candidates (and do our homework if necessary on certain issues) in order to form our own judgments. Usually, I watch CNN, PBS News, BBC, and read print news, time permitting. On occasion, I will tune in "Morning Joe" on MSNBC.

During this campaign season, I also made a point of following other news and media outlets in determining the impact on their viewers. I thought Ruth Ginsberg's comments were quite accurate when she said the media had been too easy on Donald Trump over, for example, the release of this tax returns. I was a bit shocked at her candor. But think of the magnitude of the problem that would prompt a Supreme Court Justice to make such forthright statements during an interview with the Press.

I agree that eventually, CNN (one of the far less biased networks) seemed to favor Clinton. My goodness...Trump's rhetoric was so blatantly unconscionable and unaware, what else could they do? I confess I had a chuckle when MSNBC's Joe Scarborough (Morning Joe) -- often accused of being a "Trump apologist" until a couple of months ago -- said with his voiced raised in frustration, "What PLANET is he on?"

It will be interesting to observe, and not vicariously, which planet Trump occupies during his tenure as President. Will he become a puppet for a Republican controlled Congress? Would his narcissistic character allow for such manipulation? Does he truly have any ideas of his own? How many campaign promises will he disavow? How will he react to his critics? And they will be legion. Will his darker nature lead to impeachment, thereby establishing Mike Pence as President? More importantly, will he fulfill some of his more disturbing and uninformed prescription remedies regarding foreign policy? Mr. Trump is now on a political tightrope. We can only pray that by some miracle, he maintains his balance and reaches the side of reason, wisdom and strong leadership that will benefit us a nation and the role we play in the world.

Thank you, Nellieanna, for your very perceptive comment. It was a pleasure to read. :-)

Suzie from Carson City on November 13, 2016: nice to see you again. As always your gift to your readers was worth the wait. Spectacular article written with your genius insight. Thank you.

In an effort to keep my comment brief, I'll reserve a point by point response and simply say, like you Genna, I don't believe DT wanted to be POTUS, but merely wanted to "win." His ego would accept no less. This was fine with me.

I hope this doesn't come as a shock to the man, but I (and the vast majority of like-minded) didn't actually want him as POTUS~ but took the blatant opportunity to "use" him to keep HRC OUT. The media was an invaluable accomplice and may fall into oblivion now as we're done with their bias & bull for certain.

So it seems, as you point out, the prediction is an impeachment in more or less a year's time. There'll be few tears, I suspect. IMHO, he's already served his most valuable purpose.

Your letter is a missive of truth and reality. I sincerely hope Mr. Gergen takes note.

"America isn't easy," truest of words~yet there is no place on earth I'd rather be. Thank you once again, Genna. Peace, Paula

Genna East (author) from Massachusetts, USA on November 13, 2016:


Good morning Roberta! Thank you for that very thoughtful commentary.

I'm afraid that I have to respectfully disagree with you in that journalists "believed their own outright lies." It is simply a matter of doing their homework, and some journalists are far better than others.

With regard to television or cable news, it is the format that has changed and has for some time. Journalists are required to conform to the formats set forth by network executives. Coverage of world news has diminished through programming "Entertainment News" in an effort to garner ratings. It is the dummying down of news -- and often the viewer in the process. Again, a few networks are better than others. As I noted in the article above, news stories are compressed into 60-second bites of information -- as if we all had the attention span and IQ levels of a gnat -- while complex issues are skimmed over if reported at all. Edward R. Murrow once said, "television has the potential to teach, illuminate and inspire."

What follows is a quote from the speech Mr. Murrow delivered during a television and radio convention in October of 1958:

"I invite your attention to the television schedules of all networks between the hours of 8 and 11 p.m., Eastern Time. Here you will find only fleeting and spasmodic reference to the fact that this nation is in mortal danger. There are, it is true, occasional informative programs presented in that intellectual ghetto on Sunday afternoons. But during the daily peak viewing periods, television in the main insulates us from the realities of the world in which we live. If this state of affairs continues, we may alter an advertising slogan to read: LOOK NOW, PAY LATER. One of the basic troubles with radio and television news is that both instruments have grown up as an incompatible combination of show business, advertising and news."

Sound familiar?

Regarding the protests, I believe this is one of the reasons President Obama arranged for a meeting with Donald Trump so soon after the election. It was well publicized and focused to represent a dignified and cooperative transition with the new administration. I do not think the President orchestrated this out of any great respect and admiration for Trump, personally. This was for the benefit of our nation and his respect for the Oval Office. After Clinton's defeat, Obama appealed for national unity and said he was "rooting" for our new President-elect. I thought the reasons behind this were obvious: To lead by example. The right to free speech is our constitutional right, and one that he reaffirmed during his recent speech in the Rose Garden, where he stated that he was making every effort to accomplish a "peaceful" transition.

I agree with you in that the violence on display in Portland was unconscionable. However, the majority of protestors have not resorted to violence. I listened to a few protestors who were interviewed. One was in his mid-thirties; the other two, in their twenties. They were calm, intelligent and articulate, and did not express hostility in any way. For news outlets like Fox to infer that President Obama and the media were (intentionally?) inflaming the violence was ludicrous.

Enjoy your Sunday. :-)

Suhail Zubaid aka Clark Kent from Mississauga, ON on November 12, 2016:

This is a powerful open letter, Genna.

As a person who got his education from the USA and lived there for over 5 years, I can only hope the best for our neighbours.

Imho, if Bernie Sanders were not handed an unwarranted defeat against Clinton and if the latter were not so arrogant as not to take him as her running mate, the results would have been a landslide victory for the Democrats.

Sanxuary on November 12, 2016:

This is going to be a fun four years. I was getting bored of the media but with protests and riots to cover how entertaining is that. I am waiting in great anticipation for the first dumb comment or stupid move that unleashes hell across this country. With the worst kind of people in his cabinet we should not have to wait long. With the ex-mayor of New York stopping and frisking everyone, A right wing talk show host being Secretary of State or something and the New Jersey Governor shutting bridges down every time someone disagrees with him. This should be non-stop entertainment. If we build that wall in Mexico its going to prevent Americans from leaving this country. I think his first goal is to rebrand everything in his name and change nothing he claims to be changing. Like a Dictator everything will be named Trump something. Its a fine thing to do because it gives us something to rip down later after the revolution. Maybe its just me but I feel like we will become a third world country and a Banana Republic here soon. In truth I think a lot of people believe this is going to blow over but I think its going to blow up and get really nasty. If I was a Democrat who was stalled for 8 years I think I would do everything to prevent anything from happening in Washington. The only thing we learned from this election is ruthlessness wins and the problem is where does it stop.

CreatePerfection on November 12, 2016:

Amazing, powerful article. Thank you Genna. We are in the mystery right now and no one knows what will come of this, but my hope is that it is the catalyst for world transformation.

Blessings, Lela

FlourishAnyway from USA on November 12, 2016:

I haven't been this upset over the state of the world and the uncertain future of our country since 9/11. (And Trump World started on 11/9. Symbolic, eh?). At least then we all had each other. The media bears major responsibility in creating and sustaining this pathetic liar as a celebrity, but ultimately he was America's horrible choice. I am most disgusted at the people who didn't vote.

Trump will discover that people who live in glass towers shouldn't throw stones. What a #billiondollarloser.

Nellieanna Hay from TEXAS on November 12, 2016:

Dearest Genna, - I share much of what you've said. Thank you for the post.

I made it a point to watch the actual words of the candidates all along, as repeated verbatim online, more than depending on the pundits for their 'takes' & summaries, though I heard those, too. Actually was surprised that they seemed to favor Clinton, increasingly as the Trump repertoire continued to unfold, with its many ugly revelations. I watched CNN almost exclusively because of their attempt at non-bias as they tried to be fair, though his side loudly disclaimed them and accused otherwise.

I've had the time to invest in pretty constant viewing, so I was very involved from the beginning, listening and watching it all through the nominations, debates, election and am still keeping up with the aftermath. I want and need to know all I can. Would have preferred to find a better outcome, for the good of the country and my progeny. But. . . .

I'm much less attentive to and concerned about the media than I am about the person himself, who he is as he constantly has revealed himself to be and now is the president-elect, along with his own powerful questionable local and foreign supporters and perhaps an eagerness to reject our country's supporters here and there over the world.

I prayed enthusiastically before the actual election and, like you, continue to do so. I try to think that how it is and develops may be to serve a greater more universal or eternal purpose, though that thought also comes with wondering if and how it could extend at least an eon-long time on a much larger scale and would still directly affect those of us alive here and now.

I didn't make too many comments about it online prior to the election, other than occasionally when possible to point out that one of the two major candidates WOULD become the next POTUS and that before Nov. 8 was our only chance as voters to help decide which one.

I admit that many of my own trepidations from the beginning have been more about strong possibility of putting a despot in the office which his own personality has demonstrated and supported, with very little effort to disguise it.

Those trepidations arose fully in myself from long-term attention to the person and hearing his own words and actions, rather than adopting from media ideas. That, for me, still dominates even more than the specific dreadful insults, disrespect and attitudes to groups and individual people disclosed, which fit easily into that trepidation of mine, though it's still who he IS and has been for 70 yeas which concerns me, with nothing revealed to dispel it.

The most concerning is that he's continued to disparage so much of the democratic process at its roots all along and to declare he'll overthrow it and do it all his own way, though at present he's being slightly more diplomatic, now that the office is to be his. He can afford to wait a bit before commencing whatever he'll officially do, other than to be gathering like-minded appointees, - or firing them. He's not hesitated to emphasize and align military power he'll control, either.

But, yes. We shall see. sigh. Many people are being optimistic. I'm hoping for the best. Miracles happen and he does seem to have two or more extreme personalities. Perhaps the office will bring out the better one for our country. But we need to fasten our seat belts.

Genna East (author) from Massachusetts, USA on November 12, 2016:

Always Exploring: Ruby, I'm at a point where I wonder if a woman will ever occupy the Oval Office. By the way, I read a few minutes ago that it has now been determined Secretary Clinton won the popular vote by over two million votes. (That's a higher margin than Al Gore back in 2002.) Bob (Diogenes) brought up an interesting point in that it was a pity that Michelle didn't run.

I remember what happened four years ago when the Romney campaign was shocked that he lost, and how surprised many Republicans were as well. This time around, I think demographics were misunderstood and underutilized, and certain segments were not polled sufficiently. In addition, Comey's October bomb hurt Clinton more than everyone realized. I also am appalled that some of the protesters have turned to violence in Portland. All we can do is move forward in a positive way. Hugs, my friend, and thank you for your comment. :-)

Genna East (author) from Massachusetts, USA on November 12, 2016:

Diogenes: Hi Bob. You've brought up an interesting POV, in that "Donald is all noise and no action I think. I don't even think he wants the job to be honest, he just wanted to be a winner." A number of people agree with you. And I agree that the Obama's will be missed. Had Michelle entered the race -- a prospect I think would have been highly unlikely -- she may very well have won. Thanks for commenting!

Genna East (author) from Massachusetts, USA on November 12, 2016:

Jodah: Hi John. This election has been followed by people all over the world -- including our dear friends from "a land down under." :-) I agree with your comment about the media. And also that only "time will tell" how successfully Trump handles his presidency. (I'm taking a deep breath in between prayers.) I appreciate the read and your thoughtful comment.

Genna East (author) from Massachusetts, USA on November 12, 2016:

Billybuc: Hello, Bill. It's always a pleasure to see you. :-) I have an uncomfortable feeling that more people will be thrown under the bus than we realize. I hope I'm wrong. I think what this election has accomplished if nothing else is one message: Pay attention! Thanks so much for the visit and the comment.

Genna East (author) from Massachusetts, USA on November 12, 2016:

Hi Mike...

I loved your comment, and the analogy of the broken cup. I suspect that many of us are wondering the same thing.

This past summer has been one that I will long remember as "the summer from Hades," and has kept me absent from HP for too long. I owe quite a few comments to the writers and friends I follow. I plan to catch up soon.

Have a wonderful weekend, my friend, and thank you! :-)

RTalloni on November 12, 2016:

A few points to ponder:

The difference between the dishonesties of the two candidates is that she accomplished them on behalf of a government’s people, and his, whether they are as straightforward as some say or a little more complicated than just primitive lies, they were done within a business context. Nothing new for either a government or business situation, but there is a difference. The difference does not make either one right, but the difference is pungently meaningful.

Without Divine intervention, the president-elect will not be able to curb bad behaviors any more than the deplorable Bill Clinton was able to control his. However, the new president’s choices on that have yet to be seen. He is already under attack, but he may yet choose the high road. I pray that he will. We can take hope in the fact that we have seen him respond in more presidential ways once that was called for from both sides of the campaign table. If that means he’s teachable we can take heart in the fact that he is moderating his rhetoric.

I know many highly educated people across the country who voted against the other candidate. They did so for some of the reasons you mention, but they also voted against her because they weighed her vague campaign words against her past record and could see the direction she wanted to take the country. They have studied history, politics, logic, math, and more. They run their own businesses, work in government and education, and they are thoughtful, compassionate, considerate people.

It’s curious to consider the responses and attitudes of the losing party in this election. Those who opposed the election of the current president did not violently riot. It was and is as okay for them to be vocal about their opposition to him as it is for those opposing this election’s outcome to voice their opinions. It’s also legal in this country, but the violence is not. Passions rise and fall by the moment, but the ability to let them go and get on with life is a mark of maturity and wisdom.

If news media personalities were truly played, as mentioned, then it was because they allowed themselves to believe their own twists on the truth, outright lies, and rhetoric. Watching their initial reactions was quite comical, but their initial shock is over and now they are angry. Angry that they didn’t get their way, angry that they assumed too much, angry that they lost, and angry that they embarrassed themselves. Americans had better watch out for what their next tactics will be, as well as the new administration.

Basically, there is nothing new to see here. Different personalities in different times, yes, but the media double standard is clearer than ever as they incite more violence by their method of reporting the protests. The only thing they are rethinking is how they can be successful with different strategies. Journalism used to be a respectable profession. What a sad shame it has come to this. The last thing they want is to respect everyone they cover, but we may see a modicum of real effort to do it now that they’ve embarrassed themselves to no end.

In the interim mentioned in this post, we may see a level of financial prosperity that will win over even hard liberals since the old saying “hit ‘em in the pocketbook” contains some truth, but like the so-called prosperity gospel religious movement, it will not prove to be the answer for this or any other country’s needs. A lot has been said about protestors moving to another country but this Thanksgiving season would be a good time for them to reconsider their foolishness. In spite of flaws, this country offers them freedoms that allow them to voice their opinions and work toward futures that no other country will give them.

Move to Spain? As an immigrant, they will not get to vote there or in Europe in general. Other places? They will be beheaded for their bad behaviors. Many Canadians warn them, “You don’t want to come here.” Does Australia want their ideas forced on them? Not so much.

The protestors are quite a motley crew. Immature students impassioned by ignorance and inexperience like many of the young reporters they listen to. Old hippies who have fried their brains and listen to old reporters who use their old school attitudes to justify what they say. Criminal instigators of racial hatred and division leading unthinking people into violence resulting in a criminal record for the rest of their lives. It's sad business start to finish.

Though the freedom to protest is protected by our Constitution (which somehow many of these people conclude is a good idea to abolish) we should be calling for them to stop at this point. Why are we not hearing from the current administration for that to happen? Is it because a peaceful transition is just another lie?

We the people should be calling for them to end before they escalate even more. There are other ways to communicate the opposition that are far more peaceful and effective, far less divisive and dangerous. Educating themselves on the how and why would be a good move for each of them.

Ruby Jean Richert from Southern Illinois on November 12, 2016:

I am still in shock mode. It's difficult for me to read or interact intelligently. I can't help but wonder what happened? It was a sure thing that Hillary would win. What went wrong? The young people rioting in the streets is so crazy. It only adds to the confusion. We must all remember that time heals all wounds. I agree that he used the media like a puppet, pulling their strings and laughing inside. The good people of America will rise again. I give him six months before he's impeached, but Hillary's time is up. Perhaps a woman will occupy the white house as president. This was a wonderful hub. I hope many will read it, maybe it will spark some much needed resolve.

diogenes on November 12, 2016:

Hi Genna: All this is now consigned to history and what a crock...! Poor North America; poor world, caught between a rock and a hard place; the devil and the deep blue sea.

But I think Hilary would have been the more dangerous had she won. Donald is all noise and no action I think. I don't even think he wants the job to be honest, he just wanted to be a winner. In theUK, we will really miss the Obamas...pity Michelle couldn't have run!

Bob x

John Hansen from Gondwana Land on November 12, 2016:

Yes, the media were played by an expert and they brought it on themselves. You raise some relevant issues, Genna, and only time will tell how successful Trump's presidency turns out to be. Good Hub.

Bill Holland from Olympia, WA on November 12, 2016:

"America isn't easy!" Truer words were never spoken. Well, if the goal was to shake up the political system, it has been accomplished. Now we all have to hold on for our dear lives so we don't get thrown under the bus. :) Thanks for sharing this, dear friend.

mckbirdbks from Emerald Wells, Just off the crossroads,Texas on November 12, 2016:

As a kid, when something got broken, like a cup, we would hear, "Save the pieces!" It referred to the hope that the thing could be mended. From my perspective, I now see a bunch of pieces, and wonder if the 'thing' can be mended.

As for the media. I often watch MSNBC and many days, hours would be devoted to calling out Trump's name. They were like carnival barkers. The media was conned all the way through.

Last and most important, it is great to see you publish.

Related Articles