Think Freely Media presents Common Sense with Paul Jacob

No Innocence Abroad

black pot, black kettle, pot calling the kettle black, Trump, Putin, Russia, interview, Super Bowl, killing, guilt, blame

After establishing, during the big Super Bowl day interview, that President Donald Trump respects Russian leader Vladimir Putin, Bill O’Reilly asked why.

After all, the Fox News star challenged, “Putin’s a killer.”*

“We’ve got a lot of killers,” Trump replied. “What, you think our country’s so innocent?”

This disturbed just about everyone. On the left, it was more evidence of Russian influence. The right recoiled at Trump doing the leftist thing, equating our moral failings with the much worse failings of others.

“I don’t think there’s any equivalency between the way that the Russians conduct themselves,” insisted Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky), “and the way the United States does.”

But is that really what Trump said? He merely pooh-poohed America’s innocence.**

And not without cause. His predecessor, after all, holds the world record (not Nobel-worthy) in drone-striking the innocent as well as the guilty in seven countries . . . none of which the U.S. has declared war upon.

But wait: if “we’ve got killers” is the new acceptable-in-public truth, then why not “we’ve got currency manipulators”?

Yes, I’m shifting focus from east of Eastern Europe onto the Far East. According to a different Fox report, “Trump accused China and Japan of currency manipulation, saying they play ‘the devaluation market and we sit there like a bunch of dummies.’”

Despite incoherent objections from Japan***, let’s not forget the obvious: the U.S. manipulates currency, too. What do you think the Federal Reserve is for?

I mention this not to rub Trump’s nose in hypocrisy. It’s to establish an estoppel principle here.

How may we object when others do that which we do ourselves?

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

* The Russian State is asking for an apology from O’Reilly. Not for a retraction on the grounds of truth, mind you, but an apology. O’Reilly wryly balks.

** Which certainly doesn’t absolve Vladimir Putin of guilt.

*** Yoshihide Suga, a spokesperson for the Japanese Government, insists that “the aim of monetary policies that have pulled the yen lower is to spur inflation, not devalue the currency.” Nice distinction. Thanks.


Printable PDF

By: CS Admin

6 Comments

  1. John F. Brennan says:

    All governments, including the US, which exempt their actions from the base morality which they expect of their citizens, cannot rightly claim the moral high ground. 
    It all shortly devolves, as here, to a question of which is worse.
    Trump is correct, there can be no sustainable claim of having the high moral ground unless you are and act in a moral manner yourself.  That the “leadership” desires to claim the U.S. is the lesser of two, or the least of many evils provides no comfort or hope to anyone with even minimal wisdom. 

  2. Pat says:

    “How may we object when others do that which we do ourselves?”

    Agreed. But why can’t we reverse that question: how can others object when we do what they do themselves?
    After all, sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.
    Illegal immigration is severely punished in many countries, but we are supposed to stand aside and let it happen here.

  3. JATR4 says:

    Donald Trump is dumber than dirt! He thinks the Chinese ane trying to lower the value of their currency when they are actually proping it up. Just like his claims about crime. Out to lunch!!!!!

  4. Brian Wright says:

    The US since WWII has killed 20 million or more individuals, according to this column by Global Research: http://www.globalresearch.ca/us-has-killed-more-than-20-million-people-in-37-victim-nations-since-world-war-ii/5492051. When they say ‘kill’ they mean, in general, murder of innocents. Many of the murders via CIA proxy and dictatorial governments that the government befriends… for ‘hit man’ reasons: http://brianrwright.com/CoffeeCoasterBlog/?p=5776.

    • John F. Brennan says:

      That a government that exempts itself from morality has none is axiomatic.  With little detriment to itself, indeed being praised for its acttions by many, what is it that you expected in the past, or now expect in the present and future?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

© 2017 Common Sense with Paul Jacob, All Rights Reserved. Back to top