West Wing-Nut: Kanye’s Visit To Oval Office Leads To Unhinged and Demeaning Rave

350px-US-WhiteHouse-Logo.svgIn one of the most bizarre (and frankly demeaning) moments for the White House, President Donald Trump invited Kanye West into the Oval Office for what became an unhinged and profane rave sessions in front of the world’s press.  As with the high-level visits with a Kardashian to talk policy, these sessions have a freak show quality more fitting a reality show than the Oval Office.  For anyone who reveres that office, West raving about how he is a “crazy motherf***er” is an utter disgrace. Not to be outdone, CNN proceeded to demean news coverage by racing to the bottom on the story with April Ryan.

West raved about everything from his own diagnosis of being bipolar (which he says was just a lack of sleep) to the Unabomber while wearing a “Make America Great Again” hat.  (Just for the record, wearing a hat in the Oval Office is not considered respectful.  Ronald Reagan would not even allow men to enter not wearing ties or jackets.) I know that I will be called too sensitive but I also have a serious problem with West putting his cellphone on the famous Resolute desk used by Trump. The desk has been used by seven presidents and was a gift in 1880 from Queen Victoria to President Rutherford Hayes.

Trump just let the rant continue as if he was riding the metro when some raving lunatic jumped into the car. One of the most painful moments was Kanye holding forth on the 13th Amendment.  The 1865 amendment abolishing slavery is apparently a “trap door called the 13th Amendment,” because it was written when Kanye says it was illegal for blacks to read.

Kanye sounds like a marginally functional celebrity who surrounds himself with people who constantly tell him that such idiotic thoughts are brilliant.

That went on for ten minutes.  The Florida panhandle has been wiped clean, but the President gave ten minutes to this one-man circus show.

Not to be outdone in the race to the bottom, CNN followed its coverage by cutting to CNN political analyst April Ryan who immediately raised the man who made an infamous sex tape with Kanye West’s wife, Kim Kardashian.  Ryan told Wolf Blitzer that she had asked the opinion of R&B singer Ray J who has no connection to any of this other than a sex tape with West’s wife.  Is this seriously what CNN considers responsible journalism?

CNN anchor Don Lemon also called on CNN contributors Tara Setmeyer and Bakari Sellers and engaged them into a conversation where West was repeatedly referred to as that “negro.”  Setmeyer insisted “He’s an attention whore, like the president. He’s all of a sudden now the model spokesperson. He’s the token negro of the Trump administration.” She also dismissed him as someone with a history of mental illness. Sellers then declared “Kanye West is what happens when negroes don’t read.”  Last night, Lemon returned to the subject by calling West’s appearance in the Oval Office a “minstrel show.”

Given such demeaning, low grade coverage, CNN is the last place to call out Trump for demeaning the Oval Office.  I find both displays truly disturbing and depressing.

194 thoughts on “West Wing-Nut: Kanye’s Visit To Oval Office Leads To Unhinged and Demeaning Rave”

  1. Anyone who still reveres “that office” after it has been occupied by the likes of Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack “Wait and Pay Me Your Countless Millions in Corporate Bribes Until After I Leave Office” Obama need to wake up and realize that the entire American government (both parties) is being run by craven and corrupt poodles to Wall Street, Silicon Valley and the major war contractors.

      1. Karl defines his politics in terms of conspiracies. Trumpers as well. Trumpers believe mainstream media engages in conspiracies.

        ‘Only Trump speaks the truth’. This view is central to the thinking of most Republicans. In reality Donald Trump utters falsehoods every day. But it’s impolite to note that on the threads of this blog.

        1. Peter Hill – 400+ newspapers running a op-ed against the President on the same day on the same topic. Hmmmm??? Smells of conspiracy to me. Over 400 sites taken down for fake news but not one of them is CNN, ABC, NBC, MSNBC, etc. They got many of the alt media on FB and Twitter but never touched the commercial media who push fake news on a daily basis. Sounds like conspiracy to me. And how many days is it to the election? Could this be considered election meddling by both FB and Twitter?

          1. No, Paul, none of those possibilities.

            Every president feels the media is unfair to them. It’s not a new complaint. But Trump doesn’t know that. Trump expects the media to share his opinion of Donald Trump. Journalists are under no obligation to play uncritical admirers.

            Trump, by any measure, has behaved like a rash novice. A man with little understanding of government. That has resulted in coverage which hostile to Trump. But again, real journalists have no obligation to play uncritical admirers.

            Presidents have to win respect by sounding knowledgeable. They can’t merely parrot talking points from cable. Nor can they make rash attacks on Twitter. Presidents have to sound mature and dignified.

            1. Every president feels the media is unfair to them. It’s not a new complaint. But Trump doesn’t know that.

              Peter Shill, there’s ample social research on journalists and editors as well as content analysis of media going back decades. Rothman and Lichter’s published work (part of a comparative series on elites in various occupations) demonstrated major media ca. 1980 favored the Democratic Party and views associated with it. The margins weren’t small. Samples of major media taken over more than fifty years have shown journalists preferred the Democratic presidential candidates by margins between 2.5:1 to 15:1. People like Michael Kinsley tried to use derision to discredit these studies, but journalists stopped lying about this about 10 years ago. The question today is not whether major media favors the Democratic Party, but the degree to which their work product is an extension of the DNC press office.

              1. TRUMP RODE $5 BILLION IN FREE MEDIA COVERAGE

                Donald Trump didn’t spend nearly as much on advertising as typical presidential candidates, and he didn’t have to — he relied on billions of dollars of free mentions in media ranging from major TV news networks to Buzzfeed and Twitter instead.

                The real estate magnate got $4.96 billion in free earned media in the year leading up to the presidential election, according to data from tracking firm mediaQuant. He received $5.6 billion throughout the entirety of his campaign, more than Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, Ted Cruz, Paul Ryan and Marco Rubio combined.

                “You have Donald Trump coming along and getting all this coverage without spending a dime,” said Paul Senatori, chief analytics officer at Portland-based mediaQuant.

                Over the past 12 months, the president-elect received more than $800 million in free earned broadcast media, compared to $666 million for Clinton, and $2.6 billion in free earned online news attention, compared to $1.6 billion for his rival. He edged out her and other major political names in American and worldwide newspapers as well.

                Edited from: “Donald Trump Rode $5 Billion In Free Media Coverage To The White House”

                THE STREET, 11/17/16

            2. Presidents have to win respect by sounding knowledgeable.

              Chuckles. See Thos. Sowell on Barack Obama.

              The shallowness of the Democratic Party never ceases to amaze.

  2. Here is the civics lesson:

    Presidents Have Less Power Over the Economy Than You Might Think
    Neil Irwin
    2017 Jan 17
    TNYT

  3. Amid Full Employment, Hospitals Keep Hiring
    Richard Daly
    2018 Sep 10
    HFMA

    because the population is aging which has nothing to do with presidential actions. Jeez.

  4. Why The Natural Rate Of Unemployment Is So Low Right Now
    Adam Ozimek
    2018 Mar 28
    Forbes

    states absolutely nothing about the role of presidents but does mention a “China Shock”.

    Ain’t just Krugman.

    Get over it.

  5. Shame on CNN for allowing racist slurs to air. There is never an excuse.

    Most visits to the White House should be private. You can’t really have a decent conversation on air with photographers snapping photos nonstop. Rappers, Singers, and Movie Stars often tend to surround themselves with sycophants and hangers on. Plus, Trump should be able to predict that a conversation with Kanye can go off the rails like Taylor Swift’s award. Perhaps he is hoping that it’s an opportunity to continue to improve his approval ratings with the African American community.

    Trump has invited prominent African-Americans to the White House to discuss what needs to be done to improve their circumstances, to improve Chicago. Most won’t go. They give up the opportunity to promote solutions and exchange ideas. They’d rather the gangland shootings and stabbings continue to mow people down while they boycott Trump? Kanye West shows up. I don’t know if he’s firing on all cylinders, but he shows up. Kim Kardashian bucked Hollywood, and secured the release of a woman whose cause she believed in. Everyone else invited has thrown away their chance to make the world a better place. They complain about problems but when given the opportunity to create change, they pass it up. How many times will someone be asked to voice their opinions about solutions to the President?

    I have no idea what Kanye’s problem is with the 13th Amendment. I didn’t hear his statement, but I’ve heard he’s complained about it a couple of times. I’ve found the excerpts of his argument that I’ve read to be completely confusing. Some have theorized that his problem is with the exception clause, which prohibits slavery or servitude except as punishment for a crime. But I have no idea.

    1. Kanye’s problem is bipolar disorder. He doesn’t accept the diagnosis so naturally he refuses to take the appropriate medication. And, naturally, events like this follow.

      1. Actually the ones that most desperately need medication are the newscasters that called him a “negro” that didn’t read and all sorts of insults one which included his mother. Apparently the left is scared sh-tless when a well known black person mentions that blacks don’t have to live on a Democratic plantation.

        1. Allan – several black conservatives have YouTube channels and have fled the plantation broadcasting their escape on a regular basis. The word is getting out. Democrats are losing the black vote. They haven’t lost it yet, but they are slowly losing their grip.

      2. wildbill99 – do you have any idea what the “appropriate” medication does to a creative personality who is bipolar? Do you actually know anyone who is bipolar?

    1. David – none of these are links to sources. What you should do is copy and paste a URL link to your comment.

      Also, why do you think anyone is arguing that the age of the population has anything to do with the President, or that there was any significant change in average age since 2016? Why did the markets react in such a positive way to the election?

        1. David Benson is the King of Making Stuff Up and owes me thirteen citations (one from the OED) and the source of a quotation, after nineteen weeks, and needs to cite all his work from now on. – Read Weart.

  6. J.J.Watt, 46 million dollars for hurricane victims. Colin Kaepernick, man of the year. Oh yah, the left nailed it.

  7. “The problem is illegal guns, illegal guns are the problem. Not … not legal guns. We have the right to bear arms.”

    is not idiotic.

    “[The] police acted stupidly”
    “You know, if I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon”

    were very.

  8. Allan, do you understand what Krugman wrote about on Sep 30, the Great Slowdown?

    And, by the way, you should learn the definition of “pure capitalism” before making assertions about it.

    1. David, you can go all over the map on this subject if you desire. You were the one to say “we no longer have pure capitalism.” My contention is that we never had pure capitalism which is a term that can have a more diverse meaning than you seem willing to understand. I don’t think you are referring to mercantilistic capitalism but even the origin of the word “capitalism” is debatable. I think the word existed in the time of Adam Smith but I don’t think he ever referred to it. I think another reference point would be Das Kapital as you mention (which brings into focus competitive capitalism). What makes capitalism pure? The US is and was always a mixed economy though we have slowly but surely added to the mix. Other examples creating a mixed system: roads and education.

      1. Allan — Pure capitalism is the same as lassez-faire capitalism. The USA had pure capitalism during the days of the Robber Barons.

        Go read the history. So called mixed capitalism came much later, after considerable strife.

        1. As I have said the definitions of these terms aren’t clear but did we ever have “pure” lassez-faire capitalism? You seem to think so, but purity very seldom exists and based on some of the examples I already provided I don’t think so. But you seem to set the date of the end of pure capitalism as the time of the ICC. That was definitely a time of major government involvement but you seem to think it didn’t involve itself earlier. You are wrong.

            1. “I have read the history; you clearly have not.”

              David, you can think what you wish but your words reveal that your knowledge of history is sparse at best. That, however, doesn’t mean that you can’t consider yourself a genius or whatever else you fancy.

            2. David Benson is the King of Making Stuff Up and owes me fourteen citations (one from the OED) and the source of a quotation, after nineteen weeks, and needs to cite all his work from now on. – as my mother used to say, if you read it, you must have had the book upside down. You could not be more wrong. If you keep getting your information from The Economist, you will never learn.

        2. David Benson is the King of Making Stuff Up and owes me fourteen citations (one from the OED) and the source of a quotation, after nineteen weeks, and needs to cite all his work from now on. I have already added you owing me a citation for this one. So, could we have a cite, please?

  9. TBob — Regarding economics I know enough to know that I don’t know. So I try to follow what economists write, presuming that they know at least something about economics.

    Principally I now follow Paul Krugman and, at least, his biweekly column in TNYT but also his often wonkish blog. Maybe I’m learning.

    The economy follows it’s own logic, not being neatly divided into 4 year election cycles. Presidents have very little influence on the state of the economy unless they can convince congress to pass massive spending bills to offset economic shocks. President Obama was not able to obtain a very large one to aid in the recovery from 2008; the economy has finally recovered largely on its own. President Trump deserves even less credit for the economic recovery than did President Obama. But that is just in how it works, not necessarily the leadership of either man.

    1. Principally I now follow Paul Krugman and, at least, his biweekly column in TNYT but also his often wonkish blog. Maybe I’m learning.

      Krugman (or, more likely, his wife) is given a pass by professional economists to throw meat at the Times readers and editors. They never call him out for what a foul polemicist he is, though they might if he published theoretical or empirical nonsense on stilts. He is largely retired as an academic economist (his publications are inconsequential and he’s only teaching 40% time).

      1. He is old enough to retire. I appreciate his wonkish posts to his blog.

        I have yet to find commentary by economists stating that Krugman’s analysis is wrong.

        Take your blinders off.

        1. David Benson is the King of Making Stuff Up and owes me thirteen citations (one from the OED) and the source of a quotation, after nineteen weeks, and needs to cite all his work from now on. – what part of Krugman’s prediction about Trump do you find correct?

    2. “Principally I now follow Paul Krugman”

      David, I think you ought to find a better economist to follow. Krugman gave up serious economics years ago and I believe a lot of what he says now conflicts what he wrote in his own textbook. Here is what he said shortly after Trump was elected.

      “So we are very probably looking at a global recession, with no end in sight. I suppose we could get lucky somehow. But on economics, as on everything else, a terrible thing has just happened.”

      1. Krugman is Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Science Laureate.

        So is Stiglitz but he rarely writes for general audiences.

        1. A Noble Prize for one thing is not transferrable to all other knowledge. Krugman was brilliant but when he became an ideologue he put his calculator away and started writing about his dreams.

            1. David, I have listened to your discussions and from them alone I realize that there is no reason to follow Krugman, but yes I read a bit of Krugman to keep on top of the idiocy. I have even in the past listened to him in debate and seen him destroyed.

              Did you read his prediction above when Trump was elected?

              1. Allan,.
                -Those predictions Krugman made following Trump’s election turned out to be spectacularly, and comicly, wrong.
                But when Krugman doesn’t know what the hell he’s talking about, he speaks with great conviction and great certainty that he is right.
                That may be a characteristic that David admires.😉

                1. You may be right, Tom. David seems to conclude that whatever Krugman says has to be right even though much of the time in retrospect they make no sense.

        2. David Benson is the King of Making Stuff Up and owes me thirteen citations (one from the OED) and the source of a quotation, after nineteen weeks, and needs to cite all his work from now on. – the Nobel Prize is given for what the DID do, not for what they ARE doing. For God’s sake, Obama was awarded the Peace Prize for nothing. Did he stop any wars?

          1. President Barack HUSSEIN Obama was the greatest President of the United States and Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces since Harry Truman. Moreover, prior to his marriage, he undoubtedly had “access” to the white women.

            this is to “it was a better time when miscegenation was against the law” paulie – georgie

              1. Sorry, it doesn’t pass the smell test. Caricatures of real people don’t have “marriages.” So sorry for your loss.

                this is to paulie – georgie

                1. Mark Mark Mark – my wife is going to be very hurt that you think she smells. In fact, the entire Chinese community, which is rather large will be rather hurt. If I knew who you were and where you lived, I could send members of one of the tongs to change your mind. My father-in-law belonged to one of them, not sure which, he was pretty close-mouthed about it. However, I am sure that each of the tong members would allow you to smell them to make sure they pass your “smell test” whatever that is. Of course, after they do that, they would have to teach you a life lesson.

        3. He was awarded the Prize for theoretical models on trade he produced 30 years ago. He doesn’t do any applied research. He wasn’t, prior to 2001, a political partisan. (It’s a reasonable wager his wife writes the columns).

    3. David Benson is the King of Making Stuff Up and owes me thirteen citations (one from the OED) and the source of a quotation, after nineteen weeks, and needs to cite all his work from now on. – Krugman has not correctly predicted the economy under Trump, why the heck would you read him? In fact, he hasn’t correctly predicted anything in a long time.

      1. Again, he was a theoretician. Producing forecasts was never his book. Any predictions he published would have been derivative.

      2. PC Schulte,..
        – You might look at an economic forecaster named Jim O’Sullivan.
        Not a Nobel Prize winner or a snotty commentator like Krugman; he just has a very solid track record.

    4. Even less credit that Obama? Really?

      Then why is Obama out there wanting credit for the economy today?

      Why did Obama mockingly ask if Trump had some kind of ‘magic wand’ he could wave in the air to bring back manufacturing jobs, that according to Obama, were never coming back?

      Why do numerous surveys of economists find that Trump, not Obama, deserves the majority of credit for the upturn in the economy and the surge of business optimism and investment we are experiencing today?

      Trump ran on creating jobs, jobs, jobs…and bringing back jobs…and getting people back to work – with good paying jobs. He now has lowest unemployment numbers ever, across the board, in every sector. More people working and millions no longer on food stamps or welfare. Manufacturing is coming back. Deregulation and tax cuts are spurring business investment that creates jobs. All of this is Trump’s economy.

      Obama may have turned things around and kept it steady, but the economy was stifled by his policies. The consumer and business confidence came with Trump’s election — a confidence not found in Obama’s ‘stable but stagnant’ no-growth policies.

      And so, thank you for your reply, but I’m afraid neither you, nor Krugman, have not changed my opinion.

        1. And the voters want ‘Jobs Not Mobs.’

          Trump is bringing jobs.

          Dems are bringing angry mobs.

          Which is why Republicans will win in November.

          There’s your causation.

    5. “President Trump deserves even less credit for the economic recovery than did President Obama.”

      If Obama deserves more credit for the economy then Trump, then why did the economy sharply improve when Trump reversed most of Obama’s policies?

Leave a Reply