News Opinion Sports Videos Community Schools Churches Announcements Obituaries Events Search/Archive Community Schools Churches Announcements Obituaries Calendar Contact Us Advertisements Search/Archive Public Notices

Does not think much of columnist’s effort


On the Courier News opinion page, 4A, Oct. 7, 2020, “Was that a debate or a wrestling Match?”

The Mollet column answered the question by obfuscating, misdirecting and covering-up with apologies for the infantile sandbox outbursts by Trump. Having suffered through the advertised presidential candidates’ “debate” — hijacked by one candidate’s tantrum and flagrant violations of agreed-upon terms—I was vaguely interested in Dr. Glenn Mollet’s column “debate or wrestling match?” From the get go, Mollet assigns blame to all three participants, “they gave us a show?”

If we harken back to more normal time, before Trump, expectations for a debate usually defined as a discussion involving opposing viewpoints including affirmative and negative sides of a proposition, deliberation and an engagement in argument. What we universally saw was a childish, bullying outburst from one candidate without self control nor restraints for which Mollet ignores nor blames. He pivots to casting generalized aspersions that “debates have gotten worse and worse,” “90 minutes of rudeness, name calling, hollering and mud-throwing;” and asks “Where did we lose civility in our nation?”

Turning off the spotlight on Trump, Mollet asks: “Is this who we really are, rude, crude and ignorant? Short answer, no unless you are deaf dumb and blind to the obvious culprit. Mollet’s not so sly of hand failure to call out Trump’s outrageous conduct and unpresidential demeanor points out Mollet’s purpose for this column. Mollet starts with a litany of listing strange boorish conduct and assigning greedy aspirations and questionable moptivations to some while softly chastising white hate groups but implying that people and groups peacefully protesting needless multiple deaths at police hands approve burning down various cities. This broadbrush commentary provides a smokescreen to avoid pinpointing who was and is personally responsible for the debate debacle. This column was a lame attempt to cover-up and downplay Trump’s outrageous contemptuous conduct displaying his unfitness for any office. I am not a student of Mollet’s columns but this column attempt to obscure and blur what was evident to all and now attempt to blame us and hold yourself out as a reasonable responsible voice is hypocritical.

W. Somerset Maugham wrote: “Hypocrisy is the most difficult and nerve-racking vice that any man can persue, it needs an unceasing vigilance and a rare detachment of spirit. It cannot, like adultery or gluttony, be practiced at spare moments, it is a whole-time job.”

I look forward to Mollet’s next column praising the brave, valiant GOP defending our president.

Yours truly,

Harry Shatz