David Mamet to Newsmax: Trump, Musk Will Bury Their Beef

army judge

Super Moderator
1749470821345.png
David Alan Mamet: playwright, author, and filmmaker. President Donald Trump

Pulitzer Prize-winning playwright and author David Mamet, joining Newsmax to discuss his political journey, Sunday predicted a "rapprochement" between President Donald Trump and tech billionaire Elon Musk.

He also said in an extensive interview with Newsmax's "Sunday Agenda" host Lidia Curanaj that Trump doesn't deserve the hatred of liberals.

"The Romans said the anger of kings is always severe," Mamet said of Trump and Musk. "So that's what we're looking at. He's a king, but he's talking to the emperor. … Eventually there will be some sort of rapprochement, but who knows where or when? It's all going to be fine."

Mamet's new book, "The Disenlightenment: Politics, Horror, and Entertainment," is topping the Amazon charts for essays.

Mamet, who described himself in the past as a "brain-dead liberal," said he got "thrown out" by the left after writing an article for The Village Voice to describe his play, "November," which takes place in the Oval Office.

"I said, I've even been uncivil to myself over the years, referring to myself as a brain-dead liberal," he said. "The Village Voice comes out the next week with the whole front page, 'David Mamet: Why I Am No Longer a Brain-Dead Liberal,' and everybody on the left lost my number."

As a result, he said he started reading and thinking and decided two "pretty good books" show how people can get along with each other: the Bible and the Constitution.

"When we obey these rules," he said, "we have a better chance of getting along with each other than we do if we rely on our feelings and congratulate ourselves about being right."

And Mamet, who now looks at matters differently, told Newsmax that the push from liberals against Trump is "not deserved."

"President Trump is a human being," he said. "He's been overwhelmingly elected. He's not a politician, and he threatens their livelihood. H.L. Mencken said politicians are brokers in pillage. And to a large extent, they are."

Trump and the American people who elected him, Mamet added, "threaten these people's livelihood because they're living a lie."

Mamet has been called a conspiracy theorist, but he pointed out that he looks at language for a living, through his plays and essays, but "what the left has done is confuse people by inventing language."

He maintains that America was "the victim" of a "four-year-long conspiracy, which was a coup," with the election of President Joe Biden.

"The government was taken over, the election was stolen, the government was taken over, and the facts are fairly, fairly clear," said Mamet. "So to say that that's a conspiracy theorist means someone who's making something up. But there is actually such a thing as a conspiracy."

He added that "of course there was a cover-up" concerning Biden's capabilities to serve as president.

"Joe Biden was a straw man," Maman said. "He was deluded from the time he came into office. There was a committee running of the White House, and I think it's even worse. As I said in the book, it's even worse than Jill [Biden] did it or Hunter didn't. That's not true. I think what we're looking at is a committee that said, I tell you what, you can pull out of Afghanistan, but I'll tell you what I want to do. I want to open the borders … I want to have men play in girls' sports. Oh, dude, you want to have men play in girls' sports? I want to give $2 billion to Stacey Abrams. So what we saw is the people in the power vacuum cutting up the pie. The cat was away. The mice were playing."


 
I think David Mamet needs to have the lenses on his reality glasses checked. He is wrong that Trump was "overwhelmingly elected". Perhaps he's also math challenged because no one who was being honest would call getting 49.8% of the popular vote an "overwhelming" victory. That's about as close to a 50/50 split as we are likely to ever see in a presidential election. Trump won the majority of the electoral college vote (58%), which is also not an overwhelming victory.

I've been saying for years that the electoral college system has long outlived any usefulness it may have had. We need rid the Constitution of that anti-democratic system and replace it with direct election of the president. Every other elected official in the country is chosen by popular vote, and there is no good reason that the election for president should be done any differently.

Trump would would have still have won with the popular vote because while he didn't get a majority of the popular vote, he did (barely) get a plurality of the vote. So while it would not have changed the outcome in this election, it has changed the outcome of other presidential elections where the candidate who clearly did win the popular vote lost because of the antiquated electoral college system.

David, a writer, should also understand the meaning of words. Webster's defines "coup" in the political use of the word to mean: "1. : a sudden decisive exercise of force in politics and especially the violent overthrow or alteration of an existing government by a small group : coup d'état."

If he understood the meaning of the word "coup" then he would not be repeating the far right claim that Biden got booted out the election by a coup, because what occurred doesn't even come to that definintion. The word "coup" was chosen by those on the right who were disgruntled because they believed (probably correctly) that Trump would have an easier time beating Biden given Biden's performance last summer. Maybe David just didn't understand the facts of what took place; that's being charitable on my part because I think most of the right who used the "coup" claim knew it wasn't true, and I suspect David knows it too. Much like Trump himself, some of them just don't care about the truth. All that matters is what they can convince others to believe as true. Certainly we've had a lot people over the course of our history that operated the same way: ditching the truth whenever it served their purposes. Trump and his cohorts are just most notable examples in our recent history.
 
I've been saying for years that the electoral college system has long outlived any usefulness it may have had. We need rid the Constitution of that anti-democratic system and replace it with direct election of the president. Every other elected official in the country is chosen by popular vote, and there is no good reason that the election for president should be done any differently.

I doubt that we will ever see our Constitution amended. Like the electoral college or loathe it, amending it is an extremely lengthy endeavor. As it stands today, our Constitution contains 27 amendments.

Having taught constitutional law, at the Army JAG School in VA, and a law school, I see very little that disturbs or upsets me. Our founders did a masterful job with the development, construction, and protection of our rights.

I can only add, "FAFO", those who tinker/tamper with an almost perfect form of governance, will only live to rue their efforts, should changes ever be made to the electoral college.

But, hey, what the heck do I know? I'm incapable of predicting the future, and guessing is a useless endeavor. That said, our Constitution will be 237 years old in about two weeks.

We've had our issues over the decades, but I still stand in awe of our founders. They made a few mistakes and faux pas along the journey, but for the most part, I'm appreciative for their efforts, as well as those who followed.

I've got friends in Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the UK. They're very curious about our nation and our system of government. In fact, a very good Australian friend, muses that living under a constitution is something he can only dream about. As a citizen of the US, a retired member of her Army, I'm proud and grateful for our Constitution and the protections it offers for all of us. Perhaps, one day centuries from today, there'll be other nations adopting and using our constitution for their citizenry, too.




[th]
Country​
[/th][th]
Date Ratified​
[/th][th]
Last Amended​
[/th]​
[td]Constitution of San Marino[/td][td]October 8, 1600[/td][td]2002[/td] [td]United States Constitution[/td][td]June 21, 1788[/td][td]May 5, 1992[/td] [td]Constitution of the Republic of Poland[/td][td]May 3, 1791[/td][td]October 21, 2009[/td] [td]Constitution of Norway[/td][td]May 17, 1814[/td][td]May 13, 2014[/td] [td]Constitution of the Kingdom of the Netherlands[/td][td]c.1814/1815[/td][td]1983[/td] [td]Constitution of Belgium[/td][td]February 7, 1831[/td][td]1993[/td] [td]Constitution of Luxembourg[/td][td]October 12, 1841[/td][td]October 18, 2016[/td] [td]Swiss Federal Constitution[/td][td]September 12, 1848[/td][td]May 8, 2014[/td] [td]Constitutional Act of the Kingdom of Denmark[/td][td]June 5, 1849[/td][td]June 5, 1953[/td] [td]Constitution of Canada[/td][td]July 1, 1867[/td][td]1982[/td]
 

Ask a Question

Back
Top