Womp For Victory
On the June 19 episode of Fox News Channel’s “The Story with Martha MacCallum”, substitute host Sandra Smith had former Donald Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski and Democratic Party strategist Zac Petkanas on for a segment about Trump’s zero-tolerance immigration policy, which at that time included separating children from adults when they cross the border illegally. Petkanas began with a story he read about a 10-year-old girl with Down syndrome who was separated from her mother. He neglected to mention that the mother was suspected of involvement with a child trafficking ring and was detained for that reason. Lewandowski responded by rolling his eyes and making his now-famous retort, “womp womp”, as in a sad-trombone effect that follows a failure of some kind. This caused Petkanas to completely lose his composure as he raised his voice,
“How dare you! How dare you! How absolutely dare you, sir! We have infants that are being taken from their mothers! We have infants that are being stolen from their mothers and put into cages! And you go ‘womp womp’?! This just exemplifies…how dare you, sir, how dare you! She has Down syndrome and she was taken from her mother. How dare you.”
Meanwhile, Lewandowski maintained composure and softly continued,
“What I said is you can pick anything you want to, but the bottom line is very clear: when you cross the border illegally you have given up the rights of that country. When you cross the border illegally, when you commit a crime, you are taken away from your family because that’s how this country works.”
Smith tried to keep them from talking over each other, to little avail. The next day, Lewandowski appeared with Smith again on FNC’s “America’s Newsroom” as well as on Chris Cuomo’s show on CNN to clarify his remarks, saying that “womp womp” was directed at Petkanas for politicizing children and not at the young child.
The great and good of the Cathedral brahmins reacted predictably. On June 20, Lewandowski was released by Leading Authorities Inc., a Washington, D.C. firm that helps political figures get speaking engagements. MSNBC host Rachel Maddow cried at the end of her show over the issue of child detainment centers. David Perry expressed dismay over the Trump administration’s “white nationalist agenda” in CNN’s opinion column. The harridans of ABC’s The View were outraged. NBC’s Megyn Kelly called Lewandowski a coward and said that he should be de-platformed.
This series of events contains several important lessons. First, one should always point out the logical fallacies employed by one’s opponent. Petkanas used an anecdote of a non-typical case as an appeal to emotion to attempt to sway listeners, both of which are fallacious forms. Lewandowski saw right through Petkanas’ tactics and decided to short-circuit them. While one inclined to rational discourse may take issue with Lewandowski’s method, preferring instead to explain the fallacies, it is important to recognize instances in which there is no rational discourse.
Second, Lewandowski read his opponent well and responded in a manner tailored to the situation. Realizing the appeal to emotion that was underway, Lewandowski correctly predicted that he could cause Petkanas to become overly emotional by dismissing the appeal. Petkanas probably went into the segment thinking that no one would respond to a sob story in such a manner. It is important to recognize signs that an opponent is on an edge and be prepared to tip them over that edge. Again, the method of base dismissal and ridicule was more effective than a reasoned argument about differing values because Petkanas was arguing in bad faith by intentionally resorting to fallacies. Furthermore, Petkanas was engaging in rhetoric rather than dialectic, so countering him with dialectic would have been a fruitless endeavor.
Third, Lewandowski used a sharp approach. To counter Petkanas, he who dares wins, and if Lewandowski’s efforts could have been improved, it would have been by responding to Petkanas’ stammering with this exact phrase. Petkanas was virtue signalling and expecting Lewandowski to genuflect as most Republicans would, which is the dullest approach. Meeting a virtue signal with a counter-signal is much better. Lewandowski was also careful not to be too sharp; actually mocking or attacking an innocent child with disabilities certainly would fall into this category.
Fourth, Lewandowski went high when Petkanas went low by keeping composure and continuing to speak calmly while Petkanas raged. In politics in general and democracy in particular, perception trumps reality and optics overrule facts. What the audience believes determines voting results more than the truth. While no cable television segment is going to resolve as complex an issue as illegal immigration into the United States, any neutral, dispassionate observer who watched that segment had to give the round to Lewandowski even if the facts do not entirely favor the hardline position.
Finally, and most importantly, Lewandowski refused to apologize. Instead, he simply clarified his meaning and held his ground. Radical leftists take a good-faith apology as a confession of wrongthink. They view their opponents not just as misguided, but as morally evil. They offer persecution rather than forgiveness in return for such gestures, as they regard apologies as guilty pleas that allow them to skip straight to the sentencing phase in their court of public opinion. Had he apologized, it is likely that Lewandowski would have lost far more than a few speaking engagements. His clarification fell on the deaf ears, blind eyes, and numb fingers of the presstitutes that continued to post hit piece after hit piece online, but their lies and misrepresentations were obvious to a neutral observer. No amount of mea culpa would make the establishment press or leftist activists view Lewandowski favorably, and that which cannot be done should not be attempted.
These five lessons are important to remember when debating leftists, especially of the social justice warrior variety. Taken together, they offer an effective guide to baiting leftist activists into making themselves look more ridiculous than usual while minimizing the amount of harm to oneself. Lewandowski’s handling of this incident is an example for all to follow. Just imagine if all efforts to emotionally manipulate people into pushing society further leftward were met with that concise and devastating two-word rejection: womp womp.
<<Introducing Agnostic History+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++How Much Force is Best for Civilization?>>