Crooks, Liars, and Deplorables

I don’t recall if it was my parents, my teachers, or my Pastor who said it first, but I definitely remember learning to keep my negative thoughts and opinions to myself at an early age. The expression they used was, “If you can’t say anything nice, don’t say anything at all.” I have since amended that to, “Find something nice to say, even if you need to reach really, really deep to find it.” This habit has served me well over the years.

Unfortunately, this is “old” thinking. The “new” way is to say every vile, repulsive thing that comes to mind. But only about certain people who are “out of favor,” or if they happen to be your political opponent. It is acceptable (apparently) to demonstrate complete and utter prejudice towards your adversary, and the supporters of your adversary.

At the last Presidential debate, the candidates were asked to name one positive thing that they respected in one another. I held my breath for a moment, hoping that neither candidate would say, “Sorry, can’t think of a thing.” And when Clinton jumped in (despite the moderator inviting Trump to go first), I was waiting for an icy blast. Instead, she said that she respected Trump’s children, saying that they are incredibly able and devoted. She even added that she thought that this says a lot about Donald. Trump affirmed that Clinton’s comment was a very nice compliment. Trump complimented Hillary on her tenacity, saying “She doesn’t quit. She doesn’t give up. I respect that.”

Aside from these few moments, however, the Presidential campaigns of both candidates appear to be a race to the bottom. Presidential hopefuls used to hold their acid comments and criticisms to themselves, sometimes relying on others to do their dirty work. Not any longer. The gloves, it would seem, are off.

For the most part, being politically correct (PC) is the “in” thing to do. You can’t say certain words, and you can’t express certain opinions, because they may be “offensive.” For example, you can’t say “homo,” but you can say, “gay.” At least, I think that’s the current correct way to express homosexuality. And be careful to say “Happy Holidays” and not “Merry Christmas,” if you don’t want to start a riot.

There are major exceptions to this rule, however. Particularly in the area of politics and political candidates. In this arena, you can throw around labels and insults, with little or no proof to back up your statements. But only if the candidate is not “favored” in the eyes of the media. The PC Police has taken a holiday.

Apparently, Donald Trump is a Racist. I am supposed to know this, because that’s the label that Hillary Clinton has assigned him. When you drill down to the details, you find things like the fact that Trump suggested that he might not trust a Muslim judge to be fair to him, in light of his proposed restrictions on Muslim immigration. I don’t know what you think, but to me that sounds somewhat logical.

First of all, judges are supposed to recuse themselves (excuse oneself from a case because of a possible conflict of interest or lack of impartiality) in such situations. Failing that, I think that the defendant might challenge the impartiality of a person with such a vested interest. If I was on trial, and I had just proposed a policy to limit immigration of – for purposes of illustration – short people, and the judge was 4 feet tall, I think I might have difficulty trusting the outcome. Would I then be called a short-ist? I’m not trying to make light of the situation, I’m just trying to put the debate in a different context for clarity.

There has been an explosion recently about Trump’s attitudes and behaviors towards women. If the woman is attractive, he can be very complimentary, and even engage is what used to be called “guy talk” about what he’d like to do with her. All of this type of commentary and behavior came to a halt when he started his political career. But with the magic of video (and audio) tape, it will never go away. Even if he no longer thinks or behaves this way.

The same can be said of Clinton – both Bill and Hillary. There were sex scandals galore when Bill Clinton was in office, and Hillary was there to explain them away or to denigrate the victims. There is ample evidence available, but very little interest in the mainstream media about it. In fact, a Hillary supporter calling Bill Clinton’s female rape victims “tramps” is funny. Donald Trump talking about beautiful women he wants to have sex with is “horrific”.

To vote for anyone else besides Trump or Clinton is truly a wasted vote, except to make yourself feel better and assuage your conscience. So, I propose we all do this: take all off the “sex” off the table, and look at what is left. Vote on immigration, tax policy, jobs, trade, and military proposals.

If this seems overly simplistic to you, I apologize. My logic is this: we are not voting on the sexual morals of the candidates. We are voting on their policies. In the end, that is what truly matters. Look at JFK: he was famous for the numbers of sexual conquests he had while in office. Jimmy Carter was the exact opposite, and was truly torn up because he lusted “in his heart.” What history remembers is what these presidents did or didn’t do with regard to military action and policy issues. So that is what you need to remember when you decide on who to vote for. And God help us all in our deliberations, because much is at stake.