The mainstream media has been parroting the mantra from the left that Donald Trump is to be feared, that he’s despicable, and they’ve attached a series of accusations against him accordingly. To them, he’s a racist, misogynist, bigot, Islamophobe, fascist, and xenophobe, at least. They take the aspersions one step further, and claim those who voted for him are just the same. This is either out of sheer ignorance, or it is, as the attempted vote recount in Michigan also demonstrates, simply an attempt to delegitimize the results of the election out of desperation.
Reviewing the list of pejorative labels so employed will illustrate how specious and vacuous the tactic is. For example, let’s take the misogynist accusation first. A misogynist is, of course, one who has “hatred of, contempt for, or prejudice against women.” That’s the literal definition. But the effete elite, the same who fabricate “micro aggressions” and create “safe spaces” on college campuses, concoct a plethora of ancillary inferred meanings in an effort to legitimize their aspersions. For clearly, Donald Trump and the majority of people in the 34 states that elected him, do not hate women!
The “Islamophobic” allegation is equally vapid. That charge gained traction after Trump proposed proscribing immigration from Muslim countries until we can more reliably ensure that we’re not letting would-be terrorists through our front door. In other words, exercise the authority provided by the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 which includes a clause that prohibits entry to the US if the Alien belongs to an organization seeking to overthrow the government of the United States by “force, violence, or other unconstitutional means.”
Typically used in conjunction with both the “racist” and “Islamophobic” aspersions, is the accusation of Trump, and by default, his supporters, being xenophobic. Xenophobia is “fear and hatred of strangers or foreigners or of anything that is strange or foreign.” Only the intellectually challenged or dishonest can say with a straight face that efforts to protect and preserve the nation, as classified above, are “xenophobic.” It’s not a fear of foreigners or immigrants; it’s a precaution against either importing potential terrorists or allowing them to slip illegally across our border.
The “bigot” charge may have some relevance, but not in the way employed by the media who simply regurgitate the accusations of the left. Bigotry is “stubborn and complete intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one’s own.” Trump is anything but a bigot, by strict definition. Most of his friends and associates over the years, at least in government circles, have been liberals and progressives. They’d likely not be his friends if he was “intolerant” of them and their disparate views. The only class of people the president elect seems to truly have contempt for is “stupid” people.
When assessed logically, we’ve never had a more “fascistic” president than our 44th, with the way he bypassed congress with his “pen and his phone” making rules and laws out of thin air, dictator-like. And his government bailouts and intense implementation of regulation, has had the stifling effect of our economy entirely controlled by the government.
If anything, Trump represents a reversal of the fascistic system he’s inheriting, by easing the onerous regulatory environment and his determination to work with congress rather than dictator-like bypassing the legislative branch as Obama has.
The same applies to those who elected him. Trump was not elected by racist, xenophobic bigots. He was elected by voters who are sick of the corruption, cronyism, imposition of Washington’s ideological whims, and the racial divider at the top. Voters who knew that a vote for Clinton would just be more of the last eight years and realized that the only way for some real “hope and change” would come by electing an outsider.
Calling names, assigning pejorative labels and ascribing assumed motives does nothing to improve the public dialogue or assuage the ideological chasm that divides us. If we’re to be “One nation under God,” and truly the United States of America, we must move beyond the superfluous and unwarranted ad hominem aspersions and approach our politics, and our politicians, with candor and precision. Otherwise, we’re simply contributors to the division. Part of the problem, rather than the solution.
Associated Press award winning columnist Richard Larsen is President of Larsen Financial, a brokerage and financial planning firm in Pocatello, Idaho and is a graduate of Idaho State University with degrees in Political Science and History and coursework completed toward a Master’s in Public Administration. He can be reached at rlarsenen@cableone.net.
A 2023 drone strike originally believed to have killed a top leader of the radical…
Members of a CNN panel on Thursday agreed that Democratic Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg…
Plagued with inept leadership, a fractured society and an unstable economy, the once powerful, centuries-old…
Forget partisan, ideological or religious lines. It's about the Benjamin! Human Sacrifice, also known as…
Former White House Director of Digital Strategy Robert Flaherty on Wednesday was unable to state…