Category: Politics

Donald Trump is not just another run-of-the-mill presidential candidate, yet the media insists on normalizing and legitimizing this menace to our democracy while at the same time they report at length all the Republicans’ manufactured scandals about Hillary Clinton–even after she’s been legally exonerated. Whose side are they on? Given Trump’s contempt for the media, no one would expect them to have any respect for him; yet their fascination with the weird spectacle of a know-nothing NYC playboy winning over voters and the bizarre mental image of this buffoon sitting in the Oval Office has yielded them powerless to speak rationally about what they see and hear.

Everyone has heard the children’s story “The Emperor’s New Clothes,” by Hans Christian Andersen. Once upon a time, there lived a vain emperor who, more than anything else, loved being admired for his fine sartorial sense: “He had a coat for every hour of the day, and instead of saying, as one might, about any other ruler, ‘The King’s in council,’ here they always said, ‘The Emperor’s in his dressing room.’”

Then one day, two swindlers showed up in town who “let it be known they were weavers, and they said they could weave the most magnificent fabrics imaginable. Not only were their colors and patterns uncommonly fine, but clothes made of this cloth had a wonderful way of becoming invisible to anyone who was unfit for his office, or who was unusually stupid.”

The emperor, never able to resist an appeal to his vanity, immediately hired the two swindlers to set up their looms and start weaving some of their magnificent cloth for him. Believing the promise that this cloth would give him extraordinary powers of perception, he paid them a great sum of money. The swindlers worked day and night. Whenever anyone went to have a look at their progress, the two swindlers baited them with talk of the beautiful colors and pattern; and even though no one could ever see anything “because there was nothing to see,” they would never admit it because it had been established that inability to see the cloth was proof of gross stupidity. One day, a retinue of the emperor’s trusted advisers went to view the “cloth” and recommended that the emperor have garments made from it to wear in the upcoming procession. The swindlers were delighted and went to work immediately to make the “garments.”

 

The day of the grand procession arrived, and the swindlers—with much pomp and ceremony—dressed the emperor in his new outfit. Neither the emperor nor the people watching would, of course, admit to seeing no clothing on the emperor’s body. So he was escorted to his “splendid canopy,” and the grand procession began. As he marched haughtily down the streets, naked, spectators–not wishing to be revealed as stupid–exclaimed over the fine garments the emperor wore. Even after an innocent child spoke the truth, “He’s not wearing anything” and adults began echoing the child’s words, and even though the emperor inwardly feared they were right, he still had to maintain his image. “So he walked more proudly than ever, as his noblemen held high the train that wasn’t there at all.”

This story has been used as an analogy many times since its publication, but I think perhaps it’s never been more pertinent than as an example of the media’s relationship to Donald Trump and their clear abetting of his rise to become the Republican party’s nominee for the presidency of our country. The media’s legitimizing and normalizing of Trump’s buffoonery is widely regarded as one of the key factors in his success so far. His campaign “speeches” consist of ranting about how great he is and attacking the latest person who has treated him “unfairly.” It’s all about him! Yet these meandering trails of verbal vomit have been parsed and discussed on the evening news by panels of “pundits” as if they were made of real cloth. Why do the people whose professional codes obligate them to speak the truth seem blind to the truth about Trump?  Like the emperor and all of the adults in his kingdom, they look at a naked person and analyze the color, pattern, texture, and tailoring of his outfit. Even a child can see the candidate is naked! What our media talking heads are calling “policy proposals” and “positions” are nothing but underwear! I’ve wanted to scream at my TV screen every night as I watch these “experts” continue to treat Trump’s lunatic ravings as a serious political platform, “He’s naked! For the love of all that is good, stop talking about his clothes!”

One thing the “heads” keep talking about is when Trump will “pivot” to a serious general election mode, as if that would legitimize their enabling and pandering so far. He has less than four months left to make this “pivot”; and frankly, no amount of pivoting would erase the stupidity, hatred, and lies he’s already spoken. Too late! The presidency is not the place for on-the-job training. After each of the rare occasions on which he’s read a speech from a teleprompter, the talking heads seriously comment on how presidential he seemed. NO, that’s still underwear you’re seeing, folks! SAY it!

Donald Trump is as ignorant of our Constitution as I am of spacecraft technology (I know nothing), but that doesn’t stop him from seeking a job which requires an intimate knowledge of it, and that doesn’t stop people from critiquing his wardrobe when he’s actually naked. I could possibly overlook the “Article XII” remark if he’d been able to give an intelligent response to the question about how he’d protect the Article I powers. There is no Article XII, but I understand it’s difficult to be asked questions on the spot and an occasional slip is inevitable. So I’m willing to give him a little bit of a pass on that one. However, there IS an Article I, and if he’d known enough about it to answer the question intelligently, he’d never have gotten to the Article XII part. His response—“I want to protect Article I, Article II, Article XII”—was the emperor’s recognition that he is indeed wearing no clothes but is determined to continue marching proudly forward because the show must go on.

The Trump supporters I’ve heard from most often cite his outsider status as their primary reason for supporting him. They’re sick of politicians, they don’t trust any of them, and they’re buoyed by the promise of someone who’s not a politician bringing hoped-for change to shake things up in Washington, D.C. I understand that, and I even share some of that distrust and disgust, especially for the deadbeat members of Congress who have done nothing but obstruct for the last eight years. I also have a pretty strong distrust of doctors. I don’t like how they’re always pushing pills and treating symptoms without looking for more holistic therapies. BUT when I decide I don’t like my doctor, I don’t turn to my auto mechanic, my lawn maintenance crew, my next-door neighbor, or my hair stylist to take over my health care. My hair stylist is quite a health-conscious young woman, and we sometimes discuss her holistic ideas on wellness because some of her ideas are really good. This year, my next-door neighbors have become “mostly vegan” as an approach to more healthful living, and I’ve been interested in their ideas and recipes. However, if I become seriously ill, I won’t be calling my hair stylist or my neighbor. I may try one of the non-conventional professionals, such as a naturopath or a chiropractor, or I might even try an acupuncturist if I were not such a coward around needles. Those people are outsiders to conventional medicine, but they’re NOT untrained; they’re trained in different methods but still knowledgeable about the human body and its care.

And the problem most often lamented about this election is the only alternative to the naked emperor is another unpopular and highly distrusted candidate. How many times have you heard people say “I just wish we had another choice”? And I see their point. For me, the choice between these two is easy, but I’ll admit I wouldn’t mind having another option. Hillary Clinton is a flawed candidate; I know few people who disagree with that statement.  She’s been the subject of many investigations; and even though she’s been cleared of guilt, and charges have been dropped in each one, they’ve left scars on her reputation. The FBI Director just this month used the words “extremely careless” to describe her handling of classified information. But with her as the only alternative to Donald Trump, the choice is in my opinion a no-brainer. She’s a highly intelligent, highly educated, and highly experienced person. She knows how many articles the Constitution has, and she could offer a coherent, thoughtful answer to a question about any one of those articles. She has served in high office and knows how government works. Not much is going to shock her or throw her off course. She’s a smart, seasoned candidate; she’s also an imperfect candidate, but she’s clothed! And I’m not talking about her famous jackets. I’m talking about her knowledge of history, law, and government.

Arianna Huffington has gained my respect as a most outspoken journalist, not afraid to admit what she sees and report to the world that Emperor Trump is wearing no clothes. For several months, she has added this comment at the end of every article about Trump:

“Editor’s note: Donald Trump regularly incites political violence and is a serial liar,rampant xenophobe, racist, misogynist and birther who has repeatedly pledged to ban all Muslims ― 1.6 billion members of an entire religion ― from entering the U.S.

In an excellent article published in the July 12 Huffington Post, she cites Edward R. Murrow, the journalist’s journalist from the early to mid-twentieth century:

“’This is no time for men who oppose Senator McCarthy’s methods to keep silent,’ Murrow said on the air in 1954. ‘We can deny our heritage and our history, but we cannot escape responsibility for the result. There is no way for a citizen of a republic to abdicate his responsibilities… We proclaim ourselves, as indeed we are, the defenders of freedom wherever it continues to exist in the world. But we cannot defend freedom abroad by deserting it at home… Cassius was right. ‘The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves.’ Good night, and good luck.”

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has lived up to her nickname, “Notorious RBG,” by risking her reputation and her legacy to speak the truth: “The emperor is naked!” Judges are not supposed to support or denounce candidates for elected office, but this judge placed love of her country above rules and above her personal interests.

This is no time to be silent on the threat which looms in November. Donald Trump has no clothes! Admitting what is blatantly obvious is not evidence of stupidity; it’s evidence of intelligence, courage, and love of country.

These last few years, I’ve increasingly had the feeling I’m living in the Wild West. Everywhere I go, I hear gun-slinging, NRA-brainwashed, second-amendment-parroting folks crowing about protecting themselves and their families and the American way of life. Sometimes the enemy is their fellow citizens, sometimes it’s a potential mass shooter, and sometimes it’s our government. Here are a few lines from some western movies which may sound vaguely reminiscent of statements you’ve seen recently on social media.

Made famous by Clint Eastwood and probably the most familiar line of all, this one is often used in jest with no real intent to do harm. But when this attitude is expressed in tense situations, it says, “Your life is of so little value to me that I welcome the chance to snuff it out. Just give me a reason! I dare you!”

Here’s another one:

Kurt Russell, as Wyatt Earp, also thinks he can solve problems with his guns. This doesn’t sound like an invitation to a friendly chat or a logical argument. If someone bothers you, a threat of violence should make them see things your way. That’s what the NRA says, so it must be true.

And another:

Doc Holliday, too, thinks he’ll solve both of his current problems with his pair of six shooters. Why talk when you can shoot?

And finally:

Gun pointed, John Wayne, as John Bernard Books, gives the person looking at the open end of the barrel a lesson in respect.

These fictional characters and their bravado-fueled threats are entertaining enough. Even though I’m not a big fan of the genre, I probably wouldn’t favor denying others their enjoyment. What troubles me is seeing these attitudes playing out in the words of real people I know and interact with, especially the statements I find on social media which sound just like these four examples. In real life, violence never solves a problem; it just compounds the problem. And the plot is not neatly wrapped up in 90-120 minutes; it can go on over generations.

Two police officers, in two separate cities, on two consecutive days, kill two black men; and the next night, a crazed sniper murders five police officers and wounds seven more. Now even more people are angry, even more people are protesting, and even more people may die. Yet the most die-hard NRA bullies are not even willing to come to the table to talk about another way of solving problems. They just keep talking about the second amendment, while making it crystal clear that they’ve never even read the whole thing or given it five minutes’ thought.

Well, I for one am tired of the wild, wild west; I’d love to live in a peaceful, civilized society where I don’t have to look over my shoulder wherever I go or wonder if that new person in church might be another Dylan Roof or whether the person in line ahead of me at the convenience store could be planning to rob the place and kill everyone present or whether my grandchildren might be murdered at their little school desks or whether I might leave the movie theater in a body bag or whether the person I flicked off in traffic is going to run me off the road and shoot me dead. Just kidding! I don’t do that! If I did, perhaps I should be ashamed of myself for being rude and uncouth, but I shouldn’t die.

Martin Luther King suggested a better way:

It takes “guts” to stand up for your principles, to live by them and not just say the words. It takes “guts” to face unfair treatment with only the force of your own words and the power of your faith and conviction. It may cost you, as it cost Dr. King; but more often than not, people don’t die for non-violent resistance. More often than not, they effect change; and even those who do die, as Dr. King did, leave behind a legacy of hope, not a bloody trail of dead bodies.

In contrast to the four images of gun- and bravado-enforced threats, look at these four images of strong character and bold conviction.

Kudos to Mr. Bachman for capturing this beautiful, captivating image: an unarmed, poised, dignified woman approaching two officers in riot gear. She was arrested and detained overnight, but now the whole world has witnessed her protest and been moved by her courage and dignity, and no one died. Her protest did not escalate an already tense situation. In the accompanying article published in the July 11 Huffington Post, the photographer explains: “It happened quickly, but I could tell that she wasn’t going to move, and it seemed like she was making her stand. To me it seemed like: You’re going to have to come and get me. . . . It wasn’t very violent. She didn’t say anything. She didn’t resist, and the police didn’t drag her off.” No one can say at this point whether her protest will help ease tension or restore order, but we can say it did nothing to increase tension or cause further disorder.

The above image is already being compared with this one:

The lone figure standing in front of the column of tanks has come to be known as “Tank Man” and has become part of the history of the Tianenman Square student protest in Beijing in 1989. Tianenman Square was anything but a non-violent confrontation, and the body count is variously estimated in the hundreds or perhaps the thousands. But this lone individual makes his personal statement peacefully and with human dignity.

Rosa Parks has long been one of my heroes for her courageous protest of discriminatory laws in the state of Alabama and most other Southern states. On December 1, 1955, Ms. Parks, already a civil rights activist, refused to yield her seat in the “colored” section of the bus  to a white man who couldn’t find a seat in the white section because that section was already filled.

As a result of her defying the bus driver’s order, she was arrested and taken to jail. In a TV interview years later, Ms. Parks recalled,  “When he saw me still sitting, he asked if I was going to stand up, and I said, ‘No, I’m not.’ And he said, ‘Well, if you don’t stand up, I’m going to have to call the police and have you arrested.’ I said, ‘You may do that.'” She gave him permission to have her arrested! She didn’t fight or threaten; she just said, “I’m not moving. Do what you have to do.” And no one died.

What did happen is that outrage over Ms. Parks’s treatment launched the Montgomery Bus Boycott which eventually led to changes in the law. This was also the incident which catapulted the mostly unknown pastor of Dexter Avenue Baptist Church in Atlanta, the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., into the national spotlight where he created his own legacy for which all African Americans everywhere are indebted to him.

Rosa Parks has earned the titles “the first lady of civil rights” and “the mother of the freedom movement,” and she did it without firing a shot, threatening to fire a shot, or spewing hateful, vitriolic words. She did it all by quietly and consistently resisting injustice.

Finally, here’s another familiar face:

Mohandas Gandhi, better known by his honorific title Mahatma Gandhi, led India to independence from British rule and inspired other civil rights and freedom movements across the world, all by means of nonviolent civil disobedience, which he also called non-co-operation. He is known for saying “Non-cooperation with evil is as much a duty as is cooperation with good.” His accomplishments are far too numerous for the small scope of this article, and they were all accomplished without firing a shot and without threat or implementation of violence on his part.

Guns or guts? Do we want to retreat further and further into the wild west, until we’re all strapping on our six shooters to go to the grocery store? Or will enough people grow enough guts to face evil and overcome it with love? Each of us has to make our own choice. I’ve made mine.