by Robert M. Traxler
Let’s discuss a recent speech Secretary Hillary Clinton gave at fund-raiser in New York City to a group of rich donors headlined by Barbara Streisand. She said in the speech Sept. 9, “You can put half (more than 63,000,000) of Trump supporters in what I call the basket of deplorables.” Mrs. Clinton went on to say half of Trump supporters are racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic, and other phobics.
Referring to many of the good Americans in Dorr, Wayland, Hastings, Martin and Moline as deplorable and then to say the Republicans want to divide us should be condemned for its hypocrisy. Not to worry, the good folks in the media agree with her that most of us are horrible, vile, racist, people.
This goes back to the bedrock of the Democratic Party; if you have the audacity to disagree with a liberal, you are not wrong, you are a racist. If you do not want unisex bathrooms you are homophobic, if you do not want tens of thousands of unvetted immigrants from countries that are hot beds of Islamic Terrorists you are Islamophobic. If you prefer to use historic terms like fireman, policeman, lineman or yeoman you’re a sexist. Xenophobic, a term I had to look up to understand, is a catch-all term. The Thesaurus uses words like, chauvinistic, intolerant, racist, nationalist and prejudiced. Secretary Clinton used xenophobic just in case she missed prejudging anyone who may be contemplating ever voting for a Republican.
We now have a new way to divide us even further using the term “nativist;” give the left a day or two and they will come up with a few more ways to divide us.
One of the things I have never been able to understand is what I call zip code prejudice. The liberal folks who live on the east and west coast think you and I are toothless backward rubes because we live in flyover country (land you fly over when going from coast to coast) or Mid-America. They also feel those who live on the coasts are vastly superior humans compared to those of us who live in Mid-America.
According to the self-proclaimed liberal elite, if you want to become a good bit smarter, move to a politically correct zip code. One of the things that has always baffled me is how the liberals in Mid-America agree with the assertion that your address makes you either smarter or a complete idiot. Somehow a mid-American liberal feels the east and west coast liberals are not referring to them, but all those other ignorant fools in Mid-America.
Secretary Clinton’s remarks are designed to sow hate and division in the name of unity. Mrs. Clinton’s remarks prejudged 63 million Americans, but the folks in the media will tell us she is not prejudiced because prejudging millions of outstanding Americans by a liberal is not prejudging. Folks, you cannot make this ridiculous stuff up. Common sense is not so common when it comes to politically correct liberal hate and prejudice.
Our friends on the left are not doing us any favors dividing Americans into groups to politically divide and conquer. We need to celebrate our national pride in a way to include all Americans, not dredge up our divisions from 151 or 168 years ago, divisions over slavery and the Mexican War.
There are 600 sub-groups who according to the self-proclaimed enlightened ones on the left have never had a chance to succeed in our nation and are still held down and unable to succeed. A self-fulfilling prophesy; tell most people they cannot succeed and they won’t, tell folks they can succeed and many will.
Presidents Clinton, Obama, and Carter, liberal presidents elected after the Civil Rights Acts of the 1960s, all said that they would end the perceived and real injustice; if it were a true problem, would not President Obama have fixed it? President Obama had a majority in the House and Senate but he offered almost no laws in the area of civil rights; could it be they were not as necessary as the Democrats constantly say they are? Could it be the United States is not the bastion of “phobics” Mrs. Clinton maintains we are?
Time for a change time, for President Trump.
It is all about remaining in control. One must ask why, when an outsider or a serious 3rd party candidate becomes a viable option for voters, that both Major Parties join to quash any thought of voters turning toward them? We saw it with Ross Perot, the Democrats turned on one of their own candidates (Bernie Sanders) and Republicans are doing their best to stifle the Trump movement (even to the point of voting and supporting a Democrat, that Conservatives claim to abhor). It is all about maintaining the status quo of the (supposed) 2 party system. My own opinion is that elections that pit 2 candidates (one from each political party) is much the same as a professional wrestling match. Where once, there was even the premise of a “working man’s party versus a big business party, there is little difference between the two now. Both are solely engaged in luring whatever portion of “Big Business” as they can and consider them the only constituency that they serve, regardless of what they promise “us” during any given campaign.
If one were to take the blinders off, most programs that are touted for the people are just more government subsidy of any given business sector. Free prescription drugs =’s a pharmaceutical subsidy. Food Stamp Program expansion benefits the Corporate Farmers and Food Retailers. Mortgage Relief is not a bailout of mortgage borrowers, but a bailout of banks that face the dread of foreclosing on mortgages and becoming the holders of a ton of worthless real estate (in comparison to the valuations given when lending on them). And both parties have been guilty of expanding these subsidy programs under the guise of “Helping the People”.
The real travesty of all this is, the media, which is supposed to serve the people as a fair and balanced source of information, have joined the politicos to keep “us” both blind to these political games, as well as to keep us divided. And what is even more frightening is, that most citizens have failed to use their own reasoning to figure out the actual truth contrary to what our media and politicians are force feeding us as the truth.
I agree with your analysis, Bob, but Trump is not the answer, and I’m not afraid to say that, obviously.
Ah David T., the beauty of being an American is we can voice our differing views and opinions. I feel differently of course, but I think I have always been more of a gambler than you. And that would actually make you more CONSERVATIVE than me. LOL!!
Hillary is a proven screw up and a liar. Thus far, Trump has not been given the political opportunity to be proven either, so he is only accused thus far and deserves a chance to either put up or screw up.
I liked Jimmy Carter, but he was one poor president. And before Obama, I thought he was the worst I would ever see. Giving money to Iran to fund the continuation of terrorism, restricting the production of fossil fuel and making us more dependent of the Saudis, trade deals that are a joke and violated by our supposed trade “Partners” are one more opportunity by other nations to make us a laughing stock and poorer as a nation and the out and out dishonesty (as well as lack of transparency) are some of the more dubious acts of his presidency, that I find not only contrary to the welfare of our nation but frightful. And Hillary is just a continuation of all that. And I am not afraid to say that. As it should be.
So, we will see. Perhaps he is not the answer, but then again, he may be. Time to roll the dice baby. LOL!!
typo should read “more dubious acts of this presidency”.
Mr. Moras,
Thanks for the comments . I would say Mr. Trump is more of an outsider than Mrs. Clinton. If we give Trump a chance he may be stronger for the people than we have seen in my lifetime.
A third party just maybe the solution .The system is so ingrained it will be hard to defeat from the left or right. If someone like Ross Perot would try today he or she may have a chance appealing to the center