Trump Gets It. The GOP Doesn't
Once again Republicans have proven just how stupid they can be with Paul Ryan publicly corroborating that Trump’s comments about Judge Curiel are racist. Maybe Ryan should have read attorney Alberto Gonzalez’s Washington Post article defending Trump’s right to question Judge Gonzalo Curiel’s objectivity. Instead, Ryan -- once a Tea Party darling -- couldn’t wait to deride Trump’s comments as racist. This is why people like me -- reluctant Trump supporters -- will vote for him and enthusiastically defend his comments regarding Judge Curiel. If nothing else, the presumptive nominee gives a big “Trump U” to the Democrat-Media Complex overlords and the Republican sycophants who fear them.
Trump isn’t timid about highlighting the double standards that have been foisted upon us by the Democrat-Media Complex and affect virtually every aspect of our lives. You see, racist comments or bias in the criminal justice system or judiciary in general, are racist or biased only when conservatives, Republicans, or, G-d forbid, white people make such comments or hand down judgments that impact any of the myriad victims in the Democrat-Media Complex fold -- gays, blacks, Hispanics, women, union members, the homeless, drug addicts, welfare-recipients, etc.
As clumsy as Trump’s comments might have been, it’s obvious from the context they aren’t racist and, if Republicans behaved more like Democrats, they would have run to the mic to defend his motives and character much like Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Chuck Schumer, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi and the entire Democrat-Media Complex would have responded -- parroting one after the other in a barrage of media appearances and op-eds.
It isn’t that hard, Speaker Ryan. It would go something like this:
Of course Mr. Trump is not a racist. He is saying that, because of his stance on illegal immigration and U.S.-Mexico relations, the judge, who is of Mexican heritage and is a member of La Raza Lawyers Group and holds differing views on these issues than Mr. Trump, might not have been able to separate his personal and political views when he made a slew of negative rulings against Mr. Trump in the Trump U case. These built-in biases can affect a Mexican-American judge in much the same way liberals argue that white police officers have built-in biases against black men.
Regardless of what anyone thinks of the presumptive nominee -- whether a #nevertrumper, an avid trumpporter -- or the many conservatives who are torn apart because they want to stand by their principles but also want to make sure Hillary never steps over the threshold to the White House -- we should demand that Republican and conservative pundits cease and desist from openly bashing Donald Trump. Enough. Like it or not, as of now, Trump is our guy, and, truth be told, we all know that the average Republican candidate would play tiddlywinks with a Hillary candidacy while getting pummeled by her girls' rugby team style tactics.
Trump won’t be afraid to talk about Hillary’s criminality, corruption, and character flaws. He won’t hesitate calling a lie a lie versus a misunderstanding, mistake, or mischaracterization. And he will throw as many punches -- offensively as well as defensively -- as warranted to defend not just himself, but the country, our traditions, our values, and our way of life. He will not let Hillary Clinton mock us, malign us, or marginalize us. He not only gives voice to over half of this country, but defends each and every one of us with pride and patriotism.
Comments by Paul Ryan, David French, Bill Kristol, Erick Erickson -- among too many others -- only serve to divide the party they claim to be uniting. They fan the flames of negativity about the most likely person to be our nominee while arming the enemy with more firepower.
Do Republicans and conservatives ever learn?
Clearly, they do not. They just don’t get it, when it comes to the media, PR, and communication with the public. And they certainly do not understand their own constituents.
Trump gets it. While Republican and conservative pundits throughout the media galaxy are wringing their hands or gnashing their teeth, Trump has barreled ahead unfazed -- taking a page out of the Clinton-Obama-DNC playbook: Go out there, tell your story as you want it be received, turn the guns on your opposition, then move on while using media opportunities to hype your message.
We saw some of this in the interview where Jake Tapper perseverated on probing whether his comment was racist and Trump took advantage of being asked the same question some 23 times to further explain the situation -- although it could have been handled much more skillfully akin to my suggestions above. In response to Tapper’s question “If you are saying he can’t do his job because of his race, is that not the definition of racism?” Trump confidently replied “No, I don’t think so at all.” Republicans take note -- no fumfering, no reversal, no apology, no giving into what’s politically correct.
In an ideal world where everyone plays the game with honesty and integrity, I wouldn’t advocate for this approach. But we don’t live in an ideal world. We live in a world where people lie and cheat and dance around words. They obfuscate. They manipulate. They own the messengers and control the message. They punish those who challenge them. They are politically correct. They pander. They do what’s expedient to get elected. Masters of legerdemain, very little is as it seems. And we the people are getting royally screwed.
We cannot continue to bring a butter knife to a fight where the opposition is wielding a machete. And we can do it without compromising our values. The suggested response above that Ryan should have uttered is truthful yet uses a media opportunity to defend Trump, explain his intent maybe a bit more artfully, and get a message out to the public -- that there is a double standard regarding racism and bias, and we are calling it out.
Trump believes Curiel’s personal and political beliefs regarding his heritage -- not the law and facts of the case -- may have been a factor in a string of negative rulings in the Trump U case. Trump has some views on illegal immigration, the building of a wall, and U.S.-Mexican relations that, it would be an understatement to say, have irritated many Mexican-Americans -- just look at the protestors in San Jose waving Mexican flags and their signs: Make America Mexico Again. It is not far-fetched to suggest that bias might have played a role.
If white juries can be biased against black defendants; if white employers can have built-in, internalized biases that, despite good intentions to be non-judgmental and discrimination-free, dictate their behavior anyway; if basically every time a white person does something to a black person it is racially motivated because we cannot control our inner racist no matter how much we try; if every black male in jail is incarcerated because of institutional and internalized racism even if the cops who put them there are black -- then why can’t a Hispanic judge or employer or juror be riddled with the same invidious racist tendencies that influence their decisions and behaviors as well? Because only whites, conservatives, and Republicans are racists.
To show you how insidious this has become, I was recently at a conference about robots and the law. One of the robots demonstrated was white, like a refrigerator or a car. The academics in the audience considered the color choice of the robot to be racist. When asked why they chose white, the rep said because it was cleaner. Well, if there were people at the conference who didn’t think a white robot was racist, announcing that white was cleaner than other colors quickly changed their opinion. Eventually, a self-identified white male stood before the mic and said he has strived his entire life as a white male of status and education to overcome his racism but understands no matter what he does, his biases are built-in. What can he and others like him do to overcome this? He was serious.
Anyway, in the case of Judge Curiel, had any Democrat made the Trump comment, the entire Democrat-Media Complex machinery would click into gear and every Democrat pundit and politician would deliver the same response -- Clearly, this isn’t racist. It just acknowledges the possible built-in biases of a judge who is clearly ruling against the candidate on every issue. It calls into question his objectivity especially in light of his affiliations outside of his job. It is not because he is of Mexican heritage that he might be biased against Trump; his positions on issues related to U.S.-Mexico relations and Mexican illegal immigration are so at odds with those of Trump, the concern is that they could very well be driving the judge’s negative rulings in the Trump U case.
Then segue into a discussion of how illegal immigration is hurting the country economically and culturally, maybe even bring up the Mexican flags and Make America Mexico Again signs in San Jose. Use the media opportunity to turn the conversation around to Trump talking points about illegal immigration and how, unlike the politicians of the previous 20 years, he will do something about it. Then, move on.
This isn’t hard, yet Republicans just can’t figure it out. Maybe it would help if Paul Ryan and Bill Kristol thought of this like the Katz’s delicatessen scene in When Harry Met Sally: one minute Meg Ryan and Billy Crystal are arguing about fake orgasms, the next minute Meg Ryan is faking an orgasm for all to see in order to clarify her point, once Estelle Reiner says “I’ll have what she’s having” and it is clear the message has been received and she has won, Meg Ryan glibly returns to her coleslaw with great satisfaction.
But this would mean Republicans and conservatives of all stripes would have to band together and walk in lock-step in every press appearance. From Newt to Paul Ryan to Erick Erickson to David French to Jonah Goldberg and Bill Kristol, we’d all have to swarm around our candidate -- love him or not -- and do for him what Democrats always do -- defend him, praise him, and recast his clumsy comments into a more refined and nuanced narrative that makes sense, drives the underlying issues to the surface, and, in the end, highlights our talking points. It doesn’t matter if he is good or bad, right or wrong, stupid or smart. Like the Democrats, we wield our magic wand to make the bad, good; to right the wrongs; to smarten up the stupid.
But we don’t. Instead of explaining our candidate, rallying behind him, and jumping aboard the Trump train, we call him a racist and jump on the politically correct, anti-Trump bandwagon -- which, by the way, is engineered and steered by the Democrat-Media Complex. No rational being can possibly expect that bandwagon to take us all the way to the White House.
And herein lies the rub -- it is the very ineptitude of Republicans articulating our principles and policies and their failure, once elected, to implement the policies promised during campaigns, coupled with all of the politically-correct backtracking they do in an effort not to be criticized by the Democrat-Media Complex, that is responsible for the rise of Donald Trump in the first place.
And this leads to my final query: are Republicans deliberately undermining this nominee because they truly believe 4-8 years of Hillary is better than 4-8 years of Trump? Are Republicans really that stupid? Or, by doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result, are they just nuts?