It appears that some Trumpies have panties in a twist over the brouhaha that erupted over "The Donna" waltzing over a question by an obviously ignorant Reeptardo at a NH Rally. They are outraged, outraged ....that their man has taken it on the chin again by "commies and limp wristed socialists" - oblivious to the searing complaints that have also appeared in conservative media and by Reepo candidates themselves - including Chris Christie and Lindsey Graham. What? These two aren't conservative enough for them?
One FLA blogger has erupted in incandescent vitriol to the disdain shown the Donna by asserting on his site that: "Trump is under no obligation to defend Obummer from words or attacks"
Which is true. He isn't under any "obligation". But as John McCain showed in 2008, there is such a thing as countering racist hate-filled claims (and queries, questions) on principle- especially woven in lies (the blogger claims he has "proof" Obama "admitted to being a Muslim", but any half competent jerk can put together a dubbed, edited faux video (see link at bottom) that abuses facts and portrays falsehoods - I could cite dozens!)
This is one element of leadership I warrant is important, not that it is "obligated". McCain demonstrated he possessed that element of leadership (as well as courage) but "the Donna" didn't - choosing to bypass a golden opportunity to show he had some type of principles and wasn't just a rabble rousing demagogue as conservative (NOT communist) columnist Cal Thomas put it in his recent column.(Colo. Springs Gazette, Sept. 17.)
But failing to take up the challenge, again because it's easier to act the part of a pissed-ass bully boy, Trump lost on the matter of upholding propriety in a public forum - because even if one had antipathy toward Muslims and especially extremists, it was NOT necessary to drag Obama's background into it, which has already been thoroughly documented as 100 percent Christian NOT Muslim! (With the birther scrapple also debunked by serious journalists.) And I would argue this point to the ends of the earth, though it might be futile in doing so with a person who only gets news or views from a limited, biased media domain. Or, who has his mind already made up, meaning he embraces a pre-established belief, divorced from objective evidence.
The blogger also insists:
"These commies and socialist bastards are just trying to tell Americans that they can't say whatever they want.."
First, we aren't "commies and socialist bastards"- all his histrionics and hysteria notwithstanding. (Well, ok, I am a socialist, but not a bastard.) But leaving out all the useless elaborations, we are full, red blooded Americans like he is, but believe our political campaign forums ought to be venues for uplifting political insight and informative exchange, as opposed to being mere pig pens with pig excrement tossed hither, thither and yon.
Thus, a fool - half assed and ignorant - "saying whatever he wants" reduces the political forum to the lowest common denominator. This isn't democracy but rather the rough equivalent of having a shit tossing contest. See how much shit you can dig up and just hurl in any direction, truth and facts be damned (like in the Reepo "debates"). In such a venue, it is then the responsibility of the political candidate to act the grown up and "throw the penalty flag" - to use football parlance. Not to stand there like a dummy, bloviate about this and that and allow the goober's hurled shit to pass without comment.
Second, it is not just we on the left calling attention to this. If the blogger would have read my blog post properly (from which source I presume he got his material to react so vehemently) he would have seen multiple references to conservatives and Republican candidates. They also pulled Trump up for his egregious omission to call out a knuckle dragger and hateful fool that debased the civic space of a political forum by his xenophobic ranting.
What I am hoping is that he will agree with the right to criticize by those upstanding conservatives and not vilify them as "commies" too, because they do criticize. It would also give me confidence that the NY Times piece I read last week - about most of Trump's base and following being abject xenophobic haters and racists - is not true. Because, personally, I cannot believe the blogger is a racist at heart.
Anyway, the choice remains: do we want our public political rallies and forums to be hitting the high marks for content and sobriety as well as propriety, or "pig pens"? If we choose the slack pass, anything goes latter we can only gnash our teeth when the political outcome is ultimately no better than what the Germans wrought in their 1932-33 elections that injected Hitler onto the world stage.
The question then remains which my blogger pal can answer himself:
Do Trumpies have any concept of principle or propriety for the political arena?
We "commies" are waiting with bated breath to hear.