Trump and Racism

Disclaimer: I will not be voting for Trump, because I consider him incapable of being a successful president. His main qualification for the presidency, his alleged business acumen, is a sham. He has more failed business ideas than Ralph Kramden. Trump's only skill is marketing himself, hence his success in politics so far. Finally, his political views seem to shift quickly and often, so it is difficult to say what he believes in, if anything.

With that disclaimer out of the way, now we must face an unpleasant truth: Hillary Clinton and the progressive/socialist Media are about to get him elected president, because they are ignoring the 800 pound cultural gorilla in the room: Racism.

But they keep accusing him of racism? How are they missing it?

The problem is in the classic Shakespearean line: "The lady doth protest too much, methinks." Or if you prefer, it is in the boy who cried wolf. The Left's favorite accusation for everything is racism. If you simply disagree with a darker-skinned Leftist, you will inevitably be called a racist, especially when they have no other defense.

This has created a dog whistle for conservatives and moderates and independents. When they hear a Leftist call something racist, it probably isn't racist, and it might even be a good idea. Take the Michael Brown shooting. As protested as it was, it was clearly a justified shooting. If a white guy reaches into a cop's SUV, he will get shot too.

Mind you, I am not saying all police shootings aren't racially motivated, but the ones that get thrown in our faces tend not to be racially motivated. And God forbid we should correct a black person who holds up Michael Brown's death as an example of racism.

I would be remiss if I didn't mention Trayvon Martin's shooting, which is a textbook example of  two a-holes looking for trouble, and finding each other. The only problem is the black a-hole ended up dead, so this somehow proves racism is alive and well. If George Zimmerman was black, this would have been an ignored statistic, since black-on-black crime is ignored because it doesn't prove racism exists.

Let's not forget the immigration problem. To point out there are literally tens of millions of Mexicans and other hispanics in this country illegally is racist, even though many of them are as caucasian as the majority of Americans. Since when did "pointing out a criminal" come to equal "racist"?

Racism is used as a discussion ender for Leftists, so they don't have to defend their ideas or actions. This has reached the point where the rest of the country has learned what they are doing. So when we see/hear Leftists crying racism, we immediately stop and reconsider the person/idea being accused of racism, because we know the Left has run out of arguments against the person/idea.

This is what is happening to Trump now.

While racism is a valid charge, is it the most important one? In this case, if a person is openly and actively racist, then yes, a case can be made against that person's qualifications. If they aren't, then the charge is speculation at best. If your case isn't air-tight, then the charge of racism, which is very serious, should not be made. In my opinion, the Left's case against Trump is speculative.

And this is where we have our problem. If the Left throws the racism charge at Trump too hard and too often, it actually makes him look sympathetic to many Americans. When they consider all the other times the Left has done this (i.e. the Duke lacross scandal), the average American looks at Trump and reconsiders him. If the Left is using the racism label on him, maybe he is right?

There are plenty of good issues to attack Trump. Even if he is a racist, he has much bigger problems as a candidate. The Left needs to save the racism charge for where it needs to be used. Their indiscriminate use of the racism charge is turning it into a dog whistle meaning "another bone-headed Leftist idea".