
How have we come to this point? Why has a divisive, bombastic, trash-talking, ethically-challenged, bottom feeding bully emerged as the frontrunner for the GOP presidential nomination?
Let’s answer the question with a question: How did Rush Limbaugh become the nation’s most popular radio show host? After all, Rush has majored in racism and sexism ever since his show became nationally syndicated in 1988. He’s called Barack Obama “uppity.” He joked that NBA teams should be called “gangs,” not “teams.” He said, “Feminism was created to give ugly women a place in society.” He has called Guantanamo Bay a “Muslim retreat.” And on and on.
I’ve spoken with a few Rush fans who say, “I don’t always agree with Rush, but he makes some good points.” Sorry. That dog won’t hunt. Rush is a crass entertainer, nothing more. Shame on you for making him rich. And an even greater shame on you for letting Rush tell you how to think.
Some psychologists explain that brash bullies such as Trump and Limbaugh appeal to people seeking authority figures who offer easy answers to hard questions. That may be a good explanation, but it’s a poor excuse for using bad judgment.
Consider the shameless opportunist who brought lessons learned at the Rush Limbaugh Charm School to the American political stage: Sarah Palin. As a candidate for Vice President, Palin referred to people in small rural towns as the “real Americans,” meaning, of course, white Christians. She said, “Keep your change. We’ll keep our God, our guns, our Constitution.” She stated that Barack Obama had been “palling around with terrorists who would target their own country.” Not surprisingly, Palin has endorsed Donald Trump for president.
Closer to home, we have our own Trumpeteer: Gov. Paul LePage. You know, he’s the guy who suggested that the NAACP could “kiss his butt;” that it would be good to bring back the guillotine. Oh, and referring to a state legislator, LePage stated, “He’s the first one to give it to the people without Vaseline.” Again, buzzards of a feather flock together.
Many leading Republican political leaders and columnists have decried Trump’s ascendancy. Yet those same people have been reluctant to criticize Rush Limbaugh over the years lest they alienate his fan base and lose votes or followers.
Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell recently criticized Trump for not distancing himself more forcefully from KKK leader David Duke. In my view, they were saying, in effect, “Stop using the bullhorn. Be more subtle. Go back to using the dog whistle.” Sadly, the Republican party needs the votes of the people who support blowhards like Donald Trump.
The GOP also needs the votes of evangelical Christians, a constituency George W. Bush shrewdly wooed in the 2000 election. Trump’s style and message, however, is totally antithetical to the tone and teachings of Christ, a point made in a recent New York Times piece by Peter Wehner, a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, who served in the last three Republican administrations. In his piece, entitled, “What Wouldn’t Jesus Do?,” he noted that, “For evangelical voters like me, backing Trump is a huge mistake.”
Sadly, millions of American voters of all faiths — or no faith — seem all too happy to make that mistake in their desire to elect what they believe to be a strong leader who will make everything right for the world. As a result, they’re voting for the class clown to be the student council president. They’re inviting the drunk uncle who says outrageous things to take the seat at the head of the family table.
The Trump saga is scary, and it is sad. I do not know how the general election will come out. I do hope that America comes to its senses before it is too late.
———
David Treadwell, a Brunswick writer, welcomes commentary or suggestions for future “Just a Little Old” column at dtreadw575@aol.com.
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less