Common decency, sense
In the age of Michelle Wolf, America is fortunate to have a supreme leader who sets a high moral example, a man of temperence, a man of virtue, a man who, unlike Wolf, does not demean others in search of a laugh, a man who treats others, especially women, as he would want to be treated, a man who does not sink to racial or ethnic slurs, a man who does not deliberately try to embarrass others in public.
Those who voted for our supreme leader can take pride in knowing that he is not of the Michelle Wolf ilk. He stands above the fray, leading by example, showing the nation and the world what dignity looks like.
He says, by example, let others sink into the gutter, let others demean themselves by trying to demean others. He stands for something greater, something to which all Americans – indeed, all citizens of the world – can aspire.
Not for our supreme leader the language of bitterness, the language of divisiveness, the language of anger, the language of self-aggrandizement.
His language is temperate, his language seeks to bring us all together as one nation working for the greater good.
You think I’ve been drinking, don’t you. I’d think the same about you if you wrote or said any of that claptrap.
The one thing that came out of the White House Correspondents Dinner for me is finding out that Michelle Wolf exists. Never heard of her. Never knew of her existence. Now I know. I’m not thrilled that I know, because most of her routine that I heard in excerpts on the radio or on PBS wasn’t funny, but I thought she was spot on about Sarah Huckabee Sanders and the burning of FACTS. She did not say Sanders burned FAT. She said FACTS. Quit twisting the truth. Quit faking your own news.
I wonder, though, how many of the folks condeming Michelle Wolf voted for Donald Trump, a man who bragged about grabbing women’s private parts as if it were okay because he was rich and famous. You? Are you one of those folks? Can you condemn a comedian and not condemn Donald Trump? Would you vote for Michelle Wolf? Why not? You voted for our great moral leader. Grab ’em by the what?
The other night on the PBS News Hour, an evangelical minister was interviewed. I forget his name, but I remember his reasoning:
Evangelicals, he said, put aside hypocrisy in favor of political points of view with which they agree. Thus, Trump is cool because he is supposedly “pro life,” whatever that means. I’m pro choice. Does that mean I’m anti life? And is Trump one of those pro life people who are pro life from conception to birth? They you’re on your own? Who knows? He changes his tune so often that it’s tuneless.
I don’t care that he had sex with a porn star. I saw the Stormy Daniels interview on 60 Minutes and I believe her, but what I found a little surprising was that I liked her. Porn star schmorn star. She was a likeable woman and, yep, I’d have a drink with her. Not George W. Bush, though. I don’t find him likeable.
But where do so-called religious people draw the line? At what point do they say, “Well, I agree with his policies but he’s just too immoral.” Is it all about getting your way? Is that cool?
I know what you’re thinking: Well, schnook, you were probably for Bill Clinton, but he was hardly a moral cat. Right. That’s right. I get it. But I’m not religious. I don’t have to weigh a politician’s morality against his, or her, policy proposals. I didn’t care what Clinton did as long as he killed the deficit (but it’s back, it’s BACK, thanks to the GOP) and supported gay rights. Right, right, he copped out on that, the fink.
Still, if you are a moral Christian, how can you support a Donald Trump? What’s next? You want Charlie Rose back on TV because you like his interviewing style? OK, maybe not Rose, a liberal, but what about Bill O’Reilly? Evangelicals surely agree with his political points of view, so why aren’t they up in arms about him disappearing from the Fox propaganda channel?
Perhaps because he never really influenced public policy. Got it. So if Bill O’Reilly runs for president against, say, Tammy Duckworth, you’d swing with O’Reilly? My, my.
In the end, though, I don’t really care. You want to support a guy who denegrates women, bully for you. Oops. Bully is maybe the right word, eh? You want to support a guy who denigrates … well, anyone who either doesn’t agree with him or who can give him an ego boost through denegration? Be my guest.
But here, from the novel “Silent Joe” by T. Jefferson Parker, is something you should wonder, as did his lead character:
“I wondered how a man could have everything in the world except common decency and common sense.”