by Dr. Ellen Brandt
The Gain Control series offers our two cents worth of advice to Candidate Trump, telling him how we - GOP Base Loyalists - might like him to respond, in debates and otherwise, to specific kinds of attacks by Hillary Clinton.
Democratic operatives - and Hillary Clinton herself - love to use what we think of as the Road Runner Strategy: Coming back over and over again to certain kinds of familiar points of attack - Beep Beep! Beep Beep! - in the hope that Candidate Trump will, in Wile E. Coyote fashion, lose his cool, bluster his way into ineffectual responses, and be blown up again by the Clintonista Acme Corporation.
Just say No! Donald. You're a Republican, not a Coyote. Throw the dynamite back in Clinton's face by staying calm, cool, and collected and giving (100 percent accurate) responses that both illuminate the real issues involved and adhere to the philosphies and viewpoints of the majority of Republicans.
We give you suggested answers to three very typical Road Runner attacks - on so-called Gay Rights, Americans of Latino ancestry, and Clinton's collection of endorsements from "former GOP officials."
Trump Channeling Our Advice (on so-called Gay Rights, Gay Marriage, and Unisex Bathrooms): Although these are contentious issues, we Republicans are happy to talk about them in a way that will unite Americans, not try to divide us, as the Democrats are apt to do.
First of all, as we have said before, we believe there are only two kinds of Rights anyone should be focusing on: Human Rights, which all Human Beings share, and American Rights, which all American citizens share.
Talking about any other supposed kinds of Rights is simply a blatant attempt to divide Americans, rather than to unite all of us to work towards common goals. No American's Rights should be abridged nor denied because of irrelevant categorizations, whether we are talking about gender, age, ethnicity, religion, sexual preference, or any other personal characteristic or trait.
As for both the Gay Marriage and the Unisex Bathroom issues, most Republicans' uneasiness or objections, I firmly believe, have to do with jurisdictional issues, not anything else.
We tend to think it is absolutely horrid when a President and his administration go all-out to usurp powers that have been in the hands of States and local jurisdictions since our nation's founding and arbitrarily hand those powers over to the Federal government.
Most Republicans want this rapid trend towards Centralization of powers that were formerly Decentralized to cease and desist. Many in the GOP therefore thought the Supreme Court decision taking marriage law away from States and localities and placing it into the hands of the Federal government was both wrong and dangerous and should be reversed. The Supreme Court does sometimes make what the general population feels are errors. And when that happens, efforts may be made to reverse those errors.
The issue of Unisex Bathrooms and Locker Rooms is a bit more complicated. But again, let me explain how most Republicans tend to feel.
First, this is another States versus Federal government issue, in which an arbitrary decree from the Federal government seeks to take away rights which have historically been in the hands of the States. Many State administrations and legislatures are very upset about this, as are many American citizens.
An additional issue, of course, is whether any human being can actually change his or her sex and become transgender, up to the time when scientists have figured out a way to alter people's basic DNA.
Many people, within the GOP and otherwise, think the entire concept of gender reassignment is pure political correctness, invented as an artificial conflict which does not belong in the political arena at all.
Again, if all Humans possess basic Human Rights, and all Americans possess basic American Rights, by all means, individuals can dress the way they please, alter their appearance any way they please, or utilize plastic surgery or hormone therapy to make them look or feel the way they want to look or feel.
But whether all of this actually changes one's basic gender - well, many still disagree. And most Republicans tend to think it is a matter for philosophers and theologians to argue and decide upon and not the place of government to take one side or the other - let alone legislate this issue in any way, shape, or form.
Trump Channeling Our Advice (on the Latinos-Are-Upset-At-Your-Proposals Canard): The majority of Republicans - me included - are getting really very tired of this "Latinos Hate You" theme, which has pretty much no connection to the Truth, either in terms of Republicans in general or of my campaign in particular.
First, let me tell you that many people, whether with some Latino ancestry or not, seriously question the way polltakers and Democrats define the terms "Latino" or the more narrow term "Hispanic" for purposes of their polls and the propaganda arising from those polls.
Many think there is now, in today's America, about as much sense talking about "Latino" voters as a bloc as there is talking about "Caucasian" voters as a bloc, which we don't do.
And, in fact, we greatly dislike talking about "Black" voters as one homogeneous bloc, either - and at some point, both the pollsters and the political propagandists should do something about that, as well.
But back to Latinos. Americans with ancestry from the "Latin" nations, whether in Europe or in the so-called New World, are every bit as diverse a population as those traditionally called "Caucasian."
In fact, the vast majority of Latinos are Caucasian or mostly Caucasian, although some have African ancestry, others have Native American ancestry . . . What does it really matter? Once you are an American citizen, you are part of the American mix - period - and shouldn't be sliced and diced and divided into ethnic groups and subgroups for purposes of polling or political propaganda.
We might also mention that in the Western and Southwestern States - which tend to be GOP country, by and large - an exceptionally large proportion of our citizens can claim some or a lot of Latino ancestry - and are very proud of it - just as they can claim some or a lot of Native American ancestry - and are very proud of it.
In fact, the oldest families in many of the Western States were Latinos who populated those States long prior to their becoming States and, in some cases, many decades prior to the landing of the Mayflower or the settling of the American East coast. They are, in those terms, the most aristocratic citizens - the ones with the oldest and proudest lineage - of any Americans, other than Native Americans.
A second point: Which Party, one has to ask, had the most prospective Presidential candidates with a Latino link of some kind this past primary season?
I think we all know the answer to that. Candidates Rubio and Cruz are themselves Latino. Candidate Bush has a lovely Latino wife. And many other GOP candidates - Rick Perry, Carly Fiorina, Chris Christie, George Pataki - as well as myself - come from States with large Latino populations, which we are proud of, as all Americans should be.
Trump Channeling Our Advice (on Clinton's braggadocio about Endorsements-From-Ex-GOP-Officials): Well, Gee, endorsements are always nice, and we've gotten some very surprising ones ourselves. For instance - Here the Candidate should list 7 or 8 endorsements he is proud of from unusual sources, particularly those which are Democrats or generally allied with Democrats, like labor unions or Black groups.
Yes, all these endorsements are hunky-dory, but I don't think either I or Secretary Clinton should really focus on them much or brag about them very much.
Because we don't want potential voters - do we? - to make up their minds about whom to vote for or not vote for based on what some well-known individual or media personality or newspaper editor or Hollywood actor says or doesn't say or thinks or doesn't think.
I mean, really, Hillary, we don't want our American voters acting like sheep who can't make up their own minds and need some outside force to do it for them, now do we?
At least, we Republicans don't. We're proud to be the Party of intelligent and sophisticated and well-informed voters, who are perfectly capable of thinking for themselves. We're just not "politically correct," after all. Based on Secretary Clinton's way of thinking, we're Adorable Deplorables. And darn proud of it!
**********************************************
No comments:
Post a Comment