Words and Deeds of Trump the Horrible

 

I spent yesterday, Monday October 10th 2016 listening in horrified fascination to the mass media creating a crude amalgam of Trump’s sins in the so-called video, yes, that old video.

Nearly all, the media including, I am afraid the Wall Street Journal, put together, even often mix in the same sentence two elements of Trump’s objectionable aspects: words and possible deeds or actions. The two deserve completely different treatments. There is no excuse for confusing them except a desire to win at all costs.

Words first: Trump referred to women in obscene terms. This is not in dispute. Calling women “pussies” may tell you something about his present character. (Although that happened fifteen years ago, when he was a registered Democrat.) I don’t see what it tells you that’s new. The man is crude. He is crude in precisely the same way that millions of American men are. I am completely innocent of that particular sin myself (because I was raised overseas) but I have several friends who qualify. It’s interesting that they are, by and large, the same male friends I would describe as “pussy-whipped.” (This is another topic, an interesting one I can’t deal with here: Married American men are exceptionally submissive.) I think the brouhaha about Trump’s obscene words is completely hypocritical and massively promoted by media that lost their intellectual self-respect some time ago. Public discourse also stopped being sensitive a long time ago irrespective of what the current neo-Victorians would have you believe: A young woman I have never met except on-line, and only a couple of days earlier, a Clinton supporter, recently invited me on Facebook to “suck my dick!” (She meant her own no-existent appendage.) And then, there are the rappers.

Further, there are Trump actions as revealed on the video. Fact is, the video reveals no, zero, objectionable acts. Instead, it reveals Mr Trump bragging about engaging in sexually assaultive behavior. The report is not a fact. Fake confessions are legion, especially within a bragging context. Donald Trump may have never, not once, done the things he says in the video he does, not even the slightest crotch grab. Now, if he is guilty of this kind of boasting, characteristic of teenage boys everywhere, you may decide he is too immature for the job but he is not (NOT) an unpunished criminal.

A stupid braggart and a rapist are different creatures. If you think they are more or less the same, you are full of shit and we need someone like Trump to clean house, because of you, precisely. You are poison while he, Trump, is only moronic. Moronism is harmless to the body politic no matter how offensive it is.

Let’s focus on various forms of sexual assault. Trump committed some, at least one, or (OR) he did not. There is nothing in between. The function of the amalgam I heard all day  is to spread the credibility of the reports of obscene talk onto the supposition of sexual assault. It’s to make the fact that reports of obscene words being credible reports of sexual assault must also be credible:   It’s true that he referred to women in a sexually crude manner, therefore, (THEREFORE), he must have assaulted women sexually. This kind of verbal ploy sometimes actually works. It works with fools and with fanatics. Reminds me of Goebbels, Hitler’s Propaganda Minister.

Now I imagine I might be on a jury regarding Mr Trump’s sexual assault (s) (one or several). I would not have the option to find him a “little bit guilty,” or “sort of guilty,” or “mostly guilty,” or “no evidence of his being actually guilty perhaps but he might have done it; look how he refers to women.” The only options available are guilty/not guilty. That’s it. For once, judicial conventions correspond well with logic: He did it (any “it”), or (OR) he did not. There are almost an infinity of offenses a person can be charged with so, there is not reason to come up with unclear verdicts. The prosecutor can charge with attempted sexual battery, sexual battery, aggravated sexual battery, different kinds of rape, etc exactly so a clean verdict is possible without violating factual evidence. Those who do not know this to be true don’t understand either the US Constitution nor basic fairness. They are temperamentally fascists. (There are other forms of fascism on the Clinton side, following Mr Obama.)

What we see right now, is a massive and concerted display of hypocrisy on the part of the bulk of the kind-of-educated class, beginning with the media. It’s so obvious that I think that if Jesus were around today, He would be for Trump. Fact is, there is no record of his speaking up against obscenity while he repeatedly and vehemently attacked hypocrisy.

PS I am wavering in my support of Trump. It’s not because Clinton has become less than a total horror but because he falls too easily into her traps. It bothers me.

About jacquesdelacroix

I am a sociologist, a short-story writer, and a blogger (Facts Matter and Notes On Liberty) in Santa Cruz, California.
This entry was posted in Current Events and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Words and Deeds of Trump the Horrible

  1. Warren Gibson says:

    No argument on most of what you said. But I remain scared of Trump, as for example his recent threat to sue the NY Times for publishing allegations of two women who say he molested them. (I assume this news appeared after you posted this.) Whether these allegations are true or not is beside the point. If Trump is willing to sue the Times just for reporting the story, imagine what he would do with the full force of the federal government at his fingertips.

    • jacquesdelacroix says:

      Warren: I am scared of Trump also because he might do bad things but I know for sure that Clinton will be awful. I find Trump’s threat to sue the NY Times as delightful as it is vacuous. It cannot be done but I like to see them scramble and worry. They are bullies. It’s good to see them bullied ever so lightly.

  2. concerned cynic says:

    Diana Davison of Canada, the author of the video in the link below, is one of the shrewdest YouTubers I know of. She does a good job of taking down the politically correct dog-pack that is baying for Trump’s blood. A great deal of American political rhetoric has always been silly virtue signalling, but that signalling has gone totally ballistic in this campaign.

  3. concerned cynic says:

    Davison’s use of “proof” in the title of her video is comical exaggeration. That video is not a forensic exercise (although some of her videos consist of superb analyses of the transcripts of Canadian sexual assault trials) but a call for common sense, and for the USA mainstream media to stop its self-satisfied virtue signalling.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s