By Steve Rensberry
Opinion/Analysis
-----------------------------
EDWARDSVILLE, Ill. - July 12, 2020 -- Pundit and Christian conservative icon Cal Thomas took his penchant for exaggeration and
his undying devotion to our current president to new heights in a
recent column, in which he responds to criticism of the president's July 3 Mount Rushmore speech as being divisive.
I hate to say it, but in the past 40 years of sharing his views on politics and religion in public life, I don't think Thomas has learned a thing.
I hate to say it, but in the past 40 years of sharing his views on politics and religion in public life, I don't think Thomas has learned a thing.
Say what?
Overlooking the
literary awkwardness of Thomas' comments, notice that he does not really
deny that the speech was divisive, but rather reframes
it, then more or less asserts that what is really going on is just the
actualization of a necessary and just cause, being led by righteous,
angry, fed-up conservatives.
It's a mighty
strange and inadequate defense, however, and a distraction from the
real issue. Thomas' comments also fly in the face of what millions of
Americans heard and saw with their own eyes, from both left and right.
Trump supporters themselves have
as-much admitted embracing division and chaos as a political
strategy, with the goal of toppling the presumed “liberal
establishment.” They wanted to shake things up, clean the swamp and
take down the status quo, isn't that what we heard?
Have there been any voices at all in the Trump camp who have tried to
build constructively on the successes of the previous administration?
Has Cal Thomas tried? No. They've blocked, tried to repeal, divided,
denied and destroyed jobs and careers in the pursuit of total control
and ideological purity. The one and only thing they have tried to
build is a wall along our southern border. Trump and Thomas are both
guilty of fanning the flames of the culture war, the consequences of
which have pitted family member against family member, neighbor
against neighbor, and public servant against public servant, and for
what? Over the desire to divide, control, and dominate in a changing
culture, rather than learn how to get along with others, to
peacefully coexist?
One highly critical response to the Mount Rushmore speech, addressed to
conservatives no less, came from an opinion piece written by Mona Charen and published in the Chicago Sun-Times.
Speaking about
Trump's remarks on protecting Confederate-era monuments, Charen
wrote: “The conservative reflex to resist accusations of racism is
worse than misguided in this instance. Why? Because in this case the
accusation is not false. It’s blatantly, obviously true. Where is
the 'white supremacy'? How about the fact that Trump is threatening
to veto the National Defense Authorization Act if Congress follows
through on plans to rename military installations named after
Confederate generals? This is not a conservative making the case
against racial preferences. It is not a reasoned argument about
school choice, or welfare reform, or disparate impact. It is
straight-up white supremacy. The Confederacy was not the United
States of America. It was a whole other country. So, no, that’s not
patriotism. It’s kind of the opposite.”
The words Trump
used in his speech to describe American protesters, as though they
were foreign enemies, also was divisive and unbecoming of a
president.
“Trump’s chosen message on Independence Day was the good news
that 'I am deploying federal law enforcement to protect our
monuments, arrest the rioters, and prosecute offenders to the fullest
extent of the law. ... I am pleased to report that yesterday, federal
agents arrested the suspected ringleader of the attack on the statue
of Andrew Jackson in Washington, D.C., and, in addition, hundreds
more have been arrested.' News of arrests is supposed to make
patriotic hearts swell with pride? Leadership of a large diverse
nation requires certain grace notes that every president in living
memory has found it in his heart to pronounce on important occasions.
This president has chosen and continues to choose division and
vitriol,” Charen said.
Having downplayed the divisiveness of his political idol, Thomas then
does the one thing he never tires of doing: he creates a straw man
argument to bash the imaginary villains he assumes are behind
everything that is wrong with America, which to him include abortion,
the welfare state, the “entitlement mentality” and a weird thing
he calls “the promotion of 'any human relationship that can be
conjured up in the most twisted of minds.'”
Judging by just about every column Thomas has written on gay rights
and family relationships, it's obvious what he means by “the most
twisted of minds.” It's also ignorant. I'm not saying he doesn't
have a right to say what he feels, but he should expect to be
criticized if he does.
Christian conservatives like Thomas love to play the part of victim
and firmly believe that they are being systematically persecuted at
the hands of mean, secular, immoral perverts, that is “the left,”
which has become the current catch-all phrase for every evil deed
they can imagine, and for people who they wrongly assume want nothing except
to control your life and usher in a totalitarian, godless global
state.
It's nothing but a grown-up fairy tale and scapegoat, and easily
refuted by the evidence, but without things to demonize and fears to
stoke, people like Thomas just might have to rethink some of those
hateful, divisive thoughts they keep having.
That fear mongering is a part of it should come as no surprise. What was the
title of Thomas' column, published in the July 8, 2020 online edition of
the Washington Times?: “Democrats want to impose socialism
and worse on America.” Right, Thomas barely talks about
socialism, and barely even defends against the accusation of
divisiveness, and this is the headline they give it? No fear
mongering going on here.
Further Reference:
Democrats want to impose socialism and worse on America (Thomas' column)
