Denigrating ‘Peace-Loving’ Muslim Veterans

Both major candidates denigrated Muslims and Muslim veterans this week, although only one was reported as doing so. In speaking disparagingly about the Khan family’s sacrifice, and in comparing his financial setbacks to the family’s ‘sacrifice’ of their son, Donald Trump has hit a new high in lack of class (or is that a new low in class?).

His remarks (among others) prove, as many claim, that he does not have the intelligence, common sense, simple good manners, or deportment required of a U.S. president, much less the people and statesmanship skills. Uh, big surprise; we already knew that…all of us, Republicans (and in their secret hearts) his supporters, too.

Yet Hillary Clinton’s unfitness for the presidential role once again escaped attention. This time it was not illustrated by ineptitude and criminal behavior (as in the email scandals and the many others she and ‘Slick Willy’ have been involved in), nor in overt racism or bigotry like Trump, but in perhaps subconscious but telling remarks, sort of patronizing Freudian slips.

In speaking of the Khan family, she (or most likely her speech-writers) lauded the Khan family as ‘law-abiding Muslims’. Somehow, to me, this is just as disrespectful as Trump’s overt ignorance and bigotry, perhaps more so because it is cloaked bigotry, under the guise of progressive liberalism.

When I hear the words ‘law-abiding Muslim’ (especially as counterpointed with terrorist Muslim, as Hillary did), I cannot avoid hearing an old-fashioned slave owner saying ‘one of the good darkies’, or a cavalry officer speaking of the ‘good Indians’. It is the type of unthinking bigotry that classifies all others as ‘wogs’, and then separates the wogs into Good Wogs and Bad Wogs. Whatever you call them, they are still wogs to anachronistic, authoritarian types like Hillary.

When both candidates try to play off the loss of veterans and of their families to their advantage, I am highly offended, for neither has served the country, and both have opposed and derided the military, in public. This type of calculating insinuation illustrates why neither candidate is fit for office, and why both are narrow-minded bigots of a sort.

Add to that the fact they both support plans and policies (and Clinton a history) that will undoubtedly result in more Americans dying in wars. and perhaps many of those conscripted (forced) to. Under these conditions, any time these political hacks and wordsmiths speak of the military service members patronizingly, or as if they were their supporters or somehow ‘aligned’ with them (pandering their votes, in reality), I am greatly offended.

Offenses like this against one of America’s most honored minorities (veterans) are not to be tolerated, and clearly illustrate why neither candidate is fit for office, and neither party which backs such candidates is fit to represent the American people.

Lastly, the remarks of both these inappropriate candidates is an offense and affront to all Americans. When politicians try to use our sentiments to promote their own agendas, they are no longer potential representatives for us, but proven manipulators, and unworthy of our respect or votes. When they try to ‘align with’ or pander to (the votes of) people they plan to send to war, or compare their political or business sacrifices to those of soldiers who have lost lives and limbs, or families who have lost sons and daughters, they have proven themselves an offense to all of us, and thus unworthy of our votes.

When they try to pull this type of nonsense on us with a straight face, they treat us as if we were stupid, or easily deceived. That alone is a cause for rejection of someone who hopes to be a leader of the people, a representative and servant of the people.

We are often told lately the upcoming election is not a choice between ideals or a choice for what we believe, but a choice for one person, one candidate or another. One or another. It seems so simple. Yet there is another choice, especially in light of their documented ineptitude and unfitness for the position of president and Commander in Chief.

It’s not either-or.

One choice remains, to all thinking and feeling people.

Neither.

 

Advertisements

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