WHAT REPUBLICAN LEADERS SHOULD LEARN FROM DONALD TRUMP’S CANDIDACY

As a lifelong Republican who often departs from the religious right rhetoric typically associated with my party, I am quite enjoying the shock waves Donald Trump’s candidacy has created.  In fact, I get a bit giddy when conservative leaders, pundits and consultants scramble to try to explain why this brash businessman turned television personality, who is more at ease slinging insults than he is at offering policy ideas, is leading the pack of Republican candidates for President of the United States.

Some say that Trump is a flash in the pan who will soon burn out at which time the “real” candidates will emerge.  Others feel that he should be reined in with promises to support whomever the nominee turns out to be.  Then there are those who believe Trump is giving Republicans a black eye. They ridicule him and hold him up as an example of everything a Presidential candidate ought not be.

Here’s my advice to Republican Party leaders everywhere, “If you truly want to build our party, pay attention to Donald Trump!”

Donald Trump knows how to connect to his audience.  Plain talk and harsh criticism of government policies often appear on the pages of Facebooking or Tweeting American citizens.  So do the personal insults (albeit not hurled at the same people). Social media has given people the platform to be honest, outspoken and judgmental for or against anything and everything. Instead of mumbling under their breath and throwing up their arms in defeat, people have taken to social media to release their frustrations.  Donald Trump has tapped into this world and used it to create a campaign strategy to which people are responding.

Another winning strategy for Trump is his decision to embrace his success.  Unlike Mitt Romney who tried to play down his wealth, Trump celebrates it.  And while he is celebrating, he is telling voters that they too can be rich if they work hard and utilize the rules and regulations set up by a broken government to their advantage.  Most of my political pundit friends would have advised against such a strategy.  More likely than not, they would have steered Trump away from discussing his wealth, advising that it would not play well among Americans because they hate rich people – especially those who run large corporations.  But when you think about it, true Republicans applaud hard work and ingenuity.  They believe that success should be rewarded and they aspire to have the same for themselves and their family.

In my opinion, Donald Trump’s candidacy is not an enigma.  It is a reflection of what is in the hearts and minds of many American citizens (whether they vote or not is a discussion for another time).  People are growing resentful of having to work long hours just to pay their tax bill.  They also resent being penalized for minor infractions while illegal immigrants are granted food, shelter and municipal ID’s paid for with the hard earned tax dollars of American citizens.

Polished Republican politicians who have lost themselves in the PC world of government should pay particular attention to Trump because more likely than not, their own candidacies had a similar start.  Many of them railed against a sitting liberal candidate and his or her policies.  Most spoke frankly and captured the attention of their base.  Unfortunately, many have spent too much time in government and it is showing.  Even the sharp tongued, straight talking Chris Christie has been out maneuvered by “The Donald” and for good reason – while Christie spent the last several years preparing, polishing and primping himself for this run, Republicans were growing desperate for a leader.  They wanted someone with the courage to say what they were thinking in simple, no nonsense English.  While they were at it, they wouldn’t mind someone who knew how to be rich and stay rich.

While Chris Christie primped, Donald Trump answered the call.  And right behind him is Dr. Ben Carson, a witty, Neuro-Surgeon who appeals to the more intellectual Republican voter.  Some might call him “The Anti-Donald”.  Unlike Trump, Dr. Carson is thoughtful, well-mannered and unassuming. What they have in common is their lack of government experience – a void that voters seem to appreciate.

While entrenched political leaders and elected officials may feel like they have taken a trip down the rabbit hole with Alice, where everything is opposite of what it should be, they would do well to pay attention to what is happening around them.  The world they have created is one where success is punished and knowing how to bilk the system is rewarded.  Large corporations, which are responsible for providing jobs for US citizens, are demonized while financial aid is given to countries whose governments trample the human rights of their citizens and openly criticize US policies.

As US government policies become curiouser and curiouser, we shouldn’t be surprised when the electorate becomes enamored with the Mad Hatter.

THE SLOW, PAINFUL DEATH OF FREE SPEECH IN AMERICA

In 1993, Marco Brambilla directed “Demolition Man”, a film starring Sylvester Stallone and Wesley Snipes.  The plot was built around a non-conforming police officer (Sylvester Stallone) who was jailed because his violent actions in an attempt to capture an evil criminal (Wesley Snipes) caused the death of innocent hostages.  In 1996, both were found guilty of their crimes and frozen in a Cryo-prison.  Snipes was unfrozen in the year 2032 to attend his parole hearing and easily escaped his captors because the world into which he was awakened was devoid of bad language, thoughts and deeds, leaving his jailers unequipped to recapture him without the help of Sylvester Stallone, the violent, foul mouth police officer who captured Snipes in the first place.  Law enforcement officials insisted that Stallone abide by the rules of their “Politically Correct” society in his attempt to capture Snipes, but when that approach failed, Stallone reverted back to his rogue ways, much to the shock and dismay of everyone around him. During his pursuit of Snipes, Stallone revealed that the leader of the new politically correct world, Dr. Cocteau had helped Snipes to escape in order to advance his own agenda.  Stallone ultimately kills both Snipes and Cocteau and proceeds to educated the population about the joys of living in a more free and diverse society.

When the movie debuted the concept of “thought police” was a tongue in cheek commentary on an America which was beginning to show signs of hypersensitivity toward words, but twenty-two years later, the movie seems to have been prophetic.

On October 21, 2015, Peter Hasson, a Texas Campus Correspondent for Campus Reform wrote a story entitled,“UWM SAYS POLITICALLY CORRECT IS NOLONGER POLITICALLY CORRECT”.  The article was about the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee (UWM) Inclusive Excellence Center’s “Just Words” campaign designed to “raise awareness of micro-aggressions and their impact”.  In the article, Hasson highlights the fact that the “Just Words” Campaign wants students to stop using words such as “thug, whore and lame” and phrases such as “third world country” and “politically correct” (among others) in conversation because those words and phrases are micro-aggressions which could offend certain people.

On their website, the staff of the Inclusive Excellence Center state, “Through Just Words? and “Just Words??”, we seek to raise awareness of micro-aggressions, their impact, provide an insight into their meaning…”

As part of the “Just Words?” introduction the staff asks participants to consider targeted phrases and contemplate, “Are they really only words, so they carry no weight or added meaning? Are they said from a place of respect or belief in fairness, will it aid in creating a just culture?”

As an American writer and a political commentator, I appreciate every word in the English language and the meaning behind them whether aggressive or not.  I celebrate the fact that I live in a country where I can type those words into sentences and sentences into paragraphs which express my point of view on issues which I feel are important to me, then share those thoughts with others who may or may not agree.  I revel in the fact that there are people in the world who don’t think as I think; who don’t speak as I speak; who don’t believe as I believe and I want them to share their thoughts with me because, through that discourse and exchange of ideas, my world will grow and theirs may as well.

Yes, words have meanings and when strung together into a sentence and delivered by a human being, the thought might make some people uncomfortable, but should that be a reason for not sharing a thought? Should we make “thought police” a real and tangible thing?  Have we done so already?

If we allow our society to suppress free thought and speech because it might be offensive and create a society where everyone is “politically correct” do we run the risk of retarding our artistic ability, our right to worship freely and our growth as individuals?

In a world where college campuses are asking students to measure their words to be sure they, “are said from a place of respect or belief in fairness,” I wonder if Susan B. Anthony and the suffragette movement would feel free to protest against the then common belief that women should not have the right to vote?  Or if Frederick Douglass would have thought it fair to publicly state at a July 4th celebration, “Fellow citizens, above your national, tumultuous joy, I hear the mournful wail of millions, whose chains, heavy and grievous yesterday, are today rendered more intolerable by the jubilant shouts that reach them. If I do forget, if I do not remember those bleeding children of sorrow this day, "may my right hand forget her cunning, and may my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth! To forget them, to pass lightly over their wrongs and to chime in with the popular theme would be treason most scandalous and shocking, and would make me a reproach before God and the world."

As part of their mission to mold our youth into “fair and just” individuals, UWM encourages a frank and open discussion about words, phrases and their micro-aggressive meanings.  I can’t help but wonder whether the director of UWM’s Inclusive Excellence Center, Warren Scherer (@warrenascherer) was practicing “Just Words?” when he tweeted at Governor Mike Huckabee (@GovMikeHuckabee) on October 13, 2015, “fuck every fiber of your being…”.

As presented by “Demolition Man” and demonstrated by Scherer, the problem with surrendering to the “thought police” is that you can never be certain of the motives behind the person in charge.