Fake Tears, Phony Compassion

President Trump called them fake tears.  The television commentator Sean Hannity described them as crocodile tears.  Whatever else they were, minority leader Chuck Schumer’s on-screen snivels were political theater—and cynical theater at that.

Schumer was attempting to demonstrate how upset he was by the president’s temporary exclusion of potential terrorists from our nation.  This was portrayed as un-American and as unjustifiably splitting innocent families apart.

Nonetheless, if evidence were needed that liberals are counterfeit humanitarians, this was it.  The ability of left-wingers to depict themselves as compassionate is surely one of the greatest con-jobs in political history.  Amazingly, Schumer sought to perpetuate this myth by condemning Trump as mean-spirited.

But what is mean-spirited?  My grandparents came to this country over a century ago.  Schumer’s probably did as well.  When they arrived at Ellis Island, they were checked for communicable diseases.  If these were found, people were refused entry.  As a result, some families were indeed broken apart.

Schumer assures us that keeping dangerous aliens out of our country is a violation of American values.  But one hundred years ago, protecting American citizens was a widely held belief.  When did it become un-American?  When did completely open borders turn into proof of compassion?

Nowadays Democrats do not want to build a wall on our southern border.  Doing so is denounced as hard-hearted.  This too presumably leads to separating families.  After all, destitute Central and South Americans deserve an opportunity to pursue the good life.  To deny them this is obviously cruel.

But what of the U.S. citizens who cannot find jobs?  What of those killed or injured by illegal aliens who are not deported.  Evidently liberal compassion is selective—as demonstrated by the fact that Schumer did not cry about Kate Steinle’s death or those massacred at San Bernardino and Orlando.

Liberals tell us they believe in free speech.  This too is an American value.  So why did they depict the rioters who prevented conservatives from speaking in Berkeley or New York University as merely expressing dissent?  Where was their benevolence toward those who disagreed with them?

Liberals likewise tell us they love democracy—ostensibly another American value.  But maybe I am wrong.  Apparently preventing a new president from putting his government in place is a way of defending our heritage.  No doubt, this too is an indication of deep concern for our freedoms.

Liberals also favor women’s rights.  That’s probably why they defamed Kelly Ann Conway, Melania Trump, and Betsy DeVos.  Although this might have seemed mean, they were protecting genuine womanhood—which, as everyone knows, does not include conservative women.

By the same token, liberals have always been on the side of freedom of religion.  Of course, this does not include pastors speaking up for conservative causes.  Nor does it apply to bakers who refuse to provide wedding cakes for gay couples.  These hypocrites have to be put out of business for their own good.

And finally, again as is common knowledge, liberals are the champions of the little guy.  This is why during the Obama administration they made so many more of them.  It is also why they forced union members to make contributions to political campaigns with which they disagree.  Here too it was for their benefit.

Let’s face it.  Liberals are not compassionate.  They are arrogant know-it-alls.  They are would-be dictators who would impose their discredited ideology upon the rest of us.  If they habitually employ dishonesty to fool us into supporting their agenda, it is because they are mistakenly trying to save us from ourselves.

At this point in history, liberalism is steeped in phoniness.  Some liberals genuinely believe they are kindhearted.  But folks like Schumer know better.  He understands that he is engaged in a naked power-grab.  As the leader of Senate Democrats, he knows it is his job is to advance their political interests.

So what about us?  Are we to be taken in by specious arguments and spurious tears?  Or should we stand back and separate political posturing from authentic American values?

Melvyn L. Fein, Ph.D.

Professor of Sociology

Kennesaw State University