Have you noticed that during
this political season when one side gets caught in an embarrassing moment, the
other side is soon accused of something similar? For example, when the Clinton Foundation came
under attack, it was not long before opposition research zeroed in on the Trump
Foundation.
The idea is to make two
problems equivalent so that they cancel out.
Although they might be of an entirely different magnitude, if they are
treated the same rhetorically, the voters may not notice the difference. In fact, this technique works depressing well.
Consider the Foundation
controversy. The Clinton Foundation is a
political slush fund. It has collected
billions of dollars that have mostly gone to subsidizing Clinton
hangers-on. The idea was to finance a
campaign team-in-waiting until it was needed.
The Clinton operation was
also a way of laundering money. Foreign
nations that wanted favors from the Clintons could make donations to this
ostensible charity, while collecting their payoffs from another door. This way if the public watched one hand, it
would not notice what the other was doing.
This is flat out
corruption. There is no other word for
it. The Clintons put their public
offices up for sale just like they once rented out the Lincoln Bedroom; just
like they sold pardons to felons when Bill was leaving the presidency.
Compare this with the Trump
Foundation. First of all, Trump’s is a much
smaller operation. Second, it was not
primarily political. Until recently, he
was not a politician and therefore did not have favors to sell. If anything, he was in the business of
purchasing special treatment.
Trump has also been criticized
for not financing his Foundation with his own funds. This ought to be laughable in that virtually
all of the Clinton money came from outsiders.
Although Trump has not exactly been altruistic, his alleged generosity
was never a major selling point.
What really needs emphasis,
however, is the lies. Trump is no saint. He has not always taken the high road. But compared with the Clintons, he is a
paragon of virtue. When it comes to
misstatements, his are typically exaggerations.
Indeed, they are sometimes so hyperbolic as to be silly.
The Clinton fabrications, on
the other hand, are ruthlessly self-serving.
Whenever they get into trouble, they deny, deny, deny. This is not a recent development. Hillary and Bill have been at it from the
beginning of their political careers.
Do you recall Bill’s fib
about marihuana. When caught in a lie
about whether he indulged, he obfuscated by claiming that he never
inhaled. And when it was discovered that
he misled the public about his draft status, he again told half-truths.
As for Hillary, when Bill’s
dalliance with Gennifer Flowers became public, she flat out repudiated it. It never happened. This failed entertainer had made it up. She was probably going after cheap
publicity. Of course, we now know there
was an affair. Flowers was telling the
truth.
Over the last year how many
whoppers has Hillary told? Remember, there
was nothing classified on the server.
The FBI gave her a complete pass.
She believed the Benghazi tragedy was due to a video. She never claimed that the Trans-Pacific
Trade Partnership was the “gold standard.”
So what does she do when
caught? She points a finger at
others. She tries to divert attention by
maintaining that they are worse. It
doesn’t matter if they are; she jumps up and down and swears it is so.
But isn’t this what
teenagers do when they get caught doing something wrong? Don’t the try to get off the hook by saying
that everyone does it? Nevertheless,
most parents don’t buy this. They quickly
ask: if Johnny jumped off the roof, would you jump off too?
Hillary’s lies are so
egregious that they deserve reflexive dismissal. Donald may have lied about some things, but
the difference in degree is so great as to be one in kind. She is a habitual prevaricator. She is so routinely counterfeit that other’s
sins ought not absolve her of her own.
Melvyn L. Fein, Ph.D.
Professor of Sociology
Kennesaw State University
No comments:
Post a Comment