On Fox News: Misinformed People Should Not Vote – And Obama Is Just Like Hitler

With the methodical precision of the German train schedule, Fox News has come out with their regular feature arguing that the fewer people who participate in America’s democracy the better. They seem to trot out this theory before every election, along with efforts to slash democrats from the voter rolls, in an obvious attempt to exclude those they regard as unfit to vote. This year’s version features right-wing economist, and frequent Fox News guest, Thomas Sowell.

Thomas Sowell

Appearing on Neil Cavuto’s program on the Fox Business Network (video below), Sowell elaborated on an article he published that made the case for shrinking the electorate so that only the “right” people voted. In response to Cavuto’s brazenly leading question, with the premise that voting “is not necessarily a birthright,” Sowell said that…

“Elections are not held just for social participation. They’re not held just to vet our emotions. They’re held to elect people who will hold our lives and the lives of our loved ones in their hands, as well as the fate of the entire nation. To go out as if we’re voting for homecoming queen is madness. I advise in that column that people who really haven’t had a chance to study these things and know much about it, their most patriotic act would be to stay home on election day, rather than vote on the basis of their whims or their emotions, which is really playing Russian roulette with the history of the country.”

The arrogance of Sowell’s perspective is both wrong and dangerous for two reasons. First, he fails to define what he regards as “whims” and “emotions.” It would be way too easy to label anyone who disagrees with him as emotional and, therefore, unfit to cast a vote. What’s more, emotions have always been a part of the democratic process and should continue to be considered by a compassionate electorate. And secondly, Sowell’s advice that allegedly uninformed or misinformed voters stay home is more of an avoidance of the problem than a solution. How about educating the voters so they can make informed decisions? Apparently Sowell and Cavuto would prefer to just exclude them.

After hearing Sowell’s theory that misinformed citizens should abstain from voting, Cavuto offered a typically snarky response saying that “By that measure I think it’s safe to say that every MSNBC viewer should just stay home.” Very funny, Neil. But actually Cavuto has a point, just the wrong one (as usual). If anyone should refrain from voting based on the cable news network they watch it should be Fox News viewers. Numerous studies have shown that Fox viewers are consistently the most uninformed. Even among Republicans, the ones who watch Fox have the worst grasp of reality.

The political bias in Sowell’s article was starkly evident in his deranged assertion that Obama is the same sort of “glib egomaniac” as Donald Trump. He provided no examples to support that absurd claim. Certainly Obama has never engaged in ludicrous boasts about how he is the greatest, smartest, bestest at anything and everything the way Trump does. But where Sowell goes completely off the rails is when he makes this disgusting comparison between Obama and Hitler:

“No national leader ever aroused more fervent emotions than Adolf Hitler did in the 1930s. Watch some old newsreels of German crowds delirious with joy at the sight of him. The only things at all comparable in more recent times were the ecstatic crowds that greeted Barack Obama when he burst upon the political scene in 2008.”

See? Obama is just like Hitler, according to Sowell. And all because he attracted large crowds. You know who else attracts large crowds? Donald Trump. The difference is that Obama’s crowds represented the diversity of America and never devolved into insults and hostility. Trump’s crowds, on the other hand, are predominantly white and they are openly hostile to Latinos, Muslims, and gays. So which crowd is more like the Nazis? And which party, with it’s demagogic appeals to American Exceptionalism (aka American Supremacy), is more aligned with Hitler’s mission? I’m just sayin’…

News Corpse Presents: The ALL NEW 2nd volume of
Fox Nation vs. Reality: The Fox News Cult of Ignorance.
Available now at Amazon.

Birther, Bigot, Donald Trump Wants To Make America Hate Again – Update: Trump Rejects ‘Moral Obligations’

At a rally in New Hampshire, Donald Trump demonstrated why he is better suited to running a Klan Kouncil than the U.S. He briefly addressed his audience of crackpots and then opened up the event for questions. The very first one tells us everything we need to know about both Trump and his warped disciples. (Video below)

Donald Trump

Question: We’ve got a problem in this country. It’s called Muslims. We know our current president is one. You know he’s not even an American, birth certificate man. But anyway, we have training camps growing where they want to kill us. That’s my question. When can we get rid of them?

This would be a perfect opportunity for Trump to exhibit some intelligence or dignity or … what the hell, we’re talking about Donald Trump here. That isn’t going to happen. This was his response:

Trump: We’ll be looking at a lot of different things. And, you know, a lot of people are saying that. A lot of people are saying that bad things are happening out there. We’re gonna be looking at that, and plenty of other things.

So Trump is gonna be looking at how to get rid of Muslims like President Obama? Despite his recent reluctance to talk about it, he is apparently as committed as ever to his birtherism. It would have been easy to dismiss the question and repudiate the bigoted inferences of the questioner, but Trump’s prejudices are deep seated and he wasn’t about to cut any slack to either the President or the millions of Muslim-American citizens.

Trump’s defenders might complain that he was blindsided by the question and should not be held accountable for not responding appropriately off the cuff. But that wouldn’t explain the statement provided by his campaign hours later after having plenty of time to develop a considered response.

Campaign response: The media wants to make this issue about Obama. The bigger issue is that Obama is waging a war against Christians. Christians need support in this country. Their religious liberty is stake.

Ferchrissakes. They took their time in order to compose the most nauseating, racist, idiotic, official reply they could think of? First of all, the media isn’t making this about Obama. The questioner explicitly made reference to him. The bigger issue is that Trump is now awkwardly attempting to divert attention to his delusional and wholly unsupported claim that “Obama is waging a war against Christians,” whose “religious liberty is stake.”

Where on Earth does he get these lunatic ravings from? Obviously he thinks that by retching up the most grotesque lies imaginable he can distract people from his boorish bigotry. That may work for the putrid collection of imbeciles who support him, but anyone with an IQ higher than Trump’s favorability among Latinos aren’t so easily fooled. And the only question left is how long will Republicans continue to prop up this jerkwad?

News Corpse Presents: The ALL NEW 2nd volume of
Fox Nation vs. Reality: The Fox News Cult of Ignorance.
Available now at Amazon.

[Update:] Trump Rejects ‘Moral Obligations’ After ducking the issue, Trump is now responding to his flagrant bigotry in a series of tweets that illustrate his complete obliviousness:

Tweet 1: Am I morally obligated to defend the president every time somebody says something bad or controversial about him? I don’t think so!
This isn’t about defending the President. It’s about defending the truth and repudiating prejudice. Trump should have excoriating the questioner, not as a favor to Obama, but because what he said was both false and hateful. And yes, that is a moral obligation if you expect to be regarded as a leader. Note: Trump got this line from Fox & Friends who spent much of the morning trying to justify Trump’s assholiness and specifically saying he had no moral obligation to respond.

Tweet 2: This is the first time in my life that I have caused controversy by NOT saying something.
This is a vain distraction that ignores the responsibility to speak out against bigotry. Martin Niemöller’s famous poem “First they came for…” is a stark reminder of what happens when you do NOT say something. You have to wonder if Trump would have said something if the questioner had said Jews instead of Muslims. Would he have been morally obligated?

Tweet 3: If someone made a nasty or controversial statement about me to the president, do you really think he would come to my rescue? No chance!
This is projection on Trump’s part. If someone at an Obama rally said Trump was a fascist Christian and asked how to get rid of them, based on his record of tolerance, Obama would almost certainly have slapped him down.

Tweet 4: If I would have challenged the man, the media would have accused me of interfering with that man’s right of free speech. A no win situation!
What utter nonsense. Trump has the example set by John McCain who faced a similar situation and reacted honorably. He was universally praised for his dignified response. And therein lies the problem for Trump: He has no honor or dignity.