Most Americans, having listened to President Donald Trump July 4th address from Mt. Rushmore, were appreciative of the call to justice, to the commemoration of the country’s great men and women.
“Today, we pay tribute to the exceptional lives and extraordinary legacies of George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, and Teddy Roosevelt. (Applause.) I am here as your President to proclaim before the country and before the world: This monument will never be desecrated — (applause) — these heroes will never be defaced, their legacy will never, ever be destroyed, their achievements will never be forgotten, and Mount Rushmore will stand forever as an eternal tribute to our forefathers and to our freedom. (Applause.)”
Not so the New York Times, which observed the president was once again descending into dark and divisive language.
It’s amazing how differently the Times covers Trump today versus how the Times covered former President Barack Obama when he visited Mt. Rushmore in 2008.
In 2008, reporters were fawning over Obama.
“As for Mr. Obama, he nodded as a Park Ranger talked about the dynamite charges that the sculptor deployed to carve out those faces. (The faces are lit up at night). But when a reporter asked Mr. Obama if he might like to have his visage up there one day, he shook his head rather definitively.”
Mt. Rushmore was described as the pride of South Dakota.
The Times also observed that black voters might desert the Democrats should Obama’s rival for the Democrat’s presidential nominee Hillary Clinton win.
“In February, I rarely talked to black voters who insisted that they would reject Senator Clinton if she wrested the nomination from Mr. Obama. Now, more than a few ill-chosen words about “hard-working white voters” and the like down the campaign trail, black disaffection with Hillary Clinton is palpable.”
Fast forward to 2020 and the Times is now observing that it is Trump who is fanning the flames of the racial fires.
“He signaled even more clearly that he would exploit race and cultural flash points to stoke fear among his base of white supporters in an effort to win re-election. As he has done in the past, he resorted to exaggerated, apocalyptic language in broadly tarring the nationwide protests against entrenched racism and police brutality, saying that ‘angry mobs’ sought to ‘unleash a wave of violent crime in our cities’ and that those seeking to deface monuments want to ‘end America.’”
To the Times, Trump was leaning on the culture wars to buoy his white supporters and has adopted a “searing tone” in his speeches.
“‘Trump needs — or thinks he needs — fear of ‘the other’ to motivate his base and create enthusiasm,’ said Christine Matthews, a Republican pollster. ‘Right now, people are fearful of Covid-19, but that is inconvenient for Trump, so he is trying to kick up fear about something he thinks will benefit his re-election: angry mobs of leftists tearing down American history.’”
I suppose we should be thankful that the Times at least mention the culture wars, but portraying the riots in the wake of George Floyd’s death while being arrested as some sort of peaceful protest that eschewed violence and did not result in deaths, property damage and business loss is dishonest.
If the protests were so peaceful, it’s doubtful that the state of Washington would be seeking federal funds to rebuild the downtown destroyed by rioters.
In fact, the City of Portland is recording its 37th day of rioting downtown.
Little wonder that Trump has labeled the fake news media the enemy of the people. When even the New York Times cannot bring itself to acknowledge the violence that black and white Americans alike find abhorrent, then journalism has descended into advocacy.
In 2008, the Times and other media outlets subtly and not so subtly made the contest between Clinton and Obama about race. Obama was being made out to be the nation’s savior. The message was it was about time America had a black president.
Eight years later, the press could not bring itself to realize that Obama had done little to improve race relations and that the lives of blacks had not improved under his presidency. Black Lives Matter, after all, was born during his presidency. The Ferguson riots happened one year into his presidency. And a majority of Americans believed race relations worsened under his presidency.
Still, the Times and most of the mainstream media peddle the lie that police target black youth and are wanton killers.
It is a lie that breeds hatred and fans the flame of a simmering race war. It is simply not true. Any objective study of the data shows as much. But emotions are running so high that otherwise intelligent people refuse to acknowledge the data.
Now, Trump reacts to the violence and it is he that accused of divisiveness?
This is how nations die – when there is literally a psychotic break from reality.