Skip to content

Explaining the 2016 election in 500 words or less

January 9, 2016

Every pundit in the U.S. is trying to explain why the presidential race of 2016 is so “different” from the ones before.

Then along comes a Thursday news story out of Philadelphia that encapsulates it better than reams of paper, gallons of ink, gigabytes of video or hours of debate ever could.

After waiting for three days, the press release we should have heard from the Obama White House relating to the shooting of a Philadelphia police officer still hasn’t hit the airwaves, and it probably never will.

Here’s something along the lines of what we should have heard:

In response to the shooting of a white Philadelphia police officer by Edward Archer, a black career criminal who stated at capture that he wanted to kill police officers because they defend people and enforce laws that the radical Islamic culture he embraced at least as early as 2011 seeks to annihilate, the President is issuing an executive order directing the Justice Department  to capture and prosecute followers of radical Islamic terrorism  within the United States by any means necessary.  

Of course that didn’t happen. Instead we get the mayor of Philadelphia trying to spin the story 180 degrees away from the facts.

The administration that literally can’t wait one day to not only assign racial overtones to every interaction between a white police officer and a black citizen but pass judgment on it as well, has nothing to say when the shoe is on the other foot.

The administration that can’t wait to condemn Americans who want the threat of Islamic terrorism stopped as religious and racial bigots “clinging to their guns and Bibles” has nothing to say when racial and religious bigotry results in the maiming of a police officer.

The administration that can’t wait to make it harder for law-abiding citizens to own a gun has nothing to say when the gun used to attempt to assassinate an police officer was stolen from the home of a police officer, who presumably obtained it legally.

Every Sunday talk show raises the question of why Americans are so mad at career politicians.

Every liberal talking head brings up income inequality, poverty, racism, sexism, and every other contrived “ism” they can think of to explain why candidates like Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, Chris Christie and Marco Rubio are resonating with prospective voters.

You want to know why Americans are pissed off?

Because they are tired of being sitting ducks, and they are tired of waiting for well-fed and well-protected politicians on  both sides of the aisle to do something about it.

They know that this isn’t about race, gun control or Islam vs. Christianity.

It isn’t even about Republicans and Democrats or liberals and conservatives.

It’s just about right and wrong.

Most Americans simply want the bad guys that threaten our free society punished and the good guys to win for a change.

That’s the dynamics of the 2016 presidential race in a nutshell.

From → op-ed

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: