Tom Fulks responds to his haters: ‘Hey, I’m an opinion writer!’
Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I rest my case.
Indeed, many local Donald Trump supporters who read this newspaper are perfectly fine with his sexism, racism, xenophobia and advocacy of violence.
They recently confirmed it — angrily, bitterly, aggressively.
So incensed were they over my commentary about Trump voter traits, some accused me of hate speech.
Yep — they read it and they hated it.
Naturally, rather than countering the argument that Trump promotes violence — a pernicious predicate to fascism — they reflexively attacked the notion that anyone would make that observation.
Which illustrates the point: Like the man himself, Trump’s supporters can’t defend his dangerous demagoguery, so they attack those who criticize it.
“Arrogant, condescending, self-important litany of leftist drivel,” wrote one fellow on The Tribune’s comment section under the column. “A perfect storm of the reasons for Trump's popularity, and the perfect demonstration of how far out of touch the leftist bigots are with the daily struggles of those who pay their bills for them.”
I pay my own bills, but I still think “Trump logic” threatens our democracy.
“I haven’t been much of a Trump supporter,” another fellow wrote, “but claptrap like Fulks’ causes me to give Trump a second look. You seem like a very unpleasant sort Mr. Fulks, therefore quite well suited to represent the liberal point of view.”
The point apparently being that his vote is based on personal animus rather than the selection of someone he believes best suited to be president.
It’s a common thread among so many Trump voters. To them, a vote for Trump is a thumb in the eye from the disaffected to “the system” run by stuffed suits, lefties and effete intellectuals.
Another letter writer objected to my use of “inflammatory terms” when describing Trump as a potential “despot” surrounded by “henchmen,” and that his supporters seem to like it.
Hey, I’m an opinion writer. It’s what we do. But wait, that hot rhetoric seemed validated when, the day after the column ran, Trump’s campaign manager was arrested for battery.
One commenter twisted a new line of pretzel-logic outrage to cook up a charge of racism — against which race is not clear.
Calling me a “divisive puerile a__hole,” he claimed that the term “grayback”— which I used to describe Trump’s more antediluvian supporters — is a “racial slur.”
“The editors of this newspaper are DISGUSTING for allowing such racist and hateful bile to go to print and should apologize for publishing Fulks’ abhorrent hate piece,” he wrote, without a hint of irony or self-awareness.
The online Urban Dictionary defines grayback thusly: “Another term or name for a redneck or Southern hick, especially one that is loyal to the Confederacy … derived from the color of the jacket that Southern soldiers wore … during the Civil War.”
Many Trump supporters want to “make American great again,” apparently harking to an era when women weren’t so uppity, abortions happened in back alleys, “negroes” sat in the back and setting fire to a church or a neighbor’s home was considered free speech.
Yep, “grayback” works just fine.
Clearly, Trump supporters have difficulty defending the indefensible. And then there’s the man himself.
Trump’s assertion that “there has to be some form of punishment” for women who have abortions provoked criticism from all sides. Within hours his campaign issued a “clarification.”
A day later, Trump bulldozed ahead.
“A lot of people thought my answer was excellent, by the way,” Trump told a radio interviewer.
A day after that he took another position, which his campaign again clarified later, bringing to five the number of abortion positions Trump took within a span of three days.
Trump also said the U.S. shouldn’t try to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons. In fact, he said, we should arm South Korea and Japan with nukes, or demand payment for protection.
Sort of like: “Nice country you got there. Would be a shame if something happened to it.”
Many will support Trump no matter what he says and follow him unquestioningly — another dangerous predicate to totalitarianism.
And they’ve learned well from their leader: When confronted with the truth, deny it — aggressively, violently.
When presented contrary evidence, attack the people presenting it, smear their character, accuse them of wrongdoing.
Most of all, when making a case for Trump, make up “facts” to distract from the distasteful truth that their emperor wears no clothes.
Now it’s up to the jury.
Liberal columnist Tom Fulks is a former reporter and opinion writer. He has been a political campaign consultant for many local races. His column runs in The Tribune every other Sunday, in rotation with conservative columnist Matthew Hoy.
This story was originally published April 9, 2016 at 8:55 PM with the headline "Tom Fulks responds to his haters: ‘Hey, I’m an opinion writer!’."