Fire the Messenger

By Calvin Hill

The trouble with Congressional hearings in the age of Tea Party, “Freedom” Caucus and MAGA mania Republican extremism, there is less a search for truth and understanding and more of a grandstanding, reputation building video montage.

College administrators named in lawsuits against universities over various Constitutional issues have been an all too common occurrence in America. In an era where consensus cannot be reached between members of student body organizations, faculty, media, political organizations, civil rights organizations and think tanks concerning who should even be invited to speak on campuses, how is a college president and board of directors expected to navigate such when the topic(s) and speakers are controversial? And how does a Congressional witness satisfy institutional policy and Constitutional rights in the face of a hostile, sound bite seeking sycophant who has turned her wide open eyes away from some of the most deliberate racial and religious bigotry of a candidate, then president, in decades? Facing an agenda driven Elise Stefanik, the university presidents should have referred her pointed questions to “our lawyers for matters involving policy and Constitutional speech and punishable behavior.”

First, the 2016 GOP candidate disparaged and came for the Mexicans. The Republicans were outraged, but quickly got over it. Then they found that the candidate admitted to sexually assaulting women, and got over that too. When the candidate became president, he openly insulted non-white immigrants as coming from “shithole countries.” When the Republicans could not use “locker room talk” for that as an excuse, they said nothing. During a worldwide pandemic, Asians throughout America were being routinely brutalized each time Donald Trump trivialized thousands of daily deaths as victims of the “Chinese virus” and “kung flu.” Trump’s repeated denigration of Muslims caused assaults, not only against Muslims, but also Sikhs, Hindus and other non-white Americans and immigrants in religious garb by Americans too ignorant to know the difference. And in all of her hearing bravado in defense of Jews facing rampant and ugly anti-Semitism, Elise Stefanik and the MAGA cult did not show the outrage they feign against college administrators when Herr Trump claimed there were “very fine people” marching in the Jew bashing rally in Charlottesville, Virginia that led to the death of Heather Heyer.

It was not enough for Donald Trump to eschew due process for five young, non-white, men in Central Park. It was not enough for him to lie about Muslims celebrating in Jersey City while the smoke from the Twin Towers covered death and destruction in lower Manhattan. Donald Trump has convinced much of the GOP that their autopsy of outreach to non-white Americans was unacceptable and insulting to him as a white man and them as real Americans. Donald Trump has been Ground Zero in the orchestration of many forms of hate and hate speech in America since the Obama administration. Lindsey Graham was right the first time. “Donald Trump is a race baiting, xenophobic religious bigot.”

For these reasons, and more, there is a need to question that the atrocious anti-Semitism being viewed could not, or would not, be accepted about any other group. It is painful to hear Jews feeling unsafe in environments where free speech should thrive but becomes scary. To this day, there are still communities that black folks should not be caught in after dark – or pulled over because they look like “they don’t belong.”

It is the height of hypocrisy for Rep. Stefanik to disparage college administrators who answer the questions she asked, and then try to put her words in their mouths when she disapproves of their answers. Were a classroom debate to occur over an assigned reading of Mein Kampf, and some of the students approved of Adolf Hitler’s positions, what does Stefanik believe should happen to students when/if the debate continued out on the quad or in the cafeteria? Would she ban the book? Should the students be suspended? Free speech is not absolute when it exacts harmful conduct. That appeared to be the point of the answers.

The fear that Jews feel over the boisterous rise in vile and offensive anti-Semitic speech is real. It cannot and should not be ignored. However, under the guise of free speech, Donald Trump continues to emit vile and repulsive attacks that have terrorized entire ethnic communities and families into a need for professional protection as death threats against them have become frighteningly commonplace while Republicans remain deafeningly silent. Thus, Elise Stefanik is an extremely flawed messenger as it concerns speech and conduct. Her support and defense of Donald Trump is reprehensible.

The late Justice Sandra Day O’Connor once told former Obama official, Rick Stengel, that someday soon America would pay a heavy price for no longer teaching our children Civics. If Stefanik has a problem with specific kinds of speech, she should have the guts to say we should amend that clause in the Constitution through legislative means. Or, perhaps her abiding support for Mr. Trump is her approval of his desire to terminate the Constitution altogether.