Jon Stewart's Ridiculous and Offensive Reaction to Donald Trump and the RNC

"There is no real America... You don't own respect for police and firefighters."

That was basically comedian and former Daily Show host Jon Stewart's reaction to Donald Trump's speech Thursday night (July 21, 2016) and to pretty much the entire Republican National Convention when he temporarily took over hosting duties on television from Stephen Colbert. Regardless of my distaste for him as a candidate, otherwise, this is almost enough to make me want to vote for Trump out of pure spite.

First, if there is no America, then why is anyone trying to be its president - including Hillary? Why are we even voting or planning to vote, and by extension, why do we even care so much about what is said by what are otherwise strangers that most of us will never meet, let alone know, and who would probably have little or no interest in meeting or knowing us if they did know we existed (as individuals)? 

Secondly, absolutely nobody said they "owned" any of that stuff - least of all respect for police and firefighters, which the Republicans at least pretend to have even if chumps like Jon Stewart claim they don't. As I said yesterday on another post, I don't doubt that there is some racial bias and prejudice against blacks and Hispanics in many police departments. I was horrified by the video taken in Minnesota even if that guy was a thief or suspected thief, etc. He didn't deserve to be shot and killed for that or any other reason, INCLUDING the fact that he had a gun in the car (which makes me wonder why the NRA isn't upset, as well). I also believe, however, that no matter what the reason, police officers are in heightened danger from a particular kind of threat at the moment which does seem to come out of the African American and/or minority communities. Are they acting out of justifiable fears and frustrations? Yeah, maybe, but what does that really change? NOTHING. To deny, as I saw one CNN analyst advise, that all these cop killings in just over a week represents a "trend" of blacks shooting cops when he would simultaneously have everyone see a similar "trend" of racism in the number of black suspects shot and/or killed by cops in the last few months or years is at least mildly hypocritical and totally unproductive.

Neither side seems willing to take enough responsibility for their roles in this problem to make me believe that any amount of protesting, public sentiment, or government "recommendations" is going to change anything any time soon. As I've been saying for years, these kinds of "problems" have become far more valuable than any would-be or effective "solution" in terms of the kind of attention they generate and the kind of power people can get for themselves by just appearing to take them on.

Honestly, how many of us would even know who the "Reverend" Jesse Jackson is if not for his crusade against racism? Even if he is a real reverend, that doesn't mean he has to also be a career-activist, let alone one that has made as much money as Jackson has. And don't ANYONE - liberal or conservative - tell me that it isn't at least a little fun to argue a political point or to feel like you have some insight to share, whether personally relevant to you and your everyday life or not?

Right now, even if there are out-and-out racists in law enforcement (and statistically, there have to be), I think the problem on an institutional level is more reactionary than it is based in a lot of personal or deeply-rooted prejudice spurred-on by someone's skin color or even cultural differences. Instead, I think that reaction is to long-standing statistics and on-the-job experience with regards to how violent so many black and other minority communities tend to be relative to others - and not just in big cities anymore - combined with what appears to be the relative lack of black and Hispanic representation in a lot of police departments which, nevertheless, is probably due to the distrust that minority communities have had of American cops going back decades. The fact remains that you can't just grab a black or Hispanic or any other person or youth off the sidewalk and force them to join an institution they might distrust and dislike.

I'd be the last person to say that hypocrisy isn't relevant, but accusations of hypocrisy are really all Stewart has with which to fight back. Granted, it's hard to use substance to fight back against rhetoric like Trump's, which really has little or no substance to it in terms of HOW he'd do anything, but if the only message of the whole speech or even the whole convention was that Trump is or is claiming to be someone that would, as president, overtly and without apology make America and its LEGAL citizens an actual top priority, then why is that bad? If you're hired to run a business and deal with that business' employees, do you think and act first on what is best for THE BUSINESS and THE BUSINESS' EMPLOYEES, or do you spend a lot of time worrying more about how what you do affects the competition from the standpoint of in any way protecting that competition and/or its feelings... or people that are not qualified for the jobs or are not being hired? Yeah, a president has to deal with other nations, and right now, the idea that Trump could make all these great deals with China or even many of America's allies when there are some countries already claiming to ban Trump from crossing their borders altogether is insanity. Still, you don't have to be isolationist or in any way bigoted to say to yourself, your citizens and the world, "I am here to guard and respect our alliances and our deals, but my first responsibility is to those within my country's sovereign borders. Therefore, while we are not out to screw you over, neither is it our responsibility to level the playing field for you when and if it does not also benefit us."

Even if it's ludicrous to believe that Trump or anyone could go out and deport thousands upon thousands of illegal immigrants in the near future, let alone quickly, the idea that they should be allowed to stay and to work and, on top of that, be granted temporary citizenship rights via amnesty just because they had sympathetic reasons for being here, have families, and aren't otherwise known as "criminals" is absurd. As long as we have immigration laws, these people became criminals the moment they crossed the border! The left says, "How dare you! These people are building your roads and your houses and doing jobs you won't!" Really? Because I see WHITE construction workers on the road and in convenience stores all the time, and how do you know what someone won't do if you don't ask? There are women with young children and otherwise decent families that are currently in prison because they committed crimes and/or hurt people - in many instances because they felt they had to - but whether they did or not, most of them are not about to have their sentences overturned out of sympathy. If nothing else, think of it this way:

If someone broke into your home and stole food and supplies, would you not report it? Would you not rather someone in need have the decency to ASK you and to respect your rights than to just break-in, take what they want, and run away in attempts to avoid any real contact or interaction with you? Good or bad, a lot of these illegal immigrants don't even plan to stay indefinitely, so amnesty as I understand it would basically just be giving them something they never wanted and, based on what I heard, TAX what little money they could earn and reduce the options available to the less-skilled among them because employers would have to report their work and pay legal wages!

It's one thing to say that Donald Trump lacks the experience and temperament to be an effective President, let alone one able to accomplish what he claims he will. It's another to insult ANY candidate's platform, their patriotism, or their enthusiasm by making the ridiculous assertion that they don't own patriotism or America and, worse, say or even insinuate that America does't even exist. Frankly, I'm not even sure what Stewart means by that... unless, of course, he's one that thinks it belongs to the Native Americans, many of whom are believed to have IMMIGRATED to North America by crossing the Bering Strait. But when has that ever made any difference?