Thursday was a big day for both presidential candidates. Donald Trump spoke in New Hampshire and made a hyperbolic case of loose association that Hillary Clinton is a bigot. Hillary Clinton made a well-documented case that Trump is a racist, using his own words and rhetoric. Clinton seems to have won that round. The same day, Clinton released a new ad in which members of hate groups professed their love for Trump while dressed in pointed hoods and white robes.
However, Pastor Mark Burns, who is African-American and a Trump supporter, called on Hillary Clinton to take the ad down calling it a “new low.” But the ad was effective and simply showed that Trump is cozy with racists, due to his offensive rhetoric.
It’s ironic that Burns finds the Clinton ad offensive, yet will go to great lengths to justify his favored nominee’s offensive behavior. Friday, on MSNBC’s Morning Joe, Mika Brezinski sat down with Burns and pressed him with a simple “yes or no” question that the Pastor squirmed and failed to answer. The question?
When he made the comments about the judge saying he’s a Mexican, was that racist or not?
Burns tried to get out of the territory of absolutes, but Brezinski patiently reasked the question.
I just want to know if that is racist or not. Then I can move on with the conversation, but I need to know where you stand on things in terms of reality. So, were those comments racist or not?
But Burns was obstinate and refused to call Trump’s very obviously racist attack on Judge Curiel racism. In case you’ve been living under a rock, in May Trump attacked the judge presiding over the Trump University case, not based on the judge’s performance, but based on his purely on his ethnicity. Trump said the judge would be biased against him because he wants to build a wall to keep Mexicans out, and that he couldn’t do his job fairly because he’s “Mexican” despite having been born in America. The attack was so racist, many Republicans and right wing pundits called Trump’s comments out as being “textbook racism.”
Burns tried to dance around Brezinski’s question, saying:
Well, I think it’s important to understand, I think if I was in Mr. Trump’s shoes and I had a very controversial policy that offended many millions of, potentially millions of Hispanic people–
But Brezinski cut Burns off, asking again:
Were the comments racist or not?”
Burns once again tried to dodge the “yes or no” question, but finally said:
If I was in Mr. Trump’s shoes, I don’t think it was racist. I know what real racism is.
It’s like denying someone has a nose on their face.
If someone told Burns he couldn’t be a good pastor simply because he was black, he would likely consider that racism. But because Trump did that to a Latino judge, and Trump is the candidate Burns is supporting, he’s chosen to play ignorant. It’s just ironic considering someone who claims to know what “real racism is” can’t recognize a very obvious racial attack.
At this point, Trump supporters need to take a trip outside of pretend land. They have every right to support Trump, even if they’re of the ethnicities Trump has said offensive things about. But let’s not deny “textbook racism” when we see it. If Trump is your guy, embrace the fact that he’s racially insensitive, offensive, rude, ignorant, and is pandering to the alt-right and has the ear of the KKK and other White Supremacists. Let’s not pretend he hasn’t tweeted out memes that are factually erroneous that paint black people as violent perpetrators of murder. And let’s definitely not justify Trump’s attack on the judge presiding over his fraud case and pretend he was in the right to call out the judge’s ethnicity. In fact, I could fill up a page as easily as Clinton filled up a speech with all the overtly racist things Trump has done on the campaign trail and in the past.
Was Trump’s attack on Judge Curiel racist? The answer is a resounding “yes.”
Featured Image via screencap