Letter to the editor: Shocking political discourse reaches a new level


One morning in the not-so-distant past, a point was made on the air about two political opponents who had resorted to an unheard level of sophistication in attempting to best each other. This shocking spectacle occurred at a local public event.

"Yeah, so what? We’re used to that. It’s never too early to say that the election was rigged. What’s the big deal?"

Well, the big deal was, and is — that there was no trouble, just a polite, informative and complementary exchange all around.

The stunning spectacle apparently left the audience frozen in their tracks, having no ammunition to hurl epithets at (i.e., "keep the government out of my Medicare!"). I would imagine that the shock and amazement of this spectacle would take some time to gradually wear off. And according to the testimony of at least one witness, the clouds parted and the sun shone down on the realization that this is what normal political discourse should consist of — it is worthy of encouragement and praise. Hurrah. I finally get it.

But the real shock is what this impromptu, on-air civics lesson informed us of. If someone has to resort to tactics like crude name-calling and personal attacks, one should become suspicious that the speaker has a definite lack of rational facts and reasoning to share. I suppose we could boil that down to: Insult and brain cells exist at an inverse proportion to each other.

I find this conclusion to be more shocking than the event under scrutiny. This instruction dwells in a reality completely unknown by one of our foremost candidates for president (and his outspoken supporters: “___ Biden”).

I imagine you’re beginning to get the gist of where this is going, but rather than give you even the slightest taste of the thousands of examples available for audit, I’ll go easy on you. I offer just a brief peek at a few seconds from one late post by the “most persecuted man in the world’s history,” and let it go at that.

Truth Social post mid-August immediately after an indictment: “A biased, Trump-Hating Judge” and “Deranged Jack Smith & his team of Thugs, Committee of Marxists, Fascists, and Political Hacks … lowlifes, who have been lying for years…”

Pretty powerful argument: I hope to see this employed by his defense in court. According to this new theory of civility, one should be able to count this candidate’s brain cells with, as good old Rush Limbaugh used to say, “With one hand tied behind my back.”


Dennis Shain