By Jeffrey A. Rendall
Democrats have a golden opportunity to leave TDS behind – smart money says they won’t
You had to know it was bound to come up after the excitement at the Hilton last month.
Speaking of the plans to add a ballroom on to the White House. The facility was controversial when it was proposed by President Donald J. Trump and has only become more contentious as time passed. Attach the name “Trump” to anything these days and Democrats instinctively revolt against the notion no matter how potentially useful and beneficial the project might turn out to be when realized.
The furor over the privately funded ballroom had seemingly died down recently as Democrats – and the world – were preoccupied with overseas happenings in Iran, and elsewhere. Democrats also savored the chance to make “affordability” a crucial issue in this November’s federal midterm elections. Similarly, President Trump’s ongoing effort to convince Americans that gas prices eventually would subside had seemingly reached a lull.
Then would-be assassin Cole Allen struck at the White House Correspondents Dinner and the shiny-object seeking establishment media returned to the ballroom topic once again. Naturally, whenever such a jolting event takes place, Americans’ focus on security becomes all the more intense.
The one Democrat renowned for his common sense and pragmatism spoke out in favor of doing everything possible to keep the president safe.
In an article titled, “Fetterman: Democrats should ‘drop the TDS,’ fund Trump ballroom after shooting”, Alexander Bolton reported at The Hill after the latest Trump assassination attempt:
“Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) is calling on fellow Democrats to support the construction of a new ballroom at the White House after a lone gunman tried to assassinate the president and senior administration officials at the White House Correspondents’ Association dinner …
“Fetterman said the Washington Hilton, where Secret Service officers exchanged gunfire with a 31-year-old man armed with a shotgun and handgun, was not secure enough to host an event with the president, vice president and more than 2,000 guests.
“’We were there front and center. That venue wasn’t built to accommodate an event with the line of succession for the U.S. government. After witnessing last night, drop the TDS and build the White House ballroom for events exactly like these,’ Fetterman posted Sunday…”
As has often been the case since Trump was inaugurated early last year, Senator John Fetterman has spoken up and spoken out on common sense measures that would make on-the-ground conditions better. This is true not only for the divisive ballroom issue, but also for Democrat initiated filibusters and the like – partisan agitation that just didn’t pass the laugh test.
In doing so, Fetterman’s drawn positive comparisons to a few recent-vintage Democrats who didn’t necessarily toe the party’s hate-Trump-all-the-time notions of unfairness. Former West Virginia Democrat Senator Joe Manchin was one elected official who could be counted on to do something reasonable… occasionally. Now it’s Fetterman doing the right thing.
As Bolton’s article also noted, The National Trust for Historic Preservation has sued the administration to block the construction of the 90,000-square-foot ballroom, and a federal judge last month issued an injunction halting construction of the ballroom after months of litigation though a federal appeals court issued an administrative stay allowing the project to proceed until early June.
So… it’s safe to say the ballroom’s finishing point is still in legal limbo. Good ideas aren’t always appreciated, are they?
Thinking about what Fetterman said, if Democrats maintain that the true threat to society stems from the nebulous concept of “white supremacy”, wouldn’t they open themselves to walling off future assassination ventures from hooded Klansmen and goose-stepping Nazis by ensuring that a virtual fortress was fabricated to protect them?
Democrats’ scare tactics over the prevalence of “systematic racism” and “white supremacy” has subsided, a bit, after recent revelations that the Southern Poverty Law Center actually paid empty-brained freaks to cause trouble, the 2017 Charlottesville incident being the most notable example of a “protest” that turned violent – and deadly. It seems that when leftists aren’t paying idiots to advocate for “white supremacy” that there just aren’t sufficient numbers of ignorant rednecks to (literally) carry the torch for the Democrats’ main bugaboo.
No wonder Democrats were so against the concept of an impregnable White House facility where there would never be worries about security and whether some nook or cranny wasn’t properly swept or checked for hidden menaces. Anyone who’s been to – or near – the White House recently understands that you can’t take a step near the grounds without some official looking-law enforcement individual sizing up your intentions.
Democrat attempts to link the January 6, 2021 “tourism” riot couldn’t establish a firm connection between skin color and the causes the demonstrators stood for.
Nonetheless, Democrat presidents deserve protection, too, don’t they?
Common sense – and historical precedent – suggests there will be another human being (minority male, female, LGBTQIA+++, he/she, whatever) that will be nominated and elected president at some juncture. Theoretically, the ballroom improvements will have been completed by that point, offering a virtual palace of solitude for that person regardless of his or her or “it’s” station in life.
Besides, Democrats may be honked off over Trump’s audacity to make changes to the White House now, but the passage of years will make the new look Executive residence appear rather commonplace. And I doubt a future Democrat, once he or she discovers how useful the ballroom will be to his or her presidency, would ever imply that the structure needed to be bulldozed or removed just because it “stank” of Donald Trump.
Here’s thinking the ballroom will melt right into the status quo in the not-so-distant future and Americans won’t even give its existence a second thought, except maybe for when they visit the White House. Here’s also thinking a future Democrat president, if indeed there is one, will devote major public resources to change the décor of the room to suit their own preferences. And send a message.
Who knows. Perhaps Nancy Pelosi and “Chucky” Schumer can dig their Kente Cloth robes out of mothballs and erect a shrine at the site to George Floyd’s memory to spite Trump and the Republicans.
We recall how one of the first things senile Joe Biden did when he took over in 2021 was unveil a bust to the late Ceasar Chavez in the Oval Office itself. Boy did that turn out to be an epic miscue, didn’t it?
Despite the repeated assassination threats to the current president – and the overwhelming evidence indicating that leftist kooks are only growing bolder in their willingness to give harming Trump a shot (pardon the pun) – it’s my impression that the “Oh, it’ll never happen” attitude perseveres in the United States.
After two of Trump’s would-be assassins never actually got close to harming the man himself, complacency started rolling in. The Butler shooter got near enough to Trump to draw blood, but the others were foiled in advance and met rather brusque finishes when taken down by the Secret Service and others tasked with keeping the president safe.
Because the shooters were detected and stopped, within days, a “no harm, no foul” attitude began creeping back into Americans’ consciousness. This was definitely the case with Cole Allen, as Democrats (except for John Fetterman, of course) began assailing the need for the White House ballroom, again, preferring to collect political chits in the never-ending bash Trump game instead of conceding that danger endures and there are solutions available.
This is what Senator Fetterman referred to when he mentioned TDS (Trump Derangement Syndrome) and how his fellow Democrats should just keep it to themselves and give the okay for the ballroom. Trump himself said construction continues, but the legal proceedings are ongoing and here’s betting there’s a federal judge out there just itching to be a hero (to the leftists) by stopping Trump cold in his tracks in a matter they see as easy pickings.
In essence, Democrats have the attention span of your average three-year-old when it comes to maintaining focus on real issues as opposed to manning the ranks of the eternally disgruntled Trump-haters brigade. Even the president’s potential safety is less important to them than doing the right thing.
Will the president ever be truly safe under such conditions? It’s a question Americans should ask – and then work to get right before the next assassination try happens.
Jeff Rendall is editor and publisher of GolfintheUSA.com and has written about golf and politics for over a quarter of a century. A non-practicing attorney from California, he moved to the east coast three decades ago to pursue and combine his interests in all things American history and culture. Jeff has worked as an intern on Capitol Hill and in various capacities in grassroots organizing and conservative organizations and publications, including a nearly two-decade stint at ConservativeHQ.com. Column republishing or other inquiries: Rendall@msn.com .