It’s time once again for a liberal double standard. Recently, Meryl Streep attended a gala at the “The Public Theatre” and wore a fat suit to mock Donald Trump. It was reported complete with pictures of her in costume. In not one of those reports was it said Streep insulted and mocked all fat people. Yet, when Donald Trump called Rosie O’Donnell a “fat pig,” only after she lambasted him on “The View,” the media said it was an attack on all women. This is what is in store this election season.

It is now pretty much a certainty that Hillary Clinton will be the Democrat nominee for president. Her speech after she won the New Jersey primary, when we are told she sewed up the nomination, boiled down to: “Vote for me because I am a woman. Let us make history. Ignore the potential scandals. Ignore my public record of total failure. I am woman; here me screech, sorry, roar.”

So, and mark my words, should Trump or anyone else say an unkind word about her record, or potential scandals, and urge people not to vote for her, you will be told that you are only against her because you are sexist. It is happening now. It’s happened before. This paper employs a liberal columnist, Bernie Kosberg, who is all in for Obama’s agenda. Yet, and because he believes in the righteousness of his policies, like all liberals, should you be against any of this, it can only be because you are against a black president.

Sign Up for E-News

They are liberal demagogues, because they cannot argue on the merits. Oh, they will tell you how well-intentioned they are, but when presented with the consequences, well that is either racist, sexist or any number of “phobias.” If one brings up the statistics compiled by the Justice Department on felonies committed by people here illegally, regardless of country or origin, you are either a racist or nativist. This campaign will be fought on the Democrat side on two fronts:  War on women and racism. Everything you will be told about Trump will come from those two prisms.

You can see it now. Yes, Trump did point out that the judge hearing the case against Trump U is of Mexican decent. Saying that he said he did not think he would be judged fairly because he wants to build the wall on the United States/Mexican border. On its face, it was a very dumb thing to say. It plays exactly in the media template. They are like many of you; they will not seek out the context. It is a context that if one looks, and not very deeply, puts a different light on what he said and meant. Stuff he should have pointed out when he made those remarks. Stuff he knew when he made those remarks:

• Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd, the law firm behind the class action lawsuit, paid the Clintons a total of $675,000 in fees for speeches since 2009, according to data compiled by The Washington Post.

• Federal judge Gonzalo P. Curiel, the judge hearing the case, is a member of The San Diego La Raza Lawyers Association. Point of note: La Raza means “the race.” This organization distributes scholarships to illegal immigrants. This organization sends lawyers to the border to ensure that “no illegal aliens’ ‘human rights’ are violated,” according to its mission statement.             

• In a speech that has been re-printed in many forms, Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor was applauded for her “wise Latina” speech, in which she said “our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging.” This speech was pointed out especially during her confirmation hearings on why she would be a great appointment to the court. Trump, in pointing out possible bias on the judge’s part, only echoed the same thing. She says it, it is called wonderful. He says it, it is called racist. Another liberal double standard.

• This organization that the judge belongs to, last year called for a boycott of everything Trump. We are told by the good liberals in the media that in spite of this, Trump is a racist to believe the judge may not be impartial to a case that involves him.  

• Racism by definition is the intentional oppression and marginalization of people based on their color of their skin. You can include race, religion, sex or sexual orientation. In all the years Trump has been in the media eye, he has employed thousands of people from all walks of life and never has one reporter uncovered actual racism by definition in the Trump organization. You can rest assured, if there was, it would be in the headlines.

Trump may have spoken ignorantly. OK, it was an ignorant thing to say, especially without context. Especially in this politically correct climate. Especially with a media whom only last week you castigated, will pounce on any misstep you make. However, it is only racist if you are looking for a reason not to support Trump. Believe me, if one hangs their hat on this, they were never going to support Trump anyway, no matter what they say or have said. This only supplies them with cover.

This is what I say. What say you?