Hannity and the Cult of Trump Are Giving Halfwit Sean King the Appearance of Credibility

Fake black person Sean “Talcum X” King is a one trick pony. His job is to take an item from the day’s news and complain about it being racist. He’s not someone who should have any credibility among anyone but his fellow left wing whackos. However, the Trumpists are giving him the appearance of credibility simply because they are incapable of being critical of their dear leader. By doing exactly what he routinely hacked on Obama for doing, even Trump himself is doing yeoman’s work to make King look respectable too,


Here’s King’s moronic headline for today: KING: Conservatives don’t hate a golfing President, but they hated an uppity negro golfing President.

More than ever, it’s clear that conservatives never really had a problem with a golfing President, what they hated seeing was a black golfing President. I also think this was the subconscious message that Trump was pulling on throughout the campaign trail to his almost exclusively white audiences.

The racist caricature of the “uppity negro” has deep roots in this country. Uppity negroes have irritated white folk for over a hundred years. In its most simple form, the uppity negro is a black man or woman who enjoys anything other than working from sunup to sundown. Particularly, an uppity negro is a black man or woman who enjoys creature comforts in life that some whites may not yet be able to afford to enjoy — say a musical, a play, fine dining, or, you guessed it, a round of golf.

It’s why referencing Obama golfing got such a rise out of white, working-class crowds. It was a coded way to say, “How dare that uppity negro golf and enjoy leisure time why we work hard to make this country what it truly is?” Of course, they could never use those words, but I truly believe that is what they wanted to say every single time they expressed disgust and disdain seeing Obama golf.


Making it into a race issue is moronic, but sellouts like Sean Hannity (who else?) make it next to impossible to make that argument.


It wouldn’t matter if he had included the name because either way he’s a flaming hypocrite.

King cites Newt Gingrich’s selective outrage as well.

Neither of those tweets have aged well. Now it is Trump enjoying his taxpayer-funded golf outings after announcing military actions all over the world, including Syria. Now it’s Trump charging the taxpayers not $920,000 per golf outing in Florida, but reportedly much more.

Suddenly, the costs of golfing don’t seem to offend Trump or Newt or Hannity anymore. And I sincerely, genuinely don’t think the problem is political. It’s racial.

King can’t see it as anything other than racism simply because bleating about racism is his raison-d’etre. However, he’s absolutely right that there is a double standard being applied.


There are probably some limited circles in which race plays a role in this hypocrisy, but by and large this is not about race. It’s about party.

Blind loyalty to a party is perhaps just as stupid as racism, but it is not racism. It’s tribalism. Guys like Hannity and Gingrich hocked their integrity to go all in for Trump and now they can’t be critical of him without looking (more) like fools. They propped him up and declared him to be conservative. Now they own him.

Since Trump assumed office, he has engaged in all sorts of activities for which his supporters attacked Obama—from superficial things like playing golf to reneging on campaign promises, governing via executive order, or promising massive spending programs. Trump doesn’t get a pass because he’s white but because he’s Republican.

It has been become rather obvious that for many, the President’s actions aren’t right or wrong by their objective nature. The rightness or wrongness of a President’s deeds are only a function of the letter that sits beside his name. A great many who say they want to reduce the size and power of the federal government in reality just  want to put one of their own in charge of it.

Last week here at RedState Patterico analyzed how Trumpism is now coming to define conservatism.


This is why it is so ruinous for Donald Trump to have become the standard bearer of the Republican Party — which is the reason I left it last May. Perhaps it’s also time to shed the meaningless mantle of “conservatism” — a word that has no real meaning when it is defined by Donald Trump — and exclusively refer to myself as a classical liberal. (This is a stance that has the added benefit of confusing Trumpers who don’t know the historical meaning of the word “liberal.”) The disease of Trumpism easily spreads — whether in the Republican party or in “conservatism” generally — when the president himself is its champion

That Trumpism would become perceived to be equivalent to conservatism was one of the primary reasons I was opposed to nominating Trump. What many of us were worried about is now happening. It’s not as if conservative voices aren’t pointing out the hypocrisy. It’s just not happening among the big radio and TV hosts who can’t remove their lips from Trump’s behind long enough to say anything negative about their hero.


During the 2016 primary and general election, many alleged conservatives abandoned the idea that character mattered in choosing a president. When it became evident that Trump was just as sleazy as Bill Clinton had been, character ceased to matter for them. (Note that Clinton and Trump are both white. The hypocrisy isn’t race based.)


Now all the people who bashed Obama for his extravagant golf habit have decided Trump’s even more extravagant golf habit is just peachy with them. As predicted, the former conservatives turned Trumpists are making it far easier for the extreme left to stereotype and attack small government, Constitutional conservatism.

I’m sure Sean King appreciates the help from the other Sean.



Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Trending on RedState Videos