When Donald Trump said he preferred war heroes who weren't captured, he lit a firestorm over his 'disrespect' for American service members. Some said he had impugned all who wear the uniform.
I saw a comment by Presidential candidate Ben Carson who noted, "It depends on how you define hero." I think this is a fair assessment, since you can't really believe it OK to reference every person who ever wore a service uniform automatically a 'hero.' That would distort the definition of hero and depreciate the unique aspects of what constitutes a true hero.
So where do we draw the line on this kind of characterization of someone's service? Just what does it take to qualify as a 'hero?'
Once again we find ourselves battling an Orwellian-style redefinition of important and respected American institutions and icons. George Orwell predicted in his classic novel '1984' that massive efforts to modify, devalue and impugn the dominant language of a democratic society was a fundamental tactic to turn citizens against popularly elected, representative governments and the culture of freedom.
So now we have patriots warring with each other over the definition of who is a hero and how much should people value their opinions, especially when those opinions are at variance with the politically correct, anti-US, anti-war, anti-capitalist template.
It is amazing to me how easily this strategic tactic diverts Americans from the stopping the outrageous usurpation of personal rights and freedoms, and sends the entire political discourse into a totally irrelevant and specious spiral of media frenzy and wasted public debate over misrepresented and redefined words that alter the realities of the issues.
Where is George Orwell now? We need him more than ever....