Barron Trump, a 10 year old, has been the target of attacks from the left and some of the media. It’s SICK, SICK, SICK!

We have seen articles float conspiracy theories that Barron Trump has a mental problem. We’ve seen loony libs like Rosie add fuel to that fire, even if she claims it was unintentional. We’ve seen NBC employees claim Barron’s going to commit a massacre with a machinegun. We’ve seen so much sick things.

And the Washington Post, which is obviously trying to fear-monger, just had a photographer awarded earlier this month .. awarded for a photo, with a twisted underlying tone.

..

In a photo contest by the WHNPA, a WashPo photographer exploited Barron to win a category.

If your passion is politics, nothing tops the photo contest each February by The White House News Photographers Association. And that is especially true every fourth year when the awards include an inauguration category. Washington Post photographer Jabin Botsford not only won the category prize, his shot of Donald and Barron Trump, the photo titled “BARRON” (below), might be the most fascinating and provocative choice of all the photo contests this year. The White House News Photographers Association. And that is especially true every fourth year when the awards include an inauguration category. Washington Post photographer Jabin Botsford not only won the category prize, his shot of Donald and Barron Trump, the photo titled “BARRON” (below), might be the most fascinating and provocative choice of all the photo contests this year.

But given the media blackout on children of the president, how far can we go in analyzing this now acclaimed piece of journalism? To what extent is it respectful (or safe) to tease out the meaning, power and symbolism of the prized scene? Where does one draw the line in addressing this photo as a cultural artifact? And the most fraught question: how much are we allowed to probe the expressions and personalities as they inform the composition?

On one level, of course, the face in the front window could belong to anyone. As a visual counter to Trump’s “thumbs up,” the child’s expression could be seen to represent the alienation, the horror even, so many people feel  over Trump’s election. Call it a “silent scream.” The fact it’s Barron though makes the photo a lot more complicated, and turns the silent scream allusion into blasphemy. It turns the photo — like a child itself, especially an unruly one — into something that “should be seen but not heard.” With creative and political license curtailed, the suggestive power that makes the photo a winner in the first place gives way to a family rating. Hail the president, and a kid fascinated with soldiers in uniform.

Art and symbolism aside, however, what can we say about the politics of the choice? How much was the  selection made in literal spite of the journalistic demilitarized zone around Trump’s son? The fact Trump is constantly going low is no excuse, of course, to follow him there. The award is ironic, though, given Trump’s absence of boundaries. Apparently, there is nothing sacred or off limits to him, whether it involves the allegedly fake, lying, enemy-of-the-state media or even his own loved ones. Is it possible the elevation of this photo, at least in part, is a pushback to that?

Here’s where the photo gets really dangerous though. The fact the WHNPA chose to bestow significance on this particular image turns Trump’s role as a father, and this father-son relationship into subject matter. Exhibited side-by-side, the expressions and behaviors of Donald and Barron being highly compelling while thoroughly disconnected, the photo literally frames the question of how father and son relate, and how the behavior of one informs the other.

And it gets even stickier than that.

Given the child’s animation, the photo also raises the question of whether Barron is all right. It’s the question that guarantees to rip off the presidential seal off Pandora’s box. Last month, I wrote a post for Columbia Journalism Review laying out the case for the civic relevance of the Trump marriage. If we were a healthier society, if we weren’t polarized to death and the digital commons wasn’t beset by trolls, perhaps that question and answer, whatever it might be, might prove cathartic, might strike a blow for tolerance. Perhaps a little more information, while still protective of Barron, might actually create a healthier and more dimensional picture of Donald Trump, and his wife’s compassion, say. Dare I say it, it might even imbue such an adversarial figure with some empathy. Without pushing further, though, I would propose that Trump’s aversion to weakness in any form is probably a much larger rationale for total privacy than anything else.

Literally, the image is a pseudo-second of Barron Trump awkwardly yawning and his father giving an optimistic thumbs-up to supporters & cameras.

BARRON: WASHINGTON, DC - JANUARY 20: President Trump waves as his son Barron Trump looks out during the inaugural parade as it makes its way down Pennsylvania Avenue on Inauguration day in Washington, DC on Friday, Jan. 20, 2017.

Yet the dark tint & the dark, twisted, vitriolic portrayal of the Trump family by the media — makes a pic come off meaning & representing so much more. There are people, who believe they’re psychologists apparently, that say Trump is a sociopath.
Glenn Beck says Antonin Scalia was killed by God, so Cruz would step up and win. LMAO. Click here to read about that incident.

glennbeckglennbeck4glennbeck3

Glenn Beck, the same guy who threatened to kill himself if Evangelicals didn’t vote for Cruz, is calling Trump a sociopath. Let that set in. LMAO!

So the media has also, according to this report, has attacked the fact it costs a decently-big amount to protect the President’s 10 year old son. Pretty sick, if true.

CNN’s Jake Tapper is someone I’ve, historically, had sparse agreements with. But his tweet in January about vitriolic, disgusting, heinous attacks on the President’s child ‘Little Barron’ — sums up my feelings.

Despite the intolerant left being more intolerant than any political movement I’ve ever seen, the right-wing has had it’s fair-share of disgusting moments. Like when Rush Limbaugh called a 12 year old Chelsea Clinton a ‘dog’

It does not matter whether it’s a right-winger or left-winger.. attacking children because of their parent’s politics, is plain wrong.

 

 

Advertisements