I am sorry RT but yes it does allow you to do that.

You seem to be missing a big thing.

Any gold star mom and dad would not be able to go on the DNC and attack Donald Trump. What makes these two people special is that Donald Trump says he does not want any immigrants, especially the muslim immigrants. He has defined muslim immigrants as a threat and we must be vigilant against these outsiders.

Here is a family who are immigrants, whose son is an immigrant, but even though he is an immigrant he volunteered to serve his adopted country, he volunteered to risk his life in the service of others. And now he is being villified and his character questioned after he has died. That is what created the image and endowed the Khans with "special powers" to attack the Republican party nominee. You may see this as stagecraft, as a silly distinction, but what is really happening is Trump is now being charged with hypocrisy. You may not see this as Trump being a hyporcrit but everyone else in the room does.

-----

<QUOTE>Dead son or no dead son if he is not man enough to take a counter attack without hiding behind his dead son he is to much of a pussy for anyone to care about. He needs to either man up or shut up.</QUOTE>

He is not hiding behind his dead son when Donald Trump counter attacks, it is quite the opposite, he responds with shame on Donald and he responds I am not going away. That is the opposite of running away or hiding. That is standing up against someone you see as a bully, you may not call Donald Trump a physical bully but he is definitely a rhetorical bully.

And it is working. Want to know why it is working? Because Donald Trump is a populist and he is leading a populist movement. People who follow populist movements do not have trust to any thing that is establishment. The leaders identify with the voice of the people.

But Khan and Khan's wife are not of the establishment, they are instead of the people. Donald Trump can't win by attacking them, for all it does is cause a rift in his coalition, a self inflicted rift. It shows that he does not speak with one voice for the rest of the disenfranchised, it is him turning on his own.

Now Donald Trump in reality never spoke for ALL of the disenfranchised, did not speak for all of the people who are not part of the establishment. But some people were not aware of things like that muslim immigrants who were not born in the US did actually serve for the armed forces and they died for this country as martyrs to empower their neighbor and to protect their neighbor. If people thought more rationally and actually reflected and imagined they could have guessed that such people do exist, but they did not for they were so self absorbed with their own problems and the media narrative. This is the definition of privilege it assumes that your personal experience is the same one all other people also experience. Now this is not necessarily bad nor is this good, privilege is not the active enemy, it is just an insidious thing that happens naturally people assume their own experience is the same experience that all people experience but this is not how reality works. Put another way privilege exists whether it is earned or unearned.

Privilege by itself is not a bad thing nor is it good thing. What matters is how you respond to the situation when you are assumptions are challenged that is what true character is about.

------

If you divorce politics from this situation, lets not imagine Donald Trump was running for president, lets imagine he was instead running for dog catcher and he made the statements, and the Khans spoke up against him in a local meet up in his city. Would Donald Trump show character for his behavior over the last week? Would you identify Donald Trump behavior as showing leadership, empathy, understanding, does he show that his character is worthy of kingship? (the last phrase is paraphrasing a peggy noonan book title)