Gimmigrants and Trump Derangement Syndrome
More than a century ago, Theodore Roosevelt delivered a warning that feels almost prophetic today. He argued that America must insist on full assimilation from those who come to its shores. In his words:
“If the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else… But this is predicated upon the person’s becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American… There can be no divided allegiance here… We have room for but one flag, the American flag… one language, English… and one sole loyalty, and that is a loyalty to the American people.”
Roosevelt believed that unity required shared identity. If he could see the state of the nation today, he would likely wonder how we drifted so far from that principle.
In modern America, we have created a new category of immigrant — not through law, but through political maneuvering and ideological pressure. Millions have entered the country without proper vetting, without adherence to federal statutes, and without any expectation of assimilation. They are not simply undocumented migrants. They have become what many now call Gimmigrants: individuals who arrive expecting full benefits — housing, healthcare, food, transportation, and cash — while showing little interest in contributing to the nation that supports them.
And when demands are not met, they protest, accuse the country of bigotry, and sometimes even attack the very citizens and officers tasked with maintaining order. This is not a fringe phenomenon. It is the predictable result of policies that reward illegal entry and punish those who question it.
The American taxpayer never voted for this arrangement. Yet it has been imposed anyway, echoing the political strategy of Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society — a system designed to create dependency and secure long‑term political loyalty.
But immigration is only one part of the fracture. The other is a national psychological condition that has reshaped political discourse: Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS).
TDS
There was a time when journalism demanded integrity. Reporters were expected to verify facts, avoid personal bias, and present information with fairness. Institutions like the Poynter Institute and major journalism schools taught these principles as sacred obligations.
Today, much of the media has abandoned that mission. Instead of reporting, many outlets engage in activism. Instead of facts, they deliver narratives. Instead of balance, they offer hostility — particularly toward one man.
For nearly a decade, major newspapers and networks have treated Donald Trump not as a political figure but as a national emergency. Their coverage is not merely critical; it is obsessive, emotional, and often disconnected from reality. This phenomenon has a name: Trump Derangement Syndrome.
TDS is characterized by an inability to evaluate Trump objectively. To sufferers, he is responsible for every problem — past, present, and future. They blame him for events that occurred long before he entered politics. They attribute global crises to him. They treat disagreement with him as a moral failing.
Meanwhile, the politicians who have held office for decades — Biden, Pelosi, Schumer, Nadler, Schiff — escape scrutiny. Trump served four years. They have served a combined two centuries. Yet he is blamed for everything.
To understand how this happened, we must look at how the division began.
A House Divided
The fracture did not appear overnight. It unfolded in stages, each one deepening the divide.
Did it begin when nearly every Democratic member of Congress refused to attend Trump’s inauguration? Before he even took the oath, they signaled that they would not accept him as a legitimate president. Imagine Republicans boycotting Obama’s inauguration — the outrage would have been deafening.
Or did it begin when, less than twenty minutes after Trump was sworn in, a major newspaper announced that the impeachment campaign had already begun?
Or when the Speaker of the House tore up the State of the Union Address on live television, a gesture of contempt witnessed around the world?
Or during the years‑long Russia investigation — a sprawling, expensive, politically motivated effort built on dubious evidence and partisan motives? After years of accusations, surveillance, and hearings, investigators found no proof of collusion. Yet the damage to national unity was immense.
Or perhaps the division began when wealthy donors who had invested heavily in Hillary Clinton’s campaign demanded political retribution after her loss. They had expected influence, access, and policy favors. When those expectations evaporated, they turned their fury toward Trump.
Or maybe the divide took root when the media realized that Trump could not be controlled. He did not seek their approval. He did not fear their disapproval. And so they embarked on a campaign to remove him — not through elections, but through investigations, leaks, and impeachment.
Despite all this, Trump delivered economic growth, strengthened alliances, rebuilt the military, and pursued policies that benefited working Americans. Yet the hostility toward him only intensified.
Why?
The Assault on the Presidency
Trump’s greatest offense, in the eyes of the political establishment, was that he did not belong to their club. He was not shaped by Washington. He did not owe favors to lobbyists or donors. He threatened the comfortable arrangement that allowed career politicians to enrich themselves while accomplishing little.
From the moment he took office, opposition leaders vowed to resist everything he proposed — not because the policies were harmful, but because cooperation might make him look effective. Their strategy was simple: obstruct, accuse, investigate, repeat.
The Kavanaugh hearings revealed the depths of this approach. Baseless allegations were weaponized to destroy a man’s reputation and derail his nomination. Evidence was irrelevant. The goal was political victory.
Then came two impeachments, both built on shaky foundations. Both failed.
Meanwhile, Trump continued to fulfill campaign promises: tax reform, deregulation, energy independence, border security, and support for veterans. He donated his presidential salary. He visited Arlington National Cemetery quietly and without fanfare. He pursued policies that benefited working families.
Yet critics refused to acknowledge any of it.
Ask yourself:
- What has Biden accomplished in half a century of public office?
- What did Obama do for Black Americans beyond speeches and symbolism?
- What private‑sector jobs has Biden ever created?
- What legislation has Pelosi, Schumer, or Schiff passed that improved the lives of ordinary Americans?
And why, during the Trump years, did we see riots, vandalism, attacks on police, and the destruction of monuments? Why did anti‑American sentiment flourish on college campuses? Why did students chant slogans calling for the elimination of Israel?
Obama deported over 5.3 million illegal immigrants during the eight years of his presidency. The media hardly wrote or said anything about it. Today, the Trump administration has deported about 660,000 and I.C.E Agents are under siege in Minneapolis. It defies logic.
These are not isolated events. They are symptoms of a deeper cultural shift.
The Education Crisis
For decades, the American education system has drifted away from teaching history, civics, and national pride. As someone who has taught at universities for more than forty‑five years, I have watched this transformation firsthand.
Students are increasingly taught that America is fundamentally flawed — racist, imperialist, oppressive. They are exposed to revisionist narratives that distort the nation’s past. The 1619 Project, adopted in thousands of school districts, reframes American history around slavery while ignoring the nation’s achievements and progress.
Students are rarely taught that:
- The Democratic Party founded the Ku Klux Klan
- Democrats opposed the constitutional amendments that granted citizenship and voting rights to former slaves
- Inner‑city ghettos were shaped by Democratic policies to control blacks
- Planned Parenthood’s early strategies targeted minority communities, particularly black communities.
Instead, students are encouraged to view America through a lens of guilt and grievance. They are discouraged from questioning teachers who present political opinions as fact. Some are even punished for disagreeing.
Many students in high school today cannot explain how a bill becomes law. Many cannot recite the Gettysburg Address. Yet they are convinced that socialism — a system that has failed everywhere it has been tried — is superior to capitalism.
This is not an accident. It is the result of decades of ideological capture. Thomas Jefferson is probably turning in his grave!
The Double Standard
Consider the contrast in how the media treats different administrations.
When Obama built the detention facilities later labeled “cages,” the press was silent. When he commuted more than 1,700 sentences, including over three hundred on his final day in office, there was little mention in the media.
When Biden and Obama allowed the H1N1 virus to infect tens of millions before declaring an emergency, the media did not blame them for the spread.
But when Trump restricted travel from China during COVID‑19, he was accused of xenophobia. When he mobilized hospital ships, built emergency facilities, and accelerated vaccine development, critics dismissed his efforts.
The double standard is unmistakable.
Final Questions
What have Democrats done to strengthen the nation? To support working families? To improve inner‑city schools? To secure the border? To reduce crime?
Biden allowed more than 20 million illegal entrants into the country, including individuals on the terror‑watch list. This is not compassion. It is negligence.
Imagine what America could achieve if both parties worked together. Imagine if Democrats supported Trump’s efforts to improve the economy, expand opportunity zones, and promote school choice. Instead, they opposed everything — even policies that would have helped the communities they claim to champion.
And look at the cities with the highest crime, homelessness, and failing schools. They are overwhelmingly run by Democrats.
That is not coincidence. It is consequence.
