Posted on 05/21/2017 4:51:58 AM PDT by Kaslin
That liberals are hypocrites is not news. Just take a look at the net worth of any Democratic Party leader who routinely rails against the “1 percent.” But in the age of Trump, where the hatred that normally drives what we’re told is the “tolerant” left has been turned up to 11. All standards have gone out the window; no hypocrisy is too great, no conspiracy theory too insane for someone on the left to advance it and its drone army to believe.
It must be easy to be a liberal in 2017. You don’t have to think for yourself. You don’t have to prove anything. And your life can swirl in a bubble where you’ll never have anything you say challenged in a serious way. Liberals have become the bad guy in Lethal Weapon 2 – their membership in the progressive club grants them a sort of diplomatic immunity from reality.
The same people who cheered the release of traitor Bradley Manning after serving only seven of 35 years for giving thousands of classified national security secrets to Wikileaks clutch their pearls to this day over the same website publishing unclassified emails from the Clinton campaign.
Is Wikileaks evil or righteous? Do they support the information it receives only if that information damages national security and puts American lives at risk? Sure seems like it.
When it comes to conspiracy theories, the left has become the Fox Mulder of politics. There is nothing beyond the pale or too insane to be advanced…as long as it is against a Republican. If it’s not, if it’s critical of the left, it’s dismissed as paranoia.
I’ve never written or spoken about the murder of DNC staffer Seth Rich because, honestly, I haven’t seen anything but wild speculation about it. Was he the source of the DNC email leak to Wikileaks? I have no idea. If someone offers real proof, I’ll bite. Until then his death is just another senseless murder.
The lack of evidence hasn’t stopped some on the right from connecting dots that may or may not exist to advance a political agenda. But just because I tend to agree with a lot of the policy objectives the people connecting those dots want advocate not mean I’m on board with everything they do. If I’m disgusted when a Democrat does something, I’m disgusted when a Republican does it too. The same can’t be said for liberals.
Liberal journalists raged against the right over Rich both because there was a grieving family here and it’s distasteful to dredge up conspiracy theories in that circumstance, and because they are outraged a story has advanced for which there is no evidence. These are awful behaviors, but the left engages in them frequently and gleefully.
On the matter of advancing theories lacking proof, there isn’t a liberal publication that not only functions under the assumption Donald Trump colluded with the Russians to “steal” the election from Hillary Clinton, but prints stories and editorials alleging it on a regular basis.
It’s been almost a year and there is still zero evidence of this conspiracy, yet the Washington Post, New York Times, and every other left-wing birdcage liner has a team of reporters opining in their pages and on cable news about how this myth is fact.
Even Democratic members of Congress, who’d sacrifice their grandchildren to find a crumb of proof, have admitted there is none. It had to kill Sen. Dianne Feinstein and Congresswoman Maxine Waters to admit it, but they did. Journalists can’t.
Instead they run anonymously sourced stories, many of which are denied on the record by the very people implicated in them. They leave those stories, uncorrected, on their websites because the conspiracy must be true.
Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein had to have threatened to resign if the president used his letter as justification for firing FBI Director James Comey; anonymous sources told them he did.
Never mind that Rosenstein personally, unambiguously denied the story. Liberals need it to be true. As such, the original story sits, uncorrected, on the Washington Post website without mention of Rosenstein’s unequivocal denial. It would be journalistic malpractice…if journalism still had standards.
The same goes for countless stories in which Casper the Friendly Leaker whispers something into the ear of some liberal reporter that fits the narrative so perfectly it snaps in place like the last Lego.
Comey was fired just after requesting more money for Russia probe? Obviously. It doesn’t matter that the acting Director of the FBI denied it under oath or that there is zero evidence; it just has to be true.
Someone is going to read you a couple of lines over the phone from a “dear diary” entry by Comey that claimed the president “hoped” the FBI would leave Michael Flynn alone? It doesn’t matter that you don’t know the context, or that Comey didn’t tell anyone at the time, or you weren’t even allowed to see the words on the page. Trump is corrupt, so it has to be true. And so on.
When it comes to love of anti-Trump-perfectly-fitting-the-left-wing-narrative conspiracy theories, facts just get in the way. Journalists are ready to roll around like a happy dog in the sun on the grassy knoll of news.
As for the idea that respect for the dead should dictate decorum, these credentialed degenerates stepped down from their high horses long enough to cheer the death of Fox News founder Roger Ailes. I don’t know how damaged someone has to be to write the things they wrote – thinking something sick is one thing; believing the world needs to know it is a disorder yet to be named – yet there they were, dancing on his grave before his family even had a chance to digest their loss.
You say someone is a monster and insensitive to the family for theorizing about a murder last summer, but you can’t wait for the body to get cold to express glee over someone’s passing because you didn’t like their politics? There’s a special place in hell for people like that.
Liberals, particularly journalists, have morphed into something very disturbing since the arrival of Donald Trump onto the political scene. They’ve achieved a new level of hypocrisy and disgusting cruelty that would shame a normal person.
Something deep inside them, at their core, is fundamentally damaged. Whether it was broken before the election or not is irrelevant, it’s their driving force now. Were they civilians, they’d likely be shouting at streetlights and losing the argument. Since they’re journalists, they’ll probably win a Pulitzer.
There’s something fundamentally wrong with conmen, criminals, liars, looters, marxists, murderers, scumbags, socialists, totalitarians, tyrants.
It’s not what goes in the body that defiles a person. It is what comes out of the heart that defiles.
Liberals are the camp that believes human nature is basically good, and they point to their camp as evidence of that.
demons
Matthew 15:11—
Liberals are fundamentally damaged and twisted, far removed from the Spirit and Knowledge of God.
Yep. Twitter gives us insight to people. And it gives people a way to spew the contents of their heart.
They have always been very disturbing.
During the Obama years, they masked their cruel side because they saw that their goal to destroy freedom was being advanced. They looked to Hillary to drive the final nail into the coffin of our great Republic. But when we, the people, did not cooperate and instead elected a non-politician who shares our desire for freedom, the mask came off. Their dream of an American totalitarian state is in grave danger, and they will stop at nothing to try to save it.
These people are evil.
Freedom of speech does not cover libel or slander. Shouldn't we have a mechanism to hold them accountable for knowingly printing lies?
As I get older, more mature and wise, LOL—I can tell exactly who and what I am dealing with in very short order-—Spiritual Discernment-—I do not listen to or take counsel from fools.
I recognize and dwell in the Spirit and know who is friend or foe——
Well, yes there is something wrong with LIEberals: they are bat shit crazy!
And, LIEberals LIE!
It is why I callem LIEberals!
“Shouldn’t we have a mechanism to hold them accountable for knowingly printing lies?”
Until March 9, 1964, there was such a mechanism.
This essay explains why such outrageous lies can be published without fear of retribution: Supreme Court Ruled that Media Can Lie with Impunity by Kelleigh Nelson. You can read the entire article at http://newswithviews.com/Nelson/kelleigh269.htm.
Paraphrasiong the pertinent part of the article:
“We can thank the liberal 1964 Warren Supreme Court for a unanimous decision in New York Times Company v. Sullivan. It was argued on January 6-7, 1964, and decided on March 9, 1964.”
Snip
“. . . The Court said the right to publish all statements is protected under the First Amendment. The Court also said in order to prove libel, a public official must show that what was said against them was made with actual malice – “that is, with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard for the truth.”
“Isn’t that just grand? Now the media can say anything they want about a public figure whether true or false, and get away with it. So with a stroke of the pen, or an email send, a public figure’s reputation can be utterly destroyed....with lies or twisted truths.
“So, the Court held that the First Amendment protects the publication of all statements, even false ones, about the conduct of public officials, except when statements are made with actual malice (with knowledge that they are false or in reckless disregard of their truth or falsity). Under this new standard, Sullivan’s original case collapsed, and this is why today, lies are told by media and public officials with impunity.”
Read the entire article at http://newswithviews.com/Nelson/kelleigh269.htm. It is a good read.
In other words, liberals.
Our founding fathers wanted a free unrestricted press. And so do I. The problem is not that the media is biased, it has always been biased. The problem is the the media has become a monopoly with only one point of view.
Up until the 1950s every major city (and many small ones) had two or more newspapers. Each with a different point of view.
There was a sort of balance of power between the various views.
Today there are just a few people who really control what goes out in their media. They support the liberal views and hate conservatives. In their view everything is fair in love and war and trust me on this, they are at war with conservatives.
Perhaps the solution is the same when other industries turned into monopolies, break them up.
But that may not be necessary as newspapers are committing slow suicide by being so heavy handed. With the internet, it is possible for someone to actually find the source material on many stories before the bias is added. Newspapers are going the way of the video stores.
I think what we are really seeing is the dying days of liberals, in their heart they know it, so they are putting everything they have in this last battle.
Even if they win, it would be a Pyrrhic victory in that they would have exhausted themselves and our nation.
:^) At least that is what I think for what it is worth.
I would argue that LIEberals are the camp that believes human nature is basically bad, and then point to their camp as evidence that they are the “good guys” who MUST BE IN CHARGE so they can control all those “bad guys.”
LIEberals, IronJack, please! LIEberals!
That is really horrific. That is just like when Comey unilaterally decided that Hillary should not be prosecuted for mishandling classified information because she had no “intent.”
No one can read minds, so any journalist could testify that he or she had no malicious intent when he/she published the most vile lies about politicians. While one could argue that they wouldn’t print the lies if they were not malicious, such arguments are not based on evidence.
Still, it seems that even with the Sullivan decision, we should be able to take the media to task for knowingly printing lies. I think that two things should happen here-one, hold the media accountable for their lies, and two, break up the media monopoly. IIRC, only six conglomerates control 90% of the media. That is not a good situation for free speech.
Greater legal minds than mine (and I am NOT a lawyer!), who should be hard at work on this issue, have apparently decided that there is no legal recourse that can be taken, since none has been.
HST, We the People can stop reading/watching/listening to their LIES and affect their bottom line. Witness the loss of readership by the WashingtonComPost and the NYSlimes.
How are other LIEberal newspapers doing - anybody know?
I don’t follow the TV ratings, but LIEberal TV has not done so well lateley, IIRC, and Fox News (which I quit watching when O’Reilly was fired), has apparently lost some viewers.
We the People can and do influence the “opinion makers,” and We the People need to get off our asses and bring these LIEberal “opinion makers” to heel!
I’ve been reading and hearing about the decline in circulation of every major newspaper for several decades yet they still print their garbage. Advertisers still fill their pages. They get more liberal every year. I used to buy the Sunday paper because of the coupons and the puzzles but since my wife passed I stopped that 4 years ago so I’m doing my part!
Sorry to hear of your wife’s passing. Hope you are doing OK.
I neither read the local rag nor watch TV news. Get all my information off the internet and conservative talk radio.
Let’s ALL boycott the LIEberal bastards!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.