Posted on 03/13/2016 8:13:36 AM PDT by Lazamataz
One consistent behavior of the left is that they create a crisis, then offer to solve it, all the while blaming the victim.
So it goes with Donald Trump and his rallies. The group #BlackLiesMatter has stormed his rallies, fighting with his supporters in Chicago, and disrupting other events, and even had a lone wolf Thomas Dimassimo rush Trump on his podium. Thank the Good Lord the Secret Service was prepared and protected him quickly with their bodies, for who knows how this might have otherwise played out.
In response, the Propaganda Ministry (formerly and inaccurately known as the American News Media) blamed Trump for the attacks on him. This is the political equivalent of blaming the rape victim. They are claiming that Donald Trump caused the attacks with 'divisive and inflammatory' rhetoric.
Note, also, that the meme circulated last weekend was that Trump is just like Hitler. Yet, who is really acting like the Nazis? It is those in the #BlackLiesMatter movement, and others who would shut down Trump's rallies. In the 1920's and 1930's, the Sturmabteilung (also known as Brownshirts) stormed the rallies of their political opponents with violence and disruption. It turns out that those who falsely accused Trump of Nazism, adopted every single tactic of the Nazis themselves.
Let us momentarily ignore the hideous accusation that "Donald Trump deserved it, for he dresses like a SLUT!” Let us analyze his "divisive and inflammatory" rhetoric:
In so doing, they impugn all of us who think these comments are very positive developments in modern politics -- and, most importantly, they blame Trump for the attacks upon his supporters and upon his person. They are saying that "Trump deserves his rape! He dresses like a SLUT!"
This is the most base and vile possible argument. People who advance this heinous must be called out and publically shamed for their comments. Additionally, let us imagine for a moment that Trump *was* speaking in an objectionable way. America traditionally does not shut down objectionable speech. America traditionally meets such speech with more speech.
I was quite disappointed to see Ted Cruz jump aboard this argument, and it gives me pause per his true allegiances and motivations. He presented the obligatory condemnation of the attackers, and then used the word 'but', and went on to defame Donald Trump. I hold that most of the time that people say "this, BUT that", they deny their first clause, and are actually solely advocating their second clause. Cruz went right to the most base of all possible arguments. He agrees: "Trump deserves his rape! He dresses like a SLUT!"
This argument cannot stand, and we must call out anyone who advocated this "blame the victim" mentality.
Which is why they are so hellbent on destroying Trump. And by "they" I mean the lot of them, from the DemocRATs down to their minions in the GOPe.
Thank you, Laz.
I hear you. It's so old and he just needs to stop. It's starting to get on my last nerve.
Thank you, Laz.
Very good job, Sir Laz. :-)
Did George Smathers really defeat Congressman Claude Pepper in a 1950 congressional election?
Campaign distortions often include certain amounts of truth but create false impressions. The classic example of this was a speech made by Rep. George Smathers of Florida in a Democratic primary campaign of 1950 for a U.S. Senate nomination in Florida.Smathers told an audience of rural folk that incumbent Claude Pepper was "a known extrovert," practiced "celibacy" before marriage, practiced "nepotism" with his sister-in-law, "matriculated" with women in college, that his sister was "a thespian" and his brother "a practicing homo sapien."
Smathers carried the rustic vote and won the election.
Or a mailman.
I try to stay fair.
No, I am speaking of the definition of but. That is not rhetorical.
I know, That is why I asked earlier who you were and what you had done with Laz. Cause it didn’t seem like you. Thank you.
I know we still disagree, but as long as we can have an honest debate, all is good.
I say again, repeating your talking points doesn’t change the fact that your god-king Cruz is a massive phony.
And he played you for a sucker, and it was so EASY for him to do too.
And I’m just sitting here laughing in your face.
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!
May I be so humble as to suggest that you rephrase "Propaganda Ministry" to the less politically correct terminology, "Ministry of Propagana".
Your Humble Servant,
HD
Hey we could all use a laugh.
Things are getting ugly.
That sort of tactic works when you have relatively few sources of info and folks aren’t paying close attention.
I believe that Americans make the right choice when they’re both engaged and have the information necessary to base a decision. The internets and social media have taken care of available information aspect. Not perfectly, but good enough. And people are most definitely engaged. Hence Milhous having the problems that he is. I suspect that in the last 2 days he has lost 10% of his support. That’s yuuuuge.
*Snort* Giggles! Indeed!
I will post a revised version of this editorial today. There’s two glaring grammaticals, and one point I must address. It’ll be in the comments.
Okay, my dear friend.
I read your editorial, and I agree with you, Mr. Brilliant Mataz.
Hahahah add me, plz
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.