Posted on 09/10/2024 6:37:10 AM PDT by SJackson
Publicizing family squabbles - and why leftists aren’t normal people.
So, Tim Walz’s family thinks he’s a schmuck, just like the troops he sort of served with until he abandoned them. We should encourage his family members to dish the dirt on him. Who knows what it is? Is he a liar and a scumbag around the Thanksgiving table, just like he is during this campaign on the rare occasions he speaks to somebody? The last time he ran as fast as he did when he got a question about how his Hamas friends murdered an American was when he found out he might have to go to Iraq. Maybe he stole inheritance money – after all, stealing is what communists do. Maybe they would tell us that he is some kind of pervert – I could see the guy in a Ford panel van idling outside an elementary school. Who knows?
Well, his family knows the truth about Tim Walz, and I’m hoping they tell us every embarrassing and disgusting detail.
I’m hoping they open the door and allow us all to see the truth about this guy, although most of us already suspect the truth. But coming from his brother and other relatives, that gives the dirt a whole different cast. After all, they’ve spent 60 years knowing this guy – yeah, he’s 60, not 85, if you can believe it. I guess all that cavorting with Chinese communists ages you. Hey, maybe the dirt is about that!
Now, this is the point where normal people say, “Wait, Kurt, hold on. I’m not sure this is how we want to go. I think it’s terrible. I don’t like politically opposed relatives turning on their family members over politics.”
And you know what? I agree with you. I think it’s terrible form. I actively opposed normalizing this kind of behavior. But others disagreed. When some third cousin twice removed of Trump started talking about how he was horrible, I wondered why she was getting a platform. After all, she came off as a dumpy malcontent, as lonely leftist middle-aged cat women tend to be. Why would anyone let her waddle in front of a mic? But the regime media plastered her all over. She was the voice of reason, even though, apparently, she hadn’t seen Trump in forever. She was speaking from unequivocal moral authority because they shared a little bit of DNA. Quick, come on MSNBC and run your fat mouth!
I thought this was terrible. I thought it was ugly. The idea of coming out against someone in your own family over politics was just alien to me, but then again, I wasn’t raised by wolves, and I’m not a moral illiterate. I think normal people felt this way, too, although the liberals lapped it up. They loved it because it had everything they enjoyed. It trashed their political opponent, it demonstrated casual cruelty, and, as a bonus, it undermined the concept of the family, which they hate because the family sits in opposition to Marxist totalitarianism. So it’s pretty much a trifecta for the communists. For normal people, it’s just gross.
And I said so. I advocated keeping the Old Rule that you don’t publicize family squabbles about politics. I thought changing the rule was a terrible idea, not just because it was my guy who was being defamed, but because the whole idea of turning families against one another over politics is just completely repellent to any normal human being. I guess I forgot that I was dealing with leftists and not normal human beings.
We’ve seen this happen since then. There was a congressman in Arizona whose communist kin turned against him and made some ad about how terrible he allegedly was. He won. But what was remarkable was when RFK Jr. decided he had had enough of the anti-democratic shenanigans of the Democratic Party and came out in support of Donald Trump. Cue losers, weirdos, and hangers-on, including siblings, who publicly came out and trashed him. It wasn’t “Hey, my brother has his own views, and we disagree with him but love him” – which I would still find lame. These were even worse. These were direct attacks on their own blood. It was kind of sick.
Now, I don’t expect much from the Kennedys. This is a family where the grossest story is not the one about the patriarch getting hammered and leaving a gal pal to die in a submerged car. The ultimate Kennedy tale is about lobotomizing one of the daughters because she might embarrass the family. It tells you a lot about the family when John F. Kennedy, with all his peccadillos, was one of the least creepy. So, nobody should have been surprised that these monsters acted like exactly what they are. They’re just terrible people.
And again, I thought this was awful. I don’t believe you should go against your family even if you disagree. What thought process would lead you to a place where you felt that was the morally correct course of action? It’s inconceivable.
But I will celebrate when the Walz family does it, and I hope they do it a lot. I hope they give it to their scumbag relative good and hard. Why? Because that is now the rule.
I didn’t want this to be the rule. I argued strongly against it. I still think it’s a terrible idea. But my objections were disregarded. Our opponents decided to go in a different direction, and now the new rule is that your relatives can trash you because of your politics. The Democrats took advantage of it with that fat niece of Donald Trump and with the cast of mediocrities that is the third generation of Kennedys, so we will take advantage of it with the normal, reasonable, and patriotic relatives of Tim Walz. At one time, I would’ve said, “Hey guys, just save it. I don’t need to hear it.” Now? Dish people. Come on, let’s hear it all. Spill.
I still think it’s ugly and gross. I want to go back to the Old Rule. There are a lot of Old Rules I’d like to go back to. I think that many of the New Rules will do incalculable damage to our culture, that the Old Rules were there for a reason, and that they shouldn’t just be disregarded because of the potential for short-term advantage. I’m open to going back to the Old Rules, but I’m not going alone. There can be one set of rules, not two. There’s no unilateral disarmament anymore – we’re not Romney/Bush wusses who feel morally obligated to be abused. If you communist bastards want to play horsey, well, this is horsey.
BTTT
Harumph, harumph..."
Unfortunately, what is being suggested is slander. It used to be a crime to assassinate ones character. If you do not care for the man, vote against him.
Old rules, new rules. For Democrats there are no rules. Only the pursuit and maintenance of power.
i missed the sentence where he told them to lie
where is it?
I’ve noticed the Harris campaign is keeping him quiet and out of the spotlight these days....
With good reason. He is a communist and a liar and keeps getting called out - hell, his own family won’t vote for him.
“I didn’t get a harumph out of that guy!”
Yep.
I am sure there are plenty of "gentlemen do not read other people mail" people who will disagree. They think they are nice. Ironically they will fight tooth and nail BUT only against people on their side who are not "nice" enough.
Against the people who are actively trying to destroy our civilization? They want them treated with all honor and respect and will throw their allies down for them to tread on.
Something we need to learn to do is to ignore those people.
It is suggested that if his family wants to tell the truth about their relative that we give them a platform.
Truth is never slander.
I hope the family is invited to speak out, but a tactic I wish Trump would play out is by announcing that Kamala’s middle initial is “D”.
Let that sink in with “Journalists”.
;)
(smiles)
Slander is defined as a statement intended to assassinate ones character, truth or falsehood has nothing to do.
Incorrect.
Slander n. 1. Oral communication of false and malicious statements that damage the reputation of another.
2. A false and malicious statement or report about someone.
Truth is not slander. Truth is just truth.
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.