Mateen was just a troubled youth who grew up in Trump’s neighborhood
Here’s a typical and actually relatively subtle case of liberal propaganda about the Islamic terrorist Omar Mateen. Do they teach this stuff in journalism school, or does the press learn how to do it afterwards? Or does it just come naturally?
Here are the first few paragraphs, with my interpolations (some of them sarcastic) in brackets and bold:
If Omar Mateen was a disciple of “radical Islam,” as Donald Trump angrily [oooo, the mean Trump is angry!] described him, and “one of the soldiers of the caliphate,” as the Islamic State approvingly deemed him, he wasn’t a very impressive one, ideologically speaking. Mateen didn’t observe Islam terribly faithfully or seem to know much about what Islamists call the “true path.” [Why is his degree of observance the least bit relevant? Now someone has to be doctrinally pure and theologically knowledgeable in order to be a bona fide Islamic terrorist?] According to FBI Director James Comey, in the past few years Mateen confusingly expressed support for both the Islamic State and Hezbollah””even though the latter group is an avowed enemy of the Islamic State and is fighting against it in Syria on the side of Bashar Assad. [Oh no, I guess this “confusion” means he had nothing to do with Islam and couldn’t really have supported both of these two groups, who after all share the same anti-American, anti-infidel, anti-Western, anti-Israel, pro-Islamic supremicist, pro-terrorist bias.] The night he slaughtered 49 people in Orlando on Sunday, Mateen swore allegiance to Islamic State leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi at the last minute and with apparent self-doubt. Mateen called 911 twice, hanging up at first before finally fulfilling ISIS’s injunction to self-starter terrorists to declare allegiance to the group publicly before they act. [Again, does that mean he wasn’t a real jihadi?]
Based on the accounts of his aquaintances [sp.] and family, Mateen also appears to have been a deeply conflicted and possibly self-loathing homophobe who drank heavily, took drugs, dated men, frequented the same club he later attacked, Pulse, and used a gay dating app””not the sort of behavior one would expect of a faithful soldier of Islam. [Actually, homegrown terrorists often have a similar biography, because it’s when the temptations of the West interact with the restrictions of traditional Islam that a person is at his/her most vulnerable to the terrorist call. What’s more, there is evidence that Mateen’s contacts with gays were for the purpose of scouting the territory in order to plan his attack rather than any actual gay tendencies.]
Yes, Mateen was a terrorist””but what kind of terrorist? He had no known ISIS or Al Qaeda connection [of a formal sort, but who cares? He had plenty of exposure to and interest in them, and declared his allegiance. That certainly should be enough.]; he wasn’t getting operating orders from abroad; he hadn’t gone overseas to be trained [but he was recently in Sauda Arabia and authorities are just now investigating whether he might have made side trips to Yemenn or elsewhere for some training]; he followed no predicable course of radicalization [actually he followed an utterly predictable course of home-grown, internet-generated, radicalization followed by quite a few citizen children of immigrants from Muslim and/or Arab countries]. Mateen appears, in fact, to have been less a soldier than yet another deeply disturbed American [an American of the Muslim religion, born of immigrant parents from a Muslim country, however] (born in Trump’s own home borough of Queens) [egad, what possible significance does that have, except as an attempt to somehow create some equation with Trump?], who was full of hatred and uncontrollable anger””an example of what law enforcement officials describe as an aspiring violent criminal searching for a larger justification for the acts he’s desperate to commit. [He didn’t have to “search” very far, did he? In addition, all violent and sick ideologies always appeal most strongly to violent or sick people. I doubt that Hirsh would minimize the Nazi influence on individual Nazis who were “searching for a larger justification” for their acts, or for that matter the influence of ideology on individual white supremacists who might be moved to kill people of another race. No, I’m pretty certain that their ideologies would be front and center as motivation. Most human acts are determined by multiple factors, and to minimize the influence of Mateen’s declared Islamist and ISIS-inspired ideology is to either be a fool or a knave, or both.]
I will stop there; the article is very very long. But I will summarize the rest of it by saying that as it continues, Hirsh demonstrates that he actually is well aware of many aspects of Mateen’s radicalization by ISIS and of the FBI’s failure to discover it—or more importantly to be able to do anything about apprehending or stopping him before he acted. It’s an article with a split personality, in which Hirsch goes back and forth between propaganda and a sober and knowledgeable discussion of the problems inherent in the radicalization of violent Islamic terrorist “known wolves” who are citizens of Western countries such as the US.
It’s as though Hirsh feels the need to get the propaganda part over with at the beginning (that’s the part most people read), and then allows himself to get into the real reporting later.
[NOTE: In case you’re wondering who Hirsh is, he’s national editor for Politico and former foreign editor for Newsweek, as well as former member of the former JournoList.]
Do they teach this stuff in journalism school, or does the press learn how to do it afterwards? Or does it just come naturally?
I believe they have a keyboard macro for it.
I fear that we will be seeing more terrorists recruited via remote means. And I wish that the press would stop using the term “radicalization”, especially in the passive tense. It implies that there is no agency involved, that these people did not choose to do these heinous acts of their own free will.
We have seen several references to Mateen’s possible homosexuality, conflicting with homophobia.
Well, I guess many of the pundity cannot connect the dots. Islam condemns homosexuality, and in fact, often executes homosexuals. Mateen is Muslim. Mateen has homosexual tendencies. Is it so tough to see the source of conflict here?
But, somehow many conclude that Mateen was homophobic because of his exposure to American culture.
Related to the coverage. Headlines continue to label the site as a gay club. Yet, some of the victims were obviously not gay; mothers with children. I have seen some reports that claim that it was not a gay club at all. Interesting question. The answer would effect the narrative, of course. Well, the accepted narrative is that it was an attack on homosexuals, and that will no doubt continue.
Just rationalizing and playing defense lawyer for Obama’s failed policies.
We’re not most of the people killed or wounded Latin? Perhaps he was just anti-Latin. /sarc.
Poll: Clinton’s lead over Trump slipping since Orlando:
She’s still ahead by quite a bit, but that 19.7 percent undecided number can’t be reassuring to her. Especially with Obama and his MSM surrogates continuing to deny what’s obvious to everyone but the Democratic base.
The ME region’s terrorism has often been complex, adaptive, fluid, and often seemingly contradictory, mixing seemingly conflicting ideological, political, and pragmatic notions, and short-term and long-term goals. Hirsh’s apparent contradictions are actually par for the course.
ISIS’s roots in Saddam’s terrorism speaks especially to a broad net that would, like Saddam did, ally with jihadists and utilize jihadist rhetoric and trappings without in and of itself demanding an especially rigorous ideological purity.
Add: Terrorists are activist, and typically as activists, they’re competing to win social dominance to create paradigm shift – by any means necessary.
Ann Barnhardt desribes Mateen, afaganis and the mohammadan culture in general at her site.
Ann Barnhardt.biz
Strong language naturally.
islam must be destroyed
Mateen had all sorts of problems even in grammar school where he once threatened to shoot people. He also cheered at 9/11. His father is a Taliban-supporting immigrant who probably raised him in a strong-man household. People don’t realize that immigrants raise their kids as they were raised and their kids bounce back and forth between two cultures. Aside from developing psycological problems, they are ripe for picking by radical imams and social media propaganda. He was not a normal American troubled youth.
It is disgusting to see “journalists” put out such spin. They should be trying to inform us. It also seems that the FBI needs to revise their investigations to take into account more of the family background of suspects.
Whether consciously or dimly sensed, attempts to define terrorist attacks as, anything-but-related-to-Islam are attempts advanced in support of maintaining the narrative. On some level, they know that once a majority of Americans conclude (in their gut) that the problem is Islam itself.. it’s ‘game over’…
Brian Swisher Says:
June 17th, 2016 at 5:12 pm
Do they teach this stuff in journalism school, or does the press learn how to do it afterwards? Or does it just come naturally?
I believe they have a keyboard macro for it.
***
And now you owe me a keyboard.
some things that make you go hmm:
http://chicagoboyz.net/archives/53110.html#comments
Hirsh is just another Self-hating Jew. I prefer my Jews to be armed and dangerous and acknowledging that they have some skin in the game when it comes to the survival of Western Civ.
Not to mention Deracinated. Give me Bibi any day.. at least there’s a man.
Oh, and btw, I’m Kinch the Neo Nazi Right Wing Death Beast (you claim). Far from it, folks.
See today’s Drudge Report and tremble.
51% of US Muzzies want sharia.
One million Muslims admitted to the US in the reign of Obama.
Paul (the goat from Janesville) Ryan says “We” will sue Trump as POTUS if he exceeds what the goat believes allowable about Muslims and Mexico. He sure hasn’t sued Hussein yet.
The estab. GOP is trying to win control of the government by killing its own nominee. Some of us here seem similarly inclined.
The GOPers have been so very, very successful with Reid and Pelosi in the drivers’ seats. Wait until they resume their posts and are joined by Hillary.
If the choice is between ignorance and evil, those who don’t vote, or vote for Dems, are choosing evil. There is no nice way to say it.
TheRebbe, 8:40 pm — “Give me Bibi any day.. at least there’s a man.”
As far as I’m concerned, and this applies to some of my friends and acquaintances as well, Benjamin Netanyahu *is* The Leader Of The Free World *now* and has been for some years. Or, The Leader of what remains of The Free World.
Or, The Leader of what remains of the World that once was thought of as The Free World, but with increasing rapidity is slouching into being a pretty non-free world. Or something.
It’s very depressing.
Well, according to the New York City chief of the counterterrorism task force (retired):
So the toolheads of the Obama Administration, per the orders from the chief toolhead, Hussein himself, have dictated to our law enforcement that Moslems are a “protected class,” and they’re not allowed to protect innocent Americans from being maimed and murdered by them.
This. Is. Obama. Policy. POLICY.
We’re on our own, and the Goobermint is utterly hostile to us. It isn’t our government any more, and hasn’t been since 2008; it’s been taken over by a silent coup d’etat. Look not to them for aid and succor.
MJR,
Excellent observation, other than perhaps the Hungarian P.M., I cannot think of a current world leader that is his equal.
MJR: Yes, depressing and infuriating.
Sadly, the regnant elites in the West have taken Brecht rather more literally than he intended.
After the uprising of the 17th of June
The Secretary of the Writers’ Union
Had leaflets distributed in the Stalinallee
Stating that the people
Had forfeited the confidence of the government
And could win it back only
By redoubled efforts. Would it not be easier
In that case for the government
To dissolve the people
And elect another?
Neo:
Trump (short of his being assassinated) will be the nominee.
Will you or will you not get behind him?
Wringing hands about his personal character issues or perceived electability will not save you and yours from the flood tide of savages that Hillary & Co. will assuredly loose on you and me (but, should be needless to say, you first).
This is not a time to worry about what other people think of you or to go bury your head in Robert Frost. Sorry to be so vulgar, but it’s Game On and there’s what’s left of the best ever way of life to play for.
Right.. +1 for Orban. And to the gallows with Soros.
Neo:
Every time you feel like you want to say ‘But… but…’
… meditate upon Pascal’s Wager.
It really is that simple. And no, being reductionist isn’t always bad. Not in evolutionary survival terms, it’s not.
TheRebbe:
I am really tired of the flood of people coming here to tell me their perceptions of the situation without reading the 160+ posts I’ve written on the subject of Donald Trump. I have thought it out and given richly detailed reasons for my position. And then people such as yourself come on here and say what they think I should do based on their reasoning—people I’ve never heard from before and who don’t bother to mount anything even remotely resembling the mountain of evidence and the logic I’ve presented.
You write, “This is not a time to worry about what other people think of you or to go bury your head in Robert Frost.”
It proves to me you haven’t a clue about my reasons for saying what I say, because you haven’t a clue why I will vote the way I will vote. Nor do I know myself what way I will vote, and I’ve explained that in detail, too. Why would I care what people think? And what on earth would Robert Frost—whom I rarely write about—have anything to do with it?
I write posts here at least six days a week. Donald Trump has been a candidate for approximately a year. I’ve written over 160 posts during that year, which (minus Sundays, the day I usually don’t post) amounts to an average of approximately a post on Donald Trump every other day. This is a topic that I probably know far more about than you do (including having read many interviews with the man going back decades, watching two lengthy documentaries, and having read much of a biography). It is certainly not one I have run away from by “burying my head in Robert Frost.” Au contraire. I’ve immersed myself so deeply in Trump study that I’ve been criticized for my intense focus on the subject.
So cut the condescending advice.
TheRebbe:
Oh, and Pascal’s wager is about the existence of the deity.
I certainly see no analogy there, to say the least.
TheRebbe:
And speaking of wagers—you’re no rebbe.
hirsch, is journolist, he was a correspondent with the former sepah chief, mohsen rezai, what passes for a moderate in iranian circles, the foolishness would suggest enemy action on his part,
who sponsored at least one of the trips,
http://www.investigativeproject.org/4222/incoming-nyc-mayor-taps-pro-censorship-imam-for
Neo, now *that* is a fair bet. Nobody shows up to watch me eat my dinner… more’s the pity. 😀
Of course I am condescending. You are too. We’re not all gap-toothed in-bred Dirt People out here. Goose.. Gander.
Given that my career / income derive from statistics and numerical methods, I know precisely what Pascal’s Wager and live and die by Expected Value. My blindingly obvious point is that the Expected Negative Value of a Hillary Presidency is far higher than a Trump Presidency, no matter how distasteful you might find the man.
I think the Rebbe’s point is that overall, in your multitudinous essays about Trump, you have made a point of hostile equivocation in comparing him to Hillary.
You are after all, a new Con, and may be shlepping around vestiges of the stinking Leftist thinking in which you were perforce subjected to by all your friends, family, and acquaintances in that bastion of conservatism, NYC, the breeding ground for lots of red diaper babies, just to characterize the Jewish mileue there.
Do you agree that Obama has worked evil on the Country he is sworn to protect? Do you agree that Hillary is an unindicted felon and most probable traitor by disseminating State secrets through her easily-hacked private sever and refusing to follow all the email regs of the Department of which she was the Head?
Is she equivalent to The Donald? She should be in prison.
I think Frog has summarised my thinking.
I also wonder a bit about intellectual pride. It’s a hard thing to give up. Most of us here probably feel that we have more insight than Joe Sixpack. And we’d often be right in that. But the truth is that the High Culture Buckleyites have failed utterly. I won’t bother listing the others. Actually everyone has failed — except the Left in their destructive endeavour. A Republic requires a bunch of pre-requisites which no longer exist.
This is very sad. But it is what it is (Dirt People talk like this… oops).
The question now is literally Who Whom?
We have to save what we can and rebuild. If we can.
It’s going to be hard.
Hillary and Bill did more than just sell state secrets. They were engaged in the selling of indulgences to foreign enemies… I’d settle for nailing their steaming hearts to the doors of the House.
Attention NSA: Obviously I’m not really going to do or advocate that. I just really really don’t like those scumbags. Rhetorical device: look it up.
One can’t be too careful these days, I guess.
Frog:
You write:
You may hate Paul Ryan; I assume you do. But his reason for proposing the lawsuit is not the content of Trump’s immigration proposals (although it is likely he doesn’t like the content) but the process—he believes it is a separation of powers issue and that Trump would be exceeding his powers:
You also write:
Paul Ryan has been Speaker only since Oct. 29, 2015, which is about seven and a half months. But his predecessor—a man you probably detested as well, John Boehner—has sued Obama. The topic had to do with the same issue, executive action that was inappropriate and a violation of the separation of powers.
The history of the first Boehner lawsuit is here (it had to do with Obamacare). Then in 2015 Boehner said he planned to sue Obama again, this time for executive overreach on immigration. But (at least as far as I can determine) before it got to the Senate, the lawsuits by Texas and 25 other states against Obama got an injunction (in Feb. of 2015), and so Congress’ lawsuit was put on hold.
In addition, in late February 2016, Paul Ryan threatened to sue Obama if he closes Gitmo:
Rebbe; Frog:
I’ll let people other than you judge whether I’m condescending or not.
And Frog, you have skated on thin ice before, and you’re on it now. Hostile equivocation? No equivocation at all. I have been completely clear about my opinions and why I hold them, in the 160+ posts I’ve written on the subject of Trump. If you see “hostile equivocation,” I think you’re imagining what you want to imagine.
Frog—in years of reading this blog you should know I don’t give a hoot what friends or family or some NYC liberals think. I left that behind a long long time ago, and they do not shape my thinking on Donald Trump. You write:
“New con”? My political conversion started 15 years ago, and was pretty much complete by 2003, which is 13 years ago. The “neo” in my moniker is now just a vestige of what once was the case.
And I never, never was a leftist. I always challenged leftist thinking. I was pretty much a Scoop Jackson type liberal, always, as were my parents when I was growing up and was a young adult, and they pretty much remained in that mold until their deaths.
“Shlepping around”? “Jewish milieu” of “red diaper babies”? Once again, interesting Jewish innuendos there that don’t conform to what I’ve written about my attitude, even as a child, about the leftists in my larger family, whose point of view I despised even back then.
If you can’t do your research before you make accusations, you should stop making them.
I think the question remains unanswered. Will you or will you not vote against Hillary if Trump is the opposing candidate?
We can all accept that you don’t like Trump. And more power to you for having your own opinion about him.
But still, will you or will you not vote against the far greater evil?
It’s really that simple.
If it was me, I’d write grumpy (I daren’t say kvetching) stuff about Trump and then put a signature line at the bottom of everything along the lines of “But Hillary is worse, so I must hold my nose and vote for Trump”.
Carthago delenda est, and all that, you know.
Rebbe and Frog don’t get it. They don’t get that we ate Hillary but that it is also possible to be vary wary of Trump. Trump makes big brash statements that he then sort of walks back, but because he never does his homework, never investigates issues, you never know how far he will walk. The problem with terrorists like Mateen will not be solved by stopping immigration. It requires policies that enable te FBI to keep investigating Muslims who are citizens without endangering the civil rights of all of us. The issue cannot be solved by lawsuits like Trump U, and we cannot simply forget them as Trump did with his steaks.
If we don’t keep Trump under some kind of control by showing our reluctance, who will?
Blacks, Mexicans and Muslims are heavily homophobic. Taking into account that they make almost 50% of America, and more than 50% of american next generation… yes, american culture is quite homophobic, lazy, neglectful and populated by low IQ people.
There’s nothing bad in accepting the true nature of modern America 🙂
re: my 2:49 comment. I am not a cannibal, and if I were, I wouldn’t eat Hillary. My H key is having problems.
One of the most disturbing bits of information I have gleaned from TV news (which I watch only sparingly) came from Fox news last night: Democrats polled overwhelmingly believe Mateen’s attack is the responsibility of the American gun lobby, especially the NRA, while Republicans overwhelmingly believe it is the responsibility of Islamic terrorism. I believe the numbers were reported to be around 80% respectively.
That is a sizable difference of opinion, and I find it very troubling. Not just because it makes it much easier for Democrats to vote for Hillary, who has vowed to “go after” the NRA, but that partisans are so far apart on their beliefs.
I personally believe Mateen’s attack would have occurred without the existence of the NRA, but this is completely unbelievable to a large part of the American voting public, according to the report on Fox. Likewise, those voters do not believe Mateen was influenced by Islamic radicals. Wow! Just wow!
Pundits have liked to talk about “two Americas” for most of my lifetime. I used to find that formulation a little too clever, but right now it sounds like a good analysis. People who will vote for Hillary strike me as partisan hacks who deny reality. I guess they think of me the same way, but on the other side of the “two Americas” divide. Wow.
I guessed it was pretty obvious to everyone that Mateen acted because he thought some radical branch of Islam commanded it. Apparently I am sorely mistaken.
If Hitler invaded hell I would make at least a favourable reference to the devil in the House of Commons.
— Winston Churchill
(Bit of a sly, silent banner, the Old Neo.)
F — The nasty truth is that Civil War is not that far off. Next time around, it won’t be Fort Sumter or anything like that which sets it off in one geographical location. The balloon is going to go up everywhere and instantly. Think more of the outbreak of the Spanish Civil War. Much, much, much nastier and not an outcome to be desired.
But the Left is hell-bent on pushing the envelope.
Very few people want to face this horrific prospect. So there is much busy whistling past the graveyard.
Expat: I get that Trump is going to require a good deal of scrutiny in office. But first let’s get him there, no? It may yet be a close-run thing.
Additionally, any Trump presidential failures by commission or omission are still less likely to be more damaging than the guaranteed malice aforethought of Hillary & Co.
Former member? Still current member of X, Y, and Z.
And yes, they do actually teach the Art of Propaganda in journalism school. That’s why they filter out people who can’t graduate. It’s a guild license and certification of approval this is one solid and loyal Leftist agent.
expat- Oh, I get it. All of your wariness about Trump is a boost to Hillary’s election. Wariness does not drive people into voting for those of whom they are wary.
Your wariness is self-satisfied suicide in the end. But you are killing me and mine too, with your wariness. The same boat problem.
Hillary is evil. Don’t you get that? Obama is evil. And Boehner and Ryan are wee little men who have played wee little games as their gestures in fighting these evils.
Interesting article in Frontpage by David Greenfield. Money quote:
“Omar got away with homophobic comments that would have gotten Americans fired because he was Muslim. He weathered an “extensive” FBI investigation because he was Muslim.
Anyone who says that there is no such thing as Muslim Privilege ought to look at Omar Mateen.”
Well worth the read.
NotTheRebbe: If civil war comes, I’m afraid that you and I will be on the opposite side from the government. And I’m afraid we’ll be seriously outgunned by government agents.
expat-
you say we need to keep Trump under some kind of control as he reverses Obamaisms? I will accept that as a first step in undoing the Imperial Presidency, which has seen a new zenith under Barack Hussein.
But Ryan is not the man for that. Ryan is a little piss-ant who has actually done next to nothing as a Congressman. His once-upon-a-time media-touted “plan” to slow the growth of the Federal deficit monster was just to slow the growth. Reverse nothing.
If Ryan were the nominee, would you advocate the wariness you think Trump needs? Hell, they all need exactly the same thing, every last one of them: Two other non-corrupt branches of the government full of wariness.
Well, maybe just a little, tiny bit condescending, but as I often tell me wife, I LIKE that in a woman. Heh!
As for Trump’s “raaaacism,” what a ridiculous idea! He grew up in Nueva York, had no reason ever to fear competition from any Hispanic or Black group, so the background for racism is just not there. He is a vulgar type of New Yorker, like many you have met, and very different from another sort of New Yorker, including your own lovely self, and numerous of my friends who are as quiet and cultured as Texans. Yeah, the movies are full of loud Texans, and more rustic sorts, but they are nothing like my family and friends. People actually believe they are paying me a compliment when they say I don’t have a “very bad Texas accent.”
(At which point I begin speaking in broad Redneckian)
Trump used the term ‘Mexican’ as Mexican Americans do it, and I have given up correcting them. It is more properly “Mexican American,” but that term is sort of a class marker, like correct grammar, no doubt beaten* into you as it was in me, and the Trumps did not bother with such things. Sin embargo, this is just another of those media firestorms from the arsonists on the Left. They really don’t have much, so they use what they have, to poor effect, we all hope.
*The beatings were all verbal. Beatings, like improper grammar, are just not the done thing.
Neo-
I referenced NYC.
I wrote ” that bastion of conservatism, NYC, the breeding ground for lots of red diaper babies, just to characterize the Jewish mileue there.”
Is there any dispute that most American Jews are overwhelmingly Democrat? I remember David Horowitz’s story. I also meant that remark in a historical sense, as in “breeding ground”, going way back before the days of the adult Whittaker Chambers, for example.
I meant that you, growing up in NYC, were immersed in NYC and its culture. I went to college with a New Yawker who had never seen a cow and couldn’t drive because they always took taxis. His family was wealthy.
Frog and Rebbe:
It seems to me that you have realized that Trump has serious inherent problems getting elected so you are desperate to “convince” everyone to get on the Trump train. You have made his problem your problem, your tone is off putting, strident. Why not start using the caps lock key? That ALWAYS works.
“we (hate) Hillary but that it is also possible to be vary wary of Trump. Trump makes big brash statements that he then sort of walks back, but because he never does his homework, never investigates issues, you never know how far he will walk.” – expat
Well said.
I wouldn’t express it as “hate” (for either Trump or Clinton – as I wish them no harm, and wish to be as clear headed about them as possible), but as particularly bad choices as head of our government.
You’ve hit at one of the core issues with Trump… that nobody can truly know where he will go on any one issue.
You ask about controlling Trump. Many wary GOP, including Ryan were sweet talked into supporting Trump, presumably with the assumption that their holding back was going to commit Trump to some kind of change. He hasn’t, and he won’t.
http://www.investors.com/politics/columnists/charles-krauthammer-trump-is-running-as-trump-surprise/
If the GOP cannot manage to control him, or even have him be more disciplined and consistent in his stances, there is little hope they can manage Trump once he has the power of the Presidency in his hands.
“All of your wariness about Trump is a boost to Hillary’s election. Wariness does not drive people into voting for those of whom they are wary.
Your wariness is self-satisfied suicide in the end. But you are killing me and mine too, with your wariness. The same boat problem.” – Frog
The problem with this statement is the implied assumption that anyone wary of Trump is “for” Clinton. Emphatically Not So!
Aside from the case against Clinton being overwrought with explanations of doom over the course of the next four years, some keep arguing that Trump is somehow “acceptable” (despite his acknowledged flaws and the risk that comes with them) as a realistic alternative to Clinton.
It is an argument resting on an assumption that is soon to become self-fulfilling – that the choice is a binary one.
Want to stop Clinton and avoid the problems with Trump – we have two choices:
1) Support a GOP convention reversal (within the rules).
2) Support a third party.
Short of a conservative third party (or a GOP convention reversal), we should go for Libertarian for POTUS.
Far from a perfect choice, but one that could conceivably stalemate the election (preventing 270 ec votes from anyone), if not win (there might be enough Dems to make up for the hard core Trump supporters, or those clinging to the hope that Trump would change). The LP prospects might even be better for a win than a conservative third party.
We go to war with the candidate we have not what we wish. Anyone who backs the willfull blindness of cve is a non starter. Mr. Latif mentioned earlier had a very particular point of view re the first amendment, that why deblasio is in his board. Not onlike taquiya musri from the press conference.
Frog:
And I responded that if you have read my posts you’d realize that my immersion in “that culture” was to reject it, even when I was a Democrat.
That statement stands. Your suggestion shows a lack of attention to what I’ve written, now and in the past. Now, I don’t expect you to have memorized every post I’ve ever written. But I would hope that by this time you would understand the general tone and my general attitude. I have never been a leftist; I have always rejected that.
See this, just for one example.
Your wariness is self-satisfied suicide in the end. But you are killing me and mine too, with your wariness. The same boat problem.
It’s a kind of displacement effect. They can’t do anything about their anger for Leftists and Islamic Jihad, so they pick on politicians. But only certain kinds of politicians and voters.
Frog’s potential allies aren’t the ones killing him. He just thinks they are, because all his hate and anger developed against the Left needs a receptacle. So once they form wagons around Trump, the self identity weakness in human nature thinks anyone who opposes them are their enemies. But, of course, that’s the exact same flaw the Left and Islam uses to enslave humans for evil.
“Aside from the case against Clinton being overwrought with explanations of doom over the course of the next four years”
Overwrought? A fine example of suicidal denial. Illegal immigration, Muslim migration, disastrous trade policies and foreign disasters will at least continue and quite possibly accelerate under Hillary. Cultural attacks will continue. Attacks upon the 2nd amendment and 1st (hate speech legislation) will continue. Single payer will be imposed. Etc, etc… on every front the left is “fundamentally transforming” the country. Imagining that the tipping point will come at some conveniently distant point in the future is whistling past the graveyard.
Not “acceptable” just simply the only viable alternative to Clinton because… both a GOP convention reversal (within the rules) and support for a third party… result in Hillary’s election.
Either people will act as their conscience and will dictates, or they will be forced to Jump on the Band Wagon of Authoritarians.
Whether that Authority is King Trump or King Hussein or King Ali, doesn’t really matter in the end.
Beverly Says:
June 17th, 2016 at 9:43 pm
She is quite right in recommending that one should look around and not at the gov, for solutions or succor.
But it’ll take some time for Americans to fully accept that. They are used to elections and all that jazz, whenever problems happen. It is only when they see the system for what it truly is, that they can begin to see the Left and Islam for what it truly is. It’s all inter connected at various levels.
If they had Awakened earlier, they wouldn’t have become so confused. Trump, for good or bad, has confused people. That’s because they should have been disregarding and bypassing government since 2008. They shouldn’t have waited until 2014, 2015, 2016 to wake the hell up and start thinking about changing the system. Trying to change the system from inside the system is the Trump offer of hope. But people who awakened recently, really want that offer of hope. People who awakened many years ago, however, no longer have the emotional vulnerability for that kind of stuff. That phase has passed, so to speak.
The question comes to be, in the end, whether the US System can be reformed or changed from the inside. Or whether it cannot be.
They should be trying to inform us.
Being “informed” by a bunch of slave lords and evil Leftists, isn’t necessarily better or good.
I cannot agree that there is little to no difference in where an authoritarian Trump/Caesar leads and where Hillary’s March to the Collective leads. IMO, the difference between the horror of a dictator and 1984 is obvious.