We all know the story about the "Boy Who Cried Wolf." It's a tale of a young shepherd who persistently shouted that he had seen a wolf near his flocks. Time and again, the others in his village came to drive the wolf away, but each time, the boy had been wrong. Then, a wolf finally appeared. The boy shouted about seeing the wolf, but no one came to help. They had learned that the young shepherd could not be trusted.
We also know the story of the "racist" opposition to president Obama. When Obama ran for office in 2008, he used charges of racism against his opponents. In South Carolina, he had his spokesmen denounce the Clintons as racist, something that infuriated Bill Clinton. The charge worked, however. In the fall, any time Obama was criticized by McCain or the GOP, Obama's supporter in the media (okay, the entire media) started yelling "racism". Then Obama got elected. Those who thought that the massive spending of the Stimulus Bill would do more harm than good were labeled "racist". Those who opposed the huge bureaucracy created by Obamacare were also called "racist". Those who criticized Obama for jumping to conclusions about the conduct of the Cambridge police force in its dealing with Obama's friend Henry Gates were, you guessed it, "racist". In fact, for year after year through Obama's term, anyone who opposed or criticized Obama was instantly called a "racist". Today, there are still people who view opposition to Obama as "racist", but the average American now sees through those charges.
Much the same has happened with terrorism and how the government deals with that problem. We have had a series of terrorist attacks in the USA over the last 8 years. For a while, the Obamacrats just denied that acts were even terrorist. We had "work place violence". We had "disturbed individuals". Lately, the big description has been "lone wolf". Somehow, if the terrorist is a "lone wolf", it is supposed to minimize the death and destruction that he or she causes. It has gotten so ridiculous that perhaps we should call Obama "The President Who Cried Lone Wolf". Why would anyone believe him?
But there's more to this phenomenon, particularly with the media. Some things get reported or criticized that make no sense. The remark by Trump's son about skittles is a good example. He was talking about the likelihood that terrorists are sneaking into the USA hidden in the flow of refugees. He used an analogy and asked if you knew that there were a few poisoned skittles in a bowl, would you take a handful? The media went crazy. Social networks went crazy. How dare he compare the refugees to skittles. Racism! Islamophobia! Really? Are they kidding? There's nothing racist or anti-Muslim about the skittles analogy. Everyone knows that.
Another example also involves Trump's son and something he said. Last week, he said that if his father said some of the stuff that Hillary and her supporters were saying, the media would "fire up the gas chamber." Again, the media went crazy. The Anti Defamation League issued a statement calling for an apology because Trump's son was belittling the holocaust and saying something anti-Semitic. Really? Are they kidding? How many times have you seen a prominent Democrat call Trump Hitler or Hitlerian? Just now, there is a piece on Real Clear Politics by Richard Cohen of the New York Daily News talking about Trump's "Hitlerian" disregard for something. At the Emmy Awards the other night, reports say that speaker after speaker bashed Trump. I saw some woman receiving an award call Trump a Hitler. That is not vague in any way. The Anti Defamation League, of course, has nothing to say. The remark about the gas chamber, however, could have been a reference to the method of execution previously used in many states; there seems to be no reason to tie it to the holocaust. It doesn't matter. The direct and clear references are ignored because they were made by people opposing Trump; the possible, albeit unlikely reference, gives rise to a firestorm because it was made by someone supporting Trump.
Anyone paying attention to coverage of the election must, by now, have read multiple pieces about how the media is at a loss to understand why they have not yet destroyed Trump. The answer is not all that hard to understand. Most people in America now understand that the media is just a cheering section for Hillary. There is no fairness in the media. People are used to the standard methods used by the media hacks to try to destroy those who they don't like. Everyone just tunes it out.
We also know the story of the "racist" opposition to president Obama. When Obama ran for office in 2008, he used charges of racism against his opponents. In South Carolina, he had his spokesmen denounce the Clintons as racist, something that infuriated Bill Clinton. The charge worked, however. In the fall, any time Obama was criticized by McCain or the GOP, Obama's supporter in the media (okay, the entire media) started yelling "racism". Then Obama got elected. Those who thought that the massive spending of the Stimulus Bill would do more harm than good were labeled "racist". Those who opposed the huge bureaucracy created by Obamacare were also called "racist". Those who criticized Obama for jumping to conclusions about the conduct of the Cambridge police force in its dealing with Obama's friend Henry Gates were, you guessed it, "racist". In fact, for year after year through Obama's term, anyone who opposed or criticized Obama was instantly called a "racist". Today, there are still people who view opposition to Obama as "racist", but the average American now sees through those charges.
Much the same has happened with terrorism and how the government deals with that problem. We have had a series of terrorist attacks in the USA over the last 8 years. For a while, the Obamacrats just denied that acts were even terrorist. We had "work place violence". We had "disturbed individuals". Lately, the big description has been "lone wolf". Somehow, if the terrorist is a "lone wolf", it is supposed to minimize the death and destruction that he or she causes. It has gotten so ridiculous that perhaps we should call Obama "The President Who Cried Lone Wolf". Why would anyone believe him?
But there's more to this phenomenon, particularly with the media. Some things get reported or criticized that make no sense. The remark by Trump's son about skittles is a good example. He was talking about the likelihood that terrorists are sneaking into the USA hidden in the flow of refugees. He used an analogy and asked if you knew that there were a few poisoned skittles in a bowl, would you take a handful? The media went crazy. Social networks went crazy. How dare he compare the refugees to skittles. Racism! Islamophobia! Really? Are they kidding? There's nothing racist or anti-Muslim about the skittles analogy. Everyone knows that.
Another example also involves Trump's son and something he said. Last week, he said that if his father said some of the stuff that Hillary and her supporters were saying, the media would "fire up the gas chamber." Again, the media went crazy. The Anti Defamation League issued a statement calling for an apology because Trump's son was belittling the holocaust and saying something anti-Semitic. Really? Are they kidding? How many times have you seen a prominent Democrat call Trump Hitler or Hitlerian? Just now, there is a piece on Real Clear Politics by Richard Cohen of the New York Daily News talking about Trump's "Hitlerian" disregard for something. At the Emmy Awards the other night, reports say that speaker after speaker bashed Trump. I saw some woman receiving an award call Trump a Hitler. That is not vague in any way. The Anti Defamation League, of course, has nothing to say. The remark about the gas chamber, however, could have been a reference to the method of execution previously used in many states; there seems to be no reason to tie it to the holocaust. It doesn't matter. The direct and clear references are ignored because they were made by people opposing Trump; the possible, albeit unlikely reference, gives rise to a firestorm because it was made by someone supporting Trump.
Anyone paying attention to coverage of the election must, by now, have read multiple pieces about how the media is at a loss to understand why they have not yet destroyed Trump. The answer is not all that hard to understand. Most people in America now understand that the media is just a cheering section for Hillary. There is no fairness in the media. People are used to the standard methods used by the media hacks to try to destroy those who they don't like. Everyone just tunes it out.
No comments:
Post a Comment