Slut-Shaming A U.S. President

With the #MeToo movement in full flight, why hasn't anyone in the legacy media finally held former U.S. president Bill Clinton to account for his lifetime of boorish behavior? What of his string of adulterous affairs with numerous accusers—even within the Oval Office? What of Juanita Broaddrick's 40-year-old allegation of rape? Is it fair for Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen to slut-shame the sitting U.S. president: while giving worse behaved Bubba a complete pass? For one thing, Mr. Clinton's juvenile high jinks—among them, the Lewinsky affair: a national scandal that virtually brought the country to a standstill, and led to Bill's impeachment—happened while he was in office. How is that comparable to a porn star's allegation of a consensual affair with Donald Trump, then a private citizen, in 2006?

Where is this partisan's “honesty, dignity and rectitude”? In reality, Mr. Cohen engages in the yellowiest journalism by using language better suited to the gutter: “But Trump himself is a slut. He is a liar and a moral harlot who revels in irresponsibility and bad-boy behavior.” To paraphrase the Bible, “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone” (John 8:7). That would be good advice for the Post's holier than thou columnist to heed: especially given his own sexism directed at a younger, female subordinate in the workplace. As reported in June of 1998 by the Washingtonian's Harry Jaffe in “Cohen Gets Kid-Gloves Treatment in Harassment Case”:

“Among the allegations reported to [deputy managing editor Milton] Coleman: Cohen asked [Devon] Spurgeon to come into his office and close the door, then queried her about her generation's view of oral sex. Also at issue: a conversation where Cohen said it's too bad Bill Clinton is the only one who can grope in his office and get away with it. He also is said to have intimidated her with references to his connections with top Post editors, such as Tom Wilkinson, who can hire and fire.”

How is it not beyond creepy for a then 57-year-old man to question a then 23-year-old editorial aide about sexual mores? At the time, the Post's response was simply to move his office to a different floor. As for curbing potential misdeeds, that's about as effective as moving an accused pedophile priest to a new perish. Indeed, all these years later, where's Richard Cohen's, or The Washington Post's, integrity and transparency regarding these events? As of now, this stone thrower is still employed there. In fact, sanctioned for decades to point fingers at others while ignoring his own less than chivalrous conduct. (As was typical in the Clinton era of “bimbo eruptions,” the wagons were circled and the young woman in question was blamed.) Unfortunately, his journalistic old boy's club is still stuck in Clintonian amber. Neither Clinton nor Cohen have yet received their deserved comeuppance in 2018.

Upon reflection, how was the lurid, sex scandal-plagued Clinton era not a shadowy reflection of recently exposed Hollywood sex scandals (read: Clinton friend and donor Harvey Weinstein), and the #MeToo movement? In both cases, didn't prominent Democrats misuse their lofty positions to exploit underlings for sexual favors? Specifically, when Bubba chased Monica around the resolute desk in the Oval Office, wasn't Bill's bad-boy behavior (with her and others) equivalent to the adulterous antics of a bathrobed Harvey? Rightly, today's press has excoriated the disgraced movie mogul Yet, Bill's extramarital affair with then 22-year-old White House intern Monica Lewinsky is still treated with kid gloves. Ironically, his still traumatized former paramour, now 44, couldn't bring herself to hold the Clintons responsible in her candid March 2018 Vanity Fair article: he for his arguably predatory behavior; she for calling Lewinsky a “narcissistic loony toon”. Shouldn't the Clintons be held to the same standard of conduct that the media is rabidly trying to hold The Donald to?

The hard left media continuing to protect the coddled Clintons conveys the message that questionable actions, or words, have no bearing on character or a president's ability to lead the nation. And despite the sea change regarding sexual harassment, Bill and Hillary have survived their various imbroglios, haven't they? So, it stands to reason that President Trump will also survive the supposed peccadilloes of his past. Before applying such blatant double standards to U.S. presidents, Democratic surrogates of the biased MSM need to take a long look in a mirror. Not to do so shows the truth of what they are: untrustworthy mudslingers of salacious leftist propaganda.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

Brainless Griffin's “Headless Trump”

Is the abhorrent image of a “blood-soaked decapitated head” resembling President Donald Trump “art”? This visual horror is suspended in the air invoking the classic image of Perseus holding Gorgon Medusa's head. It's the kind of ugly propaganda one would expect from a proponent of radical Islamic terror, not self-proclaimed “D-list” comedienne Kathy Griffin, 56. This unapologetic liberal—an outspoken Trump critic—obviously subscribes to Irish dramatist Oscar Wilde's axiom: “There is only one thing in life worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about.” Among those taking notice is the Secret Service, charged with evaluating all perceived threats to any U.S. president. One of the agency's tweeted responses: “Threats made against @SecretService protectees receive the highest priority of all of our investigations. #ProtectionNeverRests.”  That's territory well beyond the controversial. That's an idiotic foray into the foolhardy.

As Griffin's now on the Secret Service's radar, she's been on the fringe of Hollywood celebrity for a long time. For context, she's a less successful contemporary of has-been pop singer Madonna. Like the middle-aged “Material Girl” (most famous for her recent public utterance, “Yes, I have thought an awful lot about blowing up the White House.”), Ms. Griffin's attention-grabbing militancy has utterly overshadowed her considerable comedic talent. That ability has resulted in notable past successes: she's won two Emmy Awards for her reality TV show “My Life on the D-List” and is one of only three women to win solo Grammy Awards for comedy. What she's known for today is this odious, anti-American political antic.

These days it's a rarity for the left and right to agree on anything. Yet, both sides widely condemned Ms. Griffin's publicity stunt. While morally challenged Hillary Clinton has remained tellingly silent, even her daughter Chelsea tweeted, “This is vile and wrong. It is never funny to joke about killing a president.” For comparison, let's consider an unthinkable scenario. What if vanquished Hillary had won the 2016 presidential election and a famous conservative had held her “blood-drenched severed head” in effigy? Better still, imagine the crazed and violent reaction of leftist political radicals if the likeness had depicted a “decapitated Obama”? Thus, how could the measure of Ms. Griffin's outrage be made any more plain?

How could this public figure—this veteran of naked self-promotion—not predict the thunderous backlash? (President Trump being defended—by any Democrat, for any reason—is disorienting stuff indeed!) So far Ms. Griffin received little more than a few slaps on the wrist. Per Variety Magazine, she's been fired from her ten-year gig as the co-host of CNN's annual New Year’s Eve program with anchor Anderson Cooper. Likewise, a couple venues on her Celebrity Run-In Tour in Albuquerque, NM and Grass Valley, CA have canceled scheduled appearances. Yet, counterbalance a few days of lost work with the media bonanza of numerous internet stories—and blurbs on the nightly news!

In her defense, Ms. Griffin (unlike Madonna) quickly apologized on Tuesday for the uproar she caused. Naturally, this provocateur enjoys First Amendment protections for her inflaming shenanigans. And as her comedic signature is known for brutal honesty, perhaps her posted mea culpa is genuine. Still, whether that's true or not, isn't really the point: TMZ reported Wednesday that President Trump's understandably panicked 11-year-old son Barron thought the horrifying televised image featuring Griffin was real.

How could this innocent know any better? Unfortunately, he was in the family's New York City penthouse with first lady Melania Trump, not in the White House. In any case, she released a statement that goes right to the heart of unhinged progressives' thoughtless tactics:

“[That photo] makes you wonder about the mental health of the person who did it. As a mother, a wife, and a human being, that photo is very disturbing. When you consider some of the atrocities happening in the world today, a photo opportunity like this is simply wrong.”

To that end, per Fox News, one is automatically reminded of 119 wounded and 22 killed, including many children, at an Ariana Grande concert in Manchester on May 22^nd. Did the world really need the made-up gore Ms. Griffin peddled?

Unfairly, this reality TV star has benefited from Barron's suffering—and the presidential family's collective disgust. The fact remains that Kathy Griffin's gone viral in a way that the infamous Oscar Wilde of the 19^th century could not fathom. Hence, this social media firestorm is a good effort for the woman whose shtick includes such gems as, “Well, I've been trying to sleep my way to the middle for my whole career.” Although said in jest, Ms. Griffin's self-serving ploy of “cutting edge” pop culture infamy is accomplished.

Whatever the ultimate consequences—good or bad—this agitator's made her bed. A raunchy bed she alone must sleep in.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

http://newstex.aci.info/authors/15977720f5100100002

Journalist, Not Biased Hack

“Objectivity is dead, and I’m okay with it.” – Lewis Wallace, former “Marketplace” reporter

The above is the title of his essay published on the website, Medium. As this attitude negates Wallace's “impartial” role as a journalist, he was ultimately terminated by his employer.

Recall, the purpose of journalism is to convey current events impartially with facts. Any unbound person—unwilling to exercise fact-based dispassion—can't be a legitimate journalist. Instead, that's a de facto activist: a propagandist with a press pass.

Facts are essential, intractable things. They remain elemental to authentic journalism. Specifically, facts anchor news stories to reality. When correctly utilized, they greatly aid journalistic truth-telling. 'Just the facts, ma'am'—for good reason.

Journalism's traditional tenets don't impede anyone with skill from getting their writerly point across. Wallace finds himself in the unemployment line solely for willfully violating a professional taboo. Demonstrating the rank intolerance he rails against, he writes:

“We need to admit that those who oppose free speech, diversity and kindergarten level fairness are our enemies”.

How is it not fascism to demonize others simply for holding a different political perspective? Is it not hypocritical, and childish, to condemn another in the name of Wallace's militant “fairness”? To paraphrase Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch, a bad judge to the law is equivalent to the journalist disregarding objectivity. They are incongruent and cannot coexist in the same sphere.

Without facts, journalism rapidly degrades into valueless, gelatinous goo. Reporting becomes untrustworthy and indistinguishable from fiction. Hence, the Orwellian specter of today's “fake news”. The false is peddled as true: witness the absurd claim of Trump's “threat to invade Mexico”. (He didn't, per CNN he actually offered help.) This Associated Press narrative was mindlessly disseminated far and wide as truth. Is this American journalism or an old fashioned telephone game from Mr. Wallace's kindergarten class?

Beyond the editorial page, neutrality remains a job requirement. Lewis Wallace confused a First Amendment right of self-expression with his professional duty. His employer acted appropriately because he wouldn't (read: another pesky fact for this “victim” to misconstrue and grouse about).

As with everything he advocates, Wallace only has himself to blame. This is the fallout of competing interests—and the healthy expression of a difference of opinion.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

http://newstex.aci.info/authors/15977720f5100100002

Putin's Rage for Immoral Obama

“People who order such fakes against the U.S. president-elect, fabricate them and use them in political struggle are worse than prostitutes. They have no moral restrictions whatsoever, and it highlights a significant degree of degradation of political elites in the West, including in the United States.” – Russian President Vladimir Putin on January 17, 2017

We live in interesting times when a commie dictator commands the moral high ground. If Russia hacked the DNC—and/or directly influenced the 2016 election—wouldn't that be a real feather in the Cossack's hat? That's a concrete demonstration of political power: something for Putin to publicly gloat about! Why then does he angrily deny it, call his Western accusers prostitutes? The only logical reason for this fiery reaction is it's not true.

Is WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange—who disclosed the treasure trove of embarrassing DNC emails—also lying when he publicly denied Russian involvement? Indeed, who's more trustworthy, progressive sore losers spinning Trump conspiracy theories, or Putin and Assange? Unfortunately, that's a really tough call! Furthermore, entrenched Republican dupes like John McCain and Lindsey Graham aren't helping matters. They're calling for a meaningless and feckless Congressional investigation. This fool's errand plays right into the Democrats' false narrative that Trump is an illegitimate president. Scapegoating Russia: that's the point of Putin's ire—and the Democrats' smoke and mirrors campaign.

It's beyond bizarre that Mr. Putin has addressed American's systemic political problems more honestly than the outgoing Obama Administration. The communist refers to the entire insulated beltway bubble ruling class. The roughly sixty House Democrats boycotting the Trump inauguration epitomize these fakers. Renewing Reaganesque patriotism and respect for our democracy is what Mr. Trump will champion. For a start, Mr. Obama is within hours of becoming an ex-president. Tellingly, also shortly to be freed from his gilded cage is Bradley (a.k.a “Chelsea”) Manning. You know, the traitorous leaker of U.S. secrets. S/he is an undeserving recipient of Barack Obama's vile presidential pardon. And as birds of a feather flee a ruined roost together, it's not tough to figure out the treasonous party most responsible for degrading America. Even Putin knows.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

http://newstex.aci.info/authors/15977720f5100100002  

Mistaking Trump for Hateful Obama

“Obama made America great again. Trump made America hate again” – Occupy Democrats' fascist propaganda

If the nation is currently politically polarized, that's due to President Obama. Who else has been in charge but him? For eight years, he and his progressive minions have badly ruled the roost. For example, who demonized the police when he said, “The cops acted stupidly” back in 2009? Further, who promoted the idea regarding his critics: 'We're gonna punish our enemies, and we're gonna reward our friends' in 2010? The only one promoting years of divisiveness and hatred has been orator Obama. As Democrat Harry Truman said of the U.S. presidency: the buck stops with him. That means every president. Is Mr. Truman wrong and Occupy Democrats right?

The fact remains that Donald Trump is not even in office yet! So, no reasonable person—or group—can blame the new guy for the acrimonious state of our nation. Therefore, Occupy Democrats' claims—and slogans, exemplified above—are patently absurd on their face. They are anti-American fascists—and their fiction is not to be trusted.

Part of living in a democracy means accepting the results of our periodic elections. Why should 2016 be any different than 2008 or 2012? Not to do so now is frankly un-American. If Hillary had won conservatives would not have liked it. Still, adults suck it up and honor the outcome.

That's a fundamental difference between today's rabble-rousing liberals and us. We actually respect the other guy when our candidate loses. Even a radical like Obama! As proof, despite his murky background, no Republican tried to derail or boycott Obama's inaugurations with claims of illegitimacy. Thus, it’s inexcusable for bogus Democrats to do so now with President-elect Trump.

In 2009, Mr. Obama put such matters succinctly: “Elections have consequences, and at the end of the day, I won.” He has never spoken truer words. It's good advice that followers of Occupy Democrats should heed in 2017.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

http://newstex.aci.info/authors/15977720f5100100002

Between Contempt and Trump's Fist

“The shortest honeymoon on record is officially over. Normally, newly elected presidents enjoy a wave of goodwill that allows them to fly high at least through their first 100 days. Donald Trump has not yet been sworn in and the honeymoon has already come and gone.” – Charles Krauthammer, author and syndicated columnist, on January 12, 2017

Trump's honeymoon hasn't “come and gone”. For the MSM, it never existed in the first place. The Donald's victory has rightfully exposed them as fools. Yet, who's really to blame for their own inexcusably wrongheaded political predictions? They made mistakes then—and their current misbehavior only amplifies their public disgrace. Rather than reform and accept journalistic responsibility, they have engaged in petulant antics worthy of a sideshow farce. What else explains Jim Acosta's clownish aggression at Mr. Trump's latest press conference? Is it not unprofessional to repeatedly interrupt, and attempt to shout over, the President-elect? Does Mr. Acosta work for CNN—or the Jerry Springer Show?

The American press is now populated by many “accosting” Acostas. Their knee-jerk Republican-bashing is the primary reason for their systemic failures. For decades, the journalistic credo of objective, fact-based reporting has been completely abandoned. Even worse, the Fourth Estate has metastasized into the propagandist arm of the Democratic Party. To this end, they have been radicalized by progressive ideology. Therefore, they are incapable of performing their original watchdog function: to hold political leaders of every stripe accountable to the American people. It's no wonder why our democracy is so dysfunctional!

Rather than counterbalance a faceless big government bureaucracy—and insulated ruling class elite—the MSM has become the Democrats' 21^st century “Uncle Tom”. For proof, contrast the tone—and treatment—of Barack Obama versus that of President-elect Donald Trump. Dispositions of the two men notwithstanding, any neutral observer would acknowledge a profound difference. For eight years, Mr. Obama has been virtually deified by a fawning, servile media. However, Mr. Trump—not even in office yet—has had more harsh questions and rough treatment in his last press conference than Obama had in his entire presidency! In retrospect, has any reporter made such a public nuisance of himself at an Obama chinwag? Has anyone in the press corps held two-faced Obama to account for his lies and misrepresentations? Has anyone interrupted him, or shouted him down, for his failed domestic and international record? If reporters had actually done their job, America would be in a far better state than it is today.

Moreover, with their shrinking audience and waning influence, what little remains is now further eroded by the emergence of “fake news”. Seriously, does anyone in their right mind believe BuzzFeed's fantasy of Trump golden showers on prostitutes in a Russian hotel suite? As CNN promoted this nonsense, only the deluded safely locked away in metal institutions are likely to believe them going forward. Further, as Mr. Trump is a self-described germaphobe, did NBC (a major BuzzFeed investor) or CNN take that little fact into account? When two major media outfits won't differentiate between reality and fiction, the waters are only muddied to that whole industry's increasing detriment.

That's why Mr. Trump is not afforded a honeymoon: something every new president richly deserves. This utter lack of fair play makes The New York Times's current financial problems—or CNN's low ratings—no mystery. Americans are tired of being falsely labeled as deplorables by progressives. This holds true for Hillary Clinton style politicians and their contemptible attack dog news organizations.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

http://newstex.aci.info/authors/15977720f5100100002

Trump's Thanksgiving Cooks MSM's Goose

“I think the media is on thin ice with the American people, very thin ice, and they ought to just … dial it [their obvious attacks on Trump] back.” – Hugh Hewett, conservative radio host on Tuesday, November 22, 2016

Now the election is over the MSM happily assumed their relationship with President-elect Donald Trump would be business-as-usual. Last Monday like turkeys to the Thanksgiving table, the elitist news executives and their figurehead anchors filed into Trump Tower with the expectation of what they hoped to get: continued unfettered access. What they got was taken to Trump's woodshed: a barrage of pointed words for a roomful of unrepentant liars, what The New York Post called a “f***ing firing squad.” Of course, the fact that this meeting was off-the-record did not dissuade these media titans from spilling their guts; probably as soon as they got out of The Donald's earshot. (This instance is yet another example of their constant underhanded dealing with Republicans.)

During the lecture Mr. Trump singled out CNN as the worst offender, but he was generally critical of the press for their widespread hatchet job reporting. Purveyors of liberal doctrine like The Washington Post's Dana Milbank called the meeting “part tongue-lashing, part perp walk.” And why not, given their habitual yellow journalism lacking even the semblance of objectivity?

While everyone is entitled to private opinions, journalism is supposed to be neutral and fact-based. Yet, leaf through any major metropolitan paper: at a rate of 93%, these “journalists” are nothing more than progressive ideologues spouting Democratic Party talking points. Despite eight years of Barack Obama's epic economic and international failures, they have nary a critical word for him. Likewise, they endorsed and defended Hillary Clinton's lawbreaking criminality—even going so far as to fundraise for her! Who but them did everything in their power to promote her (failed) candidacy?

Indeed, Donald Trump bested Crooked Hillary—and her Democratic sycophants and surrogates in the press. In a begrudging moment of clarity The Washington Post's Margaret Sullivan acknowledged:

“He has masterfully manipulated the media for the past 18 months—bullying reporters, garnering billions in free publicity and portraying journalists as part of the corporate structure that must be brought down so that the people can triumph.”

For decades, truer words have not been printed in the Post. Yet, despite her admission Ms. Sullivan's perspective is still way off the mark. This cog of the legacy press laughably believes her profession—as it currently stands—is nonpartisan:

“In fact, U.S. citizens need an independent press more than ever.”

Ah, if only that was so! In reality, the corporate media is corrupted by Democratic collaborators—“unbiased journalist” pretenders—like herself and Dana Milbank. These liberal scribblers misperceive Donald Trump—a truly independent voice for mainstream America—as the “problem” rather than themselves. Therefore, their petulant affect and defiant tone deafness are completely out of sync with our nation's character. As that is the case, how honest or valuable can their reporting be? The answer is not at all.

The reality remains that the journalistic neutrality of their ilk is nowhere present. Ms. Sullivan and her fellow travelers populating the MSM share responsibility and blame for this—not the president-elect. Theirs is classic psychological projection: unrecognized self-reproach. Recall, the Fourth Estate was intended to be generally adversarial to both political parties and government; keeping them theoretically accountable to the people by accurately reporting on their activities. Yet, this function is impossible due to the MSM's fundamental flaw: naked political bias. Even worse, the MSM only attempts to “watchdog” Republicans, but never their Democratic counterparts.

For them, the jaded editorial has become every newspaper story under the guise of “legitimate” news. And although unlikely to reform, they richly deserve Trump's Thanksgiving comeuppance. It's the gander's after election gravy: exposing two-faced media elites as squawking, progressive birdbrains. With only 9% of America trusting them, Trump has rightfully pigeonholed their whole worthless industry. After all, going forward who needs a divisive, anti-American propaganda machine lacking the merest shred of journalistic integrity?

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/
http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

Spoiler Trump: a GOP Coup de Grace

“A lion doesn't concern itself with the opinion of sheep.” ― George R.R. Martin, “A Game of Thrones”

In the MSM's unrelenting criticism of President-elect Donald Trump (and his transition team), the term “bloodletting” is weirdly telling of their collectively deluded mind-set. The Washington Post misuses that precise word in relation to the unremarkable demotion of New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (for the more experienced Mike Pence) and the departure of former congressman Mike Rogers (R-MI).

A couple of understandable personnel changes and The Post's Wednesday front page radiates: 'Key figures purged'? Likewise, the next day obviously aggrieved columnist Dana Milbank called Republicans “one big mess.” The avalanche of farcical and wrongheaded descriptions persist. Also on Thursday, his colleague Karen DeYoung petulantly complained of Trump's “still empty” transition government offices. Newsflash to Ms. DeYoung and her fellow travelers in liberal la-la land: it's only been eight days since Trump's victory! (Is she secretly impatient for The Donald's governance?)

In the postmortem of the 2016 presidential election, failed Democrats—and their still clueless sycophants in the press—are the ones actually bloodletting. Their pollsters repeatedly got everything wrong. Even “newspaper of record” The New York Times is losing money. Yet, the red meat in this scenario is the Democrats as wholesale political road kill. It's a titanic trifecta: Crooked Hillary's unrealized presidential prospects, an absolute repudiation of anti-American progressivism, and Barack Obama's legacy is dead on arrival. While the ground quakes under lame duck Democrats' feet, the mindless “squawking” cacophony of disillusioned ideologues masquerading as journalists resounds.

Hillary Clinton's well-deserved defeat puts all insulated powerbrokers of the coddled beltway bubble ruling class on notice. Today, any establishment politician (read: RINOs) still “with her”—in word or deed—is not with We the People. Our will has been clearly voiced. Populist Donald Trump's surprise election to the presidency makes this assessment factual. Therefore, his famous catchphrase from “The Apprentice” is apropos to Washington elites: “You're fired.”

Similarly metaphorically pink-slipped are urbanite talking head prognosticators and the heedless Chicken Little MSM with their absurdist newspaper propaganda. The media's baseless criticisms are dishonest exaggerations that deny the new political reality. Herein lies the problem: their deeply partisan “reporting” will consign them to irrelevant background noise. (Think of the teacher's voice in “Peanuts” cartoons.) Mourning has indeed come to them, but a new dawn has come to America.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

Love American Style

Putting aside the fear-based barbarity of a radical Islamic terrorist for a moment, the Orlando massacre ironically brings to light a little-discussed subject to the forefront, that of love.

At 90, former Pennsylvania senator Harris Wofford remarried this past April 30^th: this second time around to a man. This happy event received scant media attention compared to the tragedy at Orlando's Pulse gay club. Why? I do not mean to imply that honoring the deaths of 49 innocents gunned down by a self-hating, religious fanatic is not important. Still, on balance, widely reporting life-affirming events—like this organic demonstration of new American tolerance—deserves much more attention than it currently gets.

Every wedding is significant because it represents hope and commemorates new beginnings. So, what's special about Mr. Wofford's nuptials with a second great love, Matthew Charlton, 40? This marriage proves American hearts transcend the superficial differences of age and gender. Specifically, Mr. Wofford's daughter articulates the prevailing attitude the MSM virtually ignores: “I think it's wonderful. My father is a very lucky man to find someone who cares for him.” Indeed, the acceptance both bridegrooms universally experience may still be surprising to some, but not among them is this present generation.

This truth is that our culture has taken quantum leaps in acceptance. Yet, who would know that from listening to the biased MSM? They make a deliberate effort to ignore this clear progress. Why? Because an alienated electorate votes for Democrats (whom the press philosophically supports) under the guise of providing “objective” news. What is actually presented is propaganda. A distorted fun house mirror of American cultural dynamics circa 1963's “The Help.”

Yet, it's not 1963, it's 2016. The problem with our society is not with discrimination. It is not about guns. It concerns dishonest leaders in government and in the sycophantic liberal media. Collectively these overly cozy bedfellows promote a divisive, anti-American agenda via politically correct progressivism. Yet, this statist philosophy of Democrats is an anti-American corrosive upon the very fabric of our republic. Hence, the many politically polarizing disasters of the Obama years.

Why this devil's partnership between them? The distraction is useful to the powers-that-be in both establishments to maintain elitist political control. That's why both groups fixate on disseminating—and promoting—the circumstances that divide. Thus today's flood of stories about mass murders like Omar Mateen. The liberals' false narrative about “hate-filled America” has no room for the diametrically opposing 21^st century American reality. Where is their vested interest in acknowledging the loving unions that build society-strengthening family connections of various kinds? They have none.

There remains the quiet expression of great love in America despite its disregarded—and changing forms. That quiet truth about us—as a nation—is undiminished. We are Ronald Reagan's “shining city on a hill.” Likewise, we are MLK's realized dream of open hearts and open minds. This inspiring nexus forms the uniquely American character, making anything possible. Therefore, ultimately, it matters not what zealots do. Or what the MSM says about them—or us. Love, like an unified, indestructible undercurrent always prevails, gently guiding America's destiny.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

Blended politics and befuddled ideas

In this day and age of tenuous labeling of human behavior, fluid gender identity—and bathroom usage based on the whims of personality—now a self-described Socialist (the badly electorally-challenged presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT)) isn't really what he says he is? 

That's what political scribblers like the Stefani Olszewskis of the world laughably claim. Specifically, how is Sanders's outspoken advocacy of a 90% income tax not her idea of hindering economic freedom? Further, Ms. Olszewski specifies Sanders isn't a traditional socialist because he doesn't want the government to “own the means of production.” That trivial statement is ultimately academic. Bernie “free-millennial-everything” Sanders wants to tax private industry into submission, if not oblivion. Why should government do the heavy-lifting of inefficiently controlling production when they can simply take? That's the basis of Democrat's tax-and-spend policies—and the Obama wrinkle—wealth redistribution. 

Fact: Under Mr. Obama almost 10 trillion has been added to the national debt. Per the WSJ, Mr. Sanders's policies, if enacted, will add an additional 18 trillion to that. That's a national tab of almost 40 trillion. It's economic suicide. 

Indeed, Mr. Sanders wants to continue self-described “Democrat” Barack Obama's almost 8 years of economy-destroying policies. However, in practical terms, there is no difference in the nebulous 2016 “Democrat/Socialist alternative.” At least those supposedly in the know like DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz and front-runner Hillary Clinton can't explain a difference. Translation: that means there isn't one!

Democrat's obscuring alphabet soup of different labels is meaningless. Whether proffering themselves as “liberals, progressives, Democrats or socialists,” all re-brand the same anti-American principle: big-government, cradle-to-grave dependence with themselves, the elitists, perpetually at the top of food chain. In political parlance, this is the Democrat's poverty plantation (that interestingly keeps 90% of the black population loyal to the party that historically was pro-slavery, anti-women's suffrage and anti-civil rights.) 

The duty of all conservative media outlets is to convey these realities (and their underlying facts, as above) not drink the same propagandist Kool-Aid as their fellows in the MSM.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog
http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446
http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/
http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

Seeing black and white bookends 2015

At the end of any given year—or the beginning of the next—it is a common practice of many to soul-search and reflect on the past. In this preoccupation, Washington Post columnist Lonnae O'Neal is no exception. Her concession—obvious to anyone familiar with her relentless race-based scribbling—is still a real whopper. A person of rare moments of surprising clarity, Ms. O'Neal admits to seeing a world of gradation and layered human interactions in the unrealistic contours, literally and figuratively, of black and white. Therefore, as such, she is a self-confessed unreliable narrator with no business being employed as a de facto journalist in a major news-reporting organization.

As a typical, misguided liberal goody two-shoes, on the surface she seeks to “heal” the racial divide by constantly pointing it out. The disconnect is seen in how it is done: in the most divisive and polarizing manner possible. This creates a deep-seeded hypocrisy of philosophically claiming to “address” society's ills (a “good” deed) while simultaneously making her living sowing the seeds of racial discontent (seen like brush fires across the nation in places like Ferguson, MO, Chicago and Cleveland). Therefore, ironically she has a direct economic incentive not to solve anything, but to “keep the stirring the pot” with a steady stream of racially-charged propaganda.

This is the standard fare of the MSM: two-faced duplicity that parallels all Democrats' lies (à la Mr. Obama) and seeks not to cover them, but to minimize and/or change the subject entirely. It also mirrors both Hillary Clinton's style of falsehoods and her Sal Alinsky-inspired college thesis (“There is only the fight...”) in order to sell newspapers. Specifically, Ms. O'Neal's oversimplified “monotone” victim/victimizer formula usually fixates on some minor, unfortunate incident, for example, between the police and a black minority. Anytime the authority figure is white she promotes the racist “bogeyman:” a fantasy specter hiding around every corner that minorities should fear.

The fact that such an outrageous point of view is given credence in 21^st century America is completely out of touch with the good faith of a country that has elected a black man to the presidency twice. Worse, it completely ignores generations of substantive civil rights gains made since the 1960s and is antithetical to MLK's admonishment to focus on the content of character rather than the superficial difference of skin color; a hang-up more than fifty years later Ms. O'Neal cannot seem to grasp or move beyond in 2015.

As a minister, MLK's advice is grounded in Biblical scripture: “Do not judge so that you will not be judged.” For in the way you judge, you will be judged; and by your standard of measure, it will be measured to you. “Why do you look at the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye?” (Matthew 7:1-3). Once again, true to form in her latest article, Ms. O'Neal claims victimization (this time for herself) due to unfortunate and vulgar comments she received as negative reactions to her year's labors in the shallow end of race relations. In any case, as a self-proclaimed 'race woman,' it is equally wrong when she has judged others with the broad brush of ethnicity as when she, in turn, has also been pigeonholed by readers for her biology. That is the only issue here that is truly “black and white.”

Collective societal harmony has not been in evidence since Mr. Obama assumed office in 2008. My New Year's resolution for America: a more tolerant, forgiving and constructive 2016 reflecting mutual respect and Dr. King's non-violent code of conduct on all sides. May we see brotherhood through the colors of red, white and blue before any other consideration.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog
http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/
http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976