When I compare the authorities of Minneapolis who put out this notice
Minneapolis City Government tells residents to be ready to give up their phones and wallets and to always cooperate with criminals: pic.twitter.com/qQhw4YLRSY
One must conclude that the later (albeit for political reasons) is more interested in the safety of the citizens then the former .
If you told me six months ago that the city of Minneapolis would be better off & safer under a parody pol created by Mel Brooks vs their current government I wouldn’t have believed you.
Either way, this video is not an aberration. It is not a special circumstance. It’s him. There’s no pivot in him. There’s no “presidential” switch to flip. He’s Donald Trump all the way down.
However given the reality that either Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton will be the next president of the United States I ask Jonah this question:
If we concede that Donald Trump’s character is bad, Would it be better for the country to have a President of poor character who will be under intense scrutiny by the press, pols and law enforcement agencies (Trump) or to have a President of poor character who will be given a pass and or defended by the press, the pols and apparently the FBI regardless of what they say or do (Hillary).
I submit and suggest the answer is clearly the former.
Now it’s four years later and on twitter a general question was asked as to why one supports Donald Trump for President. This was my answer:
because he has constantly fought for what I believe in while advancing positions & policies that I believe are the best for my country as a whole and me and mine in particular many of which have been promised by others who didn’t deliver.
However there are others who have a much dimmer opinion of the president & his accomplishment who find themselves in the Trump column this time around for completely different reasons:
Democrats and their lapdogs/stenographers in media have decided that that’s not something I can get. It’s either Trump, where problems will be called out, or Biden where problems will be ignored or applauded. >
While I have issues with some of the characterizations in this thread the primary point that is being made is rather critical
When it comes to the media/left is has now been amply demonstrated that DaTechGuy’s Laws of media outrage are in full force and no action by a Democrat, by the Democrat Party or even by people who are part of the Democrat base may be critiqued or highlighted if it might reflect badly on the potential return of Democrats to power or the maintenance of said power if it happens. And as Glenn Reynolds pointed out this view is not confined to pols and press:
It’s disappointing to see not just the usual gang of idiots, but also some people who should know better joining the hysteria here. As I said before, we had elections during the Civil War and there’s no need to delay them now. But once again, just because a tweet — or other presidential action — riles up the political class doesn’t make it an impeachable offense. And if our political class had been as dedicated to actually defending decency, decorum and tradition as it is determined to weaponize them against Trump, we wouldn’t have gotten Trump.
Amusingly on Facebook where this was originally posted, one person explicitly agrees with Steve Matthews’ legal argument — except for Trump. Because #OrangeManBad. Rule of law!
Put simply we now know that if the Democrats in general and Joe Biden in particular are given the reins of government, no action they take will be subject to critique by the mainstream media in print or television (except perhaps a 30 second segment at the end of Jake Tappers show to throw us a crumb).
However we can be assured that if Donald Trump is reelected, his words, his deeds, his facial expressions, his companies, their business dealings, his family and even his passing of gas will be scrutinized by this press to a level that will be the envy of the Chinese Totalitarian state (and likely financed by it too).
The bottom line is clear, if you don’t trust government and what to be sure that the press shines a bright light on anything it does, you need to re-elect Donald Trump.
If you however are a relative of a Democrat pol or of a large Democrat donor and want to be sure that you can get rich either off the taxpayer’s dime or via foreign money contributed to you as a favor. Well vote democrat.
Last month the Chicago Tribune’s lead columnist, John Kass, penned a column about left-wing billionaire George Soros and his funding of campaigns of Democratic prosecutors such as Cook County’s Kim Foxx–who can rightly be called soft-on-crime. Despite a state of Illinois threshold of $300, Foxx won’t prosecute accused shoplifters unless they steal merchandise worth more than $1,000. Even before this spring’s rioting and looting in Chicago, shoplifting was on the rise.
Criminals appear to be emboldened in Chicago–as the consequences for illegal activities diminish, people believe they can get away with more crimes. Think of it as the opposite of the “broken windows” theory of law enforcement. While I admit it could be a leap to equate Foxx’s permissive attitude on prosecution of crimes to an even more violent Chicago, but shootings and murders for July, 2020 were up dramatically from the previous July. Still I believe Foxx bears some of the responsibility. While the suits in the Chicago Police Department are claiming overall crime is down, I suspect shell game chicanery or something even more troubling. It could be that fewer crimes are being reported because victims believe that it won’t make a difference. The victims know, with minor crimes, Foxx won’t prosecute.
And what about more serious crimes?
In that controversial piece, Kass opined, “And in many of the violent cities, the prosecutors have delivered on their promises not to keep the violent in jail but rather to let them out.”
Kass’ column brought about a fierce backlash by the Chicago Tribune Guild, a union that Kass does not belong to, calling that piece an “odious, anti-Semitic conspiracy theory that billionaire George Soros is a puppet master controlling America’s big cities.”
That column led to a demotion of sorts from Kass. After over twenty years of his column being placed on Page 2, a halcyon spot once occupied by the legendary Mike Royko, Kass’ column has been moved, by the Trib’s editor-in-chief Colin McMahon to the opinion section, in order to, in his words “maintain credibility of news coverage.” That’s not a credible statement as I’m certain there are very few people who see Kass’ work as anything but opinion.
In that column about Soros, Kass did not mention the billionaire’s faith or ethnic origin. I’m going to be more direct. Kass didn’t say in that piece that Soros is Jewish.
Replace “white” with black and “male” with female. And of course “conservative” with liberal. Do you think if Fraud Feder wrote that about an African-American writer at the Trib who is a woman that he would have gotten away with it?
Of course he wouldn’t have.
Which reminds me of something I read in high school from George Orwell. Not Animal Farm or 1984, but his 1946 essay, Politics and the English Language.
This line stands out from that classic: “The word Fascism has now no meaning except in so far as it signifies ‘something not desirable.'” Contemporary liberals, and especially leftists, reflexively label their critics as “fascists.”
I’m sure there is a Kass column over the years, none currently come to mind however, where in my opinion he was totally wrong. Any attacks on that theoretical opinion piece from me, correctly, should be on refuting his points with facts, or at least reasoned thoughts. Not, as some people might, retorting that Kass is wrong because he’s a white man, or that he benefits from “white privilege” and “systemic racism.”
Is white becoming, in Orwell’s words, “something not desirable?” Or worse, something that is inherently wrong?
Conveniently, at least for this post, Kass is of Greek descent. Much if not most of classical logic comes from the ancient Greeks. Oh, let’s say Kass is a Filipino-American. I’d still make the same points you’ll see next.
In college I took a logic course–and seriously–it may have held me back in the work force. I guess I’m too logical. There are a number of argumentative fallacies that the ancient Greeks identified, including the “fallacy of origins,” now generally called the “genetic fallacy.”
Genetic Fallacy: This conclusion is based on an argument that the origins of a person, idea, institute, or theory determine its character, nature, or worth. Example:
The Volkswagen Beetle is an evil car because it was originally designed by Hitler’s army.
In this example the author is equating the character of a car with the character of the people who built the car. However, the two are not inherently related.
So, if the Chicago Tribune Guild wished to honestly attack Kass, they should have pointed out where they believe Kass is wrong about Soros and his funding of campaigns of Democratic prosecutors. They didn’t. They responded with another logical fallacy, the ad hominem attack, calling him anti-Semitic.
The Chicago Tribune Guild couldn’t, or was to lazy to, argue with Kass’ Soros column on its merits. Or lack of.
Feder in his blog post deemed it necessary to mention Kass’ race, gender, and political philosophy in explaining the columnist’s demotion.
Using one’s race, faith, lack-of-faith, ethnic background, sexual identity and the like as a means of argumentative attack is something until recently I thought was a relic of a more ignorant era, or the denizen of crude online forums. Or the weapon of drunken barroom rants.
Our society is headed the wrong way.
And if white people are today’s bogey man tomorrow it may another group. Movements with absolutist philosophies eventually eat their own. See the French Revolution. Or the Russian Revolution.
While Voltaire never said, “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it,” he should have. Because it’s a noble sentiment I believe in. And no one is always right. Yep, not even me. Not John Kass either. No political philosophy has the solution to every problem. We need each other.