Sometimes I hate it when I’m right. Which is a problem because I’m right a lot. From time to time, I’ve made references to people who get all their news from CNN and MSNBC. These are people who still believe that the mainstream media is fair, impartial and without bias.
Isn’t that precious.
I made those references even though I had never actually met one of those people. Until last week.
Last week, Facebook kindly let me know that a “friend” of mine made a new post. I’m using air quotes around the word “friend” because I don’t actually know the person. At best, she’s a business acquaintance that I talked to maybe twice in the last 20 years. So, we’re not close.
But Facebook thought it was important to let me know that she had something to say.
So, I looked.
She had reposted a meme that said:
“My kid just said: ‘It’s sad to watch a pack of lies beat a good person just because the good person can’t speak.’”
Then it said, “I literally just gave him a hug and said that ‘debates don’t matter.’”
My “friend” indicated that she thought the post was “well said”.
I don’t think it’s well said at all. I think it’s sad.
This sounds like child abuse
I have no idea how old the kid was but I’m going to assume he was fairly young because the mother gave him a hug to make him feel better. But we’re talking about Liberals here so I guess her son could be just about any age. In any case, the kid was either old enough to determine for himself that Trump was lying or naïve enough to believe his mother.
What that woman should have told her son was that the person who couldn’t speak is the President of the United States, who is no longer fit for the job. And, she should have mentioned that the “good person” lied no less than 14 times in the 90 minutes he was onstage.
But she didn’t say that.
Someone, one of my business acquaintance’s other “friends”, let’s call him “Jim” replied with:
This from a long-time record business colleague: “THIS ABOUT SUMS IT UP! An 81 year old man spending his final years trying to make our lives better stood for 90 minutes in front of a revolting human sewage pipe spewing lies — my resolve to reelect him is even greater now.”
I realize he was just quoting someone else. Presumably someone who had responded to the same meme in a different thread. But, since he copied and pasted the words, I figured he felt the same way. Turns out I was right again.
I asked him why he felt that way. He replied:
“Because Trump has been convicted after a jury trial of 34 felonies, has further indictments and trials pending, has been found guilty by a jury of sexual assault and by a judge after trial of massive fraud, is barred from operating a charity in New York state, lies effortlessly and endlessly, is ready to sell out NATO, Ukraine, and our western allies to Putin, and all the top people from his administration who have reputations and experience abhor him. Is that enough?”
Probably shouldn’t be throwing the first stone
First of all, Trump hasn’t been convicted of those 34 felonies. He has been found guilty, but that’s not the same thing as “convicted”. The sentencing phase of the trial has been moved back to late September and it’s likely that at that time all the charges will be thrown out. We need to wait until at least then to see if he’s actually been convicted. So, if that’s the biggest bee in his bonnet, then he should probably rethink his stance.
Secondly, people like “Jim” support late term abortions, the mutilation of young children, allowing naked men to parade in the streets in front of young children, allowing books in school libraries that are too filthy to be read at school board meetings, illegal immigration (which results in human trafficking), and looting Target stores.
So, “Jim”, don’t try to take the moral high ground until you start fighting to stop all of the morally reprehensible things you believe in.
And, as far as the 34 felonies go, anyone who was paying any attention at all would know that those charges were trumped up.
I told “Jim” that if he took anything away from the debate, it should be that Biden is unfit to run the country. And that since he hates Trump, his goal should be to defeat Trump, not to reelect Biden.
I then asked him for a list of reasons why he supports Biden. He said:
Polly wants a cracker!
“He’s held the office for four years and has shown he is up for the job — no scandal, rebuilt relationships with our allies, passed major legislation despite MAGA opposition, and has surrounded himself with strong capable people.
He also has a lifetime of experience as a public servant, understands the system of government is Constitutionally based — not a one-man show, all reasons, given the choice, to bring him back for an encore.
It is too late in the process to find a substitute. And we have a strong VP Harris who has held previous office as a prosecutor, DA, state attorney general, and US Senator before becoming VP, who is fully able to step in should the need ever arise.”
Wow! Just…wow. I hardly know where to start.
Rebuilt our relationship with our allies? I guess if making us the laughingstock of other nations counts as rebuilding our relationships, then…sure. I mean… who doesn’t like a clown?
Passed major legislation? I don’t think executive orders count as legislation. Besides, passing legislation isn’t a good thing unless the new legislation isn’t destroying the country.
Surrounding himself with strong capable people? His administration hired people based on DEI criteria, not whether they can do the job.
Scamala (I wish I had thought of that first)
Which brings me to Kamala Harris. Kamala was obviously a diversity hire meant to bring in the women and black vote. The problem with that is that women and “people of color” are smarter than Biden gives them credit for and aren’t going to vote for someone simply because of her sex or the color of her skin.
And speaking of sex…those of us here in California who know Kamala’s background can tell you that she got where she is by spending a lot of time on her knees and on her back. Which, if Kamala were ever in charge, would give new meaning to the phrase, “the position of the United States.”
On the other hand, I guess those talents might come in handy when dealing with Putin or Kim Jong Un.
And what about his claim that Biden is scandal free? I guess he hasn’t heard about Hunter’s laptop, the strange business deals going on in Ukraine and Hunter making payments to “the Big Guy”.
And that’s my entire point.
Can you say “echo chamber”?
I asked him where he gets his news/information. “Jim” replied, “From sources that have long histories of Pulitzer Prizes for their reporting…Credibility has to be earned.”
No argument from me there “Jim”. Credibility does have to be earned. But it must also be maintained. Just because someone won an award for their reporting doesn’t mean that they’re still trustworthy.
And besides, Pulitzer Prizes are awarded by Columbia University, one of the most Liberal schools there is. You don’t have to look any further than the recent pro-Hamas demonstrations to see that. Winners are selected by the Pulitzer Prize Board which is primarily comprised of people working at Liberal media outlets.
The only thing a Pulitzer Prize is good for is as an indicator of whether or not an article written by the author has a Liberal bias. If he or she has won a Pulitzer, then it’s a near certainty that the article supports the Liberal agenda.
Like I said, I hate it when I’m right. There actually are people who only get their news from CNN, MSNBC, the New York Times and other Liberal media judged trustworthy solely because of a prize awarded by other Liberals.
And these people are so ill with Trump Derangement Syndrome that they’d rather kill our country than support someone who can make it great once again.
