By DEXTER DUGGAN
Pointing out the liberal propaganda tilt of HBO’s TV movie Confirmation in mid-April, San Francisco Chronicle columnist Debra Saunders brought back a vivid memory to those of us around at the beginning of the 1990s. We recalled a photo.
Known conservative Clarence Thomas was nominated to the U.S. Supreme Court by Republican President George H.W. Bush in 1991, and left-wing Democrats were grimly determined to stop Thomas however it had to be done — standard unethical procedure against conservatives.
The black Thomas who rose from poverty couldn’t be routinely smeared as a right-wing racist or silver-spoon son of privilege. Oh, let’s claim he talks dirty about sex! It seemed a prim new standard for a left-wing machine that rose from the ashes of sex-n-drugs destructive campus radicalism, but how ya gonna know if mud sticks unless you throw some?
Thus, a powerful 1991 photo of seven left-wing, pro-abortion Democrat congresswomen striding over to the U.S. Senate to heave their mud balls. “People call this photo ‘The female Iwo Jima’,” one of the participants improbably said later, comparing their raw politicking to the time of the war photo of the U.S. flag-raising against Japan.
It was a tough warning of what Thomas faced, take-no-prisoners leftist feminists who made liberal reporters squeal in delight. Democrat politicians and media being united to overwhelm a foe in a very uneven fight.
But Thomas, who wasn’t raised being fed from a golden platter, mustered courage often lacking among elite Republicans — he definitely wasn’t one of the GOP’s risk-averse ranks — and faced down the banshees to win a narrow Senate confirmation vote to the Supreme Court seat he still holds.
A lesson for the current political season about triumphantly confronting the furies.
“The left is masterful at rewriting history,” columnist Saunders wrote of the slant of the HBO movie. She proceeded to spotlight that even back then, the Democrats harbored and hailed as a great hero the predatory legend Sen. Ted Kennedy. He hardly was suited to lead the charge against a GOP nominee who — allegedly — talked a little harassingly dirty. And Thomas, unlike Kennedy in reality in 1969, never fled from a tryst, to leave a drowning woman helpless.
Then our heads were left swimming in barely more than a moist blink of an eye when previously unknown Bill Clinton suddenly leapt onto the national scene and proceeded to win the White House in 1992. Although he didn’t campaign as the vile, experienced sex predator that he was, Clinton’s liabilities wonderfully extinguished Democrat politicians’ lust to slime Republicans on sex.
Fierce Democrat feminists suddenly found coercive, sex-abusing President Clinton downright delightful. Why, after all the political work Bill does to push liberal feminism, that Arkansas scalawag deserves to have his relaxation however he chooses.
The double standard probably couldn’t have gone disgustingly lower than when Newsweek writer Nina Burleigh said she would have been happy to give Bill Clinton oral sex as thanks for his keeping abortion legal.
No Republican probably ever could win that sort of media plaudit, thank goodness.
This isn’t a world honorable people want to live in. But they’re still targeted to be dragged there.
To the Democrat leftists, words didn’t have anything to do with truth, honor, clarity, the search for agreement, or whatever. Words are just wartime tools — grenades, landmines, fogs of poison gas, any weapon needed to get victory. Their media pals are the infantry.
Year after year, Democrat pro-abortionists insisted that no one dare come between a woman and her doctor over the intensely private, sacred matter of abortion. This was a lie on top of a lie. Usually the doctor wasn’t her own knowledgeable physician at all but an anonymous, cash-hungry abortionist who’d never seen her until she was pinioned on his table.
And a sacred, private medical relationship suddenly counted for exactly nothing when Barack Obama lied his head off with whopper after whopper that people would be able to keep their doctors and health coverage if his national government medical plan was approved.
Obama knew very well that people probably would be forced to change and shrink their health protections while having to pay more — and they’d oppose that. But that didn’t cause a twinge to his calloused conscience because Obama was battling to bend countless innocent people to his socialist grasp.
People who’d just like to earn a living, raise hopefully happy families and go their own way are the bull’s-eye on Big Government’s target. To the Obama-Democrat mindset, everything, in every way, is about pushing left-wing politics.
There’s a political way to think about family size, a political way to think about eating, a political way to think about weather, a political way to think about going to the lavatory. And about owning a home, having a wellness exam, and being suffocated under unlimited illegal immigration.
Big Government totalitarianism is grabbing for you.
With liberal media doing all they could to keep people in the dark about mystery man Obama’s background when he first ran for the presidency, who ever would have thought that by his second term, Obama’s government would be issuing orders that it’s a civil right to invade the opposite sex’s public lavatories and locker rooms?
And that judges would be hammering home this incomprehensible “right” for the sexually troubled to avoid “discrimination”? There must be “safe space” for scared young liberals at university, but no safe space from male predators in the stalls.
Much of contemporary liberalism simply is built on indulgent fantasy, handily prescribed as a sure way to suppress facts.
Anyone can see the facts of prenatal human life on scientific sonograms. So rabid liberals say the facts are trickery that mustn’t be allowed. And what might seem plainer than one’s sexual machinery? So rabid liberals say this doesn’t count; you can be whatever percentage of whatever gender identification you mash into your mind.
Commentator Rod Dreher on April 17 was among those calling attention to University of Washington students on a video who were unwilling to dispute whatever a white male interviewer said about himself. Is he a woman? Is he Chinese? “Good for you.” He’s 5-foot-9, so can he say he’s 6-foot-5? “I feel that’s not my place” to deny his falsely claimed height.
It’s related to the bathroom-locker room debate, and students have been desensitized to reality that offends “the sacred dogma of Self-Definition.”
Dreher wrote at The American Conservative site: “These people are ripe for dictatorship. They will not let themselves see reality if it offends against the party line.”
In an American legal system where the millennia-long historic understanding of marriage is turned on its head by a one-justice margin in 2015, and a few months later people who want to protect their undoubted sexual privacy are branded culpable bigots, anything seems terribly possible to endanger freedom and innocence.
Many very worried people are determined to choose a candidate who’ll actually stand up to oppose what they fear is the end of their world.
New York Values
GOP presidential aspirant Donald Trump couldn’t have been more pleased when Communist China attacked him as an economic threat. Campaigning for the New York primary, billionaire Manhattan developer Trump said this proved his point about China wanting to continue its economic war against the U.S. Once again Trump was the hero of the little guy suffering under the globalists.
And Trump added an important caveat: “And I’m not angry about China, in fact I respect them….I’m angry at our leaders for being so incompetent that they allow it to happen.”
This was the same sort of distinction he’d made about Mexico, whose leaders aren’t dumb, he said; they’re smarter than our own leaders. Trump respects the other guys but thinks the U.S. should meet them on an equal playing field instead of dropping dead.
Noting the Chinese attack on Trump, national radio talk host Laura Ingraham said on April 18 that China has been growing stronger and richer at the expense of U.S. workers, even building its offshore islands to increase its reach.
As long as Trump seems to be connecting with voters, he doesn’t worry about political propagandists in the media. He won voter praise to “Build the wall” even when campaigning in New York, far from the wide-open Southwestern U.S. border.
It’s a fact there are “rape trees” along that border, marking Latino criminals’ sexual conquests. It’s a fact female illegal immigrants take contraceptives before trying to cross, precisely for that reason. Yet hostile media, rather than explaining Trump’s spotlighting “rapists,” howl about his incomprehensible bigotry. Once again, liberal fantasy displaces fact.
Trump’s style may come across as abrasive elsewhere in the U.S., but he fits the stereotype of a New Yorker, and his home state voters rewarded him with a resounding victory in the April 19 GOP primary.
It’s an understandable political game that Trump misrepresented presidential foe Ted Cruz’s earlier criticism of “New York values” as an attack on ordinary Empire Staters. Cruz meant the intolerant bile of someone like New York liberal Democrat Gov. Andrew Cuomo two years ago, telling conservatives to get out of his state.
An opinion piece in the liberal UK Guardian replied to Cuomo on January 24, 2014:
“Cuomo crossed a line by saying anyone who supports traditional marriage or is against abortion is not welcome in New York. While no one would mistake New York for Utah, there’s certainly lots of diversity and ‘traditional values’ in the state, ranging from ultra-orthodox Jewish communities in the Big Apple to Amish in upstate New York. It reinforces (the) stereotype of liberals as tolerant — as long as people are speaking views they agree with.”
Still, Cruz went down to a crushing defeat in the New York primary, finishing even behind limping Ohio Gov. John Kasich.
But Cruz deserves full credit for standing up for proven conservatism and the pro-life cause, and doing so in a way that should recommend him for the second spot on the GOP ticket, should Trump get the presidential nomination. While Trump has muddled his way through abortion questions that he sought to give a pro-life response to, Cruz has been firm, factual, and unblinking.
If Trump’s looking for the experienced kind of guy who can make his projects work, Cruz fits the bill. Or if Cruz gets the top spot, he can see Trump as a formidable success who knows how to close the deal.
Powered by WPtouch Mobile Suite for WordPress