Skip to main content

On the Media, Democrats, Compassion and North Korea:


North Korea really exposed priorities of a whole lot of people as far as I'm concerned. The need to tear down Trump was far far more important than the people of North Korea. Who really cares about Kim? No one on the Left. Who cares about the people of North Korea? No one on the Left.

Trump accomplished an unprecedented bringing together of North and South Korean leaders and all of a sudden our media and Democrats wouldn't shut up about how immoral it would be to let Kim get away with past horrors.

The *solution* was to insist that those horrors continue?

Or maybe they wanted us to go in for some international assassination action? But no.

Just months before, just a few months before, the media and Democrats were warning about how Trump wasn't nice enough! They were horrified that Trump insulted "Rocket Man" Kim! And they were praising Kim's elegant, cosmopolitan sister at the Olympic winter games and the *delicious* way she threw shade on Vice President Pence.

The people of North Korea didn't come into the question at all. It's as though they weren't even real to our media or the Democrats.

I mean, if someone wants to point out how doing everything possible to undermine progress with North Korea was showing even the least bit of *compassion* to the people of North Korea, they should go ahead and try.
I found it all horrifying.

And the rhetoric? Oh, if you're not calling for Kim to be arrested and tried for his crimes, you were a horrible person. The self-righteousness of it all. It was breathtaking.

The "journalists" accosting Trump and trying to force him into calling Kim a monster (and he certainly is one) when doing so would have completely destroyed the work that had been done?

I have to believe that real evil exists in the world. On the one side you've got a tyrant like Kim, raised to it. On the other side you've got Journalists wallowing in their self-righteousness but working as actively for the cause of a monster like Kim as if they were raised to it by a monstrous father. So on which side of that does actual evil occupy?

And a few months earlier the exact same people really were gushing over Kim's equally monstrous sister.

They really were.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Tyranny.gov vs Tyranny.com

Compulsion is Compulsion, no matter who does it.  This is Brilliant Theft is Theft, no matter who does it. Freedom of Association has no room in it for *private* action   that takes that away Freedom of Association. If I have a business and have voluntary associations such that I choose to serve some people and to not serve others, that might make me a jerk and it might lose me business, it might make me smart and it might gain me business, but it's got to be my choice.  If I would normally serve the current disliked minority in my shop except for the fact that if I'm SEEN to serve them by the wrong people I'll have a private campaign against me as those people do everything possible to ruin me by preventing me from doing business physically or by attacking my customers or suppliers, then I am NOT free to make those choices. Does it really make a difference to losing my CHOICE to voluntarily associate if there's a law that says I may not serve "those people" o...
Post a Comment
Read more

Some times some people.

 
Post a Comment
Read more

What Cancel Culture is NOT

  Maybe we should talk about what cancel culture isn't. It's not a boycott.  It's not deciding to no longer go to a business. It's not giving a bad review for bad service. It generally involves two things. First, the offense is a matter of opinion. Second, secondary or even tertiary targets are threatened. Cancellation does not need to be successful, and often with very famous and wealthy people it is not successful. But it serves as a warning to vulnerable people who are not in a position to weather that kind of attack. The goal is terroristic in that it's about forcing social behavior in people who are not currently the subject of the attack. The message is always, this could happen to you. And the tactic invariably includes seeking out vulnerable people to threaten in order to put pressure on businesses or on the target of the attack. So it works like this: JK Rowling is invulnerable. But they can try, right? So what they do is they find out who works for the pub...
Post a Comment
Read more