The standard liberal mentality is to blame others. When a liberal sees a friend or someone in their family do something bad, they blame the system, the elites, or some other esoteric classification of “anybody but us.” When a liberal sees someone they don’t know fall into the hands of crime or perversion, they blame society. When a liberal sees their candidates lose, they blame the vast right-wing conspiracy.
Some are reporting that there could be 100 million people watching the first debate between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. Moderator Lester Holt will be alone in his duties of asking the questions. We’ll all be paying attention to the answers, but the questions themselves are actually equally or more important.
This weekend, I will be posting on The New Americana about how the Ted Cruz endorsement of Donald Trump for President is the rallying call conservatives have needed to finally break free from the bonds of the GOP in order to form a new conservative party. This was based upon initial reactions from many NeverTrumpers who looked to Cruz as a leader. Their reactions were not as Trump or Cruz had likely hoped.
For the third time in less than a week, I’m forced to invoke a book that I actually didn’t really like. Atlas Shrugged is a classic that made some great points about free market capitalism and personal responsibility, but it was a militantly anti-Christian story that glorified “enlightened” thinking outside of Biblical doctrine. Still, there are things that we can take away from it that are worth noting.
It’s easy to find irony in comparing Donald Trump to the villain in George Orwell’s Animal Farm. First, the fact that Orwell was a socialist might make the comparison something of a compliment in the eyes of Trump supporters who either haven’t read it or are unfamiliar with its meaning. Second, the villain, a pig named Napoleon, represents Joseph Stalin, one of the early leaders of the Soviet Union.
Leave it to politicians to politicize common sense. That’s what happening on both sides of the aisle when it comes to voter identification, though Democrats are pressing the bounds of politicization much further. The latest example is the Supreme Court’s unwillingness to address a North Carlina voter ID law struck down by a lower court.
Communist-style state-run journalism is alive and well in the United States. We’ve seen the Trumpeters at Breitbart and Drudge make a mockery of their “conservatism” by hopping on the Trump train hard. We’ve seen CNN this week fire Dr. Drew after he questioned Hillary Clinton’s health. Now, Huffington Post has joined the attack on dissenting views by terminating David Seaman and removing his stories that also questioned Hillary’s health.
It’s not news to most of us that Donald Trump has performed an almost flawless 180-degree back flip on deporting illegal immigrants. It was the staple of his campaign for a year. It was the very issue upon which he launched his successful bid to win the GOP nomination.
Arguably the most prominent argument made by pro-Trump conservatives is that Hillary Clinton will load up the Supreme Court with activist liberals if she’s the President. This is partially true, but there’s a more important thing to consider: the scenarios. Let’s look at those scenarios to understand why the best-case-scenario among likely outcomes in this election cycle for the Supreme Court is if Trump loses by a huge margin.
It wasn’t too long ago when I was proud to declare that I operated a handful of conservative news sites. It was a badge of honor to wear the stripes of opposition against both the liberal mainstream media as well as the progressive slant of the vast majority of social media sites and blogs on the internet. They had the numbers but we had the high ground. Now, I have to distinguish that I’m part of the “other side” of conservative media that hasn’t devolved to the point of utilizing leftist Alinskyite tactics to try to sway readers.