The Left’s Selective Moral Outrage

[Separatist]

http://www.godarchy.org/2017/01/06/the- ... l-outrage/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Tweets and tomes will break my bones but bombs will never hurt me.

A few weeks ago, Huffington Post columnist Michelangelo Signorile wrote an open letter to a “a long-time, long-distance friend” who voted for Donald Trump. Sigmorile basically said he could no longer associate with this individual because of his vote.

“How could I continue a friendship with you knowing that you voted for rolling back my rights as a gay man – most of Trump’s cabinet choices are vehemently opposed to LGBT rights – and the rights of millions of women and people of color?”

Signorile went on, building a moral case for disassociating with Trump supporters, no matter what reason they may have had for casting their vote.

“You’re too informed, too aware to just have blindly followed Trump. And my only conclusion is that the dark, ugly bigotry of this man was dismissed by you, tolerated by you. That’s unacceptable. You allowed for the legitimacy of white supremacists and a brutal misogyny we have never seen at this level of politics.”

You get the idea. Trump’s character and his potential policies are so deplorable, Signorile can’t, in good conscience, associate with anybody who tolerates them. He’s not alone. His open-letter resonated strongly with many on the left.

I can certainly understand why Signorile reviles Trump. And while I wouldn’t take this approach, I can appreciate his willingness to stand on principle and disassociate from a person he believes holds morally reprehensible views. Here’s my problem with Signorile and many on the left who share his viewpoint.

They supported a warmonger.

Trump has said plenty of revolting things. But his words pale in comparison with the policies Hillary Clinton actually had a hand in implementing. Hillary was a principle architect of “regime change” in Libya. “We came, we saw, he died.” She supported and actively pursued “regime change” in Syria – a disastrous policy that helped empower ISIS and resulted in the deaths of thousands of innocent people. She rattled sabers at Russia during the campaign. Her foreign policy positions were so aggressive, she became the darling of neoconservatives warmongers.

On top of that these same people support Barack Obama. I’ve seen many who condemn Trump as a monster literally fawning over the president – a man with a kill list.

In fact, Obama and Clinton directed foreign policy virtually identical to George W. Bush. You know, the guy these same progressives decried as a war criminal (And rightly so).

So, the same people who want to stand on some kind of moral pedestal and disassociate from people because they supported a guy who says bad things have no problem actively supporting murderers? They wag their finger at Trump voters for tolerating Trump’s “dark, ugly bigotry,” while completely dismissing the actual violence unleashed on the world through the policies of Clinton, Obama and their minions.

I don’t get it.

Tom Woods made a similar observation after reading the headline “Gospel Singer’s ‘Ellen’ Appearance Canceled After Anti-Gay Sermon.”

“Oddly, I never read this headline: Hillary Clinton’s ‘Ellen’ Appearance Canceled After She Destroyed Two Countries…The same celebrity leftists who pride themselves on being on the morally superior side of every issue, who stand up for the despised and rejected, really couldn’t care less when the despised and rejected are non-Americans.”

People like Signorile and the rest of the leftest Sanhedrin like to parade around with their chins in the air certain of their moral superiority. Quite frankly, I’m not impressed with their selective moral outrage.

[ajax]

From the left wing CounterPunch

He Bombed the Poorest People on Earth
https://www.libertarianinstitute.org/bl ... ple-earth/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

One of the persistent strands in American political life is a cultish extremism that approaches fascism. This was given expression and reinforced during the two terms of Barack Obama. “I believe in American exceptionalism with every fibre of my being,” said Obama, who expanded America’s favourite military pastime, bombing, and death squads (“special operations”) as no other president has done since the Cold War.

According to a Council on Foreign Relations survey, in 2016 alone Obama dropped 26,171 bombs. That is 72 bombs every day. He bombed the poorest people on earth, in Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen, Somalia, Syria, Iraq, Pakistan.

Every Tuesday — reported the New York Times — he personally selected those who would be murdered by mostly hellfire missiles fired from drones. Weddings, funerals, shepherds were attacked, along with those attempting to collect the body parts festooning the “terrorist target”. A leading Republican senator, Lindsey Graham, estimated, approvingly, that Obama’s drones killed 4,700 people. “Sometimes you hit innocent people and I hate that,” he said, but we’ve taken out some very senior members of Al Qaeda.”

Like the fascism of the 1930s, big lies are delivered with the precision of a metronome: thanks to an omnipresent media whose description now fits that of the Nuremberg prosecutor: “Before each major aggression, with some few exceptions based on expediency, they initiated a press campaign calculated to weaken their victims and to prepare the German people psychologically … In the propaganda system … it was the daily press and the radio that were the most important weapons.

Take the catastrophe in Libya. In 2011, Obama said Libyan president Muammar Gaddafi was planning “genocide” against his own people. “We knew… that if we waited one more day, Benghazi, a city the size of Charlotte, could suffer a massacre that would have reverberated across the region and stained the conscience of the world.”

This was the known lie of Islamist militias facing defeat by Libyan government forces. It became the media story; and Nato – led by Obama and Hillary Clinton – launched 9,700 “strike sorties” against Libya, of which more than a third were aimed at civilian targets. Uranium warheads were used; the cities of Misurata and Sirte were carpet-bombed. The Red Cross identified mass graves, and Unicef reported that “most [of the children killed] were under the age of ten”.

Under Obama, the US has extended secret “special forces” operations to 138 countries, or 70 per cent of the world’s population. The first African-American president launched what amounted to a full-scale invasion of Africa. Reminiscent of the Scramble for Africa in the late 19th century, the US African Command (Africom) has built a network of supplicants among collaborative African regimes eager for American bribes and armaments. Africom’s “soldier to soldier” doctrine embeds US officers at every level of command from general to warrant officer. Only pith helmets are missing.

It is as if Africa’s proud history of liberation, from Patrice Lumumba to Nelson Mandela, is consigned to oblivion by a new master’s black colonial elite whose “historic mission”, warned Frantz Fanon half a century ago, is the promotion of “a capitalism rampant though camouflaged”.

It was Obama who, in 2011, announced what became known as the “pivot to Asia”, in which almost two-thirds of US naval forces would be transferred to the Asia-Pacific to “confront China”, in the words of his Defence Secretary. There was no threat from China; the entire enterprise was unnecessary. It was an extreme provocation to keep the Pentagon and its demented brass happy.

In 2014, the Obama’s administration oversaw and paid for a fascist-led coup in Ukraine against the democratically-elected government, threatening Russia in the western borderland through Hitler invaded the Soviet Union, with a loss of 27 million lives. It was Obama who placed missiles in Eastern Europe aimed at Russia, and it was the winner of the Nobel Peace Prize who increased spending on nuclear warheads to a level higher than that of any administration since the cold war — having promised, in an emotional speech in Prague, to “help rid the world of nuclear weapons”.

Read the entire scathing article here.

[Fiannan]

Not to worry, the left will suddenly be anti-war once Obama is gone.

[eddie]

This liberal tantrum is being driven by ideology as much as by rage at the possibility that someone might take their government handouts away. This applies as much to the protestors themselves as the financial oligarchs who usually fund their operations.

Life for those who live off government in America has been good for a long time now. For the past few decades, and especially since the Global Financial Crisis in 2008, the economic spoils have increasingly gone to the financial elite and the state-dependent rather than the workers and taxpayers in the heartland of America. Productive Americans have been progressively subsidizing the economic parasites. Overall, it’s been a good time to be a liberal in Obama’s America.

While real wages have been declining and debt burdens have been rising for everyday Americans, the liberal establishment has not been concerned. Instead, the left has been obsessed about climate change, transgenderism and demonizing Vladimir Putin.



Inside the palace of the liberal establishment, the fashionable moral crusades have been abstract and driven by ideology rather than by reality. The mounting concerns of the peasantry who feed those inside the palace walls have not been a priority.

With the election of Donald Trump the peasants have stormed the palace, put their bare feet up on the gilt chaise lounge and let the elite know they will no longer submit to the will of a corrupt internationalist oligarchy. It’s a beautiful moment in American history that many have longed for. Things will never be the same again.

As expected, the liberal establishment and the indoctrinated stooges who worship them are throwing a tantrum of the ages. Rather than soul-searching to examine how they got things so wrong, the liberal elite in America are doubling down on their scorn and hatred for the president-elect. Some of them can’t even.

The outrage of the left has become a spectacle that only serves to make liberals look even more ridiculous to the rest of America.

What is enraging the liberal elite is that they are losing control. Paul Krugman has come out lambasting everyday Americans for ensuring that the New York Stock Exchange crashes forever by voting Trump in. In Krugman’s world, it’s the end of American capitalism. Perhaps Krugman knows that it is the plan of Hillary’s Wall St backers to crash the markets to punish the peasants for defying their will.

Instead the Dow closed up 272 points on Wednesday. Yet again the establishment was not able to impose their will on reality. It seems capitalism will continue, just as Krugman will continue with his lunatic scribblings which fewer and fewer people will read. One day he will be gently superannuated, muttering neo-Keynesian gibberish into his beard while enjoying the wealth the establishment has bestowed upon their loyal servant.

Glenn Thrush at Politico has attributed Trump’s landslide victory over Clinton to ‘white rage’ and ‘pure emotion’. In Glenn’s world this must have been the case, because if anyone disagrees with the New Left ideology at the heart of Clinton’s campaign they must be either ignorant or insane. To America’s coastal elites, if you don’t agree with the liberal version of history, you must be uneducated. If you don’t agree with the Cultural Marxists that white men are privileged, toxic sub-humans who must be relegated to the bottom of the social order, then you must be a complete moron.

The way the liberal media speaks about the deplorables who support Trump is as though we are a pack of ravenous animals. Such arrogance is breathtaking.

Should any of the liberal elite still think Trump is stupid, they will soon learn of their mistake. All Obama had to do when he was campaigning was turn up and give a nice speech. His handlers held his hand every step of the way, and have directed him throughout his presidency. Trump on the other hand has strategized to overturn the entire liberal establishment, including the toothless Republican leadership, and has defeated all of them. He may well be the greatest political genius in American history.

Talking heads in the media have enjoyed mocking Trump’s way of speaking. The joke has been on them. Trump’s laconic speech has been strategic. Trump’s biggest political handicap was him being a billionaire. What better way to overcome that problem than by talking simply? While the elites thought they were laughing at Trump, he was laughing straight back. Trump’s plain speech has proven a political masterstroke.

When the liberal elite of America watch Alex Jones vituperate against the globalists, hear Rush Limbaugh rail against Obama or read Ann Coulter call them a cult, they recoil in effete horror. They fear they have encountered some fey subspecies of humanity which does not deserve the same treatment as themselves.

This is the type of mentality common among a degenerate ruling class just prior to full-scale revolution. The peasantry doesn’t mind being ruled; what they cannot abide is being mocked. When Trump baited the liberal elite to deride and ridicule him, he made the rest of America love him. He stood and took the slings and arrows of an arrogant and out-of-touch elite to show the people he is worthy to lead them out from under the rule of an oppressive and corrupt establishment. In doing so, he started to make America great again.



Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/11/10/the-r ... z4WF9xHA3h" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;