Table for one in Hell…
Posted August 24, 2016on:
Good morning Widdershins.
What say we start with a little thought experiment? Let’s say that Barack and Michelle Obama had a credit card or car loan from the Bank of Bahrain. How would Fox, Drudge, Breitbart, Blimpbaugh, or Hannity react?
Now you are thinking, “Prolix, that is just plain three-legged dog stupid. Of course they would never shut up about it.” For example, Hannity, the dumbest man to ever be paid to talk on teevee and proud Trump adviser, still mentions Bill Ayers every third breath and that illicit entanglement is based on a chance meeting at a 1995 cocktail party.
So where is the outrage when the Republican nominee is in hock to the Bank of China and Russian oligarchs? In a backbreaking piece of research journalism, the New York Times article: Trump’s Empire: A Maze of Debt and Opaque Ties found:
Beyond finding that companies owned by Mr. Trump had debts of at least $650 million to the Bank of China among others, The Times discovered that a substantial portion of his wealth is tied up in three passive partnerships that owe an additional $2 billion to a string of lenders, including those that hold the loan on the Avenue of the Americas building. (A building that alone carries $950 million in loans.)
So where is the outrage when the clamoring Yam doesn’t make good on his commitments to charities, particularly, veteran charities? Or how about a little outrage over evidence of self-dealing when he jacked-up the rent on his own campaign five times higher when contributors started footing the bill?
When there are daily, even hourly, outrages the tongue-wagging press becomes anesthetized to them. Just like beekeepers being immune to stings, the sting of outrage has ceased to make an impression upon the keepers of the Trump press.
Instead the Yam and his Trumpanzees want to focus on the Clinton Foundation. It’s a charity with an “A” rating that enjoys contributions from 300,000 contributors, 90% of whom contribute $100 or less. Its good works have positively affected the lives of 430 million people in over 180 countries, including 31,000 American schools, 11.5 million needing HIV/AIDS drugs, and 85 million people in the U.S. through strategic health partnerships.
And the call is to shut the Clinton Foundation down. Shutter it. Stop the good works – all for a talking point of a two-bit, lying buffoon being choreographed by a racist, nationalistic, purveyor of slime and hatred who wriggled from the fever swamp of Breitbart.
This is the modus operandi of the Alt-right. Throw so much spaghetti on the wall it makes you think an Olive Garden exploded. It’s a perfect scheme now that a human’s attention span is less than that of a goldfish. Mother Jones explains Steve Bannon as the head lizard of the Breitbart fever swamp:
Trump was signaling a wholehearted embrace of the “alt-right,” a once-motley assemblage of anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim, ethno-nationalistic provocateurs who have coalesced behind Trump and curried the GOP nominee’s favor on social media. In short, Trump has embraced the core readership of Breitbart News.
Though disavowed by every other major conservative news outlet, the alt-right has been Bannon’s target audience ever since he took over Breitbart News from its late founder, Andrew Breitbart, four years ago. Under Bannon’s leadership, the site has plunged into the fever swamps of conservatism, cheering white nationalist groups as an “eclectic mix of renegades,” accusing President Barack Obama of importing “more hating Muslims,” and waging an incessant war against the purveyors of “political correctness.”
All of this to feed the prying eyes of those hungering for click-bait. It is the last refuge of those wanting to be seen as something genetically similar to journalists, but too lazy to engage in anything beyond false equivalencies.
With the outrage-o-meter in the red courtesy of the flying monkeys led by the wicked Noodleliani, there are those who camouflage their laziness and Clinton derangement syndrome with an intellectualized Mary Kay sampler kit. A prime case in point is Jonathan Chait, a graduate of the Ryan Lochte Ethics Institute, who writes:
“Give a man a reputation as an early riser,” said Mark Twain, “and he can sleep ‘til noon.” Hillary Clinton finds herself in the opposite situation: She has a reputation for venality — the merits of which we can set aside momentarily — that forces her to a higher ethical standard. Her inadequate response to the conflicts of interest inherent in the Clinton Foundation show that she is not meeting that standard, and has not fully grasped the severity of her reputational problem.
Ultimately, there is no way around this problem without closing down the Clinton Foundation altogether. Passing off management of the foundation to non-relatives or other third parties doesn’t do the trick, either. If the Clinton Foundation is not leveraging the Clinton name, it has no purpose.
Chait is representative of the lazy journalists who pander to the jaundice-eyed skeptics who forego facts for conditional morality. The conditions of their morality are whatever fits their transitory narrative. Presently, that narrative is to reward the Circus Peanut for keeping his clothes on and not howling at the moon as he spews factless, baseless lies.
It is easy to say in hindsight, why didn’t the Clintons change the Foundation accordingly? Their answer is: Change it to what? Here is a leadership truism: If the objective is randomly subjective, why bother? Just do what is right. The lesson is this: No matter what the Clintons might have done eight years ago, it would have made no difference since the standards by which they are judged are constantly evolving to fit the subjective views of those proclaiming the standards. CDS makes ordinary strategic thinking useless, so the Clintons just did what was right. Not politically expedient, but a methodologically practical plan to provide charitable services.
When you consider the Trumpanzees, the flying monkeys, the lazy co-opted press, and the attention-grabbing bobbleheads, what you have left is a coalescing Alt-right world embodied by the Republican Party. It is a world of rumor and innuendo with closed captioning of hate and paranoia. The caricatures of bigotry and prejudices are now the reality of the GOP.
And what is missing throughout this: Not one word about the 430 million poor people whose lives have been made better. Instead, the good work of the Clinton Foundation has been turned into fodder for the promotion of anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim, racist provocateurs. To quote James Carville, “Someone is going to hell over this.”
What’s on your mind today?
61 Responses to "Table for one in Hell…"
Comments are closed.