Connect with us

Politics

Pro-Trump media voice upset conservatives are leaving the GOP

Published

on

“When an anti-Trump voice in the media announces he’s leaving the Republican party but no one’s there to read it, does it make a sound?”

This pathetically lame attempt at humor was the opening salvo in a pro-Trump opinion piece written for the pro-Trump Washington Examiner over the weekend by Eddie Scarry about Republicans in the media who are leaving the party.

The trigger for Scarry’s opine was an article written by Max Boot for the Washington Post—one of Trump’s favorite targets in his war against freedom of the press. By the way, the owner of the Washington Post is Jeff Bezos, the owner of Amazon which also happens to be one of Trump’s favorite targets.

Despite Scarry’s careless and lazy interchangeable use of the words conservative and Republican—they’re not the same thing—he claims that Boot and others like him should be ignored because “It isn’t newsworthy when a conservative in the media hates Trump” and that “hating Trump in the media comes cheap.”

Using a style all too common whenever #Cult45 defends Trump, Scarry fails to address the reason why Boot and others like him are lining up to leave the GOP. Instead of defending the track record of GOP successes—a tough task since there isn’t one—Scarry uses the tactics most often employed by the man in the White House by attempting to discredit Boot as someone “most people don’t know.”

Besides the fact that I know who he is, Max Boot is a Senior Fellow in national security studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, has been an editor for Christian Science Monitor and The Wall Street Journal, and has authored several books including a New York Times bestseller. Scarry, for the record, used to cover media and politics for Mediaite.com and recently authored a pro-Trump masterpiece entitled, Fraud and Fiction: The Truth behind Fire and Fury.

But here’s the ultimate pro-Trump clincher: Scarry claims that Boot and those like him didn’t leave the GOP; they “left it behind when Trump transformed it.” Scarry also boasted how “[Conservatives] didn’t quit the GOP. The GOP’s voters fired them for contributing nothing valuable to the party since at least 2010.” An ironic claim when you realize that it was conservatives and the TEA Party that gave the GOP control of the House in 2010 in a landslide.

I’m thinking that the non-contributors since 2010 are the Republicans in Congress, not the Republicans in media. But, hey! That’s just me.

As growing numbers of conservatives and Republicans—they’re not the same thing despite Scarry’s sloppy interchangeable use of the words—rush the fire exits to avoid being destroyed in an inferno started by the political arsonist in the White House and fueled by the GOP establishment, the Scarrys, Ingrahams, Coulters, and Hannitys of the so-called conservative media have chosen the wide gate leading to the pro-Trump echo chamber. It’s their right to do so, but they will have no one to blame but themselves when there’s nothing left of the GOP but a pile of ashes.

A parting thought. According to Scarry, Trump has transformed the GOP, meaning that the Party no longer exists. If true, why does he feel the need to discredit those who choose to leave something that he says no longer exists? Could it be that he is disappointed that his sellout to Trump’s brand of faux-conservatism isn’t panning out as he had hoped?

Which reminds me of a line from the 1980s classic movie, The Princess Bride. In the Age of Trump, Mr. Scarry probably needs to…

Originally posted on The Strident Conservative.

 


David Leach is the owner of The Strident Conservative. His politically incorrect and always “right” columns are also featured on NOQReport.com and TheResurgent.com.

His daily radio commentary is distributed by the Salem Radio Network and is heard on stations across America.

Follow the Strident Conservative on Twitter and Facebook.

Subscribe to receive podcasts of radio commentaries: iTunes | Stitcher | Tune In | RSS

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Guns and Crime

Intellectual ammunition, part 3: Armed with logic and a mistake by SCOTUS

Published

on

By

Intellectual ammunition part 3 Armed with logic and a mistake by SCOTUS

Is nuclear annihilation less of a threat than purchasing a lower parts kit?

In the third part of a multipart series, Gardner Goldsmith @gardgoldsmith of MRCTV addresses the issues surrounding Liberty Control, destroying some of the prevalent mythologies in the process.

Which is more intimidating: purchasing an inanimate object or the threat of gun confiscation?

In the beginning of the video, he asks the very pertinent question:

“Who engages in threats of gun violence, the civilian who owns, or attempts to own, a firearm, or the civilian or politician intent on passing ‘gun control’ statutes?”

Which is quite an interesting point in light of the comments from Representative Eric Swalwell (D-CA) who wants the government to make gun owners an offer they can’t refuse on their freedom. Rejecting said offer could see them and millions of other die in a thermonuclear style gun confiscation.

That threat being just the latest of the long list of over 70 instances of Leftists demanding gun confiscation. Note that number could easily be doubled or tripled if one were to account for the number of times those demands were syndicated or excerpted in other publications.

The video details the point that it is the people wanting to impose controls on freedom that are threatening violence – up to and including nuclear genocide. But perhaps if one if of the Liberty grabber set on the Left it’s possible that someone having a scary looking rifle is far more of an issue than the wiping out of an area via nuclear incineration with fallout contaminating everything down wind.

The illogic of so-called ‘Gun-free’ zones.

Further on he addresses question of whether the passage of more and more restrictions on freedom and setting up ‘gun-free’ zones keep people safe? Consider the scenario he proposes in how a mass murderer might select is his target:

And what of the idea that, practically, passing gun statutes will make areas safer? In Part One of this series, we looked at the real-world numbers on that question, but here is a logical argument to pose to gun-grabbers.

Suppose you are in a paintball game. You have a paintball gun, and you will win $10,000 if you enter one of three houses and, in five minutes, hit ten people with pellets. If you get hit by a pellet, you will have to pay $200,000… There are forty people in each house. In House One, you know that there is no one with a paintball gun. In House Two, you know that there are a few people with paintball guns, and in House Three, you know that there are many, many people with paintball guns.

Which house would you choose?

The answer is obvious. Let’s not be foolish about pretending that we would choose anything other than House One.

The logic of self-protection through firearm possession and use is irrefutable. The statistics of it are clear. The history of despots disarming citizens prior to destroying their lives is also clear, as is the history of what the Founders thought when they wrote the Second Amendment.

 

Continue Reading

Democrats

Kamala Harris pushes fraudulent ‘petition’ to build her 2020 fundraising spam list

Published

on

The worlds of marketing and political campaigning have many things in common. Their intention is to persuade people. They’re both selling something. They employ tested colors, designs, and buzzwords to get people excited. One of the keys to their success is something called “list-building.”

With ballots from the 2018 elections still being counted, Senator Kamala Harris is wasting no time building her 2020 list. To do it, she’s employing a deceptive technique, promoting an online “petition” that’s really nothing more than a way to get people to willingly give her campaign their contact information. These people will be targeted with campaign fundraisers later.

No official announcement has been made about her 2020 presidential run, but it’s hard to believe she’s not running after purchasing 1,100 Facebook ads to promote these “petitions.” A Facebook ad doesn’t have a set cost, but we can assume big money is being put into these list-building ads because of the sheer volume. To put it into perspective, Beto O’Rourke spent around $5 million on Facebook ads for his Senate campaign. Presidential campaigns can easily spend 25 times as much as an expensive Senate campaign.

Unlike a valid petition people often sign to get a candidate or proposition on a ballot, these list-building petitions don’t actually do anything. People are told they’re demanding this action or that, but in the end they’re just giving over information. Some go so far as to ask for everything, including name, address, phone numbers, email, and occasionally even income. These lists grow much more slowly because of the depth of the information requested.

A more common technique is to ask for minimal data to encourage people to fill it out. At the end of the day, all a campaign really needs is an email address they can later use in fundraising campaigns. Here’s an example of an ad Senator Harris’ campaign recently put out:

Kamala Harris Petition

The meta data reveals the page was titled, “Acquisition: 180822 Mueller FB.”

“FB” means it was a Facebook campaign. “Mueller” was the topic. “180822” is the tracking number for A/B testing. “Acquisition” is the goal. Anyone who signed this “petition” has just had their contact information acquired. Mission accomplished. They will soon be receiving emails asking them to donate to the Kamala Harris 2020 presidential election fund.

As for the results of the “petition,” they will go nowhere. There won’t be a Congressional action that is enabled by the thousands of people who “signed” it. You won’t see Kamala Harris standing in front of the White House reading off the names of the people who participated in the “petition.” She couldn’t do that even if she wanted to because the “petition” only asks for a first name. Are there really people out there who believe signing a petition only requires a first name?

Senator Harris is promoting fraudulent petitions with the sole purpose if building her 2020 fundraising spam list. Anyone who “signs” it believing they’re demanding protection for Robert Mueller is a sucker. That’s exactly who she wants to target.

Continue Reading

News

Florida update: Rick Scott almost certain to win

Published

on

Florida update Rick Scott almost certain to win

By now, Rick Scott should be transitioning into the Senate and Bill Nelson should be looking for a new job. Instead, we’re having to wait a few more days until it all gets sorted out in the election-challenged state of Florida.

The good news for Scott, the current Republican governor, is that when the dust settles, he will be declared the winner.

Over 4,000 ballots are in bad-signature limbo, meaning they are currently being rejected over signatures that do not match what’s on record in 45 Florida county election offices. No word on how many ballots were rejected in the 22 other Florida counties.

Currently, Nelson trails Scott by around 12,500 votes.

With half a dozen lawsuits crossing the state over every voting issue imaginable right now, there will be legal proceedings that go well beyond the election’s final results. As it stands now, we won’t get those final results until a manual recount. The state’s threshold following a machine recount is .25%. Scott’s lead is currently at .14%.

My Take

It’s better to get elections results right than to get them swiftly. Both sides have used legal maneuvers to promote their causes, and while this can be an annoyance to voters while forcing the rest of the nation to collectively scratch our heads, it’s imperative that they see this all the way through to the end.

Republicans are wrong to be in a hurry to certify results because in such a close race, we as Americans should hope every valid vote is counted and every invalid vote is rejected. They’re in a hurry because there’s nothing to gain for the party by prolonging a race they’ve won. It’s understandable, but misguided.

Democrats are wrong on multiple levels. First, it’s becoming more and more clear that someone, whether it be election officials like Brenda Snipes, secret groups with ballot access trying to cheat, or a combination of the two, is trying to tip the scales in favor of Democrats. Second, some of their delay techniques and legal maneuvers won’t do anything to change the election results but are intended to taint the GOP wins. Third, their attacks through the media on Republicans, including Scott and governor-elect Ron DeSantis, have been unnecessarily brutal.

While it’s very likely Rick Scott will be declared the winner… someday… this latest series of incidents highlights two things: Florida’s election incompetence and forces working on behalf of Democrats to steal elections any way they can.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement Donate to NOQ Report

Facebook

Twitter

Trending

Copyright © 2018 NOQ Report