Connect with us

Everything

Acceptable losses

Published

on

We’ve all seen the scene in some Hollywood movie or TV episode.

It’s time for the climactic battle, an apocalyptic clash of good against evil. The conflict is titanic. In the chaos, innocent citizens perish in the crossfire, or thousands of soldiers die in the push to retake a crucial point on the field. Perhaps a general even disobeys an order, or does something ghastly, in order that good may triumph.

As the tableau winds down, some halcyon time after the battle, that grizzled old general is being grilled by a committee or a reporter or a fellow soldier about all those who died. So many perished, the credulous questioner asks. So many lines crossed. What was it all for?

And the general scowls through squinted eyes, grits his teeth a little harder. “Acceptable losses,” he’ll say. And then he talks about how it haunts him, but it was all necessary to achieve victory over an uncompromising evil. Play jaunty patriotic tune. Fade to black.

Many mainstream media personalities – especially those at the New York Times, the Washington Post, and CNN – probably see themselves as this strong-jawed general. Their climactic battle is the fight against the most powerful man in America, a man who seems determined to convince the country that the news they report is largely “fake.”

In the face of this threat, these pundits react with vengeful wrath. Behind the scenes, I’m sure some fault President Trump for targeting the product they peddle, threatening their business. Many fear that he’s an authoritarian who wants to chill hard-hitting reporting with his rhetoric. The very freedom of the press is at stake, they exclaim, wide-eyed.

And some just don’t like him much.

So they punch back. Hour after hour, day after day, week after week, on and on. The flailing blows to Trump and his administration come so fast they seem like a blur. Some glance off Teflon Don; others hit him square in the jaw. They know they’ve got him riled when he goes on Twitter to rake one of them over the coals. This spirit infects their places of business, with the most audacious voices promoted until their screeds receive special treatment, both in the newsroom and on social media.

And the screed-makers’ heads grow at the same rate as their megaphones.

So what if a few false claims are made? So what if journalistic procedures aren’t perfectly followed? We are the tip of the Resistance’s spear, they rationalize. This is war, and Trump must die for the nation to live.

But in their quest to resist Trump, these pundits and the networks who house them have lost their way.

It’s happened far too often since November. Someone makes a claim, sometimes anonymously sourced, usually about Trump. Its authenticity or wisdom is questioned by the broader public. The network may retract the claim, fire the offender, or stand by the report. Regardless, the thing has been said.

And then there was yesterday.

Trump tweeted an old video clip of himself at a wrestling event tackling and fake-punching a dude with the CNN logo superimposed over his face. Like most Trump tweets, it was dumb and sophomoric, but played well to his base.

Then Andrew Kaczynski of CNN decided it would be a good idea to find the personal information of the Reddit user who had created the GIF and . . . get in touch with him.

I can imagine how that conversation went. “That’s a nice address and phone number you’ve got there. Be a shame if someone were to make it public.”

The chastened Redditor hastily, profusely, and publicly apologized. But as of this writing, Kaczynski’s article remains up on CNN’s website, along with the haunting line: “CNN reserves the right to publish [the Redditor’s] identity” should his apologetic behavior change.

This goes beyond a lapse in professional judgment. It tiptoes dangerously close to extortion and blackmail. The fact that something like this is deemed acceptable at CNN, one of the foremost voices in news media, should be enough to question their integrity as an organization.

Like so many others in the past several months, this piece of reporting makes it clear that to the media wing of the Resistance, journalistic ethics are less important than the next beachhead. There must be a stopping point to their anti-Trump frenzy, or else the moral losses accompanying their assaults will no longer be acceptable under any reasonable standard.


Connor Mighell is a third-year law student at The University of Alabama School of Law with an undergraduate degree in Political Philosophy from Baylor University. He is a staff writer at SBNation and The New Americana, and his work has also been featured at The Federalist and Merion West. He may be found on Twitter at @cmigbear.

Politics

Polls show Trump, the GOP, and Trumpservative media sinking fast

Published

on

Polls show Trump the GOP and Trumpservative media sinking fast

According to several recent polls, Trump’s job approval and personal popularity have continued to fall as the GOP tries to find ways to survive in November.

While the pro-Republican Rasmussen Reports released a poll showing an increase in Trump’s job approval to 50 percent, other polls paint a much different picture of the NY liberal.

Gallup is reporting that Trump’s job approval rating has dropped to 39 percent, and a Quinnipiac University National Poll shows that only 31 percent of American voters like him as a person while 59 percent dislike him—a 2-1 ratio against Trump.

As Quinnipiac assistant director Tim Malloy accurately observed, these are “not the kind of numbers that gets you a date to the prom—or helps your party as the midterm elections approach.”

Another Quinnipiac poll shows that Trump is losing his war against the media with 65 percent of voters stating that the news media is important to democracy, while only 26 percent agree with Trump’s claim that the media is the enemy of the American people. Unfortunately, the party owned, operated, and rebranded in Trump’s image is the exception to the overall results, with 51 percent of Republicans agreeing with Trump.

As I wrote a few weeks ago when Trump banned CNN from a White House event, so-called conservative White House Correspondent Jon Miller with CRTV praised Trump for attacking CNN reporter Kaitlan Collins. A few days after that incident, I reported on Sean Hannity’s defense of Trump supporters after they threatened CNN reporter Jim Acosta at a Florida rally.

Trump recently bragged about being the most popular Republican with the Democrat party since Abe Lincoln, but these recent polls tell a different story. What little popularity and job approval he still has is limited to just over half of Trumplicans and Trumpservatives and is propped up by media outlets like CRTV and FOX News.

Last week I wrote about how the struggles historically experienced by the party occupying the White House, along with documented evidence of Democrats outperforming projections in special elections, made predictions of a Blue Tsunami in November very real. And when you take the long list of broken promises by Trump and the GOP and add that to these recent polls, the only question remaining is how serious the damage will be when tsunami strikes.

Originally posted at The Strident Conservative.

 


David Leach is the owner of The Strident Conservative. 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

Opinions

Conservative Picks for the Minnesota Primary

Published

on

Conservative Picks for the Minnesota Primary

Minnesota has a lot of action and potential relative to other states. Minnesota has three blue districts Donald Trump won in 2016. This means the right candidate can come along and upset the “blue wave” or at least mitigate potential losses. Minnesota is hopeful because in almost every race, there’s at least one candidate that doesn’t suck. It would be nice to see a little more enthusiasm in the Senate races(courtesy of Al Franken.) The GOP can look to make progress in what has been a staunchly blue state for decades. Minnesota has become redder with each of the last three presidential elections, so the Democrats reign is in trouble.

Best Picks: Jim Newberger, Tom Emmer, Jen Zielinski
Worst Picks: Carla Nelson
Best Race: District 7
Worst Race: Senate Special Election

US Senate Special Election

Karin Housely is the GOP favorite in this race. However she comes off as a RINO who would expand the debt. Her stint in the State Senate shows she really isn’t all that Conservative despite having a more Conservative 2017 session, which every other Republican did as well, so it seems. She doesn’t impress up front. Her main opponent is Bob Anderson. Anderson fancies himself as an outsider. He comes off as a populist rather than a Conservative, but that is preferable to the shining RINO that Housely would likely be. Anderson is anti-establishment so he is more likely to shake things up.

Conservative Pick: Bob Anderson

US Senate

The most serious candidate here seems to be Jim Newberger. As a rep in the Minnesota House, Newberger has an outstanding record. For that reason, it’s a good thing for Conservatism that he may walk into a easy victory here in an underwhelming race. Merrill Anderson is a populist and perhaps a conspiracy nut. He doesn’t reasonably stand a chance. Roque De La Fuente is literally running for Senator in every state that has loose enough residency requirements. He isn’t Conservative. He is not the pick here, but he understands taking chances.

Conservative Pick: Jim Newberger

District 1

Jim Hagedorn looks to reclaim he seat he barely lost in 2016. This is district went red for Trump, yet he lost by less than 1%. His main opponent is Carla Nelson, a state rep. She is ACU’s lowest ranking Republican in 2016 and was tied for a repeat in 2017. She is no Conservative.

Conservative Pick: Jim Hagedorn

District 2

Jason Lewis is the highest rated Congressman in the state. He’s not a perfect Conservative, but deserves another term. He is unopposed.

District 3

Erik Paulsen is an unchallenged RINO.

District 4

Greg Ryan is an unchallenged RINO.

District 5

Jen Zielinski seems to be the GOP favorite in this race. She seems to have the potential to shrink the government. She also wants to make the Republican Party the “Party of Choice.” This is good branding for incorporating issues such as school choice. The other candidates don’t appear to be as serious.

Conservative Pick: Jen Zielinski

District 6

Tom Emmer hasn’t done a terrible job in Congress. His Liberty score of 69 shows a more fiscally responsible Republican than a typical RINO. He faces the same two challenges as he did last time around. Neither of these candidates are particularly inspiring enough to warrant a course change.

Conservative Pick: Tom Emmer

District 7

David Hughes looks for a rematch after losing by 5% in 2016. Hughes is a solid Conservative by looks. His platform is right of Trump on immigration and healthcare. His opponent Matt Protch is campaigning as an outsider. Rather than a populist, he actually seems Conservative. This race is winnable for the GOP so Hughes is perhaps the best bet here. But he lost a race where Trump won. This indicates weak campaigning. So perhaps its time to invest in someone new? However Collin Peterson has been in since 1990, too long. He’s also way more vulnerable in an increasingly red district. Perhaps Hughes can win with a second chance, now that he potentially has more name recognition. Or perhaps Protch is the choice.

Conservative Pick: David Hughes?

District 8

The most serious candidate here is Pete Strauber who seems like a regular Republican, and that comes with a bad connotation. This is another flippable seat in Minnesota.

Conservative Pick: Pete Strauber

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

Pro-life Trumpservatives praise Trump for protecting unborn babies he isn’t protecting

Published

on

Pro-life Trumpservatives praise Trump for protecting unborn babies he isnt protecting

Lately, it seems that not a day goes by where we aren’t provided with another example of how conservative values have been consumed by the fires of compromise on the altar of Trumpservatism. While sacrificing principles for power is commonplace for the GOP priests serving in the Temple of Trump, the sad reality is that real priests, pastors, and other religious leaders have provided the kindling and the oil that fuels the flames.

One of the tragic consequences coming from the rise of the group I refer to as the Fellowship of the Pharisees concerns abortion. In the Age of Trump, these false teachers have abandoned their defense of the unborn under the delusion that Trump is keeping his promises.

On her blog (civilrightsfortheunborn.org), Dr. Alveda King, the niece of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., wrote a piece responding to recent accusations made by Omarosa Manigault Newman that Donald Trump often uses racial slurs. *

* NOTE: While her claims may or may not be true, Trump is taking advantage of this “squirrel” moment to let America know that Omarosa is a “low life” even though he frequently brags about how he hires only the “best people.”

After making her case in defense of Trump, King concluded with these words:

“He is keeping his campaign promises. The job market is better for everyone. Unemployment is at an all-time low. Babies and children are safer inside and outside the womb. Prayer is returning to the public square.” (emphasis mine)

King’s claim is not only untrue, but the lives of the unborn continue to grow more perilous … and profitable.

Besides the fact that Trump and the GOP have continued to fund Baby Butchers, Inc. (Planned Parenthood), the byproduct of their murderous practices (body parts) has become another revenue stream, courtesy of the taxpayer—an income stream that has increased under Republican control of Washington.

A few days ago, we learned about a contract between the US Food and Drug Administration and Advanced Biometric Resources (ABR) to acquire human fetal tissue for experiments on mice. In a 2016 Senate Judiciary Committee report, we learned that ABR’s primary source of baby parts was Planned Parenthood.

Trump and the GOP allegedly created the “most pro-life platform ever” in 2016, and they promised to defund Planned Parenthood and bring an end to dismemberment abortions. Despite candidate Trump’s pro-Planned Parenthood sentiments at the time, so-called pro-life activists believed he would fulfill the GOP’s promise. But as we learned earlier this year, they have no intention of doing so.

Unfortunately, those who used to defend the unborn baby in the womb have chosen to defend the unethical baby in the White House. Meanwhile, there will be hundreds of thousands more slaughtered babies, thanks to cowards like Trump, the GOP, and so-called religious leaders.

Originally posted on The Strident Conservative.

 


David Leach is the owner of The Strident Conservative. 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

NOQ Report Daily

Advertisement

Facebook

Twitter

Advertisement Donate to NOQ Report

Trending

Copyright © 2017 NOQ Report.