"If you're trying to change minds and influence people it's probably not a good idea to say that virtually all elected Democrats are liars, but what the hell."
Wednesday, August 10, 2016
Scandal Meter must be calibrated differently ...
article by Stu was rejected by The American Thinker. Maybe
they had 8,000 other submissions on topic? I am glad to post it
Stu Tarlowe Stu@Tarlowe.com August 10, 2016
“My Scandal Meter must be calibrated differently from the MSM’s” I
often claim that I have a scandal detector and a Bravo Sierra meter.
For example, Hillary's, Bill's and Obama's speeches at the DNC
practically broke my B.S. meter; they pegged the needle permanently
into the red zone.
my scandal detector must be calibrated far differently from the ones
the Mainstream Media use. For example, my detector showed real scandal
potential in the recent news that an Iranian nuclear scientist, Shahram
Amiri, who had been named and discussed in Hillary Clinton's
compromised e-mails, had been executed by Iran for spying for the U.S.
This seemed to indicate that Benghazi wasn’t the only scandal which
left Hillary with blood on her hands. But, as far as the major "news
services" are concerned, not only did the story sink beneath the waves
with nary a ripple, let alone any significant mention, but Hillary, if
asked about it, would probably say,
"Well, the guy's dead, so at this point what difference does it make?"
It just didn't register on any major news service scandal detector.
My detector also registered the potential scandal in the
that, seated behind Hillary at a recent rally in Florida, in the
highly-visible area usually reserved for those supporters a candidate
wants to show off, was the father of the man who committed the
terrorist attack on the (gay) nightclub in Orlando.
On TV I encountered the story only on an "entertainment news"- type
show, and even there saw or heard no mention that the fellow, Seddique
Mateen, had made a public statement very critical of Donald Trump’s
I had to get all that from "alternative media"; the story, and the
Clinton campaign’s preposterous claim that they didn’t know he was
there or who he was until after the rally, apparently hadn't even moved
the needle on any of the MSM's meters.
Ah, but when Donald Trump quipped that Second Amendment supporters
might know how to prevent or undo Hillary's anticipated stacking of the
Supreme Court, then the MSM's scandal detectors started beeping!
Right away he was castigated far and wide for "advocating violence" and
maybe even suggesting assassination. Such “threats”, the talking heads
were all eager to pile on and tell us (almost in unison!), had no
business coming from a presidential candidate.
It seemed to me that Trump’s very casual, offhand remark might have
more likely been a reference to the actual rationale behind the Second
Amendment, that the People of the United States have a God-given right
to keep and bear the means to resist a tyrannical government.
That used to be understood by all Americans, back when American History
and Civics were still part of the curriculum. Trump might even have
been thinking of the words of Thomas Jefferson, who said (in a 1787
letter from Paris to his friend William Smith) "...What country can
preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time
that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms
[...] The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the
blood of patriots and tyrants."
But to the Libs/Progs/Leftists who inhabit the Obama regime, the
Hillary campaign and the ranks of sycophantic, footlicking
collaborators, enablers, apologists and fellow travelers in the
mainstream press, even those notions (let alone the notion that the
right to resist tyranny comes from God, rather than from Government)
set off their scandal detectors!