By Professor Doom
“Yeah, he’s (excrement).”
I have friends on the left side the spectrum, and some of them cite the smears of Kavanaugh on Facebook. When I ask them to post the retractions of the smears…they’re not so eager. Please understand, these are friends with almost no interest in politics, and yet somehow they have a deep hatred of a man who’s likely committed no crimes, has defiitely not been charged with any crimes, very likely hasn’t hurt anyone, and with absolute certainty hasn’t hurt my friends.
But they hate him, have little trouble classifying him as the above, and it doesn’t matter that most of the witnesses have recanted (their obviously bogus) testimony, and that the only witness of any significance has yet to produce any corroborating evidence, and that every co-witness she named has denied her claims.
At the risk of going to Orwell’s 1984 one time too many, the book discussed something called the “Two Minute Hate,” basically a short propaganda film at the end of which the entire audience would be screaming for the blood of, and would happily physically tear to pieces, whatever enemy of the state featured in the film.
Trying to explain to my friends how they’re being manipulated exactly as Orwell predicted accomplishes nothing, not even the very few of my friends who’ve actually read the book.
And so Kavanaugh is doomed to spend the rest of his life looking over his shoulder in fear of this crowd of people who hate him with incandescent passion. I’m troubled by this, but the gentle reader must understand that it’s not only Kavanaugh who is the target of Two Minute Hate:
: UF students plot to silence Donald Trump Jr., Kimberly Guilfoyle in leaked messages
Another odd thing about the Left is how they move with all the coordination of a school of fish, and I’m not merely referencing the Leftist/Mainstream media here. The Right, for lack of a better term, doesn’t seem to coordinate nearly so well, and certainly doesn’t do so nearly as surreptitiously.
To set the scene, Donald Trump Jr and Kimberly Guilfoyle (advisor in the presidential campaign of the “sexist” Trump, though many are too filled with hate to see anything contradictory there…) were scheduled to speak on campus. As is so often the case with “conservative” speakers, their presence, although invited, was nevertheless unwelcome.
I know such is hardly news, but it’s the vitriol from the students which really surprises me:
…inviting Trump Jr. and Guilfoyle, students were funding “blatant corruption” with their student fees. Many also referred to the pair as “racists.”
I won’t go far as to say Trump isn’t corrupt…I just would like more evidence than anonymous whistleblowers giving secondhand testimony which is demonstrably false. The endless smears from the like allow poorly informed students to become filled with hate, much as the endless cries of RACIST do the same (although there’s more than sufficient evidence that Trump, who was in the public eye for over 30 years before anybody “noticed” he was so rabidly racist, is no racist).
The linked article documents many of the students indicating how they’ll ruin the event. I’m more than willing to just call this foolish kids blowing off steam, but there’s more to it than that.
A UF staff member, for example, asks students to get their free tickets…then throw them away, thereby preventing students who want to hear what Trump/Guilfoyle have to say from doing so. Why is hearing information directly, instead of filtered through our obviously corrupted mainstream media, such a problem?
Instead of open debate and encouraging students to listen, the smears come from every direction on campus:
College Democrats signed onto a …The resolution criticizes the pair’s “hateful, bigoted, and offensive beliefs.”
UF’s student newspaper, , also expressed student frustration to Trump Jr. and Guilfoyle’s speech. An accused ACCENT of harboring “conservative bias” for speakers, and suggested Trump Jr. should not have been invited to campus because he “has little to sell in the marketplace of ideas” and because “no one would ever mistake him for being an intellectual.” A letter to the editor ACCENT for inviting a “hatemonger,” but offered no explanation of how Trump Jr. fit that description.
To their credit, UF has called for “respectful” protest, but they really should ask questions for why the student newspaper and College Democrats decided to engage in such smears.
The comments section, amazingly enough, highlights the real divide between Right and Left we have now.
First, a comment from the right, which I’ll enlarge so the gentle reader can refer back to it later:
It is time to introduce a new requirement for a university to be recognised. Each student, prior to graduation must successfully, calmly and rationally, engage in a civil discussion with a professional with an opposing political perspective. The topic may vary but the student must show the ability to directly address arguments and to support their own arguments with objective evidence.
The above strikes me as a reasonable (if unworkable) request, made in obvious response to so many students apparently able to respond to disagreement merely with namecalling and irrational rambling.
But then a leftist responds, inadvertently demonstrating fantastically why the original’s post makes so much sense. Let’s pick apart just some of the response:
I know that your comment was aimed at the left, but it actually magnifies the absolute lack of self awareness suffered by many on the right today.
Of course the subjects would change, you on the right must change topics whenever your BS is uncovered. Never conceding to a view different than your own.
What? I encourage the gentle reader to re-read that post, the above is a bizarre response by a wide margin. It continues:
I have not met a Republican lately that has any idea how to calmly and rationally debate their political beliefs. Not on TV nor in everyday life.
I can’t help but suspect this leftist has met very few Republicans in general.
And did you say "objective evidence"? Did you mean actual facts? Or what you believe to be the facts?
So cringeworthy! The original said “objective evidence” and nothing more. Interpretation of the evidence is where the argument, rational or otherwise, comes. For example, the number of poor peasants declined dramatically under Stalin’s reign. That’s objective evidence.
The Left interprets this evidence to mean Stalin made Russia wealthier, while the Right argues that Stalin’s policies killed many peasants.
But with leftists on the record as saying facts don’t matter as long as you have the moral high ground, and many of them unaware of what “objective facts” are, I worry that rational debate just isn’t an option.
Project much? You have been so conditioned to see your faults in others and rationalize anything wrong on your side.
I remind the gentle reader that the above is in response to a very simple request that college graduates should be able to discuss opposing views calmly and rationally. The screed continues, but I’ll mention just one more snippet:
….the dreams of the true Republicans do not include trash like you…
Seriously, a person is “trash” for asking college students to be able to engage in rational discourse. I yet again point out that this kind of behavior is paid and trained for via the student loan scam, which has turned many of our campuses into little more than indoctrination centers, where even the slightest hint of wrongthink can lead to effusive outpourings of vitriol…and certainly not rational discourse.