The Morning Briefing: Trump Triggers the Israel Haters
While it is true that President Trump's mere presence in the White House is a constant thorn in the sides of leftists everywhere, it is often quite entertaining when he takes things up a notch and deliberately goads them. Those of us who spent years waiting for someone who wasn't a career politician to win the presidency were hoping for this kind of entertainment.
He is at his absolute best when he is saying things that other Republicans won't say, even though they desperately need to be said:
Republicans and conservatives all over this great land have long been puzzled by the large numbers of American Jews who vote for Democrats, especially since the party has become more welcoming of people who are not openly hostile to Israel, but virulently anti-Semitic.
The always awful mainstream media is now busy with their millionth attempt to portray the president as Hitler II because he used the word "disloyalty."
They are REALLY reaching to make that point:
Mr. Trump did not go into specifics about what he considered to be Jews’ disloyalty, but his language was reminiscent of the anti-Semitic smear that Jews have a “dual loyalty” and are more devoted to Israel than they are to their own countries.
It wasn't reminiscent of that at all. There is no reading or twisting of that which makes it so. This is something the Trump haters are manufacturing out of whole cloth.
A longtime conservative acquaintance of mine who is Jewish summed it up well on Twitter:
The MSM is using this as a shiny object to distract from the fact that two vile anti-Semites are their new favorites.
The Democrats have a number of voting blocs they rely on and no one is ever supposed to question why any of them keep voting the way they do. I am a practicing Roman Catholic and I don't understand how millions of other Catholics can vote for politicians who belong to a party that is now positively gleeful about abortion.
It's legit for anyone to question things like that. In fact, they are questions that should be asked.
The Trump Derangement Syndrome is so strong in the MSM that it is a safe bet to assume that any coordinated message being reported about the president is the opposite of what's true.
That's not cynicism, it's realism.
LOL of the Week Already
We all know about the overt anti-Trump bias at The New York Times, which is the product of a brain-dead editorial vision at the paper. Sometimes they are so laughably awful one wonders if any of the decision-makers there have ever been more than five feet away from another Manhattan liberal for more than ten minutes at a time in their entire lives.
On Tuesday, the fish wrap of record published an Opinion piece written by John McCain's last chief of staff that -- I kid you not -- urged Democrats to be more like Maverick if they want to take back the White House.
The subtitle of the post is a riot:
Democrats should follow the example of my boss, John McCain, in avoiding divisive politics.
The analysis in the article is lengthy and mostly ridiculous. Then again, the central premise of it is that the Democrats can win back the White House by emulating a guy who got shellacked the one time he ran for president. There aren't any logical roads to take from there.
John McCain's legacy is getting a rewriting that most politicians probably dream will happen to them one day.
The Democrats love the John McCain they had at the end because he hated Trump. I won't go into detail here about why all of the revisionist history is laughable. It was so mind-boggling when McCain died that I wrote about it a few days afterward, which got me some nasty mentions on other sites.
Google "McCain a hothead" if you want to see how non-divisive the MSM thought Maverick was when he ran for president.
Here's a little something from a Newsweek article in 2000 titled "Senator Hothead":
Of the 55 republicans in the U.S. Senate, only four support John McCain for president. Most of the rest--39 in all, with two more signing on last week--back George W. Bush. Why can't McCain win the votes of his own colleagues? To explain, a Republican senator tells this story: at a GOP meeting last fall, McCain erupted out of the blue at the respected Budget Committee chairman, Pete Domenici, saying, "Only an a--hole would put together a budget like this." Offended, Domenici stood up and gave a dignified, restrained speech about how in all his years in the Senate, through many heated debates, no one had ever called him that. Another senator might have taken the moment to check his temper. But McCain went on: "I wouldn't call you an a--hole unless you really were an a--hole." The Republican senator witnessing the scene had considered supporting McCain for president, but changed his mind. "I decided," the senator told NEWSWEEK, "I didn't want this guy anywhere near a trigger."
On the off chance that the Times piece didn't convince you that John McCain was a once-in-a-generation political bridge-builder, The Washington Post also ran an article about Maverick on Tuesday. This one was written by his widow Cindy, who assures us that he was a man of great "civility" and that we can all "learn from him."
Maybe, but I don't think "how to calm things down and be nicer to each other" is one of them.
Off we go to Link Land.
From the Mothership and Beyond
The Kruiser Kabana
This is the first of a two-parter. I'll have Rickles' response tomorrow. Thinking about how many snowflake SJWs would be triggered by Foster Brooks today makes this even more fun to watch.
Dance like no one is watching but assume the NSA is. Happy Hump Day.
Stephen Kruiser is the author of “Don’t Let the Hippies Shower” and “Straight Outta Feelings: Political Zen in the Age of Outrage,” both of which address serious subjects in a humorous way. Monday through Friday he edits PJ Media’s “Morning Briefing.”