Democrats and the hate they love
Oprah, Stacey Abrams, NYT's Paul Krugman, Louis Farrakhan, and the reek of liberal phoniness

(Buzzfeed photo)

To some in politics and journalism, matters like honesty, accuracy, principle, and professional ethics are of less importance than whatever the advancement of ideology demands in a given moment.

On Tuesday morning, Buzzfeed reported that Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams planned to feature celebrity endorser Oprah Winfrey at upcoming rallies.

"There are still generations of people, older people, who were born and bred and marinated in it, in that prejudice and racism, and they just have to die," Winfrey told a 2013 BBC interviewer. 

MSNBC clip: 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tD7QfC0Xjwk

Oprah intoned those words with the reptilian purposefulness of a serenely horrible lunatic. She did not specify white, but it is reasonable to read that ugly meaning into her words. It would strain credulity past the snapping point to suppose she also meant blacks, including herself.

It's safe to assume Abrams doesn't disclose to her rally attendees or TV ad viewers that her high-profile supporter Oprah believes Georgia would be a far better place were they buried.

Like her chosen advocate, Abrams also may want older Georgians dead. But until then, she sure as hell wants their votes.



*****


Winfrey's evil ideation and grisly phraseology were of a part with the contemporary philosophy that, while white racial prejudice was of course a noxious wrong well smashed away, black racism is somehow historically justified and positive.

It's now common for mainstream Democrats to sneer at the entire demographic group 'old white men.' To contemporary bigoted thinking, they are, inherently, a reliably assumed evil for which proof of wrong in individual cases is unnecessary.

Racism is a principle. A disgusting one. It assumes inherent inferiority or superiority according to immutable characteristics, and does not acknowledge individuals' merits. That is nonsensical, unscientific, and retrograde.

It is ugly in every practice. 

Shorn of specifics in this or that reprehensible instance, it must be denounced whenever it raises up its hideous head. It merits equally vigorous denunciation regardless of source or target. 

Liberals once claimed to believe that truth. Today, though, they seem intent on proving their actual disbelief in it whenever politically advantageous.

The moral imperative that demands consistency in condemning bigotry no matter its voice or application is one freely ignored by many politicians and Resistance urgers.

Why, look: many are as near as your cable TV dial or newsstand.



*****



In his 10/29 New York Times column, "Hate is on the ballot next week," Paul Krugman listed several truly despicable, racially prompted crimes against blacks that all good persons would condemn.

"Killing black people is an American tradition," Krugman wrote, as if such horrible actions didn't violate both U.S. laws and faith, and were instead somehow representative of an official national ideal. 

But logic is unimportant to a columnist intent on shoehorning America-hate into his writing.

A deceitful gambit popular of late is ignoring illustrations of liberal bigotry by shouting 'whataboutism.'  Krugman ignobly waved that stunt device.

The crafty canard sweeps aside the work of accounting for examples inconvenient to the Democrat cause, and of justifying the shouter's acceptance of ideological fellows' bigotry.

The underhanded trickery also saves Krugman and like-shouters from addressing, even cursorily, bigotry from their own quarter.

Krugman constructs his odd house on the untruth that no liberal attacks on conservatives exist, save for Democrats shouting at Trump Administration restaurant diners.

Krugman lied, of course.

Last July, Breitbart reported 632 violent acts inspired by hatred of the president had been totaled, nationwide. These included physical assault, theft, property destruction, and arson -- a good deal more serious than mere restaurant shouting. 


Other outlets, including the BBC, Fox, NBC, CNN, the Miami Herald, Investor's Daily, and the Kansas City Star have also spotlighted the many assaults on Trump supporters of which Krugman feigned unawareness.

And all TV viewers are familiar with footage of masked, anti-Trump mobs marauding through city streets, robotically chanting "Not my president!," and visiting violent destruction on everyone and everything they encounter.

Does Krugman believe violence against ideological adversaries is a legitimate tool, one not deserving of condemnation? As Tucker Carlson might ask: Is that really the type of country Krugman wants to live in?



*****


In denying the objective reality of exhaustively documented liberal hate, Krugman and others effectively give a pass to Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan; the stench of hate has for decades surrounded Farrakhan like a foul cloud.

Farrakhan's hateful rhetoric has not for one moment dissuaded powerful Democrats from courting him. Barack Obama, Maxine Waters, Bill Clinton, Keith Ellison, Jesse Jackson, and Al Sharpton are only some liberals who, like Paul Krugman, find bigotry to be no big deal when it is spewed from their camp. 

"The Jews talk about 'never again,'" Farrakhan said, in 2007. "You cannot say 'never again' to God because when he puts you in the oven, you're in one, indeed."

"White people deserve to die," he told rally attendees, a few years ago.

In 1984, Farrakhan said: "The Jews don't like Farrakhan so they call me Hitler. Well, that's a good name. Hitler was a very great man."

Also 1984: "Now, that nation called Israel, never has had any peace in forty years and she will never have any peace because there can never be any peace structured on injustice, thievery, lying, and deceit, and using the name of God to shield your dirty religion under His holy and righteous name."

1994: "Murder and lying comes easy to white people."

1997: "A decree of death has been passed on America. The judgement of God has been rendered, and she must be destroyed."

2000: "White people are potential humans - they haven't evolved yet."

2018: "I'm not anti-Semite. I'm anti-termite."

There are many other, similarly vile Farrakhan quotes. Krugman may soon pen a New York Times column fully explaining why he accepts the bigot Farrakhan and powerful Democrats' allegiance to him. 

Time will tell.