Most of the opposition’s comments in this series landed on the first post in the series. Why? Well, here are my guesses.
- The post was a straightforward defense of Donald Trump. There was no mention of H. Clinton. So H. Clinton’s supporters could attack Trump’s supposed narcissism without much fear they would have to defend H. Clinton.
- The topic is fuzzy. Everyone knows Trump supporters would not stand by him if he started shooting people in the street, but it sounds awful to gun control freaks. Apparently, since sensitive souls can’t take such talk we must condemn it. Still, I wonder how such sensitive souls survive all the violence in the mass media.
Anyway, I would like to thank the commenters.
silenceofmind took the time to remind us that the news media’s bias has become dangerous to our republic. He also pointed out that “one of THE Donald’s attributes that is so attractive is that he is completely unsullied by political correctness”.
novaDemocrat (AKA novascout) fomented confusion. He described Trump’s utterance as useless braggadocio, even going so far as to say that people understood what Trump meant when they first heard the remark out of context. Shrug! He is entitled to his opinion.
Stephen thought Trump’s hyperbole imprudent.
But Prudence would dictate that you should not make such violent, hyperbolic statements to begin with.
Here is a list of examples of hyperbole. Here is an explanation of hyperbole as a literary device. People use hyperbole because exaggeration sometimes serves a purpose. If we let the news media deliberately misrepresent what people say to us, at some point we must blame ourselves for wilful ignorance.
Tony only made one comment (here), but it was a doozy. Here we get an elaborate explanation of how we choose our leaders the same way we choose our favorite soda pop and a hateful string of unsupported accusations against Trump. That comment simply disregarded the fact of news media bias.
One last observation, really a question. Has Trump manipulated the news media, or has the news media manipulated Trump? I don’t know. There is little doubt that Trump’s willingness to express himself frankly and colorfully attracts media attention. However, frank, colorful statements are also easily distorted. So there is a trade-off.
The trade-off worked for Trump in the primaries. Will it work for him in the general election. Arguably, the news media wanted Trump to win the primaries. Given, for example, how a certain ten-year old video was held until October, that is sort of obvious. Nevertheless, Trump had to be aware the media would turn on him after the primaries. So everything he said would eventually be used against him, and it has been. So how did he plan on dealing with it? Did he have a plan? I don’t know.
What about our plan? As voters, we want the best candidate to lead our country? However, we all have out own opinions about what that best candidate should look like. That’s is why we have to vote, but voting doesn’t solve the problem of choosing the best candidate. We still have to learn about the candidates, and we still have to give the needs of our country some thought. That requires homework.
If we don’t do any homework, the news media will just tell us what to think. Everyone is biased, and that especially includes so-called objective journalists. Therefore, if we want to learn about the candidates, we have to take the time to listen to them. That includes checking out their websites and listening to some of their campaign speeches. Otherwise, instead of voting based upon our own biases, we will be voting based upon the biases of our favorite talking heads.
Anyway, my future posts will focus on the issues. Which of the candidates is more qualified? Which of the candidates has the best agenda.