Posted on 10/25/2018 8:31:06 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Should The New York Times, which published Trump-killing fan fiction, be held to the same standard it expects of the president?
The New York Times published a fictional essay fantasizing about President Trump getting assassinated the same week that explosive devices were sent to prominent political figures across the country.
After explosive devices were sent to prominent Democrats and liberal political figures — Maxine Waters, Joe Biden, George Soros, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, John Brennan, and others — New York Times opinion columnist Charles M. Blow blamed Trump for creating a “toxic environment” that led to these attempted acts of terrorism.
“Trump doesn’t operate on an intellectual plane, but an emotional one, and the emotions he has learned to manipulate in politics are the darker ones,” Blow wrote, adding a summary of Trump’s speech at a rally for Republican Sen. Ted Cruz in Texas during which the president said Democrats want to “destroy American communities.”
“This is the rhetorical backdrop as we await an investigation and answers about who sent bombs to Democrats and the CNN offices,” Blow wrote.
Here’s some of the rhetorical backdrop being painted by The New York Times. In a collection of fictional essays published Tuesday, one author fantasized about a Secret Service agent helping the Russians assassinate Trump.
The Russian waited until they were a few steps past before he drew the gun. He sighted on the center of the president’s back, and squeezed the trigger.
The Makarov misfired.
The Secret Service agent at the president’s shoulder heard the click, spun into a crouch. He registered the scene instantly, drawing his own weapon with razor-edge reflexes.
The Russian tasted failure. He closed his eyes and waited to pay the cost.
It did not come.
He opened his eyes. The Secret Service agent stood before him, presenting his Glock, butt first.
‘Here,’ the agent said politely. ‘Use mine. …’
Should The New York Times, which published Trump-killing fan fiction, be held to the same standard the it expects of the president? Or do they get to paint a rhetorical backdrop of bloodshed and get to be viewed as blameless for the fractured and hostile environment we all find ourselves in?
It’s like “Snipers Wanted” over Bush and plays about assassinating Bush.
Liberals claim Trump started it all. But they are full of it.
Almost every assassin in our history has turned out to be a left-wing crazy of some sort. John Wilkes Booth was a copperhead/confederate sympathizer if not an agent, Lee Harvey Oswald (who I include even though he didn’t do it) was a traitor who lived in Soviet Russia and was pro-Castro. RFK’s assassin was a Palestinian terrorist.
Booth was a lot of things but he was not a left winger. LOL.
Depends on how you look back on a time period. I’m sure you’re not a fan of chattel slavery.
If anything the Republicans of the that era were the wild eyed liberals and wanted to change the status quo. The Democrats were definitely the conservatives of their day.
That piece sure reminds me of the reason I hate everyone at the NYTimes.
The status quo was human bondage. You are okay with that? Now I agree that the owners should have been compensated at market prices, just as if I were to confiscate your factory or office equipment and that wasn’t done, but otherwise you consider the anti-slavery people to be wild-eyed liberals?
No, the status quo was the Constitution and slavery was legal. Slavery was a legacy "gift" from the British Empire.
I want to read a piece of fan fiction where the New York Times is destroyed by a tactical nuclear weapon.
A Davy Crockett right in their front door.
I think The People would be satisfied with a 1/2 Billion Dollar fine, payable over 10 years, we’ll be nice.
Lincoln was a Republican, the south was Democrats ready to divide the Union. The conservative verses liberal was not the argument back then. It was states rights or federal authority. In that time period most people on both sides were church going Christians. Slavery was a point for arguing the states rights verses the Union authority argument. Slavery was wrong the south should have dropped that and moved to fight the states rights issue but the rich wanted the cheap labor. Notice anything today similar?
What liberals started waaaay back is the reason that America took a big chance, a gamble, and elected Trump. That gamble is paying off in spades for us so far.
Liberals from both parties created all the suck, all the corruption and all the shitty politics that pushed us into taking that big chance on Trump. I pray to God that we can keep liberals out of power forever starting now. We should all give this president every bit of support that we possibly can.
Liberals think they can get rid of Trump one way or another. I say, they better check themselves before they wreck themselves because we haven't even begun to fight... Yet.
Well said.
Given the timing of this book release/review, the Secret Service should be paying a few visits, don’t you think?
Rules and laws only apply to Republicans. Democrats can and will do anything to gain and keep power and it is OK.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.