There is Something Fundamentally Wrong With Liberals

[Joe Cooper]

That liberals are hypocrites is not news. Just take a look at the net
worth of any Democratic Party leader who routinely rails against the “1
percent.” But in the age of Trump, where the hatred that normally drives
what we’re told is the “tolerant” left has been turned up to 11. All
standards have gone out the window; no hypocrisy is too great, no
conspiracy theory too insane for someone on the left to advance it and
its drone army to believe.

It must be easy to be a liberal in 2017. You don’t have to think for
yourself. You don’t have to prove anything. And your life can swirl in a
bubble where you’ll never have anything you say challenged in a serious
way. Liberals have become the bad guy in Lethal Weapon 2 – their
membership in the progressive club grants them a sort of diplomatic
immunity from reality.

The same people who cheered the release of traitor Bradley Manning after
serving only seven of 35 years for giving thousands of classified
national security secrets to Wikileaks clutch their pearls to this day
over the same website publishing unclassified emails from the Clinton
campaign.

Is Wikileaks evil or righteous? Do they support the information it
receives only if that information damages national security and puts
American lives at risk? Sure seems like it.

When it comes to conspiracy theories, the left has become the Fox Mulder
of politics. There is nothing beyond the pale or too insane to be
advanced…as long as it is against a Republican. If it’s not, if it’s
critical of the left, it’s dismissed as paranoia.

I’ve never written or spoken about the murder of DNC staffer Seth Rich
because, honestly, I haven’t seen anything but wild speculation about it.
Was he the source of the DNC email leak to Wikileaks? I have no idea. If
someone offers real proof, I’ll bite. Until then his death is just
another senseless murder.

The lack of evidence hasn’t stopped some on the right from connecting
dots that may or may not exist to advance a political agenda. But just
because I tend to agree with a lot of the policy objectives the people
connecting those dots want advocate not mean I’m on board with everything
they do. If I’m disgusted when a Democrat does something, I’m disgusted
when a Republican does it too. The same can’t be said for liberals.

Liberal journalists raged against the right over Rich both because there
was a grieving family here and it’s distasteful to dredge up conspiracy
theories in that circumstance, and because they are outraged a story has
advanced for which there is no evidence. These are awful behaviors, but
the left engages in them frequently and gleefully.

On the matter of advancing theories lacking proof, there isn’t a liberal
publication that not only functions under the assumption Donald Trump
colluded with the Russians to “steal” the election from Hillary Clinton,
but prints stories and editorials alleging it on a regular basis.

It’s been almost a year and there is still zero evidence of this
conspiracy, yet the Washington Post, New York Times, and every other
left-wing birdcage liner has a team of reporters opining in their pages
and on cable news about how this myth is fact.

Even Democratic members of Congress, who’d sacrifice their grandchildren
to find a crumb of proof, have admitted there is none. It had to kill
Sen. Dianne Feinstein and Congresswoman Maxine Waters to admit it, but
they did. Journalists can’t.

Instead they run anonymously sourced stories, many of which are denied on
the record by the very people implicated in them. They leave those
stories, uncorrected, on their websites because the conspiracy must be
true.

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein had to have threatened to resign
if the president used his letter as justification for firing FBI Director
James Comey; anonymous sources told them he did.

Never mind that Rosenstein personally, unambiguously denied the story.
Liberals need it to be true. As such, the original story sits,
uncorrected, on the Washington Post website without mention of
Rosenstein’s unequivocal denial. It would be journalistic malpractice…if
journalism still had standards.

The same goes for countless stories in which Casper the Friendly Leaker
whispers something into the ear of some liberal reporter that fits the
narrative so perfectly it snaps in place like the last Lego.

Comey was fired just after requesting more money for Russia probe?
Obviously. It doesn’t matter that the acting Director of the FBI denied
it under oath or that there is zero evidence; it just has to be true.

Someone is going to read you a couple of lines over the phone from a
“dear diary” entry by Comey that claimed the president “hoped” the FBI
would leave Michael Flynn alone? It doesn’t matter that you don’t know
the context, or that Comey didn’t tell anyone at the time, or you weren’t
even allowed to see the words on the page. Trump is corrupt, so it has to
be true. And so on.

When it comes to love of anti-Trump-perfectly-fitting-the-left-wing-
narrative conspiracy theories, facts just get in the way. Journalists are
ready to roll around like a happy dog in the sun on the grassy knoll of
news.

As for the idea that respect for the dead should dictate decorum, these
credentialed degenerates stepped down from their high horses long enough
to cheer the death of Fox News founder Roger Ailes. I don’t know how
damaged someone has to be to write the things they wrote – thinking
something sick is one thing; believing the world needs to know it is a
disorder yet to be named – yet there they were, dancing on his grave
before his family even had a chance to digest their loss.

You say someone is a monster and insensitive to the family for theorizing
about a murder last summer, but you can’t wait for the body to get cold
to express glee over someone’s passing because you didn’t like their
politics? There’s a special place in hell for people like that.

Liberals, particularly journalists, have morphed into something very
disturbing since the arrival of Donald Trump onto the political scene.
They’ve achieved a new level of hypocrisy and disgusting cruelty that
would shame a normal person.

Something deep inside them, at their core, is fundamentally damaged.
Whether it was broken before the election or not is irrelevant, it’s
their driving force now. Were they civilians, they’d likely be shouting
at streetlights and losing the argument. Since they’re journalists,
they’ll probably win a Pulitzer.

Source: http://bit.ly/2rEH2lD

--
"The only people who can't recognize that our nation has a 'smug
liberal' problem are smug liberals." (David French)