Wednesday, August 12, 2015

Blood in the water

There are honest reasons for hating Donald Trump, but that’s no excuse for dishonesty. As with the infamous Donald Sterling assassination last year, and the infamous Todd Akin assassination 2 years before that, you’re being lied to by people to whom people are dispensable.

It’s easy to let alone a false accusation against someone you dislike. Bravo to Robert Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. of the American Spectator for telling the truth about what Donald Trump said:

In the first paragraph of the New York Times’ front-page story on Sunday the Times said that because Megyn Kelly “questioned him forcefully at the Republican presidential debate” Donald Trump said she did it “because she was menstruating.” He did not. Whether the Times> was perpetrating a lie on its gullible readers or simply confused I cannot say. In the next paragraph readers can see for themselves what Trump actually said.

He said that “You could see there was blood coming out of her [Kelly’s] eyes, blood coming out of her wherever” when she rather bluntly questioned him on indelicate subjects. The Times went on for more than half a page recording the observations of people such as ex-Senator Judd Gregg and Senator Lindsey Graham who, by the way, trails Trump badly in the polls. It turns out that they did not hear Trump mention menstruation either. Their observations were merely speculations.

Dare I say it? They were the speculations of dirty minds. Hey, Lindsey, get your mind out of the gutter. As Trump quite aptly said later, “Only a deviant would think I was saying anything about blood somewhere other than her eyes or her nose.” He explained the word “wherever” as a typical rhetorical device for brevity and for moving on to other matters. It was not an anatomical reference. That satisfies me, but now let us see if Graham and Judd begin complaining that Trump has called them deviants. Often times our presidential campaigns give way to absurdities.

It doesn’t necessarily take a dirty mind. It’s enough to have “war on women” sympathies if you’re a liberal, or the opportunity to enforce PC standards in exchange for a dog biscuit in the case of Lindsey Graham and RedState’s Erick Erickson.

I’m sure some good things were said at the RedState Gathering, but most people will remember it for Erickson pusillanimously disinviting Trump. The irony is liberals don’t give a flip about the RedState Gathering. It only made the news because it furthered their agenda. Had they stuck around through the weekend, they would have reported what a bunch of heartless bigots made up the assembly. “I just don’t want someone on the stage who gets a hostile question from a lady and his first inclination is to imply it was hormonal,” a hysterical Erickson said, basking in the temporary esteem of people who would destroy him. Trump didn’t imply it, Erickson inferred it, and he embellished it for max political profit.

It was a short-sighted play, trying to take out Trump by giving the “war on women” narrative credibility. Not only didn’t it work—Trump is still with us—but Erickson exposed a vulnerability that liberals are certain to exploit later on when the stakes are raised.

Read his words. If Trump didn’t say Kelly was bleeding out of her eyes first, I wouldn’t be writing this. If he said she was hormonal, I wouldn’t be writing this. Because the New York Times’s lie wouldn’t be a lie, it would be the truth. I don’t care about what Trump says and doesn’t say. He doesn’t care, so why should I? He’s a troll, and you don’t feed trolls. But I do care about people spreading lies to serve their interests, even if those interests overlap my own. (I want Cruz to win.)

Not even Don Lemon and his CNN producers caught the supposed sexist comment. Clearly Trump was talking about Kelly having it in for him. Seething with animosity, that’s what blood coming out of your eyes means. Whether this describes Kelly or not is irrelevant, it’s what Trump was actually saying.

No comments:

Post a Comment