A Post Modern Lynching
A Post Modern Lynching
Ted Cruz and his wife go into a restaurant to eat and are harassed by a group of protesters who think “Due process” is some old White Man’s rule. “We believe survivors!” they shout at Ted and his wife, as they drive them from their midsts like Frankenstein and his bride. “What a victory for justice!” they shout in response.
Does it matter that Christine Ford’s allegation wouldn’t stand up to the modest scrutiny of what approximates an objective human being? “Objective,” being the operative term. All four of the witnesses that Ms. Ford says were present at her alleged rape/sexual assault deny her claim. So, what has she got beyond a “Recovered memory,” and some extraordinarily fortuitous timing, politically speaking. The fact that Christine Ford claims to be part of “The Resistance” and donated to Democrat candidates, apparently, is of no concern. Because she’s a Democrat. But, Ted Cruz? He’s guilty as hell of being a rape enabler by mere association and can be hounded from society and politics without regard for evidence because he’s a Republican.
Justice is no longer just blind, but deaf, and dumb, as well.
Meanwhile, the defenders of womanhood offer a second, completely unsubstantiated claim of victimization by a woman in an inebriated haze, (by her own admission.) She too has a “Recovered” memory. Yes. After much cogitation on the matter, she thinks she remembers Kavanaugh, possibly, having poked his wiener in her face, while she was in a drunken stupor. Add decades and decades of time in which she said nothing, to anybody about the wiener poking incident, and “Voila!” you’ve just shot down The Republican’s nominee and destroyed his life, while upending the rule of law, solely for political gain.
What could be more un-American than that? Not much.
Not a single person interviewed for this explosive New Yorker expose’ corroborated the woman’s story. But The New Yorker printed it anyway. This is what I call “The New Post Modern Journalism,” based on the premise “Who’s to say what’s true?” This leaves us with any claim, no matter how absurd, as the basis for criminalizing people we don’t agree with, especially if politics is involved. I guess a return to tribalism is the new sheik in Liberal circles.
Meanwhile, The New York Times prints an expose about Kavanaugh's high school football team—“And kegs of beer!” Plus, parties where football players might have “Objectified” women, and other sundry crimes of masculine behavior that are/were typical of just about every human/male gathering at any sports event that’s ever existed. But now this behavior must be explained using cryptic language and deep, deep psychoanalysis. That is their evidence. Infer, imply criminality by association—regarding something that might have happened. Maybe? And then talk about 17-year-old teenage boys objectifying women nearly forty years ago, trying desperately to create the illusion that this is anything more than a pathetic hit-job, without regard for the rule of law or actual evidence.
“But hey!” They’ve got plenty of precedence for this type of political circus—of trial by media-fire—when you factor The Russian Collusion Fiction. This remains true even as every shred of actual evidence, about Judge Kavanaugh or Russian Collusion, crumble like a prehistoric biscuit calcified by centuries of time.
There’s always innuendo, though, which is all The Democrats really have left. Of course, they have the bulk of the media acting as partisans benefactors, as well. That’s where the blames really rests. If not for that single fact, The Democratic Party would be nothing more than an artifact of history.
People should be ashamed of these public crucifixions. But they won’t be. They’ll sleep like babies, snoozing in the wake of a good lynching. That is the power of indoctrination, enabling even well-heeled people—even those with the best of intentions to descend into a lynch mob—and still feel damned good about themselves.
That’s human nature at its lowest.
It’s what America has become in a post-Obama world.
Mark Magula
Ted Cruz and his wife go into a restaurant to eat and are harassed by a group of protesters who think “Due process” is some old White Man’s rule. “We believe survivors!” they shout at Ted and his wife, as they drive them from their midsts like Frankenstein and his bride. “What a victory for justice!” they shout in response.
Does it matter that Christine Ford’s allegation wouldn’t stand up to the modest scrutiny of what approximates an objective human being? “Objective,” being the operative term. All four of the witnesses that Ms. Ford says were present at her alleged rape/sexual assault deny her claim. So, what has she got beyond a “Recovered memory,” and some extraordinarily fortuitous timing, politically speaking. The fact that Christine Ford claims to be part of “The Resistance” and donated to Democrat candidates, apparently, is of no concern. Because she’s a Democrat. But, Ted Cruz? He’s guilty as hell of being a rape enabler by mere association and can be hounded from society and politics without regard for evidence because he’s a Republican.
Justice is no longer just blind, but deaf, and dumb, as well.
Meanwhile, the defenders of womanhood offer a second, completely unsubstantiated claim of victimization by a woman in an inebriated haze, (by her own admission.) She too has a “Recovered” memory. Yes. After much cogitation on the matter, she thinks she remembers Kavanaugh, possibly, having poked his wiener in her face, while she was in a drunken stupor. Add decades and decades of time in which she said nothing, to anybody about the wiener poking incident, and “Voila!” you’ve just shot down The Republican’s nominee and destroyed his life, while upending the rule of law, solely for political gain.
What could be more un-American than that? Not much.
Not a single person interviewed for this explosive New Yorker expose’ corroborated the woman’s story. But The New Yorker printed it anyway. This is what I call “The New Post Modern Journalism,” based on the premise “Who’s to say what’s true?” This leaves us with any claim, no matter how absurd, as the basis for criminalizing people we don’t agree with, especially if politics is involved. I guess a return to tribalism is the new sheik in Liberal circles.
Meanwhile, The New York Times prints an expose about Kavanaugh's high school football team—“And kegs of beer!” Plus, parties where football players might have “Objectified” women, and other sundry crimes of masculine behavior that are/were typical of just about every human/male gathering at any sports event that’s ever existed. But now this behavior must be explained using cryptic language and deep, deep psychoanalysis. That is their evidence. Infer, imply criminality by association—regarding something that might have happened. Maybe? And then talk about 17-year-old teenage boys objectifying women nearly forty years ago, trying desperately to create the illusion that this is anything more than a pathetic hit-job, without regard for the rule of law or actual evidence.
“But hey!” They’ve got plenty of precedence for this type of political circus—of trial by media-fire—when you factor The Russian Collusion Fiction. This remains true even as every shred of actual evidence, about Judge Kavanaugh or Russian Collusion, crumble like a prehistoric biscuit calcified by centuries of time.
There’s always innuendo, though, which is all The Democrats really have left. Of course, they have the bulk of the media acting as partisans benefactors, as well. That’s where the blames really rests. If not for that single fact, The Democratic Party would be nothing more than an artifact of history.
People should be ashamed of these public crucifixions. But they won’t be. They’ll sleep like babies, snoozing in the wake of a good lynching. That is the power of indoctrination, enabling even well-heeled people—even those with the best of intentions to descend into a lynch mob—and still feel damned good about themselves.
That’s human nature at its lowest.
It’s what America has become in a post-Obama world.
Mark Magula