I read with a chuckle today this Washington Post article. The writer can’t stand that Trump is doing so well in the polls. He is perplexed and annoyed that Trump would endorse someone like Alex Jones by going on his radio show. The charge leveled at Trump is that his “more controversial assertions…come from the murky swamp of right-wing, libertarian and flat-out paranoid sources.” I’m not a Trump supporter, but goodness me, I didn’t realize that right-wing, libertarian views slithered out of a murky swamp.
If so, I guess left-wing, liberal views floated down from the heavenly spheres.
Let me try to understand. Free speech, freedom of the press and freedom or religion (the First Amendment) slithered out of a murky swamp. The right to self-defense (the Second Amendment) slithered out of a murky swamp. The right to privacy (the Fourth Amendment) slithered out of a murky swamp. After all, the Bill of Rights is a “libertarian” document.
That means that “safe spaces,” the banning of classic literature, the promotion of internet censorship, the attack on Christmas, gun registration, and mass government surveillance floated down from the heavenly spheres.
I think it’s interesting how demonized Trump is by the left, especially since I remember another candidate in 2008—a senator from Illinois—who was wildly popular, telling the masses what they wanted to hear. It was something about fixing the economy and giving everyone free healthcare. A few right-wingers I know thought this man becoming president would be the end of the world, or at least the end of the nation. They kind of viewed him like so-called liberals view Trump.
Apparently, if you question the official story about anything you yourself crawled out of the murky swamp of slimy, right-wing libertarianism. This includes considering the mountain of evidence bringing into question the official story of Oklahoma City. This includes questioning the “safe and effective” vaccine narrative. This includes being concerned that fluoride might actually cause health problems (even though Harvard is concerned). This also includes questioning Obama’s origins, especially since Ben Carson got raked over the coals for a few possibly distorted details in his autobiography (I’m not a Carson supporter either, by the way).
However, I don’t think it is bombshell information that The Washington Post is a liberal publication that floated down from the heavenly spheres.
What I do find interesting is how obviously terrified the writer of this article is of rising “fringe” media. Apparently I should trust the traditional, mainstream media outlets but turn my back on information I might stumble across in the backwaters of the internet. How about this. I’ll receive all my news with a healthy dose of salt, mainstream or otherwise. I’ll do my own research. I’ll come to my own conclusions.
I’ll hold Trump to the same standard that I hold Hillary, or Bernie or Obama. That is, when it comes to my political views, I’ll hold them all up to the Constitution and Bill of Rights. I’ll dunk them in the murky swamp of libertarianism (they might meet folks like John Locke and Thomas Jefferson hanging out down there). I’ll even consider an article from a “fringe” website. In fact, I might be more inclined these days to give credence to the latter over the mainstream view.
I might be tempted to do that because freedom of the press means anyone can take up the reporter’s mantle. What makes me leery is not investigating the moon landing. What makes me leery is some reporter from the Washington Post presuming to tell me what I’m supposed to believe and what I’m not.
That, my friends, is totalitarianism. But maybe totalitarianism floated down from the heavenly spheres.