Immoral High Ground | The American Spectator | USA News and Politics
Immoral High Ground
by

The Democratic Party likes to claim a monopoly on the moral high ground, warning Republican trespassers to stay off the premises. But all they have are their disarming personalities, with no shotguns at the ready, so I will venture to disregard. No monitions without munitions. The premises… here we come!

So today we will examine the premises behind Democrat positions, putting aside the content of the positions themselves. Two prime examples assert themselves unto our attention.

The first one is going on right now. There has been a lot of yin and yang between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump over how big a lie Hillary told about Donald. She said his statements about a temporary ban on Muslim immigration have been turned into an ISIS recruitment video. He says not so; she says yes too; he says she lies a lot; she says his whole campaign is out of bounds; he says she should apologize; she says no way. And on and on and round and round.

Let us forget for a moment if he or she is right on the facts. Indeed, let us concede that Hillary is the acknowledged expert on YouTube videos and their effect on Middle Eastern populations. Instead let us examine the premise; namely, that it was a bad idea for Trump to say what he said because that sort of statement gives ISIS recruiters fodder for their ad campaigns.

Think about it. These people capture journalists and civilians and behead them on camera. They burn people alive and they blow people up with bombs and they drop people in cages into the water to drown, all on snappily produced videos designed to shock and horrify. Then some candidate in America says, “Whoa?! Maybe we need to look more closely into Who’s Who in the Muslim world before we import more butchery.” At which point they go, “Aha! You see how right we are! These Americans are a bunch of racists! Come and join us to behead more of them. The line forms in front of the guillotine, single file only please.”

Now think about it from the perspective of the prospective recruit. Here is a sweet pacifistic member of the Religion of Peace and Female Genital Mutilation, peacing out on the campus of Ramadi University of the Fine Arts, idly puffing on a hookah and strumming a sitar. This gentle soul is positively outraged over the vicious bloodthirsty practices of ISIS, practices at total odds with the teachings of the Koran. When he hears about 130 innocent victims in Paris and 14 in San Bernardino, his heart breaks for the plight of innocent victims and their families and his soul aches to see Islam distorted in this way.

Suddenly he sees the latest ISIS video. After the opening credits roll, and the obligatory beheadings set the mood, the narrator shifts the scene deftly and our hero is transported to Iowa. There he sees a Trump rally, suggesting a halt to Islam immigration until we figure out who is coming to sell falafel and who is coming to kill our children. Huh? He said whuh? Da noiv a dat guy! Immediately our Muslim peacenik undergoes a transformation into a vampire. Off he goes to slake his blood lust, jarred from his innocence by the wicked wizard Trump.

This is the premise of the Clintonian analysis of the Trumpian proposal. The Islam-loving ISIS-hating innocent cannot absorb the context of Donald’s words and he is goaded into rabid menacing animus against all of Western civilization. I’m not sure what this says about Donald, but it sure says a lot about Hillary.

Which takes us in retrospect to our second instance of Hillary embracing the insanest of premises. This one is the story of Benghazi itself. The debate has been raging over when Hillary started blaming the YouTube video, how that came about, and what was her purpose in this deception. Let’s forget all that and look at the premise which undergirded that cover story for Hillary’s abdication of responsibility.

Perhaps worse than the lies and manipulation are the ideas expressed here as casual assumptions. One, a mocking video by a private guy in America can set off large populations on the other side of the globe. Two, therefore he should not exercise his First Amendment right to make the film. Three, we should then berate him and seek an avenue for filing charges. Four, we expect the parents of the killed men to be thrilled when they hear the video guy will be arrested!

These are bizarre premises indeed and I already regret my trespass. The wacky Democrats who accept them can keep this real estate all to themselves. They definitely should be brought to the high ground of the big white house with the neatly manicured lawn. There they should be closely guarded by men in white coats and medicated accordingly.

Sign Up to receive Our Latest Updates! Register

Notice to Readers: The American Spectator and Spectator World are marks used by independent publishing companies that are not affiliated in any way. If you are looking for The Spectator World please click on the following link: https://thespectator.com/world.

Be a Free Market Loving Patriot. Subscribe Today!