The Hate That Hates ‘Hate’ - The American Spectator | USA News and Politics
The Hate That Hates ‘Hate’

Friday night in Seattle, a man was shot during a riotous protest outside an event at the University of Washington featuring pro-Trump speaker Milo Yiannopoulos, an editor for Police say the incident is still under investigation, but a report by the Seattle Times indicates the gunman was part of the anti-Trump mob and that he claimed to have been assaulted by the man he shot, whom he believed to be a “white supremacist.” However, friends of the victim — who is reported to be hospitalized in critical condition — say the man is actually an anti-Nazi activist who voted for Bernie Sanders in the 2016 Democrat presidential primaries.

The shooting in Seattle happened on the same day that mobs protesting President Trump’s inauguration rioted in Washington, D.C., where among other criminal acts they broke windows at a Starbucks and a Bank of America branch and burned a limousine parked outside the offices of the Washington Post. A day later, during the anti-Trump “Women’s March on Washington,” aging pop singer Madonna spoke of her violent fantasies: “Yes, I have thought an awful lot about blowing up the White House.”

“Love Trumps Hate” and “Make Racists Afraid Again” are among the slogans commonly proclaimed on banners brandished by these violent mobs. This simplistic mentality, equating Republicans with “hate” and “racism,” has the effect of dehumanizing the 63 million Americans who voted to elect Trump. The rioters and their celebrity supporters evidently believe that any American who votes Republican is not merely wrong, but evil. Anyone who doesn’t hate Trump as much as Madonna hates Trump is condemned as ignorant and unworthy of respect. Who is to blame for inciting this dangerously divisive attitude?

First, the Democrats bear the primary responsibility. Dozens of congressional Democrats refused even to attend Trump’s inauguration, sending a signal to their supporters that they consider the new Republican president to be illegitimate. During the presidency of Barack Obama, Democrats blatantly ignored evidence of widespread opposition to their partisan agenda. When Nancy Pelosi rammed Obamacare through Congress in 2010, she infamous declared, “We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it.” This disregard for the normal processes of political debate, expressing a contempt for opponents and critics, continued even after the landslide 2010 midterm elections when Republicans captured their largest House majority since the 1940s. Republicans took control of the Senate in 2014 and, despite Hillary Clinton’s many political advantages, last year the unapologetic populist Trump won the White House for the GOP. Clearly, Democrats are disconnected from the mainstream of American opinion.

Unnoticed by their liberal leaders in Washington, Democrats have suffered what one embattled legislator called a “catastrophic” decline in their influence at the state level. “Since 2008, Republicans have taken nine hundred legislative districts from Democrats, securing control not just in the South, where many voters oppose President Obama, but in such diverse locales as Michigan and Maine,” Tennessee state Rep. Mike Stewart wrote last month in a column for the Hill. Republicans now control both legislative chambers in 32 states, and 33 states have Republican governors. This erosion of the Democratic Party’s political base may in large measure explain why the Clinton campaign was stunned by Trump’s victory in states like Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin, which had incorrectly been assumed to be “safe” for Democrats.

The cluelessness of Democrat leadership has been enabled by the party’s supporters in the news media. During the 2016 campaign, outright partisanship became acceptable to allegedly “objective” journalists, and CNN was widely mocked as the Clinton News Network because of its blatant anti-Trump bias. Hillary’s defeat apparently did nothing to make the liberal media rethink their lapdog loyalty to the Democrats. Mere days before the inauguration, CNN showed its sympathies by publishing a list of demands by anti-Trump protesters. The network presented the protesters’ claims “as though they are the spontaneous inspiration of everyday Americans,” as Daily Caller columnist Jim Simpson observed, but nothing could be farther from the truth.

A documentary produced by the Capital Research Center exposed “an extensive network of neo-Marxist operatives coordinating highly disruptive and potentially violent protests from coast to coast” during the inauguration. Throughout the 2016 campaign, CNN and other liberal networks refused to report on the dangerous radical groups behind the anti-Trump protests. During the RNC in Cleveland, for example, the Revolutionary Communist Party sponsored a rally where demonstrators held up signs proclaiming “America Was Never Great.” These Marxist protesters marched down Euclid Avenue in downtown Cleveland denouncing police as “killers” and brandishing signs with slogans like, “No allegiance to white supremacy” and “The Trump campaign is a crime against the mind.” While these protests were widely covered by major news organizations, none mentioned that the anti-Trump rally was organized and led by self-declared Communist revolutionaries. The liberal media only notices “extremism” when such claims are useful for attacking the GOP with guilt-by-association smears.

The partisan bias of the media was especially apparent in their fawning coverage of the “Black Lives Matter” movement. Funded by left-wing donors like George Soros, Black Lives Matter demonized police officers, inspiring violent riots and terrorist attacks on law enforcement like the July shooting in Dallas that killed five officers. Police said the accused Dallas gunman, Micah Johnson, specifically mentioned Black Lives Matter, yet this did not discourage the liberal media from their continued support of the movement. Six weeks before Election Day, a Black Lives Matter protest in Charlotte, N.C., erupted in arson and looting. The cause of the Charlotte riot was the police shooting of Keith Scott, whose lengthy criminal record included assault with a deadly weapon, aggravated assault, evading arrest and contributing to the delinquency of a minor. Scott was shot by a black police officer after Scott “exited his vehicle with a handgun despite officers’ commands to drop the weapon,” according to Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Chief Kerr Putney, who is also black. There was absolutely no justification for the claim of “racism” as a motive for Scott’s death, yet Black Lives Matter incited a riot which required North Carolina’s governor to declare a state of emergency. Video showed an obscene tirade in which one protester, identified as the slain suspect’s brother, shouted that “all white people” and “all white cops” are “devils.” Anti-white rage is never condemned as “hate” by the liberal media, although the Charlotte riot might explain why Trump won North Carolina by a margin of some 170,000 votes.

Liberals find themselves supporting violent criminals and Communists because, in the partisan political calculus of the Democrat Party, all Republicans are presumed to be guilty of “hate.” The anti-Trump media ignore any evidence that contradicts this claim, so that Madonna’s fantasies of blowing up the White House and the insane rage of inauguration protesters are not viewed as dangerous. Instead, allegedly objective journalists like NBC’s Chuck Todd denounce Trump as “surprisingly divisive.” This description of the president’s inaugural address made no sense to anyone outside the Beltway media bubble. Trump’s speech actually expressed a non-partisan spirit: “What truly matters is not which party controls our government, but whether our government is controlled by the people.”

The liberal media’s demonization of Republicans as ignorant sub-humans has the effect licensing extremism by anti-GOP activists. After all, if “Republican is a synonym for “hate” (as network news stars like Chuck Todd seem to believe), then anyone who is anti-Republican is anti-hate, right? Anyone who paid close attention to Saturday’s “Women’s March” could see plenty of evidence contradict this. One of the event organizers, Linda Sarsour, reportedly has connections to the terrorist group Hamas. A profile of Sarsour at David Horowitz’s Discover the Networks site says: “An outspoken critic of Israel, Sarsour supports the Boycott, Divestment & Sanctions (BDS) movement, a Hamas-inspired initiative that uses various forms of public protest, economic pressure, and court rulings to advance the Hamas agenda of permanently destroying Israel as a Jewish nation-state.” Pro-Israel blogger Pamela Geller calls Sarsour a “vicious Jew-hater.” Given how often the media have compared Trump to Hitler, why aren’t journalists reporting evidence that anti-Semites are helping lead protests against Trump?

Obviously, the liberal media have decided that Democrats like Linda Sarsour cannot be guilty of “hate,” nor do journalists like Chuck Todd consider it “extremist” rhetoric for Madonna to speak of blowing up the White House. The media believe that only Republicans can be guilty of “hate,” and therefore, they will tolerate anything from Democrat activists — the hate that hates “hate.” Among the millions of Americans who don’t share this partisan worldview, however, the sight of anti-Trump mobs led by hate-filled radicals is not likely to persuade them to vote Democrat in the future. Donald Trump is president because voters in states like Pennsylvania and Michigan didn’t buy into the media’s one-sided propaganda, and it is unlikely these anti-Trump protests will change that.

Sign up to receive our latest updates! Register

By submitting this form, you are consenting to receive marketing emails from: The American Spectator, 122 S Royal Street, Alexandria, VA, 22314, You can revoke your consent to receive emails at any time by using the SafeUnsubscribe® link, found at the bottom of every email. Emails are serviced by Constant Contact

Be a Free Market Loving Patriot. Subscribe Today!